Jump to content

Talk:Palden Thondup Namgyal

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Indian propaganda

[edit]

The sentence "In 1975 Sikkim joined the union of India through a referendum receiving a 97%-majority election vote, thus ending his rule", is Indian propaganda. It is well enough known that India invaded, and the referendum was rigged. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.197.15.138 (talk) 00:34, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

can you even give source ?
https://www.nytimes.com/1975/04/16/archives/sikkim-votes-to-end-monarchy-merge-with-india.html
it is the proof that that election was held their, Sikkimese voted 59,637 to 1,496 for Indian statehood and the ouster of their Chogyal, or ruler, Palden Thondup Namgyal
Sikkim was protectorate state of Indian Union from 1950 and Indian Union took responsibility of defense, foreign policy, communication, and transportation of the erstwhile Kingdom of Sikkim. So there was no question of invasion
If the Union of India had responsibility of the defense of the erstwhile Kingdom of Sikkim, how deploying troops can be invasion? Think from the view - India deployed armed forces to Nepal after earthquake. http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Operation_Maitri. Will you call this invasion? AQWERTYE 345 (talk) 15:15, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reign?

[edit]

This article reads:

Shortly after Namgyal's marriage, his father died and he was crowned the new Chogyal on an astrologically favourable date in 1965. In 1975, the Prime Minister of Sikkim appealed to the Indian Parliament for Sikkim to become a state of India.

In other words, it skips directly from the Chogyal's coronation to the beginning of his being deposed. There is nothing at all about his reign (the most important part of almost any monarch's biography), which lasted ten years. In light of the previous comment, I have to wonder if this glaring omission is intentional. --Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 14:01, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]