Talk:Current Monarchs

From IBWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Thanks, Jan. I wasn't sure if Batavia would have the same monarchs as *here* or not, knowing little about Dutch/Batavian history. Nik 02:29, 17 Feb 2005 (PST)

I'm not sure either, but for the time being we can quietly assume so. IJzeren Jan 02:55, 17 Feb 2005 (PST)

Any particular reason it was neccessary to revert that, Nik? Deiniol 16:52, 15 Sep 2005 (PDT)

I'd had them in order of seniority. It seems to me to make more sense that way than alphabetical Nik 18:18, 15 Sep 2005 (PDT)
It would be if we had accession dates for all of them- as it is, it just looks largely random at first glance. Which is why I alphabetised them (following Wikipedia's example, really, but according to the person rather than the country)- they may not all have dates but they do all have initial letters. It's also easier to find individual monarchs when done alphabetically- ordering them by coronation date seems rather arcane to me. Deiniol 04:53, 16 Sep 2005 (PDT)
Personnaly, I think the alphabetical order (based on names) would be better, makes it easier to find someone. --Marc Pasquin 07:02, 16 Sep 2005 (PDT)
Actually ... yeah, you're probably right. We might as well go with alphabetical. I'll realphabetize 'em Nik 21:14, 16 Sep 2005 (PDT)
Question: Is Te in Te Atairangikaahu a personal article? If so, should it be alphabetized according to A? Nik 21:22, 16 Sep 2005 (PDT)
<shrugs> I did it under T. Thinking about it, however, if it's an article then it should probably be under A in the same way that The MacAllen comes before Lord Osborne. Deiniol 10:07, 17 Sep 2005 (PDT)


Turkestani titles go at the end of a person's name, not at the beginning. But everyone else has the title first, and unfortunately, Sultan Ilxan's given name is also a title used by other monarchs elsewhere. Should I reverse the normal Turkestani practice for this article and list him as "Ilxan Sultan Qasim-uli of Turkestan"? Geoff 8:59, 08 Nov 08 (USCT)

That would make it less confusing so, yes--Marc Pasquin 19:20, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
I thought so. But "less confusing" was warring in my head with "more accurate". Consider it changed! Geoff 13:29, 08 Nov 08 (USCT)


Wuerttemberg is not on the list of Kings and Queens...

The list is alphabetized by name, and the name of the Wuerttemburgish king/queen isn't known yet. Benkarnell 18:02, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Personal tools