Template talk:English, Scottish and British monarchs

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
WikiProject iconScottish Royalty Template‑class
WikiProject iconThis template is within the scope of WikiProject Scottish Royalty (a child project of the Royalty and Nobility Work Group), an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Scottish Royalty on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you should visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
TemplateThis template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Birth of a Template

Magnificent, now that's what I call an inclusive Template. GoodDay (talk) 19:44, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone please explain to me why King of Picts is included in this Template? Jack forbes (talk) 20:52, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Pictish monarchs were (one of the) predecessors to the Scottish monarchs. The Scottish monarchs were (one of the) predecessors to the British monarchs. GoodDay (talk) 20:54, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As has been pointed out, the Kingdom of Northumbria among other Kingdoms was also a predecessor. Why are they not all included? It wouldn't be because some people always want to link Scotland with Britain even when it wasn't, is it? I do hope there are no ulterior motives for this action. I object to the inclusion of the Kingdom of Scotland and Kings of Picts to this Template. Jack forbes (talk) 21:01, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Northumbria, Wessex, Essex, Strathclyde ect. This template is only 'bout 2 days old, it gonna take awhile to get all entries. GoodDay (talk) 22:20, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I feel completely run down by those who continually chip away at anything Scottish on wikipedia. It is like a drip drip effect which is eroding any desire I have to be here. Forget my objection, I'll just stay away. Jack forbes (talk) 21:34, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand. Kingdom of Scotland & Kingdom of England merged in 1707, to become the Kingdom of Great Britain, which merged with the Kingdom of Ireland in 1800, to become the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, which with the independance of Ireland (state) in 1927, became the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Again, what's the opposition? GoodDay (talk) 22:20, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Do as you please. I don't have the desire to argue. Jack forbes (talk) 22:51, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okie Dokie. GoodDay (talk) 22:56, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think the Picts could be removed without detriment, Kenneth is the first traditional king of a united Scotland. There were kings of Pictland who were also kings of Dalraida, but I think it's unnecessary to get into details on a navigation template. Starting from around 850 on both England and Scotland monarchs seems fair and justifiable, and avoids the need to rename the template "Pictish, Scottish, English and British monarchs"!

talk) 07:09, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

The determination by some editors to force the Pictish & Scottish monarchs together? baffles me. Not to mentions the editors who prefer sticking the English & British monarchs together, excluding the Scottish monarchs. GoodDay (talk) 12:00, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Then it looks like we're agreed.
talk) 09:28, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Order of the Kingdoms

Currently it's English, then Scottish, then British. I recommend we order them by the year of its beginnning (as currently reckoned in small text). What say we? DBD 12:45, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I figured 'alphabetical order' was the way to go. But, I'm not picky. GoodDay (talk) 18:59, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
By year, is cool too. GoodDay (talk) 12:02, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It should be ordered by the year, not alphabet. Easier to follow.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 09:45, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Existence of template

I gotta say, this new template sux. "Kenneth MacAlpin", king of the Picts, lived in the mid-9th century, and is no more a predecessor of Elizabeth I than

Gruffydd ap Cynan, king of Gwynedd, or Niall Glúndub, king of Ireland. Utter pc nonsense giving undue weight to the Pictish/Scottish monarchy, producing a clunky and ugly template. The old one was far superior. If this is what we're gonna get by changing, then please move it back to the old template. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 02:05, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

For the umpteenth time. The Scottish & English monarchies are equally predecessors of the British monarchy. GoodDay (talk) 13:29, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, this fatuous point has been responded to umpteen times, and since I don't recall you ever grasping the points made, I won't bother repeating them. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 13:35, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If ya wanna remove the Picts & the Northumbrian etc, it's your choice. But, leave the Scottish & English in the template. GoodDay (talk) 13:38, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This has become quite tiresome - at any rate, I'm going to at least remove the rulers before Donald II, who was the first to be called King of Scotland.
talk) 14:37, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
I don't mind the triming down of this Template. Just don't go back to 'English and British'. GoodDay (talk) 14:41, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note I've performed a history merge to fix the out of process deletion that took place. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 14:47, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That looks much better (congrats to you & JK). I was gonna suggest changing the Template name to 'British Isles monarchs', but I guess we all know the storm that would cause. GoodDay (talk) 14:49, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is just the former name of the template. I have no opinion about its validity other than it's a might less clumsy that the new name and doesn't prejudice the template to include pre-1707 monarchs of any kind. My opinion on that is either only have pre-1707 English monarchs or have no monarchs before 1707 at all, the way it was for years. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 14:52, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Incidentally, if we're going with the pc bs, we need a section for Irish monarchs too. "Also ruler of Ireland" doesn't cut it, as legally Ireland was as much a separate kingdom as Scotland. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 14:57, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ya can split the Template 4-ways if ya like. Have 'Template: English monarchs', 'Template: Scottish monarchs', 'Template: Irish monarchs', 'Template: British monarchs'. Tharky though, creats a stink when ya's put the Picts & the Scottish together. GoodDay (talk) 15:02, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
GoodDay, if you'd care to spend a fraction of the time you have spent typing assertions on the topic reading that talk page, you wouldn't be doing the former. Tharky in any case has a good argument for merging the English and British monarchs (but not the Scots or Irish) which has nothing to do with that, and where incidentally he was supported by both John and I. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 15:09, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The current Template is a compromise between us. Afterall, England & Scotland were rested/rests on the island of Great Britain, before & after 1707. GoodDay (talk) 15:13, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The United Kingdom does not just include Great Britain, but [now only part of] Ireland as well as thousands of other islands. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 15:14, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent) I'm content with the current Template. GoodDay (talk) 15:16, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've just cut all the duplicate clunk and taken it back to the long-standing version, so that won't be necessary. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 15:18, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As long as the English & British monarchs have seperate Templates (as the Scottish have theirs)? I'm content. GoodDay (talk) 15:23, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've unmerged the histories of these two pages: "Template:British monarchs" and "Template: English, Scottish and British monarchs". To undo an "out-of-process deletion" one simply undeletes the page rather than merging it with another one. It is traditional to consult the administrator performing the original act before undoing it.

talk) 10:14, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

predecessors of William I of England & Robert I of Scotland

Howdy Deacon. Howabout reverting your change & then make the monarch lists collapsable. That way we keep all the monarchs there & simultaneously make the Template less bulky. GoodDay (talk) 22:17, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New design

I think this template has several problems: (1) it's too complicated; (2) the same pages are listed more than once; (3) there are too many footnotes detailing exceptions or extras; and (4) overall it's more decorative than useful. I'd like to suggest cutting it right back to the essentials. Such as the example below.

talk) 14:21, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply
]