Talk:Royal family

message: After reading several wikis about royal members born in the past 9 years, I wondered how it is possible for these children to be "noteworthy". None of them have ever done anything noteworthy. Should members of royal families in Wikipedia, who have done nothing what so ever with there lives, have their wikis erased?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leveni (talk • contribs) 17:55, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability and royalty 

message: {Copied from the talk page of Princely Family of Liechtenstein as a useful observation on this article's topic}:
There are two relevant, current usages of the term "royalty". One meaning is "member of a family headed by a king or queen". The other is "member of a family headed by a hereditary sovereign". The first is technically correct, but the second is in wider, common and journalistic usage. The problem with ignoring or rejecting the latter usage is not only that it relegates to royalist jargon a word already in much broader use, but there is no satisfactory substitute for "royalty" in the second meaning. "Princely" does not work, because the vast majority of princely families were merely noble, and never sovereign or semi-sovereign. "Dynastic" doesn't work because it is too poorly understood in this context. "Royalty" clearly conveys to most people membership in a reigning or formerly reigning family, and that is why it has passed into ordinary language with that meaning. Moreover, within monarchist jargon, royalty is still used to refer to members of deposed kingly dynasties, while being withheld from still-reigning dynasties such as the House of Liechtenstein and the House of Luxembourg. Thus, those who are in the order of succession to real thrones are refused, by this jargon, the description "royal", while cadets of families which lost their thrones 150 years ago (House of Orléans, Hanover) are still referred to as "royal". Since any time these individuals' actual titles are used, it becomes obvious who is and who is not technically entitled to HRH, it is not necessary to pedantically adhere to a narrow jargon in Wiki. The reference to the Liechtenstein dynasty as "royalty" should remain. It's just too late to put that genie back in the bottle. Lethiere 20:43, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: royal vs princely

message: 1. The population of Hawaii is about 1.2 million. Polynesians make up about 9 percent of our state's population. And out of that 9 percent, Hawaiians are a smaller fraction. Pure blood Hawaiians though make up less than 1 percent of our state's population. That being the case, why are four houses of Hawaiian nobility represented here? I don't think that such is justified. The four houses are House of Kalakaua, House of Kamehameha, House of Kawānanakoa, and House of Laanui-Kalokuokamaile. 80,000 Hawaiians have representation here, four times, and much of the rest of the world is left off of your list.
2. And Manchurians are represented twice in this category! To place the name Qing Dynasty and Aisin Gioro on this list is a duplication of the same thing. The dynasty's name is Qing and their family's name is Aisin-Gioro. 
It's about time that Wikipedia editors learn more about history. Yes?
Himyaosui (talk) 19:08, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:SOFIXIT Shot info (talk) 03:26, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I grouped together the mongolian and hawaian links. Note that the list does not attempt to give proportional representation to each house, it just lists all the house articles in alphabetical order. --Enric Naval (talk) 15:43, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Famous royal houses and dynasties

message: I have a legitimate question. Some of the families that you list here, you cite as being deposed. A royal succession is determined in many different ways, which varies with each individual nation. Some nations are patriarchal, whereas others allow for female successions. In China when a dynasty ends, the former royal family is obligated to name a prince-heir to their family throne. As it is the prince-heir that gives worship to god and prayers for the entire family or clan.
If a succession continues, the above rule is not necessary. 
The king of Afghanistan left Afghanistan for Rome. A change of government regimes took place and the royal family was ousted and became no more. Yet, the king of Afghanistan was recognized around the world and three generations of the royal family lived abroad in Rome. China's royal family fled after Manchurian conquest of China. Manchurians are not Chinese. And as in the case of the king of Afghanistan, three generations lived in Hawaii-California (1871-2010).
Question: Why isn't the Afghanistan Royal Family listed? If they are not current, would they not be deposed?
Question: When a royal family is forced to flee for their lives, due to foreign takeovers of their nation or a change in government regimes, does leaving the country based on such circumstances mean that they are no longer royal? According to the Monarchist League, the foremost authority on the subject, if such occurs the family maintains their royal status. Only when they finally renounce their status does it end.
Also, please consult with the Monarchist League on the following matter and definition: A pretender is someone who makes a claim to the throne, whether legitimate or not. This is quite different from an imperial or royal succession being continued in a foreign country, due to political assassinations happening in one's own home country (as in the case of the King of Afghanistan, who was still recognized though ousted from power and living in Rome).
Before people make edits to Wikipedia, they should know facts and definitions much better than they do in order to make edits. Yes?
Rather than for me to do an edit, I thought that the proper thing to do was to bring these matters up for discussion.
Lastly, only Han-Chinese are permitted to rule China. The Yuan Dynasty and the Qing Dynasty are foreign dynasties as they are not Han-Chinese.
Himyaosui (talk) 19:08, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: As you have been told before, you need to provide reliable sources for your claims. --Enric Naval (talk) 07:01, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Current royal families

message: The following fascinating material was moved here from a section in the Nobility article because someone may wish to add citations and incorporate it herein. It predominantly describes and concerns customs and titles related to rulers or monarchs among African peoples rather than aristocrats (between ruling dynasties and commoners in rank), and because the privileges it attributes to members of priestly castes are arguably insufficiently hereditary to fall within the prevalent conceptions of nobility:
:African nobility 
:*With the vast majority of classical African states being either literal or technical theocracies, the rank and station of a noble was often synonimous with those of what we would term a priest. Even in the traditional and/or sovereign monarchies of today, from the muslim Morocco of the north to the tribally defined Lesotho of the south, notables who serve under their various monarchs usually act in a manner that an independent observer would recognise as sacral or sacrally influenced. This may generally be seen to be due to the inherent popularity of the notion of divinely appointed leadership on the continent.   
:*In Ancient Egypt, for example, the second most prominent official after the Pharaoh himself was for long a high priestess dedicated to the service of Amun who was known as either the God's Wife of Amun or the Divine Adoratrice of Amun. She was generally expected to smoothen the succession from king to king by being the appointee of the incumbent and the daughter of the successor, and presided over the vast priestly caste of the empire which functioned as its de facto nobility. The situation was much the same in the Nubian states of the same period, with the Kandakes and their subordinates being expected to perform a variety of customary rituals in honour of gods like Isis. This system, of royals and nobles doubling as clerics in an all too real sense, is found today amongst everyone from the Swazis (who are led religiously by the queen mother, or Ndlovukati, of Swaziland) to the Ashantis (whose ruler , the Asantehene, serves as the custodian of the Golden Stool and its attendant royal fetishes). 
:*Beyond this system, there is also another one where the ruler and his or her nobles will be regarded as being de jure clerics, even though their actual day to day functions are secular in practice. This is especially prominent amongst the plethora of islamic polities, where the ruler and his nobility are typically styled as either amir al-muminin or khalifa. This notwithstanding, the actual religious functions within their communities are often performed by qadis, marabouts, griots, imams, ulamah or huffaz who form a holy corps under them. This was found in the Sokoto Caliphate, in the old sultanate of Zanzibar, and in the venerable Kingdom of Morocco prior to its secularisation. Other states, such as the Yoruba kingdoms of Ile-Ife and Oyo, were also led in this manner by monarchs and nobles who were ritually (if not really) members of the clergy. The Yorubas, infact, used their polytheistic cults as agents of governance by way of their technical control by the said monarchs and nobles. 
:*Outside of these rather general descriptions, the one thing to remember in all of this is that nobility in Africa is often tied to its colonial era. States that were controlled at this time by the British, say, are often in possession of strong traditional nobilities such as those of Nigeria, Ghana and Botswana. This is due to the fact that Britain is and was a monarchy, and therefore found it all too easy to operate through existing feudal or tribal structures in what came to be known as indirect rule. The French, on the other hand, were far more likely to downgrade or simply dismantle the monarchical entities that they came across as part of their republican and assimilationist policies. Due to this, while Mali, Senegal and Ivory Coast have aristocratic traditions amongst their varied tribes that run deep, the medieval nationstates that gave them to them are long since defunct, mostly due to the efforts of their former colonial overlord. 
:*From the chieftains of the Beduin in the Sinai of Egypt to the princes of the Thembu in the former Transkei of South Africa, information on the majority of important titleholders can be found at the List of current constituent monarchs, Monarchies in Africa and African Traditional Religion pages.
FactStraight (talk) 02:11, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  African customs 

message: To make the article more complete, there is a need to enrich its schema. The first part, which is a definition of the subject has to be supported by good reference materials (footnotes). Before going to the already existing sub-topics, it might be good to give some ensights about the historical development of the concept of royalty, starting with the earliest forms of monarchic societies in the Egyptian, Sumerian, and also that of Ancient China and India, which were cradles of civilization. 
Then, an overview of how did the concept of monarchy evolved in various civilizations around the world, which contributed significant impact on the development of human society, will also help present a clearer idea regarding the subject in question.  --Duke of Kaliburan (talk) 13:02, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: @Duke of Kaliburan to make the artical most correct: Royals are dreaming Imperials, its a French word and the French were "always" Royals. the French dont have a monarchie a while now so its even strange that u call urself Royal and or Royal family cuz they aint French but ok. in the Netherlands we call the Kingdom, koninkrijk. Empire for exemple the British Empire is called Rijk in the Netherlands like het Britse rijk. many people have it wrong because they are missinformed because the ones who make the info get money to make the desinformation they are haters and do this for free and or they are missinformed as well. missinformation is used sinds the very beginning for multiple purposes. 2A02:A454:E457:1:B1BC:77EE:8085:29D3 (talk) 20:22, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  On Improving the Article

message: There are several issues here, for right now I have opened an RfC about the use of honorific prefixes and "styles and titles" for pretenders and their families, at some later point I may open another RfC about the naming of articles to do with pretenders and their families,so as this RfC is about use of honorifics etc within articles and templates and not in article names, I have opened it at MOS talk:
Smeat75 (talk) 21:29, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC opened on use of honorific prefixes and "royal styles and titles" in articles and templates referring to pretenders to abolished royal titles and their families 

message: What about this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emperor_of_Korea#Post_Korean_Empire --Yomal Sidoroff-Biarmskii (talk) 15:46, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Korea. 

message: Lee Stephen hayes 196.168.1.004 1 russs street DL15 0RU 2A02:C7F:4783:8F00:A8A1:C4C7:964:1719 (talk) 20:36, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. - FlightTime (open channel) 20:38, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 13 October 2021 

message: Monarchy of Texas Royal Family KINGS 50.220.226.34 (talk) 04:28, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. MadGuy7023 (talk) 08:48, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 11 October 2022