Talk:List of longest-reigning monarchs

message: It has recently came to my Attention that only a Total of less than 50 days are left before he enters the First List. Apparently Brunei was a British Protectorate until 1984 but the Chinese Wikipedia also states that Brunei was Technically sovereign as early as 1959 due to constitution related Reasons so the Details remain unclear here really. Also like should we start a RFC on this? Should him and his reign be included in the First List? 77.101.238.210 (talk) 18:35, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Brunei page says Brunei became independent in 1984, so he's not an independent monarch, so he shouldn't be on here until 2039. Yourlocallordandsavior (talk) 23:33, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

text: Hassanal Bolkiah certainly doesn't belong in the top list. His reign as monarch of an sovereign state, didn't begin until the mid-1980s. GoodDay (talk) 23:46, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Hassanal Bolkiah]] 

message: We probably need to semi-protect this page considering the amount of edits that's been made to this page nowadays. This topic is fairly political and can be controversial so I think it would be better to have editors be semi-confirmed.  Yourlocallordandsavior (talk) 23:44, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. GoodDay (talk) 23:51, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protection 

message: So there was a discussion about whether Hassanal Bolkiah should be included in the sovereign states section, since his country was a British protectorate until 1984. People argue that based on that, he wouldn't qualify to be listed in that section until 2039. Fair enough, but there's another monarch that has a similar issue, but in reverse. The dependent or constituent states section lists Sobhuza II's entire 82 year reign at the top of the list. However, as pointed out in the entry itself, his country ceased to be a British protectorate in 1968, which means the last 14 years of his reign were of a sovereign country. So by the previous logic, should only the first 68 years of his reign be considered for the dependent monarch section, which would bump him considerably down the list? The closest thing it says on the matter is that the list contains monarchs who were "not internationally sovereign for most of their reign", but even then "most" could be interpreted to mean anything from "more than half of their reign" to "almost all of their reign". 2601:249:9301:D570:B52E:5F5A:4889:7D69 (talk) 18:08, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sobhuza II 

message: It has previously been seen that the first list had monarchs moved to the third list due to a lack of verifiable dates and and as such i think the same should happen with the second list. user:Yourlocallordandsavior. 77.101.238.210 (talk) 18:29, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: But the monarchs in the second list all have exact dates listed. Are you more saying these dates are incorrect? Ttutcha (talk) 23:37, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I actually think it's more of that we need verifiable sources for their dates instead of just random dates from unreliable and blacklisted sources such as Royalark and Indianrajputs. Infact Muhammad II of Kedah was removed from the first list because no reliable source could be found for his exact dates and all. S302921 (talk) 15:49, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean-Up