Jump to content

Talk:Elizabeth II

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Deusveritasest (talk | contribs) at 08:13, 12 September 2015 ("longest reigning female monarch in history"?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Featured articleElizabeth II is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 2, 2012.
Did You KnowIn the news Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 29, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
June 15, 2006Good article nomineeNot listed
January 26, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
August 26, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
January 26, 2008Featured article candidateNot promoted
September 22, 2009Good article nomineeNot listed
February 23, 2010Good article nomineeNot listed
May 21, 2010Featured article candidateNot promoted
May 31, 2010Peer reviewReviewed
February 4, 2011Good article nomineeNot listed
September 14, 2011Good article nomineeListed
February 21, 2012Featured article candidatePromoted
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on April 2, 2006.
In the news A news item involving this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on September 9, 2015.
Current status: Featured article

Template:Vital article

Update to Diamond Jubilee and Beyond Section

Queen Elizabeth II becomes longest-reigning UK monarch. (198.135.125.44 (talk) 13:14, 9 September 2015 (UTC))[reply]

Incorrect date re Longest reign

Hi there,

I made a Wikipedia account today so am extremely new to this and don't really have any idea what I'm doing so apologies if I've gone about this the wrong way.

Just wanted to highlight the following fact as incorrect: "If still reigning on 10 September 2015, she will have become the longest-reigning British head of state and the longest-reigning female monarch in history, surpassing Queen Victoria."

I think it's supposed to be the 9th September 2015 is it not? Or have I got that wrong? Some articles seem to agree but others still say the 10th? https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1TEUA_enGB491GB491&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=when%20will%20queen%20elizabeth%20beat%20queen%20victoria

Just thought it'd be worth bringing up (apologies in advance if I am incorrect)

SammyR — Preceding unsigned comment added by SammyR (talkcontribs) 14:22, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The length of Victoria's reign can be calculated to within the hour because people were present at her death and that of William IV and their times of death were recorded. However, George VI died unaccompanied in the middle of the night, and so the length of the Queen's reign cannot be determined so precisely because the hour of his death, and hence the hour of her accession, is not known. She should surpass the length of Victoria's reign at some point after 8:30 p.m. on the 9th and before 5:30 a.m. on the 10th. DrKiernan (talk) 14:37, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I would say 10 Sept is correct. See my calculations at Talk:Borders Railway#Possibly some additional content. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:34, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The correct date is 9 September, 2015. There have been numerous calculations performed including not least by Buckingham Palace. In addition, it has been announced on the BBC and elsewhere that Her Majesty the Queen will be opening a section of Scottish Borders Railway on 9 September, 2015 - the day she surpasses Victoria's reign.<ref>http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-south-scotland-33761625</ref> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:643:8500:79D4:31E4:640C:FA5E:F84C (talk) 13:48, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Under the section about Jubilee and Beyond, it still lists the incorrect date of 10 September as the milestone date where Elizabeth surpasses Victoria's reign. The correct date is 9 September. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:643:8500:79D4:5566:F186:6A71:9BF9 (talk) 23:55, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"world's longest reigning living monarch"

This is not true - check king of Thailand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.33.221.6 (talk) 16:12, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We know. If it says that at some other page, then please delete it. DrKiernan (talk) 16:38, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 2 September 2015

Please change "if still reigning on the 10th September" to "if still reigning on the 9th September", as Queen Victoria's reign lasted for 63 years, 7 months and 2 days; on the 9th September, Queen Elizabeth II will have reigned for 63 years, 7 months and 3 days.

86.21.150.28 (talk) 19:15, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done See discussion in section above this one. DrKiernan (talk) 21:03, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"longest reigning female monarch in history"?

From what I can see, she will not surpass Eleanor of Aquitaine as the longest reigning female monarch in history until around January 31st, 2019. That ought to be corrected. If the editors would like to retain a statement as close as possible to the original, it could be changed to "longest reigning queen in history", and then it would be accurate. Deusveritasest (talk) 07:41, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

One could argue that holders of fiefdoms (like Eleanor) aren't sovereigns. Replacing the word monarch with sovereign would be an idea. But if they're not sovereigns are they monarchs? Gerard von Hebel (talk) 11:01, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The way to handle this is to see what the sources say about it. If the sources say longest-reigning queen in world history, then fine. If they don't mention it, then it shouldn't be included anyway. Personally, I think there's a problem with "queen", because it could be misread as including wives of kings. DrKiernan (talk) 11:21, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Wives of kings don't reign. Only queens regnant do that. I suppose queens consort "serve". -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 07:11, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I get about 15,000 ghits for "reigning queen consort". As I said, it can be misread, even if the fault is on the reader's side rather than the writer's. DrKiernan (talk) 07:14, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's a good question. I tried to determine what the precedented relationship between "monarch" and "sovereign" was on Wikipedia. While the "monarch" article does establish that a monarch is the sovereign head of a state, it also kind of fudged with that and sent mixed messages later on in the article, so I'm not really sure at this point. Deusveritasest (talk) 08:13, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Eleanor was a consort while Queen Elizabeth was a regnant so she is the longest reigning queen regnant in History. Royal1usa (talk) 07:03, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Eleanor was Duchess of Aquitaine in her own right. Psunshine87 (talk) 08:26, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A Duchess is not a monarch or a Queen. Eleanor notionally held Aquitaine from the French King, see Duke of Aquitaine. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 16:43, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As it currently stands, I added the "longest reigning queen regnant in history" (which she is) to the article as a compromise word choice, and have sources that say the same thing that back that claim up. She can be claimed to be the "longest reigning female monarch" when she overtakes Eleanor of Aquitaine in 3 years or so.Fireflyfanboy (talk) 18:58, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That phrasing strikes me as redundant. Doesn't "longest reigning queen" already establish queen regnant? Deusveritasest (talk) 08:10, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Update on reign length


This is a request to add to the first line of this Wikipedia article: ", and is the longest-reigning monarch in British history."[1]

AsaSK 2015 (talk) 00:29, 9 September 2015 (UTC) Asa[reply]

Already done as per edit. Stickee (talk) 01:26, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And undone - both that source and others say that she will become longest reigning monarch at about 17:30 UK time and that's still over 12 hours away. Please read past the title of the source. A lot of the titles seem to suggest it's already happened but when you read the text it's clear it hasn't. No idea why the BBC is reporting it like it already has in it's title - makes more sense for the papers as they're a once a day affair. Dpmuk (talk) 04:12, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why Head of State and not Monarch?

It should be Longest-reigning British Monarch not Longest-reigning Head of State. Royal1usa (talk) 18:30, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean? England has been a monarchy for 1100 years. She is head of state as well as Monarch as UK head of state is a monarch, Royal1usa (talk) 20:23, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but only 11 years out of it 1100 years History Royal1usa (talk) 21:31, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Elizabeth II Regina

Hello, could the article be updated to note the Queen's title is: Elizabeth II Dei Gratia Regina, and explain she signs her name: Elizabeth R (R the initial for Regina)

I am unable to find a direct source stating, except for wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_cypher "The present Queen's cypher is EIIR, standing for Elizabeth II Regina."

and coins stating: Elizabeth II Dei Gratia Regina

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dei_Gratia_Regina

If the above is incorrect, could someone please make enter the correct titles?Thank you, --CuriousMind01 (talk) 19:25, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Elizabeth II Dei Gratia Regina" is not the Queen's title in any country of which she is queen. Her titles are covered at List of titles and honours of Queen Elizabeth II. --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 19:37, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So these "titles" are something else then?
In 1953, Elizabeth II's first coins bore "Dei Gratia Britt Omn Regina" ("By the Grace of God, Queen of All the Britains"). From 1954 until 1964, it was shortened to read "Dei Gratia Regina" and from 1965 onwards, it was abbreviated on all coins to the current phrase of "D. G. Regina".CuriousMind01 (talk) 20:08, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If this is not covered in biographies of her, which it doesn't seem to be, then it's not something we should cover here. DrKiernan (talk) 21:05, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Those aren't titles. Her titles are set by law, not coins.
What you're referring to is covered at Coins of the pound sterling. --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 21:11, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Signature Elizabeth R?

Is there an explanation why the queen signs her name "Elizabeth R (egina)"? instead of Elizabeth II or Queen Elizabeth II

Is the signature a traditional format?--CuriousMind01 (talk) 17:38, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's just tradition - monarchs have typically signed with 'R' at the end of their name: both Elizabeth I and Elizabeth II sign documents in the same way: see a discussion here and here. --Super Nintendo Chalmers (talk) 09:02, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's an old form which goes back before surnames existed. It was used by people in many important positions, and still is in a few. For instance the Archbishop of Canterbury signs himself "+Justin Cantuar". In the case of British monarchs they have used the format Elizabeth Regina or Charles Rex )which is simply the Latin for Queen or King respectively) since time immemorial. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 14:04, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Is it worth a note in the article explaining the use of the "Elizabeth R" signature as a traditional preference? I do not have a source. The signature forms used seem to be a person's preference. In the links above, 2 queens used "the Quene" form: "Anne the Quene” and stepdaughter “Marye the Quene”; but Mary's half sister Elizabeth I signed as "Elizabeth R".CuriousMind01 (talk) 16:41, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Something that applies to all monarchs can be explained in a general article about monarchs, but is generally not suitable for individual biographies, which should focus on the life of the subject and not go into unnecessary detail. DrKiernan (talk) 17:20, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, helpful article adviceCuriousMind01 (talk) 23:25, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]