File talk:World Monarchies.png

WHy is the Vatican city considered an absolute monarchy on this picture? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Quindie (talk • contribs) 23:45, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New Zealand should be fully green. It is a commonwealth realm the same as Canada and Australia, with Queen Elizabeth II as head of state and an elected parliament and prime minister. Werididiot (talk) 07:34, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely!

Should Indonesia be pink because of Yogyakarta? --131.215.220.112 00:10, 23 Aug is

ust 2007 (UTC)

Yes, as should South Africa and the PRC; Samoa is no longer a monarchy, too. I've updated the map. —Nightstallion 23:05, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tibet? No, unfortunately it is not an existing monarchy.

There are a huge number of Commonwealth countries missing (India, South Africa, others).124.177.2.220 (talk) 00:03, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

India, South Africe, etc, are members of the Commonwealth, but not Commonwealth Realms. A commonwealth realm is a country which has the Queen (Elizabeth II) as head of state, and is so a monarchy. Passingtramp (talk) 18:16, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is unusal to not have anyone to pass the crown down to because the royal family trys to keep the crown in the family.

I did not understand the last sentence at all.

Nepal should be updated? (Recent elections) Benlisquare (talk) 10:23, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is the United Kingdom not a Commonwealth realm? 124.254.101.121 (talk) 10:00, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vancouver island isn't included as part of canada, south africa should be added because the zulu king is king of Zululand (duh) and the uk is not only part but in charge of the commonwealth realm. Also , since Western sahara is occupied by morroco , it is de facto a monarchy because morroco is one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bezuidenhout (talk • contribs) 06:34, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct in everything except the fact that Western Sahara is not "occupied" by Morocco, it is part of Morocco.

This image doesn't match with the rest of the article it's in nor the template about monarchies. It should be consistent throughout the whole site as it'll be quite confusing to many who will go on here. That-Vela-Fella (talk) 19:51, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From October, 7th, 2008 subnational monarchy Mustang inside Nepal was abolished, what needs to exchange the map [1]CrazyRepublican (talk) 00:21, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Contraversy over United Kingdom identity in map

We should decide whether the light green is to be Commonwealth dominions, which would exclude the UK, or Commonwealth realms, which would include it. Since the Queen would be the monarch of the UK regardless of its membership in the Commonwealth, I prefer the former. (Of course, since we could argue the UK is a monarchy independent of the Commonwealth, it should be dark green regardless of whether we use the term dominion or realm.) kwami (talk) 10:03, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think I would favour colouring all Commonwealth realms dark green. Commonwealth realms seem irrelevant to this particular map. Otherwise the UK would have to be listed as a Commonwealth realm too...--Cameron * 12:38, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I must agree with Cameron, all Commonwealth realms should be coloured dark green. If otherwise: all Commonwealth realms including the UK should be coloured light green. I would prefer the first option. --Know zilla 12:52, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The UK qualifies as both light and dark green, since it has its own monarch (dark) and is in the Commonwealth. With the current wording, light green is for dominions, so the UK would not qualify. Personally, I find the distinction useful. We could do the same thing for the Kingdom of ~~Denmark~~ Spain: Dark green for countries with their own monarch, light green for countries (like ~~Greenland~~ Andorra) using someone else's monarch. This discussion might be better at Wiki Commons, since that's where the image now resides. kwami (talk) 18:59, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Commonwealth realms are NOT dominions! They are independent sovereign states with their OWN monarch and they are kingdoms in their OWN right. Commonwealth realms are: independent countries and their respective territories which recognise HM Queen Elizabeth II as their head of state! Greenland is NOT independent, but the realms ARE, please get your facts right. There is a HUGE difference between Commonwealth realms and dependencies of OTHER countries such as Greenland (to Denmark). What do you mean using their own monarch and using someone else's monarch? Listen well: Greenland's monarch is DANISH. Denmark's monarch is DANISH. The UK's monarch is BRITISH. Canada's monarch is CANADIAN! Greenland "uses someones elses monarch", Australia, Canada, Grenada, etc all "use their OWN monarch". --- Here are your options: 1) Colour all the Commonwealth realms dark green, they are all constitutional monarchies. 2) Colour the UK light green as well. I would prefer the first option, it seems more relevant. --Know zilla 19:22, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why have you changed the colour descriptions?! You have to have the image match what the articles say. --Know zilla 07:14, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The image caption should match the image. I'll update the articles.

I'm not sure about Greenland--I can't find anyone who is--but that's not the point. (Meanwhile substitute Andorra.) There is a difference between countries sharing a monarch and countries with their own monarch. QE is queen of the UK, and also of some of the Commonwealth countries. You speak as if the Queen of Canada were a different person. Come on--if you say "the Queen of Canada" or "the Queen of Australia", people will look at you like you're bonkers, but if you say "the Queen of England", they know exactly what you mean. This is a distinction I think worth maintaining.

Meanwhile, this really is a discussion for the image talk page. There is no image here. kwami (talk) 07:22, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's what the encyclopedia is here for, to educate people! There isn't even a title called "Queen of England", though many people say it, that's there mistake, Wikipedia and the rest of the Wikimedia projects are to educate people, not to agree with their mistakes. Many people commented about the way this image is. Either colour all Commonwealth realms including the UK light green (edit the description according) OR colour all Commonwealth realms dark green. You can't say no what many people have said. There is a community consensus, you can't go against it. Your making the articles look weird. I'm saying for the last time, please do one of the options, that is what's right. --Know zilla 07:31, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So far I'm only seeing a consensus of you, and not even on the talk page. I don't see any kind of consensus in the file history. What's wrong with coloring personal unions differently that direct monarchies? Or, if you prefer, non-resident monarchs from resident monarchs? This is certainly an issue for discussion. On the talk page. kwami (talk) 07:38, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Read above my comments, other people have said similar things. Well, anyway, we'll discuss this further on this image's Commons talk page. --Know zilla 07:42, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

1. Why is the Auckland area in NZ striped? As far as I know it would be all green.

2. Canada, Nz, Australia, etc should all have the same status as UK. This is because they are not officially tied to the UK, under the law they just so happen to have the same monarch. Technically they could all have different monarchs, they just don't. The Person Who Is Strange 20:26, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

You are right in both cases.

The Auckland area is striped because it has two monarchs, the British and the Maori. kwami (talk) 22:55, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Maori one is not official. Such unofficial monarchs exist in most places of the World by millions, it is impossible to show on the map all unofficial subnational monarchies.

Update and correction of outright mistakes.

Here is the correct version: http://keep4u.ru/full/2009/04/15/6bfe4fe03634c24bf2b4c90fb1566eb3/jpg

I don't think so. Any particular "mistakes" you've corrected? kwami (talk) 22:54, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Africa, Thailand Mistakes: Liechtenstein, Western Sahara, UAE, Auckland, Fiji, Samoa In the case of Andorra, I noticed that the Russian and English Wikipedias show differed meaning for the salade colour: the Russian version says "Commonwealth Realms" and the English version says "personal unions". I made my map for the Russian version, so Andorra is salade, not dark green. I would really recommend the English version Wikipedia to also change the salade colour to "Commonwealth Realms", because the only country besides Commonwealth Realms that is a personal union is Andorra. But Andorra is in personal union not with another monarchy, but with a republic and a diocese, which are not specifically indicated on the map. So it does not make much profit to keep the salade colour for "personal unions", it would be much more informative and less misleading if it indicated "Commonwealt Realms", and in that case Andorra would of course be dark green. Still, if you disagree about changing annotations, you can make Andorra salade.

United Arab Emirates

I think this should be coloured as subnational monarchies.--79.111.107.139 (talk) 00:41, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]