This has to be one of the most pointless list articles, The line of succession to the British throne. I could just about understand having a list of the top 100 but this lists over 2500!

Only a small minority of those on this list are actually referenced, how can an 'encyclopedia' have a list like this that is 95% unreferenced?

What is the fucking point of this ridiculously long list? Why has it been semi-protected for over 2 years?

Oh, it gets worse. Look at all the "lines of succession" on this page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_succ...round_the_world

Of those other lists not one is over a 100 names, indeed most are under 20. So why over 2500 on the British one?

What's your beef? That the list is too long or that it's unreferenced?

This article is priceless if you intend to murder your way to the Throne.

Both. For all anyone knows half the names on that list could just be invented.

What is the obsession with the British line of succession, this list takes trivia to new dimensions of absurdity.

Nope, Wikipedians obsessed with Pippa Middleton's buttocks do that.

At least one can get to grips with a pair of buttocks, but 2500+ would be too many to handle.

Also, doesn't every one of those 2500+ names listed require a reference to comply with Wikipedia's BLP policy?

Oh, and they spelt my name wrong.

This thread needs a picture:

That doesn't really need a caption...


It's not only that, but some enterprising individual has almost certainly put each listee's position in the line of succession in that person's BLP, so every time there's a change at the top, everyone's number changes - it looks like about 20 percent of them have articles, so that's roughly 500 changes each time just to maintain accuracy.

Frankly, they should stop the list at the point where they'd prefer to abolish the monarchy altogether rather than allow the person in that position to ascend to the throne - that would be #67, tops. Personally, I'd stop it at #45.


Mine too!

What a spoilsport

I'd stop it at #1.

I'm for that!! OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!!

What have you got against the Norwegian royal family? Or are you just trying to troll Norwegians?

There was a Scandinavian King of England once - Canute.

I don't think we want a royal with wet feet again.

We had 'Foggy' Philips doesn't he count? 'Foggy' cos he's wet and thick.

Would it be possible for a UK monarch to come from Northern Ireland?

Is there anyone out there who isn't trying to troll Norwegians?

I mean, sure, I'd stop it at #1 too, but I'm talking about UK popular sentiment here. It isn't a question of what would actually happen if all 67 of those people were to die in a short span of time - presumably if that occurred, it would be because someone was systematically assassinating them one-by-one, correct? So if the assassins got all the way to #60, and you were #67, you'd probably be thinking maybe this whole English royalty thing isn't really something I want all that much really, and you'd renounce your claim to the throne anyway.

Or else it could be something like the plot of 28 Days/Weeks/Months Later, in which the entire population of Great Britain turns into raging zombie-psychopaths, including the Royal Family (as if anyone could tell the difference). So if you're in Norway when that happens, and none of the 67 people in front of you were spared due to their being on vacation in Monaco or some other jet-set locale, then sure, go ahead - but do you really want to be the titular monarch of a nation of raging zombie-psychopaths? Especially when you're already the titular monarch of a bunch of Norwegians?

So clearly, cutting off the list at #67 is a purely practical move. And #45 would actually be better, since it's pretty obvious that most English folks (or at least the sane ones) would rather have the King of Norway on the throne than Jeremy Lascelles.

Good grief, we can't have a foreign monarch ascend to the throne of Britain, can we?

Even better; http://pippasass.com/

Maybe I'm just being dense, but what the hell is the point of up-to-date lines of succession for thrones and countries that no longer exist? A list for England, Saudi Arabia and other current monarchies seems reasonable ....but Line of Succession to the throne of the Two Sicilies? At least the Ottoman article admits that there is nothing to inherit.

Sometimes these defunct monarchies do get restored—look at Spain for instance, or Cambodia—so I can see why those who care about these things keep these lists. Whether Wikipedia needs them is another matter, but a short list like that Sicily one doesn't seem unreasonable.

A very reasonable answer although Spain and Cambodia both remained sovereign nations after the deposing military coup. Many of the ones on the list are no longer countries and haven't been for centuries. It gets stranger with Italy: the Italians actually abolished the nobility back in '48. "Prince Casimir of Bourbon-Two Sicilies" has no more legal claim to the title than I do, it's all self-styled. It's even lulzier as there are zero references (anyone feel like adding Prince Sol Goldstone as rightful heir to Alsace?)

It's not a big deal, just another one of those bizarre articles it's hard to imagine someone bothering to write.

Bizzarrely we not have a navigation template listing Diana, Princess of Hearts as "mother in law" to Princess Kate.

And, in other news, they want to to delete her (alleged) dog.

That was VERY naughty Scott. You should really block yourself for POINTY disruption.

Yes. Baron Carrickfergus would suffice.

The Ottoman throne is a big issue. As the article hints, the Sultan of Turkey was also the Caliph. The restoration of the Caliphate is a big issue among Sunni Islamists, so presumably they are interested in who would get the job were it restored.

I don't think the Spanish monarchy was ever quite defunct. It was always expected to be restored after the death of Franco. Of course, restoring the Two Sicilies would undo the unification of Italy and prejudice the restoration of the italian monarchy.

Incidentally, why isn't there a list of succession among Jacobite claimants to the British throne?