Talk:Monarchy - Knowledge

1282:

existed in and why; variation by civilization and ethnicity and why; the various constraints on each being a function of traditional laws of the region, and the military and economic and developmental differences that caused those differences in government. Why does this matter? This article is a sort of hearsay collection of complaints. Monarchy provides predictable change in power, and limits competition for power, thereby forcing people into the marketplace for survival, prosperity, and status. Most revisionist criticisms of aristocracies and monarchies are due to the land (Farming) being the only means of increasing productivity, and welfare and wars as a system of economic entrepreneurship, just as economic wars are conducted today with money and law, they did with money and arms. With europe's success and lack of stagnation like other civilizations due to distribution of power into competitors forcing a market for government. Monarchies were more tolerant of people and differences, but intolerant of use of politics or war to obtain power (unlike today). Why is it the dynastic monarchies lasted for so long and modern states so short? Why were taxes 1-3% under monarchies and 50%+ today? Why couldn't people participate in government (ignorant, illiterate, lazy, petty, superstitious on a level we can't imagine). Who fought in wars and why? (It was profitable. Piracy of the land. People volunteered enthusiastically.) Why do we call them sovereigns, yet also state every man is sovereign in our traditional law? Were monarchs and policies influential or just what we talk about when common law and custom determined people's actions far more so? Where are cites from the say, the Routledge History of Monarchy? Any work of comparative government? And the hundreds of other sources?

2039:

argument. Yes republics can have puppet states or colonies (not precicely vassals though, or especially fiefs) but it is not about comparing monarchies with republics (the sentence about republics further below has nothing to do with this). Monarchies have historically formed special polities that republics mostly havnt, republics havnt formed states out of alliegence to a person, such as in states out of personal union; best example Spain. Just because Andorra has the french president as protector doesnt invalidate that monarchies had this kind of association as one of its main modus operandi, republics do this only through colonization etc. and dont associate states through sharing a president, yet again as evident with Andorra, Andorra is not a part of the French republic, its more a statement about the monarchic elements of Andorra. But enough of the missplaced comparison with republics. As I said the main point is to elaborate that monarchies do often form states through personal association, constituted either as federations, through personal union or vassalage. Maybe it helps, to connect it with feudalism, a very monarchic system. But I have favoured just listing vassalage, because feudalism is a rather European system and vassalage is more generally applicable. I hope I could flash out what I mean and find a text that works for everyone.

1644:

in my opinion quite crucial to understand the concept. The first one and a half sentences are about the special nature of monarchies compared to the modern nation state since monarchies can come into being not only as an unitarian or nation state, but also as a network of polities best illustrated by a personal union, but more frequently in history as a federation or system of vassalage. If people want to understand monarchies throughout history, and thats when they were big, then they need to understand this dimension. The second excerpt is underlining the crucial shift and conceptual difference that defines our modern world of nation states, which chose mostly the concept of republic.

1354:). The monarch can go by various titles, and little extra information or clarity is added if we include that their authority can be "proclaimed" and "recognized" by inhabiting various seats. It's a more complex way of saying the same thing, so both sentences were not needed. The other sentence I removed stated that monarchs can be bound by and rule over territories or people groups, just as can almost any ruler, so it did not seem significant. Additionally, the example title given "King of the Belgians" is functionally no different from most other monarchs. All of this, besides the over-linking of words, adds unnecessary complexity to the lead. 1813:

know what it means by "polities" being "formed" "through personal relations to the monarch." It's not untrue, it's just that the language is very technical and it's still kind of vague. I understand how the republic ideas could be lead-relevant, although I am not sure what you mean in your comment immediately above. The part I am hesitant to add would be that republic is "opposite" of monarchy, as if it is a binary choice or a spectrum, where in fact there are many more varieties of government that aren't plotted on that bi-polar model, right? If there are sources that use the exact word "opposite," then I could be convinced.--

805:

individuals whose ancestry and birth has placed them within the small ruling class of the country or society in question. Even for elective monarchies (such as the Holy Roman Empire and the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth) the monarch was elected by the ruling class and elected from the ruling class, and access to the ruling class was determined by heredity: You could only be elected King of Poland if you were born to the right people. In contrast, dictators aquired power solely through conquest and/or political processes; it has nothing to do with accident of birth. --

1592: 2113:

monarchies can be a weird conglomerate of territories, particularly in Europe and therefore the colonial world. As I said this is all a hint to the complexity of mostly (and importantly the contemporary) the British/Commonwealth Crown, and how its relations can be understood, e.g. historically the best example is how Queen Victoria could also be Empress. So its mostly about feudalism and other political constructs like personal union. I am open for more discussion, but otherwise this is closed for me. Thank you for the constructive work.

229: 2008:

situation. Or perhaps the relationship between Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands and the United States. Even if neither of those quite fit, something equivalent to vassalage is possible with republics as well as with monarchies. The only difference with a monarchy is that the "state" is a person. 2) Then I propose that you use the wording: "Monarchies were the most common form of government until the 20th century, by which time republics had replaced many monarchies." --

283: 262: 293: 2170: 220: 1547:

last aspects are also not common, only historically, because legaly in the today common form, a constitutional monarchy, these powers are given by the constitution contracting subjects. I think the lead needs to consider the many contemporary and historic monarchies that are subnational and mostly symbolic, since they outnumber the top layer monarchies of nations and independent states.

597:, defined as "a type of monarchy common to the late middle ages period, characterized by the formation of distinct social classes. In particular, the classes of nobility, priesthood and to a lesser extent, townsfolk, would gain some representation in the government, and limit the rulers powers." The direct translation of "monarchia stanowa" would be "class monarchy" (stan -: --> 2007:

1) A republic could conceivably have the same head of state as another republic, just as the same person could be monarch of two separate realms (personal union). And a republic could have another republic that is subservient to it (vassalage). The territories of the United States might approach that

1928:

as 2) addressing the raised issue:"Monarchies were the most common form of government until the 20th century, when new republics were established with the purpose of abolishing monarchies (see republicanism), replacing them as the dominant form of government." ... if you have a better wording, please

1425:

Perhaps somewhere under the "role of the monarch"? The territory vs. people could go there, maybe. The problem with the "insignia" or seats information is that it's often unclear whether these insignia or seats have an important impact on the role of the monarch. Again, if it goes in, it should be

435:

He sounded deeply traditional: a loyal courtier to his kings. But North Korea's communist origins mean it can't admit it has become a monarchy, so this isn't quite enough. Both the ruler, and even more his successor, have to justify their rule in some other way. This is the third factor, and it takes

1643:

Hi I had this recently reintroduced after being taken out without proper explaination. Now it got again taken out for reasons of "unneeded" and "wordy". Well I want to defend the content of it (not the wording). So I want to put this up for discussion. I argue for thos two sentences because they are

413:

But my trade has its uses too, as I shall now try to demonstrate. Take Kim Jong-eun, newly crowned dauphin of North Korea. A communist monarchy: that's a strange beast indeed, and a contradiction in terms. But sociology, I contend, may shed some light here. What is going on? How on earth did it come

1944:

1) All this is saying is that the monarch (as the representative of the state) determines how the state relates to other states. Is that really necessary to spell out? 2) "Monarchies were the most common form of government until the 20th century, at which time republics had become more common." But

1770:

1) How is the first bit more relevant to monarchies than to other forms of government? Republics can also come into being as unitary states or as more complicated agglomerations. 2) the bit about historical commonality is already in the article. What does the sentence about republics add to this?

1546:

I argue for the latter because: "Political system" is broader than "form of government", a monarchy can be within a larger political system and does not need to be supreme or hereditary, good example here is Malaysia. Further mention of heredity is later in next paragraph and wording is longer. The

1145:

English language (i.e. not the state language of a particular government). It needs to be improved. Its in reference to the powers of the monarch. In the United States we have developed the convention of saying that a national leader excercises "executive authority," and that seems to be a natural

875:

Hi, I edited the starting definition to reflect the explicit lifetime tenure as defining element. I am aware that many autocrats rule until their death, but only monarchs and thus monarchies have this "until death" (or abdication) rule written into law. Inheritance is only an option for succession.

439:

The first is a cult of personality: originated by Stalin, extended by Mao, and pushed to its extremes by Kim Il-sung. Hey, if a guy claims absolute right to rule, he'd better be special. This is what the German sociologist Max Weber called charisma: a term which has entered the language in a looser

420:

Communist monarchy Communist monarchy: what a grotesque paradox. Yet there is a double logic to this. First, at the end of the day who can you trust? Especially in a culture that prizes filial piety, your own family looks the best bet. Kim Jong-il certainly thinks so, promoting not only his son but

1992:

The further down mentioned Commonwealth is the best example why both points are important: the Commonwealth is an association of realms under a crown/monarch, exactly what I try to state in 1) ... and calls in the Commonwealth realms for a republic are the common proposal against the monarchy (see

1812:

I did not remove the text this time, but I agree with Khajidha's critiques. I also do not see exactly how your comment here addresses them. The fact that monarchies can exist in these different forms does not seem essential for the lead and makes it more confusing. Most readers are not going to

1793:

ad 1) well I can see what you mean, but its just a problem of focus. To address this we could write something like "A monarchy has the capacity to form polities through personal relations to the monarch. Beside the common organization of states as unitarian or federated states, monarchies can also

1249:

How is it not discriminatory to deny millions of people the equal right and chance to be the head of state of their country because one family was at some stage hundreds of years ago awarded the exclusive privilege usually based on centuries of oppression and tyranny (which is how "royal" families

895:

Their are two historical inaccuracies about Bhutan in the article. Firstly Bhutan is mentioned as a kingdom which had never been under European subjugation. This is false as Bhutan remained a protectorate of the British Indian Empire until 1947 and secondly Bhutan is mentioned as being a Theravada

1621:

I think this article should not be a competition between who was the first, better to mention a few cultures who were undoubtedly part of the beginnings. The Sumerian culture is one the generally accepted ones, and yes I checked, the only verifiable king is the one mentioned, however the Sumerian

1330:

The only problem is that this an opinion, not fact. It can not be quantifiably ascertained, and that point of view could be criticized (considering most members of society never have the possibility to be head of state, or there isn't even that position as a separate office, such as in the United

1281:

Does not disambiguate between chieftain (pre-roman), manorial system, kingdom (pre-christian dominance), Monarchy(christian monarchy), papal monarchy, constitutional monarchy (Secular), absolute monarchy (european), tzardom (absolute), Despotism, and the international equivalents or the eras they

2038:

2) thanks & added; ad 1) if you argue like this then allmost no element of monarchies or republics are relevant because they are present in both, hell even communism can have monarchic elements like in NKorea, though the elements are differently crucial for the different systems and thats my

1971:

ad 2) no my whole argument is that it is important to draw a connection to the contemporarily dominant form of government, especially because it is used as the concept to abolish monarchies, put in place instead of monarchy. I am contextualizing, not just mentioning historic conditions as in the

1701:

PS: Previously the first part was even longer, elaborting in more detail the first issue with following sentences. These sentences had been cut because they were touched upon particularly by the now taken out sentences. The older sentences are for illustration and need not be reintroduces if not

804:

I'd say the defining characteristic of the monarch is that they inherit the office, as opposed to acquiring it through purely political means. That doesn't mean that pure primogeniture determines who the monarch will be, but it does mean that a) the monarch can only come from a select number of

694:

most monarchies throughout the ages essentially were absolutist dictatorships. Franco's rule in Spain was essentially a kingdom without a monarchy. Mussolini in Italy was prime minister under a monarch. Even the modern day constitutional monarchies are still essentially discriminatory as in that

2112:

I am glad we found something that works for both. I integrated it now and I hope that how I (re-) integrated it in the remained text is okay and not sabutaging what you saw that works for you? I originally intended the titles not as a list, but to show why monarchs have different titles and why

424:

Second: In a state barely 60 years old, but preceded by centuries of Confucian monarchy and (more immediately) four decades of emperor-worship under Japanese occupation (1905-45), keeping it in the Kim family presses powerful buttons. Or to put it more sociologically, this mode of essentially

1967:

I am sorry but you seem to not get what I am saying. 1) the sentence does not say anything about foreign policy/other states, it talkes about how the state is constituted/assembled, which is as crucial as it is for democracies to be constituted through the identification of a populace/voting

1314:

differentiate between constitutional and absolute monarchies, as well as comparing several different methods of succession. Additionally, before adding some of your above claims to the article, I recommend gaining consensus (and providing sources) here on the talk page first. A "market" for

632:

From the first few paragraphs of this, there appears to be no difference beetween monarchy and dictatorship. Then come charachteristics of monarchy, none of which seem to distinguish it from other governments. Dictatorship usually has a republican government behind, but what about modern

1410:

Last but not least, maybe there is a spot in the article where the taken out senances can be of use? Obviously I find it important to note somewhere what the senances say about the nuances of legitimation of monarchs through insignia, seats or connection to territory or people.

410:. Plenty of obfuscating jargon, too. Nor is it half as trendy as when I first got hooked, back in 1968 - when I mixed it up with Marxism. These days, subjects like psychology, history and even economics (despite our present discontents) are more highly regarded than sociology. 1245:

The article fails to mention even any of the argument that the concept of monarchy is in itself discriminatory as it differentiates between families based on birth, asserting that members of one particular family are "higher", "nobler" or simply "better" than all others.

1858:

ad 2) Well I know the whole thing with the history of the concept of republic is contradicting, but republic is used by many states to denote the "absence" of a monarchy. But how about this:"Monarchies were the most common form of government until the 20th century, when

421:

his sister - Kim Kyong-hui also becomes a full Politburo member - and of course her husband Jang Song-taek, now an alternate Politburo member as well as a vice-chair of the National Defense Commission (NDC), the highest executive body of state outranking the Cabinet.

443:

Yet as Weber saw, as a mode of rule charisma has problems. Unlike traditional authority - a monarchy proper, for instance - charisma is vested in just one exceptional individual. What happens when they die? The challenge, in Weber's rather ugly term, is to routinize

749:

with the part about "any predetermined limits on the length of their tenure," or in other words, term limits. Even without that part, though, there are many dictators in office for life who are not traditionally considered monarchs (historical examples range from

430:

Our people take pride in the fact that they are blessed with great leaders from generation to generation... Our people are honored to serve the great president Kim Il-sung and the great general Kim Jong-il. Now we also have the honor of serving young general Kim

1356:

I appreciate your efforts to improve the article, as we seem to be the most frequent and consistent editors on the page recently. However, it seems as though we have very different standards for the type of information that should be in the lead. Perhaps a

1254:

Good idea. I think this would fit well somewhere in the last two paragraphs of the History section when many countries turned away from monarchism; it would make sense to include these kinds of critiques from an Enlightenment perspective of human rights.

1309:

The article could benefit from significant revisions, and we would welcome your help on this article, but I would ask for a more specific statement of the problems with the current version before saying yes to a complete re-write. Currently, the article

666:

King Juan Carlos (or King John Charles, if you wish to translate the name he assumed in office) of Spain, unlike Elizabeth II who at least has a religious investiture power, is a true figurehead. Spain is also an officially Christian state, but a

1924:

1) that statement does not refer remotely to republics. But ok, lets reword:"Monarchies can claim realms through personal association of lands and peoples to the monarch, allowing personal association as personal union, federation or vassalage."

1393:

Regarding the other edit of you, moving the remark about "dynastic periode", this was at the end of the sentance because also elective monarchies can build dynastic periodes. But of course it is mostly in the context of hereditary monarchies.

1376:

Thank you very much for the elaborate explanation. I think your arguments are fine, even if I clearly have a different approach. A third opinion is allways good, but I have no problem with your edit thanks to your elaboration. All the best.

1622:

King list goes back much further, indeed backed by written evidence. So the first pharagraph of the history sections should not be removed, they have verified entities. The rest of your edits you may put back. I Wish You A Happy New Year!(

471:

of North Korea; (at any rate, a monarchy doesn't have to be hereditary, it can also be elective.) he constitution states that the people are sovereign (and thus the country is a republic), rather than the sovereignty being vested in the

550:

I've done some CE on the "current monarchies" section, but I'm wondering where the justification is for this particular subdivision. In particular I would question the division into two sets of constitutional monarchies. Do we have a

1165:

While it may be illegal to criticize the monarchy in certain places like Britain and Canada, its necessary that the topic have a criticism section, which will also naturally spill over into an article. In fact there appears to be a

1315:

government? Monarchies more tolerant of differences? (than whom? when?) Many of these claims would require careful citation ... And if cited and added, they wouldn't necessarily require a rewrite of the text now in the article.--

1033:

of Malaysia is no monarch but a simple head of state, but is still elected from the federated monarchies of Malaysia, making Malaysia an odd construct of being a republic made out of monarchies, making it a monarchy afterall?

1797:

ad 2) the sentence about republic(-anism) puts monarchies in political context, importantly since most people live in republics and they are products and even named to signal non-monarchic. Besides its half a sentence.

1223: 1064: 2084:

See, now that makes sense. I still feel it isn't strictly necessary to state, because we have already established that the monarch embodies the state in his/her person, but will not object to making it explicit.

2053:

Ok how about this, turning it around, making it not a statement about federations etc, making it clear that federations etc are not a speciality of monarchies, but rather how they come to be:"Monarchies can form

663:. As monarch, she is a constitutional officer of the British state, but has no secular power, and is in fact mainly a religious leader for the recognized denomination (the UK is an officially Christian state). 1331:

States). I wouldn't go around editing Knowledge pages on the basis of opinion. It could be phrased as a question and backed up, but it is not something that in good conscience that could be presented as fact

153: 788:

men as monarchs: Barrack Obama, Vladimir Putin, Filipe Calderon, and others; and formerly Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Joseph Mobutu, Momar Al Kadaffi, Idi Amin, Milton Obote, Manuel Noriega, and others?

741:

Forms of monarchy differ widely based on the level of legal autonomy the monarch holds in governance, the method of selection of the monarch, and any predetermined limits on the length of their tenure."

857:, the Polish nobility (who claimed to represent the Polish nation as a whole) and not the King; whose power they severely circumscribed. For those reasons, it can be considered a republic rather than an 2182: 2249: 1207: 574:

On the current map New Caledonia and Vanuatu shown as constitutional monarchies instead of Tuvalu and Tonga (I think, that Tonga remains an absolute monarchy). Please somebody exchange the map.

1426:

clear to the reader how the different "seats" are functionally different rather than mostly being different terminology (and it would also have to be supported by sources, of course).--

598:(social) class in Polish), but I am not seeing anything like this in the English sources on Google Books. Any ideas? PS. On a related note, en wiki is also missing an article on the 2239: 1085:

Do orphans have an issue that a family man places his umbral over that what he(she) has created, maintained themselves? (Beaurocrats and social anarchist mafia do, but do you?)

2254: 675:

back in the 1100s, and is himself elected, not appointed. This leaves the modern Monarch of Spain with no power, secular or religious, except for his symbolic significance.

1638: 917: 1060: 836:

male Roman Catholic (in theory any male Christian) can be legally and validly elected Pope, although once elected he must be consecrated as a Bishop in order to serve.

1285:

So the question is: is a rewrite possible? Is it worth it for me to invest time in updating it? Or is this kind of work subject to petty political infighting? -Thanks

1096: 513: 499: 388: 1235: 1292: 1216: 406:"I'm a sociologist, by discipline. Or indiscipline, do I hear you sneer? True, my subject has its share of what one eminent sociologist, Garry Runciman, has called 907: 147: 1136: 440:

sense. Or if he's not so special, you make up stories to pretend he is. These may be ludicrous, but woe betide anyone rash enough to giggle or cast aspersions.

853:

Regardless of the fact that the title of the 1562-1791 Polish Commonwealth's Head of State was 'King', the sovereignty of it was considered to be vested in the

1895:

1) Republics can also be complex systems. 2) Your proposed sentence implies that republics did not exist until the 20th century. So, no, do not insert this. --

575: 545: 1332: 695:

everyone from other families is barred from being head of state because that right is exclusively reserved for one family which is inherently discriminatory.

1288: 1141:

This language here in the introduction is vague as to the meaning of "sovereignty, or its altogether outside of the use of the word "sovereignty" in the

704: 1350:

Nsae Comp, I recently made a relatively minor edit, removing this material from the lead because I believe that it is unnecessary and repetitive (diff

973:

are in place there. Anyway I am not quite sure which part of this article it is that you suggest improving, you will have to be a bit more specific. --

349: 2163: 1276: 931: 588: 687: 2122: 1938: 1764: 1743: 1696: 1001:

The opening sentence states that a monarch reigns until death or abdication. However, the Malaysian monarchy has a term length of five years.

845: 820: 1945:

the only part that is really relevant to this article is that "Monarchies were the most common form of government until the 20th century." --

1240: 954:

if the children and grandchildren from the king/queen dies/divorce then sister-in-law/brother-in-law can't be a member of the royal family.

233: 2214: 1155: 564: 1197: 1068: 996: 727: 453: 79: 1203:

Dude, its never been illegal to criticize the monarchy in any of the Commonwealth Realms. Australia has a referendum on it, after all

2264: 2234: 1024: 339: 1324: 1010: 1270: 622: 1631: 489: 459:

Regardless of whether the position of leader of North Korea has effectively been passed down from father to son (although neither

2244: 738:"A monarchy is a form of government in which sovereignty is actually or nominally embodied in a single individual (the monarch). 678:

So, Queen Elizabeth II and King Juan Carlos are by no means dictators, yet they are monarchs. I hope that answers your question.

517: 503: 398: 1876: 1822: 1435: 1420: 1403: 1386: 2269: 1890: 1043: 798: 2098: 2079: 2048: 2021: 2002: 1981: 1958: 1908: 1807: 1784: 982: 825:

In that case, shouldn't we amend the Article definition to say that a monarch must be partially hereditary if not directly so?

2140: 85: 1843:):"The focus of monarchies on the monarch, particularly its relations, has allowed monarchies to become complex systems of 1584: 1577: 1092: 841: 794: 683: 509: 495: 384: 781:

the Head of State of the USA, and he is inarguably the very personification of Article II in the country's Constitution.

642: 315: 1340: 2259: 1302: 903: 627: 168: 30: 135: 1839:

ad 1) Ill try another wording that is less convaluted and more focused on the special dimension of monarchies (e.g.

870: 44: 963: 922:

Which Monarchy or Kingdom is the richest in the world? and which is the poorest? Any tally of wealth by Kingdom?

2229: 936: 837: 790: 679: 99: 671:

Catholic one rather than Anglican Catholic. The Pope assigns all other Bishops to their Dioceses ever since the

2094: 2017: 1954: 1904: 1780: 1193: 1179: 583: 449: 428:

On October 8 Yang Hyong-sop, a veteran Politburo member aged 85, told Associated Press Television News (APTN):

306: 267: 104: 20: 1261:, also, however, that anything added would have to include citations referencing reliable secondary sources.-- 885: 1464:

and legal authority exercised by the monarch may differ from varying levels of constitutionally constrained (

1160: 1126: 74: 1612: 494:

Yes, it is absurd to call a failed republic a monarchy or even a "quasi" monarchy. This is clearly wrong. --

392: 1370: 1231: 403:

Perhaps North Korean should also be listed within this article hundred the heading of communist monarchy.:

242: 1170:

article, and so thus this article should have a section which addresses the topic and links the article. -

1100: 129: 2210: 65: 2190: 1603:

I can go on with these examples but I believe this is enough to remove that disputed part again. Thanks

1512: 1461: 1130: 703:

The British Queen does indeed have some (not much) political power, i.e. residual powers as part of the

603: 508:

Removed. Interestingly enough in Footnote 2 it has been stated that North Korea is *not* a monarchy. --

185: 911: 1189: 1020: 866: 733: 723: 579: 485: 445: 125: 1351: 1188:

It is not illegal to criticize the British/Canadian monarch in the United Kingdom nor in Canada. --

1608: 1580:, which I had removed because it seemed unsourced and even if it was sourced it is truly disputed. 1336: 1006: 745:

By this broad definition, you could argue that all heads of state are monarchs if by another name,

1591:

which is way older than these examples and shows clear evidence of monarchy before these examples.

711:, not the 'Anglican Catholic Church' she is head of. (Although the Church of England is indeed an 314:

on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

2173:

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between

1668:. Monarchs can carry various and, particularly in personal union, multiple titles of monarchies," 1556: 1520: 1465: 1227: 672: 190: 109: 175: 2206: 1598: 1532: 1477: 1048: 1840: 1345: 1167: 1106: 1030: 927: 668: 659:

realm of power. She appoints the Archbishop of Canterbury, and he in turn is the head of the

638: 248: 828:

Also, this makes Vatican City a non-monarchical dictatorship, on the grounds that there are

1818: 1431: 1366: 1320: 1298: 1266: 1114: 1088: 1056: 1016: 978: 899: 862: 719: 599: 594: 569: 481: 380: 8: 2118: 2075: 2044: 1998: 1977: 1934: 1886: 1872: 1803: 1760: 1739: 1731: 1692: 1604: 1595: 1552: 1416: 1399: 1382: 1122: 1039: 1002: 970: 881: 476:(which would make it a monarchy). That, and the fact it's called the People's Democratic 219: 55: 1212:

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

2090: 2013: 1950: 1900: 1776: 1564: 1496: 813: 366: 70: 141: 2198: 1673:"Monarchies were the most common form of government until the 20th century, when the 1627: 1528: 1473: 959: 858: 773:

With the term limits part, the definition is even more problematic. For example, the

708: 616: 51: 1476:). However, common across monarchical systems are the monarch as the legal fount of 1727: 1661: 1516: 1175: 1151: 1142: 1074: 923: 767: 634: 633:

constitutional monarchy. This blurs the line beetween monarchy and dictatorship. --

560: 534: 784:

So, how do we tweak the definition of a monarch so that we don't end up including

161: 1814: 1427: 1362: 1316: 1262: 974: 298: 2114: 2071: 2059: 2040: 1994: 1973: 1930: 1882: 1868: 1844: 1799: 1756: 1735: 1723: 1688: 1657: 1588: 1548: 1412: 1395: 1378: 1079:

Parse the worth, into it's components, especially if you have a mind above ...

1035: 890: 877: 832:

birth circumstance or social class qualifications to be Pope. On the contrary,

607: 199: 2223: 2186: 2086: 2009: 1946: 1896: 1864: 1772: 1750: 1681: 1653: 1504: 1457: 806: 759: 755: 473: 468: 1703: 1665: 1623: 1571: 1443: 1358: 1118: 955: 774: 751: 655:

Queen Elizabeth II of England is a monarch, and she is a figurehead in the

612: 552: 425:

patriarchal legitimation of rulers is familiar, indeed deeply ingrained.

2194: 1715: 1536: 1481: 1171: 1147: 969:

The particulars of succession varies in each monarchy depending on which

660: 556: 464: 460: 1600:, who is just as old as Egyptian but the script hasn't been deciphered. 988: 555:

authority for this division, or is it just something one of us made up?

292: 282: 261: 204: 2055: 1848: 1794:

and particularly become polities through personal union and vassalege."

1508: 1993:

the reference that states that in the beginning of its own argument).

2067: 1852: 1719: 1540: 1524: 1485: 1469: 2169: 1015:

North Korea is a republic; what does that have to do with anything?

203: 1860: 1707: 1674: 1460:

and who normally ascedes to the position by heredity. The system's

854: 712: 372: 311: 201: 24: 2133: 1515:

and governing power of the monarch may vary from purely symbolic (

1587:

shows Sudanic people already had kings way before that. There is

1500: 1453: 2141:"A Note on the Meaning of 'Republic'† – Parliament of Australia" 1452:

is a political system in which supreme authority is vested in a

1208:

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

1082:

Monarchy, does NOT create My Enemy, it creates, "My Arch, and?"

371:

Why is Asiana the map of jarod? I think this version is better:

2250:

Knowledge level-3 vital articles in Society and social sciences

1649: 1111:

The map of European monarchies has two identical categories.

205: 2063: 1711: 896:

Buddhist nation whereas it is actually Vajrayana Buddhist.

770:, despite his being often thought of today as a monarch). 942:

rule throne king/queen candidate, there are two options:

2240:

Knowledge vital articles in Society and social sciences

1867:), replacing them as the dominant form of government." 950:

the sequence child and gender sex (from above to below)

160: 2255:

B-Class vital articles in Society and social sciences

1968:

citizens. Please anyone? My english cant be that bad.

1639:

In defense of recently taken out sentences from lead

918:

Cool to have a comparison of wealth between Kingdoms

310:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 288: 15: 1250:usually gained their wealth, or rather stole it). 414:to this? And can such a peculiar system survive? 373:http://en.wikipedia.org/File:World_Monarchies.png 2221: 2070:through personal association with the monarch." 648:Some now-existing monarchies are most certainly 535:http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Korea/LJ22Dg01.html 33:for general discussion of the article's subject. 2164:Wiki Education assignment: Political Sociology 1222:Participate in the deletion discussion at the 174: 1881:I would insert this, if no more objections? 1863:were established to abolish monarchies (see 1706:and recognized through the different seats, 777:is not referred to as a monarch, and yet he 537:"For the Kims, the weakest link is family" 1594:Other than these examples, you will see 436:two forms - or more precisely, stages. 1217:Richard Löwenhez, Salbung zum König.jpg 217: 2222: 1241:Monarchy is equal with discrimination 1137:"..exercises the role of sovereignty" 1061:2601:197:480:5550:856C:CD67:AC88:136C 947:only male child from the sequence; or 613:Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 1702:deemed useful. "Its authorities are 546:Organization of "current monarchies" 304:This article is within the scope of 213: 1448:Different versions of the lead: "A 247:It is of interest to the following 23:for discussing improvements to the 13: 2178: 2174: 1972:previous dominance of monarchies. 1053:tt e5wwwwwwwwwww rbbdbdygggn tt 997:Reigning until death or abdication 766:this category would have included 14: 2281: 1714:that a monarch can occupy and be 718:Spain is not officially Catholic. 2265:Top-importance politics articles 2235:Knowledge level-3 vital articles 2181:. Further details are available 2168: 291: 281: 260: 227: 218: 45:Click here to start a new topic. 1718:with." & "can be bound to 399:North Korea: Communist Monarchy 344:This article has been rated as 2245:B-Class level-3 vital articles 2145:Home – Parliament of Australia 1680:the dominant and opposit (see 1325:20:59, 24 September 2019 (UTC) 1303:20:21, 24 September 2019 (UTC) 593:Polish wiki has an article on 589:"Monarchia stanowa" in English 528: 518:04:26, 16 September 2013 (UTC) 504:04:23, 16 September 2013 (UTC) 324:Knowledge:WikiProject Politics 1: 2270:WikiProject Politics articles 2215:18:33, 17 December 2022 (UTC) 2205:— Assignment last updated by 1632:20:57, 31 December 2020 (UTC) 1613:05:58, 31 December 2020 (UTC) 1341:21:40, 23 November 2020 (UTC) 871:13:46, 24 December 2012 (UTC) 565:21:06, 27 February 2012 (UTC) 490:13:42, 24 December 2012 (UTC) 454:15:11, 29 December 2011 (UTC) 327:Template:WikiProject Politics 318:and see a list of open tasks. 42:Put new text under old text. 2123:05:58, 31 January 2022 (UTC) 2099:00:12, 31 January 2022 (UTC) 2080:07:36, 30 January 2022 (UTC) 2049:22:35, 27 January 2022 (UTC) 2022:12:38, 27 January 2022 (UTC) 2003:01:31, 27 January 2022 (UTC) 1982:01:15, 27 January 2022 (UTC) 1959:15:26, 26 January 2022 (UTC) 1939:21:25, 25 January 2022 (UTC) 1909:13:59, 25 January 2022 (UTC) 1891:20:33, 24 January 2022 (UTC) 1877:19:06, 22 January 2022 (UTC) 1823:14:47, 22 January 2022 (UTC) 1808:21:27, 21 January 2022 (UTC) 1785:23:23, 19 January 2022 (UTC) 1765:22:14, 19 January 2022 (UTC) 1744:14:25, 18 January 2022 (UTC) 1697:13:52, 18 January 2022 (UTC) 1677: 1236:13:52, 16 January 2019 (UTC) 1156:07:45, 7 February 2018 (UTC) 1131:12:57, 6 November 2017 (UTC) 1101:23:37, 1 February 2017 (UTC) 1069:01:52, 4 November 2016 (UTC) 912:19:56, 17 January 2013 (UTC) 7: 1044:01:01, 17 August 2019 (UTC) 983:08:51, 13 August 2013 (UTC) 964:01:32, 13 August 2013 (UTC) 886:00:51, 17 August 2019 (UTC) 50:New to Knowledge? Welcome! 10: 2286: 1576:I disagree with your edit 1436:15:35, 11 April 2020 (UTC) 1421:19:47, 10 April 2020 (UTC) 1404:17:46, 10 April 2020 (UTC) 1387:17:22, 10 April 2020 (UTC) 1371:15:34, 10 April 2020 (UTC) 1198:06:10, 25 March 2018 (UTC) 1180:06:05, 25 March 2018 (UTC) 1011:13:54, 21 March 2015 (UTC) 932:14:10, 14 April 2013 (UTC) 838:The Mysterious El Willstro 791:The Mysterious El Willstro 680:The Mysterious El Willstro 628:Moanarchy vs. Dictatorship 604:pl:Monarchia patrymonialna 350:project's importance scale 2260:B-Class politics articles 1652:under monarchs as either 1029:You could argue that the 846:05:25, 19 July 2012 (UTC) 821:14:21, 18 July 2012 (UTC) 799:06:57, 18 July 2012 (UTC) 688:06:17, 18 July 2012 (UTC) 623:16:01, 6 April 2012 (UTC) 584:22:55, 1 March 2012 (UTC) 343: 276: 255: 80:Be welcoming to newcomers 1557:11:07, 16 May 2020 (UTC) 1025:10:07, 24 May 2016 (UTC) 993:??????????????????????? 728:10:18, 24 May 2016 (UTC) 661:Anglican Catholic Church 467:have ever been formally 393:03:54, 15 May 2012 (UTC) 1755:Can we make this work? 1521:constitutional monarchy 1499:in which a person, the 1466:constitutional monarchy 1271:17:21, 5 May 2019 (UTC) 937:Rule king/queen monarch 673:Investiture Controversy 643:10:51, 3 May 2012 (UTC) 610:for the time being). -- 2230:B-Class vital articles 1686: 1684:) form of government." 1670: 1277:Needs complete rewrite 408:attitude and platitude 377:Thank you very much. 75:avoid personal attacks 2185:. Student editor(s): 1841:Personenverbandsstaat 1671: 1646: 1168:criticism of monarchy 1161:Criticism of monarchy 1031:Yang di-Pertuan Agong 600:patrimonial monarchy 234:level-3 vital article 100:Neutral point of view 1732:King of the Belgians 1462:political legitimacy 1190:Willthacheerleader18 595:pl:Monarchia stanowa 446:Bee Cliff River Slob 307:WikiProject Politics 105:No original research 2193:). Peer reviewers: 1596:Cretan civilization 699:Just a few points: 606:, I redirect it to 2183:on the course page 1519:), to restricted ( 1507:for life or until 1497:form of government 1228:Community Tech bot 1049:eyg nyt hyedyt 971:laws of succession 243:content assessment 86:dispute resolution 47: 2207:ImagineWorldPeace 1648:"Monarchies form 1529:absolute monarchy 1474:absolute monarchy 1456:who functions as 1305: 1133: 1117:comment added by 1103: 1091:comment added by 1071: 1059:comment added by 902:comment added by 859:elective monarchy 734:Flimsy definition 709:Church of England 705:royal prevogative 383:comment added by 364: 363: 360: 359: 356: 355: 330:politics articles 212: 211: 66:Assume good faith 43: 2277: 2217: 2191:article contribs 2180: 2179:17 December 2022 2176: 2172: 2156: 2155: 2153: 2152: 2137: 1754: 1575: 1517:crowned republic 1296: 1112: 1086: 1054: 914: 816: 809: 768:Emperor Augustus 762:and others; and 758:, and currently 707:. Also it's the 619: 538: 532: 395: 332: 331: 328: 325: 322: 301: 296: 295: 285: 278: 277: 272: 264: 257: 256: 240: 231: 230: 223: 222: 214: 206: 179: 178: 164: 95:Article policies 16: 2285: 2284: 2280: 2279: 2278: 2276: 2275: 2274: 2220: 2219: 2204: 2166: 2161: 2160: 2159: 2150: 2148: 2139: 2138: 2134: 2060:personal unions 1929:share it, thx. 1748: 1685: 1669: 1641: 1569: 1567: 1446: 1348: 1279: 1243: 1224:nomination page 1210: 1163: 1139: 1109: 1077: 1051: 1017:JWULTRABLIZZARD 999: 991: 989:Empire of Ghana 939: 920: 897: 893: 863:JWULTRABLIZZARD 814: 807: 736: 720:JWULTRABLIZZARD 630: 621: 617: 591: 576:CrazyRepublican 572: 548: 543: 542: 541: 533: 529: 482:JWULTRABLIZZARD 401: 378: 369: 329: 326: 323: 320: 319: 299:Politics portal 297: 290: 270: 241:on Knowledge's 238: 228: 208: 207: 202: 121: 116: 115: 114: 91: 61: 12: 11: 5: 2283: 2273: 2272: 2267: 2262: 2257: 2252: 2247: 2242: 2237: 2232: 2175:24 August 2022 2165: 2162: 2158: 2157: 2131: 2130: 2126: 2110: 2109: 2108: 2107: 2106: 2105: 2104: 2103: 2102: 2101: 2051: 2029: 2028: 2027: 2026: 2025: 2024: 1987: 1986: 1985: 1984: 1969: 1962: 1961: 1922: 1921: 1920: 1919: 1918: 1917: 1916: 1915: 1914: 1913: 1912: 1911: 1856: 1845:personal union 1830: 1829: 1828: 1827: 1826: 1825: 1795: 1788: 1787: 1724:King of Norway 1672: 1658:personal union 1654:unitary states 1647: 1640: 1637: 1636: 1635: 1619: 1605:ArvindPalaskar 1589:Clovis culture 1566: 1563: 1561: 1445: 1442: 1441: 1440: 1439: 1438: 1407: 1406: 1390: 1389: 1355: 1347: 1344: 1333:CanadianPrince 1328: 1327: 1301:comment added 1278: 1275: 1274: 1273: 1242: 1239: 1220: 1219: 1209: 1206: 1205: 1201: 1200: 1162: 1159: 1146:term to use. - 1138: 1135: 1108: 1105: 1093:190.39.122.242 1076: 1073: 1050: 1047: 1003:Thunderstone99 998: 995: 990: 987: 986: 985: 952: 951: 948: 944: 943: 938: 935: 919: 916: 892: 889: 851: 850: 849: 848: 826: 735: 732: 731: 730: 716: 697: 696: 691: 690: 676: 664: 653: 652:dictatorships. 629: 626: 611: 608:patrimonialism 590: 587: 571: 568: 547: 544: 540: 539: 526: 525: 521: 510:89.204.138.237 496:89.204.138.237 400: 397: 385:180.254.90.124 368: 365: 362: 361: 358: 357: 354: 353: 346:Top-importance 342: 336: 335: 333: 316:the discussion 303: 302: 286: 274: 273: 271:Top‑importance 265: 253: 252: 246: 224: 210: 209: 200: 198: 197: 194: 193: 181: 180: 118: 117: 113: 112: 107: 102: 93: 92: 90: 89: 82: 77: 68: 62: 60: 59: 48: 39: 38: 35: 34: 28: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2282: 2271: 2268: 2266: 2263: 2261: 2258: 2256: 2253: 2251: 2248: 2246: 2243: 2241: 2238: 2236: 2233: 2231: 2228: 2227: 2225: 2218: 2216: 2212: 2208: 2202: 2200: 2196: 2192: 2188: 2184: 2171: 2146: 2142: 2136: 2132: 2129: 2125: 2124: 2120: 2116: 2100: 2096: 2095:contributions 2092: 2088: 2087:User:Khajidha 2083: 2082: 2081: 2077: 2073: 2069: 2065: 2061: 2057: 2052: 2050: 2046: 2042: 2037: 2036: 2035: 2034: 2033: 2032: 2031: 2030: 2023: 2019: 2018:contributions 2015: 2011: 2010:User:Khajidha 2006: 2005: 2004: 2000: 1996: 1991: 1990: 1989: 1988: 1983: 1979: 1975: 1970: 1966: 1965: 1964: 1963: 1960: 1956: 1955:contributions 1952: 1948: 1947:User:Khajidha 1943: 1942: 1941: 1940: 1936: 1932: 1926: 1910: 1906: 1905:contributions 1902: 1898: 1897:User:Khajidha 1894: 1893: 1892: 1888: 1884: 1880: 1879: 1878: 1874: 1870: 1866: 1865:republicanism 1862: 1857: 1854: 1850: 1846: 1842: 1838: 1837: 1836: 1835: 1834: 1833: 1832: 1831: 1824: 1820: 1816: 1811: 1810: 1809: 1805: 1801: 1796: 1792: 1791: 1790: 1789: 1786: 1782: 1781:contributions 1778: 1774: 1773:User:Khajidha 1769: 1768: 1767: 1766: 1762: 1758: 1752: 1746: 1745: 1741: 1737: 1733: 1729: 1725: 1721: 1717: 1713: 1709: 1705: 1699: 1698: 1694: 1690: 1683: 1682:republicanism 1679: 1676: 1667: 1663: 1659: 1655: 1651: 1645: 1633: 1629: 1625: 1620: 1617: 1616: 1615: 1614: 1610: 1606: 1601: 1599: 1597: 1593: 1590: 1586: 1581: 1579: 1573: 1562: 1559: 1558: 1554: 1550: 1544: 1542: 1538: 1534: 1531:), combining 1530: 1526: 1522: 1518: 1514: 1510: 1506: 1505:head of state 1502: 1498: 1494: 1489: 1487: 1483: 1479: 1475: 1471: 1467: 1463: 1459: 1458:head of state 1455: 1451: 1437: 1433: 1429: 1424: 1423: 1422: 1418: 1414: 1409: 1408: 1405: 1401: 1397: 1392: 1391: 1388: 1384: 1380: 1375: 1374: 1373: 1372: 1368: 1364: 1361:would help?-- 1360: 1359:third opinion 1353: 1346:Edits to lead 1343: 1342: 1338: 1334: 1326: 1322: 1318: 1313: 1308: 1307: 1306: 1304: 1300: 1294: 1290: 1289:CurtDoolittle 1286: 1283: 1272: 1268: 1264: 1260: 1259: 1253: 1252: 1251: 1247: 1238: 1237: 1233: 1229: 1225: 1218: 1215: 1214: 1213: 1204: 1199: 1195: 1191: 1187: 1184: 1183: 1182: 1181: 1177: 1173: 1169: 1158: 1157: 1153: 1149: 1144: 1134: 1132: 1128: 1124: 1120: 1116: 1107:Map of Europe 1104: 1102: 1098: 1094: 1090: 1083: 1080: 1072: 1070: 1066: 1062: 1058: 1046: 1045: 1041: 1037: 1032: 1027: 1026: 1022: 1018: 1013: 1012: 1008: 1004: 994: 984: 980: 976: 972: 968: 967: 966: 965: 961: 957: 949: 946: 945: 941: 940: 934: 933: 929: 925: 915: 913: 909: 905: 901: 888: 887: 883: 879: 873: 872: 868: 864: 860: 856: 847: 843: 839: 835: 831: 827: 824: 823: 822: 819: 818: 817: 810: 803: 802: 801: 800: 796: 792: 787: 782: 780: 776: 771: 769: 765: 761: 760:Robert Mugabe 757: 756:Joseph Mobutu 753: 748: 743: 739: 729: 725: 721: 717: 714: 710: 706: 702: 701: 700: 693: 692: 689: 685: 681: 677: 674: 670: 665: 662: 658: 654: 651: 647: 646: 645: 644: 640: 636: 625: 624: 620: 614: 609: 605: 601: 596: 586: 585: 581: 577: 567: 566: 562: 558: 554: 536: 531: 527: 524: 520: 519: 515: 511: 506: 505: 501: 497: 492: 491: 487: 483: 479: 475: 474:Head of State 470: 469:Head of State 466: 462: 457: 455: 451: 447: 441: 437: 433: 432: 426: 422: 418: 415: 411: 409: 404: 396: 394: 390: 386: 382: 375: 374: 351: 347: 341: 338: 337: 334: 317: 313: 309: 308: 300: 294: 289: 287: 284: 280: 279: 275: 269: 266: 263: 259: 258: 254: 250: 244: 236: 235: 225: 221: 216: 215: 196: 195: 192: 189: 187: 183: 182: 177: 173: 170: 167: 163: 159: 155: 152: 149: 146: 143: 140: 137: 134: 131: 127: 124: 123:Find sources: 120: 119: 111: 110:Verifiability 108: 106: 103: 101: 98: 97: 96: 87: 83: 81: 78: 76: 72: 69: 67: 64: 63: 57: 53: 52:Learn to edit 49: 46: 41: 40: 37: 36: 32: 26: 22: 18: 17: 2203: 2199:RadicalPizza 2167: 2149:. Retrieved 2147:. 2011-06-12 2144: 2135: 2127: 2111: 1927: 1923: 1747: 1700: 1687: 1642: 1602: 1582: 1568: 1560: 1545: 1523:), to fully 1513:legitimation 1492: 1490: 1468:), to fully 1449: 1447: 1349: 1329: 1311: 1287: 1284: 1280: 1257: 1256: 1248: 1244: 1221: 1211: 1202: 1185: 1164: 1140: 1113:— Preceding 1110: 1087:— Preceding 1084: 1081: 1078: 1055:— Preceding 1052: 1028: 1014: 1000: 992: 953: 921: 904:39.47.63.112 898:— Preceding 894: 874: 852: 833: 829: 812: 811: 785: 783: 778: 772: 763: 752:Adolf Hitler 746: 744: 740: 737: 698: 656: 649: 631: 592: 573: 570:Map is wrong 549: 530: 522: 507: 493: 477: 458: 442: 438: 434: 429: 427: 423: 419: 416: 412: 407: 405: 402: 379:— Preceding 376: 370: 345: 305: 249:WikiProjects 232: 184: 171: 165: 157: 150: 144: 138: 132: 122: 94: 19:This is the 2056:federations 1730:(e.g., the 1722:(e.g., the 1720:territories 1537:legislative 1482:legislative 1297:—Preceding 924:CaribDigita 764:at the time 635:Questions99 465:Kim Jong-Un 461:Kim Jong-Il 148:free images 31:not a forum 2224:Categories 2151:2022-01-22 2128:References 1849:federation 1815:MattMauler 1704:proclaimed 1662:federation 1565:Evidenced? 1525:autocratic 1509:abdication 1470:autocratic 1428:MattMauler 1363:MattMauler 1317:MattMauler 1263:MattMauler 975:Saddhiyama 747:especially 618:talk to me 523:References 444:charisma." 367:Update Map 2115:Nsae Comp 2072:Nsae Comp 2041:Nsae Comp 1995:Nsae Comp 1974:Nsae Comp 1931:Nsae Comp 1883:Nsae Comp 1869:Nsae Comp 1861:republics 1853:vassalage 1800:Nsae Comp 1757:Nsae Comp 1736:Nsae Comp 1689:Nsae Comp 1666:vassalage 1549:Nsae Comp 1543:power." 1533:executive 1478:executive 1413:Nsae Comp 1396:Nsae Comp 1379:Nsae Comp 1036:Nsae Comp 878:Nsae Comp 775:President 480:of Korea. 456:and 2012 431:Jong-eun. 237:is rated 88:if needed 71:Be polite 21:talk page 2187:Afletc23 1751:Khajidha 1716:invested 1708:insignia 1675:republic 1650:polities 1583:My edit 1541:judicial 1493:monarchy 1488:power." 1486:judicial 1450:monarchy 1127:contribs 1115:unsigned 1089:unsigned 1075:Mon Arch 1057:unsigned 900:unsigned 855:szlachta 715:church.) 713:anglican 478:Republic 381:unsigned 321:Politics 312:politics 268:Politics 186:Archives 56:get help 29:This is 27:article. 25:Monarchy 2068:vassals 1728:peoples 1624:KIENGIR 1572:KIENGIR 1501:monarch 1454:monarch 1299:undated 1143:natural 1119:Bearsca 956:Akuindo 657:secular 348:on the 239:B-class 154:WP refs 142:scholar 2195:PJ8421 2064:realms 1726:) and 1712:titles 1678:became 1618:Hello, 1511:. The 1172:Inowen 1148:Inowen 891:Bhutan 808:Jayron 557:Mangoe 245:scale. 126:Google 2066:with 1656:, in 1503:, is 1495:is a 786:these 669:Roman 553:WP:RS 226:This 169:JSTOR 130:books 84:Seek 2211:talk 2177:and 2119:talk 2091:talk 2076:talk 2062:and 2045:talk 2014:talk 1999:talk 1978:talk 1951:talk 1935:talk 1901:talk 1887:talk 1873:talk 1819:talk 1804:talk 1777:talk 1761:talk 1740:talk 1734:)." 1710:and 1693:talk 1628:talk 1609:talk 1585:here 1578:here 1553:talk 1539:and 1484:and 1444:Lead 1432:talk 1417:talk 1400:talk 1383:talk 1367:talk 1352:here 1337:talk 1321:talk 1312:does 1293:talk 1267:talk 1258:Note 1232:talk 1194:talk 1186:Note 1176:talk 1152:talk 1123:talk 1097:talk 1065:talk 1040:talk 1021:talk 1007:talk 979:talk 960:talk 928:talk 908:talk 882:talk 867:talk 842:talk 795:talk 724:talk 684:talk 639:talk 580:talk 561:talk 514:talk 500:talk 486:talk 463:nor 450:talk 417:... 389:talk 162:FENS 136:news 73:and 2093:) ( 2016:) ( 1953:) ( 1903:) ( 1851:or 1779:) ( 1664:or 1491:"A 1295:) 1226:. — 834:any 754:to 650:not 340:Top 176:TWL 2226:: 2213:) 2201:. 2197:, 2143:. 2121:) 2097:) 2085:-- 2078:) 2058:, 2047:) 2020:) 2001:) 1980:) 1957:) 1937:) 1907:) 1889:) 1875:) 1855:." 1847:, 1821:) 1806:) 1783:) 1771:-- 1763:) 1742:) 1695:) 1660:, 1630:) 1611:) 1555:) 1535:, 1480:, 1434:) 1419:) 1402:) 1385:) 1369:) 1339:) 1323:) 1269:) 1234:) 1196:) 1178:) 1154:) 1129:) 1125:• 1099:) 1067:) 1042:) 1023:) 1009:) 981:) 962:) 930:) 910:) 884:) 869:) 844:) 830:no 815:32 797:) 779:is 726:) 686:) 641:) 582:) 563:) 516:) 502:) 488:) 452:) 391:) 156:) 54:; 2209:( 2189:( 2154:. 2117:( 2089:( 2074:( 2043:( 2012:( 1997:( 1976:( 1949:( 1933:( 1899:( 1885:( 1871:( 1817:( 1802:( 1775:( 1759:( 1753:: 1749:@ 1738:( 1691:( 1634:) 1626:( 1607:( 1574:: 1570:@ 1551:( 1527:( 1472:( 1430:( 1415:( 1398:( 1381:( 1365:( 1335:( 1319:( 1291:( 1265:( 1230:( 1192:( 1174:( 1150:( 1121:( 1095:( 1063:( 1038:( 1019:( 1005:( 977:( 958:( 926:( 906:( 880:( 865:( 861:. 840:( 793:( 722:( 682:( 637:( 615:| 602:( 578:( 559:( 512:( 498:( 484:( 448:( 387:( 352:. 251:: 191:1 188:: 172:· 166:· 158:· 151:· 145:· 139:· 133:· 128:( 58:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index