Talk:Family tree of English monarchs

No surviving issue between Geoffrey and Constance?

So who was Prince Arthur? Who was the Pearl of Brittany?Heinrich ⅩⅦ von Bayern (talk) 04:14, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Surely it isn't Possible for there to have been two 1st dukes of Suffolk? Mary Tudor's 2nd Husband, Charles Brandon, is 1st Duke of Suffolk. But they later marry their daughter to Thomas Grey - surely 2nd Duke of Suffolk? BarshamBarsham (talk) 23:22, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

A new creation bore a new 1st Duke.——Heinrich ⅩⅦ von Bayern (talk) 15:35, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Cnut's kids

Wrong mothers - Svein and Harold were Aelfgifu's, Harthacnut and Gunhilda were Emma's.

Can't swap the mothers, because Emma marries Aethelred.

So have to swap the kids, but this isn't totally easy if we want to keep Henry as Gunhilda's husband.

Needs a chart expert. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FitzwilliamDarcy (talk • contribs) 11:57, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

PS. Evidently now fixed, 21 Oct 2016, thanks Daduxing — Preceding unsigned comment added by FitzwilliamDarcy (talk • contribs) 09:01, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

This article needs to be adequately cited

See footnote 3 in WP:CHALLENGE: if someone adds a template asking for citation it should not remove it without providing the requested citations. Many featured articles such as Charles I of England have fully cited ancestry trees and the same standard apply to this article.

There is a fundamental difference between a navigational list such as often appears in the footnotes of an article and an family tree. A navigational list such as the "Royal or noble family trees" at the end of this article contains a series of facts, each of which can be checked in the link provided. However in an family tree there is information conveyed in the tree that is probably not available in of the individual articles, for example how Lady Jane Grey is related to Mary Queen of Scots.

It is very easy to construct Family tree from unreliable sources published on the internet. However it only takes one mistake for large parts of the tree to be incorrect. For example if a grandmother is recorded as the first wife rather the second wife (the correct mother), then much of a tree will be inaccurate, even if all the other entries for every single person are correct. For this reason trees need accurate sourcing from reliable sources.

Tree like these does not need a citation on every node depicting the relationship with everyone to whom they are connected. As a parent can have many children, it is often simpler just to include a verification of parents in the child node as biographies usually include parents even if they do not include all the children. So in the case of James I of England a citation confirming his parents is sufficient. If the former is provided a back citation stating that he is the child of Mary Queen of Scots is not needed.

The number of sources needed is often much smaller that appears to be the case initially as a reliable genealogical source will often span many royal generations. See for example James I of England#Ancestry where one source (Louda, Jiří; Maclagan, Michael (1999) [1981], Lines of Succession: Heraldry of the Royal Families of Europe (2nd ed.), London: Little, Brown, ISBN 978-0-316-84820-6) covers a lot of that ancestry tree. Even where that is not the case, in the example Henry Percy, 3rd Earl of Northumberland#Ancestry all thirty entries are covered by just 8 citations.

-- PBS (talk) 09:07, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:French monarchs family tree which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 09:15, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Horrible layout

Is there any reason why the attractive layout style at e.g. [1] has been replaced by the HORRIBLE layout at the present version, [2]?