List of British monarchs is a former featured list candidate. Please view the link under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. Once the objections have been addressed you may resubmit the article for featured list status.
Article milestones Date Process Result August 28, 2008 Peer review Reviewed January 6, 2026 Featured list candidate Not promoted
Current status: Former featured list candidate

This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Commonwealth This article is within the scope of WikiProject Commonwealth, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Commonwealth of Nations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CommonwealthWikipedia:WikiProject CommonwealthTemplate:WikiProject CommonwealthCommonwealth British Royalty Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject British Royalty (a child project of the Royalty and Nobility Work Group), an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to British Royalty on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you should visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.British RoyaltyWikipedia:WikiProject British RoyaltyTemplate:WikiProject British RoyaltyBritish royalty Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. British Empire High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject British Empire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of British Empire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.British EmpireWikipedia:WikiProject British EmpireTemplate:WikiProject British EmpireBritish Empire High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Lists Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Biography: Royalty and Nobility This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility (assessed as Mid-importance). United Kingdom Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Similar to the list of Swedish monarchs article, can someone add each monarch's cypher to their row? StrawWord298944 (talk) 01:03, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 18:56, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The photo from his coronation is kinda goofy looking. I'd love to see it replaced with the portrait just released for Armed Forces Day where he's in Field Marshall Uniform

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cv2gle48845o 2001:8003:22C0:9601:C0F1:95B6:C3D8:8416 (talk) 02:24, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That image might be copyrighted to Hugo Bernand. We can only use copyright-free images here. Celia Homeford (talk) 10:20, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Better question is why have we broken from tradition on this page and not used a painting of some kind? 147.194.51.9 (talk) 20:19, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There may not be any free-use paintings of him, and the more recent they are the less likely they would be in the public domain. Celia Homeford (talk) 12:33, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is now an offical painting. It should be used. 12.155.53.220 (talk) 14:44, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Official paintings can still be copyrighted. We can only use free-use files here. Celia Homeford (talk) 14:49, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There were four large text error messages in red sprawled across the reference section because fake citation identifiers were present in the "Statistics" section. Content unsupported by citations, at least one sentence of which was clearly incorrect anyway, can be removed at any time. Celia Homeford (talk) 14:02, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• King Charles.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:52, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can we go back to the old timeline chart? I like it that way better than the new version. Can we go back? Please. 2601:40A:8400:1820:C104:DCFE:EF92:5C00 (talk) 12:36, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any reason that it is better. The new version:

• Is a high quality vector graphic
• Is rich-formatted text which can be highlighted or copypasted
• Does not show the houses as a long line at the bottom but instead using a key
• Automatically scales correctly, making it accessible (whereas the old one becomes blurry)
• Has clearly marked wikilinks (as opposed to the old one which violates MOS:COLOUR).
• Includes the regnal years which makes it more precise than just the chart at the bottom.
• Uses pastel colours rather than difficult contrasts (such as   (#002bac) on top of   (#0065c7).

Could someone with knowledge of accessibility information comment on the screen-reader compatibility of both charts?

@UpTheOctave! @DrKay please could you provide your personal opinions on which one you think is better? Once a consensus is reached then surely the article is considered stable, because forcefully overriding consensus by reverting changes is just vandalism no?

Kind regards, JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 17:46, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JacobTheRox: as I explained on the FLC, reverting of this kind is not vandalism. Even if a consensus forms here, per WP:VAND: even if misguided, willfully against consensus, or disruptive, any good faith effort to improve the encyclopedia is not vandalism (emphasis added). As such, no matter how "wrong" the reversions are, they are not exempt from WP:EW under WP:3RRNO. UpTheOctave! • 8^va? 17:55, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So let's say we form a consensus here and then any editor comes along and keeps changing it back. Does that mean the article can never be a featured list because it is never stable, and that reverting back to the consensus is always still edit warring? JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 18:00, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If someone is reverting against consensus, it is disruptive editing per WP:DISRUPTSIGNS#4, but not vandalism as explained. In that case, follow the steps at WP:DDE, which explicitly warn not to edit war. UpTheOctave! • 8^va? 18:06, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How about we go back the old timeline but add the colours of the new one? That sounds like a good compromise. Please, while the old one is better, we can also add the colours from the new one! Whose with me here? Richie1509 (talk) 23:37, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That does not explain why the old one is better. The colours are the most minor issue, and you have not addressed the first six points above. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 17:16, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with JacobTheRox that the new version is better. The only reason I can see to prefer the older version is the bar at the bottom, which could easily be added if consensus is for it (I have no strong opinion on adding it), and the colours, which can be changed. (I personally find that magenta quite aggressive; and I wouldn’t call them pastels, not that they need to be.) — HTGS (talk) 20:42, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to WP:BEBOLD and carry out any colour changes that suit you; I've just had a go improving them now. Personally I prefer it without the bar but it doesn't make a massive difference to me. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 21:07, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can we please have the old timeline back? The real reason is the bars are not large enough on the mobile version of Wikipedia. ~2025-35939-80 (talk) 03:12, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is a good reason to revert. I have just checked and it is functionally unworkable on mobile: [1] — HTGS (talk) 06:20, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@~2025-35939-80 @HTGS Please check again now – I have added code which creates a minimum width of 800px for those on smaller screens. If it still doesn't work please post a screenshot (WP:WPSHOT) so I can see. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 10:43, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Much better, almost perfect. The last digits of Elizabeth II’s reign are cut off though; can we put hers and Charles’s labels to the left? That would also prevent having to display so many decades into the future. — HTGS (talk) 06:48, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@HTGS Unfortunately I can't find a way to do this. If anyone else can I would welcome that change as well. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 15:40, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• His Majesty King Edward VIII in his Coronation Robes.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:16, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]