| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the King of Bahrain article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Does it Make a Difference?
editDid the title change from Emir to King make any substantial difference in the government? I thought the title was arbitrary: a ruler could call himself prince, duke, emir, king, sultan, or emperor, and the government would have the same structure.Inkan1969 (talk) 19:35, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- It is a matter of honour and rank, a king outranks emir. By the declaration, he has put himself as equal to other longer reigning kings and queens, when in the past the dominion of Bahrain was considered merely a lordship. In thirty some years, to go from a mere lord to sovereign prince to a full king is a big jump, and in the past this may have caused issues, but today no one wars over such titles. As for the government, it will operate the same.
Η936631 (talk) 17:56, 17 February 2011 (UTC)- It is ridiculous small for a Kingdom, only the total landmass of Tonga is smaller. Even for an Emirate it is not so big (although Ajman is smaller). I believe the Al Khalifas were the past rulers of Qatar as well, but they lost the control of it in the early 19th century. The succeeding Al Thani rulers of Qatar begun to name themselves Emir of Qatar in the beginning of the 20th century. So maybe because the Al Khalifa families were the older rulers of Qatar (but now only Bahrain), they regard themselves of higher prestige than the Al Thani family. Since there is no intermediate rank between Emir and King, the Al Khalifa Emirs therefore promoted themselves immediately to King of Bahrain to differentiate them from the Al Thanis. Mr. D. E. Mophon (talk) 18:48, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
- Size does not determine a kingdom. Most of these kingdoms that are deemed small today are kingdoms that have avoided conquest and loss of sovereignty through political connections and luck. It is the other kingdoms and empires that have grown ridiculously large. England was once home to over fifty kingdoms, and Ireland over thirty. France was considered massive when it was only one-third of its modern size. Germany was once home to hundreds of sovereign kingdoms, principalities, duchies and counties. But it is for the sovereign to decide his title, and for other nations and their leaders to accept or reject it.
Η936631 (talk) 04:19, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- Size does not determine a kingdom. Most of these kingdoms that are deemed small today are kingdoms that have avoided conquest and loss of sovereignty through political connections and luck. It is the other kingdoms and empires that have grown ridiculously large. England was once home to over fifty kingdoms, and Ireland over thirty. France was considered massive when it was only one-third of its modern size. Germany was once home to hundreds of sovereign kingdoms, principalities, duchies and counties. But it is for the sovereign to decide his title, and for other nations and their leaders to accept or reject it.
- It is ridiculous small for a Kingdom, only the total landmass of Tonga is smaller. Even for an Emirate it is not so big (although Ajman is smaller). I believe the Al Khalifas were the past rulers of Qatar as well, but they lost the control of it in the early 19th century. The succeeding Al Thani rulers of Qatar begun to name themselves Emir of Qatar in the beginning of the 20th century. So maybe because the Al Khalifa families were the older rulers of Qatar (but now only Bahrain), they regard themselves of higher prestige than the Al Thani family. Since there is no intermediate rank between Emir and King, the Al Khalifa Emirs therefore promoted themselves immediately to King of Bahrain to differentiate them from the Al Thanis. Mr. D. E. Mophon (talk) 18:48, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Table
editIs a table really necessary for this article? The Emirs number two, and Kings number one currently. The Hakims are not so numerous either that a simple list does not work. The table is bulky, takes up space and adds nothing.
Η936631 (talk) 19:50, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
ibn not bin
editUser:Sadadi (contributions) seems to have introduced a lot of ibn instead of bin into the titles of many links and some articles. It's probably worth checking into the accounts edits to check no more errors have been added. Cheers, Jack (talk) 00:44, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
- Right I definitely just wasted half an hour then, should have read: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Arabic)#Names first! Jack (talk) 00:57, 4 February 2012 (UTC)