Talk:Claims to a crown

Cleanup
The material sounds good, but without references there's no way to know it's not all made-up. Also needs links and/or categorization to give it context in the fields of law, government, and history. --Meyer 16:14, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Redirect
Maybe this should be placed under Divine_right_of_kings as a subsection. There are no sources which is a problem in this matter. savasas (talk) 08:01, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Claims to a crown. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150313091856/http://www.royal.gov.uk:80/ThecurrentRoyalFamily/Successionandprecedence/Overview.aspx to http://www.royal.gov.uk/ThecurrentRoyalFamily/Successionandprecedence/Overview.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 13:47, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Unsourced
The source for the claim that there are five methods states only the following:
 * The ruler, or monarch, of a monarchy may be chosen or elected, or may have achieved rule through conquest or heredity.

The closest approximation to what the article asserts seems to be this:

The ranking of the five methods seems pure OR. jnestorius(talk) 12:21, 6 September 2018 (UTC)