Talk:George III

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleGeorge III is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 16, 2004.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 27, 2004Featured article candidatePromoted
June 14, 2007Featured topic candidateNot promoted
January 18, 2010Featured article reviewKept
August 24, 2016Featured article reviewKept
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on October 25, 2013, October 25, 2017, October 25, 2020, October 25, 2023, and January 29, 2024.
Current status: Featured article

RfC of interest[edit]

(non-automated message) Greetings! I have opened an RfC on WT:ROYALTY that may be of interest to users following this article talk page! You are encouraged to contribute to this discussion here! Hurricane Andrew (444) 20:00, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 22 December 2023[edit]

Please insert the following (including the picture) after "George allowed Pitt to increase taxes, raise armies, and suspend the right of habeas corpus.":

George's carriage is stoned and attacked by club-wielding Republican protesters, one breaking the window with a blunderbuss blast. A French Republic tricolour emblazoned "PEACE and BREAD" flies in the background. William Pitt is the coachman and the horses have trampled Britannia
James Gillray's satirical print of George being attacked on his way to opening Parliament, 1795

Pitt prosecuted British radicals for treason in 1794, and in October 1795, crowds attacked George's carriage on his way to opening Parliament, demanding an end to the war and lower bread prices.[1] In response, Parliament passed the "two acts", the Treason and Seditious Meetings Act a month later. 91.125.206.62 (talk) 17:02, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is a 2002 edition of Thompson available online here which provides more detail. The carriage window was shattered, probably by a pebble and he thought he had been shot. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:21, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've added the text but not the image. There are already 3 images in that section including two Gillray cartoons. DrKay (talk) 07:03, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Thompson, E. P. (1966). The Making of the English Working Class. New York: Vintage Books. p. 144. ISBN 0-394-70322-7.

Bipolar diagnosis[edit]

Bipolar disorder is widely considered a psychiatric, not a psychological diagnosis. Reference DSM5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Mental Disorders) 2600:1702:4630:5230:C873:1850:BB57:4698 (talk) 04:05, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bipolar disorder just says "previously known as manic depression, is a mental disorder..." But yes, I think "psychiatric" fits better with the source there, Roberts (2023), so have changed it as suggested. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:24, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Outdated language[edit]

I am not a Wikipedia editor and have no idea about standards and so on, hence why I wouldn't dare to edit the page myself, but I would like to point out that this article contains some outdated language that could be improved.

Under the section 'Final years' there is a reference to his deteriorated health and a final relapse of his mental health that he did not recover from, which is worded as 'permanently insane'. The lack of quotation marks seems to indicate that this isn't a direct quote, so I have to assume that it is a dated choice of words by an editor of times past.

I would argue that in current times, using the term 'insane' to indicate mental health problems and/or symptoms is offensive and unnecessarily stigmatising. I would suggest using less problematic language, such as what I wrote above to describe the context.

If the phrasing in question is in fact a direct quote, it would be beneficial to make that clear, so that the phrase can be understood in historical context.

My thanks goes out to the community of editors for considering the sentiment above. 2001:1C00:318:E600:11A9:5945:8D3D:EBC1 (talk) 20:59, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can see from the sources, Hibbert (1999) certainly uses that word, so yes, maybe the phrase should be in quotes. I see that Fraser (1975) also uses that word, but not in quite that exact context. Maybe "an editor of times past", but more likely one just trying to follow Hibbert and Fraser? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:17, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 16 April 2024[edit]

Unlike other British monarchs are Protestant, King George was isn't Anglican, but holds Protestantism in Scotland. 91.213.233.175 (talk) 13:00, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. HouseBlaster (talk · he/him) 13:59, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]