This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the George III article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 90 days

	George 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.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 16, 2004.
Article milestones Date Process Result August 27, 2004 Featured article candidate Promoted June 14, 2007 Featured topic candidate Not promoted January 18, 2010 Featured article review Kept August 24, 2016 Featured article review Kept 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

This   level-4 vital article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Biography: Military / Peerage and Baronetage / 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 articles This article is supported by the military biography work group (assessed as High-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Peerage and Baronetage (assessed as High-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility (assessed as High-importance). Military history: Biography / British / European / Early Modern / American Revolution / Napoleonic era This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles Associated task forces: /  Military biography task force British military history task force European military history task force Early Modern warfare task force (c. 1500 – c. 1800) American Revolutionary War task force Napoleonic era task force (c. 1792 – 1815) 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 articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. England High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England 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.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Politics Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Politics of the United Kingdom High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. British Library Mid‑importance This article is related to the British Library. Please copy assessments of the article from the most relevant WikiProject template to this one as needed.British LibraryWikipedia:GLAM/British LibraryTemplate:WikiProject British LibraryBritish Library-related articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. United Kingdom High‑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 articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Germany Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany 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.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Lower Saxony ( inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lower Saxony, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Lower SaxonyWikipedia:WikiProject Lower SaxonyTemplate:WikiProject Lower SaxonyLower Saxony articles United States Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Disability George III is within the scope of WikiProject Disability. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.DisabilityWikipedia:WikiProject DisabilityTemplate:WikiProject DisabilityDisability articles Deaf Top‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Deaf, the WikiProject which seeks to improve articles relating to all aspects of deaf-related and Deaf culture. For the Project guidelines, see the project page or talk page.DeafWikipedia:WikiProject DeafTemplate:WikiProject Deafdeaf articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Discussions: RM, George III of the United Kingdom → George III, No consensus, 5 November 2015, discussion RM, George III of the United Kingdom → George III, Moved, 1 September 2020, discussion RM, George III → George III of the United Kingdom, Not moved, 30 July 2023, discussion

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 4 times. The weeks in which this happened: April 30 to May 6, 2023 (10th) May 7 to 13, 2023 (4th) May 14 to 20, 2023 (6th) May 21 to 27, 2023 (22nd)

Revisions succeeding this version of this article is substantially duplicated by a piece in an external publication. Please do not flag this article as a copyright violation of the following source: Chris Stubbs (12 November 2015), Character Portraits Of England's Germanic Monarchs 1659-20-- A.D., Trafford Publishing Additional comments The relevant text "Augusta, as the Dowager Princess of Wales, preferred to keep George at home, where she could imbue him with her strict moral values, until he became king" was added to the article a decisive seven years before the book appeared.

(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

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

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

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

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

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

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

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. House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 13:59, 16 April 2024 (UTC) reply

New Wiki user, & not a George scholar: upon reading the “Slavery” section someone called “Pitt” is referenced without first name or understanding of who that is. Reference should be fleshed out. I will leave amendements to someone more invested & certain than me. Putzac ( talk) 17:07, 29 April 2024 (UTC) reply

It's Pitt the Younger, who was one of George's prime ministers. Celia Homeford ( talk) 07:14, 30 April 2024 (UTC) reply

He should probably be disambiguated with his father William Pitt, 1st Earl of Chatham, who was also a Prime Minister. Pitt supported slavery, because it was "one of Britain's most profitable businesses". By contrast, his successor William Grenville, 1st Baron Grenville passed the Slave Trade Act 1807 and prohibited the slave trade in the British Empire. Dimadick ( talk) 14:46, 30 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Would this benefit from a very short inline qualifier, as recommended in MOS:NOFORCELINK?-- AntientNestor ( talk) 15:17, 30 April 2024 (UTC) reply

" William Pitt the Younger" is not sufficiently clear and distinct from " William Pitt the Elder"? What additional qualify would you suggest? Martinevans123 ( talk) 15:27, 30 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Following the suggestion in MOS:NOFORCELINK: just a very short bit of context so as "not [to] force a reader to use that link to understand the sentence", making it easier for users reading in print or otherwise offline.-- AntientNestor ( talk) 16:56, 30 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Well yes, sure. But what exactly? Thanks. Martinevans123 ( talk) 17:10, 30 April 2024 (UTC) reply