Talk:William III of England

Image

I've changed the image to a more closer image of the king and clearer Lew 283 (talk) 19:20, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

@Lew 283 I agree with the change. It's a nicer painting and better reflects the warrior king William was DavidDijkgraaf (talk) 19:55, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, your right Lew 283 (talk) 07:52, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

I happen to disagree with the change. The majority of monarchs are depicted wearing their coronation/Garter robes, including William's wife. This change disrupts that consistency and frankly I don't see any problems with the image's quality. Keivan.f^Talk 11:17, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Well I see your point but not a problem either for me that I changed it as it was closer that's all Lew 283 (talk) 15:06, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Could somebody check this Napoleon translation?

C'étoit un grand homme, l'ennemi de la Françe, à qui il a fait bien du mal, mais on lui doit de l'estime.

He was a great man, an enemy of France, to which he did a great deal of harm, but we owe him our esteem. DavidDijkgraaf (talk) 21:29, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Google translate thinks it is OK :-) Ereunetes (talk) 23:52, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

But did Napoleon say it? I fed it to Google and got no hits for the exact quote. I found a slightly different version in a footnote to this book: Jan Willem Sypesteyn; Jan Philip de Bordes (1850). De verdediging van Nederland in 1672 en 1673: bijdragen tot de staats- en krijgsgeschiedenis van het vaderland : voor een groot deel uit onuitgegeven stukken zamengesteld (in Dutch). p. 117, n. 1. Retrieved 5 September 2023. That footnote appears to refer to an article by general J.W. Knoop in Knoop, J.W. (1848). "Krijgskundige beschouwingen over den oorlog van 1672-1678 in de Nederlanden". De nieuwe spectator: krijgs- en geschiedkundig tijdschrift voor het Nederlandsche leger (in Dutch). 2. J.F. Thieme: 1, 49, 89, 135, 257. Retrieved 5 September 2023. But in that lengthy and interesting article I didn't find the quote itself. So what is going on? Ereunetes (talk) 19:30, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

@Ereunetes Bosscha writes it at the end of his chapter on the Nine Years War (page 229). [1]

That is how I found it. He refers to page 306 of Collot d'Escury.[2] But I do not know were Collot d'Escury gets it from DavidDijkgraaf (talk) 19:47, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

I fear dear Collot d'Escury may possibly have misquoted "Buonaparte". I did find a number of users of the quote after I shortened it to "mais on lui doit de l'estime", but they all are in Dutch books/articles and all seem to use Collot as their authority (or no authority at all). Ereunetes (talk) 21:09, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

I am not saying that it is impossible that Collot d'Escury misquoted Napoleon, but why do you think that it is a likely scenario? DavidDijkgraaf (talk) 21:26, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Otherwise it would be easy with the power of Google to find at least snippets of the Collot quote in French books pertaining to Napoleon, like I just did with "mais on lui doit de l'estime". But nothing at all. I also tried a combination with "portrait de Guillaume III" (because Collot says that Napoleon produced his quote in the context of his alleged desire to acquire a portrait of the king). But that went awry, because then I got a lot of stuff about Napoleon III and Emperor Wilhelm. So wrong Napoleon and wrong king William :-) Ereunetes (talk) 00:03, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 15 February 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. – robertsky (talk) 00:35, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

---

William III of England → William II and III – He was not only the king of England. He was also the king of Scotland and Ireland. William II and III is both more accurate than the current title and also completely unambiguous, so you can get rid of the territorial designation. There was only one William II and III. The Scottish number should go first for consistency with James VI and I. DieOuTransvaal (talk) 23:18, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose Technically he was William I of Ireland. See my comments at Charles I. PatGallacher (talk) 01:33, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:SOVEREIGN: Where a monarch has reigned over a number of states, use the most commonly associated ordinal and state. Rosbif73 (talk) 08:47, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose. Use the common(er) unambiguous name. Celia Homeford (talk) 12:36, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

  The common name is William of Orange, William III of Orange or William III DavidDijkgraaf (talk) 12:43, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

  • • Comment "William" was a rather common family name in the House of Orange-Nassau. Besides him, we have articles on William the Silent (the house's founder), William II, Prince of Orange, William IV, Prince of Orange, William V, Prince of Orange, and William I of the Netherlands (who was also William VI, Prince of Orange). Dimadick (talk) 13:18, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

      My point was that William III of England is not his common name. DavidDijkgraaf (talk) 13:28, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose. England has more than 10x the population of Scotland, so it follows that he is most commonly associated with England, per WP:SOVEREIGN the name should be the current title. "Where a monarch has reigned over a number of states, use the most commonly associated ordinal and state. For example, Charles II of England, not Charles II of England, Scotland and Ireland; Philip II of Spain, not Philip I of Portugal." Do you think Charles I of Austria should be moved to Charles I, III & IV?

UmbrellaTheLeef (talk) 13:02, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

• Comment - I certainly can understand your nominating this page for a name change. At this moment, all monarch bios are extremely inconsistent with how they're named. GoodDay (talk) 15:13, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose. Very clear WP:COMMONNAME. Nobody even calls him that. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:54, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Portrait

@Robertus Pius Why is this version better? DavidDijkgraaf (talk) 19:29, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

It’s the most realistic looking. The other portrait just looks odd. Yes it might have more pixels but, aesthetically it looks worse. The portrait I propose looks much better in the infobox. Robertus Pius (Talk • Contribs) 20:32, 16 April 2024 (UTC)