Talk:Prince George, Duke of Cambridge

message: The War Office Act was passed in parliament and given royal assent in 1870, not 1881 as previously listed, according to both "The Mid-Victorian Generation, 1846-1886" (p.602) and "The Historical Dictionary of the British Empire" (p.249).
:This has been corrected in the article. Dormskirk (talk) 20:38, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: War Office Act 1870

message: Am I right in thinking that he was the next in line of succession to Queen Victoria, until she produced a male heir? If so, worth adding. Or would Cumberland/Hanover have resumed holding the two thrones?  Johnbod (talk) 17:04, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Line of succession 

message: I vaguely remember seeing ages ago a contemporary cartoon on the rival claims of Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and the then Prince George of Cambridge to the hand of Queen Victoria, and I recently watched The Young Victoria in which the scheme was mentioned. Might anyone have a source for this? Opera hat (talk) 21:47, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: One source of information, which has been my citation for details inserted under the heading Marriage and Mistress, is Roger Fulford's book, "Royal Dukes, The Father and Uncles of Queen Victoria", originally published 1933 but revised 1973 by same author. William IV and Queen Adelaide are stated to have had George brought up at Windsor with an aim to potentially marrying him to Victoria, and George's own parents to have favoured this, but they clearly reckoned without Leopold I (a Saxe-Coburg, widower of Princess Charlotte and brother of Victoria's mother) who fulfilled an ambition to get her betrothed to Albert, his male line nephew, after the King's death.  The book quotes from a letter Victoria subsequently wrote Albert that suggests she knew of George's father's interest by declaring she disbelieved his denial of it to Lord Melbourne.Cloptonson (talk) 10:50, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

text: His candidacy may not have been as strong and as public as that of Prince Alexander of the Netherlands (1818-1848), who has been mentioned for context, his suit openly approved by William.  Fulford does not mention this. (Though it is mentioned by later writers such as Elizabeth Longford ("Victoria R.I." published 1964).Cloptonson (talk) 11:55, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Candidate for hand of Alexandrina Victoria 

message: I've removed this:
"As the marriage did not exist in British law" 
from the "Marriage and mistresses" section, as I'm pretty sure it's untrue. The marriage was contrary to the Royal Marriages Act, which had the effects descibed, but they were still married (and consequently the children of the marriage (just Augustus, in this case) would be legitimate). Swanny18 (talk) 23:36, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marriage 

message: Do we know of his armorial bearings? As a grandson of George III he presumably would have born the royal arms differenced by a label of five points argent, with some other symbols, but there is no reference in this entry. Robin S. Taylor (talk) 12:02, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The first Duke of Cambridge had a label of three points argent, the centre point charged with a St George's cross and each of the other two with two hearts in pale gules. The warrant to the second Duke assigned him the same label with the addition of a second label, plain, of three points gules, to be borne below the former label. Fox-Davies' Guide to Heraldry, 1909, p. 498. Opera hat (talk) 12:12, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arms 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Prince George, Duke of Cambridge. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20120716012032/http://www.tfa.net/2011/04/30/after-the-triumph-of-the-royal-wedding-now-we-need-a-stronger-monarchy/ to http://www.tfa.net/2011/04/30/after-the-triumph-of-the-royal-wedding-now-we-need-a-stronger-monarchy/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:28, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Prince George is represented in one part of the article as opposed to all reform, yet in another section he is described as having initiated several reforms, including the adoption of improved firearms and the use of maneouvers for training. This appears to be a contradiction. Perhaps a more nuanced view of his attitude is required?Bill (talk) 02:06, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Attitude toward reform

message: The redirect Giorgio di Hannover has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  estar8806 (talk) ★ 17:50, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Giorgio di Hannover]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]