User talk:Borsoka/Archive 15

1291: 2400: 31: 3885:. I have some suspicions that it is a hoax article...but it also could be an article on a subject that is missing on Knowledge! All of the editing of this editor has been on this subject and as an admin who works in Draft space, in the past I've come across drafts written by people trying to establish the noble origins of their ancestors so that is where my mind went. But I know little about the world of European nobility. The draft relies a lot on archived pages from 4810: 4762: 4124: 3607: 2028: 1980: 1823: 1728: 1641: 1559: 1511: 1428: 516: 417: 185: 137: 4547: 3661: 2372: 1202: 4038: 1942: 371: 999: 2506: 3560: 3475: 4681: 3955: 937: 283: 2717:, etc.). And that dispassionate discourse doesn't need patronizing rhetoric repeatedly interspersed, because it never helps, it is always superfluous to the substance of whatever is being discussed, and that, ultimately, it serves as a form of attrition against content opponents. As for that entire thing about me saying that more descriptive edit summaries than ones containing a single word (I said " 1352: 691:

day, that is the reason why I decided to leave a message directly on your talk page. But anyway, I do not see the end of this discussion, my aspirations clearly did not succeed this time. As a leave-taking, I have to thank you for keeping an eye on Hungary-related history articles. I will try to do the same from time to time.

2123:"Pannonia, Pamfilia, Macedonia, Dalmatia és Frigia városai, mellyeket a húnok gyakor rablásokkal és megszállásokkal zaklattak, Ethelétől szabadságot nyervén, szülöttjök földét oda hagyva, az Adriai tengeren át Apuliá-ba költözének, az oláhok, kik pásztoraik és jobbágyaik voltak, önkényt Pannoniában maradván." 2118:"Pannoniae, Pamfiliae, Macedoniae, Dalmatiae et Frigiae ciuitates, que crebris spoliis et obsidionibus, per Hunos erant fatigatae, natali solo derelicto in Apuliam per mare Adriaticum de Ethela, licentia impetrata, transierunt, Blackis, qui ipsorum fuere Pastores et coloni, remanentibus sponte in Pannonia." 690:

I knew that you were going to jump onto this. :) I did not state that it is his ethnicity that is included in the lead in this case. With personal issues (e.g. an editing mistake) I always try to seek help and guidance from more experienced users, so that I can become a more useful contributor day by

4429:

in reliable English sources). The Merriam-Webster Dictionary refers to Serbian rulers without mentioning the Rurikid princes of Kievan Rus, the Lithuanian aristocrats bearing the title knyaz or Vlach knezes in the same article. If reliable sources do not mix these rulers, aristocrats and chieftains,

4349:

One can deduce this not only from the explicit evidence provided by medieval documents but also from the fact that the titles of such Vlach officials were of Slavic origin (knez, vojvoda, etc.) and they were a way of projecting medieval Slavic political and administrative ideas and concepts on Vlach

2805:

I'm shocked to see you've been blocked for a week. It's interesting that some useful and committed editors are punished in this way, while the activities of clearly destructive editors imbued with nationalist sentiments are tolerated. I hope this unfairness doesn't put you off Knowledge and you come

2772:

Please be careful. Sooner or later you will be taken to ANI, and you will be warned without having a chance to express your views beforehead for using words like "fringe" in edit summaries and explaining them only in the Talk page. We are developing a collaborative environment, so administrators are

2708:

from that entire area of study, indefinitely, if, once the block expires, you continue to act un-collaboratively. Believe it or not, I personally don't want you to fail. That would not be a mark of my being right in having sanctioned you as a problem user or whatever. On the contrary, it'd be a mark

1054:

on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit

2699:

Context matters, Borsoka. Which is the difference between the facetious and the sincere; the purposefully obtuse and the genuinely confused; the browbeating and the collaborative. I'm sorry to say, but it is to your discredit that what ought to have ended with a mere warning, became... all of this.

2680:

thank you very much for this experience. I am proud that I am a member of a community where judicious administrators enforce what they say. Also thank you for the nice and short adjective "obtuse". I will be using it instead of the uncivil expression "You obviously do not understand..." for which I

327:

One thing I noticed that I was not able to resolve was the years in the footnote: "Many historians write that these events happened in 1242, because Conrad II reached the age of majority at fifteen, according to the laws of Jerusalem. However, evidence conclusively proves that these events actually

3403:

Could you quote text suggesting "Genetic continuity was detected between Avars and Hungarian conquerors"? Please also explain what it means: were there Avars who migrated to the east to return as Hungarian conquerors? Furthermore, the genetic continuity between Avars, local Slavs and Hungarians is

2195:

Thanks to share me that English text! I searched that part and I see this "shepherds and husbandmen" and I do not see the text in that reliable English translation "husbandmen of the Romans", so I think it is still incorrect that recently edit with this "Roman" exentsion. Because the text say they

464:

Good Evening Borsoka I'm contacting you to ask why you reversed my edit back from Arbuz to Árbóc. Sadly I cannot access the book used as a source. But the first mention of the name is in the Chronicon Dubense, listed in latin as "Arbuz". Its meaning is watermelon. Maybe we could add (sic) to the

3842:

Thank you for your kind words. I would rather say I am a quite enthusiastic editor. :) Yes, the text was copied from the English translation and we should prefer a reliable translation to our own interpretation of the text. This is especially true if our interpretation is based on the Hungarian

2726:

I, therefore, urge you to take the long view. The warning you were originally given by myself was not particularly severe in nature. Your reaction to it, however, not only became intractable, but also exhibited a fundamental lack of understanding of how the English Knowledge works. Like, asking

651:

should not be included in the opening paragraph. To avoid disruptive editing, which Hunyadi's page has unfortunately seen a lot of, I do not think that an exception should be made. I would be very thankful, if you could provide me another article where this decision had been made, so that I can

3706:

The quote came from a secondary source, not from a primary, from modern academic historian: Szabados György: 9–12. Századi magyarok életmódjáról – amit az írott kútfőkből kiolvasni lehet és amit nem. Hága Tamara Katalin – Kolozsi Barbara – Nagy Emese Gyöngyvér szerk.: Sötét idők hétköznapjai.

1089:

and it is not a productive step to take. If there are issues with the article text, you should take it up on the talk page, not keep reverting. What is and what is not a copyright violation can also be disputable: sometimes, there just aren't ten thousand different ways to say the same thing.

2821:

You are wrong. Two judicious administrators have concluded after fair and thorough investigations that I am guilty in tendentious editing or I am obtuse. Now I am in Purgatory where I am being trained to be more collaborative through a series of conciliatory threats. For me, wikipedia is an

3889:

which seems to be the town of Monok's website but the site hasn't been updated in quite a few years so I'm not sure how reliable it is. Any way, if you could just look this draft article and give me a quick opinion on whether it rings true, I'd greatly appreciate it. Thank you, in advance!

779:

In case you think I was revenge editing here, no I clicked on your userpage and found the article and got drawn in. Its very good, but could use with some condencing of refs..ie claim 1 claim 2, should be claim1 claim 2. If you see what I mean (very late here so might not be making sense!)

2745:@Bosorka: in a "Randy in Boise" situation it might seem hard to keep one's cool. But it's the only right thing to do, because there are many wrong ways to be right. Remember: WP is a community, there are a lot of knowledgeable editors out there who will chime in if you seek input e.g. via 646:

I did not at all say that it was not relevant, but that it does not contribute to Hunyadi's notability. Relevance means that something should be included in the article, notability means that it should be in the lead. Ethnicity is a very sensitive and abstruse topic, that is why it

1013:; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the 4350:

societies. The Vlachs’ social structures and legal frames within which they functioned were largely shaped according to the Slavic institutional logic, as Vlachs themselves did not have large-scale political and/or social institutions they could have reproduced on their own...

885:

A lot of people on the Middle ages article would be surprised to hear this (you gave the impression you know all), given your stubborn and off-putting hubris there. But fine. Can you let me know the limits of your knowledge, so please, so can judge. Also, thanks for nothing.

4434:

into one large article just because their name is identical? The article about the Vlach chieftains is verified, no further verification is needed to keep it. On the other hand, you want to merge it into another article, so you should verify the rationality of your proposal.

593:

In this case, Hunyadi's origin is not at all a defining factor of his notability, so I do not see any reason why it should be included in the lead. The issue is already thoroughly discussed in the paragraph about his childhood in a completely adequate and satisfactory way.

2487:

Sorry, no. I think I was quite clear. You've willfully ignored my warning, repeatedly, to the extent that I deemed your approach thusly. You are free to launch an unblock appeal, however, with whatever reasoning you see fit (though I recommend you review

2735:

admin, for academic sources, something one would expect from a new user, not a 15-year veteran. So, I hope some or all of this ends up resonating with you, and that you'd be able to put all this unpleasantness behind you. Thanks in advance for reading.

604:

At last, when rewording the sentence, I changed wikilinks to avoid redirects and made it clearly visible which link gets you where, in accordance with the Manual of Style. E.g. hiding "Hunyadi family" behind the word "ancestry" is not too felicitous.

3726:

Also in a lot of wiki pages I see a lot of old quotes, which are I think good thing to describe the situation, of course some relevant, not quoting the full old books. When we read modern history books, those books also has many relevant old quotes.

100:

I was reading in German Knowledge about John Hunyadi and it says that he learnt to write and read when he was Old. Also, it mentions that he couldn't write well in Latin language. Please, could you solve that doubt in the article in English.

3404:

not a surprise because it is quite obvious that the conquerors mixed with the local population. What do we want to emphasize when writing about "continuity"? Do these sources specifically refer to the survival of the Avars in Transylvania?

4267:

The root of the terms are the same, but the concept is quite different. While knyazes were mainly heads of state or a wider region, the Vlach knezes were settlers who became the hereditary leaders of the colonists they brought to Hungary.

4424:

First of all, we do not edit WP based on WP articles; therefore, the existence of an article about knyazes do not verify that the article about Vlach knezes should be merged into it (especially, because Vlach leaders are not mentioned as

608:

I – of course – will not restore my edits without reaching a consensus first, but I would like to know where I was (or was not) wrong, as this is the first time someone reverted the changes I had made on a page about a historical figure.

2712:

A key part of my warning which you continued overlooking, over and over, is that there are relatively straight-forward ways to bring in outside input to content disputes, especially when these mostly involve two people (avenues like

1870:

Hi. You reverted my edit with the reason that Kosztin is not a reliable source. I'm not questioning your decision, but Kosztin himself cited another source for his statement. Can I put back what I wrote with this source instead?:

2612:

First, knowing El C from admin work, I can say that when he is firm, as firm as he is above, there is no doubt that he will enforce what he says he will enforce. Those who trifle with that, as you seem to have, do so at their

710:

Helló! I would like to inform you that the first monograph on the Golden Bull is published, scheduled for the 800th anniversary, also in English. I find this useful information for you. Reference data for the English version:

4601: 2822:

interesting social experience. It could still develop into a high level encyclopedia but it could also end as a playground for overage cosplayers playing a role that they could never play outside this artificial environment.

328:

took place in 1242 (the year when he reached the age of majority, according to Sicilian laws). Thomas of Acerra, for instance, left Acerra for the Holy Land in 1242." Should one or more of the years be different from 1242?

4600:, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so. If you wish to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article, you can do so at 3031:

with the explanation that "And the Magyars were frequently mentioned as Huns, Scythians or Dacians, while the Romanians were at least once mentioned as Dacians - these anachronistic ethonyms do not prove any continuity."

4597: 1130:

After an other editor also noticed the many cases of close paraphrasing, original research and original synthesis in the article, and the main contributor to the article is convinced that he is not responsible for them

3759:

Thanks for the answer! Agree, indeed this is my translation, so it is not official. But I think it was connected to the text, the previous sentence refered to this author what he was at the court of King Géza II.

3575: 4540: 3436:

clan. But who is this family member? As I see, Romanian historiography (or at least Nicolae Iorga) has no idea about the existence of a Hungarian noble family with that name and considers Csupor a personal name

4286:

has had many types of uses, the term was also used to designate chieftains of smaller Slavic communities, particularly Ruthenian who were also settlers in Hungary. Keneziatuses existed outside Hungary, in the

2199: 1182:

We say "I wish your hands and legs broke" on these occasions. I guess this is a kind of superstition: those who wish you good luck before an exam or opening night may raise the jeolousy of bad spirits against

2753:

who are here to safeguard a healthy discourse environment. Many good potential editors shun WP because of ubiquitous strongmanship. In any case, the ANI thread has triggered my interest in what's going on in

3922: 2462: 4067:. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose 1223: 855:

However its surely within, as you have been (loudly) claiming, within your era of expertise (incl broad tracks of 100-1200 European history. I'm disappointed if otherwise and at at this reaction.

3745:

1. First of all, it is not a reliable English translation. 2. Secondly, it is out of context in the article. It is not connected to the main text. 3. There are too many quotes in the article.

1164:

Thanks, will take a look when I have more time to dedicate to such complex matters, as currently I`m rather busy IRL (nearly end of university term, exams and papers and what not...) Cheers,

2723:") would be better, which for some reason you viewed in error as excluding that example word itself — you need to let that go. Your continued misreading there was and remains a distraction. 2591:

This is the first time I am appealing a block for almost 15 years. My reason is that I would like to understand what was the actual reason of my blocking. Is this a highly uncivil request?

2157:

I linked you the reliable Hungarian translation, and you can see there is no "husbandmen of the Romans" text, and this recent edit have put these extra words, so this is the incorrect edit:

1422: 510: 411: 179: 4637:

from that article. I have been busy dealing with family Christmas party plans. Having to coordinate four kids and their spouses and six grandkids schedules is serious work. Stay safe! --

3928: 3907:

I doubt that modern peer reviewed scholarly works exist. I think nobility itself does not verify nobility, especially because nobility made up about 5% percent of Hungary's population.

2314:

I see you reverted my edit refering that this is friinge, but this is not fringe, this is the exact text what I can read in the referenced academic source, please read check yourself.

131: 4083: 4804: 4756: 4118: 3601: 2787:

You've had ample time to express your views, but you continue to scoff at any attempt at reconciliation, from anyone. So I will leave you to it, as there's nothing else to be said.

2022: 1974: 1817: 4052: 1722: 1635: 1553: 1505: 3330:

Szabados György: Avar pusztalakók és birodalmi nagymorvák. A 9. századi Kárpát-medence politikai és ethnikai viszonyairól. Kiss P. Attila – Piti Ferenc – Szabados György szerk.:

2143:

We do not need to and we cannot translate the original Latin text if a reliable translation exist. Furthermore, we cannot change the text of a quote from a reliable translation.

4575: 3792:

I rewrote this "arely did Hungarians suffer such slaughter as in this battle" to this: "The bloodshed there was so great that the Hungarians rarely suffered such a great defeat"

4311:? Could you refer to reliable sources presenting the princes of Kievan Rus', the Polish-Lithuanian aristocracy of Rurikid or Gediminid stock and the Vlach chieftains together? 3257:

Szádeczky-Kardoss Samu: A Kárpát-medence IX. századi történetének néhány forrásáról. Megjegyzések az Einhard-féle Nagy Károly-életrajz 15. fejezetéhez. Róna-Tas András szerk.:

2248:

with fringe sources (of course not putting back the tag). To avoid an edit war between me and him, can I ask you to reorganize things in the chapter, maybe he won't fight you?

1298: 2200:

https://books.google.hu/books?id=a72xT1YubqAC&printsec=frontcover&hl=hu&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=snippet&q=shepherds%20and%20husbandmen&f=false

1392:

for FAC. As you had participated in the Peer Review, I wanted to see if you'd like to give it a second review at this time, and if so any comments would be much appreciated.

2228: 1258: 3940: 4234:. Reliable sources don't have enough coverage on it. I don't know how much are Pop and Rábik reliable, but altogether these sources don't give enough data on the subject. 459: 270: 3182: 1800:

Yes, it contradicts, but fairly presents the topic. A chronicle claims that Zoltan of Transylvania was the first voivode, but modern scholars do not accept this claim.

827:

when you get a chance. For phrasing and etc. You can be blunt; I can take the hits. Realise its undercooked and only nearing PR, but hints and steering would be good.

2570: 1465: 1090:

Anyways, without taking any position in all of this, I strongly recommend you keep it to the talk page, unless you want somebody else to report you for edit-warring.

553: 454: 222: 3843:

translation of the Latin text. Yes, I have the English translation of the text. The alphabet "r" is in a cage because the quoted text contains a capital letter "R".

3035:

I'm not here to question that, as I agree with you, but I've never heard of any source calling the Romanians "Dacians". So just for curiosity, can I ask for a link?

2325: 955: 303: 2709:

that I, too, had failed. Failed to bring the matter to some sort of resolution — you being out of the picture would not be that. But I get the cards that I'm dealt.

174: 2103:

I rewrote in this format which I think it is more correct when I read the original text, because the original text does not say at all "husbandmen of the Romans":

902:

Yes, people often have wrong impressions about each other. Sorry, I will not list the limits of my knowledge because it would be time consuming. I prefer editing.

493:

Thank you for your query. WP is clearly biased towards secondary reliable sources so we could add the Latin version of the name if a secondary source verifies it.

1705:

I do not know. He is a quite controversial figure with quite controversial views, therefore people tend to edit the article about him based on their emotions.

1325: 4227:. It doesn't have enough content, only the meaning of the term in short and the terminology, having all the three sources, is in need to be cut and pasted in 2954:

As per user Rgvis' suggestion in the talk page I proposed Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Re-latinization of Romanian - Knowledge. Please see discussion page.

4847: 4799: 4161: 3644: 2661:

template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired.

2065: 2017: 1860: 734:

It will be available in bookstores in the coming weeks and months. For the 800th anniversary, it would be good to upgrade and expand this important article,

484: 4497:

I tried to explain it above: these knyazes/knezes are not presented together in reliable sources, so we should not present them in the same article either.

3144:

I think the genetic results cannot be "fringe", this is the most modern genetic study which was published a very respectable international science journal:

1765: 1678: 1596: 1548: 1735: 951: 315: 299: 144: 2331:"Cei mai de seamă filologi şi istorici ai noştri susţin aşa dar fără deosebire că Ardeal ne-a venit din ungureşte. Şi lucrul s'a. petrecut în adevăr aşa." 2257: 1375: 4817: 4384:

To be honest, I don't understand why you are requesting me to line up sources for what you wrote. Smaller communal leaders among Vlachs were known as as

3781:

I know you are a very experienced and great Knowledge user, so I would like to understand the things to learn how to use wikipedia and make useful edits.

3665: 3115: 1919: 1103: 2988: 4110: 570:

First of all, as you probably already know, the part about the family's "Wallachian ancestry" has been removed from the lead in the article about the

4769: 2244:

several times removing needed reliable sources, and contesting the internationally (and in Romania mainly) accepted explanation for the etymology of

1987: 1147: 871:

Sorry for disappointing you but I must loudly repeat that my knowledge about the article's subject is below average. I have to accept my own limits.

386:

within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility.

3393: 2269:. You should discuss issues relating to an article on the article's Talk page. You can also seek external inputs through the relevant wikiprojects. 4596:

for January 7, 2023. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page blurb, you're welcome to do so at

4430:

WP should not mix them either. Yes, the title is of clearly Slavic origin, but neither does it verify a merger. Should we merge all articles about

4378:, for instance mention the Slavic counterparts in relation to the Vlach ones, but I don't know how are they going to bring this discussion forward. 3654: 3529:, and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to 3482: 2840:

I would like to reiterate Norden1990's sentiment. I hope you will continue to work here on Knowledge. I have seen your work and it is very good. --

2376: 1206: 348: 1969: 406: 1601: 1177: 1159: 1123: 4688:. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to 3962:. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to 3795:

Which is quite similar, so there is no debate between us. By the way I do not understand what does mean "arely", why the "r" alphabet in a cage.

3681: 3343:

Szabados György: Identitásformák és hagyományok. Sudár Balázs – Szentpéteri József – Petkes Zsolt – Lezsák Gabriella – Zsidai Zsuzsanna szerk.:

1416: 125: 3210: 3017: 2035: 3162: 1132: 764: 1949:

for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article.

1630: 262: 4722:

to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an

3996:

to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an

2179: 1275: 987: 671:

I would be grateful if you could mention your concerns on the article's talk page. By the way, his ethnicity is not mentioned in the lead.

3059: 1401: 680: 638: 502: 3514: 3167: 582:, also actively edited Hunyadi's page before getting banned, although he/she was not the one who initially added this info to the lead. 110: 2854:

Thank you for your kind words. Yes, I will continue to work. I enjoy editing and such unexpected interludes are always entertaining. :)

911: 895: 880: 864: 850: 836: 818: 804: 340: 3524: 1484: 1435: 1082: 4623: 795:

No, I did not think that is why I thanked your edit. All articles can be improved. So again thank you for your edits and suggestions.

378:

for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a

3826:

Or do you think the text was copied from the reliable English translation, that is why you kept that? Do you have that English book?

3382: 3183:

https://mki.gov.hu/hu/videok-hu/mediaszereplesek-hu/a-magyarsagkutato-intezet-azon-dolgozik-hogy-fenyt-deritsen-valodi-szarmazasunkra

331:

Thank you for your thorough and comprehensive copyedit and also for your query above. I fixed the problem (the first year was 1243).

2700:

I'd like you to take the following week to reflect, truly reflect, about the following: the topic area in dispute is subject to the

3874:

I see from your User page that you speak Hungarian and you are interested in history. I also saw that you have done editing on the

1320: 1218: 4253:

I'm looking to discuss this on your talk page first, and I'll only take this proposal to the article's talk page if there's need.

2326:

https://documente.bcucluj.ro/web/bibdigit/periodice/anuarulinstitutuluideistorienationala/1923/BCUCLUJ_FP_BALP_42_1923_002_001.pdf

1890: 4751: 4580: 3701: 3730:

Could you explain me to understand, why some quotes is good to publish and some is not good to publish? Thanks for your answer!

3533:. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the 3312:Ünnepi kötet Dr. Blazovich László egyetemi tanár 70. születésnapjára. Acta Universitatis Szegediensis. Acta Juridica et Politica 747: 4731: 4551: 4030: 4005: 3592: 1355:

This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period.

3835: 3044: 2078:

I am very familiar with the Hungarian chronicles, I did this edit according to my best knowledge regarding the original text.

1475:

Hello Borsoka. I understand you have some knowledge of Hungarian matters, and you were around in the old days when socking by

383: 1865: 1022: 724: 4872: 4025: 789: 4106: 3787: 3300:. Szeged, 2012. Ebből különösen Olajos Terézia: Adalékok a (H)ung(a)ri(i) népnév és a késői avarkori etnikum történetéhez. 2782: 2546: 1607: 1173: 1099: 1076: 1072: 294: 272: 4887: 4663: 3852: 3769: 3754: 3596: 3413: 3135: 3130: 2863: 2849: 2336:“Our greatest philologists and historians maintain that Ardeal came to us from Hungarian. And the fact is, it really did.” 2210: 2190: 2171: 2160: 2152: 2098: 2081: 92: 3461: 3220: 2980: 2831: 2646: 2436: 1809: 1792: 102: 3325: 2767: 2346: 2133: 3721: 1936: 1380: 972: 365: 4520: 4506: 4492: 4478: 4462: 4444: 4409: 4320: 4300: 3103: 3082: 2963: 2296: 2278: 1911: 700: 661: 621: 4860: 4483:

That's why I first contacted you, the creator of the stub, to know if my arguments would be valid at least. Why not?

3530: 3022: 1714: 1566: 1047: 2948: 2897: 2883: 2360: 232:

If you are looking for a new project, I have an idea. The subject ticks your interests in Hungary, HRE, and Sicily.

4671: 4277: 4262: 2994: 2791: 2740: 2518:

Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the

2496: 2482: 2095:"Simon of Kéza's later Hungarian chronicle described the Romanians as "the shepherds and husbandmen of the Romans" 4449:

I've listed 4 good reasons for merge. I haven't said we should do that because the title is of Slavic origin. See

3916: 2868:

Glad to hear that. Your articles are an enormous contribution to Knowledge, and their thoroughness is first-rate.

4102: 3550: 3352: 2933: 2317: 2388: 1898:

I think we should not refer to pre-war sources in this article. As far as I can remember the sentence about the

245: 3172: 1014: 3702:

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Kingdom_of_Hungary_(1000–1301)&diff=1121672564&oldid=1113935293

3446: 1247:

Language contact occurs when speakers of two or more languages or varieties interact and influence each other.

809:

Great. Am reading through and may tweak a bit more, but of course you are free to revert and no milk spilled.

97:

Hi Borsoka. Is it truth that John Hunyadi was short and he learnt how to read and write until his last years?

2564: 2541: 1946: 1500: 1146:. For example, you can review the whole article and compare its sentences with the (allegedly) cited sources 480: 3517:. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page 3211:

https://www.oktatas.hu/pub_bin/dload/kozoktatas/uj_kozneveles/2022_01/UKN_2201_21_A_magyarsag_szarmazasa.pdf

2533: 2284: 1872: 4727: 4693: 4076: 4001: 3967: 3614: 3245: 3163:

https://index.hu/techtud/2022/06/04/hun-avar-magyar-eredettortenet-honfoglalas-nepvandorlas-genetika-genom/

1697: 1306: 1030: 772: 567:

without explaining why, so I thought I should go through the changes I made and the reasoning behind them.

84: 72: 67: 59: 4646: 2529: 1025:

for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant

4852: 4237:(Context.) As these terms are practically the same, the history, origin, and wider terminology, found in 4131: 4088: 3945: 3739: 2749:, even at the risk that people will not agree with you in every detail. And don't antagonize people like 2636: 1830: 1232: 1034: 943: 705: 424: 289: 192: 4450: 4372:

Milos Lukovic: Zakon Vlahom; Self-Government Institutions of Nomadic and Semi-Nomadic Livestock Breeders

4186: 3788:

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Coloman,_King_of_Hungary&diff=1122524743&oldid=1122259786

2971:

Sorry, I do not understand your message. I already voted. This message does not cancel your canvassing.

2815: 2555: 4859:

Do you think this woman's great-great-grandfather is the reason for her notability, much less deserves

4689: 4608: 3963: 3588: 3534: 3520: 3136:

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=History_of_Transylvania&diff=1118981939&oldid=1118981684

3131:

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=History_of_Transylvania&diff=1118981684&oldid=1118945450

2161:

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Origin_of_the_Romanians&diff=1111709253&oldid=1111704524

2106:"Simon of Kéza's later Hungarian chronicle described the Vlachs (''Blackis'') as "shepherds and serfs" 2099:

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Origin_of_the_Romanians&diff=1061335517&oldid=1061333479

2082:

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Origin_of_the_Romanians&diff=1111709253&oldid=1111704524

1240: 1225: 1195: 38: 4550:

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at

3664:

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at

3499:, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was 3190: 3168:

https://magyarnemzet.hu/kultura/2022/05/feny-derult-a-hunok-avarok-es-honfoglalo-magyarok-szarmazasara

629:

The lead is to be presented in accordance with the main text. He Wallachian origin is quite relevant.

4737: 4011: 3432:? Who is he? It is clear for me that he was a member of the Csupor family, which originated from the 3367:

Szabados György: Mítoszok és történetek Álmosról és Árpádról. Hubbes László – Povedák István szerk.:

3310:

Olajos Terézia: A Kárpát-medencei onogurok történetéhez. Balogh Elemér – Homoki-Nagy Mária (szerk.):

2690: 2600: 2519: 2408: 1770: 1042: 523: 1776: 4853: 4700:, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. 3974:, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. 3806:"Oly nagy volt ott a vérontás, hogy ritkán szenvedtek a magyarok oly nagy vereséget, mint ezúttal." 3200: 2574: 2551: 2513: 1932: 1925: 1338: 1331: 1214: 1169: 1095: 1068: 591:"Ethnicity should generally not be in the lead unless it is relevant to the subject's notability." 4830: