User talk:Borsoka/Archive 16

Archive 10

←

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

Invitation to join the Fifteen Year Society

Dear Borsoka/Archive 16,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Fifteen Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for fifteen years or more. ​

Best regards, Chris Troutman (talk) 18:36, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Congratulations

Congratulations for your fifteen-year participation! - Gyalu22 (talk) 19:59, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 06:30, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

TFA

Thank you today for Charles I of Anjou, introduced (in 2020): "This article is about a 13th-century French royal prince who established a powerful Mediterranean empire before his and his retainers abuse of power led to a popular revolt, known as the Sicilian Vespers. He is also the founder of a powerful dynasty, with members ruling southern Italy, Greece and vast lands in Central and Eastern Europe in the 13th and 14th centuries."! - Happy new year! -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:23, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

about a "banned wiki editor"

Hello there,

I saw you have a history with Noconteos on the Cuman wiki page. Did he join community and later get banned? Is it possible to join this community? I'm relatively new to wiki editing.

~ Gibby01 (talk) 03:15, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

You are welcome. I hope you will enjoy this community experience as I do. Sorry, I do not remember Noconteos but he seems to have been a sockpuppet of a banned user with whom I had some debates on wikipages. Which community do you want to join? Borsoka (talk) 04:51, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 26

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Middle Ages, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Patarenes.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:31, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

You errase all my work, and that work is hard

Why you do this? Do you have something with slavic language? Those words you can find in dictionary, and yet you just errase them. If slavic origin word Blato is albanian, also albanian Zjar is direct borowed from slavic žar, and yet those words can stand and other not. Also bulgarian word Bor can stand there and you cant make it right and write slavic bcz all slavs call bor same ot breza, bereza.. i give many words that south slavs use stil, and gotmany derivated words from them, and on some places they are better to describe word thst is reconstructed but yet you push Lith, Lat alb why? Do you want truth or you just doing your job that you got paid for..? Rrgnuti (talk) 23:27, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

I assume you refer to this edit: [1]. I explained my edit in the edit summary WP:NOR. That means we are not here to share our own thoughts with the community but to present a summary of scholarly works. Borsoka (talk) 02:47, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

These arent my thoughts, all words are still used in language. Also, you or who wrote didnt give prof for example word balta in albanian, i know albanian language, rooth bal if for forehead (balli), so how is there sense to be same as mud? Balta word in albanian is loan word, and how to be objectivw and use many loan words here. Also, all words that i posted arent loan words in any south slavic languages. So, if i did wrong in summary you can ask or infor me, and not to errase all without actualy cheeking it. Also i think many words that we got can cotribute to understand better history, not to decline all that you think its personal opinion. For some words in this table i didnt find match in my language or other south slavic so this is all true without fabrications. How this page can be true when i who know s. Slavic languages can contribute and also see mistakes there, like zjar, balto, also tym (is smouke, you give fog, and fog is mjegull loan word from prob slavic), and many other mistakes, can you cheek this that i write. Also for albanian you got more mistakes like diferent words or loans, and you miss some places where albanian word is most close to word you decifer here... Rrgnuti (talk) 22:39, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Kálmán herceg

Szia! Látom, sokat dolgoztál a Coloman of Galicia cikken, és megvannak a forrásaid is. Nekem nincsenek. Volna kedved a magyar cikkbe is átvinni ezt az információt a forrásokkal? hu:Kálmán herceg. Nekem nagy kedvencem, de nincsenek ilyen könyveim. Bináris (talk) 10:39, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Szia! Nem igazán. Nem tervezem, hogy a magyar WP-n is közreműködjek. Borsoka (talk) 11:10, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Nem mellesleg még az angol változat is - jóindulattal - félkész állapotban van. --Norden1990 (talk) 20:58, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Valóban, elég kevés benne a muhi csata. Bináris (talk) 22:34, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Undefined reference in Hungarian nobility

Hi, you introduced an sfn reference to "Bánó 2004" in this edit to Hungarian nobility. Unfortunately you did not define the reference, so nobody can look it up and the article is added to Category:Harv and Sfn no-target errors. If you could fix it that would be great. DuncanHill (talk) 09:54, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Charles I of Anjou

I see you got the Charles I of Anjou article to FA status. Granted it was in 2021, but would you happen to recall any information concerning any mention of a Pierre Charlot in the capacity as chancellor for Charles? --Kansas Bear (talk) 02:36, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

I do not remember him. I checked the indices in Dunbabin's and Runciman's works and they do not list him. Borsoka (talk) 02:45, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for checking! I figured it was a long shot. --Kansas Bear (talk) 03:15, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Britannica

Please watch the Romanians article where I'd like to add:
According to Encyclopædia Britannica from the arrival of the Huns in the 5th century until the emergence of the principalities of Wallachia and Moldavia in the 14th century, the Romanian people virtually disappeared from written history.
Do you have other references that confirm this statement? Apparently there are Byzantine and Arabic sources contradicting this. RF354 (talk) 10:15, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Actually, Arab sources do not contradict this (only certain historians try to associate uncertain people living somewhere in Eastern and Southeastern Europe with Vlachs living in the lands now forming Romania). Byzantine sources indeed refer to Vlachs of the Balkans from the 10th century and Vlachs living in the lands to the north of the Danube from the late 12th century. Borsoka (talk) 10:35, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your swift response, so we may leave out Britannica's quote. RF354 (talk) 11:14, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

References

About István Bóna file referenced on Romania's page

Hello there, why is the file with the link for "From Dacia to Transylvania: The Period of the Great Migrations (271–895); The Hungarian–Slav Period (895–1172) chapter 6: "Southern Transylvania under Bulgar Rule" wrong? What is a good link for reading the book online if this is wrong? Why did you add back 11th century when in chapter 6: "Southern Transylvania under Bulgar Rule" it clearly talks about Balkan Latins/Vlachs under Bulgar Rule (that covered the territory of Romania today) in the 8th and 9th centuries. It even cites historian István Bóna that Hungarians quote so much...Also in History of Transylvania Volume 1: Introduction to the English Edition it clearly says that writing the book was politically motivated: "Official policy turned virulently nationalistic in the Ceauşescu era. The above-noted theories and biases became firmly entrenched, and political as well as administrative measures were applied to repress the Hungarian minority in Transylvania. Hungary's persevered in its policy of accommodation, but hopes dimmed regarding its effectiveness. The growing stream of biased interpretations from Romanian historians impelled scholars in Hungary to emerge from their officially-sanctioned silence. In the late 1970s, the Historical Institute of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences rose to the challenge. The result was the three-volume Erdély története (History of Transylvania), published in 1986." So it's just as biased as Romanian communist historians of that time period...But he still wrote 8th-9thth centuries instead of 11th century. Ninhursag3 (talk) 06:28, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I do not understand your above message. Bóna explicitly writes that the migration of the Romanians to Transylvania did not start before the end of the 12th century. Borsoka (talk) 08:03, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Then why is he talking about Balkan Latins (Vlachs) under the Bulgar Empire (that reached Southern Transylvania in the 8th-9th centuries?) "The Bulgar empire on the Danube had a mixed population that consisted principally of Bulgaro-Turks (whose language began to acquire Slavic characteristics in the 9th {1-269.} century), various Slavic tribes, and the Balkan Latins (Vlachs). One of the fundamental goals of the early Bulgar khanate's empire-building policy was to resettle the various ethnic groups. In the case of Transylvania, the answer lies in burial rituals, for the graves contained skeletons; and there is general agreement that in Danubian Bulgaria's 'pagan' cemeteries of the 8th–9th centuries, these graves held the remains of Bulgaro-Turks. To be sure, cemeteries of this type were less numerous than those that cremation and double rites identify with the Slavic and local Balkanic population; but they reflect the ornate, 'nomadic' attire and wealth of a dominant group. It is therefore likely that Bulgaro-Turk soldiers and their families — the ethnic group that gave the empire its name — were present in Transylvania, a militarily and economically insecure border zone." Ninhursag3 (talk) 08:17, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

It's interesting you said 12th century, wasn't it 11th century, now you're contradicting yourself? " Scholars who reject the Daco-Roman continuity theory say that the first Vlach groups left their Balkan homeland for the mountain pastures of the eastern and southern Carpathians in the 11th century, establishing the Romanians' presence in the lands to the north of the Lower Danube." is what you kept. Ninhursag3 (talk) 08:22, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

1. Bóna does not write that the Bulgar Empire reached southern Transylvania in the 8th century. 2. Yes, Danubian Bulgaria had a mixed population, including Vlachs. 3. Bóna explicitly writes that Bulgars (not Vlachs) were settled to Transylvania in the 9th century. 4. My reference to the 12th century was a typo. Borsoka (talk) 08:43, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Also he says something very interesting: "To be sure, cemeteries of this type were less numerous than those that cremation and double rites identify with the Slavic and local Balkanic population; but they reflect the ornate, 'nomadic' attire and wealth of a dominant group."

I wonder what that local Balkanic population population in the 8th, 9th century in Southern Transylvania is?...The only other time it mentions Balkanic people in this chapter is "Balkan Latins (Vlachs)".

Hmmmm... Ninhursag3 (talk) 08:44, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Perhaps you should read the whole chapter and understand that when writing of the mixed population of the Bulgarian Empire, Bóna does not refer to Transylvania Borsoka (talk) 08:46, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

The Bulgarian Empire reached Southern Transylvania in the 8th and 9th centuries, including having control over salt mines Transylvania: "In all likelihood, the Maros valley was occupied by a detachment from Khan Omurtag's army. Perhaps it was a unit that veered away from the Tisza in the direction of Transylvania; one of its chiefs, Tarkan Onega(bon) of the Küviar clan, drowned in the Tisza. Or, perhaps, it was another detachment that came up along the Olt River. Following the conquest, which must have occurred around 830, the Bulgars established settlements along the Maros. The settlers came from the right bank of the Lower Danube, in Bulgaria. Their material legacy — jewellery, and dishes, complete with potters' marks on the bottom — is entirely the product of Danubian Bulgars. The settlers, who enjoyed military protection (grave with spurs at Tatárlaka), were charged with the task of putting back into production the salt mines at Marosújvár, Mezőakna, Sóvárad, and Torda, and to organize the transport of salt on the Maros River. Some of the shipments, towed along the Tisza to Csongrád, went to the Moravians, but most of them were directed downstream towards Belgrade. Since the bulk of the salt was probably shipped to the Bulgar khanate on the Lower Danube, the settlers had easy access to Bulgar products and luxury articles (jewellery). None of the finds indicate that they changed their way of life."

It also shows trade and movement, from Mureș/Maros, to Tisza, to Csongrád to Belgrade in the South. The Balkan Latins/Vlachs under the Bulgarian Empire in the 8th century traded and transported salt, that way they were in contact with local Balkanic people from Southern Transylvania (and also Slavic settlers). Ninhursag3 (talk) 08:56, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

The Balkan Latins/Vlachs under the Bulgarian Empire in the 8th and 9th century. Sorry. Ninhursag3 (talk) 09:01, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Your interpretation is not based on Bóna's text. Bóna writes of the conqest of Southern Transylvania around 830 and the archeological evidence of the presence of Bulgars in southern Transylvania, without mentioning Vlachs living in Transylvania in this period. Borsoka (talk) 09:11, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, he mentions graves in Southern Transylvania in the 8th and 9th century that are a local Balkanic population (along with Slavic graves) as well as Balkan Latins/Vlachs under the Bulgar Empire in the 8th and 9th century (during that time period the Bulgar Empire reached Transylvania). It also mentions that those under the Bulgar Empire (which would include Balkan Latins/Vlachs) transported and traded salt in the 9th century throughout the Bulgar Empire in the 9th century. Balkan Latins were useful for traded especially because they spoke a form of Latin, that's why he calls them Balkan Latins.

Why do you deny it? Ninhursag3 (talk) 09:19, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

were useful for trade* Ninhursag3 (talk) 09:19, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I stop discussing this issue in parallel on two pages (here and the article's Talk page). The Talk page is the proper page to continue the discussion. Borsoka (talk) 09:26, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Ok, so we will continue here and not the article's Talk page. Ninhursag3 (talk) 09:29, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

When he says "Following the conquest, which must have occurred around 830, the Bulgars established settlements along the Maros. The settlers came from the right bank of the Lower Danube, in Bulgaria." He is very vague about who those "settlers" were, but taking into account Balkan Latins/Vlachs were already part of the Bulgar Empire, they could have easily been a part of this settler group. Ninhursag3 (talk) 09:28, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi Ninhursag3! You mentioned Hungarian historians had political motivation to write a book about the history of Transylvania which is part of the Hungarian history. The political motivation came from Romania by irredentist reason:[2]

Romania’s entry into World War 1, 27 August 1916. Detail from Proclamation of King Ferdinand of Romania: “In our moral energy and our valour lie the means of giving him back his birthright of a great and free Romania from the Tisza to the Black Sea, and to prosper in peace in accordance with our customs and our hopes and dreams.”

Romanian historiography with the Daco-Roman theory produced a lot of absurd fake maps to justify the territorial claims againts Hungary. Romania in the 9-13th century by Romanian historiography: fake map from 1920: Dacia!? in the 9-13th century [11] fake map from 1980s from the national-communist times, Romania 9-13th century: [10] fake modern map, Romania 9-13th century: [9] If you see international Europe maps, you will not find this "Dacia/Romania" country in the historical maps of Europe: [11][12][13] Those maps which made by Romanian historiography is clearly a falsifications and abuse of the international and Hungarian historiography, because in the reality this "Romania country" did not exist, which occupied the half territory of the Kingdom of Hungary in the 9-13th century in those maps. I think it is also strange that we have no records about that allegedly "always majority Romanians" in that huge area which presented on the fake maps in that long period between 300-1100. It was also a joke when in 1980s in the national-communist Romania, the Romanian state celebrated its 2050th anniversary... just purlery the existence of these faks maps is clearly a testimony of the quality and the political purpose of the Daco-Roman theory. Because international and Hungarian historiography does not match with these fake maps, it is not a Hungarian political motivation, but simple they have right to present their own historography which are by the way matching with the international historography and the historiography of the other surronding countries regarding Transylvania. OrionNimrod (talk) 09:50, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

I did acknowledge it "So it's just as biased as Romanian communist historians of that time period", so why did you even bring it up? That's not to say we now have generalize EVERY Romanian historian and say they're wrong about everything. Just as we should say that Hungarian historians are wrong about verything. There should be a balance.

And again, I quoted from a Hungarian historian, István Bóna that said Vlachs were part of the Bulgarian Empire and that the Bulgarian Empire conquered Southern Transylvania in the 8th and 9th centuries and exploited its salt mines. I didn't quote a Romanian historian. Ninhursag3 (talk) 10:19, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Just as we shouldn't say that Hungarian historians are wrong about everything.* corrected Ninhursag3 (talk) 10:20, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

About Dacia Ripensis and Scythia Minor - They both had territory in today Romania

About Dacia Ripensis and Scythia Minor - They both had territory in today Romania. Before you deleted the Diocese of Dacia because of its 5 provinces which were in the Balkans. Dacia Ripensis is one of the provinces of the Diocese of Dacia and had cities that are in today Romania like Sucidava. Dacia Ripensis along with Moesia Prima were the northernmost provinces of the Diocese of Dacia (that reached the Romanian-Bulgarian border and the Serbian-Romanian border respectively). The capital of Scythia Minor was Tomis, now Constanța, in today Romania. The wikipedia page is called Romania and the section is Romania's History. Dacia Ripensis and Scythia Minor are part of Romania's territory and history. Ninhursag3 (talk) 21:32, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

In this case why did you delete the reference to Scythia Minor from the article ([3])? You should use the article's Talk page when discussing this issue. Borsoka (talk) 01:22, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

I didn't delete it, I didn't write about Scythia Minor before. I wrote about it just yesterday. Oops. Ninhursag3 (talk) 01:54, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Open the link above: it was you who deleted the reference to Scythia Minor and the Roman forts on the northern bank of the Danube at 12:11 on 11 April 2023. Borsoka (talk) 02:01, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Oh, I see. I mention Scythia Minor as a historical place in a historical context, irregardless of theories about the origins of Romanians. The majority of Vlachs/Romanians could have lived in Scythia Minor and Dacia Ripensis, that doesn't mean there couldn't have been Vlachs/Romanians living North of the Danube, alas fewer in number. Especially since even István Bóna mentioned local Balkan graves together with Slavic graves in Transylvania even before the Bulgars arrived in the 8th and 9th centuries.

So in conclusion: Scythia Minor should be on the page as a matter of fact, without theorising pro or anti Daco-Roman continuity. The theorising should be left on the 'Origins of the Romanians' wikipedia page. Ninhursag3 (talk) 02:13, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

1. István Bóna does not mention local Balkan graves together with Slavic graves in Transylvania. 2. The text you deleted mentioned Scythia Minor as a historical place. 3. All scholarly works about the History of Romania shortly mention the theories about the Origins of the Romanians. Borsoka (talk) 02:31, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

John Hunyadi

We don't know where John Hunyadi was born. Just that in 1409 when King Sigismund of Hungary bestowed Hunyad Castle (in present-day Hunedoara, Romania) and the lands attached to it upon John's father, Voyk and Voyk's four kinsmen, including John himself, so John Hunyadi was already born by then. Does it say how old John Hyundai was? Modern historian Kubinyi wrote that Voyk most probably joined Sigismund in 1395. But we don't know for sure from primary sources. So John Hunyadi could have been born in Wallachia before 1409 and joined his father in Hunedoara, Transylvania under the Kingdom of Hungary by 1409. Ninhursag3 (talk) 06:43, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

I kept "John Hunyadi (c. 1406 – 11 August 1456) was a leading Hungarian military and political figure" and rephrased it to make his ancestry more clear: "of Vlach (Romanian) descent in Central and Southeastern Europe during the 15th century." Ninhursag3 (talk) 06:58, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

@Borsoka What do you mean "the main text verifies this version"? Where does it say John Hunyadi was born in 1406? Ninhursag3 (talk) 09:24, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

No, it does not say. Would you use the article's talk page if you want to discuss edits in an article? Borsoka (talk) 10:31, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

I guess, if you're okay with that? I don't understand the specificity of the year 1406. Was he 50 when he died so is that why? Did anyone know his age at certain times so we can do the math?

Btw: Happy Easter and wish you lots of good things ^^ Ninhursag3 (talk) 12:33, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Removing Hungarian related contents and strange modifications on Hungarian related articles

Hi Borsoka ! An user started removing Hungarian related contents and strange modifications on Hungarian related articles:

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Hungary#Removing Hungarian related contents and strange modifications on Hungarian related articles OrionNimrod (talk) 14:05, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

He is quite obviously a sock of banned User:Stubes99. For some mystical but obviously deeply personal reasons, he hates Kun people. Borsoka (talk) 09:58, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Operation Blue Star on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:39, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

House of Mónek

I am not sure if your deletion of the content is acceptable. You should probably demand removal of the article. Xx236 (talk) 11:47, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, probably sooner or later. Borsoka (talk) 12:08, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Székelys' origins

I've recently found this 2022 paper by Hakan Aydemit (who is apparently a respectable expert), who has this quite... revolutionary proposal that:

the first mentions of the Szekelys are in the chapters on the Tiele (鐵勒) tribes of the Suishu (隋書, chapter 84) and Beishi (北史, chapter 99). In both works, the Szekelys are listed as one of the Tiele tribes inhabited north of the Tula River (Mongolia) under the name Sekel (Sījié 斯結), which was mistakenly read as Sïkïr / Sïkar / Siker or Izgil until now.

Whenever you will have time, will you kindly peruse Aydemir (2022) and judge if it shall be a suitable source dealing with Székelys' origins. Erminwin (talk) 23:03, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, it is quite revolutionory. Thank you for referring the source to me. For me the possibility of the survival of Székely groups in the Carpathian Basin for almost half a millenium is less than likely but the source is undeniably reliable. Borsoka (talk) 09:07, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Seven years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:45, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Source

Hi Borsoka! I have question about your request https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Decree_of_Turda&diff=prev&oldid=1153900650

You can see the marked source are quite reliable the source used many articles: 2001, Columbia University Press, Institute of History Of The Hungarian Academy of Sciences OrionNimrod (talk) 10:31, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Could you quote the text stating that the text contains the Hungarian PoV? Borsoka (talk) 15:37, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi Borsoka! I always provided links (btw I really do not like those sources which are unlinked) so you can check my sources. http://mek.niif.hu/03400/03407/html/82.html

"In the 14th century, Hungary underwent a process of political and economic consolidation, and Transylvania prospered as never before, or since. The campaign led by András Lackfi had finally expelled the Mongols. The main source of unrest was the relationship between nobles and villains, which remained unsettled and was further complicated by judicial and social aspects of the settlement of Romanians in the counties. King Louis had to pay a visit in 1366 to Transylvania to deal with the disorder. Among Hungary's kings, he was the most frequent visitor to the province, one reason being the problems in the southern borderlands. The frequent rebellions by Wallachian voivodes did not represent a serious threat, but their armies would repeatedly rampage through the mainly Saxon villages in the frontier zone. To secure the mountain passes, the king had the fortresses rebuilt at Talmács and Törcs, a defensive measure fully supported by the Saxons of Szeben and Brassó." OrionNimrod (talk) 21:10, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I do not understand the relevance of the above quote. Could you quote a text proving that the sentence represents the Hungarian PoV? Borsoka (talk) 00:53, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

The quote is from this big book: 3 volumes, history of Transylvania 3x900 pages, edited by many Hungarian academics: http://mek.niif.hu/03400/03407/html/1.html

[4][5]. OrionNimrod (talk) 10:34, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Again, no quote has been provided that proves that the quote represents the Hungarian PoV. Yes, the cited source was written by a Hungarian historian and published by the publishing house of the Hungarian AoS, but no source states that the source presents the Hungarian PoV. Borsoka (talk) 12:53, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Well, this 1366 decree topic is not the most researched by Hungarian historians, if I do not emphasize "according to Hungarian historians" then the Romanians will be not happy, who has different POV regarding this, so they do not want to see this as general fact, just a Hungarian opinion. You can see that huge book edited and revised by several Hungarian historians and published by Hungarian academic of sicence, what is this if not the Hungarian pov? This say the same [6][7] , this source say similar, but this is older: [8] OrionNimrod (talk) 16:35, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

It is PoV of one Hungarian historian. Borsoka (talk) 16:42, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

That big Transylvania book was edited supervised by many historians published by the Hungarian academy, also I showed you other books with edited another historians. This is not 1 person. OrionNimrod (talk) 17:47, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

However, you cannot make any statement based on your own research as per WP:NOR. Borsoka (talk) 17:54, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

At list 10+ Hungarian historians edited/supervised/wrote that books (I provided 3 books), and the big one published by the number 1 Hungarian academy, the other one by the University of Chicago [9]. I see what you mean that we do not know one by one the opinion of 100 Hungarian historians in that subject, however I bet many of them does not care with that topic. So what do you think converting "In Hungarian historiography" ->"According to Hungarian historians"? In this case we do not say any exact number "how many historians". If I do not emphasize that this is Hungarian scholar opinion then the Romanians will be not happy because Romanians scholars have different opinion in that subject. OrionNimrod (talk) 09:50, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Gesta

Hi Borsoka!

Could you tell me what is the problem with my edit? I quoted a reliable historian work:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Origin_of_the_Romanians&diff=prev&oldid=1154124211

Because I saw this scholar POV statement:

I.A. Pop concludes that the two chronicles "assert the Roman origin of Romanians... by presenting them as the Romans' descendants" who stayed in the former Roman provinces.

So I think we can represent other opinions of other scholar. Deletant write clearly that Anonymus made a distinction between Blachij and Shepherd of the Romans. Also you know Hungarian historians (like Krsitó) say the same.

Could you tell me why it is not relevant if the comment from IA Pop can be there? OrionNimrod (talk) 16:40, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Reformation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Constance.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Template talk:Infobox settlement on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:30, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	Thank you so much for your GA review of The Holocaust article. It's a daunting task to review an article with such a broad scope, not to mention the subject matter. (t · c) buidhe 03:12, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for this exceptionally well written, thoroughly researched and exemplarily neutral article about one of the most tragic events in World history. Borsoka (talk) 03:23, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Promotion of Hungarian nobility

Congratulations, Borsoka! The article you nominated, Hungarian nobility, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Congratulations for this achievement, dear @Borsoka:! --Norden1990 (talk) 19:32, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! You are really kind. Borsoka (talk) 01:50, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Hungarians

I don't know if you're watching Hungarians, but see [10]. @Kansas Bear: as well.--Ermenrich (talk) 12:39, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

I had posted a concern on Austronesier's talk page on 9 June. Akatziri's editing mirrors Volgabulgari's editing. --Kansas Bear (talk) 13:27, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

A research institute recently established by the Hungarian government has published several publications that state that the genetic connection between the conquering Magyars in the 9th century and the 5th-century Huns is a fact. I think those studies should be treated as primary sources. Borsoka (talk) 07:45, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Hungarian nobility scheduled for TFA

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 5 August 2023. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 5, 2023, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/August 2023. I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:26, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Agressive edit war on Hungarian topics

Hi @Borsoka, an user suddenly appears and started agressively (with personal insults) editing many similar contents, not willing to do any compromise, he force exclusively his POV, removing Hungarian historian sources, removing Hungarian historical contents.

Talk:First Vienna Award#"Non-violent"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Soviet_annexation_of_Transcarpathia#Czecoslovakia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Soviet_annexation_of_Transcarpathia#This_article_is_about_the_Soviet_annexation_of_Transcarpathia,_nothing_more

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Hungarian_invasion_of_Carpatho-Ukraine#Czecoslovak_participation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Hungarians_in_Ukraine#Borders OrionNimrod (talk) 12:27, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

I literally went to WP:Third Opinion in order to find another editor to solve the dispute, and you ignored it and resumed editing the article before the 3O could reply. You also constantly ignore all the Talk page explanations I make in favor of your narrative that aims to paint me falsely as unwilling to compromise. I am now considering to escalate this towards the dispute resolution process. Azure94 (talk) 12:57, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

I see you follow me everywhere I talked here not with you. I talked you already other pages. OrionNimrod (talk) 13:28, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Am I not allowed to defend myself from your false accusations? Azure94 (talk) 13:37, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

All your edits are recorded like mine. OrionNimrod (talk) 13:41, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Promotion of Raymond III, Count of Tripoli

Congratulations, Borsoka! The article you nominated, Raymond III, Count of Tripoli, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

August songs

Congratulations, and thank you today for Hungarian nobility, "about a privileged group of people in the Kingdom of Hungary. Between c. 1000 and 1944, mainly noblemen were appointed to the highest offices in the kingdom but the Hungarian aristocrats never formed a uniform class. The wealthiest noblemen held more than one-third of all lands in the kingdom, but tens of thousands of peasant-nobles had no more than a single plot. Furthermore, there was a sharp legal distinction between "true nobles" and "conditional nobles" (such as the "nobles of the Church"). Although nobility was officially abolished in Hungary in 1947, Hungarian noble families still live in Hungary and the neighboring countries."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:07, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

October songs

my story today

Today is Debussy's birthday. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:40, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Today, we thank you for the first mentioned, "about the last Count of Tripoli in the Outremer from the House of Toulouse. Raymond was still a minor when he inherited Tripoli from his father. He spent many years in captivity in Aleppo, and after his release he assumed the regency for the underage king of Jerusalem, Baldwin the Leper. His rivalry with Baldwin's sister Sybilla and her husband Guy of Lusignan brought the Jerusalemite kingdom to the brink of a civil war. He made an alliance with the powerful Saladin but his vassals persuaded him to join the Crusaders' army when Saladin invaded the kingdom. He was one of the few Crusader leaders who fled from the battlefield at Hattin in July 1187, but he died likely of pleurisy before the end of the year. Many of his contemporaries blamed him for Saladin's triumph at the battlefield."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:52, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Unjustified disruptive editing and removal of sourced content

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Godfrey of Bouillon, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page.

The source that I have provided to the article is both reliable and academic, written by a historian and published by a renowned university press. Original research doesn't apply here; deleting sourced content with reliable references as you did without previous discussion qualifies as disruptive editing. Please stop and check the cited sources. GenoV84 (talk) 20:18, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Primary sources, like William of Tyre's chronicle are not deemed to be reliable for WP purposes as per WP:Primary. Borsoka (talk) 09:48, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I just replied on the article's talk page; we can resolve this issue together by replacing William of Tyre with a better source. Let me know what you think about it. GenoV84 (talk) 17:18, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Operation Windsor on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:31, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

August 2023 Good Article Nominations backlog drive

Good article nominations | August 2023 Backlog Drive
August 2023 Backlog Drive: On 1 August, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year. (t · c) buidhe 05:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Defense of Sihang Warehouse on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:31, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For bringing an article on such a broad period of history as Hungarian nobility to the status of FA. A monumentally impressive accomplishment. Thank you for your work! —Compassionate727 (T·C) 14:25, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words and also for the barnstar. We are all here to improve articles. Borsoka (talk) 17:29, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Ladislaus I main image

Hi Borsoka. In my opinion, Ladislaus I's herm (picture: [11]), made during the reign of Sigismund, would be better as the infobox image in the article. The current image is from the Thuróczi chronicle which was written later. Before making any changes, I wanted to ask you about the idea. Gyalu22 (talk) 11:32, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Agree. The helm is more representative. Borsoka (talk) 12:06, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Btw the first herm was made during king Bela III (burned and remade) and he made Saint from king Ladislaus. Scholars think that only the face of Bela from the same family was the best authentic model to make the herm of Ladislaus. So the herm represent the face of Bela. But of course this is the herm of Ladislaus inside his skull. Recent genetic studies confirmed the family connection with that some generation difference between the bones Bela III and Ladislaus skull. OrionNimrod (talk) 19:57, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:History of Transylvania on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:31, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Raymond III, Count of Tripoli

Does a TFA for October 13 work for you? - Dank (push to talk) 03:06, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Yes. What am I expected to do? Borsoka (talk) 03:13, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Whatever you like. If you want to watch WP:ERRORS around that time, you can. If WT:Featured article candidates/Raymond III, Count of Tripoli/archive1 is still a red link when you read this, that means it still doesn't have a blurb ... if you want to write one, try to keep it between 925 and 1025 characters. - Dank (push to talk) 03:20, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. I will try to write a blurb. Borsoka (talk) 03:33, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:31, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Battle checking

Hi! Could you check the newly created article? Talk:Battle of Tahtalu

Is the provided Islamic encyclopedia is reliable or not? (written by users like Wiki?)

Because an article written by an user which claim the 14 years old King Matthias of Hungary attacked an Ottoman area deep in Serbia with 50,000 solders against Mehmed II and lost. But I do not find anything about this in Hungarian sources, I suppose it should be any mention of this high scale royal campaign if it was real.

Do you know anything about this? OrionNimrod (talk) 18:26, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Requested move discussion

There is currently a Request Move discussion about William IV. Since you participated in a previous move discussion about William IV, I thought you might want to know about this one. Cheers. Rreagan007 (talk) 19:42, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Promotion of Theodore II Laskaris

Congratulations, Borsoka! The article you nominated, Theodore II Laskaris, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.

This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) via FACBot (talk) 00:05, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Hungary government status

I am new to editing, and I can see you are not, which probably means you were right in reverting my edit on the Hungary page about the government status being an electoral autocracy. But it was cited from the European parliament, which is a reliable source, and any other dictatorships I checked on Wikipedia, for example Russia and North Korea, had the same format in the government status bit.

Please can you explain? thanks NecromancerOfEnchanting (talk) 14:06, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

NecromancerOfEnchanting so you state that Hungarian state today is same as the hardcore dictatorship in North Korea :) what next? The earth is flat? OrionNimrod (talk) 20:15, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

No, sorry if I was unclear, but those were just examples of country articles that had the same format I was going to use on the Hungary article, obviously the situation in Hungary is not as extreme as in North Korea.

Thank you for your understanding! (: NecromancerOfEnchanting (talk) 20:24, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Hungary state format is rebuplic not dictatorship. OrionNimrod (talk) 20:33, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

I doubt that European Parliament is a reliable source. I have never read that its decisions are peer reviewed before being passed. Borsoka (talk) 01:25, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Ahaaha Rocks on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Al-Ahli Arab Hospital explosion on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:31, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Raymond & Urraca

Congratulations on getting Raymond to the Main Page as a FA and thank you for bringing the article to that level. I just stumbled upon Urraca of León again and remembered that you had been working on that article too. I'll keep my fingers crossed that you finish that story too. Surtsicna (talk) 08:31, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words. Yes, her article should be finished but for a while my time is limited. Borsoka (talk) 01:57, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Hamis információ szócikkben. Teendő?

Szia. Láttam, hogy te már régi tag vagy az EN-wikin, ezért gondoltam neked írok. A 'Dacian language' szócikkben van egy állítás, ami forrással is alá van támasztva. Konkrétan ez: "Substratum words found in Romanian, the language that is spoken today in most of the region once occupied by Dacian-speakers. These include about 400 words of uncertain origin. Romanian words for which a Dacian origin has been proposed include: balaur ("dragon"), brânză ("cheese"), mal ("bank, shore"), and strugure ("grape")."

Mivel meg van nekem a hivatkozott könyv, ezért leellenőriztem, és még csak hasonlót sem tartalmaz. Az említett oldal az Azeri nyelvvel foglalkozik. Ilyenkor mi a teendő? Enlightenment1685 (talk) 10:41, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Szerintem a megfelelő oldalt kellene megkeresni. Az idézetthez hasonló gyakran szerepelnek a román vagy dák nyelvről szóló irodalomban. Borsoka (talk) 00:50, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Értem, köszi! Enlightenment1685 (talk) 13:11, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Battle of Kosovo on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:30, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Battle of Kosovo on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:30, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Middle Ages

Well, ok, but please stop using the insulting edit summary "OR?" when it's just that you are too ignorant to know and too lazy to even hover over the link. You could just add "citation needed", but now you have taken possession of this article, it's about time you did something to actually improve it. Johnbod (talk) 03:03, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

Please read our basic policies: we cannot edit WP articles based on other WP articles. Placing tags in a huge collection of original research and unverified claims in itself an attempt to improve it. You can hardly demand other editors to do your homework: it was you who failed to verify the sentences you wrote. Borsoka (talk) 03:31, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. 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 site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

TFA?

I'm thinking of running Theodore II Laskaris at TFA on January 20; does that work for you? - Dank (push to talk) 22:50, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. Yes, it works for me. What should I do? Borsoka (talk) 01:59, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Gog has signed up to do the blurb, or you can do it if you like. It will show up on the FAC nomination talk page. - Dank (push to talk) 02:17, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

I would prefer to review Gog's blurb. I am sure their style is better than mine. Borsoka (talk) 02:25, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

When they do the blurb, WT:Featured article candidates/Theodore II Laskaris/archive1 will turn blue. - Dank (push to talk) 02:44, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:René Lévesque on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:31, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Hamas on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 24

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Middle Ages, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Abatement.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Request:

Can you review the article of Emperor Haile Selassie I for a potential good article, it would be appreciated CtasACT (talk) 18:39, 30 December 2023 (UTC)