I've listed this article for peer review because its comprehensiveness and neutrality should be chequed before its GAN.
Thanks, Borsoka (talk) 11:53, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This review has been closed as suitable for a direct nomination. Your request has been reviewed and is considered suitable for direct nomination. No issues have been identified that couldn't be ironed out during the nomination process. Good luck!
Comments by Tom (LT)
@Borsoka. This is a really interesting and well-written article, very well sourced. I don't have major concerns about neutrality. The background sections I find very long (this may just be me) and maybe could be truncated using WP:HATNOTEs for ease of reading. Also I note the citation needed and self-published tags in the final paragraph. I encourage you to address those citation-related issues and then directly nominate. It's overall a very good article. --Tom (LT) (talk) 10:21, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Borsoka. Thank you for your review. You are obviously right. The "Background" section was very long, so I shortened it. For the time being, the using of hatnotes would be difficult, because at least two new articles should be created (one about the disintegration of the Kingdom of Hungary, and one about the Reformation in Hungary). Have a nice day. Borsoka (talk) 02:05, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
