User talk:Norden1990/Archive 4

Principality of Nitra

Smart edits. :) :) :) Thanks. What about a DYK? You know I am unable to undergo the whole procedure. A principality is quite interesting if all aspects of its history are highly debated by specialists. Borsoka (talk) 14:16, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

It's a good idea, I would gladly nominate it, if you wish, although it may be not successful, because this article is not a new one. If it does work, what sentence would you suggest to nominate? "Principality of Nitra" is full of theory, hypothesis and fairy tale.--Norden1990 (talk) 14:29, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Fenébe! (&@##) That is why I hate this DYK procedure: it is much trickier than a GAN. I hate vasting my time with policies that cannot be understood in less than 2 minutes. Ez van. (That's the situation.) Azért köszönet. (Thanks!) Mindenesetre jó móka volt :). (Even so, I enjoyed working on the article.) Borsoka (talk) 16:05, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Your comment on the Manning RM

Hi Norden. I'm Fluffernutter, and I'm attending to the requested move discussion in an administrative capacity to try to keep things flowing smoothly and without undue fighting. Your oppose comment on the RM contains commentary that unnecessarily personalizes the debate and contains statements that a significant portion of the community have found to be disruptive during previous discussions. In my administrative capacity, I am asking that you please re-word or re-phrase your comment so that it does not ascribe bad faith to your fellow community members ("homosexual lobby") or belittle the gender identity of other humans ("definitely a man", "I also could say that I'm a tiger. However it's not true."). Remember that the move discussion centers about policy, not personal feelings. You are more than welcome to your personal feelings, but they will not sway the consensus of the discussion, and may in fact cause your vote to be given less weight in the end if they make it appear your vote is not policy-based. If you are unwilling or unable to re-word your comment, I will redact the problematic portions of it in my administrative capacity, pursuant to the discretionary sanctions that are active in this topic area. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 15:25, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Norden, there was nothing wrong with your comment. You are merely another victim of a clear abuse of power. I know that there is nothing you can do about it, but I just wanted to reassure you that you are completely correct. AutomaticStrikeout (₵) 01:13, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Files missing description details

Dear uploader: The media files you uploaded as:

• File:BudinszkyLaszlo.jpg
• File:HenneyArpad.jpg
• File:JurcsekBela.jpeg

are missing a description and/or other details on their image description pages. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the images, and they will be more informative to readers.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 16:12, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

RE: King of Croatia infobox

Saying "you have no valid arguments" is a very bad way to start a discussion. As for reverting without explanation you did it first so don't complain about what you do yourself. Croatia was one of THE main titles of those monarchs. They did not have to be crowned separately (as you claim) since Hungary and Croatia were in personal union, the coronation was joint ceremony since at least mid-13th century. If we can have Ireland being mentioned in the succession boxes of English (and later British) monarchs we can certainly have Croatia being mentioned when referring to Hungarian (and incidentally Croatian) monarchs. Don't see what exactly is the problem there. Shokatz (talk) 01:24, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Manning naming dispute closed

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

1. Hitmonchan (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to any transgender topic or individual, broadly construed.
2. IFreedom1212 (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to any transgender topic or individual, broadly construed.
3. Tarc (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to any transgender topic or individual, broadly construed.
4. Josh Gorand (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to any transgender topic or individual, broadly construed.
5. Baseball Bugs (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic-banned from all pages relating to any transgender topic or individual, broadly construed. He is also topic banned from all pages (including biographies) related to leaks of classified information, broadly construed.
6. David Gerard (talk · contribs) is admonished for acting in a manner incompatible with the community's expectations of administrators (see #David Gerard's use of tools).
7. David Gerard (talk · contribs) is indefinitely prohibited from using his administrator permissions (i) on pages relating to transgender people or issues and (ii) in situations involving such pages. This restriction may be first appealed after six months have elapsed, and every six months thereafter.
8. The standard discretionary sanctions adopted in Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Sexology for (among other things) "all articles dealing with transgender issues" remain in force. For the avoidance of doubt, these discretionary sanctions apply to any dispute regarding the proper article title, pronoun usage, or other manner of referring to any individual known to be or self-identifying as transgender, including but not limited to Chelsea/Bradley Manning. Any sanctions imposed should be logged at the Sexology case, not this one.
9. All editors, especially those whose behavior was subject to a finding in this case, are reminded to maintain decorum and civility when engaged in discussions on Wikipedia, and to avoid commentary that demeans any other person, intentionally or not.

For the Arbitration Committee, Rschen7754 01:36, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For your continuous work of creating and maintaining articles related to Hungary. Keep up your excellent work! KœrteFa {ταλκ} 16:30, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much! --Norden1990 (talk) 14:51, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Kingdom of Hungary

Hi! You don't have to go to the library, i send you the original text, if i have free time (maybe in weekend). Rovibroni (talk) 19:32, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi! Here's some useful parts from the book:

1. Európai kulturális központ: "Egy, alkalmasint Kálti Márk nevű klerikus, székesfehérvári őrkanonok 1358-ban kezdett hozzá az addigi magyar krónikás anyag második szintézisének elkészítéséhez. E szövegváltozat egyik példánya a Képes Krónika kódexében maradt ránk. Ennek miniatúrái a korabeli európai művészet élvonalába tartoztak." (p. 197), "A képző- és építőművészet tárgykörébe vonható alkotások már Károly alatt szép számmal készültek, és Lajos idején teljesedtek ki." (p. 198), "E testvérpár [Kolozsvári Márton és György,- megj.] Prágában található Szent György-szobra a magyar szobrászat európai rangú alkotása." (p. 198), "Főleg a két fővárosban, Visegrádon és Budán folytak nagyszabású építkezések." [a gótika jegyében,- megj.] (p. 198), "1395-ben Óbudán hozott létre egyetemet [Zsigmond,- megj.], amelynek mind a négy kara (jogi, bölcsész, orvosi, teológiai) működött." (p. 198), "1418-tól kezdve 1444-ben bekövetkezett haláláig Magyarországon tartózkodott a neves itáliai humanista tudós és pedagógus, Pier Paolo Vergerio, aki a Vitéz János körül csoportosult humanista kör legismertebb tagja volt." (p. 199), "Mátyás udvarában gyökeret vert és megerősödött a reneszánsz és a humanizmus...., a kor európai mércével is jelentős költője, Csezmiczei Jánost, azaz Janus Pannoniust Ferrarában iskoláztatta." [Vitéz János iskoláztatta,-megj.] (p. 199), "Vitéz János kezdeményezte az 1467-ben megalapított újabb magyarországi egyetem, a pozsonyi létesítését, ahol több külföldi tudós is tanított." (p. 199), "A csak kevés nyomtatott könyvet tartalmazó Corvina teljes állománya meghaladta a kétezret, és ez Európában ritkaságnak számított." (p. 200), "A Jagelló-kor néhány évtizede alatt a műveltségi szint robbanásszerű emelkedését tapasztaljuk." (p. 200), "Az itáliai gyökerű humanizmus Mátyás halálával nem enyészett el, hanem kiterjedt." (p. 200)

2. Európai középhatalom/jelentős politikai tényező: "Magyarország a 12. század második felére jelentős európai tényezővé, középhatalommá vált." (p. 113), ..Magyarországot ez európai politika jelentős tényezőjévé tette..[Mátyás király,- megj.] (p. 155)

3. Nyugati kultúrkör része: "..Magyarország úgy tudott érdemlegesen felzárkózni a Nyugathoz (jóllehet annak szintjét távolról sem érte el), hogy belső gondjai...nem roppantották össze.." (p. 115), "A Nyugat részévé vált Magyarország.." (p. 113)

Book: Kristó Gyula - Barta János - Gergely Jenő: Magyarország története előidőktől 2000-ig, Pannonica Kiadó, Budapest, 2002, ISBN 963-9252-56-5

Rovibroni (talk) 21:55, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! --Norden1990 (talk) 09:48, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014

Hi, if you haven't already, you should consider signing up for WikiCup 2014. Cheers, --Sp33dyphil ©^hat_ontributions 01:04, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Csák I Hahót

Gatoclass (talk) 13:38, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Ernye Ákos

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Eurocentral

The last version of his comment is:

• Keep "The list is relevant for the vocabulary of Romanian language. Many works by specialists refer to words of possible Dacian origin" * Eurocentral (talk) 14:04, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Romanian_words_of_possible_Dacian_origin&diff=581910126&oldid=581909668

He moved his comment and edited it. It is true He should not have deleted yours. 82.79.213.79 (talk) 18:23, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Kérés

Lsz, próbálj meg ne minősíteni. Egyrészt teljesen felesleges (nem kapcsolódik a vita témájához), másrészt egyoldalú (a mi történetírásunkban is van rengeteg baromság), harmadrészt olyan ügyben nyilvánítasz véleményt, amelyet nem biztos, hogy ismersz (nem feltételezem, hogy akár DK-i, akár É-i szomszédunk nyelvén szoktál történelemkönyveket olvasgatni), negyedrészt kifejezetten káros (harmadik felek azt tapasztalják, hogy valami szokásos k-európai acsarkodás). Kérlek, az ilyen típusú megjegyzések előtt számolj háromig. Igen, néha idegesítőek, sokszor marhaságokat írnak, ráadásul némelyikük bicskanyitogatóan elfogult és szűklátókörű, de ez legyen az ő bajuk, ne a miénk. Egyébként nagyon tetszik az erdélyi vajda sorozatod. Sokkal jobban hozzájárul mindenféle közösségi célunkhoz, mint a negatív megjegyzéseid. Szép lassan, nyugodtan, lépésről lépésre haladva előbb utóbb célba érünk. :) Legyen szép napod. Borsoka (talk) 03:49, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

A személyeskedést nem én kezdtem, hiszen láthatod, rögtön deklarálva lett, hogy azért nem tetszik nekünk a cikk, mert magyarok vagyunk. Pedig nem, hiszen nem győztem hangsúlyozni, hogy magával a dáko-román kontiunitás cikkel nincs bajom. Úgy látszik, mindenki elbeszél egymás mellett. Minden elfogultság nélkül mondom, hogy a magyar és román történetírás össze sem hasonlítható egymással, hiszen amíg a dáko-román elmélet állami és akadémiai támogatást élvez, addig nálunk az abszurd elméletek a történészi szakma peremére szorultak (azért Badinyi-Jós teóriája nem mainstream, ezt gondolom, te is elfogadod). Merem állítani, hogy a magyar történetírás a legkorrektebb a térségben, talán túlzottan is. Ha a vita megmaradt volna civilizált hangnemben, én is az maradtam volna, de úgy látszik, a románok "szent tehenét" sértettük meg. Lehet, hogy érzékeny vagyok az ilyen esetekben. Egyébként a szlovákot olvasási szinten megértem, és nagyjából tudom, mi folyik ott történelem-oktatás címszó alatt (amelyeket egyébként közös nevező alá lehetne hozni a magyar historiográfiával, de amíg nincs meg a közös politikai akarat... na mindegy, idealista voltam mindig is). --Norden1990 (talk) 14:52, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

u. i.: köszi a dicséretet is, ha van bármiféle javaslatod, kiegészíteni valód, csak szerkessz bátran (sajnos csak három-négy könyv áll rendelkezésemre az erdélyi vajdákat illetően). --Norden1990 (talk) 14:54, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

És tényleg magyarok vagyunk. :) A szlovákért irigyellek. A magyar történetírás óriási hiányossága, hogy a magyar történészek nem ismerik a környék nyelveit. Egyszerűen nem tudnak lépést tartani. Ezzel szemben a középkorral vagy újkorral foglalkozó szlovák, román, stb. történészek megtanulnak (legalább olvasni) magyarul. Esetleg nincs valami jó szlovák könyv arról, mikor épült a kora-középkori nyitrai vár? A hercegségről szóló cikkhez jó lenne, beírni, hogy kb. 870-ben (ugyanis ez a sejtésem). Én románul szeretnék megtanulni. Sőt, már többször el is kezdtem, de mindig abbamaradt. Pedig nagyon érdekes nyelv: valójában semmihez sem hasonlít. Visszatérve az alaptémára: soha ne hagyd, hogy bármilyen megjegyzéssel felidegesítsenek. Én mindig akkor csinálok hülyeséget, ha hagyom, hogy felnyomják az agyvizemet. Jobb fordított helyzetben lenni. :) További jó munkát, még mielőtt valamelyikük ránk szól, hogy használjuk az ánglius nyelvet. Borsoka (talk) 17:39, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Hogy pontosan a nyitrai várról van-e könyv, azt nem tudom, de itt van néhány könyv Szlovákia várairól : Slovenské hrady. Szerintem a legtöbb magyar kutatóban fel sem merül, hogy tanulnia kéne szlovákul vagy románul. Ezért alakulnak ki a párhuzamos történelmek térségünkben. Még jó hogy nem vagyok középkorász, és csak hobbiszinten szerkesztek itt. Egyébként most sem idegesítettek fel, maximum nyersen fogalmaztam. --Norden1990 (talk) 18:01, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Your article submission Michael Szilágyi

Hello Norden1990. It has been over six months since you last edited your article submission, entitled Michael Szilágyi.

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Michael Szilágyi}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Hasteur (talk) 00:02, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Matthew II Csák

Hello! Your submission of Matthew II Csák at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Soman (talk) 23:24, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Matthew II Csák

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

December 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Peter III Csák may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• 40 villages from Peter III and Stephen III. The king donated [[Dombóvár|Dombó]] and Nyék ([[Tolna County (former)|Tolna County]] to the Csák clan as compensation. The Dombai family ascended

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:50, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Matthew I Csák

Gatoclass (talk) 11:38, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Stephen II Csák

Hello! Your submission of Stephen II Csák at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! NinaGreen (talk) 17:54, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Warning

"An editor who believes an arbitrator should recuse will first post a message on the arbitrator's talk page asking the arbitrator to recuse"

In my dispute with Borsoka your attitude is unfair. You fight against Romanian history like Borsoka does. So, stay away and do not talk without arguments. We do not need nationalistic approach as you promotes. Eurocentral (talk) 07:19, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

I can repeat myself, read WP:NOR, WP:PA and WP:EW. Cheers, Norden1990 (talk) 13:44, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Stephen II Csák

Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 15:47, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

re- Merry Xmas

Merry Xmas

Thank you! You too. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! All the best. GreetingsAdrian (talk) 21:48, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

I endorse and echo Adrian's sentiments. May 2014 be an even better year than 2013, at least on Wikipedia. - Biruitorul ^Talk 22:15, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! Kivanok neked is Kellemes Karacsonyi Unnepeket es Boldog Uj Evet! Fakirbakir (talk) 23:14, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Köszönet! A magam részéről is áldott Karácsonyt és boldog új évet kívánok neked és a szeretteidnek. Borsoka (talk) 06:05, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas to you too. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 08:39, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi Norden1990, let me join the others in thanking you your kind message and wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! Cheers, KœrteFa {ταλκ} 13:27, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Vajon ki ő?

Nem egy régi, már letiltott ismerősünk támadt fel? Mindkettőjük fő érdeklődési területe a székelyek külön nyelve, valamint a magyarországi cigányok helyzete. Borsoka (talk) 19:03, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Persze, egyértelmű, hogy a Hortobagy nevű, meglehetősen primitív "szerkesztőről" van szó. Nála még Iaaasi is kedvesebb és konstruktívabb személy. --Norden1990 (talk) 19:06, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Sto gyéláty, kérdezte valaha egy régen halott véreskezű diktátor. Én is ezt kérdezem: mi a teendő? Borsoka (talk) 19:39, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Mivel Hortobagyot anno bannolták, egy WP:SPI eredményes lehet, ám ha tovább rakoncátlankodik, akkor elég lesz egy jelentés is ide: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Ott meg akár finoman lehet rá célozni, hogy kirívóan hasonló stílusban és témakörökben szerkeszt, mint Hortobagy pár hónapja. --Norden1990 (talk) 22:07, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

vandalism

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Sovata. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.

Edit war on Demographics history of Harghita County

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Demographics history of Harghita County. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.

Edit war on Covasna County

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Covasna County. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.

Have you been informed by our uncivil friend?

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Edit warrior keeping POV fork reverts User:Norden1990 Borsoka (talk) 14:00, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Hopefully he will got punished. However, the fact that Hungarian POV is pushed even by you, remains. However, citing your sources where were the Hungarians tribes 2000 yrs ago when Napoca was a city :)?. 2QW4 (talk) 14:02, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Don't vandalize my talk page, "dear" 2QW4, move on, if you haven't constructive comment. --Norden1990 (talk) 14:07, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

I agree with you that the history of Kolozsvár and the Hungarian people is so closely connected, that all the major facts of the Hungarian history could be mentioned in the article of Kolozsvár. However, I am afraid there are no other editors who share our view. I suggest we should not write of the prehistory of the Hungarians in that article. Borsoka (talk) 14:06, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

What you think is POV fork, and nobody has to agree with you. Remember Trianon very well, even by then Hungarians were never a majority, so, move on you. If you can't accept reality, that's why Jobbik is increasing in Hungary. And this is not seen well by EU. 2QW4 (talk) 14:10, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

I don't care your comment. Avoid WP:PA. --Norden1990 (talk) 14:12, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

I know you don't care, but maybe that's why you're a Jobbik activist member. EU should ban Jobbik parties. 2QW4 (talk) 14:13, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Dear Norden1990, FYI. Borsoka (talk) 15:48, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Dear Norden & others, that's really hilarious. I am not a sock. Happy editing! 2QW4 (talk) 16:41, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Horty Miklosh

About him, what exactly is your opinion? Because I see you revert 2 main aspects:

1. that he's a war crminal

2. that his regime lead to massive anti-semitism and killing of jews.

2QW4 (talk) 14:17, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

January 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Albert Szenczi Molnár may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• [[File:Szenczi molnar albert sirja.jpg|thumb|left|Grave of Szenczi Molnár (''Cimitirul Hajongard'', [[Cluj-Napoca]]]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:55, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Absurd?

I am finding that you and many others feel a magnate is an absurd criteria to segregate people by. It is always great meeting people like yourself; so in tune with what is real.—John Cline (talk) 21:55, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Ethnicity in lede of bios.

Hi Norden1990, I removed the ethnicity from the lede of a few bios and you reverted me without explaination. I reverted them back and would ask you to read WP:MOSBIO, specifically opening paragraph, where it addresses ethnicity in the lede. If you feel that ethnicity is part of the subjects notability, that would be fine to include if it is the case. I would use the subjects talk page to address this and hope we can reach some agreement. Maybe we could get other editors involved and defer to their opinion? Thank you and regards, --Malerooster (talk) 16:38, 8 January 2014 (UTC)ps, maybe we can include ethnicity in a family or early life section? That would be ok as well. --Malerooster (talk) 16:40, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

I think their ethnicity is important information, because they wrote (articles, poems, movies etc.) in their own language. I moved the ethnicity info from the lead to the main text (unfortunately, these are very short and stub articles). --Norden1990 (talk) 17:08, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

I think moving that info into the main text is a good idea. Thank you, --Malerooster (talk) 01:36, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Death and state funeral of Nelson Mandela

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:12, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Hungarian parliamentary election, 1926

Hi Norden. I notice you've helpfully corrected some of the recent articles I've produced on Hungarian parties and elections. I have a query about the 1926 elections - my source (produced by academics, but occasionally prone to the odd flaw - the Hungary chapter was written by László Hubai) claims the National Party of the Lower-Middle Class (Kispolgárok Országos Pártja) won a seat in the elections. However, it did not receive any votes. I know that this is possible if it ran unopposed (it did win the seat in a single-member constituency, which is where this would happen), but I just wanted to make sure before I created the article. Number 57 21:08, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello. According to this publication, Lajos Szilágyi was MP for Berettyóújfalu from the National Party of the Lower-Middle Class between 1926 and 1931. During the 1926 election, this party (KOP) was an ally of the Unity Party, as a result the ruling party did not appoint a candidate for Berettyóújfalu constituency (source). Anyway, Szilágyi founded his party, the National Party of the Lower-Middle Class in 1926, shortly before the election. --Norden1990 (talk) 21:44, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Great, thank you - it seems the book was right, so I shall create the article. Much appreciated, Number 57 21:51, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Hungarian parliamentary election, 2014

Hi - re: that graph you asked about, I've started trying to make one - obviously not ready yet, but it would look something like this: http://i.imgur.com/1TekNtY.jpg . Would something like that be OK? It's not quite as sophisticated as the Czech example you pointed to, I'm afraid, but it comes close. No-itsme (talk) 23:26, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much, it will be OK. :) --Norden1990 (talk) 13:07, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Predecessors of Hungary

Hello! I've noticed that at the article List of predecessors of sovereign states in Europe edited by you recently the Hunnic Empire is listed (exclusively) as a predecessor of Hungary. As far as I know, there is no proved ethnic continuity between these political units, and in the same time the area occupied by the Hunnic Empire is much larger than the territory of Hungary. What's your opinion about this? 82.79.215.38 (talk) 08:20, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

See the other countries: The Roman Empire is also much longer than today's Greece, Portugal or Romania. Therefore Roman Empire should be inserted to the Hungary section (when Pannonia province established in 20 AD). --Norden1990 (talk) 11:51, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tímea Szabó, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Democratic Coalition (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Kérés

Elnézést, de Aba Samu királyunk GAR-ja során elakadtam valami WikiCommons problémával, amit én nem is értek. (Sőt nem is akarok megérteni, mivel az borzalmas erőfeszítéseket igényelne.) Szerintem te rögtön érteni fogod, miről van szó, és ki is tudod javítani. Esetleg lenne időd ránézni és segíteni? (Az "Images" rész első három francia bekezdése tartalmazza a problémákat.) Örök hála. Borsoka (talk) 15:08, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Helló! Elnézést, hogy csak most válaszolok. A királyt ábrázoló kép leírása, engedélye rendben van, valaki február 3-án pótolta. Én ez alapján most javítottam a ménfői csata kép leírását, engedélyét, származási helyét stb. Remélem, ez elegendő lesz. Üdv, --Norden1990 (talk) 17:11, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Köszönet. Borsoka (talk) 13:22, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Lazar family

Hi, Look at this User:Lazarg1. What do you think? Can we simply copy the content from user Lazarg1's page and create a new article? Fakirbakir (talk) 12:16, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

I think there is no problem as this user did not expand/modify the article since July 2013. However text needs review, inspection and repair. For istance, the correct spelling is Lázár. --Norden1990 (talk) 17:15, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Jobban megnezve csak osszeollozott anyag kulonbozo wiki oldalakrol :(. Talan lehet kezdeni vele valamit, nezek ra forrasokat. Fakirbakir (talk) 19:32, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

3RR on Kingdom of Hungary

Just so you are aware of it [1] Wladthemlat (talk) 14:35, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Unfair and unjustified ban by WP:Administrators

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. --John (talk) 18:46, 12 February 2014 (UTC) This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Norden1990 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) Request reason: Lead section of the ominous article was written after compromise and consensus, there was no need to discuss a problem arise again and again. These rules always protect long-banned editors (see the case of User:Iaaasi) and nationalist edits without valid sources... --Norden1990 (talk) 18:53, 12 February 2014 (UTC) Decline reason: Being right or enforcing what you believe is consensus is not an excuse for edit warring. A successful block appeal here will need to address what you understand and/or would change about your own behavior, rather than criticizing your opponents. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 19:05, 12 February 2014 (UTC) If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} 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. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked. Pfff... No comment, you're wrong. --Norden1990 (talk) 19:07, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Ways to improve Unity Party (2009)

Hi, I'm Mycomp86. Norden1990, thanks for creating Unity Party (2009)!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Great job on your recent page creation! If you check back i have added some tags to help the quality of the page.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Mycomp86 (talk) 16:39, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Unity Party (2009 Hungary).png

Thanks for uploading File:Unity Party (2009 Hungary).png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 18:05, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Iaasi

Hi, you mentioned this User above, and it appears that this new IP may be connected. I have opened Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Iaaasi#14_February_2014. Could you please review, and add a diff showing connection if such connection is evident. Thank you for your edits. In ictu oculi (talk) 23:15, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

True, but reporting the puppet helps keep the SPI record accurate. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:04, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

User:Norden1990, I thought you avoided to comment on the SPI because you focus on edits, not on editors, but unfortunately you seem to be not much different of your predecessors Hobartimus and Nmate. You use the pretext that this ip is from Craiova to remove sourced information that don't please you. 86.127.24.200 (talk) 15:47, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

I don't care your lie. --Norden1990 (talk) 16:10, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Translation request

I saw that you're native Hungarian speaker. Could you translate that? Please answer on my talk page on English or Polish Wikipedia talk page. You were recommended by him :) Żyrafał (talk) 19:45, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

OK. I will provide a proper translation on your talk page tomorrow. --Norden1990 (talk) 20:55, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks :) Żyrafał (talk) 21:17, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

I remind ;) Żyrafał (talk) 16:24, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, but I have one more question - skiing means cross-country, ski jumping or another sport? Żyrafał (talk) 14:19, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 1848–49 massacres in Transylvania, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Almas and Poenari (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

edit warring

please dont engage in edit warring and revering page moves, there was a pretty clear cut consensus with plenty of sources, and no one agreed to "clashes" --Львівське (говорити) 17:22, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

there was a lengthy talk page discussion requesting the move, had you bothered to even check. --Львівське (говорити) 17:26, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

and yet here you are, changing the title to one you deem fit with no consensus to push a political objective. hypocrisy much? --Львівське (говорити) 17:31, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

but the original title was "18 February Euromaidan police crackdown", it has never been 'clashes'; it was previously 'riots' --Львівське (говорити) 17:44, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Szilveszter E. Vizi

I made some changes to Vizi's page and it had been reverted. I was wondering what was wrong with the update that I submitted? Thanks for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterMo (talk • contribs) 23:38, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Latin peoples article deletion

Article Latin peoples is nominated for deletion. I'm notifying everyone involved in the related merge discussion. Diego (talk) 11:29, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Stephen I of Hungary

Who is he? Dr. Antal Miskei PhD, Associate Professor: http://www.ektf.hu/ujweb/index.php?page=370 YouTube isn't a source, right, but a leverage to mediate also (at its time 19:50-21:05) his lectur(es). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpHfhZhmdxo&feature=youtu.be& Best regards for remaking. --81.182.0.60 (talk) 12:18, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Liberal/National Party of Work

Ah, I do apologise. The book I have been using states that it was merely a rename and makes no mention of the other two parties. Do you have some sources we could use to split the articles and create one solely about the Liberal Party? Cheers, Number 57 22:08, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Again, sorry, this was based on the text. Feel free to amend. Cheers, Number 57 22:40, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

March 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Sándor Pintér may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Pintér was born and raised in [[Budapest]]. He graduated from the Police Officer College ({{lang-hu|Rendőrtiszti Főiskola}} at Budapest in 1978. He worked in the criminal-investigation

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:58, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Antal Ruprecht

You know, after I saw your edit summary I went to find the source where I had definitely definitely read "now Stockholm"... I have no idea where I conjured that from! Sam Walton (talk) 23:07, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

April 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Antal Ruprecht may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• | PLACE OF BIRTH = Smolník, [[Hungary]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:12, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Hungarian parliamentary elections 2014, Polling section

We seem to have run into a slight disagreement about how to present the Nezopont polling institute's data. Since you have almost single-handedly built the rest of the page, I thought I'd invite you to see what you think, and perhaps weigh in accordingly; see the discussion on the Talk page. It's not exactly exciting stuff, but perhaps worth tackling. — Preceding unsigned comment added by No-itsme (talk • contribs) 12:44, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 7 April

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Template:Hungarian parliamentary election, 2014 page, your edit caused a missing references list (help | help with group references). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:26, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Template

Hi, nezd meg a Sandbox-om. Az adatokat meg be kell irni (vagy javitani) meg egy reszere meg varni kell de azt hiszem valami ilyesmire van szuksegunk. Fakirbakir (talk) 21:54, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Nem ertem teljesen, a Demokratikus koalicio tagjai (es meg a LMP-bol kivalt kepviselok) bennt ultek a parlamentben a valasztasok elott. Fel kell tunteni a tablazatban ezen formaciok "kepviseloveszteset"? Tegyuk fel benn ult 10 taguk, de most csak 4 lesz?! Most ugy alakitottam a template-et hogy ne kelljen ezzel foglalkozni, de nem vagyok ebben olyan biztos. Fakirbakir (talk) 22:47, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Koszi, igy mar vilagos :). Fakirbakir (talk) 23:04, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Talk:People's Republic of Hungary

Would you please consider withdrawing your opposition to the move request at Talk:People's Republic of Hungary? I've provided fairly good evidence that Hungarian People's Republic was astronomically more common in reliable sources than 'People's Republic of Hungary'. It is also a more correct translation, as I'm sure you are aware. Thanks very much for you assistance, RGloucester — ☎ 16:07, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Béla IV of Hungary - succession box

Értem a fenntartásodat, de valahogy különbséget kellene tenni az uralkodói címek (magyar király, stájer herceg) és az egyéb/nemesi címek (szlavón herceg, erdélyi herceg) között. A szlavón és erdélyi hercegek mindig a magyar király alattvalói voltak. Valami hasonlóra lenne szükség, mint itt. Borsoka (talk) 02:13, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited National Peasant Party (Hungary), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Péter Veres (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 10 April 2014 (UTC)