Talk:Chronica Hungarorum

Edits and lack of references

Hello, I made a few changes to the article for the following reasons:

• Added a reference tag at the start of the article as obviously there aren't any.

• Removed "For a long time its original author, or rather compiler, was(?) thought to be a certain Canon Marci de Kalt (German: Markus von Kalt, Hungarian: Márk Kálti)." This sentence doesn't make sense. Is he still thought to be the author or did somebody else write / compile it ?

• Changed "truly magnificent" to just "magnificent" so that it sounds less like opinion.

• Removed ", and excels in lively episodes." as this sounds like opinion.

What is meant by "the most widely-read narrative" ? It is a bit unclear as to what exactly the Chronica Hungarorum is. Is it a book ? Is it a legend ? Is it a series of historical events ?

--WaterWolf 15:57, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Multiple editions?

Can someone clarify further all these different editions, where are they located and how exactly they differ? See also the conversation: Talk:Chronicon Pictum#Multiple editions?. --Codrin.B (talk) 22:58, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chronica Hungarorum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://archive.is/20070811033656/http://www.caslin.sk/htdoc/diglib/chrohung/gallery.htm to http://www.caslin.sk/htdoc/diglib/chrohung/gallery.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:47, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Attila

Curious. Attila is clearly brown in face. But why are his hands white? 79.106.203.54 (talk) 09:02, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Please consult with the artist who draw that image 600 years ago... OrionNimrod (talk) 18:06, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

How? 79.106.203.54 (talk) 19:41, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Not only how could I do this, but how do you know it was 600 years ago? 79.106.203.26 (talk) 11:36, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

The book was created in 1488. But there are many edition, here the face of Attila is brighter: https://corvina.hu/kepnezegeto/index.php?corvina=inc1143b&lang=hu&img=39#39 OrionNimrod (talk) 19:03, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

This is from 1358: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Attila_(Képes_krónika).jpg OrionNimrod (talk) 19:03, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Good links. What I mean is, his face could have been darkened recently. Wait... that is the same image! Why is the wikipedia one have a darker face??? Looks like an edit! 188.172.110.30 (talk) 08:35, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Copyright

@OrionNimrod:@Azure94:@Borsoka:@Joy: I don't know whether there's any copyright issue with the images uploaded by OrionNimrod, but if there's no issue, then OrionNimrod please diminish their size because they are too big, Azure94 if find there's some issue with images or text in such case don't blank the whole article but remove only the part which find problematic, as for Joy and Borsoka check it all out. Miki Filigranski (talk) 18:41, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Miki Filigranski,

I would like to show a very intense personal harassment campaign against me by Azure94 who report all of my edits one by one, and he uses the "copyright tool" just for the harassment. He has not much own edits, his campaign to remove all my edits from Wikipedia, he also remove my added images from articles, and all other sourced reliable academic contents just because I added those.

In July:

Because of long debate on other talk pages, edit war by Azure94 against academic sources: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Hungary#Agressive edit war on Hungarian topics. Often naming me "troll, bizarre, schizophrenic" [1][2][3] same profane insults with a very respected editor after following my edits:1. Then Azure94 intentionally followed me to many articles as revenge, he exclusively edited almost only those articles what I edited recently, and started exclusively harass my edits on these pages.

A small settlement had a few lead sentence, I added a church and fresco history, then Azure94 deliberately removed the full chapter because of "copyright", instead of fix those minor things giving an extra job for the admins: Sopronbánfalva [4] In the reality Azure94 does not care with the copyright or with the article, he just follows me in articles what I edited as personal revenge to make continuous conflicts. Wizardman from the copyright team, slightly changed and restored the content, then Azure94 scolded the admin that he is not satisfied, he wants more removal of my content: [5] User talk:Wizardman#Sopronbánfalva In other way, Azure94 said, it is a "big copyright problem" that I translated a non English, Hungarian text "good chance" to "probably" [6], while some hours later he copy-pasted a very long English text words by words in an article where again he followed my edit: [7][8]. Which means he does not care with the copyright in his case. Here Talk:Gesta Hungarorum#Dennis Deletant, he said "Be more careful next time" because I did not copy-pasted exactly the same text to avoid copyright issue, then he copy-pasted the text word by word from the English source.

3 weeks later, in August:

Azure94 did not do any edit 3 weeks long, but he suddenly appeared and exclusively started again bigger intensity to follow only my older contributions which are presented on my user page. Azure94 has not much own edits, he started exclusively delete only my contents in many different articles as personal harrasment, and he did all this only within 1 hour! period, which clearly show his personal harrasment intentions and not the deep knowledge in many different articles.

Within 1 hour period, after 3 weeks zero activity he exclusively attacked my edits:

• Copyright team slightly modified and restored my content, but he removed even more content: Sopronbánfalva [9]
• He removed academic sourced content what I added recently: Bratislava [10] Little later, I used talk page, nonetheless Azure94 started an edit war against Hungarian Academic Science + USA Columbia University sources, even an another user recognized his bad faith edits: [11]
• He wanted to remove all my edits: Ladislaus I of Hungary [12]
• He removed my personally captured photos: Anonymus (notary of Béla III) [13]
• He wants delete my old edits:Turul [14]
• He wants delete my old edits: Seven chieftains of the Magyars [15]
• He wants delete my old edits: Attila [16]
• I created this article earlier, the topic is about an old illustrated book, a series of king portraits, illustrations are the essence which are used in many medieval articles, all relevant and have descriptions, he removed all of them (c.15,000 characters by 1 click): Nádasdy Mausoleum [17]
• I wrote the full Chronica Hungarorum article with a lot of effort (1 year long work) to make an useful modern wiki article, old version and my version First I wrote the details about the book, then I added all images. This is not a simple gallery, the topic is about an old medieval famous illustrated book, illustrations are the essence which are used in many medieval articles, all relevant, they are listed separate and all images have an own long historical descriptions (as many articles has a list), so this is the purpose the article to show and explain the illustrations. Whitout explanation nobody know what they are. He removed all of them (c.48,000 characters), this is cleary a vandalism: Chronica Hungarorum [18] Some minutes later he removed completely the full article (even no word remains) based on allegedly copyright only because I wrote it many months ago: [19] Which means Azure94 removed much more characters by 1 click from the wiki than his characters total that he ever added to the wiki as he has not much own edit.

As we can see, he has a great obsession to critize my every single edits to perish them, even Azure94 checked my content with a tool 1 My academic source is a desrciption from an open Hungarian state library about a medieval book, however my article is quite complex and different not a copy pasted contents word by words as Azure did in his edits as I presented above. That tool show matches like: "At the end of the", "history of the Hungarians", "medieval Hungarian chronicles", "The Augsburg edition had two versions". I do not know how should I write different these things, should we add copyright protection to every single English words because everybody else using them? These basic essential matches is the nature of the topic. It is clear this is a deliberate teasing. He is not interest to make the article great and useful for the readers, he totally removed my well detailed modern multimedia content to zero: [20]

As a good faith, I source well my contents always, I usually provide links fo the sources, I use many Hungarian sources also. Ii I write an English text using Hungarian sources, those text are not exist in English, Azure94 started to Google translate the Hungarian sources to compare with my written content, he has great obsession to find paraphrases, then he report me that he complete remove the article. We can see this behavior is a great malicious obsession as he has not much own edits. Wizardman from the copyright team, slightly changed and restored my other content which was reported by Azure94, then Azure94 scolded the admin that he is not satisfied, he wants more removal of my content: [21] OrionNimrod (talk) 19:58, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

I tend to agree with Azure94: WP is not a gallery. Furthermore, the quotes and texts are not verified with references to reliable sources, so we do not know why those quotes were picked up. Borsoka (talk) 03:25, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Borsoka, listing the relevant things at the bottom of an article isn't uncommon, whether these are the names of the governors of Pannonia Superior, the works of Walter Scott, or in this case the illustrations of Chronica Hungarorum. Gyalu22 (talk) 10:37, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links, images, or media files

"Photographs or media files with no accompanying text. If you are interested in presenting a picture, please provide an encyclopedic context, or consider adding it to Wikimedia Commons."

The article itself is about only the book, because it is an illustrated medieval history book, the images are relevant, listed in a separate section below the book description, and all images have descriptions what does it represent and the historical context.

In Wikipedia there are many similar articles. These articles are a big image list with descriptions, examples:

Armorial of France

List of German flags

Coat of arms of Germany

Gallery of sovereign state flags

List of French monarchs

Early world maps

Banknotes of the United States dollar

List of flags by design

This article is a visual art book. Some subjects easily lend themselves to image-heavy articles for which image galleries are suitable, massive galleries here which has relevance to the content, examples:

Lilium

Oil painting

Wedding dress

Women's suffrage in New Zealand#Gallery

List of photographs considered the most important

Fresco

Michelangelo

I think today is 2023, we have really strong pc, 3d, cg, visual art is very strong everywhere, even many new books are full of images to understand better the history, example:

https://www.tankonyvkatalogus.hu/pdf/OH-TOR05TB__teljes.pdf

I do not think the article would be bad because all images are listed below in a separate section. I bet if Azure (who himself has not much contribution) would not attack deliberately my contributions, it would be no problem for anybody.

OrionNimrod (talk) 09:19, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi everyone, I also think it's good that there are a lot of pictures in this article, because that's what this chronicle is famous for. Without the pictures, this article would be much harder to understand. In other articles it can be bad to have so many pictures, but I think it's worth making an exception here and keeping the pictures. CriticKende (talk) 10:05, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes, Wikipedia is not a gallery, so, for instance, I can agree with the removal of multiple photos of the same statue regarding the article Anonymus. The current version of the Ladislaus I of Hungary also contains too many images, which complicate the structure of the article. However, the case of Chronica Hungarorum somewhat different. This chronicle (in addition to the Chronicon Pictum) is notable for its illustrations, so a table which lists these images with detailed descriptions is a useful additional information for the article. --Norden1990 (talk) 11:42, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes. Gyalu22 (talk) 19:26, 28 August 2023 (UTC)