User talk:Norden1990

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)