User talk:Markussep/ArchiveKoHungary

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to the current talk page.

Contents

Administrative divisions of the Kingdom of Hungary

Hi Markussep, currently there are variants like "X (county)", "X county" and "X (Hungarian county)". Why not harmonise it uppercase (like in X River)? This would only apply to Counties where the word "county" is needed. In case a historic county now part of another country need to be referenced, like above mentioned "X (Hungarian county)", I suggest to name it "X County, Hungary". see also Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject Subnational entities#Current use . Tobias Conradi 02:52, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hi Tobias, it's even more complicated, we also have plain X, without county. The contents of the articles is not the same either, some also contain information about the homonymous (usually capital) city, and some about a current Hungarian county, or a current Slovak region. But I agree it would look better to synchronize the brackets and upper/lower case. Is there a rule about when to use lower case and upper case in English? Markussep 10:40, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
could not find any rule, but I think its time to create one. I already changed some names in other countries to uppercase, because the mayority I found already was uppercase. Especially the word county almost allways was uppercase (only exception I remember right now was Croatia).
As I understand there may in future be separate articles for Pest County? One for current one for historic? Maybe it is better to have historic than like "X County (historic)", a version that also can be applied to Slovak, Romanian etc. historic Hungarian counties.
first step could be to move all non-plain-X counties to X County. further dividing and fixing the rest later. Tobias Conradi 16:09, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I see you're also involved in the Vuoksi river discussion. I don't really care about upper and lower case for the words county and river (as someone pointed out, they're usually not really part of the name, unlike Yellow River or Columbia River, I guess). I like the idea of only using "river" or "county" as a disambiguation, and otherwise use plain X. And as a disambiguation, the brackets are not so bad, see for instance Hanover (state). Actually, for counties like Sopron, Veszprém, Nitra (that are named after a city) I like the brackets better. So I'd rather move the non-bracket counties (all Slovak) to brackets. The county Pest has already been split into a current and a historic one (Pest-Pilis-Solt-Kiskun). Markussep 15:18, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Can understand you. But I do not like bracket stuff, because nobody uses brackets in articles
can you maybe help by posting a counterargument at to
if "X english" is allowed in text, why not use it for title?
at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Subnational_entities/Naming. I think it's better to have pros and contras structered than to discuss it here. best regards Tobias Conradi 19:23, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Szatmár

Hi! What I think we should do is list all the districts (járás) and urban districts with no link to them, and then list the capitals of all these districts with parenthesis of what the current names of the capitals are. Here's how you can find out what the capitals are. Go to this link, then scroll down to were Szatmár is, or you could just go directly to the image. Anyways, it has the districts and their capitals there, and so we could have something like this for Nagybánya district: (This is how they did it in Máramaros)

  • Nagysomkút district, capital Nagysomkút (Romanian: Şomcuta Mare)

---User:Hottentot

I didn't know that site, it looks nice! I totally agree with your proposal. Markussep 17:34, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Sorry for editing you page so much, but you could also see this link

I know that one, I used it for most of the counties I "did". My preferred layout would be like this Nagysomkút example, so the Hungarian name for the district and capital, and the link under the present official name.Markussep 17:54, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Ok, good idea. --User:Hottentot
Hey Markussep,
I think that table look great. Do you think we should have this same sort of thing for all counties (megyék)? --Hottentot
Of course I know that there's a project page---I made it! (Under a different account, Dagestan). --Hottentot
Ok, what should we do first exactly? --Hottentot
Ok. --Hottentot

Hungarian counties

Hi! I'm planning to split all the counties and comitatuses that have the same name into 2 articles. Békés and Csongrád are already done, which leaves Fejér, Heves, Nógrád, Somogy, Tolna, Vas, Veszprém and Zala, I'll split them too in the near future. I think 1950 should be the dividing line because the present county system was formed then. Alensha 18:51, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia Naming conventions

hi, i inform u that in accordance with Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names) i removed the names of the hungarian kingdom administrative divisions that were provided as alternate names for contemporary romanian administrative divisions from the leading paragraph in their coresponding articles Criztu 10:07, 10 July 2006 (UTC) criztu

hi again. i have addressed the ambiguities of Naming conventions related to the alternative names of administrative divisions of Romania here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions#Administrative_division_may_have_an_alternative_name_.3F pls check my points, i think i expressed my view of the matter in a more accurate and brief way. thx !Criztu 18:41, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Križevci (former county) move proposal

You might want to discuss move proposals of Hungarian counties at Talk:Križevci (former county). -  AjaxSmack  18:10, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Administrative divisions of the Kingdom of Hungary

Yes, it's a good idea. I'll participate in creating that new article. But at first we should ask Juro, if he agrees, because he often tends to revert my edits. Öcsi 10:33, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Appropriate method

Could you help me to find the appropriate method, please?
And could you help everybody else that needs your help, please?
The only thing I can see is that two days ago an editor started to destroy article titles against the previous consensus without any debate. (Line of declarations is hardly a debate...) Now he believes he is the consensus.
So: Could you help me to find the appropriate method, please?
--peyerk 13:54, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Could you help me to find the debate that led to the consensus over using Slovak names for counties of KoH?
I only found the previous consensus over Hungarian names for KoH counties and Slovak names for historic and touristic regions.
--peyerk 13:59, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I realized that a huge mess was created with former Hungarian countries in Slovakia. User Svetovid moved these articles under Slovak names against the former consensus and now he claims that every article should remain so "until the end of discussion", and reverts every revert. I think this is incorrect because he was the person who tried to change the situation. He should have reached consensus on the talk pages and AFTER that moved the article not the opposite way. Another (new) Hungarian user who opposed his moves created forks. In the end we have a huge mess ans somebody should restore the former order - but the pre-Svetovid version, I think. Could you help with this? Zello 17:46, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I am not a beginner only I'm less active here than in HU. Sorry for the mess, I have just realized today this funny naming convention. I see that some Slovak editors are keen to have the KoH counties named in Slovak. It is too important for them. I find it funny.
I correct a lot of Magyarization of geographic names in HU wikipedia because I hate this way of thinking and acting. But I also get angry of this "reslovakization" of KoH county names.
Would you ever support renaming the Roman province of Hispania to España? And would you argue that this name is most commonly used in English?
--peyerk 21:17, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

you are mistaken

Please take more time to learn about the issue, before taking action or reverting my edits. See this post by tankred you should learn more from it about the situation.

The official language of the kingdom was Latin until (if I remember well) 1848. Then it was Hungarian, German, and again Hungarian. At the same time, counties had also their local names (in Slovak, Romanian, etc.), which were not used in official documents. In my opinion, he most accurate solution would be to use Latin names, but I do not see much support for it. So, another compromise has emerged and remained more or less undisputed until now: to have separate articles for counties (e.g. Szepes county) and for informal regions (Spiš). See Talk:Spiš#Requested_move. Most Hungarian editors seem to prefer a Hungarian name of a county. Although it is clearly an anachronism for most of the history of KoH (when Latin was the official language), it seemed to be a viable compromise until now. It is a pity that a new edit war has been launched over this issue. Tankred 14:24, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

See this post? Read it carefully. See where it links to Szepes county as an example of undisputed compromise? You blanked that article with your edit. Please take the time to learn about the situation before you start to edit. thanks Also in the second link there is a discussion where you even voted for the split to create the two articles one about the historical county e.g. Szepes county), and the other informal region (Spiš). And now you try to delete Szepes county by blanking the page ? Hobartimus 22:17, 29 May 2007 (UTC)


I won't revert you but why are you so obsessed with article history? Telling me how 'destroying' it and 'trapped in another article' is so bad? Hobartimus 23:21, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi, this is your message. "See e.g. Spiš county and Szepes county, the Slovak version tells you that the article was started in November '06, not May '07." I did actually look at these articles, please take a moment to look at these histories yourself. You will see that they are exactly the same, check the first edit of Spiš county, you will see that someone copy pasted the whole article there, so the real article history that you fight over is not even there. I don't know why this copyright is so important to you, but the article history is not really there to "trap" or "destroy". Also i really don't understand this copyright issue could you explain in simple terms? why is claiming copyright so important to a supposedly free encylopedia? Hobartimus 08:25, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

So the solution is to place a note in the history to make it tracable? sorry to bother you this much but i see that you are an advanced editor who also followed this county issue. Hobartimus 11:00, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Szepes is a historical county of HUNGARY, while Spis is an informal region of SLOVAKIA. Slovak language was NEVER official in hungary. I don't know why you still say things like "propose szepes" when you yourself voted for the split and the name "Szepes" with it so the two distinct articles could be separated one called Spis informal region one called Szepes county. There was already a vote on this Tankred even said it(he calls it undisputed compromise in the post above and links to Szepes county), MarkBA said it, you can read it on the links above. Tankred even suggested this same solution for even more counties. my head hurts. Hobartimus 14:29, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

How many times do I have to explain this? The history is at "Spis county", so if there is consensus that the page should be named "Szepes county" than that page has to be moved by an admin, and not copy-pasted. There hasn't been a vote about how to name the county page, one anonymous user just decided to name it "Szepes county". If it's going to be "Szepes (county)" or something like that, fine, but not copy-pasting. Markussep Talk 14:58, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Markussep, I think that an article with the Szepes title may be allowed to exist on wikipedia. There is already one Spis article about the present Slovak county and nobody wants to rename that. The other counties in the Historical Hungarian County Category also bear their Hungarian names. In the long history of constant renaming and reverts I cannot determine who was the first to revert and who was reverting the reverted version. The first edits in the page history are about moving the article from Szepes to Spis - I actually don't understand this, I don't see any earlier version, I don't see who created the Szepes article at all. I think the discussion should rather be about what the content of the Szepes article should be. --KIDB 14:13, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
See the histories Spiš county and Szepes county. The original article was Spiš, this was split into Spiš and Szepes county. "Szepes county" was moved to Spiš county on 27 May (including history), and copy-pasted back to "Szepes county" by Hobartimus 4 hours later. That's when the mess began. Further see my reply to Hobartimus above. Markussep Talk 14:58, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

KoH county names - restart

Could you join this starting debate: Talk:Kingdom of Hungary#What language versions to be used for naming former KoH counties?

--peyerk 16:15, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

What are you doing?

subject says it all.Hobartimus 14:54, 27 August 2007 (UTC) You still cannot do what you are doing, you disruptively delete the whole article and then change even the links at other places. What you should understand that there was never such a thing as Zvolen county. Now the article has history at two places both contains only a handful of edits like ten, so who are you to say which history is more important. Even if we accept that that history is so important then you should move the article and ask admin help to do it you cannot do what you are doing even editing related templates and such. Hobartimus 15:57, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Deleted cut and paste due to violation of GDFL. Agathoclea 18:18, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm happy to see that it's resolved and you are pleased with the situation. Sorry if I used a harsh tone, it's just the title of the article was an important detail to me. Hobartimus 20:11, 28 August 2007 (UTC)