Talk:Sándor Petőfi

This article needs tidying up. Also some of the vocabulary is rather romanticised (e.g "glorious day") - a more factual account of his life would be more appropriate. Scott Moore 10:18, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Satisfied? (I leave 'glorious day' to someone with better literary sense to replace) DoDo 25 Nov 2004

Only slovak genesis

What about Igaz-e, hogy Petőfi édesapja szerb volt?? Is it not better to write: whose native language was rather Hungarian or magyarnak vallotta magát (without language). What is here a native language? First language, mother tongue? Did he speak with his wife Hungarian? Please a bit more assumption, less legends and fiction. --Mt7 21:01, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Again - Élet és Irodalom and National Geographic Hungary - best sources for hungarian literature. --Mt7 14:29, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

CITE them in the article, with exact refrences. Dahn 15:42, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

So what if his mother spoke only Slovak? A man can speak several languages, so we can assume that his father spoke Hungarian, Serbian, and Slovak. The fact that his mother spoke only Slovak does not mean that his father was Slovak too, he simply learned to speak Slovak among other languages that he knew. PANONIAN (talk) 16:19, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

From Élet és irodalom:

Többször szót emeltem már ez ellen, most sem szabad tévedésben hagynunk a tájékozatlan olvasót. Petofinek semmi köze sem volt a szerbséghez. Petofi mindkét ágon szlovák származású. A szakirodalomban utoljára Kiss József (1923-1992) könyvében (Petofi-adattár, 3. k. 1992.) található Petofinek a legtüzetesebb és legpontosabb családfája. Jakus Lajos kutatásai nyomán 1685-ig tudunk visszatekinteni a költo oseire. A Nyitra megyei Vagyóc (Vadovce) a legrégibb hely, ahová a család apai ágának, a Petrovicsoknak eredete visszamutat. Az anyai ág pedig a Túróc megyei Necpál (Necpaly) községbe. Mind a két ág evangélikus, s ez is a szlovák (tót) származás bizonyítéka. Ha szerb lett volna bármelyik is, ortodox, görögkeleti lett volna.

I said sometimes, I have now to inform the unknowing reader again. Petofi has nothing to do with Serbs. At both lines has poet a slovak genealogy. In scentic literarure has Jozsef Kiss (1923 - 1992) in his book (Petofi adattar, 1992) published the most complett and most exact genealogy of writer. Results of studies of Lajos Jakus testify this to year 1685. Last know place of father's ancestors is Vadovce in Nitra country. Mother's ancestors last place is Necpaly in Turiec. Both lines are lutheran, it is a argument for slovak ancestors too, if his father would be serb, religion is ortodox too. --Mt7 16:23, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

If he had nothing with Serbs why this source (and some other sources that I have) claim that his father was Serb, Stevan Petrović: http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2006&mm=07&dd=31&nav_category=15&nav_id=206334&fs=1 Quote: "Otac mu je bio Srbin Stevan Petrović, a Šandorovo kršteno ime bilo je Aleksandar." This is in Serbian, but since you speak Slovak, I assume that you will be able to understand this sentence. And regarding Serbs, many Serbs lived in Slovakia too and many Serbs were Protestants (and they still are). And not to mention that Petrović is well known Serbian surname. PANONIAN (talk) 16:32, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

So, to conclude: what you quoted here is nothing else but opinion of one single author which confront with data from most other sources. PANONIAN (talk) 16:36, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Dear Pannonian, Vesti is not an argument again Élet és Irodalom and National Geographic Hungary. And what about genealogy from poet to year 1685 and to Vadovce in Nitra country!? Serbs lived in Slovakia, but not in Vadovce. --Mt7 16:38, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps this genealogy is wrong or perhaps his father had both, Serb and Slovak roots. If we want to reach compromise here, we could mention both opinions about origin of his father, but it is not acceptable that you simply replace word Serb with word Slovak because one source that you saw claim this because other sources claim other things. PANONIAN (talk) 16:42, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Compromise is not possible, for me is important, that english and hungarian ( I edited it too) have a correct version, the fiction about serbian origin of petofi's father, that is only about serbian sound of his name and my sources say serbian origin is an error - and sorry we write encyclopedia and not vesti. --Mt7 16:51, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Compromise is not possible? I am sorry but then I will be forced to ask some of the administrators to block you. You clearly broke 3 revert rule here and your obvious intentions are to push your own POV which is not acceptable behaviour on Wikipedia. PANONIAN (talk) 16:56, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, it is clear, you don't have arguments, it's not acceptable to bloch me, but in this case, we have only one truth. --Mt7 17:10, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

There is no only one "truth". Job of Wikipedia is not to declare that one source is right and another wrong, but to present data from ALL sources. I repeat: the source that you presented is only a OPINION of one single author. I do not object that we include this opinion into article, but opinions of other authors should be included as well because "your" author is not a God to know everything. Regarding block, one user is not alowed to revert article more than 3 times in 24 hours, and you reverted it 4-5 times. PANONIAN (talk) 17:24, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

hallo william, nice to see you. thanks you, that you make attempion to resolve this case. I find that mistake (father of poet petofi was not a serbian) and it is sure, that is only a mistake, and I can not discuss with Panonian about this without his good arguments. His argument and link von vesti is only a daily newspaper like englis The Sun, a serbian tabloid. My arguments are the hungarian National Geographic and hungarian Élet és Irodalom. Both very good arguments, Élet és Irodalom is a very good weekly literature magazin and hungarian sources are very good, even neutral, in question: petofi's father is serbian or slovak. Sometimes there is not only one truth, in this case is only one truth. please pannonian, write some arguments or write some good articles. And be not in shit. --Mt7 20:38, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Do you understand at all the policy of Wikipedia to present ALL possible sources and ALL possible theories about the subject. In Serbia, it is generally accepted that father of Petofi was a Serb. I never heard before that he was Slovak until you came here and said that. Since I never heard that before and since sources in Serbia present different theory, then your source obviously is not so relevant to determine what is "the only existing truth". I mean, the National Geographic is not a Holly Bible, thus what ever is written there is only opinion of the author of that specific article and who knows what sources this author used for his work. Regarding my sources, if you do not like that one, I have more of course:

• http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/petofi.htm

Quote: "Sándor Petõfi was born in Kiskõrös, 110 km south of Budapest. His father, István (Stephanus) Petrovics, was a village butcher, innkeeper, and a Serb, whose family had assimilated with the majority population. Mária Hrúz, Petõfi 's mother, was a Slovak, whose knowledge of the Hungarian language was not especially good. However, the family used Hungarian at home."

I think it say it all. Now more:

• http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?id=95281

(Same thing)

• http://www.hungarianquarterly.com/no160/144.html

Quote: "The name Petrovics was Serb (not Slovak)"

• http://www.abc.net.au/rn/arts/poetica/stories/s936384.htm

(Same as previous sources)

• http://www.languagehat.com/mt/mt-comments.cgi?entry_id=1808

Quote: "And Hungary's great national poet, Sandor Petofi (Petőfi Sándor), was the son of a Serb father (named Petrovics) and a Slovak mother, although they did speak Hungarian at home."

How many sources more you want to see? Please say now that all they are wrong and that only your "Holly Bible" is the only truth and the only doctrine and that all other "false books" should be burned in fire. PANONIAN (talk) 22:04, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

sorry, I know the situation very good and I know, that many sources say father of petofi was serbian, but this is a MISTAKE and ERROR and nothing else, wikipedia is a encyclopedia and have to be EXACT and CORRECT. you don't speak hungarian, I ask in Hungarian board to say, what is truth. The hungarian boys are in that question neutral. see [[1]] --Mt7 22:26, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Just to correct you: it is your source that claim that these sources are mistake and error, but we cannot know is your source itself an mistake or error, can we? What I repeated already is that Wikipedia is not place where we should claim what is right and what is wrong but where we should present different theories if there are such, are there are certainly different theories about this. PANONIAN (talk) 02:03, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually I think Panonian is right on this one, I've always heard that his mother was Slovak and his father Serbian. I will check out some more sources...K. Lastochka 23:02, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

The correct answer is: His father had Serbian ancestors, but he himself was (spoke) already Slovak, but I am not going to participate in this debate. Juro 23:28, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome to participate, Juro, so long as you stay calm and reasoned. :) I just checked some books I have, and they totally contradicted each other. One (biography of Petőfi by Enikő Molnár Basa) said his father was of Serbian ancestry but his family had lived in Hungary for several generations and they spoke both Slovak and Hungarian. Another book ("The Lawful Revolution", by István Deák) simply said Petőfi was of "purely Slovak origin". So go figure, there doesn't seem to be any scholarly consensus anywhere. Everyone seems to agree, though, that the family spoke Hungarian at home. K. Lastochka 23:39, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, one of the sources that I presented here also claim that his father was Serb by origin, but that he was already assimilated into the majority of population (whether it be Slovak or Hungarian), so, yes, depending of the definition, we can claim that he was all 3, Serb, Slovak and Hungarian, but I really do not see a reason why user:Mt7 insist that we remove every mention of this theory about his Serb origin. If theory exist, we should mention it, especially because this theory is widely accepted in Serbia: in another words, almost everybody in Serbia "know" that his father was Serb by origin. PANONIAN (talk) 02:03, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

important is the religion of Petofi's parents, both are lutheran, please see Religion in Serbia, it is a rule in hungary and probably in north-serbia - lutheran=slovak or hungarian with slovak ancestors, calvinist=hungarian, some others --Mt7 00:15, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I told you that there are many protestant Serbs too (even some of my own ancestors were Protestant Serbs). Protestantism among Serbs was very strong in the 19th century. Later, the descendants of many Protestant Serbs converted back to Orthodox Christianity, so today number of Protestant Serbs is smaller than in the 19th century, but even today they exist. PANONIAN (talk) 02:03, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

There were only two branches of Protestantism among Serbs, Sabbathers (subotari) and Nazarenes (bugeri), and nothing else. The present day situation is a little different. Bendeguz 20:27, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, all right, my ancestors were Nazarenes indeed, but that does not mean that few Serbs could not become Lutheran too. PANONIAN (talk) 21:33, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, that is interesting, seems to point more toward the Slovak side of things... One thing, friends, is it really important what exact ethnicity Petőfi's parents were? It's pretty obvious that by the time little Sándor was born, they were a Hungarian family. Nationality and ethnicity get so confusing in central Europe...look at Kossuth, the greatest Hungarian patriot, he was of Slovak ancestry on both sides....but 100% Hungarian. Same with the great Hungarian pianist, Ferenc Liszt, he was actually German/Austrian, but again, 100% Hungarian. :) And I am not just being nationalist here, all these people, Kossuth, Petőfi and Liszt (and many others besides), all considered themselves Hungarian. So maybe this big controversy is a little bit pointless. :) K. Lastochka 00:30, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

There has been a "semi-secret" expedition of Hungarian researchers to Slovakia (I do not know any details), who specifically studied Petofi's genealogy there, so one of the sources - that one based on that "expedition" - must be correct, I do not know which one, i.e. it is not a question of opinion, but of citing the better source. But, actually. the texts you cite do not contradict each other much - the implication is that he had Serbian ancestors (the question is what the formulation "his father was of Serbian ancestry" means - directly himself or his ancestors??), but he himself already spoke Slovak. According to all Slovak sources going into details I remember, both of his parents were Slovak and his father had Serbian ancestors. And according one internet source I have read months ago (maybe it is among Mt7's links) they explicitely spoke Slovak at home (I cannot imagine, why they as Slavs should speak Hungarian, even if the father was Serbian). Also, note that Serbs settled in Slovakia exclusively and as early as in the 16th (maybe also 17th century), when they fled from the Ottoman-occupied terriroty in the south, and the Serbian families in his region were no exception. By the way, children in Slovakia have to learn Petofi for the matura as a Hungarian author, his Slovak roots are not or barely mentioned, so even for Slovaks, this is rather an academic question. As for the religion: I would not rely on that much, because it can happen that someone has parents with two religions and thus "switches" the religion, for example.Juro 00:27, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you about religion--it's usually a pretty flimsy indicator of nationality. But where have you heard that the Petrovics/Petofi family spoke exclusively Slovak at home?? Everything I have read says they spoke Hungarian, which doesn't surprise me--Slavic ancestry notwithstanding, they were, by the time of Sandor's birth, a Hungarian family. K. Lastochka 00:55, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Selmecbánya

Regarding the recent reverts, I think this is clearly a situation where the ethnic affiliation of Petőfi is much more relevant than the current name of the place, simply because 99.9% of sources dealing with Petőfi will use the name Selmecbánya, not Banská Stiavnica (or one of "Schemnicium/Schemnitz/Selymeczbánya/Ssčawnica", for that matter), and I doubt it seriously that Wikipedia is the place to start changing this practice, if it needs to be changed at all. Similarly, I have nothing against Slovak persons' biographies using the Slovak name for a place in present-day Hungary. This is btw also in line with the consensus developed regarding Gdansk/Danzig, as outlined in {{Gdansk-Vote-Notice}} (see bullet points 3 and 4). KissL 13:28, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

To put it simply: What you write is complete non-sense. The four names are the true names of that city at that time. Hungarian was neither the official language of the country, nor of the town (the town had German and Slovak inhabitants). The name you have inserted is the MODERN Hungarian name, completely out of place here (an anachronism). Errors you have seen in other articles in the wikipedia or other texts do not justify falsifying this name or any other name. Affiliations of the person are completely irrelevant for toponyms. And above all, the school-type is called lyceum in English and this is an English-language encyclopaedia. Juro 16:51, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

So a change in ortography (the omission of a "y" which wasn't always used there anyway, and the replacement of "cz" with just "c" which was one of the systematic changes effected at the definition of the first official Hungarian ortographic rules) amounts to the name with the modern ortography being "completely out of place here (an anachronism)" and "falsifying this name". And of course "what I write is complete nonsense". I'm afraid I'm not putting up with this anymore. KissL 14:39, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

The name is NOT the name used at that time, neither in terms of orthography, nor in terms of the language of the town (nevertheless, I have kept the CORRECT Hungarian name version in the text). Either you prove the opposite or the discussion is over. And the fact that you even keep changing "lyceum" to "líceum", which is no word in English is proof enough what your motivations are here. Juro 20:51, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

petofi was a hungarian person, country was hungarian kingdom, dominant language was hungarian und german, liceum/lyceum was a hungarian (german ?) institution, Selmec(z)bánya is OK and monstrum with 4 names is a nonsence. --Mt7 10:20, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

This is about a toponym, not about a person. Although the country was called Hungary, neither the language of the country, not the language of the town was Hungarian (how many times do I have to repeat this?). The fact that an article is about a Spanish person or a person that considers itself Spanish does not mean that all proper names in the arcticle will be in Spanish. The lyceum was anything but a Magyar langugage lyceum (either Latin, Slovak or most probably German), but even if it had been Magyar, the school-type existing in the whole monarchy is called lyceum in English (we also call all universities "universities" here). And whether you personally like the correct contemporary name is compeletely irrelevant. Juro 19:30, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

a lot of nonsense, my first source is en:wp and I see only Selmecbanya, Banska Stiavnica and Schemnitz END of DISCUSSION!!!--Mt7 07:44, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

What??? You "see"??? I do not understand, why someone has not blocked you for lack of elementary inteligence months ago, and I do not refer to this article only. Either you provide one normal argument or the discussion will not "end". Juro 02:21, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

no arguments, only nonsence, you demonstrate you idiocy daily. --Mt7 08:06, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Die Gefahr von Wiki-Lynchjustiz halte ich für sehr real. In der Wikipedia-Welt bestimmen jene die Wahrheit, die am stärksten besessen sind. Dahinter steckt der Narzissmus all dieser kleinen Jungs, die der Welt ihren Stempel aufdrücken wollen, ihre Initialen an die Mauer sprayen, aber gleichzeitig zu feige sind, ihr Gesicht zu zeigen see Der Standard So one demoniac is unfortunately juro. --Mt7 08:27, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

First, I am waiting for the arguments for how contemporary names can be wrong. Second, I cannot comment on your crap, because except for me and e.g. Zello in this wikipedia (ad Komarno) and Tilman Berger in the German wikipedia (ad ungarische Slowaken), others do not know who you are, to what statements you are able and the sockpuppet of whom you are. And KissL of course takes advantage of this to threat with a block. Wikipedia par excellence. Juro 16:51, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

you are author of monster ungarische Slowaken, i see you are proud of it, congratulation. --Mt7 17:15, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I assume you mean the term used somewhere in the German wikipedia, where you failed to realise that German usage is different from Slovak usage. No I am definitely neither the author of the term, not of that article. You will have to invent a better lie, I am sorry. Juro 17:25, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

your theory of sockpuppet is a total nonsence, exact suit to behavior, lack of common-sense - and verbal slander --Mt7 17:23, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Sure, Reti. A "theory". What other lies supplemented with misplaced quotes from "classics" will follow? Juro 17:25, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

next verbal slander: lies - congratulation again! --Mt7 17:33, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

yoa are a liar: Term ungarische Slowaken from you: de:Dunajská Streda and de:Slowaken. --Mt7 18:25, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh my...Dear Reti alias Mt7 (i.e. a "non"-sockpuppet), First, I am still waiting for arguments. Second, I really do not understand whether you are bored or why you are constantly talking about this here. You know very well that the articles I have mentioned are article in which YOU had problems with other users (not with ME) and the article(s) you cite are not the articles I have meant. Maybe you should provide a link to that correct article (in which btw you have basically a accused a professor of being stupid), if you are so proud of your crap. That would also show your "excellent" knowledge of German, just like your "excellent" knowledge of English and of Slovak (you are unable to write one grammatically correct sentence in any of those three languges, nevertheless your constantly try to "discuss" on language issues). Irrespective of this, you were wrong and are wrong, the two words are correct, but interestingly your ...goes so far, that you do not realise that even if 10 people tell you that - like always. And as for the two articles, I do not remember anymore whether the respective parts are from me, they use the words in a different context - population exchange between two countries, i.e. a content, in which everybody having brain understands what is meant and cannot confuse anything. Juro 18:49, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

ENOUGH. Personal attacks stop here. Discuss article content, not editor's ethnicities. Please. Khoikhoi 18:52, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

(That is a misunderstanding, ethnicities have not been discussed here) Juro 18:59, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Whatever, dont discuss other editors in this manner - period. Khoikhoi 19:02, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Name

Some editors keep on changing his birth name to Alexander, referring to the parish register which lists him as Alexander. The birth certificate does not reflect someone's real name, as in the 19th century all parish registers were kept in Latin. (My grandpa once showed me the baptismal certificates of my great-grandparents and their parents and all of them were mentioned by Latin names, even though they were mostly either Hungarians, or Poles, or somewhere in-between.) As you can clearly see, this record has Latinized names even in those cases where the person, judging by his last name, was clearly Hungarian (e.g. Paulus Szabó instead of Szabó Pál, which must have been his real name. Szabó is one of the most common Hungarian surnames).

If you insist that he was actually called Alexander, because this church register says so, you must also accept that his father was called Stephanus in everyday life, which would imply that he actually spoke Latin as his native tongue, which is clearly absurd.

– Alensha ^talk 15:17, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

sorry, but it his name is in in written form Alexander and [2] give first his name as Alexander, please do not change it once more, if you don't have a source. thanks you --Mt7 15:46, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

...but what Alensha just said is exactly the point: the official language back then was Latin, so birth certificates were written with Latinized versions of people's actual names. Franz Liszt's birth certificate, for example, says "Franciscus Liszt" but I don't see anyone running off to rename him. :) Back then people translated their first names whenever they felt like it. K. Lásztocska 16:02, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Please a statement why has hungarian wp another view? --Mt7 16:42, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

what about His lutheran record, written in Latin, gives his name as Alexander Petrovics. --Mt7 16:51, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Wow, I can't believe this. :) (Alensha and Lásztocska are right, just in case I wasn't clear.) KissL 17:27, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Mt7, you're still missing the point.....everyone's name was written in Latin, regardless of what his parents actually named him. Ferenc becomes Franciscus, Sándor becomes Alexander, Lajos becomes Ludovic (or something like that??) and on et cetera. If you want to go rename everyone to their "official" Latin name, have fun. :) K. Lásztocska 17:32, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

you statement born Sándor Petrovics is not 100% true

1. latin lutheran record
2. kiskoros was at this time a slovak town
3. his mother was 100 % slovak and father 100 % slovak genesis
4. lutheran church and pastors in kiskoros only slovak
5. hungarian was at this time not the official language of country
6. if hungary at this time would be hungarian, why revolution '48. (please make article about '48 better - a disaster - and do not quarrel about this matter)

and statement His lutheran record, written in Latin, gives his name as Alexander Petrovics is 1000 % correct. an this is wikipedia, not a accumulation of guesswork --Mt7 18:30, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

You're STILL missing the point! What we were saying about why the birth certificate was in Latin was precisely BECAUSE Hungarian was not the official language at the time! It doesn't mean parents couldn't give their son a Hungarian name. (as for the 48 article, you're absolutely right it's a disaster...we'll start on it in a few weeks once some of our important contributors come back from de facto wikibreak.)K. Lásztocska 18:39, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

So why is Alexander Petrovics a redlink? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gene Nygaard (talk • contribs) 11:46, 31 March 2007 (UTC).

Barguzin

I've deleted the assumption that Petőfi fled to Barguzin, as it is a factoid, proven to be wrong, and even talking about it is degrading for Petőfi. Pumukli (talk) 19:50, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

sex life

Surprisingly, there is no section on Petofi's sexual life. Could this please be rectified. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.122.1.135 (talk) 01:02, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Segesvar in Hungary

I see Hubartimus has to go to ground kurs of history Transylvania was only 1867-1918 part of Hungary. --Nina.Charousek (talk) 16:34, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Local names

Dear friends, I think that in this article (and also in other articles) the international rules of writing local names should be observed. It means that local names can be written in a language in which all text is written (in this case English), if this langauge has its own version of a given local name. If not, the actual local name in the official language of country in which this place is situated, must be used.

For exmaple, the sentence:

"Sándor had to leave the lyceum he attended in Selmecbánya (Banská Štiavnica) in Slovakia." should be written in this form:

"Sándor had to leave the lyceum he attended in Banská Štiavnica (Hungarian: Selmecbánya) in Slovakia."

This is a neverending problem with articles conserning the history of the Kingdom of Hungary. It looks like an sign of arrogance from the side of Hungarian contributors. If they used a Hungarian form of a local name (on non-Hungarian territories) for which a Hungarian language has its traditional version in a Hungarian text, it is ok, but if they use Hungarian names for places on the territory of foreign states in English or French texts, it is a problem. Even for potential readers who are not able to find those places on a map.

The Slovak language has also its own terminology for many places in today Hungary, but in English I do not dare to write Miskovec (Slovak) but Miskolc (Hung.). I think that English version: "Michaels town" is not in use :-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.49.188.146 (talk) 10:12, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Local names 2nd time

You wrote "When the news of the revolution in Vienna reached them on the 15th... " and did not use a Magyar name for this city (Bécs), why the same principle can not be used in case of places in Slovakia or Romania?

The most used and internationally most known name of Bratislava in 1848 was not Poszony but Pressburg () (in Slovak Presporok). If somebody write about historical Bratislava in English, he or she should write Pressburg but definitely not Poszony (see: Peace of Pressburg) for example....

Even a criterium of a historical authentic original toponomy was not kept in article about Petofi!

Cities in Slovakia till 20the century were more known in German versions of their names then Magyar... So, if somebody wants to be "international" in his or her writinig, he or she should use German names :-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.49.188.146 (talk) 11:46, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

it is an accept name convencion, see User talk:Elonka/Hungarian-Slovakian experiment, it is to use Pressburg. --Nina.Charousek (talk) 14:12, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Local names

Yes, Local name should be used in English form. If there is no English form , in an official language of a country in which the place is located. A non- Hungarian reader may not know that Kolosvar is a todaj Cluj- Napoca. The fact that Hungarina name for the city of Cluj Napoca is Kolozvar may be in brackets as an additional information. The Kingdom of Hungary was an multi-national state and there is no reason to prefere Hungarian names to Slovak, German and Romanian (till 1848 the official language was Latin and "languages of the county": Hungarian, Slovak, Croatian and German were up to 1820-30s regarded as equal).