User talk:Baxter9

Hu-Ro war

Hi, please take a look at the discussion page of the article at the section "Merge proposal" perhaps you can help a bit there.Octavian8 (talk) 14:43, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

John Hunyadi an Stephen I of Hungary

you said Stephen's Vlach origin is unlikely

Why the sources that indicate the Cuman ancestry of J Hunyadi (even if the mainstream view is that he was Romanian) are more reliable?

John Hunyadi was Romanian

"a Magyarized Romanian from Transylvania, János Hunyadi, became regent of Hungary." Ronald D. Bachman, ed. Romania: A Country Study. Washington: GPO for the Library of Congress, 1989 http://countrystudies.us/romania/8.htm (neutral source) "a petty Transylvanian nobleman of Romanian descent, Hunyadi" Babinger, Franz. et al. Mehmed the Conqueror and His Time. Princeton University Press. 2nd Edition. 1992. page. 20 (neutral source) http://books.google.com/books?id=PPxC6rO7vvsC&pg=PA20&dq=#v=onepage&q=&f=false "it may be taken as proved that the family of Hunyadi was of Rumanian origin" Catholic Encyclopedia http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07564b.htm (neutral source) "It is hardly coincidental that the mass ennoblement of Romanian cnezes is linked to the name of János Hunyadi, for this great general had grown up among them and understood their aspirations" http://mek.oszk.hu/03400/03407/html/84.html "History of Transylvania" and is written by "INSTITUTE OF HISTORY OF THE HUNGARIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iaaasi (talk • contribs) 12:37, 8 January 2010 (UTC) (hungarian source) "hunyadi was a descendant of a Vlach(Romanian) noble family" http://books.google.ro/books?id=SKwmGQCT0MAC&printsec=frontcover&dq=A+History+of+Hungary++De+Peter+F.+Sugar,P%C3%A9ter+Han%C3%A1k,Tibor+Frank&cd=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false] A History of Hungary‎ Peter F. Sugar, Péter Hanák, Tibor Frank - History - 1994 page 63 (Hungarian source) "Hunyadi[...] was born a Romanian" http://books.google.hu/books?id=vEJNBqanT_8C&printsec=frontcover#v=snippet&q=romanian%20hunyadi&f=false The realm of St. Stephen: a history of medieval Hungary, 895-1526 szerző: Pál Engel,Pal Engel,Andrew Ayton,Tamás Pálosfalvi http://books.google.hu/books?id=vEJNBqanT_8C&printsec=frontcover#v=snippet&q=romanian%20hunyadi&f=false (Hungarian source) Can you give a neutral source, different of the ONLY that you have (which is Hungarian and perhaps biased) where it is said he was Cuman and not Romanian?

1) Stephen I of Hungary: Please, read it again. I said, that your source is not reliable, and Dr. Mircea Dogaru works appear to be WP:FRINGE (furthermore, he seems to be a romanian nacionalist author, so his works are not neutral/objective at all). 2) '"All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing fairly, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources. This is non-negotiable and expected of all articles and all editors.'" The theories of John's Serb, Cuman and of course the Romanian ancestry were mentioned and referenced with reliable sources.--B@xter⁹ 11:41, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

There are only one or 2 sources which say that he was Cuman/Serb and tens which say he was Romanian. The ones who say he wasn't Romanian are HUNGARIANS, why should i consider them more objective?(Iaaasi (talk) 11:47, 12 January 2010 (UTC))

No, they say that:"Hunyadi is a Hungarian[2] noble family probably of Romanian[3][4] origin. Another opinion holds that the family was of Cuman[5] origin..." However, you still dont understand the problem here. Find a RELIABLE source (not a garbage webpage from a nacionalist author) to prove that statement (Stephen I of HUngary). The other theories, (Cuman, serb) regarding John's origins are mentioned per wiki policies. Furthermore Gyula Szekfu (one of the authors, once member of the Hungarian Academi of Scienses, and he was not nacionalist) is a reliable source. The sorce for his Serb origin is also Hungarian ("Molnar, Miklos: A Concise History of Hungary. P. 61 and Aldásy, A. (1910). János Hunyady."), -note that the last one also mentiones his likely Romanian ancestry- so I dont understand why are you so worried about the objectiveness of the Hungarian sources. I repeat: Please study the wikipedia pilicies before you continue to edit.--B@xter⁹ 12:08, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

(Iaaasi (talk) 11:10, 21 January 2010 (UTC))

Nein. Hunyadi ist nicht Rumänischen Abstammung, veil name des seines Vater is Vojk, aber das ist kumanische name. Doncsecz^talk 10:06, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

vojk name derived form an old Slavic root for warrior (voj), like voivode (voj (war-man) + vodi (To lead)) (Iaaasi (talk)) —Preceding undated comment added 12:40, 5 February 2010 (UTC).

08:42, 15 January 2010 Baxter9 (talk | contribs) (36,846 bytes) (→Family: re-added referenced information removed by User:Iaaasi)

THAT WAS NOT REMOVED BY ME

CHECK AGAIN !!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.117.152.247 (talk) 08:58, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

"He joined the Catholic Church and became Hungarian in his feelings"

1. "He joined the Catholic Church" in fact Vajk. his father adhered to the catholic faith ,like many other ennobled Romanian cnezes. John was born in the catholic faith, he didn't join it later 2. "became Hungarian in his feelings" that's not a scientific formulation. my opinion is that has no place in an encyclopedia

i think the person from Canada was right "incredibly POV (what is "feeling"?)" "A generic book on medieval literature should not constitute a source for this article."

I will not remove it by msyself, because i'll be blocked again because of you from no correct reason —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iaaasi (talk • contribs) 09:39, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I re-added it, because it was referenced, I am not the original "uploader" of this info. Please post your opinion where it belongs. "i'll be blocked again because of you from no correct reason" An administrator blocked you, because YOU violated the 3RR rule. Furthermore, I was so "incorrect", that I told you 2 times, to study the policies b 4 u continue, or not? Also, you recived 2 3RR warnings before the block, but you ignored them. I think you are the person who is not correct here.--B@xter⁹ 09:48, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Explaination

I was reporting you that in the Hungarian article about J Hunyadi the Cuman origin was presented as being demonstrated and there was nothing said about his possible Romanian ancesntry, even if it is claimed by most neutral sources

i sent the same message to Rokarudi and meanwhile he made some changes to the article so I retrieved the message to you because it wasn't actual any more —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iaaasi (talk • contribs) 21:56, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

thank you for your help

Thank you! (Moved the barnstar to my userpage)--B@xter⁹ 20:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Slovak propaganda poster.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Slovak propaganda poster.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Peripitus (Talk) 11:32, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks - I've removed the "no rationale" tag from the image page - Peripitus (Talk) 11:49, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your help! Cheers--B@xter⁹ 11:51, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

about reverting Romania article

you say you are not interested in a discussion about ROmania article. But you push for a revisionist POV when you edit it. Why are you editing Romania article if you do not know the subject (in this case the Trianon Treaty), and more, you express your lack of interest in discussing it ? Criztu (talk) 11:59, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

1) Please read my first comment again. Thank you. 2) The "revisionist" POV, as you call that information is mentioned in the Encyclopædia Britannica which is a neutral source. 3) Thank you, I have enough information about the Trianon Treaty, but it seems to be that you know little about international relations. Cheers--B@xter⁹ 12:34, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

"hungary was forced...."

it's an article about Romania; the phrases should begin with "Romania was...", "Romania did...", because it is the subject of the article. Maybe the formulation would be good for the article about Hungary

it is implicitly that the conditions of the treaty were imposed by the Entente; at any peace treaty the victorious forces decide everything, after the unconditional surrender. It's not necessay to specify that "hungary was forced" because it's obvious that it did't cede the territories willingly

I think that my formulation is enough neutral, i don't see why you modify it i did not write "the restored Kingdom of Hungary renounced in favour of Kingdom of Romania all claims over Transylvania" like Criztu

(Iaaasi (talk) 19:21, 30 January 2010 (UTC)) (Iaaasi (talk) 19:21, 30 January 2010 (UTC))

Dürnkrut

Der anon aus Tschechien ist eine Unfähigkeit, weil seiner meinug, dass Rudolf hat groß Heer, aber warum kommt in der Schlacht László? Doncsecz^talk 09:35, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Ich bin nicht Experte dieses Themas, aber es ist sicher, dass laut der Regelung die mit Quellen versehenen Informationen können nicht einfach storniert werden. Hast du vielleicht keine englische Quelle, die deine Schrift unterstützt?--B@xter⁹ 16:02, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Ich habe kein englische Quelle, nur ungarische und deutsche. Die ungarische Quellen gerade aussmessen die Nummer des ungarisches Armee, dass 2-3,000 war die Nummer des östereichisches-steierisches-swabisches Armee, das ist aus östereichisches Quelle, beziehungsweise es ist figurt in dem Noten. Doncsecz^talk 09:05, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Galánta (Galanta) District

Per this comment, I would say that this and this count as notification. As a courtesy, I notified both projects as soon as the TFD was listed. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, I know, but the projects were not informed by Iaaasi.--B@xter⁹ 20:29, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

That is true, but they were notified none-the-less. I really have no opinion about the template, but as a point of order, I tried to make sure that all related WikiProjects and past TFD participants were equally notified. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:34, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

You've done a good job, thank you.--B@xter⁹ 20:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

I think the issue is his/her English knowledge. Although my English is far from perfection, but I think he/she cannot understand some complicated expressions. Otherwise, let's enjoy that there are personalities who differ from us, and let's try to work on the improvement of wikipedia. I think that this week will be full of fun (móka és kacagás). Borsoka (talk) 15:26, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Dawn of the Dead

I think one of the exiled has just returned. Maybe the Bir..-one from Emese's dream? Or the one with numbers from the 70s? This is so misty, I am frightened. :) Borsoka (talk) 19:42, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

map

Hello! Please read Talk:Romania in the Early Middle Ages#A strange map and responde. Thank you!Asybaris01 (talk) 20:21, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles and maps are based on third-party reliable sources. Your map is inaccurate, as it was pointed out by another user. If you dont want to correct it, I will nominate it for deletion and it will be deleted.--B@xter⁹ 20:24, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Please read Talk:Romania in the Early Middle Ages.Asybaris01 (talk) 20:39, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Krisztina_Morvai_EP.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Krisztina_Morvai_EP.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Chris G Bot (talk) 00:18, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Slovakisation

Gratula a cikk szerkesztéséhez. Már egy ideje figyelem az alakulását, és a ténykedésed kifejezetten tetszik (ahogy az is, hogy a "másik oldalnak" ez eddig nem nagyon tűnt fel). Csak így tovább ;) CoolKoon (talk) 23:47, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Your revert to Slovakization appears to be mislabelled - would you kindly care to explain? I do not understand the edit summary you used. —what a crazy random happenstance 10:22, 28 March 2010 (UTC) PS: Never mind, my apologies. For future reference, it is better to add the reference straight away, rather than reverting first. Have a nice day. —what a crazy random happenstance 10:24, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

OK, I'm sorry! Cheers--B@xter⁹ 10:26, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

No worries mate, thanks for taking the time to add the reference! —what a crazy random happenstance 10:28, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok! :) I hope this ref. will prevent the edit war.--B@xter⁹ 10:44, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Orban quote

Hello, Baxter9. You have new messages at Wladthemlat's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.