Jump to content

Talk:Austria-Hungary

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 165.234.101.99 (talk) at 19:05, 26 April 2023 (→Split, April 2023 discussion: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Former good article nomineeAustria-Hungary was a Geography and places good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 15, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed


Heavy Hungaro-centricism

It seems that the whole article was mostly authored by some Hungarians (or friends of Hungary), because it presents extraordinary Hungaro-centricism. I could comment on almost every paragraph of the article, but what shocked me most was https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austria-Hungary#Electrical_industry_and_electronics which doesn't even mention ČKD and Emil Kolben.

Ceplm (talk) 06:16, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely, but if you think there is material mising on Cisleithania, WP:SOFIXIT. (I'm not sure why you would think mentions of those two is of significance). DeCausa (talk) 07:28, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I see your point, but on the other hand this is an article about Austria-Hungary. 165.234.101.99 (talk) 14:46, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RfC: Should the dual flags be displayed along with the civil ensign?

Should the dual flags displayed along with the civil ensign (such as in this revision: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=1062963982) with maybe a note alongside it linking to the Flags of Austria-Hungary page? Vamsi20 (talk) 21:44, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment I've had this idea for about a month now, but that one video really sealed the deal for me to put this.
Vamsi20 (talk) 21:46, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No. The civil ensign does not appear in this article and was removed 2 years ago. This was resolved by an RfC back then. DeCausa (talk) 21:54, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment That RfC was no consensus, there was only a compromise.
Vamsi20 (talk) 22:09, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No Given what DeCausa said I agree with not adding the flag Chefs-kiss (talk) 06:56, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No flag is better. A entire generation has already been deceived! They think the Civil Ensign was the National Flag! Dumalinas (talk) 01:05, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Make Austria-Hungary article split into seperate articles

I think the Austria-Hungary article should be split into the main Austria-Hungary article, an article about the ethnic relations of Austria-Hungary, an high detailed article about Austria-Hungary's industries, an article about its belligerence in World War I, an article about Austria-Hungary's inland waterways and regulation, and a article about Hungary's role — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.167.21.233 (talk) 22:37, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is an encyclopedia, not a scavenger hunt. Also that is not very practical for users just trying to read about Austria-Hungary. 165.234.101.96 (talk) 17:27, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well then what about users that can’t load all of the article about Austria-Hungary because they have a slower internet connection? 2603:80A0:1700:3DDE:2912:AF3:4883:EAB1 (talk) 22:41, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
2603… and 165… are the same user 2603:80A0:1700:3DDE:2912:AF3:4883:EAB1 (talk) 22:42, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
what do you mean by this? Chefs-kiss (talk) 06:58, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No. This is not a treasure hunt. You also did not reason why exactly you think they are apt for splitting. WP: SPLIT Chefs-kiss (talk) 06:55, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the readable prose size is 123kb, which is too big per WP:SPLIT. There already exists some subsidiary articles and I don't neceesarily think the ones identified by the IP are the right ones. But WP:SUMMARYSTYLE is what we should be following and I don't think this article does it particularly well. DeCausa (talk) 07:09, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Politics appears to be a bit of a monster based on the overall section sizes count in the talk header, as well as based on the overall level of complexity of the section in terms of the number of subsections contained within it. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:12, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Politics of Austria-Hungary" seems like a viable split. Oddly, there's no history section. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:15, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like some of the history is bound up in the politics section, some in the 'belligerence' section, and some in the 'demise' section. Overall, the page structure is a bit convoluted and not very easily navigable. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:18, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that politics might need seperation but i am super against the proposed ones. History section also seems fine. Chefs-kiss (talk) 12:00, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There ain’t no way I’m allowing this article to split the same way the Empire did. Keep the article the way it is. 165.234.101.97 (talk) 20:14, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree with that idea, because what about people with 2 bars and people with slow wi-fi? 2600:1014:B1EF:61DC:3DCD:6638:C9DB:2490 (talk) 21:03, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's not necessarily about splitting in the sense of removing everything from here. It is the idea of creating child articles that can take some of the strain away this article, which is currently being stretched to contain as many little factoid in one place and in doing so, generating a vastly overlength, unconcise body of material that needs rationalizing. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:14, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed but to where is the question. Economu during WW1 seems fine and Austria-Hungary during ww1 as well but the proposed categories by the poster are not suitable. Chefs-kiss (talk) 09:01, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The size of the article about Austria-Hungary is too big 2600:1014:B1EF:61DC:3DCD:6638:C9DB:2490 (talk) 21:02, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the article is too big. This is partially my fault because I took all the material from the de.wiki article and just plonked it in as best I could. It should be split and this article reduced to summary style.
Politics of Austria-Hungary is certainly viable. Austria-Hungary during World War I is another (this article goes into far too much detail and A-H is the only major belligerant not to have an ... in World War I article). Economy of Austria-Hungary is currently shorter than the section of the article here. "Formation", "Foreign affairs", a reduced WWI section, and "dissolution" could then be brought together to produce a good History section. The infrastructure section can't really be reduced by very much.
There essentially is an article on Hungary's role, as requested by the initial poster, in Lands of the Crown of Saint Stephen. Furius (talk) 07:16, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I Shall stand my ground in claiming this article shall not be split up. 165.234.101.97 (talk) 16:36, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please explain why you think that the guidelines at WP:SPLIT and WP:SUMMARY STYLE should not apply. Furius (talk) 17:34, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I OPPOSE a split. Few people know much about AH and this is a good overall summary. People only interested in specific subtopics can easily and quickly read about it here--but they might easily miss a separate article with a title that is unfamiliar to them. The suggestions at SPLIT are not fixed policy, but just suggestions by editors who seem unaware of the need for narrative coherence in historical writing. Will anyone benefit by a split?? I think few will. Will anyone suffer--yes lots of people who lack an overall sense of what AH was all about. Rjensen (talk) 19:18, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, Austria-Hungary should not have its article split, as it would be a nightmare for people just trying to learn about the empire.
(Also I don’t see any other historical articles being split up.) 165.234.101.97 (talk) 20:10, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well then, maybe you could put all of the new articles inside the related articles section 2600:1014:B1EF:61DC:159F:A3D4:F175:4C6C (talk) 20:36, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nonsense. The sections would still appear here in summary style, so readers would get a clearer overall summary, with guidance to pages on specific subtopics that they might be interested in. The links to the sub-articles would appear (as normal) directly below each heading. This is totally normal. Compare, for example the article on France - you get a clear overview from that, and it guides you very easily to more detailed articles like History of France and Politics of France. Other historical articles that have been split and summarised in this manner include Ottoman Empire, Roman Empire, and Kingdom of Scotland. Furius (talk) 01:25, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, these types of objection show a fundamental lack of understanding about how the wiki format is supposed to work. This is not a plaform for essays; it is a platform for discrete interlinked subject summaries. Iskandar323 (talk) 05:59, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I second third that as both nonsense and a fundamental lack of understanding of our format. WP:SUMMARYSTYLE. DeCausa (talk) 09:14, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Pls split it it is too big 2603:80A0:1700:3DDE:F982:4F1A:644D:9A6B (talk) 03:00, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Claiming this article is too big may be fair, but in my opinion we should not split this article into bite sized chunks. In my opinion doing this would only make it harder to navigate, further more Austria-Hungary specifically has always been an historically entity that takes quite a while of reading to understand. Splitting the article up would make it far harder for newer users to learn about the Empire. 165.234.101.97 (talk) 14:52, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(Also most people just wanting to learn about a subject don’t wish to become lost in a Wikipedia Rabbit hold.) 165.234.101.97 (talk) 15:50, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hole* 165.234.101.97 (talk) 15:51, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Having read this back again, I see your valid points, and have decided to change my views, perhaps we should split this article up. 165.234.101.97 (talk) 17:33, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wait why are you splitting this article rather than an other equally large article like the United States? 165.234.101.97 (talk) 19:25, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please read WP:WAX; this is one of the lowest forms of argument on Wikipedia, but to answer you, the US has 87kB readable prose, here it's 119kB. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:55, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should split the article. 2001:48F8:4028:1C23:0:0:0:C1A8 (talk) 01:10, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why? Imagine if we would split the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth article into two separate ones (LOL). 188.146.112.60 (talk) 21:14, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Fair point, go ahead and split the article. 165.234.101.98 (talk) 13:23, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You may conclude this discussion now. 165.234.101.96 (talk) 16:20, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers, thanks! Furius (talk) 21:53, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You may now close this discussion. 165.234.101.98 (talk) 19:36, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Flag activists

Nothing worth continuing here DeCausa (talk) 21:19, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


I’ve noticed a resurgence of people wanting a flag on the article. Does anyone know why this is? 165.234.101.97 (talk) 20:20, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Because of that video Olivarivs (talk) 01:00, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Which video? Chefs-kiss (talk) 15:36, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
[1] DeCausa (talk) 16:48, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I watched it. Dumalinas (talk) 01:06, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If any flags should be present, then the SEPARATE flags of both kingdoms should be present. 188.146.112.60 (talk) 21:16, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Lists of Ministeries

@Furius: If you're going to keep this stuff, please could you merge/link the other duplicated list and find some sourcing for the wholly unsourced one, so that the tag can at least be taken down. On a side note, going through this only compounds the sense that some of this political material could definitely do with being spun off. This government is dry and technical almost to the point of WP:JARGON, and not useful for the average casual reader. Government of Austria-Hungary now seems like a useful split that would also stop short of removing all politics. Iskandar323 (talk) 05:05, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've spun that off. I'd recommend keeping some material - what's dry and technical for one reader is fascinating for another, after all, but please cut away! I'd like to spin off the World War I section as well, but am not sure whether there is consensus for that. Furius (talk) 21:23, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Split, April 2023 discussion

This page should be split into two or more different sections. It has more than 100 kilos and is so hard to read. Consider splitting sections like the article Flags of Austria-Hungary. Memer15151 (talk) 22:47, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I think there is little or no material on the page that shouldn't appear somewhere on wiki, but it shouldn't all be here.
I've already split the government section, so that can now be reduced.
I want to do the same from the WWI section and have said so a few times now, but it's been unclear whether I have consensus for that. Furius (talk) 06:35, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The history section as a whole is 41 kB of prose long, ie. itself a full-length article, and over 1/3 of this article. Forking that off would quickly and easily go a long way to fixing this issue. CMD (talk) 07:57, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have moved a very long paragraph to Bosnian_Crisis#Buchlau_Bargain as a start. The moved material ought to be edited and better integrated there. Jim.henderson (talk) 17:45, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But it's extremely uneven - the WWI material (4 years). is substantially longer than the whole rest of the history section (47 years) Furius (talk) 18:11, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How do you want this done then? 165.234.101.99 (talk) 19:05, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Austria-Hungary&oldid=1151867210"