Talk:Martin Medňanský

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group.

Poetry

	Poetry portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poetry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of poetry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoetryWikipedia:WikiProject PoetryTemplate:WikiProject PoetryPoetry articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Slovakia

There was no such geograhical or historical region like "Slovakia". The territory of today's Slovakia was integral part of the Kingdom of Hungary. The informal term "Slovensko" was used within the Slovak community (literature, newspaper etc.) If we use the term "Slovakia" here, we need clarification. --Norden1990 (talk) 11:40, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No doubts, Slovakia as a separate administrative region did not exist in the 19th century. And no doubts, the geographical term Slovakia existed in the same time and was in use. The term was used centuries ago also by other communities then Slovaks. Ditinili (talk) 11:55, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Then clarify it. Slovak scholarly works always refer to the territory of today's Slovakia as simply "Slovakia" (even when they talk about medieval period), without the mention of Kingdom of Hungary, where these Slovaks lived and worked. Collective amnesia. This is the English wikipedia, it is not certain that readers know that you are not talking about the country (if you need to mention it at all). "Upper Hungary" was also a valid (and much older) geographical term. Why we should use only your version? --Norden1990 (talk) 12:12, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure about the source of these claims, but they can be easily refuted in 10 minutes by a short look to the bibliography of works about the history of Slovakia and the Historic Kingdom of Hungary. It seems that the statements like "collective amnesia" probably comes from your own prejudices.

The term "Upper Hungary" is not some kind of well established geographical term, it has its own history and many tows in present-day Central Slovakia were in what they called Lower Hungary. From this point of view, it is definitely not "more valid" or more clear.

I also fail to understand how can be an English reader misguided. Ditinili (talk) 12:52, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Because English readers do not can distuingish the country with the claimed "geographical term". I always strive to find a neutral position (as a result, I also had conflicts with Hungarian nationalist editors too, beside Slovak editors). Why do not we rephrase this sentence which is acceptable to both of us? Medňanský was a member of numerous Slovak-affiliated philanthropic and patriotic societies". What do you think about this? --Norden1990 (talk) 13:04, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Although its clear that the original statement about the alleged non-existence of this geographical term was not correct and it also seems that you recognize that it is used in the modern scientific literature, I have no problem with the proposed wording.Ditinili (talk) 13:26, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]