Talk:Miklós Zrínyi

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Talk:Nikola Zrinski)
Jump to: navigation, search

Beware of the pigs![edit]

Wild boards have a particular importance for the history of Carpathian basin. Prince imre, the only son of Saint Stephanus I, founding king of Hungary, also died to a wildboar's tusks. Many people and some historians argue, both him and Zrinyi were killed by austrian assains. Zrinyi actually planned to make a revolt against the Habsburgs, so getting rid of him would seem logical to the Austrian Empire. However, many eye witnesses testified that Zrinyi was indeed wounded in a way consistent with a wildboar. I'd say 75% probable hunting accident, 25% assassination, but we'll never get to know for sure.

content unfork[edit]

Apparently Silverije (talk · contribs) has created a content fork a while ago, and then persisted in undoing the unforks. I personally feel the Croatian name for this person would be just as acceptable as the Hungarian name (like I said many years ago), but what is not acceptable here is blatant Wikipedia:Content forking and Wikipedia:Edit warring. I will now merge the two article histories, leaving it at the Hungarian title, with no prejudice to the article content merging. Silverije, you're this -><- close to getting banned for a total failure to act in good faith. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 22:48, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Just to explain a bit more, in case it was unclear - all users who can technically use the Move function on this article are indeed still allowed to use it. This was just enforcement of the rule that a single person has a single article. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 23:02, 5 January 2011 (UTC)


We have a somewhat similar problem with the two articles about the Pejacsevich/Pejačević families. An article (Pejacsevich) already existed when Silverije created another one (House of Pejačević). The Pejacsevichs are again a typical Croatian-Hungarian noble family who belong to both nations. I could accept here the Croatian spelling, but the fact that family members living today use the Hungarian spelling variant should be emphasized. --Csesznekgirl (talk) 09:50, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

I have put a merge tag on both of them as well, but no progress was made since then. Although main users of both articles did have some comunication on thear talk pages related to this problem. BTW, there are also family members in Croatia that use the Croatian spelling variant, and probably same goes for Bulgaria. Kebeta (talk) 12:03, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. In Croatia might live some untitled members of the family, but they are not known in the genealogical literature. The titled branch noted in nobility registers uses the Hungarian spelling and most of them live in Western-Europe. [1] Here you can find all living members who bear the title of Count Pejacsevich de Verőcze/Grof Pejačević Viroviticki. The ancestors of this branch used Croatian spelling in Croatia and Hungarian spelling in Hungary, but as they emigrated after WWII with Hungarian passports they kept using their Hungarian name.--Csesznekgirl (talk) 14:19, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

POV Template and Information Removal[edit]

The Habsburg Kingdom of Croatia (red) at its largest territorial extent in late 1848. The Kingdom of Slavonia (light red) was at the time an autonomous Kingdom subordinate to the Kingdom of Croatia.

User Silverije has removed some information from the infobox (Kingdom of Hungary) and introduced a POV template. I would like to kindly ask him/her to explain the removal of this information and to identify those points which (s)he thinks are not neutral in the article. KœrteFa {ταλκ} 08:00, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Čakovec and Gornji Kuršanec were in the Kingdom of Croatia (Habsburg) at that time...--Kebeta (talk) 16:43, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
Kebeta, I am afraid you are wrong. Čakovec and Gornji Kuršanec historically belonged to Zala county which never was part of the Kingdom of Croatia. It was attached to the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovanes only after WWI. --Csesznekgirl (talk) 09:54, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
I am not sure about that....historically is very vague term...look at the map on the's 200 yeats after Miklós Zrínyi but it denies your "historically" and "It was attached to the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovanes only after WWI."--Kebeta (talk) 20:26, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
Maybe your map is inaccurate. Fakirbakir (talk) 22:39, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
It's not mine...I just drag it from the article Kingdom of Croatia (Habsburg). --Kebeta (talk) 22:57, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
Let's see the historical facts. Between ca. 1000 and 1848 the area was part of Zala county within the Kingdom of Hungary and had no legal or administrative ties whatsoever with the autonomous Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia. In September 1848 during the conflict with the Hungarian government, Ban Josip Jelacic occupied Muraköz/Medjimurje region and by a declaration attached it to Croatia. However, he lost it within a month. In 1849 it King Franz Josef decided that Muraköz/Medjumirje temporarily be administered by Varasd county, but from 1861 it was administered again by Zala county. So Kebeta's map might be OK for the the period between 1848/49 and 1861, but certainly not for Zrínyi/Zrinski's time. --Csesznekgirl (talk) 08:12, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I also think that Csáktornya / Čakovec was part of the Kingdom of Hungary (KoH), in that time. Even Encyclopedia Britannica claims this [2]. An editor-made map does not seem like a reliable source that proves the opposite. Hence, the infobox should be updated accordingly. Cheers. KœrteFa {ταλκ} 05:54, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

I can't f***ing belive how far hungarian fascism goes today. You imbeciles are serious in renaming people?? This is an utter digrace... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emoutofthevee (talkcontribs) 21:47, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Dear Emoutofthevee, tell me are you serious or what kind of aim should be suspected for your primitive provocation? What kind of "hungarian fascism", what "imbeciles" and "renaming people" are you hallucinating about? You make speculative and offensive charges without good faith, this is a real utter disgrace! Shame! (KIENGIR (talk) 00:28, 23 November 2015 (UTC))