![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Svetovid ( talk · contribs) added some sources to this article, which appeared to be valid reliable sources. [1] Borsoka ( talk · contribs) removed them, saying he disagreed with them, but without giving adequate explanation of why he felt they were inappropriate. [2] I have talked it over with admin EdJohnston ( talk · contribs), and we agree that Borsoka's removal of the sources was not sufficiently justified. Therefore I have restored them. Borsoka is also cautioned that if he wishes to challenge sources, he must give adequate explanation at the talkpage as to why he feels that they are not reliable. However, Borsoka is still welcome to add opposing views, with his own sources. This will help the article to achieve a state of neutrality. I encourage all editors to proceed with editing this article, towards the goal of improving it. Revert wars, however, must cease. Thanks, El on ka 14:40, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
This article is one of a series of articles that have been affected by disputes between Hungarian and Slovakian editors. A centralized page has been setup for discussion of these issues, and all interested editors are invited to participate, at User talk:Elonka/Hungarian-Slovakian experiment. Thanks, -- El on ka 14:40, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Dear Omen1229, please help me to understand your concerns.
(1) As to the first concern ("Borsoka deleted sources"), please compare the lists of sources of the two versions. The modern reliable sources used in the first version (Kirschbaum, Goldberg, and Curta) are also used for the second one; the reference to the "Conversio..." in the first version cannot qualify as a "source", because it is a pure wikilink. Although a book written in the 1920s was ignored when the second version was written, but instead of this rather old source several new, modern works were added.
(2) As to the second concern ("Borsoka deleted Slavic names, for example Blatnograd"), please read the second version of the article before reverting it, and please add a proper reliable source which proves that in historical literature written in English this place name is used.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Borsoka ( talk) 14:23, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
unsigned comment added by Omen1229 ( talk • contribs) 09:38, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
The text of the cited source (Bartl) is the following: "846 10 January - The East Frankish king, Louis the German, accepted Pribina in his service as a vassal, and granted him a fief in the region of Lake Balaton. There Pribina established Blatnohrad and built several churches. The Principality of Pribina extended through the southern part of Transdanubia and into the area of today's Styria and Slovenia."
Borsoka wrote: "the capital of the Balaton Principality" is not included in the cited source. Is there any source specialized to early medieval history which uses this rather funny denomination in English? (Principalities are not named after lakes)
I can accept any modern form (taking into account that neither the Blatnohrad nor the Blatnograd form is based on 9th-century sources, they are purely the modern translations of the documented German name of the town). However, I think we should avoid to add any piece of information to a text which is based on reliable sources, if those sources do not contain that new piece of information. Borsoka ( talk) 05:53, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
Reference no. 6 to the map presented in the article does not qualify a reliable source. Reference no. 7 is based on Kirschbaum's work (Kirschbaum, Stanislav J. (1995, 2005). A History of Slovakia: The Struggle for Survival (2nd edition)); this work contains 5 maps, and one of them (No. 2. The Great Moravian Empire, on page xi) could be relevant for the purpose of the map presented in the article. However, the map in Kirschbaum's work does not refer to the Principality of Nitra, moreover it present the "original territory of the Empire of Great Moravia" as bordered on the river Danube from the south. Therefore, the reference to Kirschbaum's work seems to be lack reliability. Reference no. 8. does not contain any map. Therefore, I think the map should be deleted. Borsoka ( talk) 08:48, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
According to Szoke (2013) there is no archaeological evidence of a Carolingian seat in Nitra nor a Carolingian church. [12]
Are you sure this text from the article is correct?
"Pribina's allodial lands were situated in Nitrava ultra Danuvium where Archbishop Adalram of Salzburg (821–836) consecrated a church,[6][7] Since Nitrava has been identified, although not unanimously, with modern Nitra in Slovakia, Pribina is considered to have ruled the large early medieval fortress excavated at that town"
Fakirbakir ( talk) 11:19, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Svetovid ( talk · contribs) added some sources to this article, which appeared to be valid reliable sources. [1] Borsoka ( talk · contribs) removed them, saying he disagreed with them, but without giving adequate explanation of why he felt they were inappropriate. [2] I have talked it over with admin EdJohnston ( talk · contribs), and we agree that Borsoka's removal of the sources was not sufficiently justified. Therefore I have restored them. Borsoka is also cautioned that if he wishes to challenge sources, he must give adequate explanation at the talkpage as to why he feels that they are not reliable. However, Borsoka is still welcome to add opposing views, with his own sources. This will help the article to achieve a state of neutrality. I encourage all editors to proceed with editing this article, towards the goal of improving it. Revert wars, however, must cease. Thanks, El on ka 14:40, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
This article is one of a series of articles that have been affected by disputes between Hungarian and Slovakian editors. A centralized page has been setup for discussion of these issues, and all interested editors are invited to participate, at User talk:Elonka/Hungarian-Slovakian experiment. Thanks, -- El on ka 14:40, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Dear Omen1229, please help me to understand your concerns.
(1) As to the first concern ("Borsoka deleted sources"), please compare the lists of sources of the two versions. The modern reliable sources used in the first version (Kirschbaum, Goldberg, and Curta) are also used for the second one; the reference to the "Conversio..." in the first version cannot qualify as a "source", because it is a pure wikilink. Although a book written in the 1920s was ignored when the second version was written, but instead of this rather old source several new, modern works were added.
(2) As to the second concern ("Borsoka deleted Slavic names, for example Blatnograd"), please read the second version of the article before reverting it, and please add a proper reliable source which proves that in historical literature written in English this place name is used.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Borsoka ( talk) 14:23, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
unsigned comment added by Omen1229 ( talk • contribs) 09:38, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
The text of the cited source (Bartl) is the following: "846 10 January - The East Frankish king, Louis the German, accepted Pribina in his service as a vassal, and granted him a fief in the region of Lake Balaton. There Pribina established Blatnohrad and built several churches. The Principality of Pribina extended through the southern part of Transdanubia and into the area of today's Styria and Slovenia."
Borsoka wrote: "the capital of the Balaton Principality" is not included in the cited source. Is there any source specialized to early medieval history which uses this rather funny denomination in English? (Principalities are not named after lakes)
I can accept any modern form (taking into account that neither the Blatnohrad nor the Blatnograd form is based on 9th-century sources, they are purely the modern translations of the documented German name of the town). However, I think we should avoid to add any piece of information to a text which is based on reliable sources, if those sources do not contain that new piece of information. Borsoka ( talk) 05:53, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
Reference no. 6 to the map presented in the article does not qualify a reliable source. Reference no. 7 is based on Kirschbaum's work (Kirschbaum, Stanislav J. (1995, 2005). A History of Slovakia: The Struggle for Survival (2nd edition)); this work contains 5 maps, and one of them (No. 2. The Great Moravian Empire, on page xi) could be relevant for the purpose of the map presented in the article. However, the map in Kirschbaum's work does not refer to the Principality of Nitra, moreover it present the "original territory of the Empire of Great Moravia" as bordered on the river Danube from the south. Therefore, the reference to Kirschbaum's work seems to be lack reliability. Reference no. 8. does not contain any map. Therefore, I think the map should be deleted. Borsoka ( talk) 08:48, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
According to Szoke (2013) there is no archaeological evidence of a Carolingian seat in Nitra nor a Carolingian church. [12]
Are you sure this text from the article is correct?
"Pribina's allodial lands were situated in Nitrava ultra Danuvium where Archbishop Adalram of Salzburg (821–836) consecrated a church,[6][7] Since Nitrava has been identified, although not unanimously, with modern Nitra in Slovakia, Pribina is considered to have ruled the large early medieval fortress excavated at that town"
Fakirbakir ( talk) 11:19, 23 July 2013 (UTC)