This
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on November 25, 2004, November 25, 2005, November 25, 2006, and November 25, 2007. |
It needs to be clarified that by 1946 the Communist Party, the Socialist Party, and the Social Democratic Party won majority representation in Parliament, or the National Assembly. Only in 1948 did Stalinization occur. It is wrong to say Czechoslovakia emerged communist because of the USSR. I cite:
I may be compelled to change the wording so as to dispel the myth that the USSR alone installed communism in Eastern Europe. Billyvamp4 ( talk) 14:58, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
"By the 1990s, in economic terms, the Czech Republic's GDP per capita was some 20% higher than Slovakia's, but its long-run GDP growth was lower. Money transfers from the Czech budget to Slovakia, which had been the rule in the past, were stopped in January 1991." Please were is the reference to these estimations? I would rather say: it was reported by Mass-media that GDP in Czech part is higher and there is massive money transfers to Slovakia. Finnaly it is not only true but was also a important reason for split (together with medialisation of underpresentation of Slovaks by Slovak massmedia). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.175.80.47 ( talk) 10:57, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
a) Sentence The Czech TV news, however, recently started to reintroduce Slovak language coverages from Slovakia. looks too optimistic. Slovak news (~10 minutes) are aired early in the morning and in main news, events from Slovakia are sometimes commented in Slovak. The use of Slovak on Czech TV has dropped considerably.
I meant that for one year or so, there has been a report on Slovakia in Slovak in the main news almost everyday, which previously was not the case (and if so it was in Czech). For me, this is quite striking. (I did not mean the main Czech news on Slovak TV in the night or the Slovak news on Czech TV at 6 a.m., of course... :) )
15:14, 29 November 2010 (UTC)15:14, 29 November 2010 (UTC)15:14, 29 November 2010 (UTC) 125.25.141.4 ( talk) 15:14, 29 November 2010 (UTC)!!!!!
b) Slovaks studying at universities in Czech Rep. - wasn't there dip in their numbers? I remember in the beginning it was negotiated just some 70 students could study in other country for free. People who study unis in CR in Czech language have now the same conditions (= no fees, access to free accomodation) no matter where they are from but this was established years after dissolution.
I left that out because I am not sure (it's always better to say nothing than to lie...). The number was definitely much higher in reality. There were some problems in one year, but then they somehow solved it...But if you have better information, you can re-insert that part, of course.
c) Is the term Sametovy rozvod actually used in Slovakia? (It is not in CR)
I know that and definitely not. (And in Slovak, it would have to be Nežný rozvod, because the revolution is called Nežná revolúcia). The term is an English invention, because - I assume - from the international point of view the most striking thing about the divorce was the fact that it was non-violent (given the then developments in Yugoslavia etc.). Juro 22:52, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
"A very large percentage" can mean just about anything. This needs to be qualified better in order to avoid being weaselly and discriminatory towards the Gypsies. Who, BTW, prefer to be called Roma, too. -- Joy [shallot] 14:18, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
"The untimely death of Alexander Dubček was widely seen as depriving the "Czechoslovakists" of the one figure with sufficent public standing to have successfully resisted the break up of the federation."
"The issue dragged on for years and in the end the existing state was codified."
Perhaps being dumb here, but which "existing state"? That the Roma are stateless? That the Roma are citizens of Slovakia? Of the Czech Republic? Shenme 05:06, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
The title of this article (Velvet Divorce) is naive and definitely wrong. It had nothing to do with so called velvet revolution.
The page should be renamed. I suggest neutral Split of Czechoslovakia, see also Czech Republic (info-box).
-- Cepek 08:10, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
"It is sometimes referred to as the Velvet Divorce in American and British media."
I have seen "divorce de velours" in French language media from Quebec and France. It is possible that other languages have adopted the expression. This phrase gives the impression that this is specifically an English language occurence, which it does not appear to be. -- Liberlogos 23:15, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Do we have a map on Wikipedia showing both new countries well, or can somebody make one? Would help illustrate this article quite fittingly. MadMaxDog 09:07, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
How was the public opinion about the seperation. My relatives live in Prague and my mum said many were against it -- 88.153.177.193 ( talk) 06:11, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Currently the article states unequivocally that dual citizenship was not allowed and was only possible "years later". However, my understanding of the Citizen Act (Slovakia) is that following the dissolution citizens had a period of one year to apply for the dual citizenship but that very few people opted to do so. Perhaps someone with more knowledge on the matter can enlighten us or update the entry to include this information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.36.15.252 ( talk) 13:00, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
The linking of the English and the German articles is wrong. While the English article is about the dissolution of Czechoslovakia in 1993, the German article is about the German occupation of Czechia in 1939. Could someone please correct this? Unfortunately, I don't know how to do it.-- Mottenkiste ( talk) 20:47, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Four times, the article quotes an otherwise unsourced and article-less Respekt, which is of course the Czech journal but who's to know that? Also, shouldn't the statements thus confirmed give a source, like the article in Respekt that is (probably) quoted there? ahoi -- WernR ( talk) 12:32, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Dissolution of Czechoslovakia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:26, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
"According to the Prague Post (September 8, 2014: Is the Czech Republic richer than Slovakia?), "Slovak GDP reached 95 percent of the Czech GDP, and it is likely to draw level with it."
The Czech Republic has almost twice the population of Slovakia. The above statement, as written, seems quite implausible. Presumably, it was intended to mean that Slovak GDP per capita reached 95% of the Czech GDP per capita. But it doesn't actually say that. Lathamibird ( talk) 06:09, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Dissolution of Czechoslovakia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:22, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
The article states: "Czech and Slovak representatives signed the Pittsburgh Agreement, which promised a common state consisting of two equal nations.... Soon afterward, (Masaryk) and Edvard Beneš violated the agreement by pushing for greater unity and a single nation...Some Slovaks were not in favour of that change, and in March 1939, ..." The claim "violated the agreement" (which I underlined) seems rather strong, and is not explicitly mentioned in History of Czechoslovakia. Is this universally acknowledged, or a controversial interpretation that should a) be toned down, or b) at least sourced? Martinp ( talk) 16:11, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
This
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on November 25, 2004, November 25, 2005, November 25, 2006, and November 25, 2007. |
It needs to be clarified that by 1946 the Communist Party, the Socialist Party, and the Social Democratic Party won majority representation in Parliament, or the National Assembly. Only in 1948 did Stalinization occur. It is wrong to say Czechoslovakia emerged communist because of the USSR. I cite:
I may be compelled to change the wording so as to dispel the myth that the USSR alone installed communism in Eastern Europe. Billyvamp4 ( talk) 14:58, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
"By the 1990s, in economic terms, the Czech Republic's GDP per capita was some 20% higher than Slovakia's, but its long-run GDP growth was lower. Money transfers from the Czech budget to Slovakia, which had been the rule in the past, were stopped in January 1991." Please were is the reference to these estimations? I would rather say: it was reported by Mass-media that GDP in Czech part is higher and there is massive money transfers to Slovakia. Finnaly it is not only true but was also a important reason for split (together with medialisation of underpresentation of Slovaks by Slovak massmedia). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.175.80.47 ( talk) 10:57, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
a) Sentence The Czech TV news, however, recently started to reintroduce Slovak language coverages from Slovakia. looks too optimistic. Slovak news (~10 minutes) are aired early in the morning and in main news, events from Slovakia are sometimes commented in Slovak. The use of Slovak on Czech TV has dropped considerably.
I meant that for one year or so, there has been a report on Slovakia in Slovak in the main news almost everyday, which previously was not the case (and if so it was in Czech). For me, this is quite striking. (I did not mean the main Czech news on Slovak TV in the night or the Slovak news on Czech TV at 6 a.m., of course... :) )
15:14, 29 November 2010 (UTC)15:14, 29 November 2010 (UTC)15:14, 29 November 2010 (UTC) 125.25.141.4 ( talk) 15:14, 29 November 2010 (UTC)!!!!!
b) Slovaks studying at universities in Czech Rep. - wasn't there dip in their numbers? I remember in the beginning it was negotiated just some 70 students could study in other country for free. People who study unis in CR in Czech language have now the same conditions (= no fees, access to free accomodation) no matter where they are from but this was established years after dissolution.
I left that out because I am not sure (it's always better to say nothing than to lie...). The number was definitely much higher in reality. There were some problems in one year, but then they somehow solved it...But if you have better information, you can re-insert that part, of course.
c) Is the term Sametovy rozvod actually used in Slovakia? (It is not in CR)
I know that and definitely not. (And in Slovak, it would have to be Nežný rozvod, because the revolution is called Nežná revolúcia). The term is an English invention, because - I assume - from the international point of view the most striking thing about the divorce was the fact that it was non-violent (given the then developments in Yugoslavia etc.). Juro 22:52, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
"A very large percentage" can mean just about anything. This needs to be qualified better in order to avoid being weaselly and discriminatory towards the Gypsies. Who, BTW, prefer to be called Roma, too. -- Joy [shallot] 14:18, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
"The untimely death of Alexander Dubček was widely seen as depriving the "Czechoslovakists" of the one figure with sufficent public standing to have successfully resisted the break up of the federation."
"The issue dragged on for years and in the end the existing state was codified."
Perhaps being dumb here, but which "existing state"? That the Roma are stateless? That the Roma are citizens of Slovakia? Of the Czech Republic? Shenme 05:06, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
The title of this article (Velvet Divorce) is naive and definitely wrong. It had nothing to do with so called velvet revolution.
The page should be renamed. I suggest neutral Split of Czechoslovakia, see also Czech Republic (info-box).
-- Cepek 08:10, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
"It is sometimes referred to as the Velvet Divorce in American and British media."
I have seen "divorce de velours" in French language media from Quebec and France. It is possible that other languages have adopted the expression. This phrase gives the impression that this is specifically an English language occurence, which it does not appear to be. -- Liberlogos 23:15, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Do we have a map on Wikipedia showing both new countries well, or can somebody make one? Would help illustrate this article quite fittingly. MadMaxDog 09:07, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
How was the public opinion about the seperation. My relatives live in Prague and my mum said many were against it -- 88.153.177.193 ( talk) 06:11, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Currently the article states unequivocally that dual citizenship was not allowed and was only possible "years later". However, my understanding of the Citizen Act (Slovakia) is that following the dissolution citizens had a period of one year to apply for the dual citizenship but that very few people opted to do so. Perhaps someone with more knowledge on the matter can enlighten us or update the entry to include this information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.36.15.252 ( talk) 13:00, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
The linking of the English and the German articles is wrong. While the English article is about the dissolution of Czechoslovakia in 1993, the German article is about the German occupation of Czechia in 1939. Could someone please correct this? Unfortunately, I don't know how to do it.-- Mottenkiste ( talk) 20:47, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Four times, the article quotes an otherwise unsourced and article-less Respekt, which is of course the Czech journal but who's to know that? Also, shouldn't the statements thus confirmed give a source, like the article in Respekt that is (probably) quoted there? ahoi -- WernR ( talk) 12:32, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Dissolution of Czechoslovakia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:26, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
"According to the Prague Post (September 8, 2014: Is the Czech Republic richer than Slovakia?), "Slovak GDP reached 95 percent of the Czech GDP, and it is likely to draw level with it."
The Czech Republic has almost twice the population of Slovakia. The above statement, as written, seems quite implausible. Presumably, it was intended to mean that Slovak GDP per capita reached 95% of the Czech GDP per capita. But it doesn't actually say that. Lathamibird ( talk) 06:09, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Dissolution of Czechoslovakia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:22, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
The article states: "Czech and Slovak representatives signed the Pittsburgh Agreement, which promised a common state consisting of two equal nations.... Soon afterward, (Masaryk) and Edvard Beneš violated the agreement by pushing for greater unity and a single nation...Some Slovaks were not in favour of that change, and in March 1939, ..." The claim "violated the agreement" (which I underlined) seems rather strong, and is not explicitly mentioned in History of Czechoslovakia. Is this universally acknowledged, or a controversial interpretation that should a) be toned down, or b) at least sourced? Martinp ( talk) 16:11, 10 August 2023 (UTC)