This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Transylvanian peasant revolt article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Transylvanian peasant revolt has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
November 19, 2017. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the
Transylvanian peasant revolt broke out after the
local bishop, having suspended the collection of the
tithe for years, demanded the arrears in a single payment? | ||||||||||
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on February 2, 2018, and February 2, 2020. |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is severely biased. Stating that the revolters were a "group of Romanian peasants" is historically incorrect. As it stands, this article is just repeating the position of Ceausescu-era Romanian historiography. When I have time, I will write a more detailed account of the revolt. Scott Moore 09:47, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
To be more specific about inaccuracies:
- the revolt did not start at Bobâlna
- it was not a group consisting only of Romanian peasants who revolted. The revolt was led by a Hungarian petty noble, three Hungarian peasants, a Romanian peasant and a burgher. Those revolting included both Romanian and Hungarian serfs, as well as burghers.
- The Unio Trium Nationum was not signed just by nobles (the nobles were just one of three Estates in the Union).
Scott Moore 09:59, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I agree wholeheartedly. In addition, it should not be called "Bobâlna revolt"--the name in common use at the time was "Bábolna", with the Romanian form only becoming official after Trianon. I strongly suggest correcting the name. 4.231.162.235 08:13, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
Another necessary correction is the replacement of the phrase: "While the Hungarians, the Hungarian-speaking Székelys and the Saxons formed sedentary communities, living in villages and towns, most Vlachs were shepherds, herding their flocks between the mountains and the lowlands." First of all, the allegation is highly offensive against the Romanian population of Transylvania - which where already a sedentary population centuries before the arrival of the above mentioned communities. Another issue is the source of this allegation: a dubious work, published in a "Slavic" review by an extremist so-called "historian". Moreover, the article does not see the clear ethnic aspect of this revolt and is insisting only on the so called social aspect of it. The article reminds me the (ideological) history lessons from the communist history manuals for school children, during Ceausescu regime. I suggest the urgent revision or replacement of this highly un-professional article. Articles like that are lowering of the level of Wikipedia as a whole. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Transylvanian ( talk • contribs) 11:30, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
You are right in affirming that some Romanians were involved in animal husbandry. BUT the Romanians are not a nomadic population. The large majority of them live in sedentary communities and only a small fraction of the population is involved in transhumance (seasonal migration of the herds between mountain and lowland pastures). Here are some reliable historical sources, by Transylvanian, local, unbiased historians: - "Romanians and Hungarians from the 9th to the 14th Century. The Genesis of the Transylvanian Medieval State", Cluj-Napoca, Center for Transylvanian Studies, 1996
- "A Social History of Romanian Space.From the Beginning of Dacian state until the rise of Modernity", Mircea Brie, University of Oradea, Romania, 2005
This was the first major peasant revolt in the history of Hungary. The revolt is called "Budai Nagy Antal Revolt" by Hungarians and "Bobalna Revolt" by Romanians. Google search gave
I suggest that the article is renamed accordingly. -- KIDB 14:11, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
@ Norden1990:, would you look at the title of the article dedicated to the revolt (I mean, Joseph Held's work)? I think the previous title is more in line with WP:Name. Borsoka ( talk) 17:39, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Transylvanian peasant revolt. 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) 09:05, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Kpalion ( talk · contribs) 11:35, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
Hi
Borsoka, I will be reviewing the article. Looks very well after the first reading. Specific comments coming soon! —
Kpalion
(talk) 11:35, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
An interesting and well-written article with ample citations. I have no access to the sources so assuming good faith. Some issues need to be addressed, though, especially regarding neutrality, clarity and breadth of coverage. If there are any suggestions you don't agree with, please discuss. — Kpalion (talk) 12:52, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
Borsoka, thank you for the changes made so far. I will put the nomination on hold for two weeks to let you expand the Aftermath section and resolve the copyright status of the stained-glass photograph. And, possibly, to get a response from Transylvanian. If you're done sooner or wish to extend the on-hold period, please let me know. — Kpalion (talk) 11:18, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
Borsoka, thanks for addressing my comments. There are still two minor issues, but once they're sorted out, it's good to go. — Kpalion (talk) 16:54, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
Thank you, Borsoka, and congratulations! This is a good article. — Kpalion (talk) 10:01, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
What were the negative consequences of the Vlach peasants' Orthodox religion in Hungary? They did not pay the tithe, while Catholic peasants were obliged to pay this 10% ecclesiastic tax. (Vlachs were only obliged to pay the tithe if they settled in a land abandoned by Catholic peasants.) The Vlachs paid only the fiftieth (that is a 2% tax), while Hungarian and Saxon peasants the ninth (a 10% tax). Borsoka ( talk) 16:08, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
The voivodes presided over the noblemen's general assemblies, which were annually held at a meadow near Torda (Turda).[7][6] The Transylvanian noblemen were exempted from taxation in 1324.[8][9] They were also granted the right to administer justice to the peasants living in their estates in 1342.[8][10] The prelates acquired the same right in their domains in the second half of the 14th century.[10] From the early 15th century, the voivodes rarely visited Transylvania, leaving the administration of the counties to their deputies, the vice-voivodes.[5][7]
Since we are discussing WP:DUE, I think the entire background section would benefit from a rewrite. Seraphim System ( talk) 19:41, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
The article may have been reviewed (and based on WP:GF), but as long as the content added by Borsoka can not be immediately verified according with the original sources (as already mentioned during the reviewing process, especially those regarding the offline Hungarian language sources), it is hard to say how much of this article is copy-paste with original text, carefully selected by Borsoka from the context. More over, each time I indicated direct links of the references cited (to be accesible by anyone), Borsoka deleted them. It seems that Borsoka has preferences only for authors, or texts that, in his personal opinion, can be cited. If the text serves his biased opinon, than everything is OK; if not, the content is cataloged as not relevant or WP:PARAPHRASE. All different sources witch present other perspectives than his opinion are worthless and must be eliminated with any price, even by the violation of the Wikipedia basic policies ( WP:LOP). ( Rgvis ( talk) 08:45, 13 November 2017 (UTC))
All the information that I have added and I will add is based on reliable and verifiable sources, with the intention to bring real balance in the content's quality (as stipulated by the Wikipedia main policies: WP:CCPOL). ( Rgvis ( talk) 13:13, 13 November 2017 (UTC))
If you do not want to cooperate, I try to summarize what you want to add, also providing my comments.
It was already explained (and, not only by me). User:Borsoka, please try at least to behave as a civilized Wikipedia citizen. Thank you. ( Rgvis ( talk) 18:38, 20 November 2017 (UTC))
Well, for you, the history of the Romanian Transylvanians might be a "fringe theory", but not for an impartial editor of Wikipedia. You know very well that editors do not have to make judgments about historical facts, as they are seen by various historians (even if we like it or not). Anyway, Wikipedia is an ongoing project, and each article is perfectible (whenever and as long as it is needed). ( Rgvis ( talk) 13:17, 21 November 2017 (UTC))
Note: Greetings everyone. A request for a third opinion has been declined, as there are more than two editors involved in this discussion already. I would recommend that you pursue another path such as dispute resolution, or perhaps a Request for Comment. Thank you, and good luck. CThomas3 ( talk) 19:11, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
Instead of adding tags without explanation, you should explain your concerns. Please remember, I sought comments from WikiProject Romania more than a month ago ( [24]), but no other editors have expressed similar concerns. Borsoka ( talk) 04:14, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
@ Rgvis:, the article was significantly modified ( [28]) fully in accordance with the recently closed discussion at the relevant noticeboard ( [29]). Even Sedlar's marginal POV (which cannot be substantiated by examples) was mentioned in the article. Why do you think that the article is unbalanced and its neutrality is disputed? Borsoka ( talk) 11:27, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
This is just a reminder or restatement. There was a request for dispute resolution at the dispute resolution noticeboard. After some effort to identify what the issues were with regard to non-neutrality, I closed the dispute resolution with no conclusion because the editors did not consistently respond in a timely manner. A request was then made by one of the editors for formal mediation, but it was declined because the other editor, the one who primarily complains that the article is not neutral, did not respond. Complaining that an article is not neutral but only responding sporadically to third-party requests to facilitate compromise is not productive.
User:Rgvis - At this point, it appears that your complaints are empty complaints and should be ignored. If you think that the article needs improvement, you have to help improve it, or accept that other editors will ignore you. Robert McClenon ( talk) 01:51, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Transylvanian peasant revolt article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Transylvanian peasant revolt has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
November 19, 2017. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the
Transylvanian peasant revolt broke out after the
local bishop, having suspended the collection of the
tithe for years, demanded the arrears in a single payment? | ||||||||||
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on February 2, 2018, and February 2, 2020. |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is severely biased. Stating that the revolters were a "group of Romanian peasants" is historically incorrect. As it stands, this article is just repeating the position of Ceausescu-era Romanian historiography. When I have time, I will write a more detailed account of the revolt. Scott Moore 09:47, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
To be more specific about inaccuracies:
- the revolt did not start at Bobâlna
- it was not a group consisting only of Romanian peasants who revolted. The revolt was led by a Hungarian petty noble, three Hungarian peasants, a Romanian peasant and a burgher. Those revolting included both Romanian and Hungarian serfs, as well as burghers.
- The Unio Trium Nationum was not signed just by nobles (the nobles were just one of three Estates in the Union).
Scott Moore 09:59, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I agree wholeheartedly. In addition, it should not be called "Bobâlna revolt"--the name in common use at the time was "Bábolna", with the Romanian form only becoming official after Trianon. I strongly suggest correcting the name. 4.231.162.235 08:13, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
Another necessary correction is the replacement of the phrase: "While the Hungarians, the Hungarian-speaking Székelys and the Saxons formed sedentary communities, living in villages and towns, most Vlachs were shepherds, herding their flocks between the mountains and the lowlands." First of all, the allegation is highly offensive against the Romanian population of Transylvania - which where already a sedentary population centuries before the arrival of the above mentioned communities. Another issue is the source of this allegation: a dubious work, published in a "Slavic" review by an extremist so-called "historian". Moreover, the article does not see the clear ethnic aspect of this revolt and is insisting only on the so called social aspect of it. The article reminds me the (ideological) history lessons from the communist history manuals for school children, during Ceausescu regime. I suggest the urgent revision or replacement of this highly un-professional article. Articles like that are lowering of the level of Wikipedia as a whole. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Transylvanian ( talk • contribs) 11:30, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
You are right in affirming that some Romanians were involved in animal husbandry. BUT the Romanians are not a nomadic population. The large majority of them live in sedentary communities and only a small fraction of the population is involved in transhumance (seasonal migration of the herds between mountain and lowland pastures). Here are some reliable historical sources, by Transylvanian, local, unbiased historians: - "Romanians and Hungarians from the 9th to the 14th Century. The Genesis of the Transylvanian Medieval State", Cluj-Napoca, Center for Transylvanian Studies, 1996
- "A Social History of Romanian Space.From the Beginning of Dacian state until the rise of Modernity", Mircea Brie, University of Oradea, Romania, 2005
This was the first major peasant revolt in the history of Hungary. The revolt is called "Budai Nagy Antal Revolt" by Hungarians and "Bobalna Revolt" by Romanians. Google search gave
I suggest that the article is renamed accordingly. -- KIDB 14:11, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
@ Norden1990:, would you look at the title of the article dedicated to the revolt (I mean, Joseph Held's work)? I think the previous title is more in line with WP:Name. Borsoka ( talk) 17:39, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Transylvanian peasant revolt. 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) 09:05, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Kpalion ( talk · contribs) 11:35, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
Hi
Borsoka, I will be reviewing the article. Looks very well after the first reading. Specific comments coming soon! —
Kpalion
(talk) 11:35, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
An interesting and well-written article with ample citations. I have no access to the sources so assuming good faith. Some issues need to be addressed, though, especially regarding neutrality, clarity and breadth of coverage. If there are any suggestions you don't agree with, please discuss. — Kpalion (talk) 12:52, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
Borsoka, thank you for the changes made so far. I will put the nomination on hold for two weeks to let you expand the Aftermath section and resolve the copyright status of the stained-glass photograph. And, possibly, to get a response from Transylvanian. If you're done sooner or wish to extend the on-hold period, please let me know. — Kpalion (talk) 11:18, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
Borsoka, thanks for addressing my comments. There are still two minor issues, but once they're sorted out, it's good to go. — Kpalion (talk) 16:54, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
Thank you, Borsoka, and congratulations! This is a good article. — Kpalion (talk) 10:01, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
What were the negative consequences of the Vlach peasants' Orthodox religion in Hungary? They did not pay the tithe, while Catholic peasants were obliged to pay this 10% ecclesiastic tax. (Vlachs were only obliged to pay the tithe if they settled in a land abandoned by Catholic peasants.) The Vlachs paid only the fiftieth (that is a 2% tax), while Hungarian and Saxon peasants the ninth (a 10% tax). Borsoka ( talk) 16:08, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
The voivodes presided over the noblemen's general assemblies, which were annually held at a meadow near Torda (Turda).[7][6] The Transylvanian noblemen were exempted from taxation in 1324.[8][9] They were also granted the right to administer justice to the peasants living in their estates in 1342.[8][10] The prelates acquired the same right in their domains in the second half of the 14th century.[10] From the early 15th century, the voivodes rarely visited Transylvania, leaving the administration of the counties to their deputies, the vice-voivodes.[5][7]
Since we are discussing WP:DUE, I think the entire background section would benefit from a rewrite. Seraphim System ( talk) 19:41, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
The article may have been reviewed (and based on WP:GF), but as long as the content added by Borsoka can not be immediately verified according with the original sources (as already mentioned during the reviewing process, especially those regarding the offline Hungarian language sources), it is hard to say how much of this article is copy-paste with original text, carefully selected by Borsoka from the context. More over, each time I indicated direct links of the references cited (to be accesible by anyone), Borsoka deleted them. It seems that Borsoka has preferences only for authors, or texts that, in his personal opinion, can be cited. If the text serves his biased opinon, than everything is OK; if not, the content is cataloged as not relevant or WP:PARAPHRASE. All different sources witch present other perspectives than his opinion are worthless and must be eliminated with any price, even by the violation of the Wikipedia basic policies ( WP:LOP). ( Rgvis ( talk) 08:45, 13 November 2017 (UTC))
All the information that I have added and I will add is based on reliable and verifiable sources, with the intention to bring real balance in the content's quality (as stipulated by the Wikipedia main policies: WP:CCPOL). ( Rgvis ( talk) 13:13, 13 November 2017 (UTC))
If you do not want to cooperate, I try to summarize what you want to add, also providing my comments.
It was already explained (and, not only by me). User:Borsoka, please try at least to behave as a civilized Wikipedia citizen. Thank you. ( Rgvis ( talk) 18:38, 20 November 2017 (UTC))
Well, for you, the history of the Romanian Transylvanians might be a "fringe theory", but not for an impartial editor of Wikipedia. You know very well that editors do not have to make judgments about historical facts, as they are seen by various historians (even if we like it or not). Anyway, Wikipedia is an ongoing project, and each article is perfectible (whenever and as long as it is needed). ( Rgvis ( talk) 13:17, 21 November 2017 (UTC))
Note: Greetings everyone. A request for a third opinion has been declined, as there are more than two editors involved in this discussion already. I would recommend that you pursue another path such as dispute resolution, or perhaps a Request for Comment. Thank you, and good luck. CThomas3 ( talk) 19:11, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
Instead of adding tags without explanation, you should explain your concerns. Please remember, I sought comments from WikiProject Romania more than a month ago ( [24]), but no other editors have expressed similar concerns. Borsoka ( talk) 04:14, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
@ Rgvis:, the article was significantly modified ( [28]) fully in accordance with the recently closed discussion at the relevant noticeboard ( [29]). Even Sedlar's marginal POV (which cannot be substantiated by examples) was mentioned in the article. Why do you think that the article is unbalanced and its neutrality is disputed? Borsoka ( talk) 11:27, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
This is just a reminder or restatement. There was a request for dispute resolution at the dispute resolution noticeboard. After some effort to identify what the issues were with regard to non-neutrality, I closed the dispute resolution with no conclusion because the editors did not consistently respond in a timely manner. A request was then made by one of the editors for formal mediation, but it was declined because the other editor, the one who primarily complains that the article is not neutral, did not respond. Complaining that an article is not neutral but only responding sporadically to third-party requests to facilitate compromise is not productive.
User:Rgvis - At this point, it appears that your complaints are empty complaints and should be ignored. If you think that the article needs improvement, you have to help improve it, or accept that other editors will ignore you. Robert McClenon ( talk) 01:51, 10 March 2018 (UTC)