Talk:Ajtony

Ajtony 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.
Review: June 9, 2016. (Reviewed version).

Serbia Low‑importance

	Serbia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Serbia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Serbia 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.SerbiaWikipedia:WikiProject SerbiaTemplate:WikiProject SerbiaSerbia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Bulgaria Low‑importance

	Bulgaria portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bulgaria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bulgaria 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.BulgariaWikipedia:WikiProject BulgariaTemplate:WikiProject BulgariaBulgaria articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Hungary Low‑importance

	Hungary portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hungary, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hungary 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.HungaryWikipedia:WikiProject HungaryTemplate:WikiProject HungaryHungary articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Romania Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Romania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Romania-related topics 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.RomaniaWikipedia:WikiProject RomaniaTemplate:WikiProject RomaniaRomania articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests :
- Help Romania reach at least GA-status
- Help History of Romania get WP:GOOD
- Request an article or create a missing one
Assess :
- Assess all articles tagged for this project that have not been assessed for quality
Cleanup :
- Review the Romania-related cleanup listing
- Normalize the use of "Northern Bukovina" (capitalized) and "Northern Bessarabia" (Bessarabian part of Chernivtsi Oblast) all over Wikipedia
Disambiguation :
- Disambiguate project articles and get points
Expand :
- Expand Postage stamps and postal history of Romania
Translate :
- Translate Romania-related articles from the Romanian Wikipedia
- Translate and keep in sync with the project versions in other languages: Projet:Roumanie (in French), Proiect:România (in Romanian), Проект:Румыния (in Russian)
Unreferenced : * Add more reference to FC CFR Timișoara.
Other :
- Make use in articles of the newly contributed images (about 5800!!) from the Wiki Loves Monuments Romania 2011 (WLM Romania external site)
- Review newly created Romania-related articles
- Check the articles needing expert attention or other work, and help with some of the items
- Create Awards for WikiProject Romania
- Contribute photos related to Romania at Commons:WikiProject Romania. Organize Romania related images on Commons. See also media-related tasks

European history Low‑importance

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe 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.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Middle Ages Low‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages 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.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography: Royalty and Nobility

	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 WikiProject Royalty and Nobility (assessed as Low-importance).

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by Miniapolis, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 20 December 2015.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

A fact from Ajtony appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 13 June 2016 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that according to the Long Life of Saint Gerard, the tongue of Ajtony was cut out after his death?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2016/June. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ajtony.

Wikipedia

The website[edit]

It will be fine with me to insert another website next to Samuil of Bulgaria#Other theories as long as it is not a news/portal site of a city. Please get a website from the Serbian academy of sciences or something of that sort. Mr. Neutron 16:22, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hunagrian POV vs Romanian POV - Please try to read the referred sources even if you are tired[edit]

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ahtum&action=historysubmit&diff=326546416&oldid=326486271

Borsoka, it is a matter of putting words into one's mouth. And I'm afraid it is not the first time you are doing this. Hungarian sources could say anything outrageous about the Romanian POV. It doesn't mean that the Romanian POV claims that, it only means that the Hungarian POV thinks that is what Romanian POV claims. And similarly in the opposite sense. Hungarian sources must be used to explain the Hungarian POV and Romanian sources to explain the Romanian POV. It is elementary common sense. Otherwise, NOPV is prejudiced from the start. I would appreciate if you could revisit also other articles where you have might done this. Dc76\^talk 15:26, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Dc76, please read the referred source which is Transylvania around A.D. 1000 written by Florin Curta (in: Urbańczyk, Przemysław (Editor): Europe around the year 1000; Wydawn. DiG, 2001; ISBN 978-837-1-8121-18). On page 144 he writes that "Romanian scholars see Ahtum as the last member of a native dynasty established in the early 900s by Glad, who is mentioned in the 13th century Gesta Hungarorum as opposing the invading Hungarians." Therefore, the sentence is based on the work of a Romanian scholar (i.e., Florin Curta); therefore, I do not understand your above remark. Similarly, could you please list your examples when Romanian authors' views are cited based on Hungarian sources in any of the edits I have made? Borsoka (talk) 18:39, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Empire of Samuil[edit]

Pakko, please stop with this nationalistic POV pushing. The older version of the map is more NPOV and present both wiews about character of empire of Samuil while your map present only one-sided Bulgarian view completelly ignoring valid views of Serbian, Croatian and Macedonian historians. Here is list of sources that show that usage of word "Macedonian" for empire of Samuil is valid and videly accepted:

Also, this article is mainly related to the history of Vojvodina and Banat and this is not a place where question whether empire of Samuil was Bulgarian or Macedonian should be resolved. It is better that this article have NPOV map in which both views are presented, not just one-sided nationalistic Bulgarian view. I hope that everybody can agree about that. 212.69.12.165 (talk) 15:18, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Panonian, you quote only sources from former Tito's Yugoslavia... They are not relevant. So read more about Samuil's Bulgaria on en.wiki... Best regards my friend! --Пакко (talk) 15:26, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, but I quote sources and it is not up to you to judge are they relevant or not. However, I propose compromise that both maps are used in the article with proper description on which sources are they based. Also, you cannot point to Wikipedia article as a source since we very well know that people can add just anything to Wikipedia articles. Certainly, the sole reason why aricle about empire of Samuil looks the way it looks is because Bulgarian and Greek editors in Wikipedia are more numerous than Macedonian ones so Macedonians cannot contest anti-Macedonian POV in proper way. 212.69.12.165 (talk) 17:56, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Move[edit]

I moved the page because use of "Ajtony" is clearly in majority. It has 6300 hits[1]as opposed to "Ahtum"(871 hits)[2] and "Achtum" (1530 hits)[3]. Fakirbakir (talk) 10:32, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Umm, looking at the "Ajtony" hits it rather looks like a substantial part of them are actually about other people. And "Ohtum" seems to deliver 2,230 hits. You could have discussed the move prior to actually carrying it out. It does not look justified to me. --Laveol ^T 12:24, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ajtony's 6300 hits are mainly about the historical person Ajtony. Do you suggest that we should use a less prevalent name? But you are right I should have discussed it before moving. Fakirbakir (talk) 13:08, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ajtony/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sainsf (talk · contribs) 09:18, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Will review. Cheers! Sainsf (talk · contribs) 09:18, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fairly well-written as always. Only a few comments: Sainsf (talk · contribs) 09:46, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Background

When you begin the article, I think it would be a good start to say "AD" though it is evident.
I think it is helpful to add something like "churchman" before Regino of Prüm, some readers may not wish to chase links to know who he was.
is the subject of scholarly debate I think it should be "a" and not "the"

In primary sources

"Florin Curta", "county" and "Gerard" are duplinks

In modern historiography

Who are László Makkai and Alexandru Madgearu?
Makkai is mentioned a second time but with his full name, only the last name will do. Likewise for Ioan Aurel Pop and Florin Curta.

Sainsf, thank you for your comprehensive review. Sorry for waiting so long, but I am quite busy in real life now. I made all the changes you suggested above, but I think "county" could remain a duplink (it is a quite special category in the context, and it is linked in the lead for the first time). I must be grateful to Miniapolis for the style of the article, because his/her copyedit highly improved its quality. Borsoka (talk) 04:10, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Very good. Indeed, I must thank the copyeditor for giving me such a beautiful article to read! I am happy to promote this. Cheers, Sainsf (talk · contribs) 05:25, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

undue[edit]

"....Ajtony's former duchy was not fully incorporated into the Kingdom of Hungary until the 13th century because frequent internal conflicts had enabled the Romanians to preserve their idea of a "Romanian country".... Is this for real? What does it mean "idea of a Romanian country"? We are talking about the 11th-12th centuries..... Fakirbakir (talk) 14:58, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is a quite strange theory, because a Romanian country without Romanians/Vlachs could hardly exist in Banat. However, the theory is proposed by one of the leading Romanian historians. Borsoka (talk) 16:00, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]