Talk:Hungarian–Ottoman Wars

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2021 and 18 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Metrboom13.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Mohacs

It would be nice to mention what had made the Sultan to be so hesitant to move further into Hungary right after defeating Luis's army (he did not believe that the Luis's army was really everything the kingdom was able to raise agaist him). You also forgot to mention what was the very important consequence of the defeat (the partitioning of Hungary into three states, one controlled by the Austrians, the other two by the Ottomans) and that there had been no 'native' king in Hungary since then. It is no less important to tell the reader that Hungary's campaigns against the Ottoman empire were all unsuccessful save for those of John of Hunyad, who was the only one in the military rank to sucessfully confront the Sultan. What was the leading cause of the fall of Hungary at Mohacs? Was not it the chaos during the reign of the Jagiello kings? The peasant revolt, brutally suppressed by Zapolya, probably did not help, either. Interestingly, Zapolya was a Croat and the Jagiellos Poles. Should be Zapolya blamed for the eventual fall of Hungary as he might want the crown for himself leaving Luis perish?

A black hole (talk) 11:08, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Last native Hungarian King was Stephen I of Hungary (ruler: 997-1038). Others were mixed with foreign imperial/royal dynasties. Zapolya's family wasn't just croatian, his mother has polish-german origin his father has minimum 3 ethnic origin. The Hungarian upper aristocracy was multi or supranational. --Celebration1981 (talk) 14:44, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Multiple issues

Mostly a matter of inappropriate tone. Poor English and some weaselish polemics. Attempting a minor clean-up. Ledenierhomme (talk) 09:25, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm affraid that you are not expert in this theme. Please stop the vandalisation of this topic. Ledenierhomme you are a French nationalist. --Celebration1981 (talk) 16:38, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Not so fast. Discuss these changes first. Gabr-el 23:56, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

French nationalist?! God this is tedious. "anti-Catholic bigot", "Irish Catholic nationalist", "Marxist", "Republican extremist" (whatever the hell that is), "anti-Turkic" and now "French nationalist". Apparently I am a partisan of virtually every nationality, ethnicity, and religion I edit on. I'm working my way around the globe. (I must be quite strange you would agree, to be all these things, seeing as I am an agnostic Australian of mixed Northern European heritage :-)....) - Ledenierhomme (talk) 05:44, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Ok, calm down sir. You keep changing this article, even though you have:

1) Failed to highlight what needs to be changed 2) Failed to wait for a discussion or response 3) You have not shown yourself to be mature in continuously changing the article to your private beliefs, which you have not expressed in a rational discussion.

Further edits and I'll ask an admin to intervene. Wikipedia has rules of etiquette - you don't just change whatever you want whenever you want; especially if another user is demanding a rational explanation and discussion of them. Gabr-el 01:36, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Not sure why user "Gabr-el" keeps reverting my edits. There is no agenda, merely cleaning up informal language, as should be obvious to anyone. Still a long way to go, I've only got to the first section. - Ledenierhomme (talk) 11:15, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Maybe if you acted like a civilized person and discussed, I wouldn't revert your edits. I am informing an admin of your behavior. Gabr-el 02:45, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

User: Gabr-el, please adhere to WP:CIVIL. What exactly is it that you are objecting to? Ledenierhomme (talk) 06:06, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

1) Though you are encouraged to be bold, you should discuss your changes first preferably if they are going to be controversial. 2) You are posting up numerous templates without even providing a discussion for their justification - where will users go to see this apparent discussion on the NPOV issue of this article? Gabr-el 01:22, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

File:Louis role.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

	An image used in this article, File:Louis role.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do?
	Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 11:28, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

League of Lezhe

Mehmed the Conqueror and His Time By Franz Babinger page 40, says:

“It was formerly belived that George Branković, responding to Murad's hopes in him, had blocked the mountain passes against George Castriota, who supposedly tried to come to the crusaders help with his Albanian troops. But recent research has shown this to be untrue.”

Also, Marin Barleti made up spurious correspondence of Skanderbeg with Vladislav II of Wallachia.

Based on above mentioned, I will delete League of Lezhe from the list of the Hungarian allies.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:52, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Hungary 1550.png Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Hungary 1550.png, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests September 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:34, 29 September 2011 (UTC)