- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: withdrawn by nominator, closed by BlueMoonset (talk) 19:39, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
Nominator has effectively withdrawn this by posting that they will not participate in the nomination process any further; closing as withdrawn.
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Stephen Bocskai
edit
Bocskai's statue in Geneva
... that in his last will, Stephen Bocskai (his statue on the Reformation Wall pictured) stated that "it will be necessary and expedient to have a Hungarian prince in Transylvania" as long as the Habsburgs rule Hungary? Source: "Transylvanians realized ... that the House of Habsburg would be unable to protect their distant country from the Turks... Once more the Transylvanians submitted to the Turks, belatedly and partly out of compulsion. Nevertheless, in Bocskai's time there was something new in the relationship between Transylvania and royal Hungary: the realization that the Hungarian Estates could profit from Transylvania. "As long as the Hungarian Crown is with a nation mightier than ours, with the German, ... it will be necessary and expedient to have a Hungarian prince in Transylvania ...", wrote Bocskai in his testament." (Barta, Gábor (1994). "The Emergence of the Principality and its First Crises (1526–1606)". In Köpeczi, Béla; Barta, Gábor; Bóna, István; Makkai, László; Szász, Zoltán; Borus, Judit (eds.). History of Transylvania. Akadémiai Kiadó. p. 299. ISBN 963-05-6703-2.)
- ALT1: ... that the Habsburgs' former supporter, Stephen Bocskai (his statue on the Reformation Wall pictured), decided to transform the Principality of Transylvania into the protector of the freedom of Royal Hungary against them? Source: ""István Bocskai, "[Sigismund Báthory's] hitherto pro-Habsburg adviser, retired to his own estate in the Partium, in Bihar county. The move brought Bocskai face to face with the ravages of the war, particularly the devastation inflicted by the constant passage of mercenary troops, and with the increasingly ugly characteristics of Habsburg rule. Bocskai began to think in terms of reorientating Transylvania towards the Turks and, with their support or at least acquiescence, making the Principality a base from which Hungary's independence might be regained. Rashly, Bocskai committed these thought to paper..." (Cartledge, Bryan (2011). The Will to Survive: A History of Hungary. C. Hurst & Co. p. 102. ISBN 978-1-84904-112-6.)
- Reviewed: Huang Xuhua
Improved to Good Article status by Borsoka (talk). Self-nominated at 15:33, 22 February 2018 (UTC).
Ineligible. As per WP:DYKRULES, "Articles that have featured (bold link) previously on DYK, or in a blurb on the main page's In the news, or On this day sections are ineligible." This article was featured on 29 December 2017 with a bold link, and therefore is ineligible. HaEr48 (talk) 05:36, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
HaEr48, for In the news or On this day, the bold link must be used in a blurb. The birth or death date bold links, not being part of a blurb, do not make a nomination ineligible. Please, continue your review. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:56, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
- @BlueMoonset: Thanks for the clarification. I suggest that WP:DYKRULES is updated to clarify this, because now the status of the bold non-blurb death links are not clear. I will do a complete review of this nomination soon. HaEr48 (talk) 21:46, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
The article is freshly made GA, long enough, within policy with regard to neutrality and references. No copyvio issues found. QPQ and image appear in order. As for the hook, while it is referenced, I suggest we find another hook. This hook is hard to understand for people unfamiliar with Hungary or Transylvania (especially visitors on the home page). Some guy says it's important to have a prince ruling a country from another country - and the relation between all these countries are not obvious. IMO, very un-enticing. It's also a bit on the long side, making it harder to parse. Do you have another idea for hook? HaEr48 (talk) 06:48, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
- Maybe something on his staunch Calvinism would have broader appeal (and also create a segue with the image)? Dahn (talk) 10:25, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
- Personally, I find the idea behind the hook rather interesting, and perhaps many other readers would, if they are somehow given the context -- what the hook means to say is that Bocskai wanted Transylvania to function as a "real" Hungarian state, and that he rejected the Hungary that had been reestablished by the Habsburgs. (This also ties with him being a Calvinist, while the Habsburgs were strongly Catholic.) I tried to propose a hook along these lines, that would reflect both the intent and what can be found and reviewed in one place in the text, but it's problematic as no quote other than Bocskai's own, as quoted in the original hook, really contains that story -- and his account is quite confusing (using "Germans" for Habsburgs etc.). Perhaps a summarizing and clearer quote from a modern historian could be added to that paragraph or the legacy section to clarify what Bocskai's geopolitics were, and we could then quote from that in an ALT here? Does for instance Gábor Barta have such summarizing marginalia to the Bocskai quote? Dahn (talk) 14:53, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
- HaEr48, thank you for your review. According to my own experiences, hooks that contain the word "Transylvania" entices readers to click and read. What about the new hook? Borsoka (talk) 04:49, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
- Well, the quoted source does not verify the ALT -- though the ALT is a fair reading from Bocskai's own words, Cartledge apparently says that Bocskai intended to chase out the Habsburgs with Turkish help, not merely that he wished to protect Royal Hungary from Habsburg abuse of power. There is even a conflict between the narratives in Barta et al and Cartledge, since Cartledge does not apparently say that Bocksai was compelled into anything when pondering an alliance with the Turk. Now, both core facts may be equally true and interesting, but one doesn't verify the other. (Also, the ALT really doesn't read well, it's clunky.) I would suggest making the ALT stick closer to Cartledge's wording, even replicating it in quotes, as in: ... that, having once supported Habsburg dominion over Hungary, Stephen Bocskai came to see his Principality of Transylvania as a "base from which Hungary's independence might be regained"? But as I mentioned before: hooks can only rely on quotes that are in the article, not just in the sources; Cartledge's quote is not in the article. Dahn (talk) 08:20, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
- Dahn's last suggestion, IMO, is better than either of the previous one, and supported by article and citations. The sentence flows linearly without having to parse too many things. And the relation between Habsburg, Hungary and Transylvania is more obvious here. If it's too long we can shorten the quoted part to just say "as a base to regain Hungary's independence", without quotation marks. Alternatively, we can leverage other facts, e.g. being the first Calvinist prince of Transylvania? HaEr48 (talk) 19:48, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
- HaEr48 Thank you, but concerning my ALT: the quote would have to be in the article text to be included in the hook. Currently, it is not: I just noticed it in the quoted excerpt from the source. If Borsoka agrees with my suggestion, s/he is best placed to add the quote in the text as well. Dahn (talk) 20:32, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
