Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Hungary/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:WikiProject Hungary. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

This page is an Archive of the discussions from WikiProject Hungary talk page (Discussion page). (January 2008 - December 2008) - Please Do not edit!

Template

This template should be first finalized then added to articles whithin the scope of the project. It might be possible to get a bot to do it later ,first we can manually add it to the few most important articles.

Do we want to add assessment "hooks" to it first or wait until later? --Stacey Doljack Borsody (talk) 18:28, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes assessment would be nice It shouldn't be that hard to add it will try to figure it out. As far as I've seen other wikiprojects have tons of "unassessed" articles even long after they have the ability to assess them it can wait and even then should be done basicly to highlight our most important articles. Hobartimus (talk) 18:40, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I can probably help with this. Been learning advanced templating. --Stacey Doljack Borsody (talk) 19:27, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Just an update, all the assessment bot stuff is set up now (look for 'Hungary' at Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Index). I just need to add the assessment categories into the template. --Stacey Doljack Borsody (talk) 17:25, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

That'd be great. go ahead and add the assessment functionality if you can. do you know of anything else that's on templates of this type that should be up there? Hobartimus (talk) 19:37, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Also I think soon it will be time to move out the previous discussion from the council page. The people who signed as intrested there should be added to participants. I will watch this page so we can discuss stuff relating to the project. Later it could be even integrated with the notice board as in the case of Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland Hobartimus (talk) 18:45, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Maybe we could also add an optional to-do list to the banner?Zoli79 (talk) 17:35, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Did you see how that's done technically (do you know another wikiproject that uses something similar)? Hobartimus (talk) 17:38, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Please look at the banner. It is based somewhat upon the WikiProject Central Asia banner. I'm not sure what is meant by adding a to-do list to the banner. If you have an example from another WikiProject, let me know. I don't recommend cluttering up the banner though. --Stacey Doljack Borsody (talk) 18:14, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

It's getting there. Most wikiprojects rate articles according to 2 categories, importance and quality. I don't know if simply taking the syntax off of let's say the Serbia project banner would produce a working system. Hobartimus (talk) 18:29, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject_Romania has a banner like that. Maybe it's disturbing putting such a large banner everywhere, but if it's optional, than it could be useful in some articles. Zoli79 (talk) 18:46, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

The to-do part is a good idea but it should be optional. We only need it when there is something to be written there which I guess might be only like 20-50 cases and in a 1000 other articles it will be nothing there. I don't know if it's possible to make it optional and only display it if something is written inside? Hobartimus (talk) 18:48, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I looked at a WikiProject Romania page and checked out Wikipedia:To-do_list. The purpose of it seems to accomplish the same thing as the WP1.0 optional "with comments" category and both work in somewhat the same way (an extra page under the main article). "Optionally, an article may have a comments subpage, like Talk:The Beatles/Comments. In order for the bot to transclude those comments in the list, a "with comments" category is needed that should be placed in Category:Wikipedia 1.0 assessments (example). To autodetect subpages with comments, the project template needs to contain a certain code; that will be discussed at the next step." See Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Using_the_bot. I recommend using the bot, but I bet the todo template could be (or already is!) modified to display the Article/Comments page on the talk page and achieve the same thing. --Stacey Doljack Borsody (talk) 18:58, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

So if nothing is in the /comments subpage, nothing will be displayed? That would be ideal. Hobartimus (talk) 19:07, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

More like if the subpage doesn't exist, nothing is displayed. Right now our banner just has a link to the comments page. --Stacey Doljack Borsody (talk) 19:21, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

In this case I support the inclusion of the to-do list. If it's used great it can be good and useful in some cases, and if it's not used on an article and the subpage is empty it won't take up space. Hobartimus (talk) 19:41, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I just want to get something clarified before I proceed further. There are three options for us. 1) Use only a Comments subpage. 2) Use only a todo subpage. 3) Use both a Comments and a todo subpage. Personally, I support options 1 or 3. All will be hidden by default. --Stacey Doljack Borsody (talk) 22:57, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't really know all seem fine to me, I'll support whichever you pick. Hobartimus (talk) 23:04, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Could you show an example for each? I'm a bit lost. Zoli79 (talk) 23:25, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I should rephrase the question. This is regarding process. It looks like most projects use the Comments subpage for comments on quality assessments while the todo subpage is used for a task list. Anything written on the Comments subpage gets included by the assessment bot onto the "by quality" page (ie. Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/The Beatles articles by quality). Anything written on the todo subpage doesn't display anywhere but on the banner todo list. So what do we want for our process? We can do option 1 and use the Comments subpage for all our comments (both task list and quality assessment). Or we can do option 3, which is where we want to keep task list and quality assessments on separate pages. Or option 2, we don't care about or need the bot to transclude comments onto Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Hungary articles by quality. I'd prefer option 1 and use the Comments subpage for both a todo list and quality assessment comments since we're not creating half a dozen subpages (that would need to be loaded by the banner in order to display them on the talk page). Then the bot will make a nice page for us where we can get a look at all pages with those comments. The only drawback to option 1 would be that other projects also using that feature might not like to see a todo list on the Comments subpage. I hope that clears things up, but I'm afraid I'm muddying the waters more. Just try to think about what process you want to follow. --Stacey Doljack Borsody (talk) 18:48, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

In option 1, others might get mixed up, when commenting the page. Otherwise, it sounds fine. Zoli79 (talk) 22:17, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I think the banner will be more accepted if the to-do lists really only shows up only when it's really needed when something intresting is written on the sub-page. That said I trust your implementation and we can always change the banner later every instance will be modified on all pages I think. We could try to focus on the technical aspect of getting the banner on talk pages I think there must be tools that allow this to be done relatively easily. Hobartimus (talk) 22:12, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Here is what is done so far: The test template and What the template looks like when there's a comments subpage. Functional but not yet pretty. --Stacey Doljack Borsody (talk) 00:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Looks good to me. As long as nothing is displayed when the page is empty (most of the time) It'll be fine and can be improved later also. Hobartimus (talk) 17:43, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Ran into a bit of a mystery. If the Comments subpage has a heading in it, transcluding that page into the template causes the Talk page TOC to display in the template. You can see this example here [1]. But for some reason, it isn't doing this on Talk:Hungary and I'm not sure why. Anyone with more experience in this area know how to have the TOC not display in the transcluded area? --Stacey Doljack Borsody (talk) 02:22, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

WP:TOC says the Table of Contents can be disabled using __NOTOC__ "''(for an article) the magic word __NOTOC__ (with two underscores on either side of the word) is added in the edit box''" . Hobartimus (talk) 03:06, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Right, but that turns it off for the whole page. I'm wondering if there is a way to do it just for the transcluded contents. --Stacey Doljack Borsody (talk) 03:33, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I haven't found a good solution for this yet (maybe none exists). Other templates I've seen in use have the same problem. The workarounds for this are 1) do not use a heading in the Comments subpage; it is best to make a list anyway for that data and 2) force the table of contents to display in the right location on the affected talk page by using __TOC__. --Stacey Doljack Borsody (talk) 18:43, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Overlaping Projects and multiple banners

Since there are many Hungary related WikiProjects, I am a bit condfused. For example, if a page fits into Hungarian culture, should it be added to Wikipedia:WikiProject Hungarian culture and this project also? Wouldn't that be redundant? Since the Hungarian culture project isn't that active, couldn't it be reduced to a workgroup within the Hungary project? This way one banner would be enough for each page. Zoli79 (talk) 20:18, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes the culture project is a bit inactive we should contact the editors the other projects are completely inactive. One Hungary-related banner is more than enough for now per page, but most pages do not have even one. It can be reduced to a work group or task force but we have to contact and ask if any members are still active. For now the easier solution is not to tag pages which already are in Hungarian Culture. There are lots of pages that need tagging but tagging even can be automated to some degree (for example use a program that puts a banner on every talk page which is in Category:Hungary etc). i'm looking into it. Hobartimus (talk) 20:25, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

OK. If I run into an untagged Hungarian culture related page, then should I: A) tag it to Hungarian cultre, B) tag it to Hungary? In case B it might has to be retagged (or at least extended with some specifications) a couple weeks later, if we have a culture workgroup. In case A a bot could easily convert it to the other group. (I guess...) Zoli79 (talk) 20:34, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

If untagged tag it to Hungary we will resolve the dual stuff I just don't know how yet :) It's not the end of the world if it gets tagged with both even. Hobartimus (talk) 20:38, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

If a page is untagged, I suggest tagging it with our banner (if we plan on being more active that is...) --Stacey Doljack Borsody (talk) 20:40, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Assessment

The assessment bot stuff is set up now and a test run of the WP1.0 bot looks good. We should set up a Wikipedia:WikiProject Hungary/Assessment page now.

--Stacey Doljack Borsody (talk) 18:24, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

{{WikiProject Hungary|class=???| importance=???}} Seems to work just fine. Highest importance to be given is 'TOP'. Hobartimus (talk) 18:44, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Who wants to do assessments? I started doing some yesterday, but it is my first time. I'm just looking for folks interested in forming consensus on how to grade Hungary articles. --Stacey Doljack Borsody (talk) 18:09, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes I was thinking about the same thing some categories could be grouped together. For example counties, county seats and other well-defined groups could have a standard importance reating like "all counties" mid. A very strong alternative is intrest based approach for example "all articles over 5000 are mid" [2] or similar. If I can finally figure out some easier solution I'll banner up quite a few articles more. Hobartimus (talk) 20:46, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm struggling somewhat with the importance definitions, namely what really are the differences between "general area of knowledge", "specific knowledge", and "highly specific knowledge"? For example, is Hungarian beer a general area of knowledge or a specific area of knowledge? Perhaps it is specific to Cuisine of Hungary? Borsod Brewery is perhaps then highly specific knowledge. But I don't think somehow that same model can be applied to say counties versus towns. In some ways the towns should also be Mid. I guess most articles would end up being Mid, huh? And what would be consider to be of Top importance/priority? What forms the basis of all our information (would Cuisine of Hungary qualify as Top or High since it is the basis of all Hungarian food-related knowledge)? So that's why I bring up this discussion. --Stacey Doljack Borsody (talk) 21:10, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh that interest-based approach is handy. Maybe we should incorporate that since it gives us a good idea of which articles of "ours" people like to look at. --Stacey Doljack Borsody (talk) 21:14, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I think a good approach to this is to identify a hadful of most important articles (top/high) first. Hobartimus (talk) 21:18, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

older WikiProject Hungary discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals

Description: an expansion of the now-inactive and very small-scoped Wikipedia:WikiProject Historical Hungarian counties, using the original framework but expanding to include other things in this populous and unique European nation. There is an existing Wikipedia:WikiProject Hungarian culture, the national project would seek to cover other topics-politics, biography, flora and fauna... Chris 08:01, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Shortcut

Shortcut should be WP:HUN or WP:HU? Maybe both. Squash Racket (talk) 06:30, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Yea both propably. Hobartimus (talk) 17:46, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

WP:HU seems better for me. --ZimmyHun (talk) 17:15, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Template take 2

Check out Template:Stargateproject. Does anyone want other little links or features on the WPHUN banner like on the Stargate banner? I'll add the Hungary portal also. --Stacey Doljack Borsody (talk) 03:24, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

The functionality is extremely cool. Just don't know what's the group of important links that should be there. Hobartimus (talk) 07:10, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Slovakian disputes

To try and get a handle on the wide variety of disputes involving Hungarian and Slovakian editors, I have created a subpage in my userspace to try and centralize discussions. This is an experiment, as it is neither a mediation nor a Request for Comment, nor is it a random chat. I will be moderating the discussion as an administrator, and enforcing rules of civility to minimize disruption. This is an experiment, as part of my participation in the ArbCom-appointed Working group on ethnic and cultural edit wars. I encourage all interested parties to post any concerns that they have on the talkpage, be they about disputed articles, or the behavior of other editors. You may also wish to simply add the page to your watchlist: User talk:Elonka/Hungarian-Slovakian experiment. Thanks, El on ka 06:54, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Translation help?

Hi, maybe some of you can help me here: Antlions are called hangyalesők in Hungarian. Hangya is "ant", that's easy. But what is -lesők? Google is unable to help me. If you can, leave me a note. Thanks! Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 16:35, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

"Lesni" means "to ambush". Probably "anthunter" would be an acceptable translation of the Hungarian term. Squash Racket (talk) 16:54, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Hungarian people article

I'm tired of trying to keep the Hungarian people article NPOV alone, at least it seems I've been quite alone with it in the past two weeks. Would be great if some more people watched it. Caius (talk) 11:18, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Draft Guidelines for Lists of companies by country - Feedback Requested

Within WikiProject Companies I am trying to establish guidelines for all Lists of companies by country, the implementation of which would hopefully ensure a minimum quality standard and level of consistency across all of these related but currently disparate articles. The ultimate goal is the improvement of these articles to Featured List status. As a WikiProject that currently has one of these lists within your scope, I would really appreciate your feedback! You can find the draft guidelines here. Thanks for your help as we look to build consensus and improve Wikipedia! - Richc80 (talk) 21:42, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

The relevant list is here List_of_companies_of_Hungary heh it could use some work, true. Hobartimus (talk) 01:20, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Hungarian witch- and vampire trials

Hello! I am most interested in the subject of witch trials, and have contributed myself with articles in that subject. I think there should be cases representing all countries here on wikipedia. Most countries are now in some way represented, but Hungary is lacking. This is truly a shame, as, judging by the little I have heard, the Hungarian witch trials was quite interesting, as they also involved accusations about vampyrism. There was to have ben a large series of witch trials in Hungary in 1738. I don't know if this is true. Unfortunately, i can't read Hungarian, and the information on the net seems small. Does anyone know anything about this? If anyone here are interested in the subject, I think this would be intereting to read about. I would be grateful for just a stub article, or a name to google. --Aciram (talk) 11:47, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

There is stuff relating to this, which is the article that would cover this? Hobartimus (talk) 18:04, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

You could always insert it in the articles about the witch hunt and, (if it includes it), the articles about vampires, but it could be difficult to insert it properly. The easiest way is to make it into it's own stub-article (or more than stub if you want of course!) under the name of the person or the case, for example "(name of place) witch trial". Don't hesitate to make a stub, it would always be expanded by someone else if you don't want to write very much. If there is an English-speaking page on the net about this, please recomend it! It would be helpful just to have words to google (names, years and places). Thank you in advance! --Aciram (talk) 12:46, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Some stuff I found on the net (it may be questionable) relating to the 1728 last major trial (it's only 1 digit off from your date of 1738). It supposedly took place at Szeged and 13 people were burned for supposedly causing blizzards instead of normal rain to fall. Supposedly the end of such trials in Hungary is 1755 when they were outlawed the start date being 1565. However what is sure and was very significant was that one Hungarian king Könyves Kálmán declared that "there are no witches" very early around 1100ish well ahead of his time. Hobartimus (talk) 13:54, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for that date and place! I managed to get a bit of information from Google using that! Could you give me the specific link you used? I'll keep on google on 1656 and 1755. Yes, that was an interesting declaration from Könyves Kálmán, though logic if you now a bit more; the witch trials was in fact very uncommon in the middle ages, it was not until the 16th century that they became more frequent. You are very helpful! --Aciram (talk) 14:57, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 21:44, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Articles flagged for cleanup

Currently, 1155 articles are assigned to this project, of which 188, or 16.3%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 14 July 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. More than 150 projects and work groups have already subscribed, and adding a subscription for yours is easy - just place a template on your project page.

If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page; I'm not watching this page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 15:34, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Box or note for Hungarian name order

I thought it might be a good idea to make a small infobox on top of Hungarian cultural or other articles, where Hungarian people are in the focus. In this box there would be a short note in which we would inform the readers, that in their original form, Hungarian names are in reverse order. I think this is important for the readers to know, (for example: using exact expression in google search) but it's never important enough from the articles point of view to write it down. The text could be something like this:
This article has Hungarian name Hungarian names in focus. Please note that Hungary is the only European country to use eastern name order, meaning that family name (last name) comes first, than follows the given name (first name).
For example:
English: Lajos Kossuth
Hungarian: Kossuth Lajos.
This article contains names in western name order, as supposed to in English language.

The box could be in the upper right corner of each article. It could be used in Hungarian biographies also. I think its a bit more elegant than stating it somewhere in the text. Any oppinions? Zoli79 (talk) 11:55, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Use this template:{{Eastern name order|Rubik Ernő}}, it will read like that:.

Cheers, Squash Racket (talk) 12:19, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! This solves biographies, but how about more general articles? Zoli79 (talk) 12:44, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

You want to mention that in every single article that contains Hungarian names? Squash Racket (talk) 03:11, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Not every single one, but in some cases: yes, it would be nice, if I had an option like that. For example I would mention it here: Hungarian comics, since none of the people mentioned in it has their own biography article. And I think many people read it, who don't have much idea about other cultural aspects of Hungary. Well, it was just an idea... :) Zoli79 (talk) 12:52, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Which flag?

Hi WikiProject Hungary. Which flag is the correct one to use in relation to Hungarian sporting events (specifically the Hungarian Grand Prix) between 1986 and 1989? Is it or ? Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 09:35, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

I find that the first one was the official flag post 57, however the second one is the flag with the correct coat of arms for 57-89 and I guess it was sometimes used when they added the CoA to the flag. Hobartimus (talk) 12:17, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Hungary

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 23:20, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Image needs replacement - Csobánka

Hello all...

An image used in the article, specifically Image:Csobanka from oszoly rock.jpg, has a little bit of a licensing issue. The image was uploaded back when the rules around image uploading were less restrictive. It is presumed that the uploader was willing to license the picture under the GFDL license but was not clear in that regard. As such, the image, while not at risk of deletion, is likely not clearly licensed to allow for free use in any future use of this article. If anyone has an image that can replace this, or can go take one and upload it, it would be best.

and also, Image:Csobanka village at summer.jpg and Image:Csobanka village at winter.jpg

You have your mission, take your camera and start clicking.--Jordan 1972 (talk) 00:59, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Discussion about Holocaust

Our agreement is that Holocaust scholars are speaking about "only" 6 Holocaust Extermination camps (stupid definition but ....). Our disagreement is about creation of sub section other extermination camps. With knowledge that there has been many others extermination camps and sites (I know 7 of them) question is: Will we create subsection in The Holocaust template for this camps ? Can you please hear your comments about this question in section Non involved users because maybe even Hungary will have place in rewriten template (events in 1944)?--Rjecina (talk) 15:30, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Help request: 181 Hungary-related articles needing geographical coordinates

Based on a search of Wikipedia's articles related to Hungary, I've found some articles that I believe are about places in Hungary, and could usefully have geographical coordinates added.

The articles in question are listed in Category:Hungary articles missing geocoordinate data. At the time of writing, some examples included:

...and there are many more, as well. At the time of posting this notice, there were 181 articles in this category needing geographical coordinates.

Why add coordinates?

By adding coordinates, a Wikipedia reader can easily view the location on a street map, nautical chart, topographic map, by satellite photo, realtime weather map, and in many other ways. Coordinate data makes an article eventually appear in various services such as Google Maps' Wikipedia overlay, Google Earth, and Wikipedia's own internal map service. Coordinate data also helps readers looking for geographically-based data, such as locations near a reference point, or related information.

How can I do it?

The articles are all marked with {{coord missing}} tags, which need to be replaced with {{coord}} tags that contain the location's latitude/longitude coordinates; or you might be able to add coordinates to an existing infobox. You can find out how to do this at the Wikipedia:Geocoding how-to for WikiProject members.

Please let me know if this is useful, or if I can help in any way. -- The Anome (talk) 22:35, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

George Julian Zolnay

I've started the article George Julian Zolnay. However, all the various schools he went to while in Austria-Hungary are a confusing mess. So is that three different source say the Romania king gave him differing honors. As he was Hungarian, I'm hoping someone here knows enough about him to help out. Thanks.--Gen. Bedford ^{his Forest} 20:46, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Can you give some quick pointers how can I check the sources that are cited in there, primarily source number three in the article. There is a mistake in there somewhere with the place of birth. Hobartimus (talk) 22:12, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

There should be links to the books cited to Google Books.--Gen. Bedford ^{his Forest} 22:17, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

I found an online cite, a little preview or snippet for his birthplace but you should review it if it differs from material that you have. Hobartimus (talk) 19:00, 13 November 2008 (UTC)