Talk:Košice

message: town vs city -- I guess calling Kosice a city rather than a town is better, since it's not a small place either by Slovakian or Central European standards. I usually use the word "city" for settlements that have more than 100,000 inhabitants. Also, if I'm correct, traditionally a settlement with a cathedral or university was called city, and Kosice definitely has a cathedral. (If it's Slovakia's 2nd largest city then I suppose it also has to have an university.) Alensha 22:05, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Town vs City

message: 250px|right|a map of Central Europe
"easternmost gothic cathedral in Europe" -- check Cathedral of Saint Michael, Cluj-Napoca. Cluj-Napoca is 46°47′N 23°34′E -- that should be eastern. ;-) (Virgo47)
:The article now states that it is the easternmost "in Central Europe", not the easternmost of all Europe. Lisa the Sociopath (talk) 22:15, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The online articles linked in the references section claim all of Europe, but that's probably wrong. Lisa the Sociopath (talk) 22:30, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Easternmost Gothic cathedral?

message: I would like to point to the ongoing discussion about the Kosice article at User talk:Juro. If more editors are interested in this issue (Kosice as an article spearate from Košice or a redirect to Košice), feel free to state your opinion here or in the original discussion. Tankred 18:12, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirect from Kosice?

message: Just to make thing easier for those who subvocalise, could we include phonetic pronunciations of both cities' names? Normally, I would recommend doing it on the individual pages, but as the town in the Czech Republic has no page... samwaltz 00:02, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pronunciation Request

message: Where do the data for the "Population in the past" section come from? Is there any source for these numbers? Tankred (talk) 00:18, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I can tell User:Juro has added that list (though in bit different form), as shown in this diff. To complicate matters, he is banned and so we can't tell from where he could take information.   So if we don't find adequate sourcing for the whole part, I'd suggest to remove this one. MarkBA what's up?/my mess 13:16, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, we should remove all the unsourced numbers from that list. Only 1910 and 1950 are referenced. Perhaps we can rewrite the section using these two years, but rather in good prose, without bullets. Tankred (talk) 16:07, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed. As a kind of "compensation" I've decided to include historical population. MarkBA what's up?/my mess 18:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Added referenced historical demographics. ilmari (talk) 06:06, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Citations?

message: Sure, the artistic image of St.Elisabeth Cathedral is gorgeous. However, this is the article about the town, not one building. Therefore I hope you agree the current picture represents the town better. The picture of Dome would be appropriate for the separated article about this beautiful cathedral which is still missing.--Oficeri (talk) 23:45, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Would you like if the article consisted about the cathedral? Your wish has already passed into the reality! Just take a glace at St. Elisabeth Cathedral--Nmate (talk) 15:43, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I am always for the panorama or skyline image in infobox but the Reprezentatívne Košice.jpg image is of rather poor quality, it is seriously oversaturated and of tiny resolution. It simply doesn't deserve to be in the infobox. So try finding an image that shows the city but that is of higher quality.--Avala (talk) 12:25, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Why I changed the main picture

message: Happenstance, did you come here to cause me a lot of chagrin?--Nmate (talk) 06:19, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No, not at all. Your use of IPA is entirely illogical - /Kɒʃʃɒ/ makes absolutely no sense. One of those letters doesn't even exist in the IPA, and the rest is actually unpronounceable by human vocal cords. May I ask where your problem with the table of city names lies? I find it quite informative and it is sourced by a book published by the Slovak Academy of Sciences. —what a crazy random happenstance 13:59, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  To the best of my knowledge: before the 20th century, this town had never ever been inhabited by significant Slovak population. I suggest gleaning the internet in order to prove that the town had a Slovak population as early as the 14th century because your source is scanty. However, I'd rather you fetched Engilsh sources instead of the Slovak ones, due to my bad experience with them.--Nmate (talk) 10:28, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I find it hard to believe a politically-independent national academy of sciences in any free country would publish anything of questionable or below-par academic standards. It would be suicidal of them to do so, they would be discredited immediately. On the other hand, any whackjob can prattle off anything he wants to on the Internet. There is absolutely no contest between the two. 'To the best of your knowledge' is the pivotal phrase here - your knowledge is not comprehensive. Neither is mine, which is why I defer to an academic source. —what a crazy random happenstance 15:53, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: But what if there are no Hungarian sources being able to reinforce what the Slovak sources are saying?--Nmate (talk) 18:22, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The question is not whether there are additional sources that confirm it, the question whether there are academic sources that refute it. To the best of my knowledge there aren't, and there is no reason not to give full faith and credit to the initial source. —what a crazy random happenstance 06:00, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

text: I like the table. It is based on two (2) scholarly publications, which are not very difficult to read, that are widely accepted as authoritative regarding the history of the names of various settlements in what is now Slovakia. Gocontributor 16:02, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

text: How is the fact relevant? A government need not recognise a language for the language to exist and be used, as is obvious. —what a crazy random happenstance 06:15, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you. We Hungarians have been using the name Kassa.--Nmate (talk) 06:55, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Splendid, in 1880 in Košice cca 50 percent of population were Hungarian and 33 percent were Slovaks - ie you were wrong in the previous statement. Alas there is no need for any hungarian sources to reinforce the statement of Slovak Academy Science which is considered even by Hungarian academy science to be reliable scientific institution, in other words it is realiable source and we don´t need any hungarian source to reinforce it. However if Hungarian academy of science, or whoever else would attack this statement and provide some other claims than there would a problem and a reason for this discussion, but it didn´t happen. Also I hope you do not suggest that we should remove all sources from Hungarian academy of science and Hungarian historians from all Hungary-related articles, am I correct? Because that would a LOT of work. --EllsworthSK (talk) 12:51, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

text: You are a very discerning man, certainly.--Nmate (talk) 07:09, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Purportedly, Happenstance and I are in dispute over content...

message: Please contact myself or another administrator when you've come to an agreement about your content dispute.--Tznkai (talk) 20:29, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, why not, however I stand my ground - the name table, as seen in the article, is well sourced by Slovak academy of science - it removal by Nmate is nothing more than vandalism and I see no, absolutely not single one, reason why should anyone look for the same table in something published by Hungarian academy of science, as Nmate proposed, that´s just utter non-sense. --EllsworthSK (talk) 20:59, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

text: A full page protect hardly seems necessary considering it is only one editor who keeps reverting against a consensus reached by several others. It ought to be used only very sparingly, and it should not have been used here. The fairly brusque comment was also uncalled for. —what a crazy random happenstance 16:37, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page protected 

message: This article has been excluded from the pending changes trial because there is lack of disruptive activity here that would justify applying any type of page protection here, specifically, semi-protection. If you think there is a need for this page to be protected, please make a request at WP:RFPP, as pages that are not candidates for page protection under current WP:PP is not to be protected under WP:PCP as well. 山本一郎 (会話) 03:12, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It was never going to get pending changes protection. PC is mainly to stop vandalism, not to add a new piece of ammunition to an edit war. I have now fully protected the article. GedUK  10:30, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pending Page Protection 

message: I've protected this page as it is currently the subject of an edit war. Please use the article talk page to reach agreement on whether the names section should stay in. Once consensus is agreed, it can be enforced, if necessary. GedUK  10:29, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It´s been more than a week since last edit on this talk-page so we can assume that agreement was reached. Please remove the lock. --EllsworthSK (talk) 14:47, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page protection 

message: Kosice has no nickname. Sometime, rarely  stupid adjective like town of tolerance (but Kosice is not more tolerant as other regions) is used but not as nicname. I am from Kosice, and I never heard about city of Rakoczi. Both are just rarely or never used fabulous adjectives but absolurly definitely not nickname.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.5.210.202 (talk) 09:49, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nick name

message: Today, Nmate refused to respect the guidelines  - WP:PLACE, even if I informed him 2 times about this policy. He switched the order of alternative names in the lead of the article about Košice and engaged into an edit war on this subject:   . According to the rule: "Relevant foreign language names (one used by at least 10% of sources in the English language or is used by a group of people which used to inhabit this geographical place) are permitted and should be listed in alphabetic order of their respective languages", but he disregards this. Note that Hungarian language has no official status in Košice (Iaaasi (talk) 14:50, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: And if you ask for a second 3O request, then what will happen? I plainly expressed that I was not willing to accept your abusive 3O request forgeries, and I won't.--Nmate (talk) 18:23, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

text: Unfortunately, It is not possible to detach the personal issue as user Iaaasi would have never interested in editing the artice if I hadn't edited it beforhand. Also, WP:PLACE is not a part of policy but a guideline--Nmate (talk) 18:41, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Just because isn`t an official policy it doesn`t mean that we should`t respect it when it doesn`t agree with us (to change it if you disagree with it in this case only). I quote from the WP:PLACE - "This guideline documents an English Wikipedia naming convention. It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply.". Since this isn`t a special case as some places where the Hungarian minority represents =>80% (ex:Miercurea-Ciuc) of the population, it is common sense to follow this guideline - in this case (article). Alphabetical order of alternative names should be followed without any problems... Adrian (talk) 18:59, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

text: Please try to assume good faith. As for the personal attack, there is no need to follow me and to "publish it" at every instance of our interaction, and I really don`t understand what should your sentence (in this context) mean... If you considered that I attacked you personally, please file a report and present your case there, don`t bother me (or anybody else) by some off-topic data.. Try to be constructive ant to talk about the content not about the editor. If you wish to talk about any editor (including me) there is an appropriate place for that. About the problem, can you please explain why do you think this guideline shoul`d be respected here? Adrian (talk) 19:17, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  By the way, in that report, I was agreeing with you.. If you misunderstood me I will explain (I agreed that IP editor(his edits) may had a nationalistic connotation) Adrian (talk) 19:20, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

text: If you are not ready to cooperate with others (anybody) on wikipedia maybe you should reconsider your presence here. We are all colleagues here and to make anything possible we should cooperate. This is one of the fundamental principles to contribute on this project. About the topic, Many cities were a part of Kingdom of Hungary for that period of time and only in places where Hungarian minority represent the majority of the local population we make exceptions (as the guideline says). At Miercurea-Ciuc we can see that example (Hungarian in from of German). Gdańsk may be the most complicated case on wikipedia where everything was established by special consensus. This is not the case here. I think that mentioning Hungarian name in the lead (while the alternative section names exists) is more than enough to specify it`s importance to the Hungarian culture. Don`t forget that the Hungarian population is under 4%... Even in Romania(Transylvania) we don`t mention alternative names if the minority doesn`t make at least 20% of the population... You are trying to make an exception about this article while that exception doesn`t exist. Adrian (talk) 20:22, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry but it sounds ridiculous to me. Hungarians have a mutual history with Slovaks. 1000 years. Hungarians have a right to use their name here, Slovaks (and everybody) are able to understand it and accept it, except the though nationalists. Fakirbakir (talk) 21:44, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I never said we/they don`t need/have a right to use it, I am just saying we should follow the guildline about alphabetical order about alternative names in the lead. I quote "Relevant foreign language names (one used by at least 10% of sources in the English language or is used by a group of people which used to inhabit this geographical place) are permitted and should be listed in alphabetic order of their respective languages, i.e., (Finnish: Suomenlahti; Russian: Финский залив, Finskiy zaliv; Swedish: Finska viken; Estonian: Soome laht). or (ar: name1, be: name2, cs: name3). As an exception to alphabetical order, the local official name should be listed before other alternate names if it differs from a widely accepted English name." Adrian (talk) 21:59, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I notice that Bratislava have the same/similar circumstances as Kosice, and there WP:PLACE (alphabetical order) is respected... Adrian (talk) 09:08, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Not the similar, as that city had a dominant German population in the past and its German name is used in contemporary historical English sources. As for I am not ready to cooperate with others, I am willing to, but I do not want with everybody, and it is not a coincidence that I do not edit too many Transylvanian related topics on WP.--Nmate (talk) 17:54, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I am sorry, but if you don`t want to cooperate I can`t force you to do so. In that case we can`t discuss really anything. When you are ready to cooperate let me know. Until then I guess no changes to the article. I will revert it to pre-conflict state. Adrian (talk) 18:24, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, the city has two Hungarian schools. --Nmate (talk) 18:36, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

text: As I said before, I was ready to accept the version(even if the names section already exists...) that respects the wiki guidelines(current version). Your example isn`t really applicable in this case because alternative names (in this article) are not deleted. Please check the special section Names where you can find all relevant historical names of this city. Adrian (talk) 05:50, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

text: It is done. I followed what Strikerforce had proposed.Fakirbakir (talk) 11:21, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I appreciate the third opinion but as you can see the bottom line of the third opinion is " I would like to point out, however, that - in the big picture of creating an encyclopedia and improving the article - this appears to be a rather trivial disagreement. In my opinion, if the information is correct and verifiable, it should not matter in what order it is listed.". does not really support this change. Since we already have a guild-line for this matter, it is better to respect it and avoid unnecessary confusion. If you wish to establish a special case (although Hungarian minority is only 3.8%) we could invite some Slovak,German and Hungarian editors and form a new consensus if this is needed. Don`t forget that all this alternative names are present in the special section. Mentioning it in the lead(again) shows it`s importance to other minorities. The pre-conflict state did`t mention any alternative name in the lead. Adrian (talk) 18:24, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Please do not attempt to refactor or otherwise interpret my words. My opinion on the issue at hand is that the Hungarian name ought to be listed first, due to the influence on the city by Hungary and those of Hungarian descent, versus the amount of German influence. The "bottom line" as you called it was merely a passing statement that I found the amount of text that has been dedicated to this discussion to be rather counterproductive, not a dismissal of the issue at hand. Strikerforce (talk) 19:22, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I apologize, I did`t had that intention, but you said at the finish - what you said. I interpreted exactly as you have written it. We have many opinions on this matter, for and against, and since this can be a sensitive matter, it is best to follow the guild-line already exists in situations like this. If there is a need for a special case, I explained in my last comment.Adrian (talk) 19:42, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

text:  Also we have many other examples of the same situation. ex:Bratislava where this guild-line is respected with no problems. Adrian (talk) 20:16, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Bratislava is different, there was a vast 'German effect' as opposed to Kosice, Kassa. Kosice was an entirely Hungarian city in the past. I think we should respect the tradition of the city and we should not ignore the point of view of the third opinion.Fakirbakir (talk) 23:19, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

text: @Fakirbakir According to a Hungarian source, Kosice had German ethnic majority until the mid-16th century (Iaaasi (talk) 20:15, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You are right, I always learn something new. But, they got this data from analysis of names. How was that with Hunyadi? You said we can not use this type of researches because these are just names, origins of the names.Fakirbakir (talk) 13:59, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: If this interpretation is made by a reliable source, it should be accepted, even if we don't agree with it.  (Iaaasi (talk) 14:58, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternative names 

message: The thread is above. According to WP:PLACE foreign names should be listed in alphabetic order, but a user refuses to accept this guideline (giving no reason for his refusal)  (Iaaasi (talk) 19:38, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The order of alternative names in the artcile about [[Košice]] 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Košice. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071024134127/http://www.kosice.sk:80/clanok.asp?sekcia=historia to http://www.kosice.sk/clanok.asp?sekcia=historia
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://k2.jozsef.kando.hu/~guczi/MAGYAR/SANGER/kazinczy.doc
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090202164833/http://www.kosice.sk:80/clanok.asp?file=history_z_hist_20_stor.htm to http://www.kosice.sk/clanok.asp?file=history_z_hist_20_stor.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050309070457/http://www.budapest.hu:80/engine.aspx?page=20030224-cikk-testvervarosok to http://www.budapest.hu/engine.aspx?page=20030224-cikk-testvervarosok
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:38, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Košice. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive {newarchive} to http://www.kosice.sk/clanok.asp?file=history_z_hist_13_stor.htm
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070625082735/http://www.kosice.sk:80/clanok.asp?file=history_z_hist_14_stor.htm to http://www.kosice.sk/clanok.asp?file=history_z_hist_14_stor.htm
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070510145748/http://www.kosice.sk:80/clanok.asp?file=history_letopoct_rok1143.htm to http://www.kosice.sk/clanok.asp?file=history_letopoct_rok1143.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071217080336/http://www.statistics.sk:80/mosmis/eng/run.html to http://www.statistics.sk/mosmis/eng/run.html
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120813012440/http://portal.statistics.sk:80/files/ev_v2-nabozenske-vyznanie.pdf to http://portal.statistics.sk/files/ev_v2-nabozenske-vyznanie.pdf
*Added archive {newarchive} to http://www.talmamedia.com/php/district/district.php?county=Aba%FAj-Torna
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160215085941/http://www.sfk.sk/eng_version/index.php?id=historia to http://www.sfk.sk/eng_version/index.php?id=historia
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080125074717/http://firmy.etrend.sk:80/17775/firmy/najvacsi-zamestnavatelia-slovenska to http://firmy.etrend.sk/17775/firmy/najvacsi-zamestnavatelia-slovenska
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20071025165857/http://www.slovakia.travel/entitaview.aspx?idp=3640&l=2 to http://www.slovakia.travel/entitaview.aspx?l=2&idp=3640
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120120092215/http://www.thedaily.sk/2010/11/29/political-affairs/those-are-the-results-in-the-main-towns/ to http://www.thedaily.sk/2010/11/29/political-affairs/those-are-the-results-in-the-main-towns/
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110928075241/http://www.kosice.sk/article.asp?id=9037 to http://www.kosice.sk/article.asp?id=9037
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080227040640/http://www.uips.sk/statis/pdf/VS_P24.PDF to http://www.uips.sk/statis/pdf/VS_P24.PDF
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080227040634/http://www.uips.sk/statis/pdf/VS_P04.PDF to http://www.uips.sk/statis/pdf/VS_P04.PDF
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080227040557/http://www.uips.sk/statis/pdf/VS_P1.PDF to http://www.uips.sk/statis/pdf/VS_P1.PDF
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080227040621/http://www.uips.sk/statis/pdf/VS_P96.PDF to http://www.uips.sk/statis/pdf/VS_P96.PDF
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080227040558/http://www.uips.sk/statis/pdf/ZS_P8.PDF to http://www.uips.sk/statis/pdf/ZS_P8.PDF
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080227040606/http://www.uips.sk/statis/pdf/GYM_P8.PDF to http://www.uips.sk/statis/pdf/GYM_P8.PDF
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080227040626/http://www.uips.sk/statis/pdf/SOS_P8.PDF to http://www.uips.sk/statis/pdf/SOS_P8.PDF
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070710064008/http://www.uips.sk:80/statis/pdf/ZSS_P8.PDF to http://www.uips.sk/statis/pdf/ZSS_P8.PDF
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080227040613/http://www.uips.sk/statis/pdf/SOU_P8.PDF to http://www.uips.sk/statis/pdf/SOU_P8.PDF
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070515154810/http://www.kosice.sk:80/clanok.asp?file=history_letopoct_rok1657.htm to http://www.kosice.sk/clanok.asp?file=history_letopoct_rok1657.htm
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080201030508/http://www.highways.sk:80/indexE.html to http://www.highways.sk/indexE.html
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090324101712/http://www.ni.rs:80/news/brat-e.html to http://www.ni.rs/news/brat-e.html
*Added archive {newarchive} to http://www.infocenters.co.il/gfh/multimedia/GFH/0000012004/0000012004_1_web.jpgan
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:09, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Košice. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070627063426/http://www.kosice.sk:80/clanok.asp?file=history_z_hist_13_stor.htm to http://www.kosice.sk/clanok.asp?file=history_z_hist_13_stor.htm
*Added archive {newarchive} to http://www.talmamedia.com/php/district/district.php?county=Aba%FAj-Torna
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:58, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Košice. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive {newarchive} to http://www.talmamedia.com/php/district/district.php?county=Aba%FAj-Torna
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:54, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Košice. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131012053526/http://portal.statistics.sk/files/obce-pohl-vek.pdf to http://portal.statistics.sk/files/obce-pohl-vek.pdf
*Added archive {newarchive} to http://www.talmamedia.com/php/district/district.php?county=Aba%FAj-Torna
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:11, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Košice. 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:
*Added archive {newarchive} to http://www.talmamedia.com/php/district/district.php?county=Aba%FAj-Torna
*Added  tag to http://eng.gov.spb.ru/figures/ities
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:24, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Košice. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://webarchive.loc.gov/all/20120910114505/http%3A//portal.statistics.sk/files/ev_v2-nabozenske-vyznanie.pdf
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.uips.sk/statis/pdf/VS_P1.PDF
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131104002625/http://www.cottbus.de/buerger/leben/cbinternational/our_twin_cities%2C255001242.en.html to http://www.cottbus.de/buerger/leben/cbinternational/our_twin_cities%2C255001242.en.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:29, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Košice. 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:
*Added  tag to http://www.talmamedia.com/php/district/district.php?county=Aba%FAj-Torna
*Added  tag to http://www.namrb.org/filesystem.php?id=12.xls
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160303172437/http://fotokosice.eu/ to http://fotokosice.eu/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:47, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Dear Cmt255,
let's see what we have:
1. you removed from the stable version flags by the claim they are modern flags; by your claim I put contemporary flags, in which only two cases you may say they were not official, becuase those periods does not have an adequate flags uploaded in Wikipedia, though in most of the cases to avoid missing flags then we interpolate the best possible, as it is done in the vast majority fo articles; you removed the flag of the Eastern Hungarian Kingdom that is valid for that time, as well Rákóczi's banner that was also valid that time (it has not any connection to any "officiality", I could ask the Rákóczi uprising was official?)
2. You altered a sentence backed by a reliable source, claiming not only Hungarians lived in the city. Again please have in mind this is per source, and does not say only Hungarians lived there, but the number of Hungarians. In case you assume the source is false, please provide inline citation and it will be corrected.
3. Finally, please be careful of any invalid accusations, because certainly you don't know what WP:vandalism means. Also have in mind, if any of your change does not gain consensus, it may be reverted. Thank You.(KIENGIR (talk) 19:02, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Comment: There is a reference to Hagala (1967): Právny, územný a populačný vývoj mesta Košíc and the estimation 10,000 allegedly comes from this work. I can check it, but the work is cited here http://www.forumhistoriae.sk/e_kniznica/Lexikon-stredovekych-miest.pdf, p. 200. According to Lexikón, Hagala estimated the total (not Hungarian) population to 5,908-8,231 at the end of the 15th century (I will check Hagala's work). Surely, 10,000 Hungarians is absolutely unrealistic.--Ditinili (talk) 15:52, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Please check then the inline citation, for sure.(KIENGIR (talk) 10:48, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Cmt255 is right, it is the total population. Hagala analyzed tax records (the number of houses in the center and peripheries) x some coeficients (the average family size, servants, etc). The English summary is at p. 114. --Ditinili (talk) 17:29, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent edits of Cmt255 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:52, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion