Talk:Vlad the Impaler/Archive 2

message: No source I have consulted names Vlad III's mother as Marya Magdalene. McNally and Florescu say she was Cneajna Musati. Double names or middle names are exceeding rare in the medieval period, it's unlikely any woman would've been named Marya Magdelene Cnjeana. Unless someone can show me a good source for the "Marya Magdalene" name, I will remove it. Missi
Cneajna means princess in Russian and other Slavic languages. --Vladko 16:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What? Dahn 03:10, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Does anyone have anything citable on this? - Jmabel | Talk 06:00, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Wow, she would have been about 1400 years old when Vlad was born, wouldn't she?  Corvus cornix 00:49, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dracula's Mother 

message: [moved up to be near related section]
I have heard from a couple reliable sources that Vlad II's mother was the Marya Magdalene who was spoke about earlier
:What? Dahn 03:10, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Does anyone have anything citable on this? - Jmabel | Talk 06:00, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Wow, she would have been about 1400 years old when Vlad was born, wouldn't she?  Corvus cornix 00:49, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Vlad II's Mother

message: Without strong proof showing Mary Magdalene had the same name as Jesus' whore/friend, then I suspect it would be mistake to promote such hearsay. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.120.83.2 (talk) 23:42, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Jesus

message: "In 1459, on Saint Bartholomew's Day (in August), Dracula had thirty thousand of the merchants and officials of the Transylvanian city of Braşov impaled."
In 1785 Brasov had 17.671 inhabitants.How many did it have in 1459?
: Good observation. This might warrant a disputed-tag for the article. Obviously that number is exaggerated, at the very least (It'd have to be a huge city to even have 30,000 merchants and officials at that time). This article does need a lot more sources, given how it's a subject with plenty of exaggeration going around. --BluePlatypus 12:06, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Atrocities 

message: I'm not sure if it has been mentioned already, but large parts of the article are copied verbatim from this essay: http://www.eskimo.com/~mwirkk/castle/vlad/vladhist.html
: I have no idea when this comment was made (I noticed it just now while archiving). Does anyone know if this was addressed? - Jmabel | Talk 05:56, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The "Atrocities" section of the article does indeed look like it's been taken nearly verbatim from that essay, minus a couple of word changes. Mcsnee 16:48, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree. --Candide, or Optimism 22:34, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Whoops, I didn't see this before I restored it.  I will unrestore it.  That should settle this whole matter, except for Anittas's disruptive behavior.  User:Zoe|(talk) 23:15, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plagiarism? 

message: This section is utterly unsourced.  Even if they're just legends, we need something to indicate where the source came from for these legends, or else I will remove them.  User:Zoe|(talk) 01:22, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The anecdotes are mentioned in the book by Florescu and also in the Russian-source site that is listed in the reference area. Don't remove anything. --Candide, or Optimism 03:52, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Then indicate in the section what the sources are.  User:Zoe|(talk) 19:38, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You mean footnotes? Since you brought it up, you do it. I'm totally burned out. --Candide, or Optimism 20:17, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, no.  There is nothing in the section which explains the anecdotes, just waving a hand and saying the refererences source them is not acceptable sourcing, and I don't have the book available to verify your comment.  If it isn't sourced, it gets deleted.  User:Zoe|(talk) 01:28, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You will not delete anything. If you do, it will be reverted and you'll be reported. We don't need to add the footnotes and we can't help that you don't have the book. However, you can still verify most of the anecdotes from the Russian document which is also translated in English. --Candide, or Optimism 04:17, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know where you plan on reporting me, but I've started a discussion of this at WP:ANI.  User:Zoe|(talk) 01:46, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

text: They will stay, since the legend of Dracula is also very much unreferenced.--Preacher, or Princelet 19:37, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:V NOTHING unreferenced can stay, for ANY reason. Period. --InShaneee 21:28, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They are referenced. --Candide, or Optimism 21:32, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not in the section I'm pointing to.  User:Zoe|(talk) 21:36, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't understand what you're trying to say. The anecdotes are sourced in the refenrece area. Florescu's book is included in the Reference section. --Candide, or Optimism 21:38, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Where is the .doc link that you keep referring to?  Where is it in this article?  User:Zoe|(talk) 21:54, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In the External Link section you will see a link to a Doc file with the title: "The Tale of Dracula Russian manuscript circa 1490, with English translation (MS Word format)". >Can you find it? --Candide, or Optimism 21:57, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, thank you, that's what I've been asking for all along.  Now, do you know how to do footnotes, because I don't.  User:Zoe|(talk) 22:00, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I do know and it takes time; and unfortunatelly, not as fun as chatting with you and InShaneee. See this. As it says in the article, footnotes are not mandatory. --Candide, or Optimism 22:03, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Footnotes are not mandatory. If you don't believe me, ask in ANI. --Candide, or Optimism 22:08, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nine anecdotes 

message: Re: His son Vlad III would later use in several documents the surname Drăculea,…
Could it really be written with ă in the XVth century? Afaik, modern Romanian alphabet was introduced only four centuries later… So how was this variant of Vlad’s name written in original documents? Could it be, that it was written in Cyrillic letters and Drăculea is just a modern Romanian transliteration?--Imrek 13:23, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Most certainly it was written in cyrillic lettres, and Drăculea is the modern romanian transliteration. Actually, as you should know, the letter ă was added in the romanian alphabet to realise a better mapping of the old Romanian Cyrillic alphabet, so it must have been written with the letter Ъ. Mihai -talk 13:46, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I believe it would be "Дракуля," but I'm not entirely sure. Jecowa 05:31, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Drăculea – how it was written originally? 

message: there are people who might not be aquainted to the Propaganda that targeted Vlad III throughout the history of the Romanian Principalities . there are romanian authors suggesting hungarian propagandists found this Bram Stoker and gave him material about Elisabeth Bathory and stuff, and manipulated him into this Dracula thing. there are fans of this Vampire thing that are pushing for a real Dracula Prince across the internet. whatever the reasons the following quotes from the article lead to a distortion of Wikipedia article about Vlad III.
Wallachian royalty and the family background of Dracula instead of family background of Vlad III
Dracula's grandfather instead of Vlad III's father
Dracula seems to have had three brothers instead of Vlad III had 3 bros
...was Dracula's half-brother instead of Vlad III's 1/2 bro
he continuously tried to replace Dracula instead of he tried to replace Vlad III
and so on and so on.
these are edits of propaganda pushers. I would request Protection for this page but i am not skilled in this matter. Instead, i will remove them until an admin will step in and RfP (i think this is the abreviation) Criztu 17:12, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: desigur,e o vastă conspiraţie...
pfiuuu, the section "Atrocities" is such a deep hole, i wont dive in that :)) Criztu 19:46, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think what you're really saying is that the term Dracula is easily overused because Vlad is known as Vlad Tepes, not Vlad Dracula (except to teenage Americans).   Also, there is zero support for any Hungarians' manipulation of Bram Stoker.  The Hungarians were basically allies of Vlad Tepes and would have no cause to do something so silly. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.120.83.2 (talk) 23:46, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Propaganda 

message: points:
*the name of the guy was Vlad III, seems he employed Draculea to refer to himself
*he came from a family of rulers of romanian principalities, called Basarabs. modern historians favour Vlad III Basarab
*he is known in romanian as Vlad III Tepes (english Vlad III the Impaler) alongside rulers with similar uber names, like Michael the Brave, Mircea the Elder, Stefan the Great, etc. this name is also favoured by modern historians, at least Britannica and Romanian academy
*medieval propaganda directed against Vlad III, modern Dracula-fans propaganda, and other sorts of propagandas, call Vlad III as Dracula.
I think the minimum of respect for Vlad III should be granted in a wikipedia, in that an objective name must have precedence over a defamatory name (Dracula is defamatory since the saxon pamphlets were defamatory, and they propagated the name Dracula). no one uses the name the anti-american propaganda uses for the United States in this encyclopedia, am i right ? noone can argue that Vlad III the Impaler or Vlad III Basarab are not known in english lang. an article Vlad III Dracula shifts things towards a fantasy-horror-entertainment aproach wikipedia, rather than an objective aproach wikipedia
having expressed my opinnion on this matter, i will wait anoter few days so anyone can realise the immensity of such name Vlad III Dracula on an encyclopedia. Criztu 17:54, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: O, thank you for your kind help, Criztu... Now, I will wait for another few years so you can realise the immensity of not using diacritics in Romanian and the importance of writing in proper English when you start a series of massive edits on English wikipedia. Dahn 08:55, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Excellent decision based on sound reasons. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.120.83.2 (talk) 23:49, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  moving to Vlad III Basarab, or Vlad III the Impaler, or Vlad III Draculea 

message: "Still others say that he was killed by his brother whom at the time was with the turks and his step father; his brother stabbed him to death. He was then buried in the church from which he was taken out of. Some people say that his father came to visit the coffin and was found beheaded. Also that somewhere in the late 1800's early 1900's when archyologists dug up the coffin the tomb had only animal bones in it." 
Up above the passage, it says his brother, Radu the Handsome, had died, and now it says that his brother may have killed him? Sometime in the late 1800s' early 1900's? In addition to being terrible grammar and mispelling, I'm wondering if there's a source. It seems highly dubious. I'm going to wait before I remove it, but I will tag it as citation needed. Any help or thoughts would be appreciated.151.203.96.36 17:29, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Snagov Sources? 

message: According to Romanian historian Constantin Rezachevici, the nickname Draculea/Dracula was first applied to Vlad II, father of Vlad III:
: Quote #1: “Even before Vlad Tepes' reign in Romania, the boyar Albu had called Vlad Dracul (which was a nickname known outside of Romania), simply Draculea (Andreescu 150-51), the popular exclusively Romanian name. The Venetian messenger Bartholomeo de Jano and his contemporary Greek chroniclers Leonicos Chalkokondyles and Critobul of Imbros have also called him Draculea (Andreescu 154-55). Even Iancu of Hunedora, who executed him, made mention on December 17, 1456, of “infidelem Drakwlam wayvodem” (Documenta 461). <...> It is clear that Draculea (Dracula) was a popular nickname for Vlad Dracul, meaning a person belonging to the Order of the Dragon. For his son, Vlad Tepes, the name “Dracula” became through affiliation an alternative, not only a nickname, with the side effect of increasing his bad reputation, with its diabolical meaning, even though originally, in his father's days, “Dracul”  did not have a malevolent meaning.”
: Quote #2: “Although Vlad Tepes and his descendants have never used the symbol of the Order of the Dragon, he has inherited the nickname of his father Draculea/Dracula, which has become a family name (outside the country).”
:  (From the Order of the Dragon to Dracula.  Constantin Rezachevici (rtf file))
If so, Draculea could not mean “son of Dracul”...--Imrek 16:50, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Draculea/Dracula applied to Vlad II ? 

message: were Radu the handsome and mehmed the second gay lovers. - Zadsat 14:10, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  radu??? 

message: This is probably the ugliest wiki entry I've ever seen.  It's a horrible mess.  It seems to me, that half of the article is just someones opinion, with very factual information.  I could easily see this wiki article being half it's size.
It seems that most of the article is taken directly from http://www.donlinke.com/drakula/vlad.htm This whole article needs to be redone.  It seems as if it is plagiarized. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Boogiebugger (talk • contribs) 23 October 2006.
: Calling it "ugly" doesn't really make for much action anyone can take.
: On the other hand, if there is evidence of plagiarism:
:# Could you be more concrete about what passages you think are plagiarised? You say "most of the article": are there actually multiple sections lifted from elsewhere?
:# If, indeed, there is apparent plagiarism, we should look through the history, because if it got there through someone who is still an active user, we may need to address more than a single article.
: Thanks in advance for any clarifications. - Jmabel | Talk 23:08, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ugliest wiki entry 

message: I would like for us to come to a consensus about the name of the city where Vlad III was born, and how it is described (e.g.: <present-day name of city>,<present-day region>,<present day name of country where city is located> –OR– <historical name of city>,<historical region where city is located>,<leave out present-day name of country, since it didn't exist back then>, –OR– some other naming convention...).  I am neither an experienced writer of research papers nor of Wikipedia articles, so I do not know what the convention is.  If you (anyone reading this) know what the rules are, or can point us to the correct style-sheet for this, please post the link here.  Thanks in advance.
BlueCerinthe (talk) 08:48, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Oops, I didn't realize this topic had already been initiated at the bottom of this Discussion page under "Language used in the article?".  Please don't answer my question about style here, but go to that section, instead, so we can keep it all in one place.  Thanks in advance! :) BlueCerinthe (talk) 09:57, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Place of Birth 

message: This section - like many others in this article - is a joke. The first phrase states he is born in Transylvania, then in the next Wallachia is mentioned as his native country!!! Make up your mind people!!! This whole article is full of mistakes and POV's. Shame!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.175.144.15 (talk) 13:26, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early Years 

message: There seems to be an unsourced section under 'German Stories' with some stories about Vlad's sexuality.  Could someone either remove this or find a source for it (and rewrite for grammar)?  
93.97.106.42 (talk) 19:08, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No, the paragraph in question does not refer to Vlad's sexuality, but rather his determination that women give up their own sexual vanity. May I request, however, that these claims be sourced? (By the way, I found no problem at all with the grammar, and ask that you please be sure of your language skills before making an emberassing comment about a clearly talented writer's literary expertise.)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frodologist (talk • contribs) 01:28, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hermaphrodite? 

message: People keep putting remarks in almost random sections above, but there are two serious matters that have not been addressed here:
# Is there plagiarized material here that needs to be removed?
# Does the article contain grossly exaggerated, uncited numbers on the numbers of impalements?
- Jmabel | Talk 05:07, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, well-informed judgments are perfectly all right, otherwise we shouldn't be able to produce any coherent knowledge mass at all, but the well-informed judgments mustn't be presented as personal, and they must belong to the textual discourse as a natural development based on citations and well known facts. Note: as long as you compose a text, you compose a story that is unique, and therefore is based on personal judgement – but it may only deviate this much from other texts, else some reader will criticize the text content. If none says your text is original research, then it isn't. Said: Rursus 12:45, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's an interesting aspect of our culture: we expect every individual to reach on their own the consensus from a variety of stated positions, each of which has a counterpoint. Is there value in stating publically that consensus? Probably so given that the attainment of a consensus approach requires an inference, and not everyone can infer everything. (says socionics) Tcaudilllg (talk) 05:36, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plagiarism and accuracy 

message: In the biography section fo the text, more precissely here, it mentions that "Vlad resided with his new wife in a house in the Hungarian capital", wich was "the setting of the thief anecdote". Where is this anecdote mentioned? Also, about his death and some other issues, I remember to have seen a documentary where some Florescu descendants (I don't remember their names) went to Romania, asked the head of Romanian orthodox church for permission to carry on an archeoligocal investigation, and then uncovered some tombstones of their family. But more importantly, they talked about how one of their relatives found what they assumed to be Dracula's tomb, buried purposelly on a church's entrance so everyone would step on it. They relate how their relative opened the tomb and the body that was pretty well preserved almost disintegrated in contact with fresh air. Then the film end as they sleep a night on Dracula's castle (not Bran's castle, but another one more ruined and isolated over a clif in the middle of the wilderness), and after that night they sent some priests to exorcise the place, because yet another of their relatives (they seem to be a big family) fatally injured himself while climbing towards the castle, even tough the slope isn't that great. --Matthewfarenheit 10:22, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anecdotes and a doubt 

message: Are there any living descendants of Vlad Tepes surviving in the world today? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.68.72.186 (talk) 13:37, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes they are. If I remember corectly, princess Brianna Caradjea is one of them. But don't take this as a fact, I'm not very shure.--Alex:Dan 17:33, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for admitting your uncertainty. Many people who are discussing this article seem unwilling to do so.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frodologist (talk • contribs) 01:50, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Living Descendants 

message: "Transylvania had long been a part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, but it too had endured a long period of Turkish domination and its culture was still largely medieval."  Moldavia, Wallachia, and especially most of modern-day Hungary were under Turkish domination at one time or another.  But even after Hungary was defeated at the Battle of Mohacs, Transylvania was an Ottoman vassal that was semi-independant and under both Turkish and Habsburg influence and was constantly switching sides.Shield2 23:45, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Transylvania, Moldova and Wallachia were all semi-independent countries, but while the last two were paying a tribut, Transylvania was "buying its peace" with a "gift", at a lower price than Moldova and Walachia. Everybody must understand that neither one of the three principalities were ever under Turkish reign.--Alex:Dan 17:31, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Later edit:Yes, she is.--Alex:Dan 17:37, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transylvania was never under "Turkish domination" 

message: Does anyone still have concerns about plagiarism in any portion of this article? Or have these all been addressed? - Jmabel | Talk 21:41, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are there still plagiarism concerns? 

message: Mate... As of late, this article has been bombarded with an endless dose of vandalism edits that it happens almost daily on my watch list! Where do you get these people?Batmen (talk) 21:26, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Endless Vandalism 

message: It was always my understanding, from a source that I cannot cite, but I remember clearly that it was an A&E documentary, that Vlad II was Dracul (as mentioned) and Vlad III was Dracula, which means 'son of Dracul', the 'a' making the linguistic addition to refer to 'son' or 'offspring'. The article seems to counter this. Dracul meaning 'son of Dracul' doesn't make sense linguistically. How can the word Dracul itself mean 'the son of Dracul'?
Does anyone have any ideas on this?
--Bentonia School 01:05, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Saw one on History Channel a few weeks ago that gave it as Vlad 2 "Dracul" and Vlad 3 as "Draculya" or, in English, "Dracula". Not really sure beyond that.--Marhawkman 18:29, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dracul/Dracula 

message: In the opening section, it says George Bush and John Kerry are both related to Vlad III.  Is this true or vandalism? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.125.5.123 (talk) 00:53, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Vandalism. This article is being constantly attacked by sad, immature idiots. --QuasarTE 08:33, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Hmm, dear Noname, make a subpage under your own userpage, such as if you're registered as User:Noname, you may create a subpage User:Noname/Undisclosed_Facts, and write it there! Elsewhere, the Wikipedia policies are boring and strict (but reasonable), and some angry administrator will whip you up (verbally at best) if you don't behave according to policies. Said: Rursus 12:01, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: I have added the  tag to the "The vampire legend and Romanian attitudes" section, as there is no conclusive evidence that Stoker did, in fact, base his Dracula on Vlad.  There is much argument about this, and no proof.  Corvus cornix 23:52, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hm.  How come "noinclude" didn't keep the tag from being transcluded?  Corvus cornix 23:53, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The vampire legend and Romanian attitudes 

message: Vlad was a well reported drug addict. There are various historical documents about him and his addiction; reported by English, Turks, Romanians, Italians and even by Arabs and Egyptian historians. It is known that especially at night, when he was under the influence of cannabis sativa, he believed that he was a wild animal (Mirza Ibrahim Sultan reported this in detail). In several occasions he really bit some female servants and sex slaves and seriously hurt most of them (John Capgrave clearly reported this in his personal notes: "When I saw the poor young lady with a wide open cut in her throat and that blood! My God!.. that blood! She passed out immediately. Me and Hingeston were in absolute shock!"). The blood drinking myth directly comes from this behaviour.
Turks never loved him, he helped Hungarians a lot. Ottoman never invaded there clearly but it took only 6 Turks to kill him in his very well protected mansion in Kazikli Tepe (means Impaling Hill in Turkish), where he impaled 2 Turkish innocent envoys only a few weeks ago. His body decapitated by Mustafa The Lion (the head of security actions of the Ottoman Empire; he was personally among 6) and his head taken to Edirne where it has been placed in a stake and shown to people for 40 days. The head probably  preserved in resin or in honey for that period, then burned.
--88.106.52.59 11:34, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is like 'MY BRAIN HURTS!!!'--Alex:Dan 09:08, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If only you had one --88.106.107.162 23:16, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Æhɯm! If this is true or a reputation, then find some citing sources and add these statements to the article! Said: Rursus 12:06, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Real face 

message: This page should be moved back to Vlad Dracula. The person who moved it to this one had poor arguments for doing so. There are no proof of Dracula ever being refered to as Tepes by the Romanians while he was alive. His son was latter called Ţepeluş, but that's irrelevant. Dracula was a combination of a family name and a title. It was given to him, just like his father was named Vlad Dracul. All the sources mention him by the name of Dracula and Dracula's servant, Ladislaus, called his master for Dracula. The same did his cousin, Stephen; the chronicler, Dlugosz, and many others. The person who moved the page argued that Dracula meant Devil (which of course does, but also means dragon, which was the reason for the name) and said that it was Saxon propaganda, but that's just silly talk. Dracula used the name of Dracula before coming into conflict with the Saxons; also, the sources call him Dracula and they have nothing to do with the Saxons; and thirdly, his father, who was also named Dracul -- without the a -- had no issues with the Saxons. --Thus Spake Anittas 17:34, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I must agree. I see no reason why the (current) page name uses an unflattering nickname for a historical figure.--Marhawkman 18:32, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move back to Vlad Dracula 

message: Vlad was a prince of Wallachia with a capital Targovishte. Why is it that he is often thought of as a ruler of Transylvania? Also, how come there are two Targovishte toponyms: one north of the Danube in Wallachia, another soouth of the Danube in Bulgaria? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.233.208.218 (talk) 14:14, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vlad's capital Targovishte 

message: wasn't there an image of vlad in the article. similar to that in the romanian article?IleanaCosanziana 18:03, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know, but now the image you refer to is there. Said: Rursus 12:20, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What happened to the image 

message: Is it really best for "Dracula" to redirect here? Most people who type in "dracula" aren't going to be looking for our man Vlad, they're looking for a Bela Lugosi film or the novel by Bram Stoker or the character Count Dracula himself. I've just spent a good fifteen minutes fixing links that were supposed to go to Dracula (novel) but instead ended up here at Vlad Ţepeṣ. Thoughts, anyone? K. Lásztocska 18:51, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Candent shlimazel 13:48, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Dracula" redirect? 

message: Apart from the appalling lack of references, can somebody explain this please?
"Infants were sometimes impaled on the stake forced through their mother's chests"
I mean, is it even English? How many chests do Romanians have? 83.67.217.254 23:52, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's only a case of a misplaced apostrophe. It should be "their mothers' chests." Then "infants" is plural, "mothers" is plural, "chests" is plural and it all agrees grammatically with itself. (Romanians only have one chest, at least the ones I know.)K. Lásztocska 14:49, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

text: (To the mess of a sentence above) Seriously??? Thanks for making us Americans look retarded.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.178.22.16 (talk) 07:55, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Easy to do after 8 years of Bush.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.67.104.4 (talk) 19:07, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infants' impalement 

message: In the lead it says he was called "Kazıklı Voyvoda" in Turkish, but I've only ever heard "Kazıklı Bey" (which is the Turkish name given for him later in the article.) Even if both are correct, the current presentation is a bit confusing...K. Lásztocska 14:46, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Turkish novelist Ali Riza Seyfi called him Kazıklı Voyvoda in his novel of the same name (1928). This novel was later filmed as Drakula Istanbul'da (Dracula in Istanbul) (1953). 'Voivode' is indeed a Slavic word but titles of foreign dignitaries are not always translated into ones own language See for instance 'Tsar' and 'Shah' and 'Ayatollah' etc. Colin4C 14:42, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Great, back to square one....is Kazıklı Voyvoda as common a name for him as Kazıklı Bey? I gotta learn Turkish...K. Lásztocska 04:33, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I used to work in Ankara as an English teacher, though for some reason the subject of Vlad the Impaler (and vampires) and the correct Turkish terminology to use about them never cropped up in classroom discussions...From what I've read lately, however, I think that the Impaler was (and is?) a sort of bogeyman figure in Turkish legend and folklore. It's interesting that Ali Riza Seyfi in his 1928 novel seems to have conflated the legendary Vlad with Stoker's Vampire. Colin4C 09:23, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Most Turks would call him Kazıklı Voyvoda. One learns about him in history class. The moniker Kazıklı bey is new to me. If you don't believe me check the corresponding Turkish entry.--Kaanatakan 09:56, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Out of interest, how do the Turks regard Vlad? I'm guessing the Turks have a different perspective on him than that of Romanian nationalists!  Colin4C 21:03, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Turkish name? 

message: Small edit: two dead-links were removed.
-Redphone 5001
Redphone5001 22:20, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Small Edit 

message: This extract from the intro seems to be POV:
:His impact on the expansion of the Ottoman Empire is recognizable in that his successful hold against them bought precious time for Western Europe.
Is it wikipedia policy to assert that the expansion of the Ottoman Empire was a bad thing? Colin4C 17:45, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't say that. It says that his resistance favoured Western Europe. --Thus Spake Anittas 18:38, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to say, further, that the historical record indicates that Vlad's resistance to the Turks only momentarily held them back, and that any putative 'precious time' was squandered by 'Western Europe' who went on to suffer a series of terrible defeats at the hands of the Ottoman Empire. Also Eastern Orthodox Wallachians were looked upon as heretics by contemporary Catholic Western Europe, not as part of a putative grand Christian coalition. Colin4C 10:57, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Also Vlad himself attacked 'Western Europe' between 1457-60 when he launched major attacks against (Catholic) Transylvania from his home base of (Eastern Orthodox) Wallachia. This was an odd way to 'buy precious time' for western resistance against the Turks don't you think? Colin4C 20:56, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: I was just looking at a website that referenced Vlad III, shown below:
 
Only now do I notice differences between Vlad in the wood cut and in his portraits. Most obviously in the woodcut he has a beard and short hair (or at least it seems short to me). 
Has anyone else ever noticed this?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.53.239.203 (talk) 20:26, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Woodcut versus Portraits 

message: His post-mortem moniker of Ţepeş (Impaler) originated in his preferred method for executing his opponents, impalement — as popularized by medieval Transylvanian pamphlets. -- Names section
:A moniker is defined as "a pseudonym, or cognomen, which one gives to oneself.   The meaning is distinct from nickname, in that a nickname is generally given to one by another, and not chosen for oneself." Post-mortem means occurring after death, so I'm just wondering... How can one give oneself a name after one is already dead? ~ WindOwl 14:47, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Post-Morten Moniker? 

message: Have I missed something out?
It seems that part of the article is an exact copy of this text, which was strangely even noted when inserting the text (!) on 2 October 2005. Funny enough, someone later noted that references were missing (9 September 2006!), but apparently again didn't check for a simple copyright violation. Then an IP hereby removed the request for references (and the NPOV tag) on 17 July 2007... and now "everything's fine"?
Please let me in if I've missed out on something, else this text should be deleted as soon as possible. --Ibn Battuta 03:36, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  copyright violation?! 

message: I guess his behaviours were just pathetic.Is there any evidence that he was a "Psychotic". I would refer him as the devil in person.
80.80.175.66 (talk) 18:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  SICK? 

message: If this article is true then the turks self created him 
It explains in fact very well why he used these hard punishments.
His hatred against the turks is also very understandable.
He is an complex character,because beside his alleged cruelty,he obviously was intelligent and innovative.His bravery has been fueled by the hate aginst the ,also very cruel,turkish invaders.
Well, it is important to keep in mind that he also learned everything concerning the Ottoman military and stradegies. He taught many guerilla tactics, military training etc. I don´t think his campaigns would have resulted succesfully if it weren´t for the Turks astounishing competence concerning the military and tactics.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.251.215.40 (talk) 16:46, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The turks learned him to impale?? 

message: as a barbarian bloodthirsty turk, I have never heard the method of scalping in ottoman empire as a torture. We eat babies alive, but have no tradition of scalping. I assume this is something about writer's personal effort in creating connection between native american tribes and turks in terms of barbarism and inhumanity.
regards,
serhat.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.29.214.244 (talk) 13:40, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  scalping in turks 

message: This article could possible be better as "The German and Russian stories about Vlad Dracula". I could rewrite it if it is ok with everybody here, as it seems to be quite un-informative and I wouldn't call it "evidence" as such because it is clearly at least partly politically inspired propaganda, the German stories I mean.Laurukainen (talk) 16:25, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anecdotal evidence 

message: "Nitin is a scum of a person"
please edit that out.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.240.23.250 (talk) 03:14, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Nitin is a scum of a person" 

message: What are the sources for his birth and death dates?--Meraculas (talk) 15:39, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have been wondering the same thing. I hav´t found any source for this in literature. The first written document mentioning Vlad is from 1437. As far as I have read even the year of his birth is somewhat disputed. He was probably born sometime between 1429 and 1431. As far as his death, according to documents it happened sometime between the 4th of December 1476 and the 10th of January 1477. If there are no sources for his date of birth and death they should be removed.Laurukainen (talk) 14:29, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: When I made my comment I was talking about the specific date that he was born and died (I had no clue that the years where somewhat disputed). I knew that the month he had been born was disputed (it being either November or December of 1431) and that he died in December of 1476. Knowing that I figured that the specific dates of her birth and death (November 8 for birth and December 14 for his death) had been made up. If those really were the dates of those events (and someone had finally learned that to be true) I would like a source. --Meraculas (talk) 00:19, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The biography "Dracula: Prince of Many Faces" by Radu R. Florescu and Raymond T. McNally states that Vlad was born in 1431 under the sign of Sagittarius, making his birth month either November or (more likely) December. Incidentally, November 8 was Bram Stoker's birthdate.Tathunen (talk) 21:26, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dates?