Talk:Černová massacre

message: I am sad to see how stubborn some people are to push their agendas, the article is too much about unimportant or misinterpreted details, and we learn too little about why things happened how they happened. I do not see the relevance of Slovak National Party, and the relevance of shooters ethnicity is questionable -- the two parties to the conflict were the local people - citizens of Hungary of Slovak ethnicity - and the Hungarian authorities (does not matter whether represented by gendarmes of Slovak or Hungarian or whichever ethnicity). The event had an ethnic dimension, but also local and idiosyncratic dynamics. LEt us just learn more about it, let us try to interpret the events carefully, but I see to many biases in the text.....   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.63.109.204 (talk) 23:46, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Very low quality article 

message: the current outline (that contains the Slovak events) was coppied in whole with permission from a work by Josef Kirschbaum, Professor of Central European and Slavic History at the University of Toronto. I suggest it be left alone as it is not a POV rather a published academic paper. so stop the edit war Hobartimus and accept History as it IS not as YOU would LIKE it to be! It is only fair that if Hobartimus is allowed to push his agenda then the other side of the issue must also be presented.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.249.224.61 (talk) 01:12, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slovak Version Edit 

message: The most recent version, Uploaded by Nygaard was pathetic... the sources were redirects that ended up in some Hungarian language newspaper and the others to a poorly organized ramble on Slovak history... Perhaps mr Nygaard should stop pushing his own agenda.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.248.200.10 (talk) 17:51, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  conflicting versions... 

message: First, just from the standpoint of helping the reader understand the significance of this event, IMO, the intro and opening sections could be sharpened up so that the reason for the conflict is made plainer for the general reader.  I'm having trouble totally understanding why, for example, the locals were so wrought up over this to begin with.
Second, phrases like 'false apostles of Magyar culture' suggest POV-ness which should probably be avoided.  Again, I get that there were two sides to this fight, but I'm not sure I could explain what the differences were.  I think the first things that should be stated are what the government policy was, and why the locals were on a collision course with it.
Terry J. Carter (talk) 18:56, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That version was a likely copyvio inserted completely by an IP editor of dubious track record. I'm reverting to the earlier version before his involvement, contributed by the community. Hobartimus (talk) 01:09, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have restored some of the information (mostly names and dates) and removed the statements that seem to be original research (e.g. who "could" gain from the events). Tankred (talk) 03:56, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

text: Also, You have added some quotations to the article, but with no reference. Another unsourced quotation is there since January 2008. Can anyone find the corresponding citations? If not, those supposed quotations should be removed. Tankred (talk) 04:08, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: For some odd reason I can't see the references and the categories right now, when I go into the edit window I see that they are there but not when just looking at the article. Hobartimus (talk) 04:29, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have just fixed that. Are they all right now? Tankred (talk) 04:30, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes perfect now, thanks. Hobartimus (talk) 04:34, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

text: The offender returned with his offensive biased text, which I've removed (Again). Someone may want to watch this page. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 22:41, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks 68.39, it's a thing to watch out for. Hobartimus (talk) 05:49, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

text: And reverted again. For one thing, there's no evidence anyone gave permission to copy anything. For another, we're not in the habit of slavishly copying other people's work, rather we rewrite and incorporate multiple viewpoints. Franamax (talk) 09:32, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

text: Note ; After the above IP99.249.224.61 was blocked for hate speech (ethnic slurs)  a while back, he was more recently blocked for a month for "(Edit warring: amending block - it seems that this has been going on for months, persistent incivility too)" The IP is now also threatening to return "do you think I can't refresh my IP?" Please watch out for further attacks on this article. Hobartimus (talk) 21:31, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two Suggestions 

message: A country appered from nowhere, but Cernova is a piece in an unprecedented puzzle. --Nina.Charousek (talk) 00:21, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Czechslovakia

message: I have seen many politically biased texts in my professional career, but such an example of a one-sided selection of sentences and quotes cited without context as it is presented in this text is really a "record". I really wonder why nobody has noticed that both because it is obvious from every single sentence that the "author" tries to play down the whole tragedy in a ridiculous attempt to say that police is cruel everywhere and because only Hungarian (and I dare to say only non neutral Hungarian) sources are used and because I see no other than Hunagrian editors editing here and because the history of this article shows that a long detailed text (probably written by a non-Hungarian) has been completely deleted without giving any reason why the details should be wrong. But that seeems to be called "neutrality" here, such an article would normally not have been written even in the Hungarian wikipedia in this way, but some radicals from Hungary seem to take advantage of the fact that American admins have no idea what is going on here. "Excellent". Evening8888 (talk) 00:49, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: by the way, article in hungarian wp is somewhat neutral. --Nina.Charousek (talk) 01:10, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality 

message: Others have already commented (and will continue) about the NPOV issues "if any", this is about something else.  Much of this material appears to have been translated either from Hungarian, or some other language, by someone whose first language is not English.  No insult intended, but some of the translation has room for improvement.  For example, it seems clear to me, from looking up the word "gendarme" in some on-line dictionaries, that the Hungarian word "zsandár" should probably NOT be translated as "gendarme", but rather, seems to have the same meaning as the simple English word "policeman".  See, for example, the entry for "any policeman", under "Translations", (under "English"), at the wiktionary entry for gendarme.  
Some other examples:  In the first sentence in the "Consequences" section, why is the word "regardless" not followed by the word "of"?  In my opinion, it is simply an example of some translation by someone who is not sufficiently familiar with English.
I would "consider" devoting time to improving the translation myself, but judging from the previous section ("[...] Why somebody frequently erased majority of this article?"), there is some doubt about whether that would be "wasted work" or not.  --Mike Schwartz (talk) 17:39, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  clumsy translation 

message: Is it fair that Hobartimus is editing material without an explination?
I think not... I'd like to hear from Hobartimus... If not then perhaps I'll begin to erase his edits... fair is fair  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.249.224.61 (talk) 21:11, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Note ; After the above IP 99.249.224.61 was blocked for hate speech (ethnic slurs)  a while back, he was more recently blocked for a month for "(Edit warring: amending block - it seems that this has been going on for months, persistent incivility too)" The IP is now also threatening to return "do you think I can't refresh my IP?" Please watch out for further attacks on this article. Hobartimus (talk) 21:31, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hobartimus 

message: The article should be moved under Cernova massacre as 
a) the majority of English sources are referring to it as such and 
b)such events are normally referred to in English as massacres. Cernova tragedy is just an improper translation of either Csernovai tragedia or Cernovska tragedia but it is incorrect in English. Wladthemlat (talk) 08:40, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Move to Cernova massacre

message: Its necessary to be neutral. That sources are not neutral, not verifiable so not the from of sources accaptable in wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources --Samofi (talk) 22:08, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Note the above post is from user:Samofi, banned for vandalism, hate speech and various other disruption. Hobartimus (talk) 00:35, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Horbatimus use Hungarian sources from non-scholars 

message: I've fully protected this page for two weeks to prevent the (fairly slow, but persistant) edit war that is taking place. You need to agree consensus on an alternative form of wording, I think, to describe people living in Hungary who aren't Hungarians. An WP:RFC may be helpful. GedUK  10:26, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: And I've protected it again. Very disappointing that nobody appears to have attempted to communicate on this talk page. GedUK  20:21, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page protection 

message: :Although police force fire was not uncommon that time in many parts of the world (in 1871, the massacre of the Communards in Paris; in 1886, the Haymarket affair in the USA; in 1905, the killing of 1000 workers by Russian army in Petrograd, the killing of 11.000 rioting peasants in Romania, in 1907, the Jallianwala Bagh massacre by the British India Army) the Černová incident received special international attention as a result of Czech and Slovak intervention.
Is there a reliable source for these comparisons? Two of them are suppressions of full-blown revolutions; the Haymarket massacre was a response to the actual killing of a police officer with high explosive; and the Amritsar massacre was in a different world, after the War, and was committed by veterans. 
If I were going to look for an actual comparandum Peterloo would be much closer; but I don't see why we should. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:55, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Synthesis?

message: I placed  on this article and was then directed to this talk page. The article appears to me to be very one-sided and not very well-referenced. This is not my area of expertise and I hope that a small group of Wikipedians can reach a concensus. — Robert Greer (talk) 16:02, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: In what what way is it one-sided? Please give some more details, maybe we can correct that 79.117.202.107 (talk) 16:32, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: Currently, the article claims that according to other sources (citing James Felak), the gendarmes were ethnic Magyars. I think that it is misleading, as James Felak does not talk explicitly about their ethnicity. Whether he meant ethnic Hungarians or just soldiers serving the Kingdom of Hungary is questionable. See  KœrteFa {ταλκ} 11:14, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, suddenly ;) Deleted. Wladthemlat (talk) 11:23, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, thanks. :) KœrteFa {ταλκ} 11:30, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ethnic Hungarian gendarmes? 

message: The shootings sparked protests in European and American press and turned world's attention to the treatment of minorities in the Hungarian part of Austria-Hungary.[citation needed]
-- Citation could be for example: Robert Seton-Watson: The Racial Problems in Hungary. London, 1908. 
-- You have a text that substantiates the claim later in the article as well - The tragedy sparked protests in the European and US press and it turned the world's attention to the attitude to the minorities in Hungary. Important protesting European personalities included the Norwegian Nobel Prize holder Bjørnstjerne Bjørnson, the Oxford historian Robert William Seton-Watson, and the speaker of the Austrian parliament. 
-- It can be easily referenced, wikipedia article on Bjornstjerne does mention he did write on Cernova profusly. 
-- References in the text [9] and [8] do not work/are not linked to a source. The claims are indeed disputable, even though the mentioned historian Roman Holec made such claims to media, his monograph on Cernova does not mention it nor substantiate it. Please remove or replace with a credible source.
Viator7292 (talk) 23:44, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Partly done: Sceptre (talk) 21:52, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 24 August 2019