Talk:Charles I of Hungary

Active discussions
WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors
A version of this article was copy edited by Corinne, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 21 October 2015. The Guild welcomes all editors with a good grasp of English and Wikipedia's policies and guidelines to help in the drive to improve articles. Visit our project page if you're interested in joining! If you have questions, please direct them to our talk page.

UntitledEdit

I think the regnal numbers are leading to some confusion.

Charles II "le Boiteux" (1254-1309) 
|     & Maria of Hungary (1257-1323) (daughter of Stephen V)
|
Charles I Martell (1271-1295) & Klementia von Habsburg (-1295) 
|
Charles Robert of Hungary (1308-42) as Károly I Róbert (1288-1342)

So if Charles Robert is counted as Charles I of Hungary, as we seem to be wanting to do on List of Hungarian rulers, he is the great-grandson, not grandson, of Stephen V.

I was adding to the confusion by counting Charles I Martel as a King of Hungary, which I think he claimed to be from 1290-1295, but we seem not to be counting him as a Hungarian ruler. -- Someone else 04:27 Dec 28, 2002 (UTC)

I searched the Google on the genealogy of the Angevins and came up with this:
(my translation from [1])
Charles Martel (1271-1295), son of King Charles II of Naples and Maria of Hungary (persumably daughter of Stephen V of Hungary). He was the titular king of Hungary (1290-1295) and married Clemence, daughter of King of Romans (persumably Rudolf I)
Charles I Robert (1291-1343), son of Charles Martel and Clemence, King of Hungary (1308-1342) and married Elisabeth of Poland (persumably daughter of Casimir III of Poland)
Louis I (1326-1382), son of Charles I Robert and Elisabeth of Poland, King of Hungary (1342-1382) and Poland (1370-1382). He married Margaret, daugheter of Emperor Henry VII.
So Charles Robert was the greatgrandson of Stephen V and we don't count Charles Martel as ruler of Hungary since he is only titular. In fact Andrew III was the real king at that time. This Charles Martel was spelled with one extra L (Charles Martell) in English text to avoid confusion with the Charles Martel, grandfather of Charlemagne. Here is another example that we cannot totally rely on 1911 EB for correct info. We need to research ourselves. Be reminded that the originial French version was copyrighted.-- User:kt2

What the hell?Edit

User:Hobartimus, stop reverting me! Would you mind looking at the edit you keep reverting? A new user significantly expanded this article. Unfortunately, he did not delete the old "Life" section, which is now redundant because it only repeats the information contained in the "Struggle for Hungary" and other sections. I have moved the few original sentences (Charles' family) from "Life" to other appropriate sections and removed this redundant section altogether. The new user also linked some words whenever s/he used them. There is no need to have five red links to Ladislaus Kán in one paragraph. I have corrected it. Just read the article for God's sake! To demonstrate absurdity of the edit war you have launched here, my version links Maria of Hungary to the correct person Maria of Hungary (1257-1323) while your version links to the generic name Mary. Please stop it. Tankred (talk) 14:50, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Now now your edit makes a lot of controversial changes such as the complete removal of one of the pictures and others lumped in together with other changes. For example to correctly fix redundancy first it has to be decided which version is written better and of higher quality. Also none of these is "my" version it's merely the previous version, and be assured I did read your edit both times that was the reason why I reverted it. Your edit as a whole was detrimental to the quality of the article and few positive aspects of it can be easily put back like the link fix you mentioned above. Hobartimus (talk) 15:53, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
I also noticed the removal of a picture and some Hungarian placenames. A major change in one edit without discussion first. Squash Racket (talk) 16:04, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
I left a contemporary picture of the Battle of Posada there. I removed the anachronistic picture of the same event as redundant, but feel free to re-add it if you like. What exactly do you consider "detrimental to the quality of the article"? Please be specific. That sentence has no meaning without examples. Tankred (talk) 16:38, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Contradiction with Amade AbaEdit

According to this article

On 10 October 1307, the magnates presented at the assembly in Rákos proclaimed Charles king, but the most powerful aristocrats (Matthew Csák, Amadé Aba and Ladislaus Kán) ignored him.

On the other hand, according to Amade Aba

He [Amade Aba] was present at the Assembly of Rákos (10 October 1307) where the participants confirmed Charles' claim for the throne.

Top.Squark (talk) 20:48, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

What the hell? 2Edit

Some guy called Links489 have modified the article, and posted this nonsense: "Charles died on 16 July 2007, he was killed by a famous samuri warrior know as Joel Kerr the Amazing. He was struck down by his mighty blade of wrath." I suggest we should warn him, that wikipedia is not some playground for dishonourable jokes. I have deleted the section.

Also I am Hungarian and Károly Róbert was our factual and rightful king. He was not only titular, he fought many battles and evetually defeated all of the oligarchs. His son Lajos the Great was our rightful king too. Don't try to teach us our own history! Also why do you translate every Hungarian name? His name was Károly Róbert, not Charles Robert damn it! We say Gorge Bush and not Bokor György, think about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mogzyx (talkcontribs) 23:03, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Cite sources. Charles Robert is the the most ommon name for this person in English sources. Besides. "you" call Elizabeth II II. Erzsébet, so why shouldn't "we" call him Charles Robert? Surtsicna (talk) 09:36, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

tamperingEdit

in the part Deterioration of the southern border a date has been altered to september 2010:

"The Árpád kings had succeeded in encircling their whole southern frontier with six military colonies or banates, comprising, roughly speaking, Little Wallachia (southern part of present-day Romania) and the northern parts of present-day Bulgaria, Serbia and Bosnia, September 2010 . Charles redistributed these territories and proselytized the residents of the region to consolidate his reign"

a1979s —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.113.82.206 (talk) 14:58, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

GA ReviewEdit

This review is transcluded from Talk:Charles I of Hungary/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Royroydeb (talk · contribs) 09:50, 22 March 2016 (UTC)


Royroydeb, thank you for your review. Based on your remarks, I made significant changes in the text. Please find my comments below. Borsoka (talk) 14:44, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

  • "was King of Hungary and Croatia from 1308." - it should be was the king of Hungary and Croatia from 1308 to ?
    • I added the closing date. Borsoka (talk) 14:44, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
  • In the lead only the lineage of paternal grandmother is mentioned. Any reason? Why not of other grandparents?
    • I modified the lead and I hope it clarified the above issue. Borsoka (talk) 14:44, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
  • "inherited the claim of his father" - do you want to mean, that he was a contender to succeed his father as the king?
    • I modified the lead. I hope the new text is clearer. Borsoka (talk) 14:44, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
  • "He was the only son" - A pronoun is not used at the beginning of a paragraph.
    • I modified the text. Borsoka (talk) 14:44, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
  • "was the firstborn son" - what do you mean by firstborn son?
    • I added a wikilink to the word. Borsoka (talk) 14:44, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
  • Did the house became "extinct" because it did not have any descendants or was just a claim of Mary?
    • I modified the text. I hope the new text is clearer. Borsoka (talk) 14:44, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
  • The article says Andrew III was crowned the king in 1290, but Mary gave her claim to the throne in favour of his son in 1292. How does it possible?
    • I modified the text. I hope the new text is clearer. Borsoka (talk) 14:44, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
  • What authority did the Pope had to decide about the throne?
    • Sorry, I do not understand your above question. Borsoka (talk) 14:44, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
      • Why was the Pope's decision about the throne given importance? Was he sort of kingmaker? RRD13 দেবজ্যোতি (talk) 18:15, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
        • I added further information on the Pope's claim to suzerainty over Hungary. Borsoka (talk) 05:26, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

RRD13 দেবজ্যোতি (talk) 10:09, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

  • A powerful Croatian lord... What does lord mean? A landlord? And why did he suddenly invite?
    • I modified the text, adding further information. Borsoka (talk) 05:26, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
  • Link Neapolitan
  • They disembarked in Split - it should be from Split
    • Modified (... landed at Split ...). Borsoka (talk) 05:26, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
  • In the last sentence you want to mean the coronation should have taken place in that city with that crown? It should be reworded
  • The last sentence of the second paragraph should also be reworded.
  • Why he renounced the crown for Otto III should be explained
    • I modified the text, adding further information. Borsoka (talk) 05:26, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
  • Why was Otto unable to strengthen his position in Hungary?
    • I modified the text, adding further information. Borsoka (talk) 05:26, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
  • Who is Ladislaus Kan?
    • I added further information. Borsoka (talk) 05:26, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

RRD13 দেবজ্যোতি (talk) 18:15, 23 March 2016 (UTC)


  • Link Church of our Lady and Buda
    • Thank you for your review. Links added. Borsoka (talk) 12:06, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
  • the powerful lord. - Remove powerful
    • Removed the text "against the powerful lord" text. Borsoka (talk) 12:06, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
  • now Timișoara in - replace now with present day
  • new voivode - link voivode
    • I modified: voivode of Transylvania (which is already linked under the same subtitle). Borsoka (talk) 12:06, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
  • Charles had taken "full possession" - why it is in quotes?
    • It is a quote from his charters. I modified the text. Borsoka (talk) 12:06, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
  • Temesvár to Visegrád - link them. Also mention where they are presently located.
    • Both towns were mentioned in previous sections. I think we should not link them again (as per WP:OVERLINK). Borsoka (talk) 12:06, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
  • link Carpathian mountains
  • Hungarian castles, along with the domains attached - what does domains mean?
    • Changed: domains > estates. Borsoka (talk) 12:06, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
  • to rule "with the plenitude of power" - why is it in quotes?
    • Because it is quote from one of his charters. Borsoka (talk) 12:06, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
  • promoting "a daughter to a son" - the question over quotation
    • I changed: "promoting a daughter to a son". I think nowadays we would not describe the act as a "promotion". Borsoka (talk) 12:06, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
  • army on the Leitha River. - I think on the banks of Leitha river
  • were soon tortured - if you know the date, mention it otherwise remove soon

RRD13 দেবজ্যোতি (talk) 18:28, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

  • seizing the fortress of Severin - link Severin
  • the new King of Poland, Casimir III - link Casimir III.
  • (the so-called chamber's profit) - Why have you written so called?
  • He died in Visegrád - in brackets write present day country
    • Visegrád is mentioned in previous chapters of the article. Since Charles was king of Hungary, the information that Visegrád is in Hungary cannot be surprising. :) Borsoka (talk) 12:06, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
  • was buried in the Székesfehérvár Basilica - mention present day country
    • As per my last remark. :) Borsoka (talk) 12:06, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

RRD13 দেবজ্যোতি (talk) 05:39, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

  • has been recently married to - it should be "has recently married"
  • to "Ruthenia" - again, why is it in quotes?
    • It is a quote from a charter and "Ruthenia" is a medieval term. Text modified. Borsoka (talk) 12:06, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
  • His mother was a daughter of Gurke Csák. He was elected Bishop of Győr in 1336. - you want to mean that Csak was elected as the bishop or Charles? Rewording must be done.
  • the "restoration of the ancient good conditions" - You can instead write, According to Kontler Charles declared that his aim...
    • Sorry, I do not understand your above suggestion: it is not Kontler's POV, but a fact. Borsoka (talk) 12:06, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

RRD13 দেবজ্যোতি (talk) 08:16, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your comprehensive review. Please ping me, if any further action is needed. Borsoka (talk) 12:06, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

I am satisfied with the response. I am passing it. RRD13 দেবজ্যোতি (talk) 13:22, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Return to "Charles I of Hungary" page.