Talk:Hunyadi family

May I alert you to the fact that the map subtitled ‘The wars and conquests of Matthias Corvinus’ contains the date 1784 associated with a yellow coloured arrow, pointing at Temesvár, showing an ‘Ottoman invasion’ (I would use the word incursion rather than ‘invasion’ to denote the movement of Ottoman troops). Please correct the typographic error. Thank you. Magister P — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.176.105.141 (talk) 00:03, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Hunyadi family has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: October 6, 2014. (Reviewed version).

Hunyadi family received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hunyadi family article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation. Hungary Mid‑importance Hungary portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hungary, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hungary on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Romania Mid‑importance Romania portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Romania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Romania-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. To-do list: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Help Romania reach at least GA-status Help History of Romania get WP:GOOD Request an article or create a missing one Assess : Assess all articles tagged for this project that have not been assessed for quality Cleanup : Review the Romania-related cleanup listing Normalize the use of "Northern Bukovina" (capitalized) and "Northern Bessarabia" (Bessarabian part of Chernivtsi Oblast) all over Wikipedia Disambiguation : Disambiguate project articles and get points Expand : Expand Postage stamps and postal history of Romania Translate : Translate Romania-related articles from the Romanian Wikipedia Translate and keep in sync with the project versions in other languages: Projet:Roumanie (in French), Proiect:România (in Romanian), Проект:Румыния (in Russian) Unreferenced : * Add more reference to FC CFR Timișoara. Other : Make use in articles of the newly contributed images (about 5800!!) from the Wiki Loves Monuments Romania 2011 (WLM Romania external site) Review newly created Romania-related articles Check the articles needing expert attention or other work, and help with some of the items Create Awards for WikiProject Romania Contribute photos related to Romania at Commons:WikiProject Romania. Organize Romania related images on Commons. See also media-related tasks Guild of Copy Editors This article was copy edited by a member of the Guild of Copy Editors.

The spelling of the name of Janos Hunyadi's father

User:Borsoka I appreciate your edits here, it would be great if you would bring Hunyadi family to GA status in the future, like you did with several articles before.

I noticed the following formula in the added text: [...] knight Vajk (who is known as Voicu in Romanian historiography [...] and I was wondering if you changed your opinion expressed at Talk:John_Hunyadi/Archive_5#Father.27s_name (where you said Personally, I would delete the "Vajk" version, even it is based on Cambride History. It is totally anachronistic and makes an artificial connection between the late 10th-century pagan name of the future Saint Stephen I of Hungary and the late 14th-century name of Hunyadi's father.). Or it is just a error that you did not observe? 79.117.184.91 (talk) 22:15, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank for your message. No, I only insist on the version provided by reliable sources. The "Voicu" form is also anachronistic. Borsoka (talk) 03:07, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

I agree, Voicu is the Romanianized version of the name, in the same extent as Vajk is a Hungarianized name. I am confused about your phrasing ("Vajk (who is known as Voicu in Romanian historiography"), which seems to imply that Vajk is the "real" name , while Voicu is the altered name.

I think we must seek a compromise regarding Ro and Hu names on this kind of articles (where Hu soreces use Hu names and Ro sources use Ro names), in order not to create a mess.86.126.35.40 (talk) 06:56, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

I think the method of duplicating his name would be funny, therefore I suggest that we use the neutral form Voyk. Borsoka (talk) 07:24, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

I agree to your proposal. I also think Radul (the form that I found in the original donation charter from 1409) should be preferred over Radol (the name used in Hu hisoroography); the Ro historiography uses the variant Radu. 79.117.174.50 (talk) 09:11, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Here is the earliest source (1409) about the Hunyadi family: ".....servitiorum preclaris meritis Woyk filii Serbe aule nostre militis per ipsum nostre Maiestati....." "....baronum nostrorum consilio ac nove nostre donationis titulo et omni eo jure, quo eadem ad nostram spectant, memorato Wo(y)k militi et per eum Magas et Radol....." ".....carnalibus ac Radol patrueli fratribus...." Fakirbakir (talk) 09:21, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

A higher resolution of the document: , if you learnt medieval graphology. :) --188.143.79.20 (talk) 10:24, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

I do not get it. Why do you think the earliest source used the "Radul" form? Fakirbakir (talk) 10:53, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

User:Fakirbakir I admit my mistake, I had the impression that Radul was the original variant. But I guess that we should also use Woyk instead of Vojk. 79.117.174.50 (talk) 10:54, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, we should. I hope Borsoka can help us to solve this problem. I have found another (quite old) source about the same charter and its spelling is different. So I am very unsure. Fakirbakir (talk) 10:59, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

I guess that is a spelling mistake, the rest of sources use the form Woyk. There is also an 1435 act cotaining the text: «Egregius JOHANNES dictus OLAH, filum condam Woyk de Hunyad aule nostre miles» 79.117.174.50 (talk) 11:06, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

WP:Name. We should prefer the form used in English literature. We could choose between Vajk or Voyk (see the list of referenced books). I think the latter is more neutral. Borsoka (talk) 04:35, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

User:Borsoka what do you think about the content of the Vajk (given name) article? Is it right to say that Stephen I of Hungary and J.H's father had the same name, given that in 15th century documents the latter one's name is spelled Woyk or Voyk? Avpop (talk) 10:25, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Actually, I do not know anything of the assumed connection between the two names. (Actually, we know that St Stephen's original name was Voic, because this form was recorded by Thietmar of Merseburg. Borsoka (talk) 10:18, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Regent or Governor

John's title is a bit confusing. Was he a governor or a regent? According to the article of Regent of Hungary, the "regent" title was established only in 1920 (however its subsections mention Hunyadi). Fakirbakir (talk) 11:17, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

He was regent of Hungary with the title "governor" (Engel 2001, p. 288). :) Actually, I think sooner or later a separate article should be written for the Governors of Hungary (Hunyadi, Horthy and two others). Borsoka (talk) 12:30, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Contradiction regarding J.H.'s year of birth

1405 or 1406 here, and 1407 in John Hunyadi article. 86.126.32.215 (talk) 15:12, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

• Thank you for your above remark. The two dates are fixed. Borsoka (talk) 13:07, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Anachronism in picture description

"Hunyad Castle (in present-day Hunedoara, Romania), after which the family was named" is not precise.

• "Corvin Castle was laid out in 1446" (from Corvin Castle article)
• John Hunyadi's father also was called "Woyk de Hunyad" (see source) 79.117.174.50 (talk) 11:13, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Only the current Renaissance-styled Hunyad Castle was laid out in 1446. The family was named after the Hunyad estate, received in 1409. de Hunyad = Hunyadi. --188.143.79.20 (talk) 11:21, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the above remarks. I modified the description of the picture. The Latin "Woyk de Hunyad" means "Voyk Hunyadi". Borsoka (talk) 04:32, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Hunyadi family article also contains the phrase On this day, Sigismund granted Hunyad Castle (in present-day Hunedoara, Romania) and the lands pertaining to it to his court knight Voyk and to Voyk's four kinsmen. implying that the castle existed in 1409. 79.117.163.9 (talk) 07:48, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, a castle existed there already in 1409. The case is very similar to that of Buda Castle which was erected in the 1250s, but was continuously rebuilt and rebuilt till the 1900s. We cannot create separate articles for the Buda Castle in 1251, in 1252, in 1253, .... in 2014. :) Borsoka (talk) 11:03, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

If a castle existed before 1409, the History section of Corvin Castle article should be updated, cause currently it affirms that "Corvin Castle was laid out in 1446" 86.127.31.188 (talk) 12:51, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Other relatives

According to http://asztrorege.blogspot.ro/2010_10_01_archive.html John Pongrácz of Dengeleg (who had the dignity of Voivode of Transylvania) was the son of George Pongrácz of Dengeleg.

Also Marina is another sister of John Hunyadi mentioned by Nicolaus Olahus in his work Hungaria 86.127.22.113 (talk) 12:37, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

I am planning to add his sister to the family tree. However, I do not understand why should we add all his nephews, great-nephews, nieces, .... etc. Borsoka (talk) 14:10, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

John Pongrácz of Dengeleg was the cousin Matthias Crovinus and held the important rank of Voivode of Transylvania, I consider he is worth mentioning. 14:36, 25 April 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.127.20.244 (talk)

Thanks. He is now mentioned in a note, together with his brother. Borsoka (talk) 03:32, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

User:Borsoka - can you please tell me in what document is Anikó Branicskai mentioned? Thanks in advance. 79.117.172.15 (talk) 22:25, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Kubunyi says, she is mentioned in a "document" of 1429 (Kubinyi 2008, p. 10). Borsoka (talk) 03:06, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Are you sure Kubinyi says she was Radol's wife? This site refers to a woman named Anko who was was Vojk Jr's widow and whose name appears in a 1429 manuscript. 79.117.179.132 (talk) 05:45, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, her name is fixed. Kubinyi writes: "A document issued in 1429 refers to Ankó Brancsikai (Barincskai), the widow of László Vajk Hunyadi. Ankó Brancsikai appears to have been married to Radol-László, who bore the name of his more distinguished elder brother Vajk in his family name. (An alternative view is that hte document simply failed to indicate László as the brother of Vajk.)" (Kubinyi 2008, p. 10) Borsoka (talk) 06:30, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Apparently the original name from the Latin document did not contain any accent (just Anko, without ó) 86.127.27.202 (talk) 07:31, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, it is apparent. However, the reliable written in English which is cited uses the "ó" form. Borsoka (talk) 08:33, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Pop is also a reliable author and he uses the form Anca 86.127.25.211 (talk) 10:04, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

In a book written in Romanian. Kubinyi's work is published in English. Borsoka (talk) 10:58, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

It has been also translated to English :) 86.127.10.96 (talk) 12:13, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

We can assume that Pop's Anca is identical with Kubinyi's Ankó Brancsikai, but we do not know. Borsoka (talk) 12:44, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Here and here there are other Hu-language sources which uses the name Anko, without accent. 79.117.183.47 (talk) 12:52, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, a book written in Hungarian. I do not insist on the accent, but books written either in Hungarian or in Romanian can hardly substantiate English usage against a peer-reviewed book published in English. Borsoka (talk) 12:59, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Armbruster

I added this but I got an error. Can someone please help me? Also, I don't know the isbn of the book. Avpop (talk) 06:38, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Wallachian

The proper English-language term for "Vlach" is "Wallachian". "Vlach" is a foreignism that does not exist outside of an academic context. I do not know how things work in other languages, but in English, the term is Wallachian, and that's that. RGloucester — ☎ 01:55, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

I am not a native speaker of English, but I guess that, for instance, John V. A. Fine Jr, who uses the term Vlach many times in his books, knows the proper terminology. Wallachia was a principality in the territory of present-day Romania. Its inhabitants were obviously Wallachians. However, Vlachs, or Romanians, lived/live in many other regions, including Moldavia, Transylvania, Banat, Serbia, Bulgaria, Macedonia, Thessaly... Borsoka (talk) 02:16, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

GA Review

Reviewer: Jonas Vinther (talk · contribs) 15:49, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

• Well-written

This review is transcluded from Talk:Hunyadi family/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

a. the prose is clear and concise, it respects copyright laws, and the spelling and grammar are correct

b. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation

The article is wonderfully written. I found a few sentence or grammar mistakes which I corrected myself as I read the article.

• Verifiable with no original research

a. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline

b. It provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines

c. It contains no original research

The article mostly uses book or journal sources which are referenced with Harvard templates. All the sources contain the necessary information.

• Broad in its coverage

a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic

b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail

The article is very broad in its coverage, stays on topic and does not go into unnecessary detail.

• Neutral

It represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each

The article is neutral and does not included personal opinions or statements.

• Stable

It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute

The article is stable and its content does not change significantly from day to day (edits made in the face of the GA-nomination will be ignored). Neither is there any edit wars or content disputes.

• Illustrated

a. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content

b. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions

The article is nicely illustrated with eight images all of which contain the necessary information.

• Pass, fail or hold?

With the article meeting the GA-criteria I'm of course going to pass it. Nice job people. :) Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 16:18, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

"Extended" coat of arms?

What does "extended" coat of arms mean in this context? Combined? Chicbyaccident (talk) 12:20, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

As far as I can remember, the Hunyadis' coat-of-arms (depicting a raven) was extended in 1453 by a new shield. Borsoka (talk) 13:47, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Transylvanian

Anon, can you verify that this family, which had extensive domains in the whole Kingdom of Hungary (including Transylvania, Slavonia and Hungary proper) could not be mentioned as "Hungarian"? Please remember, that John Hunyadi was governor of Hungary, his son, Matthias was crowned king of Hungary. Borsoka (talk) 17:39, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

@123Steller:, :@Norden1990:,

I think the issue is a bit tricky, since if you edit the infobox, the current paramater is called "nationality", but what is displayed is "ethnicity", although the two is not necessarily identical in general. As a nationality (= modern citizenship or self-declaration or allegiance) of the Hunyadi family, is undoubtedly Hungarian. Regarding ethnicity, the issue is colored and has many uncertaintes, better only more accepted or adopted versions. So I think for resolution first a solution should be found fo the infobox parameter, since I saw other pages where the nationality and ethniciy may be separated.(KIENGIR (talk) 19:04, 17 May 2018 (UTC))

It is true that the word nationality is polysemous, but the displayed word is the one that matters ("ethnicity"). According to most contemporary sources,it was a noble family of Romanian ancestry. I think Borsoka also agrees with the current version. 123Steller (talk) 09:52, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

"Of Romanian stock"/"Most of the modern historians..."

@Bruhsmillah: yes, the family was likely of Romanian origin, but this is only a theory. The theories about the family's origin are mentioned in the second paragraph of the lead. We cannot present a scholarly theory as a fact as per WP:NOR. Please also avoid adding content that is not verified in the allegedly cited source (). Borsoka (talk) 00:32, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

@Bruhsmillah: please read our policy on edit warring and discuss your concerns on the Talk page. Borsoka (talk) 08:42, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

@Bruhsmillah: why do you think we should mention twice in the lead that the family was likely of Wallachian origin. Perhaps you want to discuss the issue here instead of edit warring. Borsoka (talk) 14:39, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Chronological order of the members in the lead, I removed duplication

I arranged the members in chronological order the lead and removed duplication regarding Matthias and John Corvinus. Someone may check if all the information are presented correctly

"Matthias Corvinus, was King of Hungary from 1458 until 1490, King of Bohemia (ruling in Moravia, Lower Lusatia, Upper Lusatia, and Silesia) from 1469 until 1490, and Duke of Austria from 1487 until 1490."

was duplicated in the lead with

"Matthias ruled Moravia, Silesia, Austria, and other neighbouring regions."