Talk:Banat in the Middle Ages

Merger proposal
, I think your proposal should be backed by some arguments. For the time being, I do not understand it. Banat is a clear geographical region with its specific history. Why should we describe its history or its medieval history in an article dedicated to the geographical region itself. Should we also merge the article Kingdom of Hungary (1000-1301) merge into the article Hungary? Borsoka (talk) 09:17, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Actually, I meant to propose the merge to a new article, History of Banat, which redirects to Banat. You can remove the tag.--Z oupan 09:31, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

"Banat"
It must be mentioned that the medieval "Temeskoz" was never part of any banate in the Hungarian kingdom (the modern name of the territory "Banat" was only born in the 18th century). Fakirbakir (talk) 10:47, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * And what about the Banat of Temeswar after which the region is now known as Banat? :) Yes, Banat is a 18th-century name, such as the names of the Carpathian Basin, Central Europe and hundreds of geographical names. Borsoka (talk) 14:59, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I meant Temeskoz was not a banate at all but an integral part of the medieval kingdom. Fakirbakir (talk) 16:23, 10 December 2015 (UTC)