Talk:Géza II of Hungary

Incorrect Year of Birth?
This article lists Géza II year of birth as 1030; I believe this may be a typo and more likely his year of birth was 1130? (Based on his year of death 1162, and other Internet articles about him.) I have nothing that I would consider verifiable, just an observation based on other dates in the article. I hope this is an acceptable Talk Page item, apologies if it is not. I am brand new to Wikipedia. Celique 07:13, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Requested move 11 October 2017

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Not moved &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 16:31, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Géza II of Hungary → Geza II of Hungary – WP:English. About 2100 mentions in Books.Google Swetoniusz (talk) 21:19, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
 * , before requesting a move, please try to read the sources you are citing to substantiate your proposal. For instance, Segregation – Integration – Assimilation: Religious and Ethnic Groups in the Medieval Towns of Central and Eastern Europe, Ritual and Symbolic Communication in Medieval Hungary under the Árpád Dynasty (1000 - 1301), Church and Society in Hungary and in the Hungarian Diaspora and East Central Europe in the Middle Ages, 1000-1500 use the Géza form in accordance with the article. Borsoka (talk) 02:28, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Please avoid personal attacks. I can show many other publications using the version Geza like The Oxford history of medieval Europe. It's more common. Swetoniusz (talk) 17:50, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Just for the record, you have not verified that Geza is the most common form, because the list you presented above contains books that use the "Géza" form. Please read No personal attacks before accusing me of such misconduct. Please also remember that an administrator informed you about the serious consequences of baseless personal attacks and similar acts of vandalism . Borsoka (talk) 02:25, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
 * , as far as I can remember there was a long discussion about the use of diacritical marks in WP articles and you activelly participated in it. I would highly appreciate if you could summarize the result of the discussion. Borsoka (talk) 02:35, 12 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Oppose As a misreading of WP:UE. Part of the Use English policy states "The use of modified letters (such as accents or other diacritics) in article titles is neither encouraged nor discouraged; when deciding between versions of a word which differ in the use or non-use of modified letters, follow the general usage in reliable sources that are written in the English language (including other encyclopedias and reference works)" AusLondonder (talk) 06:19, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose. "Géza" is a Hungarian native name, it has no English variant. GB results do no confirm the nominator's claim, while he also misinterpret WP:English. Just an example: majority of English news and commentars use Viktor Orbán's name without accent ("Orban"). But that does not mean that we should rename that article. I am curious what is Swetoniusz's opinion about the article names Władysław II Jagiełło, Bolesław IV the Curly or Jadwiga of Poland, which definitely are not most common forms... --Norden1990 (talk) 08:39, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
 * See the case of Elżbieta Bonifacja, daughter of Jadwiga of Poland. I am highly suprised why we should do exception for Hungarian royalties. Swetoniusz (talk) 17:50, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The case of Elżbieta Bonifacja has nothing to do with the title of this article. Borsoka (talk) 02:25, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Support per WP:UE and WP:CONSISTENCY with other articles on European royalty. We have articles on Charlemagne, Napoleon, and Saladin; not "Karl der Große", "Napoléon", and "Salah ad-Din". Academicoffee71 (talk) 03:10, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Interesting argument. You've changed your tune. Remember arguing in vain we didn't need consistency between Grand Duchy of Kraków and Kraków. AusLondonder (talk) 08:52, 13 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Oppose, in accordance with WP:UE. Borsoka (talk) 02:25, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose Diacritics are used in English literature. When they are not used this is because of laziness or (less common now) technical issues. We should not allow either to influence us. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 04:35, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose. WP:UE does not mandate that we remove all accents. Géza is perfectly common in English-language sources. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:35, 17 October 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Intro
The first paragraph is too long! Kapeter77 (talk) 13:46, 17 October 2019 (UTC)