Wikipedia:Peer review/Ladislaus I of Hungary/archive1

Ladislaus I of Hungary
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because its comprehensiveness and neutrality should be chequed before its FA nomination.

Thanks, Borsoka (talk) 03:43, 12 May 2015 (UTC)


 * In the lead, "He occupied most parts of Croatia…" is awkward. Was it most of, some of, part of?  Unless there are distinct, seperate parts of Croatia which I'm not aware of (I'm only aware of a couple of countries that have such) Gecko G (talk) 08:22, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
 * , thank your for your comment. I modified the text. Borsoka (talk) 11:09, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
 * But we can't know the exact extent of territory that he gained control of. If he gained the lands south of Drava and north of Gvozd, then it was just northern Croatia (According to Thomas the Archdeacon's chronicle, Ladislaus "occupied the entire land from the River Drava to the mountains called the Iron Alps without encountering opposition".). Unlike today, in the 11th century the centre of Croatia was south around Knin, Biograd, Nin, Šibenik, Solin... not in Zagreb. He intervened in the succession crisis upon the request of his sister with support of a number of Croatian nobles, and after her death he was technically a legal heir to the throne. I would propose something like this: He intervened in the succession crisis in Croatia and gained control over northern parts of it. Tzowu (talk) 17:18, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
 * First, I take it your comment was directed at the previous section about his occupation of Croatia, and not his father's recieving of the Ducatus, so I hope it's ok that I'm moving it thusly.
 * Second, I turned to my collection of historical atlas to try to see if they could shed any light on what parts he occupied. I hadn't expected to find much since it was such a narrow window where the borders were in flux.  I was surprised at the number of references I did find, but also very surprised to find that my various historical atlas's unfortunately disagree with one another.   And I didn't find anything useful in other references I had on hand.  Looking around the 'net, apparently at the time Croatia did have two "parts" both called Croatia: Pannonian Croatia vs. Dalmatian Croatia, aka the Duchy of Croatia.  Croatia proper is a much later term, a little over half of which is in Pannonian croatia, the remainder of which, along with northern Dalmatia made up the Duchy of Croatia.  I wonder if that is the cause of the confusion in sources?  It seems he conquered Pannonian Croatia (& Slavonia) for sure, but it's unclear how-much, if any, of Dalmatian Croatia he got.
 * Thirdly, about the center (or heartland) of Croatia at the time being in what is today considered northern Dalmatia, very good point - I found a source confirming such: "A strong state organisation was created in the basin of the Dalmatian rivers Cetina, Krka and Zrmanja, in the hinterland of the Byzantine cities of Split, Trogir and Zadar." At least that's as of the late 9th/early 10th century, I presume it was still so in the late 11th (though apparently by this time Biograd & Nin were Venetian holdings, in the case of Biograd at least since earlier in the century ), so you are right that that is important to keep in mind.
 * Fine (1991) [which I cited twice just above] would likely make a good source for just how much of Croatia he occupied, unfortunately the page in question, page 284, is not available on Google Books.
 * Cheers, Gecko G (talk) 22:48, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, it was intented for that comment.
 * We can take 10 historical maps of Southeastern Europe during the Middle Ages and end up with 10 different versions of borders. Contemporary sources are very, very scarce about this time period, the contradictions you found are not unusual. What he definitely conquered was Pannonia. However, Croatian kings didn't really have a stable rule there even before and it was often regarded as terra nullus. It was mostly a swampy area. "Pannonian Croatia" and "Dalmatian Croatia" are names used by (some) historians for two earlier centuries' states, Duchy of Pannonia and Duchy of Croatia, or as names for 2 regions of Croatia in the 11th or 12th century.
 * I have the whole book and I can quote page 248. According to Fine, he "occupied much of Croatia, including part of Dalmatia", then after the attack of Cumans on Hungary he "pulled out of Dalmatia, but kept inland (Pannonian) Croatia." That territory was given to Almos who ruled there until 1095.


 * "The Hungarian king quickly intervened to protect his sister's interests (a fine excuse for what were probably his own ambitions) and occupied much of Croatia, including part of Dalmatia. However, some wild people (Pechenegs, according to Sisic, but more probably Cumans as argued by N. Klaic) then attacked Hungary, causing a partial withdrawal of the Hungarians. They pulled out of Dalmatia, but kept inland (Pannonian) Croatia. Between the Drava River and the Gvozd mountain they created a special Croatian banovina ruled by Almos, the nephew of the king. Almos was to hold this territory from 1091 to 1095." Tzowu (talk) 00:02, 13 May 2015 (UTC)


 * In the early years seciton, I made it clearer that it was the father who recieved the Duchy, not Ladislaus himself. And changed it to the Ducatus—as from my understanding it was not one of various duchies, like say with British or Swedish royal dukedom's or with French apanages, or what not, but rather a distinct, singular, entity.  Gecko G (talk) 17:09, 12 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Two quick clarifications in the duke section, 2nd paragraph: 1st- was the Battle of Kemej the outbreak of the civil war? If not, when it started should probably be mentioned.  2nd- Where did he command the left flank? (at the battle of Mogyoród specifically or was it routinely his command?) Gecko G (talk) 09:32, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
 * , thank you for your review. Sorry I do not know whether he routinely left the left flank or only at Mogyoród, but this information was only recorded in connection with the Battle of Mogyoród and I modified the article. The civil war started with the invasion of the duchy which ended with the Battle of Kemej. Borsoka (talk) 01:19, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
 * The Battle of Kemej ended the civil war or ended the invasion of the duchy? Gecko G (talk) 19:08, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
 * No, it was a battle during the civil war (and the invasion of the duchy). Borsoka (talk) 02:32, 18 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I had planned to go over one section a day, but I haven't had the time to maintain that schedule. To help make up for it, I went through 3 sections today.  Not sure what the etiquette is, if I should keep this near my other comments just above, or put it at teh bottom after Dank's review to keep it chronological.  If the later, then anyone please feel free to move my remarks down.


 * In the "His reign, consolidation …" sub-section:
 * However, almost contemporaneous sources contradict this report seems you are either missing an "all" OR it should be "most" rather than "almost"
 * Thank you. Modified. Borsoka (talk) 02:32, 18 May 2015 (UTC)


 * In the sentence about Rudolf of Rheinfelden, Perhaps consider working in a link to either the Great Saxon Revolt and/or him being an antiking?
 * Thank you. Link added. Borsoka (talk) 02:32, 18 May 2015 (UTC)


 * In the "expansion" sub-section:
 * all looks good.


 * In the "Last years" sub-section:
 * 2nd paragraph, 1st sentence. Is it possible to double check the exact wording in the illuminated chronicle in the quote used there, specifically 2 parts: The usage of an "and" rather than a comma between the first two items of the 4 item list, and also is it clarified what is meant by "Britain", since England is part of the physical island of Great Britain (thus that usage is odd).
 * Gecko G (talk) 19:05, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I modified the second sentence after this sentence in order to emphasize that the whole story was only a later invention. The chronicler who wrote that sentence obviously did not know geography. Borsoka (talk) 02:32, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Comments. As always, feel free to revert my copyediting. - Dank (push to talk)
 * "Cuman": quote marks here are ambiguous. Add "a Turkic nomad".
 * , thank you for your comments. I would preserve the question marks, because "Ladislaus's fight with the Cuman" is the traditional name of that legend. I delinked the word and added a short text. Borsoka (talk) 03:21, 16 May 2015 (UTC)


 * " proclaimed king in 1074; however, Solomon maintained control": proclaimed king in 1074, but Solomon maintained control
 * Thank you, modified. Borsoka (talk) 03:21, 16 May 2015 (UTC)


 * "However, Solomon resisted Ladislaus with the assistance of King Henry IV of Germany. Consequently ... However": "However" and "Consequently" are heavier words than you need here; they reduce readability, especially with 3 occurrences in one paragraph.
 * Thank you, modified. Borsoka (talk) 03:21, 16 May 2015 (UTC)


 * "Cumans": Don't link the second occurrence.
 * Thank you, I delinked the first occurence (as per above). Borsoka (talk) 03:21, 16 May 2015 (UTC)


 * - Dank (push to talk) 20:15, 15 May 2015 (UTC)