User talk:Mátyás

Welcome to my talk page! If a discussion is started here, I will respond to it here; also, if we start talking on your talk page, I'll answer there. --${\displaystyle \color {Blue}{\mathcal {M}}}$${\displaystyle \color {Blue}{\vec {(e\ ,}}}$${\displaystyle \color {Blue}t)}$ = ? 10:07, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't actually an edit war; just stopping propaganda leaking into the article. But your quotation mark contribution is appreciated :D ja fiswa imċappas bil-hara! (talk) 12:32, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The spesh man has been doing edits for list of World map changes - see his sandbox. Unfortunately he is obstinately insisting that the title should be territorial evolution of the World. He seems quite keen so I feel a bit guilty having to be negative with him. Perhaps a few words from you encouraging him to edit list of World map changes might help. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 03:49, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've restated the list format. I think the table was a bit clunky and inconsistent. The UNSC website also lists the members by alphabetical order and it does make sense because the non-permanent members are all equal irrespective of regional grouping or term. Is it OK? Nirvana888 (talk) 18:18, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for updating the list. Looks great! Nirvana888 (talk) 18:48, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the alphabetical list of current members is all right. And you're welcome.--Mátyás (talk) 18:55, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Might also be helpful to include a map of the current membership like this one United Nations Security Council election, 2009. What do you think? Nirvana888 (talk) 19:06, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done! Now why didn't I think of that?--Mátyás (talk) 20:00, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nice well done. Nirvana888 (talk) 20:14, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

200 million people using Turkish word. Turkish official language in UNICEF-UN. This is not an encyclopedia to inform people? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicef

Turkey is a founding member of the united nations.

Yes, naturally, Turkey is a founding member of the UN, but that does not make Turkish one of the official languages of the entire United Nations Organisation. Only 6 of the several hundred official languages of the world had attained such status. Next time you make an edit, read up on your subject and find a source to cite.--Mátyás (talk) 16:04, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I was just checking on my first article and wanted to say that I responded to some of your questions about the country block on the talk page: Talk:Senegambia Confederation#Not much info.... The Senegambia Confederation is more important for not being than being. --chemica (talk) 22:09, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nice, now it is evident that the info I was looking for never even existed. Maybe you could utilise this template: Template:Infobox_former_country. --Mátyás (talk) 11:40, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I stumbled across your user page when you updated the UN Security Council president, and I enjoyed reading your bio and particularly your experiences during the Yugoslav wars. The greatest part, which made me laugh, is that you have lived in 4 countries during 22 years without ever having to move. That's a pretty interesting take on all of the geopolitical reorganizing that took place. Cheers, John Shandy` • talk 17:03, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, well, thanks, I guess. That reminds me, I haven't updated that bio in quite some time... better take a look.--Mátyás (talk) 17:07, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I help out at WP:BLPN, and some editors have raised questions about Agnes Rapai, a Hungarian author. The major question is whether the reviews (listed at the bottom of that article) really indicate notability. If you have a few moments, could you please lend your Hungarian skills in checking those reviews? It's exceedingly hard for non-Hungarian speakers to tell whether 1) she has won significant critical attention in Hungarian sources; or on the other hand, 2) whether these reviews in Hungarian are trivial or insignificant in their discussions of Agnes Rapai. Any advice you feel like giving, either at the article talk page or at the noticeboard would be most appreciated. Thank you! JFHJr (㊟) 19:30, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm going to say this politely, because I know you're undoubtedly well-meaning. But you clearly know little, if anything, about Fiji's political history. Fiji became independent from the United Kingdom in 1970, but, like many countries, it did not immediately become a republic; instead, it became a Commonwealth realm. As you don't seem to understand what that means, I'll explain briefly. A Commonwealth realm is a fully independent, fully sovereign country which is a member of the Commonwealth of Nations (which is composed of independent countries) and which recognises Queen Elisabeth II as head of state. Australia, for example, is a Commonwealth realm today. So is Canada. In 1987, there were two military coups in Fiji, which resulted in the proclamation of a republic. Thus when Fiji joined the UN, it had just become an independent Commonwealth realm.
I'm an academic, and Fiji falls within my field of research. I've read numerous books and articles about its political history. I covered it in my doctoral thesis about the British legacy in the Pacific. I've talked about it at an international conference about the Commonwealth, and I've published an article about it. Need I go on? You can check the dates very easily by yourself if you have any doubts; in the meantime, kindly refrain from reverting correct information to replace it with errors, and kindly refrain from suggesting that you know Fiji's political history better than I do. No hard feelings; everybody makes mistakes. Thank you in advance. Aridd (talk) 22:58, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and while I'm here... Good work on all those other UN articles. Aridd (talk) 23:04, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I mostly had figured out I was wrong, but as I read further into the history of Fiji, it just didn't make sense to me, so I did nothing further after reverting your edit. I'll leave that part in your obviously capable hands.--... there's more than what can be linked. 11:37, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First, I wanted to thank you for your contributions to the articles I created on Security Council elections. Second, I wanted share with you a useful source for SC elections that discovered recently. A/59/881 is a Note Verbale from the Costa Rican permanent mission to the UN, and includes the results of every SC election between 1946 and 2004 in annex. Finally, I wanted your opinion on how to format an article on the 1979 SC election. In case your not farmiliar with it, the election for the Latin American and Carribean seat that year resulted in a stalemate between Cuba and Colombia. After 155 rounds of voting both countries withdrew to endorse Mexico. Obviously with that many rounds, a results table like in other election articles is not practical, nor does it have much encyclopedic value. I was wondering if you had any ideas on how best format that article? Cheers. Sir Sputnik (talk) 02:27, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I thank you for noticing my humble contributions, and I must commend you on your own efforts. For the Costa Rican Note Verbale, I am aware of it, and I don't really think we can use it for much, as it gives us only the results of the vote, and not the many details one of these elections articles must have: when and where the vote was held, who were the candidates, who said what at the vote, etc. An article cannot be written based on this source alone. However, it could be added as a secondary source to all the election articles up until 2004 - there is no such thing as too many sources. Besides, you seem to be quite capable at finding the official sources for each year's vote - something I failed at.

For the 1979 elections, take a look at the 2006 article. I'm not entirely satisfied with it, but generally that is the best thing to do: table all the results in a number of tables, and add a chart that sums up the data. A reader not interested in all the tables will just take a look at the chart, but more studious readers will want to know all the results, so we must include it all in the article. I disagree that this would be simply not practical, or that it would lack encyclopedic value - that is what happened, and the article must reflect that in order to be encyclopedic. If you don't want to bother with 155 rounds of voting yourself, leave it out, I'll get to it eventually - right now I'm quite busy with exams. Regards. --... there's more than what can be linked. 10:46, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're invited to be a part of Wikipedia:WikiProject University of Belgrade, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to the University of Belgrade. To accept this invitation, click here! Articles related to other universities in Belgrade, Serbia and Southeast Europe may be discussed as well. This helps share information and foster knowledge about higher education in the region.

Just came around to say Hi :). Regards and Happy Editing! TheGeneralUser (talk) 18:09, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, he was popularly known as "Michael Pupin", but whatever. SpinningSpark 21:49, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Google gives 183000 hits for Michael Pupin, which is relatively close to the 295000 hits for Mihajlo Pupin, but is still not the most popular. Anyway, thanks for noticing. --${\displaystyle \color {Blue}{\mathcal {M}}}$${\displaystyle \color {Blue}{\vec {(e\ ,}}}$${\displaystyle \color {Blue}t)}$ = ? 11:36, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Transwiki links are generally used for biographies.--94.65.31.5 (talk) 09:28, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See here for details; if you do insist, we can add the non-English article links in brackets. --${\displaystyle \color {Blue}{\mathcal {M}}}$${\displaystyle \color {Blue}{\vec {(e\ ,}}}$${\displaystyle \color {Blue}t)}$ = ? 09:57, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and made the changes, hope you like it this way. --${\displaystyle \color {Blue}{\mathcal {M}}}$${\displaystyle \color {Blue}{\vec {(e\ ,}}}$${\displaystyle \color {Blue}t)}$ = ? 10:05, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine, I think--94.65.31.5 (talk) 15:30, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jó napot kívánok Mátyás! Hogy van? Primetio sam da si mađar iz Novog Sada. A ja sam rođen u Engleskoj, roditelje su mi iz Makedonije. Nažalost, slabo govorim na mađarskom ali znam osnovne reči.

The reason I was writing was to tell you that I was amazed at my own error. I do follow world affairs with great interest and I was paying close attention to Sudanese developments throughout the period in question. So how did I forget? For a moment I was thinking the number ws 194 - but then I remembered how I count. At the turn of the millennium it was 189, then Switzerland reneged on neutrality and joined along with East Timor which achieved independence (191). Then came Montenegro in 2006 (192) so the figure of 193 with South Sudan is accurate.

The other reason I am writing to you is because I wanted you to know that despite me being an ex-Yu diasporan with descent remote from Vojvodina, I do have an interest in all the nations and languages that constitute our former republics an for this, I know a few bits of Hungarian, mainly phrasebook level. That said, I would have never struggled with the pronunciation of your name in its Hungarian form and if this places me above local Serbs from Vojvodina then I am only too happy. I think the reason your name is wrtten differently in Serbia is not so much the majority's inabiliy, it is to do with the nature of the written language. Firstly anything to formally enter the language will have a Cyrillic variation. In the case of your user name, that would be /Маћас/ and this only leaves us with the transliterated form, Maćas. That said, I don't fall into traps, I know the Hungarian /a/ is similar to "o" (taxi = "toksi") and the /sz/ & /s/ confusion. Thanks to these conventions, I have hours of fun listening to British newsreaders and reporters attempting to pronounce Hungarian names like Ferenc Gyurcsány (imagine Hungarian Ferank Gorksan - that's how it comes out).

Thanks for the reminder of South Sudan! Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 18:35, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Köszönöm, jól! A kako ste Vi večeras, gospodine?

You are a chatty one, aren't you? I hardly even remember what I wrote on my user page, but it seems people do read it, so I'll give it a look soon.

And for South Sudan, you're welcome. And we really do need to get rid of words like "recently" on Wikipedia. --${\displaystyle \color {Blue}{\mathcal {M}}}$${\displaystyle \color {Blue}{\vec {(e\ ,}}}$${\displaystyle \color {Blue}t)}$ = ? 18:55, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm well too thanks! Yes, words like 'recently' are vey tempting to write on the moment when editing because we forget it's an encyclopaedia. Same goes for "last month", "in the last century", "has led the party for the past five years". All those things self-adjust with time so we simply need to give accurate times (ie. on 16 February 2013, Mr.XYZ was inaugurated as President of ABCDE). The other one to watch for is "previously". As with "currently" we do need it at times and one good example involves both as contrasting parts of a sentence (eg. the previous constitution as opposed to the current, etc.) but to say, "he was previously Defence Secretary from 2006 to 2010", it really doesn't need that word. You know this though! Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 19:47, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the WP:NOTBROKEN guideline. There's nothing wrong with those phrases and redirects that would need to be fixed. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 08:06, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, yes, I've read it - I'll stop... just it's against my aesthetics, but I'll get over it, I guess. --${\displaystyle \color {Blue}{\mathcal {M}}}$${\displaystyle \color {Blue}{\vec {(e\ ,}}}$${\displaystyle \color {Blue}t)}$ = ? 08:10, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. :) The redirects tagged {{R with possibilities}} should usually be avoided, but not those that unambiguously refer to the right thing. For example, it's doubtful we'll ever change "UN" to point anywhere else other than the United Nations, so there's no need to change those. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 20:08, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mátyás. It's not uncommon that new editors add articles to the English Wikipedia that are actually not in English. So there are templated messages to notify them about Wikipedia in other languages. Usually these consist of a statement in the user's native language and the English equivalent, but there are still some templates that have only English messages. Could you please add the equivalent translations to {{Contrib-hr1}} and {{Contrib-hu1}}? They should be placed above the English text. Your help would be very appreciated. De728631 (talk) 12:51, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done! Hope it's a good enough translation. --${\displaystyle \color {Blue}{\mathcal {M}}}$${\displaystyle \color {Blue}{\vec {(e\ ,}}}$${\displaystyle \color {Blue}t)}$ = ? 15:14, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Köszi! De728631 (talk) 16:23, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you just created articles on the 2019 and 2020 elections. That got me wondering how far into the future is appropriate to go with these articles. I mean barring a catastrophic collapse of the UN or major Security Council reform, neither of which seems particularly likely, there will be an election every year for the foreseeable future. That doesn't mean each of those elections should have an article of its own. When I created articles on the 2016 through 2018 elections, I used your creation of the article on the 2015 election two years ago as barometer, figuring four years would be okay, and then went one year further simply because Israel's first ever candidacy seemed interesting enough to merit an article for the 2018 election, but that's just my point of view. What do you think? Sir Sputnik (talk) 14:43, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, my idea was to make articles for the elections that already have candidates - that is, candidates with a given year set out as a goal. Originally I wanted to make the 2021 and 2022 articles too, but there was only the one candidate, Albania, for 2021, so I decided not to. The idea is that, even if the date is quite distant, if the candidate makes a loud and clear statement, they will follow through and actually candidate themselves on this distant election. Like the way Croatia put their 2029 candidacy in their official policy statement on their Foreign Affairs site [1]. In the end, if the source is reliable enough, we can make articles on any distant date. But I think for practical reasons we should go up until the next year with two verifiable candidacies - so that the article would have some actual substance, besides stating the obviously expected.

Also, I had an idea - maybe we should create an article, United Nations Security Council elections or something, where we could discuss the rules and customs related to the elections in more depth, instead of stating them in short form on each one of these election articles. The UNSC article itself says little about the elections. This is though just an idea, I haven't taken a look around for sources yet.--${\displaystyle \color {Blue}{\mathcal {M}}}$${\displaystyle \color {Blue}{\vec {(e\ ,}}}$${\displaystyle \color {Blue}t)}$ 15:32, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That seems reasonable. With two candidacies there should be sufficient content to justify having a separate article. As for an article on SC elections in general, I'm surprised that there isn't one already. I'm in the middle of my exams right now so a little short on time, but when I have some to spare, I'll definitely start working on it. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:53, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mátyás,

I was wondering if you would be able to assist with a translation of a source for a discussion which is taking place at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Eurovision#Turkvision 2013. The source itself is written in Croatian, and we are trying to establish what the source is verifying so that we are able to establish a way forward in regards to creating a new article Turkvision 2013. The source in question is this one. If you would be so kind as to post the translation on the project talk page, then that would be highly appreciated. Thank you in advance. Wesley Mᴥuse 04:06, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On behalf of everyone at ProjectEurovision, a massive thank you for translating the source for us, it is a big help and at the same time we are now able to think about the source's reliability. Wesley Mᴥuse 14:33, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to have been of service!--${\displaystyle \color {Blue}{\mathcal {M}}}$${\displaystyle \color {Blue}{\vec {(e\ ,}}}$${\displaystyle \color {Blue}t)}$ 09:24, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mátyás "Did you even bother to read the section?" - yes I did - and it is kinda rude to simply imply otherwise (Wikipedia has some etiquette rules - please respect them) 78.42.252.102 (talk) 12:21, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mátyás! Your user page indicates you are fluent in Hungarian and English. I'm wondering if you'd be interested in helping translating w:hu:Herman Ottó (a Featured Article on Hungarian Wikipedia) into English (currently a stub at Ottó Herman), which would be a great benefit for English readers. I don't speak any Hungarian, but can assist in editing grammar, style, etc. If you know of other fluent Hungarian speakers who can assist in translating, source-checking, or peer-reviewing, please notify them and perhaps comment on the English article's talk page for coordination. With enough fluent editors, this could be a FA article on English Wikipedia as well. Cheers, --Animalparty-- (talk) 00:34, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm on it!--${\displaystyle \color {Blue}{\mathcal {M}}}$${\displaystyle \color {Blue}{\vec {(e\ ,}}}$${\displaystyle \color {Blue}t)}$ 11:13, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is a bit longer than I thought it would be - I'll make a section on my user page for the translation, and when I'm done, I'll copy it over to the article. --${\displaystyle \color {Blue}{\mathcal {M}}}$${\displaystyle \color {Blue}{\vec {(e\ ,}}}$${\displaystyle \color {Blue}t)}$ 11:17, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:30, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]