Talk:Žilina

Slovakia B‑class High‑importance

	Slovakia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Slovakia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Slovakia 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.SlovakiaWikipedia:WikiProject SlovakiaTemplate:WikiProject SlovakiaSlovakia articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Gallery

Hi i foud few pictures in wiki so I hope You like them

Recent edits

I assume this edit [1] as little bit interesting. Does the author have some sources that Slavs in those times were uncivilized nomads only? I assume Svetovid's edit more NPOV than this one. ≈Tulkolahten≈^≈talk≈ 09:58, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Uncivilized" seems like a vague POV term in the first place.--Svetovid (talk) 10:19, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Slovak lived in villages mainly, not in cities long ago. Maybe Slovaks aborigines did not live in Zilina because the Slovak nation did not exist yet in the 13. century. The Slovaks are not the Great-Moravian descendants.Only it is a Slav mix from Polishs, Czechs and Rusins. East-Slovak dialect differs very much from the west-Slovak. This is not Hungarian chauvinism because Tulkolahten understands the west-Slovakian dialect easily, but he would take the east Slovakian dialect difficultly. The east-Slovakian dialect similar to the Polish-Goral and Ukrain-Rusin dialect. That is my opinion.Nmate (talk • contribs)

This is your original research and as that it doesn't belong to encyclopedia. ≈Tulkolahten≈^≈talk≈ 11:42, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

These are facts:

Slovak lived in villages mainly, not in cities long ago. Slovak nation did not exist yet in the 13. century.

Nmate (talk • contribs) —Preceding comment was added at 11:50, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that's a reason to call them "nomad intruder Slav tribes". And if there were no Slovaks in the city, who represented them in the city council? This sounds like a deliberate insult of Slovaks, certainly not suitable for an encyclopedia. Markussep ^Talk 12:49, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, that really doesn't sound good. ≈Tulkolahten≈^≈talk≈ 12:52, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Those are not facts. That's just your opinion. Anyway, living in the country = uncivilized?--Svetovid (talk) 15:07, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I admit that my writing was a little bit injurious, but the earlier sentence what i rewrote is not true also. Nobody represented them in the city council because we could not talk about a Slovak nation before the 16. century according to the Hungarian sources. In the present-day north Slovak cities were Hungarian and German populations mainly in this time. Slovaks lived in villages but this nation is exist from the 16.century only. Slovaks were not uncivilized but they did not live in cities. The typcal occupation of much Slovak was nomad.For example :drótostót Tót means Slovak and drót means wire in old Hungarian language. Thus drótostót means a Slovak with a wire. They travelled from Trencsén (Trencin) and Árva (Orava) and Liptó (Liptovsky) counties to Buda(Pest) or to other Hungarian towns as door to door salesmans that they repair the Hungarian's pot, vessel, bowl or they went to harvest to the Hungarian Plain in summer or they protected sheep and goats in the mountains.Nmate (talk • contribs) —Preceding comment was added at 18:27, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't assume this as some progress from deliberate insult of the whole nation to something else. You are saying that Slovaks were nomads because there were people repairing pots. Well, this is called dráteník. And it doesn't mean Slovaks were wandering nomads living in the tents. The definition of nomad is a people traveling from one place to another place. This could be hardly reached at the whole nation and even harder to call it a typical occupation. You, probably because of not knowing all the history, didn't mention at least Pribina and the long history of the Slovak nation. On the other hand if you know the history well, why didn't you mention him? You also didn't support any of your words by the source and all this sounds to me as an original research and a very simplified point of view to one nation. ≈Tulkolahten≈^≈talk≈ 18:52, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I found some material that can help in the debate, "Dušan Kovác is a historian and research specialist who since 1968 has worked at the Slovak Academy of Sciences in Bratislava, where he now functions as a scientific secretary. From 1990 to 1998 he was director of the Institute of Historical Studies specializing in nineteenth- and twentieth-century Central Europe." According to Dušan Kovác it is possible to talk about Slovaks at the earliest from the 15th century. Slavs of the region spoke a Russian-Ukranian type dialect and using the term Slovak or "old Slovak" instead of Slav to describe the population in these pre 15th century times "lacks any scientific basis". Ján Steinhübel Slovak archeologist pointed out that use of the term in this way was mostly done only by "dilletants" and by people like "Milan S. Durica" who regurarly praises the fascist Slovak puppet state of Tiso. Source. [2] Based on some of these key words (names of people) I hope Tulkolahten and others can help us find more articles to clarify this issue. Hobartimus (talk) 21:50, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The main point is against this the nomad intruder Slav tribes equal to the civilized German colonists. I will assume good faith in your last sentences about fascist and I will not stretch it to the participants of this discussion. ≈Tulkolahten≈^≈talk≈ 21:55, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]