This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Biography: Royalty and Nobility B‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility. Crime and Criminal Biography B‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles 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.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related 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. Crime and Criminal Biography B‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles 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.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related 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. Hungary B‑class Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hungary, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hungary 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.HungaryWikipedia:WikiProject HungaryTemplate:WikiProject HungaryHungary articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Slovakia B‑class Mid‑importance 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. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. European history B‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe 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.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history articles B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Women's History B‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles 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.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History 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.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5

This page has archives. Sections older than 150 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

Template:Vital article

• "Elizabeth Báthory" Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
• "Báthory Erzsébet" Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

I think we should move this page to Elizabeth Bathory, as most English language sources seem not to use the diacritic. --Khajidha (talk) 15:56, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No, because its false and deceptive. Majority of scholarly works definitely use the diacritic. Tabloid journalism is irrelevant here. --Norden1990 (talk) 16:06, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Right now, the "Early Years" section contains speculation about Elizabeth's seizures and about her family training her to be cruel. These arguments are pure conjecture; primary sources do not support either statement. All the citations currently included in the body text are to unverified blogs and "pop history." There are no primary sources that document Elizabeth's childhood, and any claims that she suffered from seizures or that her family trained her to be cruel will never be proven.

It would be better to move the unfounded rumors either in the "Reputation" section or in a new section named "Speculation and Rumors."

Katanadasdy (talk) 23:59, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that a key source by Kimberly Craft was initially published in 2009, and later republished in an expanded 2nd edition in 2014, possibly leading to some of the existing content disputes. Revisions of existing content sourced to the 2009 version with the more updated information from 2014 would be an improvement to the article. Unreliable sources should clearly be removed, and edits sourced to the more recent expanded edition of Craft are preferable. It is also worth recognizing the context that surrounded the subject, i.e. that witch trials were a highly active force during this time and the subject, once widowed, became a potential pivot point for a power grab by those seeking to control the extended and politically important territory that she inherited control of. While folklore and rumors of vampirism and bathing in blood sell tabloids and books, these are not the only accounts of the subject and the article could do a much better job of presenting the disputed content for the sake of neutrality. If a number of the reliable sources disagree on the subject's history, it would be best for the article to state, upfront, which details are a matter of dispute by historians and scholars. Kind Regards,Cedar777 (talk) 00:34, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Cedar777. I completely agree on all counts.

I think separating out verifiable primary sources versus speculation, pseudo-history, and rumors is incredibly important. We can still include speculation on the page, but it should be clearly labeled in its own section.

I have read the second edition of Craft's work several times, and my (attempted) updates reflect the changed information. I'm also in the process of adding citations to other sources that support Craft's second edition. If you have any thoughts or contributions on the edits, Cedar777, I'll gladly accept them.

Katanadasdy (talk) 00:45, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Fellow Wikipedians, the problem with this article is fairly evident right out of the gate with the first two sources being at odds. Encyclopedia Brittanica provides a concise summary stating that Bathory's servants were put on trial but that she never was. Brittanica refers to "rumors," and to the subject having "purportedly" tortured and murdered others while more recent research points to "politically motivated slander" of the subject. Then we have Guinness World Records proclaiming that this "alleged" killer set a world record as the worst female serial killer on the planet who had splashed about in the blood of no less than 600 virgins. The sources agree that the accusations are rumors but diverge in making proclamations about the subject's place in history. Of the two, Brittanica is more credible. The question is, what do some of the other existing scholarly sources have to say? Which sources are worth retaining, and which should be released? Does anyone have access to the source by Michael Farin in German to review it for accuracy? First and foremost, this article is a biography of Bathory, for verifiable facts about her life. There already is a separate page for her presence in popular culture. Thanks and Kind Regards Cedar777 (talk) 20:44, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are numerous errors in the "Married Life" section of the page. Elizabeth was 12, not 10, when her mother engaged her Nadasdy. Although Elizabeth Bathory kept her maiden name after marriage, there is absolutely no evidence that Ferenc Nadasdy adopted the name "Bathory" after their marriage. There are errors in information about her childrens' names, dates, and marriages. Ursula Nadasdy did not live into adolescence, and there is no evidence she ever married. There is no evidence of any sons named Andras, Miklos, or Gyorgy. If someone has citations for any of these assertions, feel free to provide them.

It also makes sense to me to separate the information about Bathory's marriage and children away from information about battles and politicking that occurred during the Long War. Although her motherhood and the war happened concurrently, they are substantively different materials. It makes more sense to me to create two separate sections, one immediately following the other. Thoughts? Alternative suggestions?

Katanadasdy (talk) 00:54, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just go on with your edits, and we'll see.(KIENGIR (talk) 21:05, 30 April 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Looking at the poor sourcing in this article, such as the CreateSpace sources, and looking at the edits by the ZápolcAIM (talk · contribs) and Katanadasdy (talk · contribs), I'm not sure how damaged this article is and how far back it needs to be reverted. But I do know that, per WP:Self-published, CreateSpace sources need to be removed and replaced with actual scholarly sources. And what are those? Read WP:SCHOLARSHIP. Regarding this and "No Blood in the Water"? That is not the tone we should be using (see WP:Tone) and we don't add theses and dissertations. YouTube videos? See WP:YouTube and WP:LINKSTOAVOID. Someone's random YouTube channel is not a WP:Reliable source. And per WP:Due weight and WP:Fringe, we describe Báthory as the most prolific female murderer if that is how the general literature describes her; we don't use poor or outlier sources to try to contradict the general literature. I don't expect to be involved with this article beyond this post (not much, if at all, anyway), but I felt the need to point out that the current state of this article, whether before or after this revert, is problematic. Wikipedia is doing a disservice to anyone coming to this Wikipedia article to read about this historic figure. When I am eventually reverted by the ZápolcAIM and/or Katanadasdy accounts, I will not revert back since I don't have the time to look through the sources on this topic and fix up this article accordingly. And I am not determined enough to take on problematic editing at this article. I will also go ahead and note that it seems that WP:Socking is going on at this article.

I will alert related WikiProjects (seen at the top of this talk page) to this section so that they will see my concerns and, hopefully, one or more people from one of the WikiProjects will take on fixing up this article. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 19:06, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]