Talk:Attila

Gallery

I agree with Richard Keatinge and AirshipJungleman29 that the gallery should be removed - it's just a bunch of much later imaginings of what Attila looked like. It doesn't really have much to do with the subject. Some of the images belong on a page on Hungarian nationalism, perhaps.--Ermenrich (talk) 14:34, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

ATTILA ETYMOLOGY

ATTILA - ΑΧΧΙΛΕΑ. ΠΑΡΆΦΡΑΣΗ ΤΟ 'Χ' ΣΕ 'Τ', ΚΑΙ ΑΠΑΛΟΙΦΉ ΤΟΥ 'Ε'. 109.242.136.160 (talk) 08:03, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

What. RedactedHumanoid (talk) 09:21, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 January 2025

'In The West' paragraph 5, the starting sentence "On April 7, he captured Metz he also captured Strasbourg." should have a transition word and/or possibly a comma dividing 'Metz' and 'he'. MrChezzo (talk) 03:16, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

 Done Ultraodan (talk) 05:53, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 January 2025

add "https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/timeline/LV7X-2HK" as a source THEJimothy11 (talk) 04:23, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: The material is already cited. Moreover, see WP:FAMILYSEARCH for why we wouldn't cite it regardless. Remsense ‥ 论 04:25, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Bychovets Chronicle

Chronical claim that 500 famalies travel from Aquileia on ships to modern territory of Lithuania that was empty and founded Zhmont and Lituania.So part of people founded Venice and partGrand Duchy Lituania 207.107.113.94 (talk) 21:59, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 November 2025

In the section on Attila's death, there's a line that, due to being in its own paragraph, could give the impression of attempting to appear somewhat dramatic. That's not the goal of Wikipedia, so if anyone else agrees with me, I'd like to request that it be changed.

−

Attila withdrew from Italy to his palace across the Danube, while making plans to strike at Constantinople once more to reclaim tribute.However, he died in the early months of 453.

+

Attila withdrew from Italy to his palace across the Danube, while making plans to strike at Constantinople once more to reclaim tribute. However, he died in the early months of 453.

Thank you. ~2025-31249-94 (talk) 18:49, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

 Done. NotJamestack (talk) 18:56, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

Using Attila the Hun as the name

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Favonian (talk) 15:26, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

---

Attila → Attila the HunAttila the Hun – Attila the Hun was more direct Attila may refers to different identities Yiotro1 (talk) 15:05, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

See WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. If someone types "Attila" into WP, it's likely it's this guy they're after, and if it's not, there are links they can follow. Compare George Washington or Jesus. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:44, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose: I agree with the above: this is likely the primary topic, given that it is both the origin of most other uses, and probably far more familiar than any of the others. The disambiguation pages receive very few views, suggesting that there's not a lot of confusion with other uses. Despite the undeniable idiomacity of "Attila the Hun", "Attila" is the more encyclopedic title, IMO. P Aculeius (talk) 12:16, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose: I agree with P Aculeius. While Attila the Hun might be more descriptive, it appears to be unnecessary. Most people look for the current article rather than anything else see traffic, justifying the current article as primary topic. A.Cython(talk) 12:38, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose: Talking about somebody is always defined by the context, historically there are no more Attila, unique. The lead has already this extra "Attila the Hun" name. Today many people use the name of Attila, especially among Hungarians is quite common.OrionNimrod (talk) 12:48, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

  Same Charlemagne + Cleopatra OrionNimrod (talk) 12:51, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Semi-protected edit request on 20 May 2026

I propose an addition on the topic of Attila the Hun as follows:

Within the continuous historicist interpretation of the Book of Revelation, the Third Trumpet of Revelation 8:10–11 is commonly understood as symbolising the invasions of Attila the Hun and the Huns against the Roman Empire during the 5th century AD. Historicist expositors interpret the “great star from heaven, burning as a lamp” as representing Attila himself, whose rapid military rise and destructive campaigns brought widespread devastation across Europe.

The “rivers and fountains of waters” are interpreted symbolically as the internal provinces, resources, and sustaining structures of the Western Roman Empire, particularly regions around the Danube and central Europe. The name “Wormwood” is understood to represent bitterness and calamity, reflecting the destructive consequences of Attila’s invasions, which included the destruction of cities, depopulation, famine, and political instability.

Historicist interpreters connect these events especially with Attila’s campaigns between AD 441 and 452, including invasions of the Eastern Roman Empire, Gaul, and northern Italy. In this interpretation, the Third Trumpet forms part of a progressive series of divine judgments upon the Roman Empire, following the Gothic invasions under Alaric and the Vandal maritime campaigns under Genseric. Mjnewman1 (talk) 11:12, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want made. Day Creature (talk) 16:20, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

If you can find suitable sources for this interpretation and its widespread use, you might possibly get a mention of Attila into Historicist interpretations of the Book of Revelation. The Huns are mentioned there already. But it's entirely unsuitable here. Richard Keatinge (talk) 16:36, 20 May 2026 (UTC)