CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Pécsi BTC

Hungarian football club

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionAug 11, 2026
Entity authorityQ135622257 ↗
Source-derived summary

Pécsi Bőrgyári Torna Club was a football club from the town of Pécs, Hungary.

History

On 29 September 1930, Pécsi Bőrgyári Torna Club was established. Most players of the club worked at the leather factory in Pécs, Pécsi Bőrgyár.

In the 1949–50 Nemzeti Bajnokság II season, the club, as Pécsi Bőripari Dolgozók SE, finished in the second place reaching its best result in its football history.

Editorial summary

This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Pécsi BTC” as hungarian football club. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.

Editorial reviewA concise reference frame for defining the subject, testing terminology and identifying the institution closest to the evidence. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1930, 1949—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. The account is most persuasive where Pécsi, Hungarian and football can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as hungarian football club. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.

Evidence profile

The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 11, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q135622257. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1930 and 1949.

Critical limits

Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Pécsi BTC”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Pécsi BTC primary sources, Pécsi BTC archive and Pécsi research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Pécsi BTC”?
  2. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Pécsi BTC” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.