Wikipedia talk:Romanian Wikipedians' notice board/Archive 9

New Categories on Romania

For the first time on Wiki, I have created a new template and a new category. I also expanded the WikiProject Romania by adding a page on assessment. These are:

• Wikipedia:WikiProject Romania/Assessment
• Category:Romania articles by importance
• Template:WPRO

These new inclusions are to help us assess our own articles on the Importance Scale. We already have a Quality Scale, but I think it would be good to have the latter choice as well. How many times don't we see others adding the IS on articles related to Romania, but with the perspective that represents their own country and culture? Now, we have the chance to inform how the topic is perceived in our own country and culture, on the IS. It should be noted that, as far as I'm concerned, most countries have these categories. I first tried to find one of our own, without having any success. If, however, one such category and template exists, the new inclusions can be redirected to there. I would also like to say that 99-percent of the material found on these inclusions are taken from the WikiProject Turkey, and they in their turn took it from WPEU, so all merit goes to them and whoever else worked on the templates and their project. --Thus Spake Anittas 00:10, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Patriarch Teoctist

Patriarch Teoctist is now dead, God rest his soul. I believe it is time we remove partisan positions from the article concerning him, starting with the article title: Teoctist Arapasu. I suggest we follow for him the convention used for Pope John Paul II and by the Romanians themselved, and rename the article in Patriarch Teoctist. Dpotop 08:40, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

All of the other articles on Romanian Orthodox Patriarchs are titled using the full name of the person, such as Iustin Moisescu and Justinian Marina. If we're going to move Teocist Arăpaşu to Patriarch Teoctist, then the other ones should also be moved to Patriarch Iustin and Patriarch Justinian. I'm neutral with regard to the page move; on one hand, I believe it's better to use the full legal name of the person, on the other hand, other articles are also titled according to your proposal (Patriarch Maxim of Bulgaria, Patriarch Alexius II]], Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople). However what partisan positions are there in the article? Ronline ✉ 10:19, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

1. I understand your neutrality from a rational point of view. However, we are not here to be rational, but to report what sources say. Most reputable sources (including the sites of the Church itself, the Government, a.s.o.) call him "Patriarch Teoctist", similar to "Pope John Paul", a.s.o. The main source for the formulation "Teoctist Arapasu" is the Romanian wikipedia, where I edited enough to see that a Greek Catholic (Mihai Andrei) imposes his views on all the articles concerning Romanian Christianity. We do not live in a void, we must follow to a certain extent the example of the other, especially for such sensible subjects. Dpotop 10:35, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

1. Concerning the POV, take a look at the article, and you will see a full section "Controversy", supported by only one "alleged citation" from the BBC. Then, you have some more controversy in sections "Studies..." and "Ascension...". OTOH, it was me who added 1 (one) small paragraph on his invitation to the Pope in Rome. I mean, the oecumenic work of Teoctist is great. At the same time, it was under his patronage that the Bessarabian Church was re-activated, which is important. Dpotop 10:35, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Dahn and Biruitorul

As much as it pains me to admit this, it must be said that Dahn and Biruitorul are the two most productive members on the English Wiki, concerning with topics related to Ro. Ever since Dahn has made his entrace to Wiki, he, together with Biruitorul, have written two FAs and numerous GA articles. Collaboration between editors grands them greater motivation and improves the quality of the article. For that reason, I think it would be a good idea for Ro members to team up and decide to work on specific articles so to promote them to better status. Do we have enough active members that are willing to do this? --Thus Spake Anittas 21:20, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Aw, lovely stuff. Say, didn't you already have a project with your friend? Dahn 22:25, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

That's a hit under the belt. --Thus Spake Anittas 10:49, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Anittas, you are right on all counts. Dpotop 15:57, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

As concerns you proposal to work on picked articles, I remind you that Biruitorul had a similar idea: that of a contest. :) It does not work, because at some point you will always have Dahn telling you that your ideas are irrelevant/stupid/bad. Given that Dahn has one foot in every article related to Romanian history, and given that this is the subject most editors are interested in, I'd say all editors but Dahn are redundant here. I presume one could ask Dahn for "enlightened guidance", but I, for one, am not masochistic. Dpotop 15:57, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree that Dahn has intimidated a lot of editors until they stopped editing, but we should also acknowledge his good work. --Thus Spake Anittas 03:54, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Still more venom? I'm counting down. Dahn 08:58, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Collaboration efforts worked out just fine for me. They always work when people understand English, read and obey the wikipedia guidelines, and grow at least a little bit familiar with how wikipedia works and what it is used for (or at least they begin to do so after spending months on it). All people I have collaborated with fit these requirements, and two more - they are not good friends with permablocked vandals, and they never badmouthed me or harassed me (or anyone else for that matter). I'm glad to say such people are the majority on wikipedia, and many of them are Romanians. This is it in a nutshell.

Now, I'm sure you guys were both advised against using project pages to comment on contributors. Not once, not twice, but many times. As far as I'm concerned, you can carry on with this for as long as you want, but I have to wonder just how much more energy you can waste on this spectacular thread.

Scrieţi, băieţi, orice, numai scrieţi! Dahn 21:31, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is collaborative by nature whether any editor likes it or not. I like articles such as Alexandru Bogdan-Pitesti including the extensive amount of information included even though it makes for a large article, so it's good to have a Dahn contributing here. As regards his personality, Don't bite the newcomers, don't be a prick, etc., and everyone should do fine. Alex contributing from L.A. (talk) 07:38, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

De prin teze adunate

De la o cunostinta, profesor de romana:

"Latina clasica este o limba moarta, care nu se poate vorbi decat in scris. Dupa caderea Imperiului roman, o parte din latina clasica defuncta a devenit bulgara. Limba romana are la baza latina bulgara, amestecata cu elemente de daca si o groaza de cuvinte slabe. In secolul al XV-lea, limba vorbita de popor era considerata vulgara si n-o vorbea nimeni."

Dpotop 10:30, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Suna ca o prostie. De ce sursa apartine aceata afirmatie? --Thus Spake Anittas 10:45, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Si cind scoateti tabloidu?

The quote meant to say Latina vulgara, not Bulgara. You guys should've realized that. I don't understand the fourth sentence quoted, "In the 15th century, the language spoken by the people was considered vulgar and no one spoke it." Huh? Dpotop, where did you find that... Alex contributing from L.A. (talk) 06:58, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Second Vienna Award

I don´t know what´s up with this article, but it is about a real event. It was not a fictional event, it was not a literary essay, can´t we just say what really happened ? The relevant, clear, unbiased events that happened ? --Venatoreng 21:34, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

For those interested, K.Lastochka already started improving the article. --Venatoreng 10:18, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Belated remark: I just looked in on it again. It could certainly use more work. - Jmabel | Talk 05:53, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Photos of the Revolution listed for deletion

Somebody listed for deletion the photos from the Revolution (Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion/2007_August_23#Image:Ceausesculosingpower.jpg and below), including the one currently in the infobox of Nicolae Ceauşescu's article. Desiphral-देसीफ्राल 22:46, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

People of the Romanian Revolution

Please join Category talk:People of the Romanian Revolution of 1989 and tell your feedback regarding the definition we should use for the category "People of the Romanian Revolution of 1989".--MariusM 16:00, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Dahn pays a visit to his native village

Only in Oltenia. --Thus Spake Anittas 13:03, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Nice lip service. :):) Dpotop 13:38, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Wow, I didn't know this term existed. --Thus Spake Anittas 13:56, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

:-) R O ^{A M A T A A} | msg  14:24, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I am not an Oltenian, nor was I born in a village. The rest is obviously true. Dahn 19:58, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

You never told us where you're from, Dahn. That's understandable, since such information would be difficult to fit in a topic. Luckly, such a topic exists now. --Thus Spake Anittas 20:05, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Krypton. Dahn 20:07, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Hehe... :p --Thus Spake Anittas 20:10, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Provincialism in Romania

Dear everyone;

I would like to invite you to read--and hopefully contribute--to the article, Provincialism in Romania. If you contribute, please try to source your material. I believe this article is very important. If you know of any literature that explains the Wallachian discrimination against Moldavia, please include it here. Thanks! --Thus Spake Anittas 06:16, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

WP:OR. Now, who's going to list it for deletion? Dahn 08:00, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

The sources are not counted as WP:OR. Ask your buddy, Bogdan. He had the article Bucharest snobbery deleted a couple of years ago. --Thus Spake Anittas 10:21, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

You can have sources for each sentence and it still could be original research. bogdan 10:25, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Good luck having this one deleted. I understand why the Oltenian-Muntenian elite wants this to be unseen, but I even linked to an organization that deals with this kind of stuff, giving the article credibility. I checked on that WO:OR--that is, I read the first three lines--, and it argues against unpublished material, theories, etc. None of which this is; and if I remember it correctly, you suppoted Anti-Romanian discrimination. --Thus Spake Anittas 10:30, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I didn't supported it. I just said that they should either be all deleted or all kept. bogdan 11:12, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Why won't you argue the same for this one? --Thus Spake Anittas 11:18, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

The article writer isn't a real Moldavian. How can any Moldavian say "purjoala", when the correct word is "pârjoalǎ". This is a Russian agent of Smirnov. :):) Dpotop 12:17, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

BTW: the article has been listed for deletion by Bogdan. Dpotop 12:28, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Youth without youth

Y without Y has its premiere in Rome, on October 26; and will be released sometime during December. You can watch the trailer here. To my great dissapointment, Bucharest is presented as a nice city, but the movie might turn out to be a decent one. At least that's what I hope. Perhaps the article on Youth Without Youth could be updated. --Thus Spake Anittas 03:49, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

You're still with your Wallachia vs Moldavia thing. What did they do, rape you. Lisa the Sociopath 05:32, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Some people never change...Anittas, Alex... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.174.104.254 (talk) 06:03, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Just as an aside: I really think that the article on the novella itself - Youth Without Youth (novella) - should be improved. I will work on this when I have time (though I admit I haven't read it and will do so if I can get a copy in Taiwan). Ronline ✉ 07:01, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

With the exception of the word "Taiwan", that could be my message :). Dahn 07:53, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Liturgical Romanian

This article is fucking cool! I like that word list. Lisa the Sociopath 04:29, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I just did (quite) a bit of cleanup on this, but it could use a lot of work, especially some decent sourcing. And I moved it to Liturgical Romania, which is a much more appropriate title. - Jmabel | Talk 06:31, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to do it but I just found out about the hypothesis a few hours ago :) Lisa the Sociopath 06:37, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I for one would like to know whose hypothesis it is, because it looks to me like it belongs to one of the guys on rowiki... Dahn 07:11, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

AfD anyone?Anonimu 20:31, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

For once, we agree. You want to light the match, or should I? Dahn 20:43, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

You really want to become persona non grata on rowiki ;)Anonimu 20:44, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Ain't I already? ;) Dahn 20:49, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

If you guys do delete it I'm going to copy-paste it and save it as curiosa. The core of the article seems to be a claim that liturgical texts in Transylvania used more Latin-derived terms than liturgical texts in other parts of Romania. I never heard of the Gallic rites theory. However this article could be reworked as Liturgy in Romania? History of Liturgy in Romania? Lisa the Sociopath 20:31, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Probably the presence of more words with latin origin in transylvanian churchspeak has more to do with the Union with Rome and maybe even with Latin being the official language of the region for a long time. The Gallic rite theory probably is just another baseless claim in the "who was first" Ro/Hu dispute...Anonimu 20:42, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

At least "orologiu" is clearly a neologism in Romanian, borrowed from Italian "orologio". bogdan 22:57, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Who was the first? there's no question about it, and there isn't any dispute.--Space Appolo 11:40, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Adam.Anonimu 12:12, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Btw, since we're on the subject... (this should really make me popular) Dahn 20:49, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Let's delete it! It's probably original research. I don't think I've ever nominated an article for AfD so I don't want to do it. Lisa the Sociopath 20:36, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I won't do it either because I don't want to spur a wave of anti-Anonimu votes. The article should have fair chances to get deleted.Anonimu 20:40, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Romanians in Italy

There is no article dealing with the Romanian diaspora, yet, but I fear that if such an article is created, it will include such content as this one: "In the first seven months of the year, Romanians made up 75 per cent of the arrests of those who raped, stole, killed." Here is the source. I know that you won't like what I'll have to say about this, so I won't; but you know where I stand on this and whom I blame. --Thus Spake Anittas 23:06, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

This is a serious matter, indeed, best treated a froid, and, as much as possible, dispassionately. And, sorry, I have absolutely no idea where you stand on this, and who you blame. And I don't need to know, unless you insist on telling everyone, in which case I'll listen, with an open mind. Turgidson 23:20, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't want to use this tragic event as a boost for my propaganda, but perhaps you now know where I come from. Anyway, if such an article would be created, I think that a lot of sensitivity should be used. In case you disagree with some of its affirmations, you shouldn't go on an offensive and start demanding things to be removed or changed. For what we know, one of the many victims may decide to write such an article to let it all out; and picking on their content will not help our cause. Yes, I know it's a bit far-fetched, but better to be ready. After so many years of the transaction period, I feel disgusted that this phenomenon is still active. --Thus Spake Anittas 23:31, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I still haven't the foggiest idea where you stand on this, but that's OK. Also, what's the "transaction period"? Turgidson 23:38, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

From Communism to what we are having now. At least that's what they say. --Thus Spake Anittas 23:54, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

"Transition period." - Jmabel | Talk 01:11, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. That's the third time I make that mistake, even though I know the difference between transaction and transition. --Thus Spake Anittas 15:28, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

You could also refine your statement into "Romanian Roma". Which are plenty in Moldavia, too (wasn't Stephen the Great that captured and imported thousands of them?). And before the political correct bunch labels me "racist", take a look around and see how easy targets they are, the Roma abroad. They are easily identifiable, by lifestyle. Most of them can be expelled for begging. Many of them are also involved in petty crime, often in the very neighborhood where they are living. This may work in Romania, where law enforcement is a quite shy with violent gangs (minority rights organizations also have a guilt in this direction). But in Western Europe they are now looking for arguments to expel immigrants, and they have the means to do it, and the political will. What do you expect? Dpotop 00:05, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm guessing that the vast majority of them are Roma, but I doubt that will help our case. We had plenty of time to integrate those that did not integrate, so we still inherit some of the guilt. --Thus Spake Anittas 00:09, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

No need to make guesses, here is what Giuliano Amato, the Italian Minister of the Interior says. Turgidson 00:36, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Anittas here: while the majority of the accused are of Romani ethnicity, there are also Roma in the Czech Republic, in Hungary, in Bulgaria and even in Spain and Sweden. Yet, none of those communities are having the same problem with criminality abroad, meaning that their social situation in their home countries is better. I really hope that this will lead to greater debate in Romanian society about equal opportunities and how we can better provide things like education and employment to Romani communities. I think this article offers a start. Ronline ✉ 00:40, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually, the Bulgarian Roma is more problematic to Bulgaria than our Roma is to Romania. --Thus Spake Anittas 15:28, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

To Ronline: The difference is scale. While Hungarians (not to mention Swedes) have an insignificant Roma minority, we have scores of them. And yes, they are a problem in all countries where they reside. Still, in the cases you mention, a small minority has enough place to squat, it does not overflow. In Romania, there's too many of them for the size of the country.

As concerns equal opportunities, I don't understand what you want. They won't go to school. Then, it's only natural they don't get jobs. Also, Ceausescu provided many of them with houses. Could you remind me what happened to those building blocks? If even the forced integration policies of the Communists did not work, what should we do? My point: They do have an equal chance, but we can't force it down their necks (it's against minority rights, and anyway it does not work). Dpotop 09:02, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll tell you what we could do. America has great child protection laws. If you don't take proper care of your child, the state takes them away from you. Period and no BS. If we could implement such laws, not only Roma would benefit from it, but also Romanian children that are abused by their parents. However, we have all seen how Bucharest takes care of our children, so that option is out of the question. We need a new system which protects the children and which Bucharest will have no say in it. Bucharest should have ZERO authoriy when it comes to this question. If a Romani child is brought up in a good environment, without bad influence and feeling secure, the result will most likely be success. --Thus Spake Anittas 15:28, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

You should take a look at the Stolen Generation issues in Australia. They used to do exactly what you say for some time with Aborigenal children. Now, those policies are targeted as genocide. I presume this can't be done nowadays. Note that I don't assign a good or right value to these policies, they are too borderline. However, it bothers me that human rights groups would have "le beurre et l'argent du beurre". Both children rights and parents' rigths, and all of this while sticking strictly to western-style values and society models. It's contradictory. :):) Dpotop 16:27, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually, if you compare the census results for Roma in Hungary (2.02%) and in Romania (2.5%), the difference is not that striking. IMO the problem is more likely to be related to the fact that Romanian-speaking Roma find it a lot easier to move to a country, either temporarily or permanently, where they speak a Romance language. KissL 13:59, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Not sure. Those going to Germany have no such advantage. Dpotop 16:27, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I also think Hungarian society also has a trait we (Romanians) should copy: It makes it harder not to integrate. So, you still have Roma, but many of them are probably quite integrated socially, and the other are the target of discriminations (wasn't Hungary pinned down for this by the EU one year ago?). Don't get me bad: I would have Romania do this, too. Dpotop 16:39, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

To Anittas: No, we did not have enough time to do it. Ceausescu tried it by force, and it does not work. And now, you cannot do it. The only thing that can be done today is to throw money at the minority. Dpotop 09:04, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

To Ronline (2): I started to read the solution-article you suggested, and I stopped after 3 lines because it's biased nonsense. Just note how it mixes the wildest estimates of people with "Roma descent" (are these Roma, or Romanian, or maybe neither) with (probably) official data on the schooling of Roma children (actual, official Roma). Dpotop 09:57, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

It's nice the authors go against the cliché of "Romanians' disrespect to Roma culture". If by culture you mean music, or traditional clothing, then the respect is all acquired. If you mean tribal justice, child marriages, refusal of schooling, begging and thievery, then you can't expect respect. Dpotop 09:33, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I also resent another aspect of the presentation: It's all about providing infrastructure to Roma. But there are Romanians, too, that live in the same conditions, yet manage to attend school. Why not talking about infrastructure in general, and why focus on Roma? In the case study of the article, the Roma got the hospital, meaning that Romanians have to walk to the hospital. Is there some transportation proposed to Romanians? Actually, they do talk about poor Romanians, too. Good. Dpotop 09:42, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

The list of proposals is good (frankly). However, point 7 can't be done (Ceausescu already tried). Point 1.3 is again impossible. Do you imagine adult Roma of these difficult communities (including many petty thieves, etc.) attending school to learn math? There is not enough respect for school for this to be attractive. Also, how many children do you expect on point 4? Finally, point 5 reminds me of "children allocations", but who knows, maybe it works when it's related to actual presence in classes (provided these children don't destroy entire classes, and provided the allocation is bigger than what you can get for begging). As to point 10, big money is made otherwise in Romania. Officials don't even care for agriculture money, which is bigger. Dpotop 09:52, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

And here are reactions from Silvio Berlusconi, Pope Benedict XVI, Gianfranco Fini, and Traian Băsescu. Is there a relevant WP article where some of this could go? Turgidson 00:42, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

By the way, the expulsions have started. Turgidson 01:49, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I just read the article. Yesterday I was merely embarrassed; now I'm frightened. I don't like the way they relate Gypsies to Romanians. If they are Gypsies, then they should be named as such. I'm sorry. People like Dahn and Ronline can say what they want, but I don't want my identity to relate to theirs. I don't feel I have anything in common with those people. Those that can integrate and are good people are welcome, but those who aren't, shouldn't be identified as Romanians. Media is playing a doublestandard game. If Arabs with English citizenship blow up a train, they call them English citizens of X-origin, but they don't do the same when it comes to the Gypsies from Romania. Italy was one of the few countries that favoured Romanians. Now even they despise us, and they are right to do so. Basescu should shut his fucking mouth and focus on trying to solve the problem at home, instead of lecturing Italy on political correctness. No one buys that shit anymore, anyway. Scandinavia was one of the most political correct place in the world. Now the people have had enough and many right-wing parties are winning ground. A similar phenomenon is taking place in Western Europe. To change the topic a bit, many of the Gypsies that left Romania, who have committed a crime outside the country, must have done the same in Ro. Do we allow people with a criminal record to leave the country? I don't think we should. --Thus Spake Anittas 16:01, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

BTW: There exists an article where all this info can be published: Roma minority in Romania. I already started adding text, but some more interest is useful. For now, Dahn keeps saying that "rrrom" (sic!) is how we say it in Romanian. Does any of you have access to the current DEX to see which of "tigan", "rom", "rrom" is listed there? Dpotop 09:09, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

BTW2: A very nice article by Sorin ROSCA STANESCU in Ziua: [1]. I tend to subscribe to this position. And, don't forget, what he proposes is not "equal chances", but "positive discrimination". Dpotop 09:20, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Here is an update, with links to articles from newspapers around Europe. As Mircea Kivu (from România Liberă) says: "the statistics are depressing: two-thirds of Italy's sentenced criminals are Romanians." However you slice it, that's not good. Not good at all. Turgidson 16:27, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

BTW, the EU has endorsed the measures taken by the Italian government: "It is possible to expel citizens of another state if they don't fulfill the (residency) criteria or represent a threat to public safety or public health", although, of course, "measures must be targeted individually, and every case will have to be assessed individually." Turgidson 16:36, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

We are making history, albeit a negative history. Is there another being more despised than us? Even cockroaches have a higher status in society. I actually thought that our image was improving, with our movies and music being recognized outside our borders, and with a growing economy, etc. But it seems that it's all hopeless. One step forward, two steps back. --Thus Spake Anittas 17:07, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I think you are wrong. This problem finally forced our Roma problem onto the European frontline. People are slowly realizing it's Roma they are dealing with, not Romanians. That there are several types of Romanian citizens. Top European politicians spoke about Roma explicitly, which is OK. Until now, every crime was committed by a "Romanian citizen". Now, things are clarified. I think the politically correct bunch won't love it at all, because we will finally be able to call a cat a cat, and not a "Romania-dwelling mammal". Dpotop 17:20, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

That's what we hoped during the early 90s; it didn't help then and it won't help now. Even when Gypsies went to UK and asked for asylum, saying they were discriminated in Ro, people still related Romanians to Gypsies. No matter how they will identify us as, we will still be the losers in this. The Italians don't direct their hate against the Gypsies, but against all that is Romanian. The mob that attacked those three Romanians were ethnic Romanians, not Gypsies. --Thus Spake Anittas 22:38, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

The only long-term danger is that they decide to expel Romania from the EU based on this. But if they do so, then the decision had been taken a long time ago, and thil last hype is just a pretext. Dpotop 17:20, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

BTW: note that economic growth for this year is expected to be only 6%, and inflation is 5.7 (forecasted between 3 and 5 in the beginning of the year). Dixit Isarescu. Dpotop 17:26, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Yet another European says Romanians!=Roma: This time, it's the leader of the Liberal-Democrat group in the European Parliament. [2] Dpotop 22:25, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I just read the headline that said that Romanians are confused with Gypsies. Such headlines have been made before. It won't do much good. --Thus Spake Anittas 22:38, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

OTOH, the number of stupidities said on this occasion is incredible. If I were to class them, and if Gandul is right, Cioroianu gets the first individual prize here [3]. The team prize goes to Italian politicians and their mobs, which behaved in a very... Italian way. The first waved hands and escalated an irresponsible war of words, and the other started to behave like hooligans during football matches. Dpotop 22:32, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

We can't blame the Italians. They've given us the benefit of the doubt and gave us plenty of chances to fix the problem. Italy is not perfect, but then again, no-one is forcing them to go there. To go to a country and abuse its citizens, and then blame the problem on poverty and shit....I just don't buy it anymore. I can understand robbing people for money, but raping and killing is different. Spain managed to better the situation, but not even there are we viewed in a positive light. --Thus Spake Anittas 22:38, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Here's another good analysis by Adrian Severin. In a nutshell: The integration of Roma is a European problem, and the solutions need to be found, because previous ones were morally wrong or ineffective. Racism is not the answer [4]. Dpotop 23:01, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

New sources:

• Ziua is proposing in today's number a KGB-based theory. [5] [6] [7].
• RL about Mailat: [8]

The KGB used to have a (very) long hand, all right, but wasn't it disbanded in 1991? I cannot rule it out, but, prima facie, this looks like a long-shot conspiracy theory to me. Are there any other sources for this theory, besides Ziua? Turgidson 14:42, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

If you talk about Prodi's KGB link, you have [9], Gerard Batten#Prodi controversy, [10], [11]. Nothing solid. Dpotop 14:55, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Alexander Litvinenko's allegations (before he was "terminated with extreme prejudice") look well documented in that article, but were they proved in court?

Fortunately, we don't need a court decision to write things on Wikipedia. :) Dpotop 15:29, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Still, I like the analysis of Ziua: How come that an Italian communist and anti-xenophobia activist turns xenophobic? Dpotop 14:51, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

That, I don't know—stranger things are known to have happened in politics. But really, and getting back to the subject in the title of this thread, does one need someone else "ca să'şi dea cu firma'n cap"? Turgidson 15:27, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Unrelated to these articles: My assumption is that FSB continues most of KGBs operations. Maybe I'm wrong, but I can't assume a great power disbands its security service and creates another from scratch, giving up ongoing operations and undercover agents. This proves nothing, but it's no counterproof, either. Dpotop 14:55, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like a fair assumption to me, though of course, there are some very significant differences (eg, the Gulag is long gone). And of course, many people still use the old term in colloquial speech, for a variety of reasons. But, to be rigorous, especially here where we talk about encyclopedic content, I would stick to official terminology, that's all. Turgidson 15:14, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, Ziua is one source. I say we wait. If another good source talks about the KGB/FSB connection, then we can consider inclusion according to NPOV. My impression, however, is that the link was conjectured by Ziua. Dpotop 15:27, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

BTW, Basescu is guilty of racist remarks [12]. Dpotop 10:15, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Update: this is turning into opera buffa, see "Serată cu premier, regina săracilor şi Costică Argint". Perhaps that's the best one can hope for, under the circumstances? Turgidson 14:59, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. :):) My favorite quote is from Lucica, "imperatoarea saracilor": "Mio popolo a fost fugarit". :):) Too bad those stupid italian politicians played with the image of Romania. Let's hope, however, that something good comes from all of this (e.g. decent embassies, EU-level Roma policies, etc.). Dpotop 17:12, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I like a lot this article by Adrian Severin, in Ziua. It explains why the figures provided by the Italian government are bogus (more precisely, they are not what they are presented to be). Dpotop (talk) 21:16, 19 November 2007 (UTC) On the same subject, but much more "conospiracy theory"-like: [13]. Dpotop (talk) 21:16, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Another update: this article from Le Monde talks about the economic repercussions of the situation. See also Italians of Romania. Turgidson (talk) 04:35, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Romanian dress

Currently we give barely a hint as to how Romanians dress (or, more correctly, used to dress). Do readers of this page agree that should change? At least a short introduction on the model of Serbian dress would be helpful. For those who are interested, this is a very good start; see especially the menu on the left. Items like the cojoc or the various hats (inlcuding this type) really ought to have some coverage. Biruitorul 05:18, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Good idea. There are already a few bits and pieces in place, e.g., in Fustanella and Căluşari, and ah, yes, a stub for Astrakhan hat. But a more systematic and comprehensive treatment, with pics and all, would be nice... Turgidson 06:57, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Incidentally, my Commons incarnation did something relevant for this there: see here. Dahn 07:30, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Btw, how's about an article for Ie (Romanian blouse) - I'm using "Romanian blouse" only because Matisse did, so feel free to change it if there's something more adequate to distinguish it from other Ies. Dahn 07:33, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

That's a nice painting; for where he got the inspiration from see here. Turgidson 07:55, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Nice photos, Dahn. However, it's not systematic enough, given the variety of Romanian dresses. I tend to think that one great source for pics should be Gusti's encyclopedia. I don't have it with me (abroad), but one of you surely has (access to) it. OTOH, there is a place where I have seen marvelous traditional suits, with all needed info: The expo in the basement of the northern side of Casa Poporului. When I visited it, the "folklore" part was the permanent exhibition. Dpotop 10:14, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Correction: those are not images I added, they are simply sorted in that manner by me (my point was about having created the category, which is arguably on par with the intended article). I agree that there is much diversity to cover, but: I went with the precedents for such categories on commons; I think the diversity is best reflected by creating subcategories there, if such a thing is possible (one would need ethnographers indicating how to best divide, name and structure any such categories). Dahn 10:19, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Exactly: This is why I suggested Gusti, because there should be ethnographic text all along. Moreover, it's public domain. Dpotop 11:34, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

As long as you don't copy or copypaste a text here, but merely cite it/reference from it, the public domain issue does not apply to texts. And I'm pretty sure that Gusti's book is not actually public domain. Dahn 15:34, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I like those images, Dahn. Once appropriate text is found (Dpotop's suggestion of Gusti sounds like a good fit), it looks like we might have some articles ready for publication. Biruitorul 15:05, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

There is an easier way to ponder, though I'm not really keen on it. One could, for instance, start a stub on Romanian dress itself (under whatever title is validated by precedents), and then identify some of the main pieces of clothing that are/are believed specific to this area - ie, suman, iţari, opincă, stuff. These would be easy to source with at least basic info: the meaning can be picked from the Dex or an encyclopedic dictionary, and that could form the basis of the article. Some other relevant info on the wheres and the hows (regional variations, patterns) might be picked from various sources on the net (provided they are reliable), and the main article could be postponed.

I agree about the Gusti investigation as an excellent source (though, frankly, finding them and getting the time to study them is bound to be the work of a small lifetime). However, my original comment on subcategories on commons had to do more with structuring those images on the basis of, say, regional varieties - within certain limits, anyone could subcategorize by, say, types of clothing, but it would be much harder and much more speculative to subcategorize them based on any other criterion.

And, alas, none of the images on commons is mine. I just hunted them down and gathered them in one place. Dahn 15:31, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I was thinking on the same lines - start with one omnibus article, then split off as necessary. Dex does indeed have some good starter definitions. I'll see what I can come up with in the next few days. By the way, should we, in the text, focus on "Romanians" or "inhabitants of Romania"? Or create subsections for how ethnic minorities dress? (I have no definite idea if their traditional dress does differ, but I assume it does, for instance the Turks'). Biruitorul 15:45, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, actually, what I'm suggesting is keeping the omnibus article limited to filling a red link, and, at least in the first stage, developing more focused articles on individual pieces of clothing, customs involving clothing, etc. (I'd wager it would be much easier for everyone to source and illustrate the latter, and one could then move from simple to complex by summarizing info in the main article etc.). I would go with a focus on ethnic Romanians, for several reasons: 1) the dress is trans-boundary; 2) the significant non-Romanian communities, such as the Hungarians (and especially the Szeklers) are starting to have various articles involving them and only them (presumably, this is where articles such as this one are going); 3) there is a methodological precedent separating the two; 4) the traditional dress of other communities is itself trans-boundary (if anything relevant is found about, say, the Calpack in Dobruja, it can easily go in that article); 5) where traditional dress superimposes on several communities (as I picture some items in Carpathians are common to the Romanians, Hutsuls, Ruthenians and whatnot), the info could also go into the articles on these items. My 2 cents. Dahn 16:05, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

It has begun - but only begun. Biruitorul 16:39, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Maps about Romania from ro.wiki

I noticed that there are a lot of maps (for example cities location within Romania) that are on the Romanian wikipedia, but that are not uploaded to commons. Anybody knows a way of uploading them there so they can be available also to the English wikipedia? Nergaal 02:38, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

You have to create yourself a user account on commons, then, when following the upload procedure, you will get to screen saying "Where is the work from?" and a series of potential answers with links. If those images are in the public domain (they will have to be), click on the "It is from another Wikimedia project" option. You will then get to an instructions screen, which has a template available to copy and fill in. You will have to specify who the original uploader was, with a link - the easiest way to do that, for users who only have a Romanian wikipedia account (the original uploader was "Something"), is to link to that as [[ro:utilizator:Something]]. Please note that you have to select one of the licenses available, and that it will have to be the same license as the one provided in the original image. In the few instances where I uploaded an image from another project, I also linked to the original in the "other versions" section, just as a precaution - as I'm not sure that is what is meant by "other versions". That is basically it. The end result should look something like this.

As a side note: I noticed that a lot of locator maps are actually uploaded to commons, but that they are all over the place. Try and have a look around before you upload, because the image may already be there. For example, you could use the search function for the locality name (it works with or without diacritics), and see what the search yields. Dahn 02:50, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Romance Pannonian language

I nominated this article for deletion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Romance Pannonian language bogdan (talk) 16:32, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Romania

Would anybody be willing to review the article in detail before I go ahead and nominate it for GA-status? Nergaal (talk) 20:47, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Article proposal: Romanians living abroad

Right now the main Romanians-related article is Romanian diaspora, which Dahn restricts to citizens of the destination countries (see the figures). We need to say things about Romanian citizens living and working abroad, even if they are counted in the Romanian census. My title proposal is just a proposal, but the content should cover, for instance, the millions of Romanians living in Western Europe. Dpotop (talk) 10:38, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Are there any precedents for the article you propose, or are you just winging it? because your proposal screams of content forking and clutter. Plus, I don't remember having edited the article you mention in living memory. Because, I have to say: that article could easily discuss people living abroad who are or are not counted at home (unlike Romanians, which is probably what you had in mind when you made that snide comment, where some editors have allowed themselves to count hundreds of thousands people several times). Dahn (talk) 17:22, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I think one of the problems with the Romanian diaspora article is that it only discusses the present (and then, it's mainly a numbers game, without much more context than that), without any serious attempt at putting things in some kind of historical perspective. Since we've been talking about Italy in the above, take a look if you wish at Italian diaspora for how they treat the historical context. OK, nowhere near FA status, but still, much better, yes? Turgidson (talk) 18:18, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

For a different model (and perhaps a more relevant one), take also a look at Ethnic Germans. Turgidson (talk) 18:21, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I fully agree with expanding that article (and, yes, there is a helluvalot to be said), and any (relevant) info about non-permanent residents could form part of that expansion. Dahn (talk) 18:25, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

You talk about content forking. But these guys have specific problems that probably make up for a serious article. And Dahn, I do agree with you that they should not be counted in addition to Romania Romanians. But the figures in Romanian diaspora should not be limited by the citizen status. Dpotop (talk) 21:47, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

That means we fully agree: the Romanian diaspora article is the best place to include the info you want to see included, and I have no objection to any change in the count that would reflect that. Dahn (talk) 00:17, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

While at it, I have another question: How come there is no uniformity in naming the various articles on the Romanian diaspora? I discovered this after finding out that neither French Romanians nor Romanian-Americans (nor Romanian Americans, for that matter) exist, though we have both Romanian Canadians and Romanian-Canadians, both redirecting to Canadians of Romanian descent. At any rate, if you look at Category:People of Romanian descent, you'll see a hodge-podge of naming conventions: (1) "Romanian-Foo", with or without a dash, (2) "Foo of Romanian descent", or (3) "Romanian-Foo people". And this is just for the categories; for the actual articles, the naming conventions may be different than the one for the parent category. Eg, we have Category:Romanian-Americans, but the article is named Romanian American (and also, let's not forget the much-abused List of Romanian Americans). All this makes navigation very difficult, I think—even for people who edit at WP, let alone for a total novice (even more so than the Sarmis/zegetus/za imbroglio!) What is to be done? Turgidson (talk) 23:37, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I noticed the problem myself. Based on my own observations, this was started from Canada-related articles and categories and slipped out of control, eh? I've noticed that Canadian categories in general have had a weird, seemingly whimsical and incomprehensible system applied to them, and that they systematically favor the "of x descent" categories over established conventions. Also note that "of descent" is in sharp contrast to these categories being grouped in "by ethnic or national origin" (meaning that they include both ethnics and people who were also citizens of other countries, not just ethnics and their descendants - though never the descendants of people who were merely the citizens of other countries). I have even had to correct two of them, but I did not have the necessary stamina to deal with the problem as a whole. I was going to throw in a "Blame Canada", but I hate referencing that stupid show :). Dahn (talk) 00:17, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Hey, don't get this guy mad! Turgidson (talk) 00:36, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Hm. Is he in any way related to these guys? Dahn (talk) 00:41, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I did not edit on those articles, but there is a difference between Romanian and of Romanian ancestry. And this seems to be very important in the US. So, I see the problem you mention as more of a problem of article classification than one of article naming and right to exist. Dpotop 19:59, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

OK, perhaps. But we sill have ro-can and ro can redirecting to can ro descent, suggesting an equivalence between the concepts. And even with the first type of cats, there is a difference of spelling (with or without hyphen, plural or singular, the works). Plus, we have ro-fr people and ro-swiss people, I guess perhaps French and Swiss don't admit plural, whereas Canadian, American, etc do? At any rate, yes, it's important to draw some distinctions, but also to have clear definitions, and uniformity of naming similar cats, otherwise the whole thing becomes, well, a Tower of Babel. Turgidson 21:01, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

To Dpotop: actually, the general procedure here is that all people of mentionable X ancesty in Y country are "Xian Yians" - as I have said, this includes people of X descent (ethnically) and people who originated in X country. It is the simplest and most understandable system, and answers to the categories being grouped into "by ethnic or national origin" (the two definitions, together). Dahn 21:05, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

To Turgdison: they could not decide on hyphen or no hyphen when they tried to, so they left it for people who start categories to decide. The real anomaly here is the "of... descent" categorizing. Dahn 21:07, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't around when hyphens were discussed, but I would have voted for the hyphen. At least in American-English, that's always used in this context: there is even an article on Hyphenated Americans! Not to split hairs, but let me also say that I would push for the plural form, as in Romanian-Americans, as opposed to Romanian-American; after all, such articles should be talking about a group of people (>1 in number) sharing a given characteristic. Whence the plural. But maybe there are countervailing arguments? :) Finally, that business about "of...descent" sounds like a can of worms to me. Is that a well-defined notion? Turgidson 02:40, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh, me too - I'm all for hyphens! I also support the plural, since it is only too logical. As far as I can tell, some Canadian users simply wanted to explore just how much they could take that quirk out of its immediate context - the problem should have been solved the other way, with their categories/articles being renamed to "fooian-Canadians". (I suspect they did if based on the supposed Brit to French parity, that means there are no other Canadians but "Canadians of some descent".) The very prospect of a long conversation where I (or even I and a few others) would have to face and explain this to an entire community of users is not all enchanting. Dahn 03:30, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Moldovan PhD thesis on "Moldovan statality" (history)

So, if you want to:

• See what's submitted as PhD thesis in history in Moldova, or
• Have some citations of Lenin (for the nostalgic ones), or
• Read some delirious/surrealistic Moldovenistic propaganda (for the masochistic Romanian nationalist)

I suggest the following link:

http://www.cnaa.acad.md/thesis/7364/

The link to the actual thesis is easy to spot.

This document made my day. First of all, you must know it's written by a Moldovan MP of the Communist Party. Actually, I found the document after reading the following article in Ziua:

http://www.ziua.ro/display.php?data=2007-12-15&id=230777

Second: Mr. Stepaniuc, the author, wrote his thesis in a foreign language: Romanian!!! You can see this on the first link I gave you.

Third: I did not read the whole thing, but sections 1.2 and chapter II were cool. They reminded me of the old Moldovan History textbook from MSSR (in Cyrillic Moldovan).

My only question is: How can one person be so indoctrinated in our day? And I frankly don't understand how his PhD thesis adviser accepted to direct such a piece of prose. I also wonder whether the thesis will pass (it's not the case, not yet). Dpotop (talk) 21:45, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

If the link disappears for some reason, e-mail me, I made a copy. Dpotop (talk) 21:45, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

PS: I have just noted that there are two bibliography sections. Is this normal practice for historians? In Computer Science I'd say the guy is trying to inflate his thesis to a decent size. Dpotop (talk) 22:06, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

PS2: While browsing the bibliography (do so, it's funny) I have noted another of Vasile Stati's works:

Ştefan cel Mare – voievodul Moldovaniei. Chişinău, Tipografia Centrală, 2004, 94 pag.

I guess we have to add yet another name to Moldova. Dpotop (talk) 22:14, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Is he the guy with the bust of Felix in his office? Cute. Maybe there's a market for it on eBay. Turgidson (talk) 23:18, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

A quick look (cca. 30 mins) over it reveals to me:

• I suspect Mr. Stepaniuc has got some "help". I'd like to know when is the defense date, and I'd like to put him some questions. E.g., "can you, please, identify the fortresses of Tetina and Hemliov that you mention right at the begining", and more like that. I'm afraid he won't know "he" wrote them in the text...
• I understand now how they manage to circumvent the facts written in 100 sources that they themselves use. So they do 2 main things:

1. When the events agree with your vision, include as many names as possible. When they contradict, exclude any names. For example, they speak so nice of collaborators of Cuvant Moldovenesc and the leaders of Moldavian National Party, but then when they get to March 1918, they forget to mention the names of the people which did the union, exactly those from Cuvant Moldovenesc and Moldavian National Party. The top of hypocrisy is to elogiate Vasile Stroiescu's activity till 1918, and then to forget to mention that he is the author of the Union Act. In the case of Constantin Stere, another hypocrisy: at first they call him a dignified fighter for the rights of the peasantry, until this fighter comes to Chisinau in March 1918, when he becomes an "outsider". The entire thesis does not say once the name of Ion Pelivan until 1919 (!) when he complains of some incidents of gross non-professionalism. And the story repeats about smaller figures.

2. Totally erase the demand for land reform that fueled much of the changes. This is super convinient: with the main motric force out, one can remodel the truth according to whatever will one wishes. Similar about language, local autonomy, education, litaracy etc. And especially, they forget to tell that the unionist movement has started long before 1917. And that it was a movement of the intellighentsia of Bessarabia, Bukovina and Transylvania, and to a significantly smaller extent of the Old Kingdom. With that mention out, it is easy to invent new history.

The authors even mention in the introduction Stefan Ciobanu and Ivan Bodiul in the same sentence, separated only by commas, as reliable sourses of comments and analysis. God gracious! These people are not afraid to burn in the hell... Not even Beria would have been capable to write such blasphemy without blinking.

Not to mention that one must be very obtuse to want a PhD at age 50, while chief of the governing party's faction in the Parliament. I only know one guy who can compare to that: Vladimir Zhirinovsky. But the latter at least did not publicize his "thesis".:Dc76\^talk 17:00, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

List of national instruments

Do Romania or Moldova have one? If so, could we find a reference for it? Biruitorul (talk) 04:15, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Romanian Wikipedia

I know ro.wp is not one of your main concerns here, but I would like to let everyone know about a rather important movement going on there. A group of three admins (Gutza, Iulianu and myself) are on the way of being desysoped by the community, through votes. If you're interested, see ro:Wikipedia:Destituiri. This is not a vote begging call; however, your input might be useful. Thanks. — AdiJapan ☎ 11:35, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, User:AdiJapan. I saw that, a couple of days ago, and I must say I am completely baffled. I read through some of the discussions there, and I still can't make any sense of what's going on, except for the fact that there does seem to be a fair amount of bad blood involved. I wish I could help, but I'm leery to get involved in a fight that I don't understand, and that could end up sucking tons of energy. There is that much time I can devote to WP, and I'd like to maximize the portion spent editing, and minimize the portion spent arguing and/or fighting, as much as possible. There are some annoyances here at en.wp (that's life—no system is perfect), but they seem to be kept under control fairly well. What's going on at ro.wp, and why is there so much tumult? Can this be explained briefly, so at least someone like me can grasp what the basic issues are? Thanks. Turgidson (talk) 13:54, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Ditto. I have edited ro.wiki for some time last year, but it seems most editors changed. Dpotop (talk) 14:41, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Turgidson, if you accept an account from my side of the story (but I promise it'll be NPOV), then here it is: The conflict between sysop Radufan and myself is quite old, a couple years. Briefly, he hates my guts, for unknown reasons. Generally he's a good guy, hard-working, but has somewhat strange views about Wikipedia policies (the small part he is acquainted with), plus a habit of interpreting them in his very personal way --- I could give you a good number of hilarious examples, such as implementing an ad-hoc 1RR policy and so on. Nice guy, you'd love him. Anyway, recently, Dahn --- you know Dahn --- pointed out that we have a serious problem with enforcing the verifiability policy, in particular with excluding unreliable sources (specifically Altermedia, a website visibly affiliated with Noua Dreaptă). You probably don't know me, but I always insist in following the policies, so I supported Dahn. So did other sysops there, which annoyed Radufan a great deal. He's easily annoyed. His stance was that this was censorship and besides we shouldn't involve Wikipedia in political debates. He wanted all talks to stop, or else...

Hm, nowadays 1RR is used quite extensively and arbitrarily even here on en.wiki. Dpotop (talk) 17:19, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Also, Dahn is also easily annoyed. Dpotop (talk) 17:19, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Now when Dahn went further and pointed out that another admin (one who hates being criticized) had used copyrighted text in several of his articles, things were too much for Radufan and he blocked Dahn for a whole week. Most probably Dahn's tone of voice was to blame, we'll probably never know, since Radufan thinks that stating detailed reasons for his blocks is largely unnecessary. Even when asked. He then threatened Gutza, Iulianu and me that if we dare unblock Dahn he would start the desysoping procedure for all three of us. (We have such a thing there.) Then, in the next minutes, before any of us even attempted unblocking Dahn (who was going to stay blocked until the next day) he filled in our desysoping forms. The desysoping procedure requires the signatures of three admins to be started, and then the community has to vote. I need 80% support, and most probably I won't get it. (At this moment I have 76%, and the difference is larger than it seems.)

Sounds a lot like en.wiki, but with some more arbitrary involved, and with some sides changed. :) Dpotop (talk) 17:19, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Also, what do you mean by "you need 80%"? I saw that most votes were for you, so I thought there's no problem (this is why I didn't vote for you). Dpotop (talk) 17:19, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

You might ask: "Why didn't you guys start the desysoping procedure against Radufan?". I won't reply that, because it's homework for Radufan, but I'll give you this hint: It has something to do with the Romanian phrase "a se bălăci în aceeaşi mocirlă". In fact, if the community doesn't want us, who are we to say we're good for the community?

The bottom line is that ro.wp already had quite a bunch of problems with enforcing the policies, and if the last people who were doing that are gone, the future is grim. — AdiJapan ☎ 16:28, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the detailed explanations. I understand things a bit better now, but I'm still far from being able to grasp all that's going on over there. At any rate, hopefully when things calm down a bit, and the dust settles, one can revisit this à froid, and see if anything can be done to improve things. Let me know if I can be of any help—as long as it doesn't entail getting involved in personality fights (something I'm not at all good at). Turgidson (talk) 17:38, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Dpotop, at ro.wp a candidate needs a supermajority of 80% to become sysop. And the same support is required for the reconfirmation. So the fact that a majority of users voted for me is not enough, because 1 vote against me is as strong as 4 votes for me. But, I repeat, I did not come here to ask for votes. Look, Turgidson gave me his vote and then I got one vote against, specifically for putting the notice here...

I knew it before, but now I feel it: Voting is evil. — AdiJapan ☎ 18:28, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Yep, I saw that. That kind of attitude ("us vs them"? "don't wash your dirty laundry in public"?) is deeply disturbing to me: I thought we're all in the same boat (or at least, sister boats), working towards common aims, albeit perhaps from different perspectives, which is only natural. At any rate, forget about it for a moment, if you can, and let's try to find some silver lining in all this. I personally think we need more, not less, inter-wiki cooperation. Eg, there's been a steady flow both ways in terms of articles between ro.wp and en.wp (probably more ro->en from what limited perspective I have, but I'm not sure), and there are several editors working on both. What do you think could be (should be?) done to improve the atmospherics (e.g., to move away from that kind of parochial attitude you just mentioned, but perhaps the other way, too — surely there are two sides to every coin, I don't want to cast stones), with the aim towards improving collaboration and the quality of articles on both sides? Turgidson (talk) 19:09, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

This question is not for me, but I will nevertheless make 2 comments:

1. My experience tells me that smart young men, especially the introverted kind, tend to be very "us vs them" when it comes to defending ideas (they have a high potential for intolerance). Not to mention that wp is filled with all sorts of paid editors (read POV-pushers). I mean, I was lured in by the illuministic geek society thing, but we have all been here long enough to know this is just a cliche. Dpotop (talk) 21:04, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

2. As concerns the parochial thing: You can do nothing, just wait for the editors to understand that the parochial approach no longer works. Ever since '89 everything was parochial in Romania. There are always 2 or more parties and the way people choose their party and defend it looks more like religion, not politics. You have to defend your "side" coute que coute, and regardless of rational arguments, or the benefit to you/wikipedia/whatever. Dpotop (talk) 21:04, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, I guess I'm not a "smart young man", then. (I'll let you figure out which one [or two, or three] of the three criteria is missing.) And, call me naïve, but is the situation as bad as you paint it in point #1? I think I encountered something approaching what you describe 2 or 3 times, but only once was it confirmed for sure (with a block for a certain set of pages, having to do with a sliver of land beyond a river to the East). I like better the idea of an illuministic geek society (for some reason, this conjures up visions of Il nome della rosa.) As for point #2, I can't comment specifically, but are you sure you describe a purely local phenomenon? E.g., there is there anything remotely similar to BDS in Ro.? Turgidson (talk) 21:53, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Good thing you linked to "illuminism". This is what happens when one relies on false friends. I should have written Enlightenment (which translates to the Romanian "Iluminism"). Dpotop (talk) 22:56, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I guess you're not so young by WP standards, which may be why we never managed to clash. Yet. :) Dpotop (talk) 22:56, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I maintain my "paid editors" assumption, which is comforted by some current high-profile scandals, and by empirical observations (when edit time>10h/day for months, I tend to say the editor is paid). Dpotop (talk) 22:56, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

As for point 2, I agree with you that populist politics everywhere resembles what happens in Romania. But there's a difference between populist politics and tribal attitudes. I fear tribal attitudes are still strong in Romania at a level smaller than the national one (which prevents the state of right from consolidating). And no rule will make this change. Only the current status of chaos can make people understand the root of the problem. Dpotop (talk) 22:56, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

That's funny — I did not realize that was a false friend! I really thought you were talking about something really old, like those monks perched atop parchments in Umberto Eco's novel. Diderot by comparison is not geeky at all, but rather, downright hip! At any rate, why clash? There is enough sturm und drang going on, why add to the ruckus? If you ask me, there is too much noise around; one needs peace and quiet to think, and write (and not just here at WP). As for politics, don't you think it's an over-rated activity? I mean, just count how many articles there are about politicians: almost every Tom, Dick and Harry who won an election for mayor of Anytown, USA rates a page (not to say, every soccer player who ever hit a ball!), compared to how many, say, doctors, or engineers, or — ah, forget about it. It's all about that elusive notion of "notability", which of course is a reflection of the ambient medium. Sorry I got going on a tangent, but I have my own pet peeves. Turgidson (talk) 23:39, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

The question is not that of notability, but of energy put in POV-pushing and removing the POV of the "opposition". Dpotop (talk) 08:46, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Turgidson, to answer your question about what can be done to improve the editing environment and the article quality, here are a few suggestions for those willing to help:

1. First off, don't ignore ro.wp.
2. Fix, or at least point out, the problems you notice there.
3. Enforce policy. Many aspects of the policy are simply unknown there, or considered not important.
4. When you write an article here, make sure ro.wp has at least a stub for it.
5. Some of the articles at ro.wp are simple translations of their en.wp counterparts (even on subjects pertaining to the Romanian culture). When you solve POV or accuracy problems here, check if the same needs to be done at ro.wp.
6. I know some Romanian editors at en.wp avoid ro.wp because of its editing environment. But they are the most equipped to fix that.
7. GOTO #1

To reply your other concern, I'm not upset about ending my "career" of admin (and bureaucrat and checkuser and OTRS). I'm upset about the direction ro.wp seems to be going toward, due to the misplaced energy of some and the apathy of many others. — AdiJapan ☎ 07:43, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure copying en.wiki is a good thing. In my view, current en.wiki articles related to recent Romanian history do show systematic bias. There's also parochial behavior and probably external ingerence (as showed by the recent MariusM/Dahn quarrel). The only thing that makes the romanian en.wiki community function "better" is external pressure. Dpotop (talk) 08:46, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

AdiJapan: OK, I'll see what I can do. I'd rather experiment, and see how it goes, than make grandiose promises I can't keep. By the way, there is one point missing in the above: Maybe it's just me, but I don't really see much sense of community out there at ro.wp. Setting aside all that infighting (which I don't find seemly at all), I could not find any way to communicate with anybody there (well, I didn't try hard, I must confess). In one year, I got only a single message, and that was a slap on the wrist (from you, of all people!) No problem, it was my fault — but still, do people over there ever chew the fat like they do on this board, or write messages about various editing issues? I'm sure they do to some extent, but looking at some of the pages lately, all I can see is lots of commotion and hard feelings (to put it mildly), and not much else. Doesn't look like a very friendly place to me. I mean, it's not all peaches and cream here either, and surely there is some friction (quite a bit in fact, in some areas). But still, the system works. So, do you think one can put aside all that stuff, and simply concentrate on the nuts and bolts at ro.wp, with a modicum of good will all around, or is that a chimera? No need for fancy speeches, just pick a subject — any subject — that you need a hand with, and I'll give it a try (or let you know if I can't), as long it doesn't involve getting into absurd fights. How's that? Turgidson (talk) 00:29, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Măhi să fie, uite unde duc administratorii Wikipedia problemele wiki.ro. Spune multe despre cât reprezintă comunitatea un admin care dă fuga în alte părţi să-şi rezolve problemele pe care le are cu comunitatea pe care vorba vine o administrează. Este de-a dreptul jenant să găsesc această discuţie aici. Mă miram eu că apar oameni care habar n-aveau ce se întâmplă şi votau (în poziţie de drepţi) împotriva demiterii lui AdiJapan. Dar măcar celălalt punct de vedere vă interesează sau ce spune AdiJapan este garanţia pentru o analiză fidelă a "adevărului"? Sau când e vorba de articole, reguli stricte pentru surse, dar când e vorba de oameni, arătatul cu degetul este suficient. Este o discuţie de-a dreptul patetică. Mă mir că nu i-aţi arătat drumul spre uşă. --Radufan (talk) 16:46, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Are you talking to me, Radufan? For the record, my vote at ro:Wikipedia:Destituiri/AdiJapan (to which I assume you refer) was recorded here, and I explained exactly how and why I voted that way, to the extent that I linked to this very discussion here. So, why would you "wonder" about my reasons, when you could have just clicked on the link I provided? That I voted "în poziţie de drepţi" is totally nonsensical (as a matter of fact, I was lying on a couch :)). And whether I was in a position of "habar n-aveau ce se întâmplă" --well, yes, to some extent (as I made it clear in my vote, I am an outsider at ro.wo, though I registered there at exactly the same time as here). But I've been learning fast in the past few days, and much of what "se întâmplă" there is not very appealing: more noise and shouting matches than actual content creation, for one thing. And, judging from the tirade above, not a very friendly (or decorous) place, either. Turgidson (talk) 03:04, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

The demotion vote just ended. All three sysops (I'm one of them :-) got over 85% of the vote and thus keep their permissions. Frankly speaking, this outcome is a big surprise for me, a very pleasant one. This was the first attempt at gaming the system on ro.wp and one can only hope that we, as a community, gain some sort of "immunity" against such attempts. Thank you and Merry Christmas everyone! Iulian U. 10:58, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Monarchist stirrings

Ziua has helped relaunch the campaign to restore King Michael to the Throne: [14], [15], [16]. We should watch developments in this movement (if indeed it is a movement) carefully to gauge whether it is notable enough to mention somewhere here. Biruitorul (talk) 05:36, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

In the second-mentioned article, Ziua says nobody picked up the story: "Embargo. Boicot. Indiferenta. Inconstienta. Frica. Prostie. Slugarnicie. Cenzura si autocenzura in consecinta. Refuz de a informa lumea despre o initiativa cu vocatie istorica." I was curious to see whether that's true. While the internet was not rocking with the news, Google still gave me something: an article by Ion Vianu, "Vibraţiuni monarhice", România Liberă, December 19, 2007. Hmmm... Can they google at Ziua? Turgidson (talk) 05:53, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Minor translation help needed

I've been trying to do some much-needed cleanup in the Maia Morgenstern article, which is still pretty pitiful. Among other things, this has meant translating material dumped into e-wiki in Romanian. There is a phrase I don't get: "dar şi a juriului pentru acordarea". I understand the words individually, I can't put together what it is saying. Could someone look in context and maybe fix this? (The full original sentence was "Este membra UNITER si UCIN , dar si a juriului pentru acordarea Premiilor de excelenta in cultura romaneasca." I know UNITER & UCIN & have explained rather than translated.) - Jmabel | Talk 10:00, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

"But also of the jury granting [the Romanian Awards for Excellence - or whatever name the award should have]". Dahn (talk) 10:50, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

I would suggest translating "and" instead of "but". There is no actual opposition between the two facts, and "dar" is used there a bit by abuse. Dpotop (talk) 11:09, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Right - I didn't quite grasp the first part of the phrase Jmabel was quoting. In my view, in that context, the best variant is "as well as". Dahn (talk) 11:15, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! It was, indeed, "dar" that threw me, it made me expect a contrast that wasn't there. - Jmabel | Talk 18:16, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

I've now finished a pass through the article. Someone may want to carry some of the citations back into the ro-wiki article, which mostly lacks citation. Also, it wouldn't surprise me if there are good Romanian-language sources on her stage work that I have missed. - Jmabel | Talk 04:51, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

The name Morgenstern reminded me of how fun is to decrypt the etymology of names. In this case it's simple: Morning Star (from German). Is there some etymology project on Wikipedia? Dpotop (talk) 09:28, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Not really, but there are pages like thisun. Dahn (talk) 02:44, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Nivelul discuţiilor la rowiki

Văd că aici se discută şi despre rowiki, doresc să vă dau cîteva amănunte pentru evaluarea situaţiei. Toţi cei trei administratori despre a căror destituire se discută m-au susţinut nu de mult la postul de administrator la rowiki, nu cunosc motivele dar poate fiindcă am avut un conflict cu Radufan. După ce l-am contrazis pe Gutza într-o problemă, aceasta a cerut banarea mea, fiind susţinut şi de AdiJapan şi IulianU, dar propunerea a fost respinsă de comunitate. Atunci Radu a considerat momentul prielnic să lanseze cererea de destituire a celor 3 (e o veche adversitate între Radu şi AdiJapan + Gutza). Eu n-am votat deocamdată la acea propunere (cu excepţia unui vot de abţinere la IulianU), dar e limpede că sînt luat la ochi şi există ranchiună contra mea (a fost o înfrîngere pentru Gutza şi AdiJapan să ceară banarea mea şi să fie respinsă, iar ei nu prea sînt obişnuiţi cu înfrîngerile, orgoliul lor suferă). Am primit deja ameninţări cu moartea, iar ca să vedeţi la ce nivel se poartă discuţiile, dau următorul exemplu. Pe baza WP:Naming convention am susţinut că la rowiki nu ne trebuie articol Limba neerlandeză ci Limba olandeză. Toată discuţia o puteţi vedea aici. Gutza şi AdiJapan sînt contra, cred că Pavlov ştie de ce. În cursul discuţiei mi-am exprimat părerea că sînt alte lucruri mai importante care lipsesc în acel articol decît o listă cu instituţii care folosesc una sau alta din denumirile limbii, şi anume: numărul de vorbitori ai olandezei/neerlandezei în diferite ţări, istoria acestei limbi, literatura ei, sugerîndu-i lui Gutza ca, dacă are energie pentru îmbunătăţirea acelui articol, să şi-o canalizeze în aceste direcţii. Ca răspuns, Gutza mă îndeamnă să investighez "plăcerile sodomiei" [17]. Acest tip de replică din partea unui birocrat şi checkuser împotriva unui utilizator care se referise strict la articolul în discuţie şi la politicile Wikipedia sînt considerate la rowiki absolut fireşti, eu am făcut şi o sesizare formală pe care niciunul din cei 22 admini de la rowiki nu a băgat-o în seamă. De altfel Gutza este convins că nu e nimic greşit în felul cum s-a exprimat [18]. Cred că îi înţeleg pe cei care nu vor să contribuie la rowiki.--MariusM (talk) 02:47, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

De ce nu limba ungara? --Ungurul (talk) 19:28, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

I urge those tempted to believe the allegations above to actually check the facts and look at the whole story. — AdiJapan ☎ 12:32, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Într-adevăr, verificarea faptelor e totdeauna necesară. De aia am şi dat lincurile relevante, ca să înlesnesc această verificare, spre deosebire de raportul de destituire care se discută acum la rowiki şi care nu conţine nici un fel de lincuri şi nici un fel de fapte concrete.--MariusM (talk) 08:06, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that "limba neerlandeza" discussion was pretty incredible. Just like the arguments involved. It's obvious that supporters of "limba neerlandeza" are in breach of at least WP:NPOV and WP:POINT. Dpotop (talk) 11:37, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome to give your arguments in that discussion. Remember though that what's really relevant is what the sources say. (And I advise you to actually read the discussion.) — AdiJapan ☎ 14:52, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Sărbători Fericite (Merry Christmas)

Vă doresc Sărbători Fericite tuturor şi un Crăciun plin de bucurii! Şi haideţi să lăsăm certurile deoparte măcar pentru câteva zile (e destul timp după aceea pentru a fi reluate :-)
--R O ^{A M A T A A} | msg  17:49, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Ma asociez si eu acestor urari. Si le adaug si varianta lor engleza:

I wish you all a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year 2008. See you.

Dpotop (talk) 21:52, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Or, as Henry Wadsworth Longfellow put it in I Heard the Bells on Christmas Day:

I heard the bells on Christmas day

Their old familiar carols play,

And mild and sweet the words repeat

Of peace on earth, good will to men.

And in despair I bowed my head

“There is no peace on earth,” I said,

“For hate is strong and mocks the song

Of peace on earth, good will to men.”

Then pealed the bells more loud and deep:

“God is not dead, nor doth He sleep;

The wrong shall fail, the right prevail

With peace on earth, good will to men.”

On that note, Joyeux Noël to all. Turgidson (talk) 22:27, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

La Mulṭi Ani 2008!!!!! --Ungurul (talk) 12:50, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Iaşi-Chişinău Offensive

There is a debate going on there about how to call those two cities, in that historical context. Since the discussion has spilled into questions about the reliability of Romanian-language sources (in general), and how to call place names in Romania (in various contexts), maybe this would be of interest to others? Turgidson (talk) 21:12, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Casa Păucescu

File:Bucharest Architects Association 3.jpg

The building is at right in this photo, in case anyone needs context

I've been trying to find out more about the former Casa Păucescu, now headquarters of Ordinul Arhitecţilor din România. Does anyone know:

1. The name of the architect who originally built it for Grigore Păucescu in 1898?
2. The name of the architect responsible for the recent postmodern treatment of the building?
3. What it was in the years between serving as the Austro-Hungarian embassy and as a Securitate building?

I've spent about 2 hours on web searches and haven't been able to answer any of these questions. I just want to say parenthetically that it is remarkable that the site of an architects' association seems to have nothing about their own headquarters building. - Jmabel | Talk 00:44, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

It was the house where Eminescu read his "Scrisoarea III", Caragiale "Noaptea Furtunoasă" and Delavrancea "Trubadurul" The king bought the house from Păucescu's widow and a part of it was demolished to build the Central University Library. [19][20] But I can't find the info you wanted. :-) bogdan (talk) 00:57, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I knew about the partial demolition (there is an early image of the building that seems to be online in at least a dozen places, with the whole building intact), but didn't know about the Eminescu connection. The building probably deserves an article in Wikipedia. I'm actually working on an article elsewhere than Wikipedia, so I can't really write the Wikipedia article on this one. It's just so weird that it's hard to get the architects' names, particularly odd for the recent one: you'd think there would have been a press release. - Jmabel | Talk 04:04, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

[21] is largely an article from Jurnalul National about this building; if I read it correctly, it says the tower is the work of Dan Marin & Zeno Bogdănescu, but it doesn't name the architect of the original Casa Păucescu. - Jmabel | Talk 07:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

And now it's no longer on line. But that date should let someone get this again from Jurnalul National. - Jmabel | Talk 04:03, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Correcting myself: this appears to be the building of Uniunea Arhitecţilor din România, not Ordinul Arhitecţilor din România. Very confusing to have two organizations with such similar names. - Jmabel | Talk 05:46, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

The source that said it was built 1898 is obviously wrong. Păucescu died in 1897! So the building is older than I thought. - Jmabel | Talk 00:00, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

And now I've heard from the UAR, who say that their building isn't Casa Păucescu (and who sent me a 20-odd-page document in Romanian that is partly about the building, partly about Piaţa Revoluţiei in general, and seems at a quick skim to say that even the date of original construction is not known). I'll read through it, and will probably eventually report back here about what I find out. - Jmabel | Talk 04:22, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Curiouser and curiouser! Do keep us posted. Biruitorul (talk) 14:52, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

In any case, the magazine I'm doing this for has agreed that 6 months after they publish, Wikipedia is welcome also to use the material. - Jmabel | Talk 16:33, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Haven't slogged through it all, but it is clear that they are right: this is not Casa Păucescu, nor any part of it. A 1911 map they sent me makes that very clear. Both buildings can be seen on the map. - Jmabel | Talk 23:20, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Requested article: Romanian science fiction

In category Category:Science fiction by country. We have articles on Polish science fiction, Czech science fiction... I would very much like to read about Romanian one, too.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 21:18, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I have a book on the history of Romanian science fiction and I could start writing an article using the information from that source. I'll try to start it in a week or so, when I'll have more a bit more free time. :-) bogdan (talk) 21:26, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I will be looking forward to it! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 04:40, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Can you give me the reference of this book, too? I am interested. Dpotop (talk) 20:00, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

An article on Romanian science fiction/Science fiction of Romania sounds very interesting. Have the editors interested in its creation/development forgotten about it? Don't forget that Romanian science-fiction means science-fiction in film as well as literature. Are there any Romanian science-fiction films? I would like to see one, especially if it's from the 50s, 60s, 40, 30s, etc. Alex contributing from L.A. (talk) 05:51, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

I googled Romanian science-fiction films and found nothing so far [22] . That's why I asked. Alex contributing from L.A. (talk) 03:26, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

We now have a Romanian science fiction article. A from L.A. (talk) 04:17, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Take a look at this diff. Swift, isn't it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anti-Romanian_discrimination&diff=199157263&oldid=197651829 Dpotop (talk) 19:52, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd love to hear the reason for that delete. Some sort of fork? And where did the Holodomor come from? Or has it just been a way too long commute home? —PētersV (talk) 01:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Moldovan wikipedia restarted without consensus?

Somebody seems to have resurrected the wikipedia in Romanian/Moldovan language written with cylliric letters. The project has been previously voted to be closed down but now somebody seems to have deleted all the information from here. I could not find any discussion or consensous on allowing the project to restart again. Anybody else has any opinions? Nergaal (talk) 23:28, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Manuc's Inn (Hanul lui Manuc)

This article could really use a revisit if someone has time.

1. There is a lot more content in the Romanian-language article than we have in the English; offhand, it all looks worth bringing over.
2. Recent events (see Talk:Manuc's Inn#Changes: a little over a year ago, the Cantacuzino family won back ownership of the building. (One report also mentions the Lahovary and Rosetti families, and mentions the Lido; it's not clear to me whether all three families had stakes in both hotels, or if the Cantacuzino family now has Hanul lui Manuc, and the other two own the Lido). They promptly closed it for a 2-year, €10 million restoration.

I don't have a lot of time to work on this right now, and the sources are mainly in Romanian, so probably this would best be a task for a native speaker. - Jmabel | Talk 20:11, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

New photos

The NATO Summit produced fewer pictures of interest than one may have hoped; still, these are all in the public domain (see right-hand column). I rather like the one of the Arc de Triumf and its underside. There are also some shots of Mrs Băsescu, should an article ever be written about her. (It's interesting that the three post-'89 first ladies have been almost invisible, but I suppose there's a reason for that.) Biruitorul (talk) 18:56, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Paul-Philippe Hohenzollern

Paul-Philippe Hohenzollern has become a big uncited mess, with a lot of content that obviously comes from his partisans but is entirely uncited. Someone want to work on it? The biggest issue would be to find citations. - Jmabel | Talk 16:26, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

There have been no significant changes in the 3 weeks since I remarked this. I don't think I would do as well on this as a reasonably neutral Romanian would. - Jmabel | Talk 14:32, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Voting

Hi! Here is a voting about Bendery/Bender/Tighina: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bender%2C_Moldova#Statement_of_Title_Solution —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.142.252.220 (talk) 18:19, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Historic monuments

I've just discovered a very interesting list of historic monuments in Romania. This is quite exciting, really, but we should be careful how we use it. Realistically, it would probably be too time-consuming to start a set of NRHP-type lists. Moreover, there are some entries there that we can't possibly start creating articles on. For instance, you probably know the Rondul Român in Cişmigiu. That deserves mention in our Cişmigiu article - and by all means a picture! But this list has every statue there as a separate entry. Clearly, we're not going to have one article on each statue! However, what I propose is a category system. Something like Category:Historic monuments of Romania, with a sub-category for every county. I think that's far more manageable. Thoughts? Biruitorul ^Talk 14:45, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

What are these called?

Speaking of historic monuments of Romania (OK, not quite, but I've done worse segues), what are these covered wooden crosses one sees in rural Romania properly called? - Jmabel | Talk 05:55, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

They don't look like this in Wallachia, but it could be a Transylvanian "troiţă", which are built at crossroads and fountains to bring good luck. bogdan (talk) 23:42, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

A Romanian from Romania here with me just said that is a troiţă, without me telling her what bogdan wrote. So that's what it probably is. Alex contributing from L.A. (talk) 07:05, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Peace of Busza

Can anybody identify the modern names of entities of Busza (town/fortress) and Jaruga (river near Dniestr, likely a small tributary) (based on Polish sources, but seemingly also used in this context by some German, English and French works).--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:53, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

This is what I was looking for:Portal:Romania/New article announcements

It was not that easy to find. Should it be made easier to find? I was gone from Wikipedia for about half a year, and when I just came back I could not find the page for new article announcements so I announced on WP:RWNB. Alex contributing from L.A. (talk) 23:23, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Cinema of Romania

The article as a whole looks fine but I want to draw attention to this article. It's a timely subject with the recent success of Romanian films such as The Death of Mr. Lazarescu and other films. So we should have this article be about as good as it can be. Right now the opening paragraphs are not satisfactory. I did my part trying to fix the opening paragraphs and other parts of the article in my previous account. I have a somewhat current (1996) American textbook, A History of Narrative Film by David A. Cook and it has a section on Romanian cinema focusing on the period after WWII up to 1993, so I guess I got that historical area "covered". I will look through the text for information about pre-WWII Romanian cinema, although the English Wiki article already has a lot of information there. Anybody have sources for Romanian cinema after 1993? You may wanna help improve the article. Alex) 04:24, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

So far I've seen only a few (if that) of the Romanian films discussed in my textbook, so if I were to edit the Cinema of Romania just using that textbook, I could improve the article significantly but I would just be quoting the textbook. Hopefully editors with more knowledge about and familiarity with Romanian films will come along and improve that article. I'm pretty much setting that project aside. A from L.A. (talk) 10:07, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

GAN:Romania

Hey, in case someone has some spare time; I need some help to find referrences for the Foreign relations section (I cannot find them). Once those are put into text, it should be ok to be submitted for wp:GAN. Nergaal (talk) 06:13, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Palatschinken

The article currently says that the term in German is derived "from Latin". Isn't it in fact from West Slavic, then from Romanian, and then from Latin? A is putting the smack down (talk) 13:24, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure it's from Romanian, see also [23]. I'm going to fix the article. A is putting the smack down (talk) 14:07, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Iordache, Jordache

Anybody have information on the etymology of the Romanian name Iordache? It looks like it is of Greek origin. The article Jordache doesn't have information on the etymology. A is putting the smack down (talk) 20:04, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

It's from Greek last name Yeorgakis (Γεωργάκης), a patronym from the Modern Greek first name Yiorgos (Γιώργος), from Ancient Greek Georgios (Γεώργιος), that is George. bogdan (talk) 17:29, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Is Iordache ever a given name? Well until I find an attestation I will edit the Iordache article to say it is only a surname. I'm also going to add the etymology, thank you :) There is still the mystery of why Jordache is called Jordache, which I may check out. A is putting the smack down (talk) 17:34, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

But Jordache? The name (pronounced Jor-dash) is a loose acronym for three immigrant Israeli brothers, Joseph, Ralph and Avi Nakash, who have taken a faddish product and promoted it overnight into a multimillion-dollar business. ("Topless Jeans Make the Scene", Time, September 10, 1979)

bogdan (talk) 17:52, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Cool. Surely they were familiar with the name Iordache, that's what no doubt inspired the acronym. They could've came up with countless acronyms but they chose "Jordache" for some reason. Well it worked for them. A is putting the smack down (talk) 17:56, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Surnames

This is interesting, you can make a list of surnames having a common etymology and a parallel evolution in Romanian, Spanish, Italian, etc. Here are some examples I'm finding:

Lupescu (not very common)/Lopez (one of the most common Spanish surnames)

Martinescu (not that common, not uncommon)/Martinez (one of the most common Spanish surnames)

Urzică (not common)/Ortega (common)

Caldararu (not that common), Caldarescu (not that common)/Calderon (rather common)

Florescu/Florez

and other examples. A is putting the smack down (talk) 16:31, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Mircea

Anybody know the etymology of Mircea? I have no idea. A is putting the smack down (talk) 23:00, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Probably a diminutive from Mirko, a Slavic name derived from mir ("peace"). bogdan (talk) 19:45, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

It does sound Slavic with that "mir". Is it possible for that Slavic "k" sound there to become the sound that there is in mircea? A is putting the smack down (talk) 00:18, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

I found the source of the name, it is Slavic and it does contain the Slavic word "mir". However it is not from Mirko, no k-->č sound change happened from Slavic to Romanian, the name was taken directly from Slavic Mirče (Мирче). See Mirče Acev. That sound change would not have been possible I think. A is putting the smack down (talk) 01:04, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Romanian lexis

I started this soon-to-be article a few years ago. It hasn't really been touched since. The name of the article has also been a matter of dispute:Romanian lexis, Romanian lexicon, Romanian vocabulary. The article is important and has a lot of interesting potential. For example, besides detailing the change in vocabulary over time, it can discuss regional variations, what kind of Slavic words became popular and why (for example, Slavic words relating to vegetable gardens and vegetable cultivation rather than grain farming), etc. Also such things as "the Romanian words of Slavic origin that occur most frequently in contemporary Romanian writing" can be added to the article if such studies exist. A is putting the smack down (talk) 22:30, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Micul Paris

User:Man with one red shoe insists on removing references to the nicknames "Micul Paris" and "Paris of the East" from the Bucharest article. I've reverted him once, but I'm not willing to get in a fight over it. If I follow his edit summaries correctly, he seems to be claiming that the nicknames have no currency, which strikes me as plain silly: "Micul Paris" is recognized enough even today to be the title of a B.U.G. Mafia song (not exactly a band known for obscure historical references). Someone want to take this on, maybe try to start a discussion with the guy at Talk:Bucharest? - Jmabel | Talk 20:18, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it's easy to find a Bucharester who doesn't know that nickname ("Micul Paris"), it's not just an obscure reference. There are 108,000 resulta at googling 'bucuresti "Micul Paris"'.bogdan (talk) 20:42, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Google books also yield some interesting results. Dahn (talk) 21:04, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Romanian names

Didn't we have an article on Romanian names? I seem to remember one but probably the memory was of some article on European names with a section on Romanian. The article is a good idea so the "-escu", "-eanu", "-aru" and other surname suffixes can be explained in one place, among other things. A is putting the smack down (talk) 21:49, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Particularly Romanian surnames would be useful. I do not have the references. A is putting the smack down (talk) 22:02, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Or simply Romanian name, based on this model. I agree, but I too lack the sources. Biruitorul ^Talk 19:03, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Since we're on this: Alex, I noticed you were editing some of the individual surname articles; this is just to let you know that you needn't remove the {{surname}} template to get rid of the vague "Surnames" category. What you do instead (and I thank the editor who showed us back in the day) is to replace it with {{surname|nocat}}. Thanks. Dahn (talk) 21:00, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Ok. And if someone does decide to begin the article don't forget other surname suffixes like "-ulea" (Danculea, Ţugulea, etc.) and "-uc" (Coşbuc, Moisuc, etc.). My interest in Romanian names goes back years, I remember in late 2004 I was collecting surnames, given names, diminutives, etc. Wiktionary is more suited for cataloguing and classifying anthroponyms but I want to expand information here in Wikipedia (Wikipedia:WikiProject Anthroponymy) also by correlating information. And there are things you can do in Wikipedia that you can't do in Wiktionary (for example, listing people with articles who have the name, etc.). A is putting the smack down (talk) 21:26, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

When we have an article about Romanian anthroponyms/onomastics it should also list examples of Romanian names originating from various languages: Latin, Slavonic, Hungarian, Greek, and so on. Here are some Romanian names that derive from Latin names. Some were re-introduced:

Aemilius, Aemilia (Emil, Emilia)

Aurelius, Aurelia (Aureliu, Aurelia)

Claudius, Claudia (Claudiu, Claudia)

Cornelius, Cornelia (Corneliu, Cornelia)

Fabius, Fabia (Fabiu; Fabia?)

Flavius, Flavia (Flaviu, Flavia)

Florianus (Florian)

Hadrianus, Hadriana (Adrian, Adriana)

Horatius, Horatia (Horatiu,)

Iulius, Iulia (Iuliu, Iulia)

Livius, Livia (Liviu, Livia)

Marius, Maria (Marius, Maria; all instances of Maria in Romanian may be from the Hebrew name; or the Latin name may have blended into the Hebrew)

Ovidius, Ovidia (Ovidiu, Ovidia)

Sergius, Sergia (Sergiu,)

Valerius, Valeria (Valeriu, Valeria)

Varius, Varia (Variu)

Vergilius, Vergilia (Vergiliu, Vergilia?, Virgilia)

In 2004 I began to collect some Romanian names and nicknames in my notes. Since then over the years I've been studying more about Romanian names, but I don't have the references aside from online references. I find anthroponyms to be very interesting, and I spent some time improving our fund of information about Romanian names here in Wikipedia. If anybody has the references and is reading this, please consider creating the article Romanian name or whatever it should be called. A from L.A. (talk) 16:43, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Agriculture_in_Romania up for deletion

I've listed it at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Romania, but I don't see link to that delsort from this board, so I'm not sure anyone is actually watching it. VG ☎ 11:30, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

ISO 639 decision for Moldovan language

See http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/ietf-languages/2008-November/008635.html --✉ Hello World! 03:01, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Constantin Timoc

Anyone know anything about Constantin Timoc (I gather he is a US-resident Romanian citizen running for the Romanian parliament). Person who merits an article? Utter wack-job? I have no idea. Figured someone here might know. - Jmabel | Talk 20:22, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Most Romanian-Americans who get involved in Romanian politics (though it appears their activity is mostly on internet forums) are wack-jobs: Fascists and Neo-Nazis, hardline Republicans, Pagan Dacianists and often, all-in-one. On the other hand, Timoc looks okay (his site: http://www.voteazatimoc.ro/).

On the other hand, I'm not sure how notable he is. bogdan (talk) 00:35, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Does participating in "internet forums" meet the definition of getting involved in "Romanian politics"? Does that mean that us Wikipedia editors are involved in Romanian politics? In a way we are. By the way, Savescu is a Romanian-American (how "American" is he, with all his Romanian nationalism? the key word there is Romanian), but I never heard of Savescu, his book, or even the Dacian-was-a-Latin language idea till I found out all the above in late summer/fall 2004 on the internet, when I was just internet surfing/googling on my own. And I had a false impression that the Dacian-Latinesque theory may be on to something because I found the idea being discussed in Origin of Romanians as if it was even worth debating in that article. User:Bogdangiusca had started and written most of that article when I came across it in late 2004. That's where I really first came across the idea, so I guess if Bogdangiusca had attacked the idea more---and if he had not included the idea in the debate---I probably would've never been attracted to the idea. But it's not his fault, I was new to Romanian studies and I was looking for new ideas to busy my mind with, and I don't know why, I kind of went out there and was drawn to the idea that the Dacian lnguage was perhaps similar to Italic. In late 2004 I was taking a class on Cultural Anthropology. I finished first in my class (no lie). Maybe in another space-time continuum I will be even smarter and I would never have fallen into the Dacian-Italic thing. The Dacian-Italic idea was a time-waster and a mind-confuser and a thief-of-resources for too many Romanians. It has fallen off in popularity since 2004 right? Here at Wikipedia I don't notice anyone really promoting or pursuing those ideas anymore. What was also interesting, my father who loved all kinds of far-out fantasy theories (flying saucers, Atlantis, etc.) had never heard of the Dacian-Italic ideas, and one time he came from Romania to visit and I mentioned the ideas (in 2005 or something) and he was not interested, had never heard of that. I never heard any Romanian-American discussing those ideas till I found them online. There is no real Romanian community in Los Angeles anymore, only scattered Romanians; it's always been scattered but there used to be more Romanians in Los Angeles, loosely in contact. From what I remember, UFOs & Atlantis were more popular than discussing Dacians; I hardly remember any Romanians coming over to discuss Dacians or Thracians. The Dacian stuff was far more popular in Romania itself; that's where Protochronism came from, from Romania. I don't know any Romanian-Americans involved in Romanian politics. That would be an interesting topic for me to look into, whether Romanian-Americans involved in Romanian politics actually do often exhibit an interest in Dacianism and/or paganism or protochronism. I suppose Republican Romanians are common, although many Romanian-Americans are in poverty-stricken Detroit, Michigan. A from L.A. (talk) 11:22, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't know what kind of internet forum activity can be considered "engaging in Romanian politics". Who are the actual Romanian-Americans involved in Romanian politics? A from L.A. (talk) 15:10, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, I for one can't vouch that Bogdan's original comment should be taken ad litteram or if it is hyperbole, but the one Romanian-American candidate to the presidency of Romania (and, it's now I notice, some other offices since) who I know about is this guy (I can't find any reliable third-party reference to the man, so this will have to do). I saw him speak a couple of times on TV, and, aside from the fact that he's generally hilarious, he seemed to have it all: ultra-nationalism with neo-Legionary undertones, delirious protochronist speculations, some hints that his favorite Americans were the survivalists. All but paganism: you see, he's an Orthodox priest. Dahn (talk) 15:37, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

An Orthodox priest? Does he give sermons? Yeah but notice this guys: Savescu was born in Romania and grew up there, didn't he? I never read more than excerpts from his book, however one of the excerpts I read, he was talking about how as a boy he was forced to lean Russian in grammar school in Romania (for a time it was mandatory, I think). Savescu is Romanian-American, yes, but he's quite Romanian. I want to emphasize that. The American aspect comes into play in cases ike Savescu in this way, I would imagine: they come to America, they become affluent (Savescu is a doctor or something), but they never adjust to America really, their nostalgia and their dreams of Romanian dominance and their home-country pride and nationalism get to their heads. Now, how many of these Romanian-Americans that we are talking about were born in America, or almost in born in America, coming here as little boys, toddlers, or babies? It's mostly guys like Savescu who came to America when they were older, already grown men. Those guys are Romanian, I assure you. Many of them gather cash and go back to Romania, in fact. I don't like the idea that someone is pointing at "Romanian-Americans", "Romanian-Americans", when in fact those guys are usually Romanians who came to America as grown men. Their education was from Romania. And their hearts are still in Romania. A from L.A. (talk) 15:48, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't dispute that, and I don't think Bogdan's point did either (it seems he was talking precisely about those who return to Romania and run for office there, and who are, technically, Romanian-Americans). On Săvescu, I for one think it gets more complicated than that - let's just presume these guys were interested in making a lot of friends in the States, who could help with any diversion they needed to implant there, and who would help divide the Romanian-American community on any important issue. Notice how Săvescu and some pillars of the Ceauşescu regime share a Weltanschauung. Whether it worked or not... that's beyond my powers of assessment. Dahn (talk) 15:59, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Alex, I don't think I remember any Romanian-American born in the US to get involved in Romanian politics. All of those who did were born in Romania. Apart from Rădulescu, there were a few others, like Lucian Orăşel (personal website sporting a nice Dacian logo), who wanted to run for president in 2000, but he was disqualified for holding an American citizenship. (Ziua article). Also, apparently, he had in his program to recover Bessarabia and Bukovina (presumably through a war with Ukraine) (Ziua article) bogdan (talk) 16:14, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Are we forgetting Lia Roberts? - Biruitorul ^Talk 16:24, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Ah, yes. And she was okay in comparison. Dahn (talk) 16:26, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

See, let's not misrepresent, it's not good journalism and it's not good for the entire Romanian commnity. A lot of those colorful Romanian-American figures are Romanians who left communist Romania, grown men, educated in Romania. I want the readers who visit this page to know that. I expect that Wikipedia will help to educate younger generations of Romanian-Americans about Romania, protochronism, etc. A lot of that material is not available here in the US. A from L.A. (talk) 16:29, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

To linger within the scope of the original argument, I suppose it's safe to say that Romanian political offices attract many whack-jobs in general, Romanian-born or not. That's especially obvious for independent candidates running on their own platform, and it just happens that Romanian-Americans in that situation are (exclusively?) independent candidates. I'm just saying that you and Bogdan and I don't seem to disagree on the substance of it all. Dahn (talk) 16:48, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, lots of those Romanian-Americans-involved-in-Romanian-politics (internet fourms don't really count) are wacky. Interestingly, they were educated in Romania. Interestingly, they have a large number of all-Romanian wacky brethren in Romanian politics. I don't know anything about Lia Roberts, but I'm hoping she's more grounded and an example of "the other kind" of Romanian-American-involved-in-Romanian-politics. A from L.A. (talk) 16:59, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Here is a profile. - Biruitorul ^Talk 17:07, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

She sounds okay to me. Not wacky in the way Bogdan meant, that is. I'm not saying she would be a good political leader or not, I don't know. A from L.A. (talk) 17:10, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I think she's a reasonable enough person - just that her candidacy, which started out with lots of fanfare, never gained any traction. For Eastern European leaders who've spent lots of time in the US, see Valdas Adamkus and Toomas Hendrik Ilves. - Biruitorul ^Talk 17:15, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

θ-->[tʃ]?

In Romanian we have the word cimbru (the "c" representing a voiceless postalveolar affricate), the etymology of which DEX gives as cf. Greek thymbra. The DEX does not say that the Greek theta sound eventually became a voiceless postveolar affricate in Romanian, there may have been another transmission maybe. Are there other examples of a voiceless dental fricative becoming a voiceless postalveolar affricate in Romanian? It may throw light on Albanian Cham perhaps deriving from Greek Thyamis. A from L.A. (talk) 20:10, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

There is also a Romanian locale named Ciumbrud, in Hungarian Csombord. Csombord means "savory plant" in Hungarian, it's a loan from Romanian cimbru. A from L.A. (talk) 21:48, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Anybody know the story behind the toponym Ciumbrud? Does it derive from cimbru? A from L.A. (talk) 22:09, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Probably the Romanian placename is adapted from the Hungarian placename, which is named after the plant, word which is borrowed from Romanian. bogdan (talk) 22:38, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

That sounds likely. Romanian cimbru became "csombord" in Hungarian maybe because their language dictates "csombord" rather than "csombor" according to Hungarian language flow; "csombord" is patterned after their own such nouns. A from L.A. (talk) 22:43, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I made a list of all Greek words (borrowed before the contemporary era) which have "th":

• th turning into t

spătar - spathários

spatie - spathí

scatiu - skathí

patimă - páthima

ieftin - efthinós

hristoitie - hristoíthia

matimă - máthima

caterisi - kathíresa

anatemă - anáthema

• th turning into f

logofăt - logothétis

None have "tʃ", so it's possible that cimbru reached Romanian via a now-lost intermediary language.

BTW, there's another herb with a discutable etymology: mărar, cf. Albanian mëraj, Greek márathron.

bogdan (talk) 23:05, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

It's very difficult to get at what happened with a lot of these words. I was looking through Olteanu's site recently, and he has an article/essay describing how the voiceless postalveolar affricate did not exist in ancient Greek (it didn't exist according to my understanding, nor does it in Modern Greek), but it almost certainly existed in Thracian. Greek and Latin authors would have to approximate that Thracian sound with Greek or Roman letters. I'm writing this from memory, I'll look it up later. A from L.A. (talk) 23:13, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

The Bulgarian word for Summer savory is "chubritsa" (чубрица). I will look for the etymology of that. I've found that it is rather common Slavic: Russian "Chaber", Polish "Czaber" etc. A from L.A. (talk) 14:08, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

I found this very useful list in the Albanian Wiki: [24]. Mint is called nanea or mendra. I just found the list and I'm going to have fun looking through it. A from L.A. (talk) 11:57, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

In that list in the Albanian Wiki I found mention of a plant called Çami i butë in Albanian, but I haven't found out what plant that is, it doesn't say. I'm interested in that because "Çami" is similar to "Çam". A from L.A. (talk) 12:41, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

This is very interesting to look into, in ancient Greek we find a th/s variation, Doric/NorthWest Greek having (only initial?) "s" sometimes instead of "th" (so for *Samis/Sameis you can imagine *Thamis, *Thameis, and for Thyamis you can imagine *Samis or *Syamis (although "Sya-" was rare in Greek). Also interesting is the existence of sound "ts"/"tz" in the ancient Greek language (did ancient Greeks ever write down "ts" or "tz" together when it occured at the beginning of words I wonder? In later Greek texts like Procopius it does occur). I'm going to look again through Olteanu's site (which is quite good although he hasn't put up a huge amount of material up yet on that site, and somebody needs to donate some cash to him so he can have a better website or something), for more info about Thracian "ts/tz" and "[tʃ]" and how the Greeks and Romans wrote it. A from L.A. (talk) 13:39, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Çam is also a Turkish word for the pine tree (obviously unrelated etymology, although it may be related to that Albanian plant name, Çami i butë, "i butë" meaning "domestic" as opposed to "wild". Domestic pine tree? That doesn't sound right. A from L.A. (talk) 14:23, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Sesame Street & Reading Rainbow & Mr. Roger's in Romania

Hi, I have kind of an irreverent question, but in Los Angeles as a child (1984? 1985? to ...) I grew up watching Sesame street, Reading Rainbow, Mr. Roger's Neighborhood etc. on PBS, and I was wondering whether Romanian children could also have seen such programs on television in the 1980s. Anybody here know? I would guess they are available for viewing now. A from L.A. (talk) 08:10, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

You mean "these programs"? They showed Sesame Street in the early 90s, for a while, if anyone remembers that. There were no real kid's television programs in the 80s, none except this crap (which was more intelligent in the 1970s - that "astronomy teacher" guy, Iurie Darie, made comeback with stuff like this in the 1990s, and he was probably closest to the American stuff you cite). Dahn (talk) 08:19, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah I meant "these programs", those exact programs. "Such programs" could be read as programs similar to them. I'm Romanian-American, but like many young Americans I have dabbled extensively in drugs & alcohol and I have an excellent excuse why sometimes I use an imprecise phrase. Plus this is wikipedia, and wiki means quick, and in my case it often means hasty ;) Those programs are so prevalent here and are so much a part of the American child's life and have been since like the early 1980s, that it is in fact not an irreverant question whether Romanian children also grew up watching those programs. Now I know that they could have seen them starting in the early 90s. Those deprived kids! Those shows I mentioned really are excellent for children---I do believe----although I don't know how they feel in translation. Alex (talk) 08:29, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Hey, I meant no disrespect: it was just a way to stress that it wasn't clear to me what you meant (not that you formulated it in the wrong way), and that I was going to answer both potential questions. But anyway: the Sesame reruns came at a very weird time, which makes me all nostalgic: with the Petre Roman cabinet's decision to import Western goods in huge numbers; with TVR 1's 10-hour long transmissions of whatever they had on "Super Channel" (which I think is now NBC Europe); with this and this and so many other power ballads (oh, where are you now?); and with Garbage Pail Kids gum so old that it would cut into your tongue... Oh, and the Mineriad, which doesn't make me nostalgic at all. Dahn (talk) 08:40, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I wanted to ask earlier about Garbage Pail Kids in Romania, because they were so special to me as a child. No child that I knew collected Garbage Pail Kids like I did, from 1985 to the last of the original run, and I collected and still have most of them. They still look so cool to me. I think Tom Bunk (also of Mad magazine fame) may have painted the coolest ones, although the other artists were stylish too. It's nice to hear that Romanian kids got to join in the fun a little. It was always silly to me how activists used to fuss about GPKs but never fussed about those Friday the 13th & other horror films that the local networks (not cable, local networks) used to air in midday/early afternoon on the weekends for any kid to watch. Get Jason & Freddy off the air, then complain about GPKs, which were pretty much harmless and in fact encouraged kids to learn how to read. I assume the GPKs in Romania were written in English? I wonder if they were in any significant way different, that would constitute a different version for collectors. Alex (talk) 08:54, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

It was in either English or (rarely) French, and were probably exactly the same as in those countries (I remember a back issue of Pif gadget from 1988, where they showed many of the French versions, and they were exactly the same as the ones we had in English, only with clever names in French). In fact, I seriously wonder if they weren't rejects or expired merchandise from Western Europe. I used to collect them for a while, and so did people I knew, but they quickly ran out of fashion. I remember that years later I saw a wooden door literally covered in GPKs - at the risk of sounding nerdy, my first reaction was "you fool, why did you glue them?" (I would only stick the ones I had in duplicate). Dahn (talk) 09:18, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Kids who only stuck their duplicates are genetically different from kids who stuck Garbage pail kids to their face. And kids who collected GPKs are cooler than kids who collected Baseball cards. Because i hardly gave a hoot about baseball cards. I'm outro y'all till tomorrow. Alex (talk) 09:28, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Romanian poetry anthologies

Hello Hello if I still have any friends here. I want to begin reading my way through Romanian literature but I'm very unfamiliar with the literature. Right now I'm more interested in poetry and can anyone recommend a good anthology of Romanian poetry (in book form obviously) regardless of whether it's available in the U.S. (I can order it off the internet)? I don't like Wikisource that much, especially when I want to appreciate literature. I like the tactile nature of a book, the feel, the look, the smell, etc. You know what aggravates me sometimes, collections like Modern European Poetry, Bantam Books, 1966. No Romanian section and on the backcover they proclaim: "It contains poems by every important [modern] European poet". It has a French, German, Greek, Italian, Russian and Spanish section. That's just an example from 1966 of Romanian poetry not being readily available here. You know what I will do, I will visit local major chain bookstores and report back here on the availability of Romanian lit in L.A. bookstores. Alex (talk) 06:46, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Your objections are entirely justified: the under-representation of Ro poetry (and literature in general) and the reasons why that is are the focus of an entire book by Adrian Marino - I've cited some of it in the Mihail Sadoveanu article. Marino cites only a few exceptions, and I have to trust him on this one; though it seems that Matei Călinescu, Stavros Deligiorgis and a few others took steps to improve this situation. I for one can't cite any individual titles, at least for now: most such anthologies in English that I've seen were generally prose, and were unusual in that they were issued by state publishing houses in Romania and seemed to be circulated almost exclusively in Romania (people would buy them to improve their English, if you can imagine...). Dahn (talk) 09:09, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

In the case of this Bantam 1966 paperback I understand the omission. Poetry is/was hard to sell, even in 1966, and the editors of this edition from the introduction look like they had enough trouble with the languages they chose---all the material in the paperback are English translations, mostly done by authors with some name recognition (some translations for example are by Stephen Spender and Frank O'Hara and Lawrence Ferlinghetti, poets who are better known in the U.S. than many of the poets they translate). The original pieces in the respective languages are not found in this volume. Their blurb on the backcover was not bad-intentioned as far as I can tell, they were trying to make their volume seem more comprehensive than it is. Nevertheless, I see this "Romanian omission" also in other instances, such as the catalogs issued by Dover Publications (from which I first ordered in 1998). They are a kind of major publisher of poetry for libraries and bookstores in the U.S., you often see a Dover edition. They also publish non-English poetry, but Romanian is not represented, not in prose either, though they may have Eliade and Ionesco plays. Alex (talk) 09:27, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

But wait up: the criterion here seems to be "important poets" (as used in the line you quoted above). Two things jump out. One is that they're centered on poets whom they consider important, right or wrong. The other is that (at the risk of making myself even more unpopular with some Romanian editors) Romanian writers in general are not important. They may be interesting and commending once known, but they were, are and presumably will be more ignored than even the most mediocre of their European counterparts - they are and have striven to remain niche authors. I couldn't possible imagine something that Goga or Coşbuc could communicate to any foreign audience (as păşunist traditionalists, it seems that they simply did not want to). Arghezi, who is a genius in his context, is also virtually untranslatable. The modernists, as talented as they were at times, accepted and assumed the subservient role of messengers for a wider thing - in the context of that wider thing, they are very often marginal (there is, for instance, a huge clash between Tzara the founder of Dada and the handful of Romanian Dadaists who took up the trend in a second-hand variant). And, what's more, many of those who could consistently communicate something to the outside world, whatever their background, are ignored at home, by their fellow Romanians (who would rather center on sciolist images of an abstract and glorious pre-literate medievalism while submerging completely into the tumultuous nondescript kitsch of today). Dahn (talk) 11:23, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

I want Romanian authors to be more widely available in the U.S. (besides on the internet). Not because they are Romanian, but because there is a lot of good work they are unfamiliar with. What is needed indeed is an anthology in English, readily available. I don't know of one. Myself, I've already come across a lot of good Bacovia poems, and others (there are by the way a number of poems in that 1966 anthology that are not very effective and very few of them are modern by today's standards, the collection is pre-Beat, pre-Bukowski, etc.). I want to read Marin Preda's novels about communist Romania soon, those sound very interesting. One of the reasons I often mention Bukowski, Hunter S., etc. is because I want to do my part in popularizing those authors in Romania. I know Bukowski is popular in Germany and France (to a lesser extent), but I don't know if he is read significantly in Romania. Alex (talk) 20:17, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

I was going to quote some examples of not that effective stuff in that collection, but it would involve too much typing. However I actually like most of it, but there are more than a handful that aren't working, and many that are interesting but from our early 21st century perspective could use some tweaks. Romanian wasn't included neither was Hungarian, Polish, Swedish, etc. so we have company. Nor does Dover issue Hungarian poetry. Alex (talk) 23:12, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Dahn said something that refers to something I'm not familiar with: that most Romanians would rather focus "on abstract and glorious pre-literate medievalism" (is this what Dahn is saying?)---I don't think that's accurate but then again I don't live in Romania. When I visited Romania I didn't notice much focusing on preliterate medievalism. Alex (talk) 09:38, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

What I meant to say is that, culturally, most Romanians I know seem to get the more excited the more the topic relates to something far back in the past, the more it is obscure, and the more it allows one to speculate about how extraordinary Romanians once were. Some three years ago, someone on this page was telling me that he could find ample proof for Romanians having a "national consciousness" at a time when nobody else did - needless to say, that person never got back to me on that. It's that type of tacky historiography I was referring to: it goes with an inversion of logic ("the less we know about something, the more we can claim about it"), and, as it goes, everything modern and certain gets shunned or at least frowned upon. That's why, no matter how big Symbolism, modernism, the avant-garde etc were, no matter how many Romanians once lived and breathed an alternative to this nonsense, all these things are sentenced to oblivion. Consider that Macedonski is (or at least was for long) supposedly our second-best poet, and when compared to even some admittedly mediocre traditionalist poets, not to mention Eminescu or Alecsandri, the interest and coverage as reflected on the internet are minuscule. I guess it's all part of a long history of herd behavior and its many victories in Romania. Dahn (talk) 10:52, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

That seems to be true about a number of Romanians in Romania and the older generations that immigrated to places outside of Romania. Alex (talk) 23:11, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

As for me, when I was 18 & 19 I was trying to write poetry inspired by the Symbolists and on the other hand lyrics inspired by rock artists such as The Doors (I still have some writings from that time, but I went through and did away with most of it in later years, but I got my practice). Here is a poem that I wrote when I was 18 [25], in early 1999, when I was still kind of new to writing poems: I submitted it in late 1999 I think and it was published by these folks in the year 2000, I have a copy of the publication to prove when it was published (2000), and I won an Editor's Choice award which I still have. This was I think my first "published" poem, although it was published by this group which I do not like to associate with because they have no standards really, they publish almost anything. I didn't pay for publication but I paid a small amount for the book it was published in. I'm linking this to show that I was writing poems in 1999 that already had some literary feel to them, although I don't very much like this poem that I wrote when I was 18. It shows my reading of Blake & the Romantics, but most of what I was writing in 1999 was trying towards Symbolism and Surrealism, while some of it reads like Bukowski-type stuff (I wish I would have discovered Bukowski earlier, I discovered Bukowski a few years ago, but even in 1998 I wrote some Bukowski-ish stuff, maybe it has to do with our neighborhood, East Hollywood). :) I also paint better than any of you. I may post some examples of Allen Ginsberg's Blake inspired poems written when he was just developing as a poet, before he developed his Beat style. He wrote his Blakean lyrics when he was older than 18, I think he was like 24 or something. I came across Ginsberg's early Blakean lyrics when I was like 20 or almost 20: over a year after I wrote mine. Mine however seems to me to be as much Poe-inspired as Blake inspired (I was reading Poe & Blake at the same time back then), and I don't find Ginsberg's early Blakean lyrics to be very achieved, I'll post them later probably for a comparison. Alex (talk) 00:00, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm interested in many different styles of painting, but mostly I'm interested in work from the late 19th century on: Impressionism, Symbolism, Cubism, Futurism, Surrealism (Max Ernst is more to my taste than Dali, but Dali's stuff is also cool to look at), Abstract art (for example Dumitresco's and Istrati's work), Abstract Expressionism, Neo-Expressionism. Again, my public service announcement: my brother 5 years ago or so could barely draw and hadn't painted much, now he has joint shows all over the place in L.A., he's had at least one solo show in Silverlake, and he's going to have a big solo show at [http://www.myspace.com/lawrenceasher later this year, located on Wilshire Boulevard in the prestigious Miracle Mile. I don't know his highest sales I'll ask but he recently got almost $500 in advance for a painting that was inexpensive to make, and he did it in a few days I think. That was easy money. So if you can't draw, that's not an excuse! I on the other hand am quite a different person with quite a different hand (plus I'm left-handed, he's not) and I can draw like a motherfucker, and I like how I paint too. I was going to ask sooner or later about the Bucharest art scene. When I say art scene I don't so much mean art movements or popular styles, rather whether there is a living market there for new art in local galleries. In Los Angeles there indeed is, even in this economy. I just went to a local gallery two days ago not far from my neighborhood and they were charging extraordinary prices for all new art from contemporary artists (including a Banksy piece, couldn't have been much more than 20X20, for $175,000 dollars; I don't particularly like Banksy's art, but I don't dislike it; I'm more old school). In L.A., there are people who have the money and will buy. Alex (talk) 07:55, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Max Ernst's art is so much better than so much new art you see up nowadays, for example At the First Clear Word, 1923 oil on canvas, that mysterious, eerie, sexually ambiguous hand that comes suggestively almost nightmarishly out of that rectangular opening in the orangish-colored wall, a hand that may be male or female, angelic or less-than-angelic---what is the hand doing with that ball and string, why is the string connected to a green walking-stick insect on the wall, that suggests something disturbing, insectoid, and non-human beneath the ordinary; sort of like those praying mantis-like aliens later reported by abductees. That is some visionary work in a high style, and I can't paint in that style yet...but I can try :) Anyway, while I like such works from the masters, nowadays the neo-surrealistic/Pop surrealist stuff I've seen in L.A. galleries is too often---you just have to see what I'm talking about, neo-surrealists kind of make you realize that while Surrealism was cool when done by the originators, doing it now often doesn't come off right. Rather than do that, I'm trying styles more towards Neo-Expressionism. It would take a lot of practice before I could paint with such technical virtuosity as many of the Surrealists, but if they are daunting, a look at new art on gallery walls is very encouraging---because I don't like so much of the new art and I have better visions. Alex (talk) 08:57, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Some stuff happened and my account got blocked. I would've liked to continue with more details here, but the conversation became one-sided, a monologue. I just saw a nice exhibit of some of Richard Neutra's art & architectural art & design art (including bus designs etc.) at the L.A. Central Library (which you can see until September 2009 in L.A.), very excellent, stylish, his drawing style/technique is definitely one to study. My future architectural drawings will definitely take notes from Neutra, although architectural drawing for me is not a focus, but you can't get far in drawing without getting into architecture, you realize this when you are still a kid and you start drawing homes & buildings etc. Neutra's early work shows influence from Art Nouveau, later he shows more Deco, Futurism, and he helped develop Modernist styles with some minimalist tendencies, etc. I was looking at his drawings up close and he is able to put on paper such a fineness of line and such precision in small spaces, I haven't seen too many like him. A book about Neutra showing his work is Richard Neutra and the Search for Modern Architecture, Thomas Hines, 2005, Rizzoli books. Later I plan on coming by and trimming earlier text on this page, but I felt like mentioning Neutra, I am enthusiastic today. And remember, you guys haven't seen my art nor have you read anything like that from me written after age 18 (published at 19). Bye bye haters, editors. Oh yeah I almost forgot, Neutra though Austrian-born is in many ways an L.A. architect, having moved here and subsequently designed a lot of structures here. One of them, I just found out at the exhibit, is located near my current residence, and I'm going to go take a walk over there (several blocks) and look for it. This guy unlike many architects was a versatile artist and the look of his art is like amazing, like Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow stuff, even when he was drawing not Futurist stuff that never got built but actual Modernist designs, which were his major contribution. 76.208.166.0 (talk) 00:35, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I want to update some of the text above later, but I want to add that, as I mentioned before: in 2007 a combination of events happened that almost drove me crazy: I would've been okay, but I was cyber-attacked and cyber-stalked by psychopaths in myspace while I was confused and vulnerable in 2007. I came back to Wiki in late 2007 because I needed to get away from that. Then I left and came back in August 2008. I wasn't in the healthiest of mind-states after all of that, and eventually I went off and got into these scenes with various editors. Sorry about that, I'm only human. 76.208.167.187 (talk) 10:28, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Noesis Cultural Society

Noesis Cultural Society has been nominated for deletion. I don't really have a sense of how notable it might be. It certainly struck me as notable when I was in Bucharest in 2001–2002, but perhaps it was just a flash in the pan. Could someone with a better knowledge of the Romanian cultural scene please look into this and comment (soon) at Talk:Noesis Cultural Society? Thanks. -- Jmabel | Talk 17:54, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Now sorted out. Yes, it's notable. - Jmabel | Talk 02:30, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Tabaci, Bucharest

I ran across Commons:File:Cuza and dr. Tabaci visiting Tabaci, flooded in 1862.jpg this image on Commons. Description: Prince Alexandru Ioan Cuza and Dr. Carol Davila visiting the Tabaci neighborhood of Bucharest during the 1862 floods. Where would the "Tabaci neighborhood" have been? Near the present-day Biserica Apostol Tabaci (Calea Văcăreşti near Splaiul Unirii)? Or somewhere else? - Jmabel | Talk 02:30, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately I don't have access to much bibliography to verify this against, at least not at the moment, but it does sound like it would be the area around the church. It's deduction for now: the name "Tabaci" in "Apostol Tabaci" doesn't make any grammatical sense unless it's a contraction of "din Tabaci", "a lui Tabaci" or something of this sort - and the name "tabaci" is an old version of "tăbăcari" (making this a likely reference to an area and a related occupation, as in "blănari", "lipscani", as in the "Tabaci" streets of the old quarters in Craiova and Ploieşti); it would also fit in with the practice of informal names for other churches - "Cuţitul de Argint", "Biserica Colţea" etc. Hope this helps. Dahn (talk) 13:12, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

I've double-checked with the one specialized book I have quick access to, Bucureştii de odinoară, but unfortunately the index doesn't mention either a neighborhood or a church by that exact name. Dahn (talk) 13:17, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

A bit of googling revealed this:

în preajma acestui schit, la miazănoapte, pe la 1672 / 1673, prin hotărâre domnească, la iniţiativa unor boieri din Sfatul Domnesc, sunt mutaţi tăbăcarii sau tabacii din mahalaua Sărindarului. De la aceşti tabaci provine numele mahalalei [26]

near this skete, at its north, around 1672/1673 through a decision of the princialy, at the initiative of some boyars of Sfatul Domnesc, the tanners were moved from Sărindar neighbourhood. From these tanners comes the name of the neighbourhood.

So it's indeed near Biserica Apostol Tabaci, somewhere around the Timpuri Noi metro station. bogdan (talk) 00:52, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks so much! Just what I needed. - Jmabel | Talk 06:26, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Should diacritics be encouraged or discouraged in article's titles?

You may be interested in my proposal here. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:40, 14 June 2011 (UTC)