Talk:List of monumente istorice in Romania

Rethink?

I sort of disagree with the approach being used here, for several reasons:

• A list of ~20,000 items is impractical, although this particular problem could be solved by breaking down by county.
• Some monuments will never have standalone articles. To give one example, the Sinaia Monastery certainly deserves an article. But the Culture Ministry lists not only the monastery as a whole as a monument, but also the old church, the chapel, the abbot's residence, the monks' cells and the wall, each as a separate monument. Obviously, giving these five entities separate articles would be overkill.
• Even if broken down by county, and even if not all are given articles, having very long technical-looking lists (let's face it, those LMI codes aren't an inducement to the general reader, even if they are so for scholars) isn't that useful for our readers, especially considering that the lists are just one click away. So, here's my tentative suggestion:

• Retitle as Historic monument (Romania) or Historic monuments of Romania, or similar, per the Swiss model.
• Discuss, extensively if appropriate, the concept of the historic monument, giving examples, background, and so forth. But leave the actual lists as an external link.
• And let's create categories. I'd suggest having Category:Historic monuments of Romania (placed under Category:Protected areas of Romania, Category:Heritage registers and perhaps the as-yet uncreated Category:Landmarks in Romania), and subcategories by county (Category:Historic monuments in Alba County, Category:Historic monuments in Arad County, Category:Historic monuments in Bucharest, etc).
• Once the categories are created, there should be a little flexibility. For instance, if I recall correctly, Bellu cemetery itself is not a historic monument, but dozens of individual graves there are (Eminescu's, Sadoveanu's, etc.). Clearly, not all the graves are going to have their own article, indeed probably none of them will, but the cemetery does and should, and since it contains so many individual monuments, there's no harm in adding Category:Historic monuments in Bucharest to the article.

How does this sound? - Biruitorul ^Talk 02:25, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

First of, Happy New Year! ;-) Those are great suggestions!

• I thought about the list being impractically long and for the need to break it down by counties, but I thought this could happen down the road, once there is enough content. My thinking is that people could add items to this list not as a bulk translation but as they work on articles that refer to this list. For example, I am working on Amutria, and I will add Gorj County and Dolj County entries here.
• I am not suggesting articles for each item, of course, although as an inclusionist, I don't see why not. But realistically, it will never happen, so I see no threat there.
• The point of Wikipedia is to make things known to the world, and since so little is known about the Romanian archaeology, which needs a lot of help and attention such that these sites don't get destroyed, vandalized and lost, this list can serve such a role. It could stir some interest, ever from it's sheer size! I've been thinking to involved the original authors of the PDFs from the Ministry of Culture to collaborate here. I think there is tremendous value in HTML-zing and/or Wikipedizing PDFs.
• I agree LMI codes are not very inviting, maybe we can use smaller fonts or something, but might still be handy information. For example, I added a link for GIS software that uses them as input.
• The Swiss model is ok, but I would rather have the Historic monument (Romania) article point back this list for details
• The idea of the categories is excellent, as long as we have the articles to put in I guess. If you are willing to create them, please let me know. Otherwise, I will start creating some of them.

--Codrin.B (talk) 03:20, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Happy New Year to you as well! Since we definitely agree on the categories, I went ahead and started Category:Historic monuments of Romania, along with a few subcategories. There's a lot of work to be done (adding categories) now. - Biruitorul ^Talk 20:48, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

How many items in the list?

Since is not practical to have all 29,540 listed historical monuments, I think it is advisable to have the major ones for each county (10-15 max), with wikilinks to the corresponding articles. I think that is doable and very useful. --Codrin.B (talk) 13:59, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

I agree that this is a good approach, but I don't really see the problem with splitting the list per county. As far as I know, it doesn't have to be in one big file, just one page as a portal to other pages is fine. I do have a problem with what appears to be overlap with the National Register of Historic Monuments in Romania page. That page can be a county portal just as easily as this page, can't it? Also, I think the categories should not be called "Historic monuments of xxx" but be called "Monumente istorice of xxx", since the definition used is that of "Monument istoric" and not "Historic monument". I suggest renaming these categories and keeping to "Monumente istorice of xxx" in future. Jane (talk) 08:54, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of historic monuments in Romania. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120316154714/http://www.inmi.ro/lmi/alba.pdf to http://www.inmi.ro/lmi/alba.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:17, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of historic monuments in Romania. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110907010101/http://www.inmi.ro/lista.html to http://www.inmi.ro/lista.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:30, 30 December 2017 (UTC)