Talk:Moldova

Music

A lot of people are familiar with this country from Sergy Stepanov, or the "Epic Sax Guy", a Youtube and internet sensation. Should he or the music show be included in this article? 99.231.232.207 (talk) 03:16, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

"He has been fittingly dubbed "Epic Sax Guy."" This sentence displays an nonobjective association between "epic" and pelvic thrusting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.112.4.245 (talk) 01:14, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Human Trafficking

Moldova is an epicenter for human trafficking in Europe. Why is there no mention of this in the article? Erikeltic ^(Talk) 04:43, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Source for the claim? man with one red shoe 23:26, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Here are just a couple [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]. There are hundreds of other available sources too. Erikeltic ^(Talk) 01:53, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Feel free to expand Crime in Moldova. A crime section appears to be something of an exception in country articles. Nonetheless it is present here and might warrant a sentence or two on this issue as well... --illythr (talk) 03:19, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Hmm... that will work. I'll put something together later today. Erikeltic ^(Talk) 11:34, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

This problem plagues all underdeveloped countries, so it is hardly correct to say that Moldova is "epicenter". I bet Russia is a much larger source of sex slaves. Logofat de Chichirez (talk) 02:17, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Language

I see a slow-moving revert war is in this page about how to name the language of Moldova. Please discuss it in talk page. I do agree that the language is essentially Romanian, but the argument it's called "Romanian" in English, is dubious. First, there is such concept as synonym. Second, if term "Moldovan language" does exist in English, and even wikipedia article :-). Third, this page writes "Moldovan(Romanian)", and with a footnote, thus clearly attracting attention to a political controversy, which is good for encyclopedia. Logofat de Chichirez (talk) 02:12, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Map

The seperatist movement in Transnistria is not recognized by any country or organization in the world. The region is recognized part of Moldova's territorial integrity and sovereignty. So there really is no reason so highlight the seperatist region, it is already mentioned properly a couple times in the article. This should be correctly reflected in the map of the infobox. Neftchi (talk) 10:09, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Transnistria has minor if unconvincing recognition, but that aside, it's a simple fact that Moldova has no actual control over the territory in question, and never really has. The placing of it in a different shade of green balances both Moldovan and Transnistrian POV's. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 14:19, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

The question is what exacly is a map supposed to show? Territorial integrity and sovereignty or de-jure and de-facto control? There is no such regulation on these issues, thats why I suggest using the standard map untill this issue is solved. I also think this map needs to be a zoom in section, no offense but Moldova is a small country and a zoom in can will be helpful to many readers. Neftchi (talk) 16:01, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

I suppose it's supposed to show the country. No map can show 'territorial integrity', that being an abstract concept. As for the zoom, that'd be good, but it'd have to be standardised with other smaller European countries. Interesting proposal though. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 16:24, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Agree with Neftchi, the shades of green and light green actually are not discernable on current unzoomed version. Brandmeister t 13:38, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

No Sax Guy???

Honestly, this is the only reason Americans have heard of this country. Run Away is an internet meme. Hamolton (talk) 15:30, 26 June 2011 (UTC) Sorry for the rant, delete as you wish.

Um, no. I heard of Moldova/Moldavia in history courses as early as the 6th grade, then very heavily in college history courses, not to mention looking at it on a large globe we had in our family. And it's mentioned in Dracula; today it is often in the current-events news. Many people will have 'heard' of this country from many different sources; and I have no idea who "Sax Guy" is. HammerFilmFan (talk) 00:31, 22 July 2011 (UTC) HammerFilmFan

Doesn't sound like encyclopedic material to me. Also, we don't want to bring down the article to the lowest common denominator. man with one red shoe 16:34, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Alphabet Issues

This issue have been risen in the past, but I have to address it again, because the current state of the relevant Wikipedia section is too politically biased.

Why it is written that _IN CONTRAST_ Moldovan was written in Cyryllic while Romanian in Latin”. Yes, there were different alphabets for the same language, but this has just happened historically and not done by Soviets specifically to confront Romanian vs Moldavian identities, as it is written. Cyrillic alphabet is mainly used by countries which practice Orthodox Cristianity, and Cyryllic was used in Moldova since Stephen the Great (Prince of Moldavia between 1457 and 1504), so Cyrillic was always used in Chisinau. Why don’t we write on Wikipedia that the differences in alphabet were historical and religious, and not political? If you tell me that Moldovan Cyrillic was different from the Cyrillyc in Russian language, and Soviets did change Moldovan Cyrillic to be exactly like Russian Cyrillic, this was also a technical measure (alphabet/language reform) rather than a political measure. It was easier to make small adjustments in the Cyrillic alphabet to comply to the modern standards than to switch entirely to Latin. When the language evolves over centuries, so the alphabet evolves. Russia did by itself several times have made some reforms to the Cyrillic alphabet it have used for the Russian language, so why the reform of Cyrillic used for Romanian language in Moldova is considered on Wikipedia an act of opposition of Moldovan vs Romanian languages, and to promote distinct cultural identities? Maxim Masiutin (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:35, 1 August 2011 (UTC).

Mainly due to what is written in the Creation of Moldavian ASSR (and the next one) section of the Moldovenism article. --illythr (talk) 18:29, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

The alphabet issue is not related to Moldovenism. As you know, it was Stephen the Great (Prince of Moldavia between 1457 and 1504) who have introduced Cyrillic, long before the Moldovenism took place. ---Maxim Masiutin (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:13, 10 August 2011 (UTC).

While the section contents might need some swapping around between articles, the information about the promotion of a separate Moldovan identity is there. The "in contrast" bit is accurate because the Moldovan language was to "stick to the roots" in contrast to Romanian, which was "sold to the French bourgeoisie" and switched to Latin some fifty years ago. --illythr (talk) 21:22, 22 August 2011 (UTC)