Jump to content

User talk:Anonimu/Complete Works/Tom 5 (2022): Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
m Protected User talk:Anonimu: Lets see if it wants to work now? [edit=sysop:move=sysop] (expires 17:58, July 28, 2007 (UTC))
clean and tidy
Line 1: Line 1:
== Welcome! ==
==Disclaimer==
This talk page should remain '''BLANK''', so any message here would probably be deleted without being read. To prevent this, I recommend you to post your comments according to the indications below.


::1. '''Comments related to article content'''
:::This is not the place for them. Every wikipedia page has a Talk Page. If you are unhappy with what I've wrote, you want clarification or you want to suggest improvement, press '''discussion''' on the top of the respective page and express your concerns. This way, more people will see your comments and maybe they will be able to help you more.


'''Welcome!'''
::2. '''Warnings'''
:::Don't put it here. Choose a random page (preferably a talk page) and put your warning there. Admins will consider I have been warned anyway, so why ruin my Talk page?


::3. '''Blocks'''
Hello, {{PAGENAME}}, and [[Wikipedia:Welcome, newcomers|welcome]] to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
:::If you're an Admin and you have blocked me, don't note it here. I'll surely notice it when I try to edit an article. If you want to show others how strong you are, there's always my Block log. In case you want to give me the chance to ask a review of my block, don't bother. Other Admins will most probably agree with you, and even the ones who think the block was not fair will do nothing about it. So why waste your time?
*[[Wikipedia:Five pillars|The five pillars of Wikipedia]]
*[[Wikipedia:How to edit a page|How to edit a page]]
*[[Help:Contents|Help pages]]
*[[Wikipedia:Tutorial|Tutorial]]
*[[Wikipedia:How to write a great article|How to write a great article]]
*[[Wikipedia:Manual of Style|Manual of Style]]
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a [[Wikipedia:Wikipedians|Wikipedian]]! Please [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|sign your name]] on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out [[Wikipedia:Where to ask a question]], ask me on my talk page, or place <code>{&#123;helpme}}</code> on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!&nbsp; -- [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] | [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 06:43, 30 September 2005 (UTC)


::4. '''Personal comments'''
== Our forum ==
:::If you want to tell me something important, but not related to one of the categories above, don't write here. Keep it for yourself. Of course, if you want to warn be about a imminent nuclear attack against South Eastern Romania, you could send me an e-mail. But only then. So please, no personal comments here.


::5. '''Vandalism'''
Welcome to the Romanian Wikipedia notice board! This page is a portal for all Romanian-related topics and a place for Romanian editors to gather and socialize and debate. Discussions are encouraged, in both English and Romanian. Post any inquiry under their relevant cathegory.
:::Why vandalise this talk page that few people watch when you can vandalise the page of a country, a city or a [[Traian Băsescu|president]]? More people will see you and you'll gain a better reputation.


Sincerely, [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 10:39, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Romanian_Wikipedian%27s_notice_board

--[[User:Anittas|Anittas]] 19:51, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

==Salut==

Fii atent ca asta e om periculos. --[[User:Anittas|Anittas]] 12:38, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Io sau el? [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 13:40, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Tu. lol! --[[User:Anittas|Anittas]] 12:55, 29 December 2005 (UTC)


== Illyria ==

Hai ma, intorcete pe Illyria. Spurcatii aia de draci au inceput sa ne frece tare, din nou.

*http://p083.ezboard.com/fbalkansfrm10.showMessage?topicID=1277.topic
*http://p083.ezboard.com/fbalkansfrm10.showMessage?topicID=1276.topic
*http://p083.ezboard.com/fbalkansfrm10.showMessage?topicID=1275.topic

Si tot asa mai departe. Hai ca te las sa ma jignesti 7 zile, fara sa reactionez. Dankat s-a intors si el. --[[User:Anittas|Anittas]] 12:30, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

:hmmm... nu --[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 15:39, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Suparare, suparare;

Niciodata suparare;

Daca ne mai suparam;

Luam valiza si plecam!

Hai ma, ca a venit si nebunul ala de Edlund si ne freaca... --[[User:Anittas|Anittas]] 08:24, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

http://p083.ezboard.com/fbalkansfrm10.showMessage?topicID=1279.topic
Ah, acuma inteleg... --[[User:Anittas|Anittas]] 10:45, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

te rog frumos.. io foloseam invective mai poetice, si oricum inca mai sunt mesaje d'ale mele pe'acolo si poti sa verifici ip'urile (apropo sti de ce am plecat si pana nu o sa se rezolve problema n'o sa revin in persona) --[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 12:52, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Nu sunt sigur de ce ai plecat. Poate din cauza ungurilor. Daca il ating pe ungaro, o sa faca acelasi argument care ai facut si tu cand te-am atins. Cred ca deja iti este dor de forum. ;) --[[User:Anittas|Anittas]] 12:59, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

== no article about [[Sándor Petőfi]] in the Romanian Wikipedia ==

Hi, why did you insert [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=S%C3%A1ndor_Pet%C5%91fi&curid=552327&diff=34105081&oldid=33878226] a link to [[:ro:Alexandru Petőfi]]? "Wikipedia nu are încă un articol referitor la Alexandru Petőfi." [[User:Adam78|Adam78]] 16:05, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
wait until tomorrow. i had a problem with the browser and the article wasn't created.

[[Image:Bcgethnic1980a.png|200px|]]

M-am uitat pe harta aia dar cred ca nu e tocmai 100% adevarata. De exemplu, la cetatea alba, nu sunt decat 1000 de romani. la babele, chishlitza si limanskoye sunt numai romani. la satul nou langa sarata sunt romani si acolo dar pe harta nu apare nimic. Am modificat si eu un pic harta ta pe baza datelor din recensamantul din 2001. zi-mi si mie ce crezi. Si poate i-mi arati si mie un site cu hartile astea din anul 1980. numai bine. [[User:Constantzeanu|Constantzeanu]] 19:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

== imagini ==

L-am intrebat pe bogdan daca poate sa-mi faca niste imagini, dar vad ca nu mai raspunde. Stiu ca poti sa faci harti, dar nu stiu daca poti sa faci harti de batalie si alte chestii. Uite ce ai fi bine sa avem:

* Emblema (coat-of-arms) Moldovei;
* Batalia de la [http://efnord.eforie.ro/stefancm/harti/imagepages/image2.htm Codrii Cosminului];
* Batalia de la [http://efnord.eforie.ro/stefancm/harti/imagepages/image3.htm Razboieni];
* Batalia de la [http://efnord.eforie.ro/stefancm/harti/imagepages/image1.htm Baia]

Poti sa faci unele din lucrurile alea? Emblema ar fi buna pentru articolul History of Moldavia, iar restul pentru articole despre batalii. Mersi. --[[User:Anittas|Anittas]] 22:39, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

== Dlogosz ==

Am scris sursele pe Illyria. Poti sa le citesti [http://p083.ezboard.com/fbalkansfrm10.showMessage?topicID=1316.topic aici]. --[[User:Anittas|Anittas]] 00:14, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

====Dobrogea====

Am pus deja datele. A propos, mie personal cel puţin mi-au plăcut f. mult hărţile tale. Vroiam să ştiu, le-ai făcut după alte hărţi de pe internet sau pur şi simplu după datele de la recensăminte pentru fiecare localitate? Numai bine. [[User:Constantzeanu|Constantzeanu]] 02:15, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

== Tara Rumaneasca 1390 ==

According to [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Tara_Rumaneasca_map.png this map] of yours, Bessarabia belonged to Wallachia. You also said:

''Wallachia cca 1390, according to an internal document of 1387 and the Treaty with Poland of 1390''

Have you read these documents? Also, you once said that Bessarabia was probably given by Mircea to Alexandru, yet, when Stephen ruled, Bessarabia was first under the rulership of Hungary and Wallachia. Can you explain these exchanges of land? Also on that map, I see "Omlas" being a enclave of Wallachia. How come? And how come the norther border of Bessarabia has a an almost straight line? --[[User:Anittas|Candide, or Optimism]] 15:18, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

:in the 1390 treaty with poland, mircea was called ''Woyvoda Transalpinus, Fogaras et Omlas dux, seurinii comes, terrarum Dobrotici despotus et Tristri dominus''. Omlas, Fagaras and Severin were feuds given by the hungarian king to mircea. in the ''hrisov'' of 1387, he mentions along his possesions '''къ Татарскым странами''' (hope i got it right), translated by most romanian historians as ''părţile tătăreşti'' ("tatar parts"). probably this was reffering to territories in southern moldavia, bessarabia and, maybe, northern dobruja. iorga said tht he found a map of wallachia from 1780 that shown besarabia proper (today's bugeac) as part of wallachia. from what i know, hungary never ruled bessarabia after year 1000 (hungarian tribes probably lived in the region before migrating to pannonia). i think you're talking about the port of killia, which was indeed ruled for some time in the 15th century by hungary and wallachia. the border is almost a straight line because nobody knows how much of moldavia did mircea rule. the border on the map is based on Petre Dan's description in ''Hotarele românismului în date'' (Litera International, Chişinău, ISBN 973-675-278-X -- ISBN 9975-74-902-X) "Sud Cetatea Albă, Nord Cahul, Nord Tecuci, Sud Pasul Oituz" (south of [[Cetatea Alba]], north of [[Cahul]], north of [[Tecuci]], south of Oituz mountain pass. [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 16:57, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
::Yes, I meant Chilia. I thought that was a part of Bessarabia. Thanks for the info, but do you know why Mircea received those lands from Hungary, and how Chilia became a Hungarian-Wallachian possession? I think Genova also had the port - or at least the fortress - but I don't know how they got it. They also had another fortress along the Nistru. --[[User:Anittas|Candide, or Optimism]] 17:19, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
::: sorry, mircea didn't receive them, one of the previous rulers of wallachia did. Amlas, Fagaras and Severin were given by [[Louis I of Hungary]] to [[Vladislav I of Wallachia]] in october 1366, after the second accepted the hungarian suzerainty. i don't know for sure how chilia became hungarian and wallachian. in 1435 it was still part of moldavia [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 18:24, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
:::: I see. Well, I think that when it comes to Severin, it was not given, but returned to Wallachia. If you know of any books that cover this period of time in detail, pls let me know. I once had the history of Stefan cel Mare by Iorga, but was too young to read it. Now, I don't know where it is. --[[User:Anittas|Candide, or Optimism]] 18:37, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

== Harta ==

<s>Buna; ar fi bine sa avem niste harti care arata conflictele din 1476 intre Stefan si Meñli Giray; Stefan si Mehmed; Dracula si Laiota; iar Dracula si Stefan cotropind Tara Ro. Harta ar si reprezentata cu sageti care arata ofensiva si retragere. Regiunele incluse sunt Moldova, Transilvania, si Tara Ro. Daca ai chef sa le faci, sa-mi spui si am sa-ti prezint date, etc.</s> --[[User:Anittas|Candide, or Optimism]] 05:14, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

:i don't know.. let me see some info.. but anyway, they won't be free... you'll have to do something for me... [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 13:46, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
::<s>You want me be to argue your case in Illyria?</s> --[[User:Anittas|Candide, or Optimism]] 15:59, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
::: i won't come back there!(of course if i'm invited i'll give it a thougt, but i don't want you to do that.. if you do it, i won't make the maps anymore) [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 19:06, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
::::<s>Well, what is your request?</s> --[[User:Anittas|Candide, or Optimism]] 19:20, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
:::::Let's see first what can i do with those maps, then we'll talk about it... [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 19:49, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
::::::<s>Okay, but wait for me to gather the info for the places, etc. Btw, Iasi played a tie ;) I'll message you soon, after Barca versus Madrid...</s> --[[User:Anittas|Candide, or Optimism]] 19:52, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

<s>Okay, here's what I had in mind.</s>

<s>Colours: Moldavians (red), Tatars (brown), Ottomans (green), Wallachians under Laiota (blue), Army of Dracula and Bathory (black).</s>

<s>Map 1, July 1476: Army of Stefan is assembled at Bîrlad with 30,000 peasants and 10,000 boyars and curteni. Meñli Giray crosses the Dniester, pillages Orhei, crosses the prut and pillages Stefanesti (now Botosani county). Stefan allows the peasants to follow Giray and the armies meet near a forest, at Siret. The Tatar army flees across the Dniester, but few escape. The two armies were equal in size (30,000 each), so make sure the numbers correspond with the size of the two armies.</s> --[[User:Anittas|Candide, or Optimism]] 14:45, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
:: that's not much info. I tried to make a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Mengir.png map] based only on them, but i can't guarantee it's realistic. (Anyway, this isn't the final version of the map, if you decide it could help you, i'll make it nattier - i.e. lower the font size in country names) [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 16:59, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
::<s>That's all the info I have on this event, taken from Iorga's book about Stephen. The map looks good. The only thing you could add is the Moldavians pursuing the Tatars over the Dnister, but not too far away.</s> --[[User:Anittas|Candide, or Optimism]] 20:47, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
:::<s>Also, you should include Iasi, Chilia, and Cetatea Alba, because they're all involved in this conflict. I'll get back to you soon with the second scenario.</s> --[[User:Anittas|Candide, or Optimism]] 20:50, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
::::<s>Hello?</s> --[[User:Anittas|Candide, or Optimism]] 18:07, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
::::: draw it yourself[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 18:27, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
::::::<s>Well, you could've told me this from the beginning. It would've been easier for both of us.</s> --[[User:Anittas|Candide, or Optimism]] 18:42, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

== offside ==

http://p083.ezboard.com/fbalkansfrm10.showMessageRange?topicID=1575.topic&start=41&stop=57 --[[User:Anittas|Candide, or Optimism]] 07:01, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
==Vlachs==

Anonimu, where are you? --[[User:218.126.98.124|218.126.98.124]] 13:40, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Cand te intorci pe forum? Nu mai am cu cine sa ma cert. :( --[[User:Anittas|Candide, or Optimism]] 13:43, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Cand n'o sa mai am ban pe user si pe IP, desigur. [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 14:58, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
:Nu mai ai. ''Torna frate!'' --[[User:Anittas|Candide, or Optimism]] 12:52, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

== Farul-Galati 0-1 ==

Ati mancat bataie. :))) --[[User:Anittas|Candide, or Optimism]] 17:43, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
ma doare'n p...

== Civility ==

If you continue with the anti-homosexual, anti-immigrant, offensive remarks I will be forced to take action. I would encourage you to read the guidelines on [[WP:CIVIL|civility]]. Wikipedia is not the place for homophobia and racism. - [[User talk:FrancisTyers|FrancisTyers]] 13:38, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not anti-immigrant or racist. Just against homosexuality. Ain't free speech allowed here? It's not like I edit some article to impose my POV [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 13:43, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
:Sorry, but I have to agree with Anonimu: he has the right to say that he is against homo-sexuality; and he has the right to say that he thinks it is wrong. He is also allowed to be anti-immigrant, as long as it's not racism. Americans are allowed to say that they don't want more Mexicans to pass their border, don't they? --[[User:Anittas|Candide, or Optimism]] 14:09, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

This strikes me as racist: "si combaterea imigratiei asiatice si africane". You don't mention you want to stop immigration, you mention you want to stop immigration of asians and africans. As I said, please read the guidelines at [[WP:CIVIL]]. Calling groups of human beings "anti-umana, anti-naturala" is not civil. - [[User talk:FrancisTyers|FrancisTyers]] 15:58, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

And to clarify, to say that you are opposed to homosexuality is fine, to brand it "anti-human" is not. Please be more careful in your choice of words in future. - [[User talk:FrancisTyers|FrancisTyers]] 16:00, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I didn't even say i want to stop immigration. I mentioned only africans and asians because i thought no european or american so poor that he couldn't raise a child would come to Romania. Simply, my policy would apply more to these categories of immigrants. How should i call a mental condition that could affect the human species on the long term? [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 18:48, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
==[[User:Dahn]]==

Ar trebui sa vezi si articolul [[Transylvania]].--[[User:222.109.87.130|222.109.87.130]] 07:42, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

== Note ==

You're aware that you broke the 3RR, right? &mdash;<span style="font-family:Palatino Linotype">[[User:Khoikhoi|<font color="">Khoikhoi</font>]]</span> 10:46, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

{| class="user-block"
|| [[Image:Octagon-warning.svg|left|30px| ]]
|| You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the [[Wikipedia:Three-revert rule|three-revert rule]]. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.
|}<!-- Template:3RR5 --> [[User:Alex Bakharev|abakharev]] 11:07, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

== [[:Image:Battlrasb.png]] ==

Would it be possible to change this image to make colors of the two sides more distinct to make the map more readable to colorblind people? Perhaps red and blue, or solid black and white with black outline. [[User:Hirudo|Hirudo]] 15:57, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
: I made these two versions. What should i use in the article (right/left one)? (i uploaded it with no licence to make sure it will be deleted). [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 19:56, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

== 3RR ==

You are about to violate [[Wikipedia:3RR]] on [[Dobruja]], refrain from further reverts or you might be blocked. [[User talk:FunkyFly|<span style="color:#0F0;background:#000;"><b>&nbsp;&nbsp;/FunkyFly.talk_</b>&nbsp;</span>]] 19:21, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

== [[2006 Ferentari riot]] ==

When you tag for POV, you are supposed to leave an explanation on the talk page. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] | [[User talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 05:36, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

== Ceausescu page ==
"are you jealous that we were and even nowadays we are more wealthy than you?..."

==Civility==

You will be more effective on Wikipedia if you avoid [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Khotyn&curid=1436319&diff=94367156&oldid=94365033 personal attacks] and try to be more [[WP:CIVIL]]. --[[User:Macrakis|Macrakis]] 21:45, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
:I was just worried. I thought there was an outbreak of a new epidemic of somethng causing blindness among russians...[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]]

== User notice: temporary 3RR block ==

<div style="background-color: #f9f9f9; border: 1px solid red; padding: 3px;">

==Regarding reversions[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=History_of_Romania_since_1989_&action=history] made on [[December 22]] [[2006]] to [[History of Romania since 1989 ]]==
<div class="user-block"> [[Image:Octagon-warning.svg|left|30px| ]]
You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the [[Wikipedia:Three-revert rule|three-revert rule]]. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.</div><!-- Template:3RR5 --> The duration of the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=&page=User:Anonimu&action=edit&section=new block] is 24 hours. [[User:William M. Connolley|William M. Connolley]] 10:09, 22 December 2006 (UTC)</div>

== 3RR violation on [[Romania]]==
[[Image:Stop hand.svg|30px|left|Warning]]
Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly{{{{{subst|}}}#if:Romania|, as you are doing in [[:Romania]]}}. If you continue, you may be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]] from editing Wikipedia. Note that the [[Wikipedia:Three-revert rule|three-revert rule]] prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for [[Wikipedia:Edit war|edit warring]], even if they do not technically violate the [[Wikipedia:Three-revert rule|three-revert rule]]. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you.<!-- Template:3RR -->[[User:Kamenaua|Kamenaua]]

learn to count man....[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 18:07, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

==Image tagging for Image:Cutezator fiu al poporului.ogg==
Thanks for uploading '''[[:Image:Cutezator fiu al poporului.ogg]]'''. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
* [[Wikipedia:Image use policy]]
* [[Wikipedia:Image copyright tags]]

This is an automated notice by [[User:OrphanBot|OrphanBot]]. For assistance on the image use policy, see [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions]]. 10:05, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

== Karvuna Principality ==
[[Image:Bulgaria Ivan Alexander (1331-1371).svg|right|thumb|350px|The Bulgarian lands during the reign of Ivan Alexander<ref>Based on Lalkov, ''Rulers of Bulgaria''</ref>]]
Greetings. I want to settle this dispute as quick as possible because there is no point of edit war. I was very surprised when I first read this article. I got the impression that it was all but of romanian origine, which is not true.

1.These lands have always been in the territory of the Bulgarian Empire since its very creation. When the principality emerged from Bulgaria in the mid 14th century it was not because its population was not Bulgarian but because of the feudalism which was now inluenced the previously centralised Balkan states (Bulgaria, Byzantium, Serbia). Karvuna was not the only one Bulgarian area which dropped from the central power, there were also Vidin Tsardom and various principalities in Macedonia which emerged from the collapsed Serbian empire. It is obvious that the population there was almost completely Slavic. See [http://www.bgns.net/Bg/otech/history/sredna/maps.html Historical maps of medieval Bulgaria (in Bulgarian)].
: Tehy were in the Bulgarian Empire only until 971 (if you ignore the numerous byzantine interventions on the danube during that period.. i could list them if you want). The next mention of Bulgarian in Dobruja is from Ivan Asenn II (1230's) and then agian no info until the byzantine sources of the 1320s. So no proof that Balik (the founder of the state) was ever a vasal of Bulgaria. Obvious to whom.... after 970 numerous people settled in Dobruja: Petchenegs, Cumans, Tatars and even Turks.(from what i know foreign -not BG, not RO - historians, even some Romanian ones, agree the rulers had a turkic origin, cumans and proto-gagauzes being the main candidates). That is a nationalistic site, and those maps are evidently amateurish.. i could draw similar maps with an oversized wallachia[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 19:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
2.The very names Dobrotitsa, Ivanco, Theodor are Bulgarian =>they were obviously Bulgarian feudal lords who took the opportunity to gain de facto independence from the weak central power. There were more than 60 de facto independent states in the Balkans in the late 14th century, you can't say that there were also 60 peoples, yes?

:"Obviously" Bulgarian? Many Wallachian rulers had names of Slavic origin (e.g. [[Mircea I of Wallachia]], [[Radu I of Wallachia]]) - that doesn't mean automatically they were Bulgarian, does it? [[Ivanko of Bulgaria]], according to [[Niketas Choniates]], was of Vlach origin. And Theodor is a name of Greek origin, not necessarily Bulgarian. Also bear in mind that the ethnicity was of minor importance during the Middle Ages (in comparison to the religion). It is exaggerated to talk of "ethnically pure" Bulgarian or Wallachian lands. [[User:Mentatus|Mentatus]] 16:00, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
:: BTW, in the treaty with Genova(1387), the ruler is called "Juanchus", not Ivanko.[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 19:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
3.In 19th century there were more than 100,000 Bulgarians in Northern Dobrudzha alone, these lands were given to romania not because its population was vlach or romanian but because Romania needed an outled to a sea and took this region as a compensation when the Russians seized Besarabia. --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 15:45, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

:Would you please give us a reliable NPOV source for the 100,000 Bulgarians in Northern Dobruja in the 19th century? And where did you get that the Romanians or Vlachs were a minority in Dobruja from? [[User:Mentatus|Mentatus]] 16:00, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, the Byzantines made little difference between Bulgarians and Vlachs. In fact they rarely refer to the Bulgarians as "Bulgarians", they usually used Moesians, Vlachs, Barbarians, Slavs but this does not mean that the Bulgarians are Moesians or Vlachs or Barbarians. I have never written that Dobrudzha was ethnically pure. There were of course Vlachs, Tatar, Cumans, Byzantines, but they were fewer than the Bulgarians. --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 16:15, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

:I repeat myself: would you please give us a reliable NPOV source for your statement? [[User:Mentatus|Mentatus]] 16:23, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

It is very difficult to find reliable sourses about the poppulation od Dobrudzha in the 19th century. We should find the ethnic structure when the territory was Turk before 1878 because both romanian and Bulgarian sourses would be irreliabe. Neighter would I believe a romanian sourse, nor would you believe a Bulgarian one I suppose. I think that when the the region became Bulgarian and romanian both governments forced some of the Vlachs and Bulgarians respectively to write their ethnicity as the governments wanted to, While for the turk it didn't matter whether the Christian population there considerred itself Bulgarian or Vlach (they were simply infidels for them) so the ethnic structure of that period would be most reliable. So you can also search for this, not only me. And I also may ask you what your reliable sourse is. --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 17:02, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

:First of all, the origin of the source (either Romanian or Bulgarian or Klingon) is irrelevant to me, as long as it is accepted as reliable by the majority of historians and it is based on facts, not on propaganda of any kind. So don't make any assumptions on my behalf. Second of all, it was you who made a statement, not me ("100,000 Bulgarians in Northern Dobruja in the 19th century" and that the "Vlachs, Tatar, Cumans, Byzantines [..] were fewer than the Bulgarians"), and I assume that when you make a statement you know what you're talking about. Asking me for sources in return is a puerile tactic - I haven't stated the contrary, I was just wondering where did you get all that from and whether you can put the money where your mouth is. [[User:Mentatus|Mentatus]] 18:11, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

:: The ethnic composition of Dobrudja in 1850 (during thurkish rule): 30% turk, 23% romanian, 14% bulgarian... you can find the full data taken from Encyclopedia of Islam (available also online, not free of course) at [[Talk:Dobruja#Trolling_by_Bogdan_and_Constantzeanu|Talk:Dobruja]]... and unless every family had 50 members, that 100,000 you gave is impossible... Even more impossible considering the report of an italian diplomat ( ''La Bulgaria ed il porto di Varna. Cenni descrittivi e statistici. Rapporto del R. vice-console sig. avv. Perrod in data 20 settembre 1864'') saying that bulgarians settled in Eastern Bulgaria only in the previous 40 years or Bulgarian historian L. Miletich that wrote in 1902 (''Старото българско население в северо-източна България'') that most bulgarians came in northern Dobruja in the previous century.[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 19:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I do not remember the exact name of the book in which I read this data, it may have been a nationalistic one (now I am in Sofia and the library I read this in in Plovdiv, so it would take time before I check). I would accept this census from 1850 BUT I will point out that this does not include southern Dobrudzha where the population was composed mainly of Bulgarians and Turks. If this is included both the Bulgarians and romanians would be approximately equal. Now we do not claim northern Dobrudzha, so this is not so important.
:: No, it includes all dobruja. quote from EncIslam "At this date in the kadas of Tulca, Isakca, Macin, Hirsova, Babadagh, Kostendje, Mangalya, Pazardjik <nowiki>[</nowiki> Dobrich, ''n.n''<nowiki>]</nowiki>, Balcik and Silistre were 4800 Turkish, 3656 Romanian, 2225 Tatar, 2214 Bulgarian"... so it includes all dobrich oblast and at least half of the silistra oblast (which has a strong population even today)[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 08:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
The main question here is the principality of Karvuna. Of course there were no population census in the Middle ages and I cannot prove that for instance the population consisted of 76,34% Bulgarians, 12,98% Vlachs and so on. So you may speculate that the population included huns, goths; you may say that half of the population of the Bulgarian Empire was Vlach, you may say "prove me wrong". How can I prove this?! How can you prove that the population of France was French not Frank or Celtic? But no one asks these questions: though the population in Europe was undoubtedly mixed in most of the continent, it is assumed that the population of what used to Bulgaria was mainly Bulgarian, the population of what was Wallachia used to be Vlach and so on. And as the region of Dobrudzha was always within Bulgaria, it makes sense that its majority was Bulgarian. If the Tatars were majority they would have joined the Golden horde, if it was Vlach it would have joined Wallachia, but the fact is that it always remained in Bulgaria and I have stated above the reasons why it split from the central power.
:: It's ludacrious to claim that a zone controled by an medieval Empire had the omonyme population... It's like we'd claim Eastern Bulgaria was mainly russian between 968 and 971, then mainly greek between 971 and the 1200s then again Bulgarian for some years, then Tatar...etc. Again it has not been always within Bulgaria... it was in 681-968, and the southern portion was Bulgaria also in 986-1000 and for some years in the 1200s... and if we go back in time, it was roman or byzantine between 46 AD and 681. In those times region didn't join empires, they were conquered by empires, so it's again irrelevant. [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 08:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
And finally, your edits for the Bulgarian noble Dobrotitsa, deleting the word Bulgarian everywhere is insulting for the dignity of the Bulgarian people. --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 21:48, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
::: If establishing historic truth insults the Bulgarian people, i'm afraid i must insult it...

The well-established historic truth says that Dobrotitsa was a Bulgarian and ruled over the Bulgarian Principality of Karvuna. Apparently the romanians are creating a new history. ...how smart of them... but the historical documents tell nothing about serious presence of Vlachs in Dobrudzha during the Middle Ages, and do not tell me that the Byzantines use "vlach" sometimes considerring some Bulgarian Emperors, because the same byzantines have called the moesians, cumans, huns, you name it. Thus the Byzantines wanted to humiliate in a way the Bulgarians. It is not an honorable action to speculate with history.

:: What well-established historians? Both Iorga and Inalcik are respected historians (btw, Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition, a very authoritative source, calls Dobro "Walachian prince"). So, even if you could bring references, we still can't say it's Bulgarian... that wouldn't be NPOV because there's a dispute. Historic documents don't really mention bulgarian population in Dobrudja either... Ok, again that bulgarian nationalist myth... you're all vlachs man ;)) [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 09:05, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
::: I think that Zlatatski, Lalkov, Fine, Bozhilov are also respected historians, and also it would not be NPOV even if you bring me evidence that he was ?vlach???; and I rather think it is a romanian nationalistic myth, you simply try to persuade the other nations that Dobrudzha (and Transilvania) are rightfull in Romania today. I wonder what is the point to go on as nowadays no one claims them, I understand that there was such a necessity before WW2, but now...
:::: Sorry, they're not respected enough to override Columbia Encylopedia... since there are contemporaneous documents that call him Bulgarian, your claim is also a Bulgarian nationalist myth.[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 16:41, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
::: It would be better for our nations to unite, we will be stronger and we will be all Bulgarians : ) : ) : ) --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 09:30, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
:::: as a banned user would say, Serbians and Bulgarians are just slavicized vlachs... [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 16:41, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
::::: When the Bulgarians existed there were no vlachs... --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 17:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
:::::: Yeah, they've come from outer space in the 10th century... [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 18:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
For example if I say that Vladislav I of Wallachia was a Bulgarian and ruled over Wallachia populated by Bulgarian and Vlachs as a vassal of the Bulgarian Emperor (the last one is true, see the article for [[Ivan Alexander of Bulgaria|Ivan Alexander]], there is plenty of literature there) how can you prove me wrong!?
::: I can't. I doubt that Vladislav was a Bulgarian vassal. First, it had received feuds in Transylvania from the Hungarian king for his vassalage... but no feud from Ivan Alexander... Second, it minted it's own coin that imitated the Hungarian ones (as Dobrotici did)... very unusual for a vasal to have it's own coin.. Todor still hasn't answered me on Ivan Alexander's talk page.. he told me to ask a user who had left wiki (very unproffesional). [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 09:05, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
::::Yes, you can't. And would it be pleasant for you and the ronamian people to write in the article of Vladislav that he may be a Bulgarian and to have ruled over Bulgarians and Vlachs?? Is this not an insult for the romanian people, to speculate with history when you simply can't prove me wrong?! And there is a footnote after the sentence for the Bulgarian vassals --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 09:30, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
:::: I don't know.. anyway i have a stronger claim to the vlach origin of the assenids than yours about Vladislav. A footnote that mentions. A footnote that says exactly the opposite thing, as i proved on the talk page [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 16:41, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
:::::I think there is a difference between vlach and Cuman, and Asen and Peter perhaps have cuman origine. --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 17:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
:::::: But French and Byzantines called them Vlachs because they didn't know to write "Bulgarian".. yeah, of course... [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 17:29, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
:::::::The byzantine document for the [[battle of Trayanovi Vrata]] says that Basil II's army was defeated by the Moesians, does it mean that Samuil and the Bulgarians are Moesians??? --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 17:51, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
::::::: What do I care about Moesians... were talking about Vlachs, which always had a specific ethnic meaning...[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 18:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
And as far as the above statement is concerned, I think you know what I mean but you still speculate. You know very well that I mean the lands which were continuosly ruled by the Bulgarians or the french or the Serbs were inhabited mainly of the same ethnos respectively. Of course that central greece which was in the borders of our Empire for less than 100 years or the lands of eastern Hungary and Transilvania which we held for around 200 or Serbia (I do not mean present day serbia) could not have a majority of the population Bulgarians, but the regions we held for more than 600 years such as Dobrudzha or Northern Bulgaria... tell me how is this possible the population not to rebel if it is not Bulgarian?
::: Bulgaria was ruled by the Turks for 600 years... by your logic, modern Bulgarians must have come from space in 1908... BTW, very very few sources mentioning Doburdja during Bulgarian rule... this make it very hard to say if there was any rebellion...[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 09:05, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
::::The empire of the turks was too lagre for the to populate it almost completely by turks, while our Empire south of the Danube was small enough to be populated almost wholy of Bulgarians. --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 09:30, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
::::: Yes, but your small empire south of the Danube didn't generally include Dobrudja [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 16:41, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
::::::Really?!?!?! And when did the romanians invented this!? I have placed maps above which show that Dobrudzha was always Bulgarian. --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 17:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
::::::: Show me any document pre-dating 19th century Bulgarian nationalism that mentions bulgarian rule in Dobruja after 1000. Man, I don't care about your nationalist imaginary maps.[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 17:29, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
:::I DO NOT care of YOUR nationalism. Firstly you can't quote me any document which shows that Dobrudzha was not Bulgarian, and secondly: IN 1300 THE BULGARIAN EMPEROR THEODOR SVETOSLAV KILLEd THE MAIN RIVAL FOR THE GOLDEN HORDE'S RULER, CHAKA. IN GRATITUTE THE PRESENT TATAR RULER CEDED BESARABIA, TO THE NORTH OF THE DANUBE DELTA TO BULGARIA. HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE IF OUR BORDER WAS NOT THE DANUBE DELTA??? As you OBVIOUSLY have UNPRECEDENTAL knowledge of ALL contempoary documents on the topic, you should have heard that. --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 17:45, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
:::: That's the typical nationalist vandal attitude. Man, how do you want me to give a reference that says something that didn't happen... it's like you'd ask me to source the fact that the current Bulgarian president isn't an African... That would be impossible since there was a documented continual tatar presence in northern Dobrudja between 1240s and 1350s... That's only another bulgarian nationalist fallacy...[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 18:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
:::::Your view is nationalistic, not mine; what I stated above is mentioned in the contemporary Byzantine documents. And I could not understand what did not happen??? --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 18:49, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
::::: What document? In what collection was it published?[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 19:12, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
::::::I am very buzy in the moment but next week I will try to find some time and go to the National Library and I will find literature on the matter. --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 19:46, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
I have heard of romanian "historians" who speculate that the Bulgarians never ruled to the north of the Danube and call the Bulgarian findeing from the period of the Khans as some kind of local culture (I do not remember exactly the name of this "local culture"). It seems that the romanians have a good experience in speculating with history... Why don't you simply face the truth? --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 08:39, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
::: I refuse to comment, since we are talking about Dobrudja, not about the territories north of the Danube[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 09:05, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
:::: ... --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 09:32, 1 February 2007 (UTC)


::Another fact: In 1366 Emperor Ivan Alexander refused to give conduct to the Byzantine Emperor Ioan V Paleologos. To force the Bulgarians to give him conduct, he orderred his relative Amadeo of Savoy to attack the Bulgarian coastal towns. In the same year Amadeo conquerred Pomotie, Nessebar, Emone and besieged Varna which he failed to seize. As a result Ivan Alexander let the Byzantines to go through Bulgaria. If these coastal towns were not Bulgarian but Vlach why should Amadeo attack innocent "Valch" principality, and why should Ivan Alexander take any care of this??? --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 10:09, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
::: Savoyard documents mention tratatives between the count and Dobrotici to get the right to pass through Dobrudja... Would a vassal receive emissaries of the enemies of his lord? [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 16:41, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
::Can you explain why the count attacked these towns in responce of actions made by the Emperor in Tarnovo??? Quite simple: he attacked Bulgarian towns. --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 17:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
::: Probably they had been occupied by the bulgarian tsar in the previous bulgaro-byzantine war ended in 1365 (since Dobrotici was a subject of the byzantine emperor)[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]]
::This is nonesense, the Bulgarians could not defeat the Turk mercenaries of the Byzantines and they have occupied nothing, and Varna which was besieged by Amadeo was in Dobrotitsa's lands. BTW have you read these documents which you are quoting? --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 17:45, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
::: Amadeo attacked and sunk some turkish ships... why would he do that to the allies of his ally? Hey, I'm not like you to believe any unsourced nationalist propaganda [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 18:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
:The case with Ioan V Paleologos is documented in the byzantine chronicles, this attack on the Bulgarian coastal towns was the only reason for the conduct the Ioan V received. The siege of Varna on 25 October is also mentioned. I am not the person who will believe to romanian propaganda. I have the impression that you dare to claim the Maps I have written above are wrong; please find me maps of Bulgaria in 1250s, 1300-1321, 1341 on which Dobrudzha is not included in our borders, because it seems that your claim is unsoursed. Can you also provide me link to romanian maps of Medieval Bulgaria? --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 18:49, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
:: Did I dispute that? And those cities weren't quite Bulgarian.. they changed hands a dozen times only in the 13th and 14th centuries. All you maps are made by bulgarians (and most of them are taken from a bulgarian nationalist site). Of course i can't believe them... Romanian and generally non-Bulgarians don't make maps about Medieval Bulgaria. [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 19:12, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

:::I knew that, of course you can't find anything that fits the romanian propaganda; as non-Bulgarians do not make maps of Bulgaria you have no choice but to trust and respect the Bulgarian maps and the scientists who have devoted much time to make them with maximum accuracy. No matter what the site is, the maps are the same, these are also in all atlasses I have ever seen, and believe me I have seen hunderds. Now you are mocking and ridiculating serious Bulgarian historians and geographers; which I will take as an insult for The Bulgarian (and mine) dignity and honour. --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 19:46, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

== 3RR warning ==

You are about to violate Wikipedia:3RR on [[Dobruja]]. Refrain from further reverts. [[User talk:FunkyFly|<span style="color:#0F0;background:#000;"><b>&nbsp;&nbsp;/FunkyFly.talk_</b>&nbsp;</span>]] 19:33, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
:And you also almost violated it on [[Dobrotitsa]] about a day later. Please stop skirting 3RR. Doing that multiple times will get you blocked. --[[User:Woohookitty|''Woohookitty'']]<sup>[[User talk:Woohookitty|Woohoo!]]</sup> 11:50, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
::It's just a warning and nothing more. --[[User:Woohookitty|''Woohookitty'']]<sup>[[User talk:Woohookitty|Woohoo!]]</sup> 12:17, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

== The Bulgarian rule over the whole of Dobrudzha during the Middle Ages ==

You claim that after 1000 Bulgaria never ruled the whole of Dobrudzha any more. First see this '''non-Bulgarian maps''' [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Europe_1360.jpg], [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Europein1328.png], [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Europe_mediterranean_1190.jpg]. It can be clearly observed that the Danube delta was our northern border. You did not believe me what I stated for Theodore Svetoslav and the Bulgarian rule over Besarabia in the early 14th cent. (see again what I wrote and your answers). As I said I found some time and went to the National Library for sourses and this is what I found:(1)Laiou, A. E. Constantinople and the Latins (Foreign Policy of Andronicus II, 1282-1328). Cambridge, Mass., 1972. (2)Б. Цветкова. Българо-византииски отношения при царуването на Теодор Светослав, ИСиффСУ, 3, 1948, 1-32 and several other books by Bulgarian authors which I have no time to write. It was written there that the Bulgarian rule over Besarabia continued during Toktu's heirs Uzbek and Dzhanibek and here are the sourses: (1)Brâtianu, G. I. Les Bulgares a Cetate Alba (Akkerman) an debut du XIV esiecle-Byz, 2, 1926, 153-168 (2)Recherches sur Vicina et Cetatea Alba. Bucarest, 1935, p.104 sq (3)Николов, П. Българи и татари през средните векове, 138-141. --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 15:45, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Look at these maps: [http://historymedren.about.com/library/atlas/blatmapeur1346.htm], [http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/historical/se_europe_900.jpg], [http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/historical/se_europe_1210.jpg], [http://www.culturalresources.com/MP_Muir7.html], [http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/historical/shepherd/europe_mediterranean_1190.jpg], [http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f266/NikeBG_History/Historical%20maps/Encyclopaedia%20History%20of%20Bulgaria/21-KulturanaVtorataBulgarskaDarzhav.jpg], [http://www.zum.de/whkmla/histatlas/balkans/haxbulgaria.html], [http://images.google.bg/imgres?imgurl=http://www.macedoniainfo.com/BULGARIA-ASSEN-I.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.macedoniainfo.com/cyrill_and_methodius.htm&h=816&w=970&sz=157&hl=bg&start=3&tbnid=4LDZ_t7Do1RH2M:&tbnh=125&tbnw=149&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmedieval%2Bmap%2Bbulgaria%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Dbg%26sa%3DN]
[h=125&tbnw=149&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmedieval%2Bmap%2Bbulgaria%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Dbg%26sa%3DN] Ohh, these are enough I think. You should agree that the area of Tulca was part of Bulgaria, why don't you simply accept this? Is it so hard? --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 21:46, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

:Well... then the map you gave me means nothing, too... But the fact is that you have no documents to show that these lands were Byzantine in the period (681-1000, 1185-14th cent.); just this logically: after the battle of Ongala, the Bulgarians established capital Pliska to the south, how is this possible for the byzantines to hold the area of the lower Danube just to the north of the Bulgarian capital????, it is just impossible. So you must try very hard to find sourses for byzantine presence in that period, because these does not exist.

:And about Vidin and Severin: Your countryman Menantus told me to feel free to write the Bulgarian name for romanian towns which used to be Bulgarian; Vidin was never in romania, so the romanian name has no place there. --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 22:21, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

== Foreign names ==

Hey, I think it's a bit silly... to Romanian articles we're usually adding old, actual names which are often very different phonologically from your variants. You're adding Bulgarian names written in Romanian to our articles (''Vidin'', ''Şabla'', ''Caliacra'')... this is stupid, everyone can check the rules of your script somewhere and ''transliterate'' Cyrillic into it. What I suggest: foreign names should be added only if they're special with something, not just dumb transliterations or adaptations, unless they've got anything to do with minorities. ''[[User:TodorBozhinov|Todor]][[User_talk:TodorBozhinov|→]][[User:TodorBozhinov|Bozhinov]]'' 10:33, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
: The same goes for reading a book about your cities in the Middle Ages. That's why it's best to make a redirect and only list the name in a relevant historical section. Also, to be precise, one needs to read a Romanian book written after 1919 and before 1940, not just before 1940.
: ''Tulcha'' is just a phonetic rendition, but ''Harsovo'' is a pretty different thing, possibly related to [[Hors]], and it's an old variant. ''Diiu'' is OK, it's pretty interesting and there's some limited Bulgarian-identifying Vlach-speaking population west of the city. I would suggest including it in the body just like the Hungarian ''Bodony''. I'd recommend the same for obsolete Bulgarian names like ''Harsovo'' and ''Holavnik''. ''[[User:TodorBozhinov|Todor]][[User_talk:TodorBozhinov|→]][[User:TodorBozhinov|Bozhinov]]'' 12:29, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Here's my suggestion (see also [[User talk:Gligan#Gligan|Gligan's talk page]]):
The rule for adding a name of a place/town/region in another language should be:
* a significant minority lives or lived there
* the place/town/region had OFFICIALLY that name
Of course, as a rule of thumb, all the edits should be referenced and verifiable.
All the othequite differr names should go as [[Exonym and endonym|exonym]]s to the corresponding articles (see for example [[List of European exonyms]]). [[User:Mentatus|Mentatus]] 12:35, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

::Look, Anonimu. When these towns were in the Bulgarian Empire, their official name was the same I have given. You are constantly provoking me and I have the feeling that you are trying to insult and mock me (with great success, I should say that if this is your aim you have achieved it). When I provide sourses you keep silence, and even when I provide them you do not accept them without reason. I give you facts, sourses, maps; you give me NOTHING. I went to the National Library to search references for you and you still show no respect toward my effords. It is very easy only to ignore without reason as you do it.
::I want a sourse which shows that there used to be important vlach community in Vidin. --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 12:59, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

:: German and Hungarian sources are seldom used for events of Bulgarian history, and Turkish sources have no relation to anything but the 14th-15th century, which is the very end of our empire. Romanian was used for a relatively short period in this part of Dobruja, so only publications between 1918 and 1940 would use it, and not all of them at all.
:: Hǎr<u>s</u>ov<u>o</u> (if you'd like that transliteration) is a different name, it's Slavic (perhaps [[Hors]] + [[-ovo]]). The modern Bulgarian one is Hǎr<u>š</u>ov<u>a</u>, which is phonetically the same as the current Romanian rendition of the older Slavic name.
:: As for Mentatus' suggestions, the main flaws are what is considered official and what is considered a significant minority. ''[[User:TodorBozhinov|Todor]][[User_talk:TodorBozhinov|→]][[User:TodorBozhinov|Bozhinov]]'' 13:06, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

:::I meant the following by "official historical name":
:::*the place belonged to the respective state/country whose language is used for the rendition of the foreign name, and
:::*the place was then named as such in an official document/chronic by that state/country (i.e. an official document when that place belonged to the respective state). See for example [[Istanbul]], where also the Greek Κωνσταντινούπολη is mentioned.
:::As for the significant minority, I think we can define it as minimum 10-20% of the population.
:::I know the rules are not perfect, but maybe we can stop this stupid edit war. What do you guys think? [[User:Mentatus|Mentatus]] 13:52, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree, it's stupid. But what are going to do? I suggest that we write the Bulgarian for Severin, Orsova, Turnu Magurele, Braila because they were used in the Middle Ages, leave the Romanian for Kaliakra, Tutrakan, Silistra, Balchik and stop removing them once and for all. What do you think about this? I will wait for your answers before I restore the Bulgarian names. --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 14:07, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
:::: To Anonimu: the personal name is associated either with the Slavic god Hors (Hǎrs in Bulgarian) or with the ethnographic group of the hǎrcoi (хърцои), the old Bulgarian population around the Danube in the northeast which Miletič talked about. In turn, hǎrcoi may be from Hǎrs,[http://liternet.bg/publish/akaloianov/stb/hyrs.htm] from Romanian ''răţoi'' (as a derogative) or from a Bulgar (?) translation of Slavic ''poljani'' ("people of the field").[http://mladite.com/index.php?level=6&sub=134].
:::: To Mentatus: sounds OK to me, though the task would certainly be easier for you (there are plenty of documents from 1918-1940, but medieval sources are often scarce) :) ''[[User:TodorBozhinov|Todor]][[User_talk:TodorBozhinov|→]][[User:TodorBozhinov|Bozhinov]]'' 14:51, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

::To Anonimu: Yes, you're right about the protochronism, that's what I meant by the rule "the place was then named as such in an official document/chronic by that state/country (i.e. an official document when that place belonged to the respective state)".
::To Gligan and Todor: Well, I think the rules are pretty fair, bearing in mind that the purpose of inserting the historical name in an article should be adding more information about the history of the place, not to make irredentist claims (e.g. I don't think the Greeks - or at least the majority of the Greeks - claim [[Istanbul]] nowadays). I understand it's more difficult to find documents from the Middle Ages, but citing a source is a Wikipedia rule, I didn't make that one up :) [[User:Mentatus|Mentatus]] 15:42, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
::: No, it's not difficult to find sources citing documents from the Middle Ages, it's just that less sources are preserved from the period and thus we know less names. But we ruled over a larger portion, so I guess that balances things :) BTW, any idea what Romanian cities [http://www.promacedonia.org/lm/lm_6a.htm Ruker and Dubovica] ([[Dâmboviţa]]?) might be? ''[[User:TodorBozhinov|Todor]][[User_talk:TodorBozhinov|→]][[User:TodorBozhinov|Bozhinov]]'' 16:15, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
::: A lot of those names are just different renditions of names. [[Braşov|Braşev/Braşov]],Rajnov/Rojnov=[[Râşnov]] (note that ş+consonant is sometimes rendered j+consonant even today), Doboviţo/Doboviţo grad/Domboviţa=i don't really know, but according to my historical atlas there was a fortress of Dâmboviţa in the region, Brail/Brailov=[[Brăila]], [[ro:Târgşor]]-a city that didn't survive to the modern era, [[Târgovişte]], Giurgev=[[Giurgiu]], Severin=[[Turnu Severin]], Argeş=[[Curtea de Argeş]] (=the court of Argeş), Ruker/Rukor=[[ro:Rucăr]], Sacuian=Săcuieni-a dissapeared town&county, Gergicha=[[ro:Gherghiţa]], a medieval town, now a village. Buzjia=[[Buzău]], Flocia=[[Oraşul de Floci]](=town of Floci), [[Prahova]]. The only different name is Dâlgopol=[[Câmpulung]](also mentioned as Longo Campo). As youu see, none fo those names are really different.[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 17:36, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

A lot of the Romanian names are also just renditions. There are German, Polish, Russian, Ukraine names for towns in Romania which have never been to those countries, so I will add the Bulgarian names for the towns which were in Bulgaria, and as I see at least three of us have agreed to this. --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 11:30, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

:I do not think so. Around 7-9 Medieval Bulgarian documents have survived, excluding those related fully to the Church. By your logic I cannot give the Bulgarian names even to our towns not to mention the towns in Greece and Turkey which have their Bulgarian names written. As archaic Bulgarian names such as ''Холъвник'' exist it is obvious that these towns were called like this when they used to be Bulgarian. Nowadays no one in Bulgaria refer to Turnu Magurele as Holavnik or to Drobeta-Turnu Severin as Severin, so these names were only used in the past when these towns were Bulgarian.

:I will repeat again, your logic is not not reliable. If I follow it, it would seem that as there are no contemporary document in which is written that Lovech or Silistra or Pernik was within Bulgaria, consequently you may say that these were not in Bulgaria, which is ridiculous.

:You know very well that in the Middle Ages no one called Turnu Magurele for instance with its contemporary name, how did they called it then???

:I want us to do simply this: vote "yes" or "no" whether we should write the Bulgarian names. I say '''yes'''. --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 13:25, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

The Early and late Middle Age Bulgarian names did not change. Vidin was always calles Bdin, Silistra-Drastar, Sofia-Sredets and so on. In the history section section of all these towns (I mean Severin, Orsovo, Turnu Magurele) is written that they existed since Roman times, so they existed in the Middle Ages too. And when thay were Bulgarian it is not possible that they were called Turnu, Drobeta or anything like this. How do you imagine that the Bulgarians would have created their names later, after their rule has vanished?? That makes no sense.

Also their origin. Severin may have come from the Bulgarian ''Sever'' which means North, Orşava originates from Orsovo and -ovo is typical Slavic sufix.

Please wait Todor and Mentatus to write their opinion. Write in your page, so that they would easily follow our thoughts. --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 14:03, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
::The fact that an important settlement existent in ancient times doesn't necesarily imply a continous inhabitations. The only thing that could certify this would be the continuity of the placename(Rome,Athens, London, even Paris), but this is not the case. SO uless they're mentioned in Bulgarian documents, there's no proof they've existed in that period. You don't need a rule over a city to have a different name for it. There are numerous examples of exonyms that have nothing to do with a foreign rule. Severin may also come from the roman emperor Severus, while "ova" means field in Turkish, and that would make perfect sense considering the geography of the place.[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 14:48, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
::And about Vidin: you are the nationalst vandal and I will report you as a vandal if you continue. My computer could not open yours sourse, so you must present it to me in other way. And I saw the cencus of 1910 where it is written that the pop. of Vidin was around 17,000, while the data you wrote me for a similar year was 1500 which is smaller that the 10%-20% which Mentatus wrote above. --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 14:11, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
::: [http://209.85.135.104/search?q=cache:6BvFyzXbdzkJ:www.romanii.ro/romanii_de_langa_noi/ROMANII%2520DIN%2520BULGARIA.doc&hl=bg&ct=clnk&cd=3&client=opera here]'s the source from google cache . The city was the centre of the bulgarian timok vlachs, so the name historically used by them has the right to be there.[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 14:48, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

:I do not know Ronamian but I think that for 1940 it was written 40,000 Romanians in the Vidin district, not in the town, and I think that the Vlchs mainly populated the villages. Also I could not find that this sourse cites the Bulgarian census for thses years. I will go to the National Library again and will try to find the census data from the period 1900-1940.

:I would also like to tell you that there have been significant Bulgarian minorities in Bucharest, Braila and other Romanian towns, whose Bulgarian names I cannot see. --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 15:04, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
:: Yeah, but Bulgarian names for Bucharest and Braila are just cyrillic rendition for the Romanian names... while "Vidin" and "Diiu" are very different. Moreover, while the vlach population in Vidin is autochtonous, the ones in Bucharest and Braila were people who had run from Ottoman occupied Bulgaria.[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 15:53, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
:::First: you cannot prove that these communities were not indigenous, second: they existed, third: The romanian names for Balchic and others are also just renditions to the Bulgarian names. --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 16:09, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
::::But Balcic was Romanian in 1913-1916 and 1919-1940, and there are documents to prove that the town existed in that period and that the Romanian name used for it was "Balcic", so it fulfills the first criterium.[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 18:33, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
I would also like to point your attention in this direction: there are the Polish and German names for Orsovo, without this town ever being populated or conquerred by these nations. Why don't you accept the Bulgarian???
:: Orsova had an important German population when it was part of the Austrian Empire. As for Polish.. i don't know.. i might have Polish roots, so maybe that's why i didnt try to remove them...[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 15:53, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
:::But ufortunatelly YOUR personal attitute shall not have any role in the Wikipedia, this proves that you act as you think and that you do not listen to others' opinion.
:::: So what? [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 18:33, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Why there are the Romanian names for Bekescsaba, Debrecen, Szeged??? These were never populated or conquerred by Romanians. --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 16:09, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
::: Romania (on his own) has occupied all Hungary east of the Danube and an important chunk of the west-Danubian Hungary in 1919, so they were "conquerred by Romanians". And those cities also had important romanian coumnities.[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 15:53, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
::::Bulgaria have occupied Bucharest, the whole of Dobrudzha and many other romanian towns in the First World War, if I am to follow this logic, I will add the Bulgarian names for them. --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 16:09, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
::::: Yeah, but, unlike Romania who administered all the occupied hungarian territory on her own, Bulgaria administered only Dobruja (and we do have Bulgarian names for most cities in that region).[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 18:33, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Thus you leave me an impression that you hate Bulgaria because your attitute towards the other names are ent.

I want answere for these, please. --[[User:Gligan|Gligan]] 15:13, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
:I agree with Gligan and Mentatus. It seems to me that you are being rather one-sided in your push to add Romanian names. These really don't add any value to the article, but do provide a stumbling block to a smooth read. [[User:Madman2001|Madman]] 13:22, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
:: so?[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 17:15, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

== Re ==

Show me the exact quote from the report. <tt class="plainlinks">[[User:Khoikhoi|Khoi]][[User talk:Khoikhoi|khoi]]</tt> 22:10, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

:Ok, but it doesn't say that the Romanians "attacked and injured the soldiers". Perahps it could be re-worded somehow. <tt class="plainlinks">[[User:Khoikhoi|Khoi]][[User talk:Khoikhoi|khoi]]</tt> 22:27, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

== [[Elena Ceauşescu]] ==

Please don't rv the page. I work at the Cerimonial Office of Bologna University and in our archive are not documentation on honorary degree confered to Elena Ceausescu. [[User:Superfeccia|Superfeccia]] 11:40, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

== AfD ==

Hi {{PAGENAME}}, this is a message I'm posting to everyone who participated in [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Border history of Romania|this AfD]]. I have nominated the same article for deletion again [[here]] – you might be interested. Regards, [[User:Kissl|K]][[User talk:Kissl|issL]] 09:07, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

== careful... ==

my friend, you're beginning to tread on some thin ice. You have called Biruitorul an [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Fântâna_Albă_incident&diff=prev&oldid=119458553 ultranationalist], and now a [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Biruitorul&diff=next&oldid=119533512 holocaust denier, fundamentalist and perhaps even Iron Guard member.] Remember that Wikipedia has [[WP:NPA|a policy against that sort of thing]], which I would advise you to respect. [[User:K. Lastochka|K. Lásztocska]] 19:06, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

"Prove"? I'd like to see you try. He is not a Holocaust denier, not an ultranationalist (he is a nationalist, but not of an especially destructive variety), and I seriously doubt he is a member of the Iron Guard. [[User:K. Lastochka|K. Lásztocska]] 19:15, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

There you go again--care to explain why you just called [[User:Istvan|István]] a "vandal"? [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fântâna_Albă_incident&diff=121189625&oldid=121124130] Such things are not taken lightly. [[User:K. Lastochka|K. Lásztocska]] 14:45, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

No, you don't have to "answer" for everything, I just wish you'd learn some basic social skills. See talk, I have responded there. [[User:K. Lastochka|K. Lásztocska]] 14:53, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Please observe [[WP:NPA]]. Calling another user holocaust denier or vandal is offensive. Please don't use ''[[ad hominen]]''s in the future - this is a blockable offense, if repeated.--<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|&nbsp;Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&nbsp;]]|[[User_talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;">&nbsp;talk&nbsp;</font>]]</span></sub> 04:29, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

== Happy Easter! ==

[http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/070407/occidentalpetroleum_pay.html?.v=8 Is this what He died for?] ;) --[[User:Anittas|Thus Spake Anittas]] 18:21, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
:He died for nothing. I feel sorry for the guy. --[[User:Anittas|Thus Spake Anittas]] 19:33, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

==Request for Mediation==
{| class="messagebox" style="width:80%"
|-
|[[Image:Info-icon.svg|100px]]
|
|A [[WP:RFM|Request for Mediation]] to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, [[Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Soviet occupation of Romania]].
::::::::''For the Mediation Committee,'' <span style="color:red;font-weight:bold">^</span>[[User:^demon|<span style="color:black;font-weight:bold;">demon</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:^demon|<span style="color:red">[omg plz]</span>]]</sup>

<small><center>This message delivered by [[User:MediationBot|MediationBot]], an automated bot account operated by the [[WP:MC|Mediation Committee]] to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please [[WT:MC|contact the Mediation Committee directly]].</center></small>
|}
<div align="right">''This message delivered: 18:31, 23 April 2007 (UTC)''.</div>

<div style="background-color: #f9f9f9; border: 1px solid red; padding: 3px;">
==Regarding reversions[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gheorghe_Flondor&action=history] made on [[May 10]] [[2007]] to [[Gheorghe_Flondor]]==
<div class="user-block"> [[Image:Octagon-warning.svg|left|30px| ]]
You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the [[Wikipedia:Three-revert rule|three-revert rule]]. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.</div><!-- Template:3RR5 --> The duration of the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=&page=User:Anonimu&action=edit block] is 48 hours. [[User:Alex Bakharev|Alex Bakharev]] 08:53, 10 May 2007 (UTC)</div>


== friendly warning ==

[[Image:Information.svg|25px]] Please see Wikipedia's [[Wikipedia:No personal attacks|no personal attacks]] policy. Comment on ''content'', not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocks]] for disruption. Please [[Wikipedia:Staying cool when the editing gets hot|stay cool]] and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.<!-- {{uw-npa2}} -->

I'm referring specifically to [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Anonimu&diff=135278533&oldid=135242858 these] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AAnonimu&diff=135406557&oldid=135397766 edit summaries]--"ultranationalist", "vandals", "doesn't have a clue",--it's all really quite rude. Please try to be a bit more tactful in the future. Incidentally, I really hope "holodeni" is just Romanian for "troll", and not what it looks like (it looks like an abbreviation of "holocaust denier.") <font face="Edwardian Script ITC" size="4">[[User:K. Lastochka|K. Lásztocska]]</font> 22:28, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

#the guy is an ultranationalist (i think smb who considers a hero one of hitler's friends and most important military ally fits and who claims territories from neighbouring countries fits pretty well the description of a typical ultranationalist)
#the ones who re-added that fragment i decided to delete were clearly vandalising my user space.
#the comment of the ultranationalist was unrelated to the previous discussion; so if he had a clue, he was harassing me (but i assumed good faith.. next time i won't)
#every region of romania has some unique words.. so.. who knows...[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 22:41, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

::That he is an "ultranationalist" is your personal opinion, it is not fact. For what it's worth, my definition of an "ultranationalist" is a racist and a chauvinist who wants to either kick out or kill everyone not of his ethnicity from his country--our mutual friend certainly doesn't fit ''that'' description. Also, please be so kind as to explain to me what "holodeni" means in the Romanian dialect of your home region. <font face="Edwardian Script ITC" size="4">[[User:K. Lastochka|K. Lásztocska]]</font> 22:53, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Our mutual friend has just informed me that "holodeni" is not a recognized word in standard Romanian, and that Constanta doesn't really have a regional dialect. It is therefore fairly obvious that you have again labelled him a Holocaust denier. As I am sure you know, that accusation is an extremely serious one and not one to be taken lightly. I must request that you either provide evidence to back up your accusation, or that you retract the accusation entirely. <font face="Edwardian Script ITC" size="4">[[User:K. Lastochka|K. Lásztocska]]</font> 22:13, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
:But Constanta is a multiethnic town. "holod" is a common word in the language of a traditional minority of the region, while "-ean/-eni" is a widespread romanian suffix that changes nouns in adjectives. In multiethnic regions such hybrids are not unusual.[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 22:44, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

"Holod" is Ukrainian for "hunger", isn't it? What's "holodeni" then, "starving artist"? <font face="Edwardian Script ITC" size="4">[[User:K. Lastochka|K. Lásztocska]]</font> 00:46, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
:::Actually, you're entirely correct about my username. I spoke Russian before I even started learning Hungarian--a precocious Dostoyevsky fixation is partially to blame. :) As for the context of "holodeni," Anonimu deleted something that Biruitorul wrote here with the edit summary "deleted comment of an ultranationalist holodeni" or something to that effect.<font face="Edwardian Script ITC" size="4">[[User:K. Lastochka|K. Lásztocska]]</font> 21:17, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

:::It's slang, so be a little more creative ;)[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 20:15, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
::::well, dear specialist in slang, enlighten me, please! :-) :[[User:Dc76|Dc76]] 20:19, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
:::::I would also like to know. Not everyone speaks Tatar. --[[User:Anittas|Thus Spake Anittas]] 20:21, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
::::::Pay me and i'll tell you ;)[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 20:23, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
:::::::You know what, you want money now? - give me a break! - bye! (BTW, the only Romanian Tatar I've ever met was an exceptionally intelligent person. A pleasure to talk with, totally different category from Anonimu.) :[[User:Dc76|Dc76]] 20:40, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
::::::::C'mon, Anonimu, at least give us a hint--what language is it in? ;-) <font face="Edwardian Script ITC" size="4">[[User:K. Lastochka|K. Lásztocska]]</font> 21:17, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
::::::::Yeah, that was a very capitalist thing to do. but, when in rome... BTW, in Ani's semiotic system, ''Tatar'' is someone living south of the Milcov (and north of the Greek border?), as opposed to the [[Tatars|ethnic group]]. It's not the language, it's the meaning ;)[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 21:21, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
:::::::::Update: I just Googled "holodeni" and with the exception of one document which appeared to be in Swahili, ''every single thing'' that came up was about Holocaust denial. Try it yourself, my friend. <font face="Edwardian Script ITC" size="4">[[User:K. Lastochka|K. Lásztocska]]</font> 21:23, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
::::::::::OIC, b/c '''holo'''cast '''deni'''al. In the absense of an explanation it remains to decree holodeni to mean "A huna mutholi ane" :-) (from the swahili text). I have no idea what that means (apparently something explaining that 45/5=9), but it sounds funny :-)

:::::::::: Actually that's in [[tshivenda]], and it that language it means holiday. Btw, in romanian it's also the name of a plant.[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 22:11, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Here we go again. In light of your [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Soviet_occupation_of_Romania&diff=prev&oldid=136279045 recent] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dahn&diff=prev&oldid=136662316 spate] of continued incivility and general rudeness, I must inform you that I am keeping a mental list of all these little incidents. I respectfully suggest that you clean up your act and start to abide by [[WP:CIVIL]], or you may well find yourself brought before an official arbitration committee with a solid body of condemning evidence. I'm sorry to be so blunt, but there cannot be exceptions to the basic rules of good conduct and wiki-citizenship, otherwise the whole project would collapse. <font face="Edwardian Script ITC" size="4">[[User:K. Lastochka|K. Lásztocska]]</font> 23:46, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
:Give the guy a break, will you? The message that he posted on Dahn's talkpage was no big deal. You may think that you are being civil and all of that, but your persistent messages are getting a bit annoying. I can only speak for myself on that one. Anyhow, no one employed you to be the moralist of this site. Sometimes people need to work out their differences themselves. If these two cannot, then they will probably ask someone for help or ask for arbitration. One thing that Anonimu did wrong was to remove the messages posted on his talkpage by Bir, while he himself posted on Bir's talkpage. However, if Bir is the patriot that he claims to be, then he will realize that it is better for two Romanians to work it out themselves than to ask for a higher authority to take action. Anonimu will have to let Bir have his say and try to meet him in the middle. And no offense to you, but having a Hungarian working as a mediator between two Romanians is a bit ironic. I'm not saying that Anonimu doesn't deserve a short block once in a while, but threatening with Arbitration because of some message is rather lame. --[[User:Anittas|Thus Spake Anittas]] 00:05, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
::Fine, sorry! I'll go away. Sorry for being Hungarian, btw, maybe I should stop working with Romanians altogether and just hang out with my "own kind". <font face="Edwardian Script ITC" size="4">[[User:K. Lastochka|K. Lásztocska]]</font> 00:39, 8 June 2007 (UTC) PS incidentally, though, it wouldn't be just because of "some message" if I were to actually threaten him with arbitration, but for ''persistent'' incivility and disruptive rudeness. Oops sorry, I'm moralizing again. <font face="Edwardian Script ITC" size="4">[[User:K. Lastochka|K. Lásztocska]]</font> 00:41, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
::::You don't have to go away or stop working with Romanians; and the irony thing was just pointed out. I just think that if one is to work as a mediator, they should try to identify the source of the problem and try to get the two parties to talk with each other and work on the problem; not pick sides and warn the other party and making them feel humiliated, in public. To your defense, you're not the only one who has done this and at least you haven't asked other admins to step in and start blocking everything in their sight. --[[User:Anittas|Thus Spake Anittas]] 04:06, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
::::I understand two things: one, education and primitivism (whatever the latter means to you) are irrelevant to what I said was being ironic; and two, classism (even the one based on education) is, in in my opinion a sort of privitisism and I think the commie would agree on that, but if a different or as you probabaly meant to say—a higher education—would make you want to avoid me, then call me proud for being 'dumb'! :) --Anittas.

OK, just before this spirals totally out of control: I officially apologize for any rudeness or untoward aggressiveness on my part. Anonimu, sorry for inadvertantly hijacking your talk page. <font face="Edwardian Script ITC" size="4">[[User:K. Lastochka|K. Lásztocska]]</font> 05:18, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

:::Appologies to Anonimu for hijacking his page, and to all here if I said something that was rude or (also) even wrong.:[[User:Dc76|Dc76]] 19:31, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
::::I just said that it was ironic, that's all. I said that in order to make those two (Anonimu and Bir) make peace with each other, as they are Romanian and their argument was on Romanian topics. That is, if a Hungarian is friendly towards a Romanian and wants them to stop arguing, then two Romanians should be capable of making peace with each other. You are too emotional, Dc76. --[[User:Anittas|Thus Spake Anittas]] 19:39, 10 June 2007 (UTC)


==[[:Image:DobrXIV.png|1370 Dobrudja Map]]==

I saw there were some discussions about Hârşova's name. P. P. Panaitescu in his study, ''Mircea cel Bătrân'', cited Leunclavius saying that in 1388 the Grand Vizir Ali Pasha conquered all those castels and citadels from the right bank of the Danube occupied by transalpin vlachs in the same year. Among those is mentioned Hârşova (''Jurcova'' near Danube). In original: ''între cetăţile supuse e pomenită şi Hârşova («Jurcova» pe Dunăre)''. I hope this prooves useful. Regarding the Wallachian map from 1390 it will take me some time to discuss all of Mircea's posesions. As I said, the only problems are concerning Putna (Vrancea) land, which was already part of Moldova, according to most historians (I will detail this matter). Also, Panaitescu considered that Făgăraş Dutchy was bordered by Olt River. --[[User:Alex:Dan|Alex:Dan]] 20:42, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

== Image deletion ==

I have delete the image on your user page. This is because it is an obvious attempt to disregard any editors you disagree with as Nazis and is such a personal attack. Please refrain from such behavior in the future or you will face further reprimands. Thank you. '''[[User:Sasquatch|Sasquatch]]''' [[User_talk:Sasquatch|t]]|[[Special:Contributions/Sasquatch|c]] 19:35, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
:What type of "good faith" am I to assume when you put a picture of Romanian Nazi's with a knife saying they're going to kill you whilst you put a caption under it specifically referring it to you. As for other users threatening to kill you, I suggest you give me the links and I'll take a look at it. This has nothing to do with paranoia but everything to do with keeping this encyclopedia civil both on your front and on others. '''[[User:Sasquatch|Sasquatch]]''' [[User_talk:Sasquatch|t]]|[[Special:Contributions/Sasquatch|c]] 19:56, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
::Considering your history of statements including calling people facists along with "holodeni" (no matter what you claim it is in the local dialect) along with references to the Romanian green uniforms makes it more than clear who you directed that picture toward. And how did the picture not imply they were out to get you? Overt holocaust references... either way its inappropriate. You are free to take this up with other admins as well. As for the other statement by [[User:Biruitorul]], I'll ask around a bit and see what other admins think. Don't think we don't take crap like that from him seriously though. On the other hand, if it doesn't contribute to the encyclopedia, don't bother with it (in relation to your picture). Thanks. '''[[User:Sasquatch|Sasquatch]]''' [[User_talk:Sasquatch|t]]|[[Special:Contributions/Sasquatch|c]] 20:49, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
:Let's put it this way then: if the purpose of the image isn't to show other editors in a negative light then what is it for? Note that I'm not blocking you or anything close but does that image better the encyclopedia or perhaps, whether you directly intend to or not, add more animosity into an already heated situation? Ignorance of law is no excuse. As for calling people "holodeni" or other people constantly bringing up your political alignments, I think both are pretty damn good examples of ad hominem attacks. Both of which are uneeded. Now I'm just getting involved here and I don't know the entire history but I'm just trying to sort things out a bit first. Again, if you really really strongly feel the image deletion was out of hand and completely wrong, I'm up for discussion with other admins as well as the rest of the community. '''[[User:Sasquatch|Sasquatch]]''' [[User_talk:Sasquatch|t]]|[[Special:Contributions/Sasquatch|c]] 22:53, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

==Apology==
Anonimu: I am sorry for posting that story, as it was inappropriate and I see it caused you offense. Let us work toward a new spirit of friendship and cooperation, free from the acrimony and insults that have thus far characterised our interactions. Let us remain civil, cease personal attacks, and work in harmony toward building a better encyclopedia. Warm regards, [[User:Biruitorul|Biruitorul]] 22:48, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

:I also apologize, as I was 50% responsible for the writing of that absurd story. It began as a little silly back-and-forth nonsense, and then it escalated, and then by the last few installments I was getting a little nervous. For my part, I sincerely apologize for turning the fictional character based on you into a vampire in the last chapter. Incidentally, I am considering leaving Wikipedia. I don't know how I can salvage my reputation after this fuckup. <font face="Edwardian Script ITC" size="3">[[User:K. Lastochka|K. Lásztocska]]</font> 04:09, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

==Blocked for 3RR==
You have been [[WP:BLOCK|blocked]] from editing for violating the [[WP:3RR|three-revert rule]] at [[Soviet occupation of Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina]]. As this is your fourth violation of the three-revert rule, the duration of the block will be for 72 hours. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek [[WP:DR|dispute resolution]] rather than engaging in an [[WP:EW|edit war]]. If you wish to request review of this decision, please [[Special:Emailuser/Seraphimblade|contact me by email]] or place <nowiki>{{unblock|reason here}}</nowiki> on this page. [[User:Seraphimblade|Seraphimblade]] <small><sup>[[User talk:Seraphimblade|Talk to me]]</sup></small> 11:05, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
:Generally when there's a large scale edit war the page gets protected. Why this didn't happen here?
::In this case, the edit war seems largely to be due to your actions. Given your previous history with the 3RR, you should be quite aware that edit warring is not acceptable, yet you chose to do so in any case. When there is indeed a large-scale edit war, I generally will choose to protect, but when one editor has chosen to edit war despite knowing better, that editor will be stopped from editing to prevent further disruption. [[User:Seraphimblade|Seraphimblade]] <small><sup>[[User talk:Seraphimblade|Talk to me]]</sup></small> 12:18, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
::: So it's my fault [[User:Dc76]] removed facts supported by reliable sources, and added dubious info he could not prove with any references? Sorry, but when i present the sources and the users refuses to acknowledge them claiming that's my interpretation (and strangely, keeps the sources, while removing the relevant text, just to give the impression the article is referenced , there's no place for discussion. And note [[User:Dc76]] and his meat/sock puppet also knew they were breaking the rule but they continued doing it (dc76 had 2 warnings in the last week, while his sock/meat puppet even had a 3rr case). Why i'm the only one punished? Just because i've been blocked before? The other admins who blocked me for 3rr had at least the common sense to block all the participants in the edit war. [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 12:34, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
I will wait for you at Illyria. --[[User:Anittas|Thus Spake Anittas]] 12:22, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
::''pui de viperă ce-mi ești'' [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 12:34, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

==Just a question==
Regarding that odd red template at the top of this page: certainly no one has a userbox saying "this user is an ultranationalist" or anything, so how do you intend to decide which editors may not be given a chance to post comments or questions on your talk page? Regards, <font face="Edwardian Script ITC" size="3">[[User:K. Lastochka|K. Lásztocska]]</font> 18:47, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
:Arbitrarily ;) (though having irredentist maps on your userpage might help) [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 18:53, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
::Hey man, the map that you are thinking about is what it should be like. Being an irredentist is not always the same as being an ultra-nationalist. --[[User:Anittas|Thus Spake Anittas]] 19:43, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
:::When you want your country to annex region populated by a group who doesn't share your ethnicity and, most important, doesn't want to join you, you're definitely an ultra-nationalist.[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 20:05, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
::::Whatever you say, but those regions were ours and the fact that they seized that land from a group of people who didn't belong to their ethnicity and most importantly, who did not want to join their nation, and who were to be discriminated against, makes those invaders for what? If wanting to have your land back makes you an ultranationalist, then I think you'll have a hard time explaining why that is to be considered a bad thing. --[[User:Anittas|Thus Spake Anittas]] 20:15, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
:::::Who gave it to you? Didn't you seize it from someone else " who did not want to join their nation, and who were to be discriminated against" in the first place? Hey, but maybe you can prove Romanization happened in the northern and eastern regions claimed by that map. Actually you should go to back to Africa, unless you can prove you're a neanderthalian. So, yes, wanting land inhabited by other populations who don't want to join you makes you an ultra-nationalist (especially in the post ww2 world).[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 20:47, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
::::::The Ruthenians handled Moldavia northern Bukovina. When the Moldavian state formed, the population was already ethnically Moldavian, so no, the population did not belong to a different ethnicity. They not have been happier, because they wanted to get rid of Hungarian influence and Catholicism, while those in the south wanted to be fred from your people (the Tatars). As you once said: it is not theft to steal from a thief. As for northern Bukovina, the Ruthenians there were settled by Stephen the Great. What right do they have to rebel? --[[User:Anittas|Thus Spake Anittas]] 20:59, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
:::::::Proofs? Even if they did, those ruthenians are not the same as moder day Ukrainians. And nowadays that land could be inhabited ultrby Vietnamese. If they don't want to join you, you don't have the right to claim their land. I still believe the theft thing. But this doesn't mean you or people who have such maps can ignore the will of an ethnic group. (Apropo, penultima ta propozitie o contrazice pe prima.) And be aware that you may fall in the category defined by the tag. You've been a bad boy. No more maps for you.[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 21:16, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
::::::::Why would it become their land? People may reserve the right to defend their interests. This is a matter of conflicting interests. If you think that a people have the right to defend themselves from agression, then wanting to retrieve lost territory can also be seen as a way to defend your nationhood. At the end of the day, it's all about selfinterest and the interest of your nation. This is why Soviet took the land by force and this is why we tried to retrieve it, but in the middle of all this mess, there still is a sense of fairness when judging these things, but I'm not sure how relevant that is to politics. --[[User:Anittas|Thus Spake Anittas]] 21:37, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
::::::::: It's not their land. It's not anybody's land for that matter (hereditary private property on land is against nature and it's the main tool used by aristocracy/monarchy/bourgeoisie to control the people). It's just the land they inhabit. And this gives them the right to decide on its sovereignty. There's a word for "wanting to retrieve lost territory can also be seen as a way to defend your nationhood": Lebensraum. Hope you don't end like its promoters.[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 21:55, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
::::::::::As an idea, if a part of Romania would be invaded and the population would be expelled and a new population would inhabit the region, according to your logic, the new population would have the right to decide over the land. That doesn't sound reasonble at all and there is no interest in following such rules. And I think you're getting too old to keep on to your rebellious image of a communist. As I have told you today: everything cannot be blamed on higher authority. The nature of man and animals cannot be blamed on aristocracy. What have you done today to make the world a better place? Or this year? Nothing. You just argue with Biruitorul on Wiki. So much for being a rebel. Even he has probably done more than you by simply donating some crap to some organization. If he wasn't a part of the [[Spanish Inquisition]], I would have liked him a lot. --[[User:Anittas|Thus Spake Anittas]] 00:39, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
::::::::::: Isn't that how the Romanian people was formed (at least according to one of the three main theories)? But why go so back in time... wasn't this the case of Dobruja after 1878 and of transylvania after 1918? Anyway, probably the thing you describe will never happen, due to the Geneve convention. This is not a "rebellious image".. this is the ideal in which i believe... something like your image of bucharest.. it won't go away soon... I've never said that. Partially, it can be... For example, i've "sacrificed" myself on Truth. I can't always save the day. I'm not one of the powerpuff girls.[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 21:32, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

== "ask your idol". ==

Good idea, I'll ask István about that as soon as I get a chance. I assume most Romanians celebrate Christmas on January 7 along with the rest of Eastern Orthodoxy, <strike>but I don't see what that has to do with the small wording/grammar/clarity changes I made to the article?</strike> <font face="Edwardian Script ITC" size="3">[[User:K. Lastochka|K. Lásztocska]]</font> 21:41, 13 July 2007 (UTC) Never mind that last bit--I just noticed the sentences about the Julian calendar which were included in the reverts. I didn't notice those, and I apologize if I unintentionally re-added false info. (I don't know many Romanians off-wiki, so I don't know if it is false or not.) If it was only those sentences you were after, why not just delete those instead of reverting all the other edits that went with them (with uncivil edit summaries to boot?) <font face="Edwardian Script ITC" size="3">[[User:K. Lastochka|K. Lásztocska]]</font> 21:45, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


Point taken, but you should read those guidelines too, before using communist propaganda as "evidence" to back up your POV. In turn I would suggest (for the hundredth time) that you read [[WP:AGF]] and [[WP:NPOV]], not to mention [[WP:CIVIL]]. <font face="Edwardian Script ITC" size="3">[[User:K. Lastochka|K. Lásztocska]]</font> 18:41, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

'''There is no gang or cabal''', and it is a classic case of assuming bad faith that you continue to insist on the existence of some such sinister organization dedicated to making your life miserable. Perhaps I misstated the case when I accused you of using "communist propaganda", and if so I apologize, but the fact remains that you are just as guilty of politically-motivated editing as me and everyone else you accuse of "ultranationalism" (or whatever. I'm a pretty lousy excuse for a Romanian ultranationalist, frankly.) The reason you've made so many enemies here is your constant name-calling, political edit warring and general rudeness, not a sinister online branch of the Iron Guard (which no one here would join anyway.) <font face="Edwardian Script ITC" size="3">[[User:K. Lastochka|K. Lásztocska]]</font> 18:52, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

== My Maps ==

[http://youtube.com/watch?v=W91sqAs-_-g What you gon' do with all that junk?]

All that junk inside your trunk?

I'ma get, get, get, get, you drunk,

Get you love drunk off my maps.

My map, my map, my map, my map, my map,

My map, my map, my map, my lovely little maps--[[User:Anittas|Thus Spake Anittas]] 19:20, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

:wow, that's nice... but is WROONG! the supercup is tommorrow.[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]]
::So on Thursday you work and on Friday you deliver. Perfect. --[[User:Anittas|Thus Spake Anittas]] 19:33, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
:::it depends on how many ''devil's eyes'' i get in advance. And when you want to check an user, you usually note it [[WP:RFCU|somewhere]] [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 19:38, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
::::Noted. Have you opened a devileyes account? --[[User:Anittas|Thus Spake Anittas]] 19:51, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
:::::I'm still deliberating. [[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 20:01, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

== Blocked for 1 week ==

{{Block|continuing to put [[WP:NPA|personal attacks]] on userpage for the purposes of [[WP:HARASS|harassing]] other users. User has been warned before see [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive274]] section titled "Anonimu constantly calling "ultra-nationalist" people with whom he disagrees". The duration of the block is 1 week}}--[[User:Jersey Devil|Jersey Devil]] 15:47, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

{{unblock reviewed|1=Abuse of administrative powers, infringement of the personal liberty and freedom of one's userspace. Fake motivation: How could I harass someone when I follow nobody? Also, I didn't know nothing about that action on ANI and I was abusively judged in absentia (nobody warned me about that), without having the right to retort. Note also that i was on wikibreak during the period of that action.|decline=You are confused. You are not entitled not to be blocked, or even to defend yourself on WP:ANI. If your actions warrant a block, as appears to be the case here, you are blocked. You have no right to edit, not even edit your userspace. — [[User:Yamla|Yamla]] 17:51, 25 July 2007 (UTC)}}

Reviewing admin failed to answer any of my questions, moreover using a harsh tone. I request review by an Admin from the Eastern Hemisphere, people with less vainglory, who look for more than an indiscriminate and malicious collection of diffs.[[User:Anonimu|Anonimu]] 18:02, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
::Note:I WAS going to unblock you until I saw your "admin from the eastern hemisphere" comment, as though people from the West are somehow less intelligent or less apt. That kind of discrimination has no place here. [[User:Swatjester|<font color="red">&rArr;</font>]] [[User_talk:Swatjester|<font face="Euclid Fraktur"><font color="black">SWAT</font><font color="goldenrod">Jester</font></font>]] [[WP:CLIMBING|<small><sup>Denny Crane.</sup></small>]] 18:20, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

:I suggest you read [[WP:USER]], [[WP:TALK]], and [[WP:NPA]]. Your userpages belong to the community, not you. '''[[User:Sceptre|Will]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Sceptre|talk]])</sup> 18:53, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

::Be cautious about what you do on your user talk page. It may get protected if administrators deem you're abusing it. [[User:Digwuren|Digwuren]] 19:18, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 10:39, 29 July 2007

Disclaimer

This talk page should remain BLANK, so any message here would probably be deleted without being read. To prevent this, I recommend you to post your comments according to the indications below.

1. Comments related to article content
This is not the place for them. Every wikipedia page has a Talk Page. If you are unhappy with what I've wrote, you want clarification or you want to suggest improvement, press discussion on the top of the respective page and express your concerns. This way, more people will see your comments and maybe they will be able to help you more.
2. Warnings
Don't put it here. Choose a random page (preferably a talk page) and put your warning there. Admins will consider I have been warned anyway, so why ruin my Talk page?
3. Blocks
If you're an Admin and you have blocked me, don't note it here. I'll surely notice it when I try to edit an article. If you want to show others how strong you are, there's always my Block log. In case you want to give me the chance to ask a review of my block, don't bother. Other Admins will most probably agree with you, and even the ones who think the block was not fair will do nothing about it. So why waste your time?
4. Personal comments
If you want to tell me something important, but not related to one of the categories above, don't write here. Keep it for yourself. Of course, if you want to warn be about a imminent nuclear attack against South Eastern Romania, you could send me an e-mail. But only then. So please, no personal comments here.
5. Vandalism
Why vandalise this talk page that few people watch when you can vandalise the page of a country, a city or a president? More people will see you and you'll gain a better reputation.

Sincerely, Anonimu 10:39, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Anonimu/Complete_Works/Tom_5_(2022)&oldid=147832164"