Talk:Moldova: Difference between revisions
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
::Having said that, I do not think that we should unprotect the page. The revert wars will start again and nothing will get done. We should solve all our disputes here first before we proceed with changing the page.[[User:Constantzeanu|Constantzeanu]] 15:12, 6 January 2006 (UTC) |
::Having said that, I do not think that we should unprotect the page. The revert wars will start again and nothing will get done. We should solve all our disputes here first before we proceed with changing the page.[[User:Constantzeanu|Constantzeanu]] 15:12, 6 January 2006 (UTC) |
||
:::Check out [[Austria]]... despite cultural and historical relations with Germany, Germans haven't been allowed to vandalise their page and add heaps of irrelevant drivel about Germany. --[[User:Node ue|Node]] 08:37, 7 January 2006 (UTC) |
:::Check out [[Austria]]... despite cultural and historical relations with Germany, Germans haven't been allowed to vandalise their page and add heaps of irrelevant drivel about Germany. --[[User:Node ue|Node]] 08:37, 7 January 2006 (UTC) |
||
::::This is not the case Node. Austria was never annexed by force from Germany and made a Soviet republic. I'm afraid you are too little and haven't read the history books yet. [[User:Bonaparte|<font color="#FFFFFF" style="background: maroon;"> Bonaparte </font>]] [[User talk:Bonaparte|<small>talk</small>]] 08:48, 7 January 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== [[Moldova#Administrative_divisions|Administrative divisions]] == |
== [[Moldova#Administrative_divisions|Administrative divisions]] == |
Revision as of 08:48, 7 January 2006
Back to normal
I invite to request unprotection for Moldova. The current version of the article on Moldova is much nationalized. And it is not normal for Wiki. We should not let nationalistic groups (in this case, Romanian nationalists) to take control over Wiki. Current normalized (from my point of view) version for Moldova See Here. Any of counties who are interests in Moldova can't vandalize Moldovan pages, its sovereignty and independence. I invite all constructive people to collaboration. serhio talk 08:26, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
- Beside the fact that you have deleted all references to Romania did you had any other contributions? Bonaparte talk 08:31, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
I have not deleted all references to Romania. Please, don't start the dispute. Just compare Moldova page with other european countries in Wikipedia. serhio talk 10:00, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
- Serhio, Moldova is not a country like any other country. Moldova's history is strongly tied to that of Romania. So is its language and its culture. I think that even if you are Russian, you still cannot deny that. So to eliminate this kind of information from the page, I think it would only make the article much poorer in information.
- Having said that, I do not think that we should unprotect the page. The revert wars will start again and nothing will get done. We should solve all our disputes here first before we proceed with changing the page.Constantzeanu 15:12, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
- Check out Austria... despite cultural and historical relations with Germany, Germans haven't been allowed to vandalise their page and add heaps of irrelevant drivel about Germany. --Node 08:37, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
- This is not the case Node. Austria was never annexed by force from Germany and made a Soviet republic. I'm afraid you are too little and haven't read the history books yet. Bonaparte talk 08:48, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
- Check out Austria... despite cultural and historical relations with Germany, Germans haven't been allowed to vandalise their page and add heaps of irrelevant drivel about Germany. --Node 08:37, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Links from districts point to the county capitals, but they should point to counties, e.g. not Drochia but Raionul Drochia. Links like Anenii Noi County should be redirected not to Anenii Noi but to Raionul Anenii Noi. I've uploaded locator maps of counties in WikiCommons. They may be used in county pages. --Zserghei 10:30, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Why "Raionul", but not "County"? serhio talk 14:55, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
- Raionul is russian. Who needs russian terms in English Wikipedia? Serghei I know you're russian from Moldova but stop pushing your POV fork Bonaparte talk 15:01, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
- You don't understand my point of view. Raionul Drochia may be redirected to Drochia County or vice versa, but not to town of Drochia. The same with section Administrative_divisions. --Zserghei 15:16, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
- Serhio I have written something in your user talk-page; I think its under archive now but I would really like you to take a look at it. Poate o să-ţi mai domolească oleacă românofobia.Constantzeanu 15:15, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Census
Maybe this is not the best place to bring this up, but does anyone know if the recent census data in both RM and PMR have released their final versions. I noticed in the Tiraspol article and Tighina article that the population is reported to be 266.000 and 157.000 resp. which results in more then 400.000 people out of a 555.000 total for all of PMR. This seems to me a little off. Does anyone have a ref. for this data?Constantzeanu 15:12, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
- It appears that neither Moldova, nor the MRT have released any official results. On the official Moldovan page: http://www.statistica.md/recensamint.php?lang=ro it says that only preliminary results exist. On Olvia Press, the main press organ of the MRT the last article I could find on the subject stated: В республиканском Центре обработки материалов переписи населения работа еще далеко не завершена (In the center of the republic, work on materials from the census is far from finished ....). TSO1D 15:47, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
- Then someone should use World Gazeteer data on the populations of Tiraspol and Tighina. I find it quite strange that the PMR census shows only 555.500 people in all of Transnistria but Tiraspol and Tighina toghether contain more then 400.000 of those. That leaves only 150.000 for the rest of Transnistria which seems to me very inaccurate. Constantzeanu 01:08, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
- The results from the recent census are in fact suspect, however so are results from previous studies, especially unofficial ones. I do not see a way to assess the veracity and accuracy of any of the results that are available in various sourses. I suppose the best way to deal with the problem is to utilize the results provided by MRT government, especially after they will be made official (if ever). After all, as suspicious as these numbers might seem, the official census is still the best source. TSO1D 03:59, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
- I agree but there is no proof that these numbers of 266.000 and 157.000 actually come form the official gov. census. Constantzeanu 06:53, 7 January 2006 (UTC)