Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 12:34, 10 February 2008

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 | 12 | 13

Romanian wikipedia and the liberties it takes - please look into this

Hi, Bogdan. I was hoping you'll have a look into this, as you are in a position to review this conflict. I recently intervened in respect to ro:Vladimir Tismăneanu, where sources such as the Civic Media forum and Tricolorul are still being used, in defiance of rules. I explained my position on the talk page, and referenced the rules that make those sources be untenable on wikipedia (including the cornerstone "Verifiability, not truth"). The first part of the conversation was with Gutza, who first admitted that the source was dubious. My assessment was shared by Plinul cel tanar, who noted that Civic Media does not appear to have credentials. Gutza alleged, without presenting any proof, that I am somehow connected to Vladimir Tismăneanu - an accusation that should raise concerns in itself - and that there is a conflict of interests. MariusM intervened himself, expressing support for the link, and claiming that it should be kept because it expresses a relevant viewpoint. In one of his edits, he introduced what it turns out was a self-published source, contributed to the neofascist site Altermedia - this is a conflict of interests! He also keeps pushing back the link to Tricolorul, claiming that it is reliable enough, because Tismăneanu never contested it (I asked him to show me the rule that said he should, and, of course, there was no such thing). He also accused me of lacking "deontology" because I said Victor Roncea lied and MariusM thinks he did not - I told him that I am not a journalist and that I only edit on the basis of rules of conduct on wiki. He repeated the claim that I am related to Tismăneanu, based on Gutza's earlier allegations. Gutza himself returned with similar comments: together, they posted and reposted false warnings on the talk page I was using, even though I told them it was harassment; MariusM threatened me (he received no warning). Please, please, would you please have a look at ro:Discuţie:Vladimir Tismăneanu and intervene? It's getting out of hand, and am left facing ad hominems, insinuation and what seems to be a coterie. I have no energy to go through the higher stage of the process there, especially since they all seem to be backing each other when it comes to issues such as this one. I could really use an authoritative voice who has experience in editing there and has clearly a better grasp of the WP:RS issues than those guys. Dahn 04:39, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

And check this out! Dahn 04:48, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi Bogdan, please look here, Dahn is making untolerable personal attacks against me, he is accusing me of vandalism and of other things (in fact, I think he don't like that I dare to have a different opinion than him). Regarding the so-called "threat", I already gave an explanation to AdiJapan, is good also for you.--MariusM 16:58, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Be still, my trembling heart! After one erases sourced info on the basis of it "not being relevant" just because it exposes the nature of attacks against Tismăneanu, one cannot be said to have engaged in vandalism. Oh, my. Would Marius prefer if I took him to WP:AN/I right now?

As for the rest: Bogdan, I trust your judgment. I invoked the clear guidelines of WP:V and WP:BLP for all my arguments, and this person has claimed, well, his own opinion. As for the threat, he has actually been warned about it, whether he "explained" it afterwards or not. Dahn 17:09, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I did not manage yet to read the rather long discussion on Romanian Misplaced Pages, but here are a few thoughts after a first glance over the debate:

First of all, the rule about reliable sources is a core rule and it's not negotiable.

It's quite clear that Tricolorul should not be used as a source. That newspaper has an amazing record of slander/calumny and of publishing made up information and there's absolutely no reason to call it "reliable" by any definition of that term. Vadim publishes virtually everything he gets from his "informers" and while there might be *some* true information, most of it is bull. We can't personally check each article whether it's true or not.

The site of Civic Media appears to be an one-man show of a journalist, Victor Roncea and since it's some kind of a blog, it lacks editorial control, so it's also not considered a reliable source. I don't know how notable is Victor Roncea or his website, but if they're rather notable, I think some information could be used by attributing it to the website/article, but not being taken as truth. bogdan 23:46, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Are you perchance following this? Dahn (talk) 19:01, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, but from what I see, it's quite futile trying to argue with them. bogdan (talk) 18:17, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Khojaly Massacre

Hi. Please check this article Khojaly Massacre as currently it contains strong Azerbaijanian POV. Thanks. Steelmate (talk) 03:48, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

"Notable" student society members

Hi. I noticed that you have removed the word "notable" in the title of a list of members of a student societiy. For consistency, I would request that you do the same for the four or so other organizations with the word "notable" in the titles of their lists shown here: Category:Lists_of_chapters_or_members_of_United_States_student_societies Thanks. 4.235.156.158 (talk) 18:05, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Done. Thanks. bogdan (talk) 18:17, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

"Notable" is the standard word to use. I have moved the List of Delta Tau Delta notable members back there from "List of Delta Tau Delta members." I request that you do the same for any other pages you moved. I appreciate your interest and enthusiasm, but want to maintain a standard page naming scheme. —ScouterSig 08:04, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is supposed to talk only about notable people, so the keyword "notable" is superfluous everywhere. Please see: Misplaced Pages:Lists (stand-alone lists)#Naming conventions:

The name or title of the list should simply be List of _ _ (for example list of Xs). Do not use a title like: Xs, famous Xs, listing of important Xs, list of notable Xs, nor list of all Xs.

bogdan (talk) 09:34, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

• Oh, man, cool. I learn something new about Misplaced Pages every freaking day. Thank you, then, since that's what I should be doing. —ScouterSig 15:25, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Miron Cristea

Considering how long ago that information was added, it might be problematic to find the source now. I don't think I added the source because the entire article was unsourced at the time. I am certain that the source exists, as I think I was adding all the content like that from the various catalogs of saints which I was using at the time. I think he was probably from a book called "Orthodox Saints", but I can't really remember specifically at this point. Give me a few days and I'll try to find it again. John Carter (talk) 15:00, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

An issue

Hi, Bogdan. Could you please look here (including talk page), and see what, if anything can be done? I'm having difficulties communicating with a single-purpose user there, who doesn't seem to know or care about WP:AGF. The problem has spilled over here, too. (There was a second user involved, also red-linked, but he seems to have quieted down for now.) At any rate, I'm willing to look at a compromise solution, but I don't even know where to start under such continual questioning of motives and uncivil behavior. Turgidson (talk) 06:04, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Bogdan! Could you, please, see that WP:NPOV is respected in Michael I of Romania and Soviet occupation of Romania? This user has been aggressively pushing his pro-King Michael POV's (see Talk), deleting or mislabeling as OR and Weasel some unsavory, but well-referenced information about Michael. I asked for clear proofs for his OR and Weasel tags, which he has yet to produce. Sadly, Turgidson does not even understand what WP:OR entails, since he labels as OR a clear-cut fact, such as Tsar Simeon's status as another surviving head of state from WWII, logically inferred from his regnal years overlapping WWII. Thank you in advance for your mediation and help! Lil' mouse (talk) 06:25, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Single-purpose accounts

What's with all the attacks from single-purpose accounts and IPs on your userpage? What did you do to these freaks that they keep showing up on my watchlist? Dahn (talk) 10:35, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

I think it's my friend, the Dacian from Los Angeles! :-) bogdan (talk) 11:05, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

I actually don't know who that is. Does it have to do with Winona? Dahn (talk) 11:19, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes. He has a crush on Winona and her shoplifting habits. bogdan (talk) 11:21, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Dniester

The article was silently moved to "Nistru river" a few days ago, so when I was unable to move it back, I did it by copypasting the contents. However, this left the entire edit history in what is now a redirect. Is there a way to move all that back to the original article? --Illythr (talk) 15:24, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I did it. One would need to be an admin to do revert that (delete the Dniester article and move the Nistru river over the current contents). bogdan (talk) 15:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I thought as much. Thanks! --Illythr (talk) 15:34, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

The Next step

Bogdan, s you might have seen by now, I was blocked on Romanian wikipedia after I criticized an admin for introducing copyright violations into articles (alongside POVed text). so was the other user who complained about it. The explanation, as given by Radufan and his cronies, was that I was "disrupting activities" (by commenting on the main discussion page they have, and while he was accusing me for the "crime" of not having edited articles!). Three admins were warned by Radufan that, if they do not accept his decision, he is going to do all in his power to have their status revoked. The whole altermedia discussion was where the threats began (because he was removing references to altermedia from articles, User:New World Order was blocked by Radufan, who went against consensus).

This is truly outrageous. What I need to know is where and how to open a debate on the state of an entire wiki project - the antisemitic material it still hosts, the permanent state of copyvio, the failure to ensure quality, the glaring partisanship of some admins and their history of abuse, have made ro:wiki a laughing stock. I am prepared to initiate action, and I would like it if all users who have noted the problems get to comment on this. Dahn (talk) 16:44, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I maintain a list of anti-semitic articles on my user page there. And while some of them have been deleted, stuff there passes that wouldn't last 5 seconds on en wiki. I've also been following the copyvio thing. It is ridiculous. The anti-semitism might not be illegal, but that certainly is. What is needed is a page where we can detail complaints, with translations in English (because at least the people on the mailing list and the people in power need that to be able to understand the situation). - Francis Tyers · 17:23, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I am ready to go through the steps required, providing translation and whatever else is necessary. I would not want to be alone in this process, and I'm sure that, like you, there are plenty of users who have been troubled by the issues involved. I would like to know where we should file this, and what results we can expect - I do not aim for the entire Romanian project to be closed, at least not permanently, but something important and large-scale needs to be put in place before it is truly too late. Dahn (talk) 20:28, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I am not sure exactly where we could go. Writing to the mailing lists certainly doesn't help: it would lead to a long discussion, but not towards any decision. bogdan (talk) 20:35, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Does this fall within the scope of Meta? I have never contributed there, but I am willing to open an account if it is only just for that. Is appealing to Jimbo Wales directly an option? (I have seen users posting messages there in relation to other wikipedias.) Dahn (talk) 20:38, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok, don't forget to mention to Jimbo the current state of the Romanian education system, as well as the budget normal Romanians can spend on culture. Thank you. --Venatoreng (talk) 21:37, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Here is one example mailing list conversation: http://www.nabble.com/From-Romanian-Misplaced Pages-2C-the-Nazi-Encyclopedia-to10001253.html - Francis Tyers · 22:52, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Okay. The revolution can start without me. I'll be away for a few days and as such I won't be checking what's happening here. Have fun playing de-a naziştii şi comuniştii and Merry Christmas!, Happy Festivus!, etc. I hope Moş Crăciun (or Deda Mraz for the Yugoslavs still affected by nostalgia) will bring you something nice! ;-) bogdan (talk) 23:33, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Bom Natal, man. I'll be working on a Festivus miracle.

I'm sorry if it seems like I pestered you (come to think of it, I might have sounded pushy because of the "there are plenty of users who have been troubled by the issues involved" part - but I was actually addressing this to Francis). My main rationale for presenting this here was to ask where this could go, just in case you knew (and, of course, thank you for the tips). I want to reassure you that I respect any decision you take, but that I would appreciate any form of input (for or against) once you have the time, and provided you should want to comment at all. Best, Dahn (talk) 21:11, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

salut

Intrebare: de ce ti s-a parut de cuviinta ca subiectul "Kord (band)" ar trebui sters? Ai vreun pic idee cat de complicata este pentru un incepator editarea unei pagini pe "Misplaced Pages" si nu crezi ca ar fi fost interesant ca intainte de a crede de cuviinta ca pagina trebuie sa fie stearsa, sa te informezi un pic si sa afli ca subiectul este intr-adevar notabil? Ar fi foarte frumos sa stiu motivul "NOTABIL" pentru care a fost stearsa acea pagina si as aprecia f. mult daca ar fi readusa. Multumesc anticipat si astept un raspuns.

Okay, am pus pagina la loc, cel puţin temporar. Problema este următoarea: trebuie să dovedeşti că acea formaţie este "notabilă" prin nişte surse independente. De exemplu, ar trebui să existe nişte articole în presă despre această formaţie. bogdan (talk) 23:51, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Ufc_rapid_logo.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Ufc_rapid_logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 16:22, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Crăciun

Un Crăciun şi un An nou fericit!--MariusM (talk) 16:44, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Merry Xmas

I wish you a very Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! --R O | msg  17:57, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Ghidul autostopistului galactic.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ghidul autostopistului galactic.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Misplaced Pages:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:37, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Madaba removal from Origins of romanians

You have removed madaba from the article, still, you mention that the province should be Dacia in today Bulgaria- Moesia.

Still the map from Madaba, is concerning the only today siria, Israel, Jordan and Sinai. So I've teo questions: 1. Do you have any information reseach that prove that the map is about some representings of of Dacia (even if situated on south of the Danube?), It is possible that madaba map is some sort of Tabula Peutingeriana? 2. If so? It is possible to have a representations of the byzantine town such are Dinogetia and Troesmiss?

I would be interesting to add some links if so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CristianChirita (talk • contribs) 23:10, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Dams

Recently several articles on dams in Romania have been posted by a user Mario1987. Most have been posted in November 2007 but it is only recently that I have discovered them. Unfortunately they contain incorrect information - actually many of the dams do not exist. I wrote to the user without getting any response.

The problem is that the user confuses dams and hydroelectric plants.

Also the user has designed a template: Power Stations in Romania which is woefully incomplete. There are over 100 hydroelectric plants in Romania and probably over 1000 thermoelectric plants. Having a template which lists only some of them makes no sense at all.

I have marked these articles for deletion. The list includes Template:Power stations in Romania as well as articles Şugag Dam, Şugag Dam, Brădişor Dam, Lotru-Ciunget Dam, Râul Mare Dam, Remeţi Dam and Mărişelu Dam.

You might be aware that I am not only administrator of ro:Wiki, but also that I am an expert in the field and that I have been consistently working on a comprehensive list of articles on rivers in Romania and also that I have written articles on Romanian dams (both in Misplaced Pages as in technical magazines. I am thus not making these allegations lightly.

Could you please have a look at the articles and take an appropriate decision. I am willing to provide any additional information you consider necessary.

Regards. Afil (talk) 01:03, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

hi there friend !

I want to show you some article www.ziare.ro/articol.php?id=1195855382

this is only a sample, if you want more about this subject you only have to ask. Regards ! Adrianzax (talk) 12:16, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Communist Romania

Has been moved to Socialist Republic of Romania. I think this is wrong. Could you please take a look at the comments on the talk page, and see what you think? Thank you. Turgidson (talk) 19:03, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

The history of Romania template

Hi, and Happy New Year. I have a question/proposal: is it possible to turn the template into a horizontal one and move it around in articles accordingly? It's really taking a toll on texts such as Wallachian Revolution of 1848. Dahn (talk) 15:13, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Happy New Year! It is possible, but a horizontal template would be inconsistent with the rest of the templates from Category:History by nation navigational boxes. bogdan (talk) 15:22, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Then would it perhaps be possible to make it more condensed without dropping any of the entries? As far as I can see, templates in the category you mention tend to be more manageable. Dahn (talk) 15:45, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Done. Is it better? bogdan (talk) 15:51, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

It looks much better. Thank you! Dahn (talk) 16:26, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Theater Hopper deletion

Hello, I noticed that you deleted the Theater Hopper comic article as non-notable. Unfortunately, I disagreed and blundered into the process by recreating the article without including the authorship history information, which another admin pointed out to me. I apologize for not taking the matter up with you beforehand and I'd like to request that you restore the original article for the reasons I noted in the recreated article's discussion page. If you still disagree with the article's notability, please let me know. Thanks! -Fearfulsymmetry (talk) 21:06, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Indiana Jones Atlantis cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Indiana Jones Atlantis cover.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Misplaced Pages constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Project FMF (talk) 02:51, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Trolling on Romania

User mrg3105mrg3105 is ranting into Talk:Romania with an hallucinatory semieducated delirium about Romania, its name and etimology. He deploys such a disruptive energy, that the two or three users who are trying to temper him seem overwhelmed. I think it's time for an intervention. Thanks. --84.153.17.16 (talk) 16:35, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Romanian profanity

Hi. Can I ask you to semi-protect Romanian profanity? It's not that we don't need everyones contribution, but the article has been the target of persistent vandalism (considering the subject it's perfectly understandable...). The current instability of the article discourages earnest editors willing to clean it up. Thanks. — AdiJapan ☎ 09:01, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Could one of you guys provide me with an assessment of whether the article as a whole is encyclopedic material, and let me know if it can actually survive on this main project. While I have no opinion for or against, it would be worth knowing if one should make links to it in various articles, or if such links will rot. The last time I checked, it was tagged to be moved on another project - this is why I chose not to link to it in Geo Bogza, an article that could have used the link. Dahn (talk) 23:56, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I think it can survive, if it would be rewritten in the manner of Latin profanity. Currently, it's an unsourced list of slang. bogdan (talk) 00:36, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Concerning potential expansion and the likes, I think this can indeed go places. One could consider exploring the taboos in Romanian society and literature and how they were cast aside by the likes of Bogza, and, since I'm hanging around in that area, Mateiu. There's a trove of such material I could contribute eventually, but why do I have the feeling that the main part isn't gonna go anywhere for the time being? Dahn (talk) 02:38, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

The ș again

Please see this, this, and this. A wikipedia divided against itself cannot stand. And why is it that we are still discussing these issues after year upon year of editing? Dahn (talk) 14:23, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Argh. Francis is trolling again. He knows the issue and the arguments... :/ bogdan (talk) 14:43, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

So, would you please undo the moves (also note that he introduced ș in spellings withing the articles in question, so you could look into that as well)? Dahn (talk) 14:48, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Ah, okay, I moved the articles: I'll look into the articles, too. bogdan (talk) 14:49, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Done. bogdan (talk) 14:57, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

That guy

This is the third picture he uploaded, and it has at least one clear problem (the Enescu picture). The man was told repeatedly that this is not the way to go at it, and yet he persists in doing that. When coupled with all the disruption and trolling, shouldn't it at least buy him a serious conversation with the guys over at AN/I? Dahn (talk) 03:31, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Eh... Dahn (talk) 11:40, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for this. I remember i struggled with it a lot, wanting to know just what could they possibly be calling it today? And I actually googled all variants I could think of. Dahn (talk) 04:40, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi again. I'm considering starting an article on the magazine unu (well, not now, but in the future). A long time ago, when I was looking through articles on completely unrelated subjects, I noticed that it is actually possible to start articles with lower-case titles, when the subject made a point of using lower-case. I admit I have not checked to see if this is still accepted. Do you happen to know what is needed for that to be possible, or is better/more appropriate to have all titles starting with an upper case? Dahn (talk) 22:19, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

You can't create articles with names that begin with a lowercase, but you can add {{lowercase}} at the top of the article text and it would display it like that. see iPod. bogdan (talk) 22:34, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

That's great! Thank you! Dahn (talk) 22:35, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi again. There are two unilateral and rather absurd article moves by Nergaal that I would like you to undo, please. One is here (per the actual meaning of the word cinematography, and per what other such articles are usually called) and the other is here (it seems this was a case of putting the carriage before the horse - the article is needed, while the list we could do without, meaning that it should eventually be turned into prose; plus, the title is in defiance of naming conventions). Thank you. Dahn (talk) 06:26, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

May I ask it actually be called "Cinema of Romania", as originally? Everyone else uses the "cinema of ..." formula. Biruitorul (talk) 00:41, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Bessarabia

Why you putting false data. I see you like puting more great data about Romanian at Romanians article and at Besarabia in Rusia empire (you can watch at Charles King book at page 24 to see you artificial put much more big number than reality) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Donchev (talk • contribs) 13:08, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Why are you assuming it's false data? It was taken from Hitchins, p. 240-241. Yes, I noticed King has different data and I'm searching for a third source. bogdan (talk) 13:12, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

The annexation of Bessarabia profoundly affected the composition of the population. Most striking during the century of Russian rule was the steady decrease in the percentage of Moldavians. According to the census of 1817, 86 per cent of the inhabitants (419,420 out of 482,630) were Moldavians, while 6.5 per cent (30,000) were Ukrainians and 4.2 per cent (19,130) were Jews. By 1856, Moldavians had fallen to 74 per cent (736,000 out of 990,000), while Ukrainians and Jews had risen to 12 and 8 per cent, respectively. In 1897, 56 per cent (1,092,000 out of 1,935,412) were Moldavian, 18.9 per cent Ukrainians and Russians, and 11.7 per cent Jews. These changes were primarily the result of immigration from neighbouring provinces promoted by Russian authorities. Moldavians formed an overwhelming majority in the central part of the province, but in the far northern and southern districts other ethnic groups together outnumbered them.32 For example, in Hotin uezd in the north 53.3 per cent of the population were Ukrainian and only 23.8 per cent Moldavian, and in Akkerman uezd in the south 26.7 per cent were Ukrainian, 9.7 per cent Russian, and 16.4 per cent Moldavian. In the centre the countryside belonged to the Moldavians, whereas the cities took on an increasingly cosmopolitan character. (Hitchins, p. 241-242)

Hitchins cites:

• Ion Nistor, "Istoria Basarabiei" (Cernăuţi, 1923), 288-9, 299-300, 303-4;
• Iakim S. Grosul and Ilya G. Budak, "Ocherki istorii narodnogo khoziaistvo Bessarabii" (1861-1905 gg.) (Kishinev, 1972), 42-51.

King cites

• Zashchuk, "Materialy dlia geografii i statistiki Rossii", 1865, p. 186;
• Zamfir C. Arbore, "Basarabia în secolul XIX", 1898 p.118
• 1897 Russian census

bogdan (talk) 13:47, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I found the reason why it is this way in Ion Nistor, Istoria Basarabiei, which has both sets of data: the one with 56% is "by ethnicity" and the one with 49% is "by language". If one spoke Russian or Ukrainian, he would be automatically listed as Russian or Ukrainian speaker, regardless of the ethnicity or whether it was the first language or not. bogdan (talk) 13:57, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

The tables are on p. 213 (labeled "după naţionalitate") and p. 304 (labeled "după limba maternă"). I'll look at them later. bogdan (talk) 14:08, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

For the older censuses, both Nistor and King cite Zashchuk, someone should check the source, IMO. bogdan (talk) 14:12, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Medeleni

An article that you have been involved in editing, Medeleni, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Medeleni. Thank you.  Tivedshambo (talk) 20:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

First mention of Albanians & some problems

Found and older one. :) From the age of Samuilo's reign. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:28, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Wow, great find! :-) bogdan (talk) 22:30, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I know you usually veer out of articles that are problematic, but could you please make an exception? It's about the Romanians of Serbia and Vlachs of Serbia articles. Please check 'em out. Cheers. ;) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:03, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Firstly from reading the (age)-old articles and listening to your words, I though I knew something about the ancient Vlach society - now, I don't understand anything at all and can't make heads or tails in this...? ;( --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 12:06, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Both articles are a confusing mess. I don't even know where to start. Perhaps I should try to remove the unsourced parts and try to look for sources. :-) bogdan (talk) 15:59, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 3 February, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bessarabia in the Russian Empire, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Archtransit (talk) 18:00, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Technology History

I noticed that you have edited Ancient Roman technology, and I was wondering if you'd be willing to join Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Technology History? Thanks, Redmarkviolinist 21:11, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of people who died before the age of 30

An editor has nominated List of people who died before the age of 30, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Misplaced Pages is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of people who died before the age of 30 and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 00:59, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Did you delete my page

Did you delete my article about Kord(band) without checking my references to reliable sources that i provide? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lukassandi (talk • contribs) 23:57, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

That was a link to a youtube video, not a reliable reference. Being a guest at Teo does not automatically makes one notable. If you think I am wrong, you can bring up the issue at Misplaced Pages:Deletion review. (see the "Steps to list a new deletion review" section) bogdan (talk) 00:10, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

If you think that being invited in a tv-show which is very well known, it's not notable and a reliable reference, than i should think that you have a personal problem with this article. So, should i tell you that's not right? Reconsider your deletion and bring it back.

Anyway i'll inform about this untidiness. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lukassandi (talk • contribs) 00:23, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

reliable source

is the library of Timis County a reliable source enough ?

http://www.bjt.ro/bv/ScritoriBanateni/VALENAS_Liviu/Valenasmiscarea.pdf Adrianzax (talk) 23:44, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Short answer: no.

Long answer: That's an interview with an Iron Guard member (Mircea Dimitriu, "Secretarul General al Miscarii Legionare"), so it's simply what some guy claims. Basically, you're replacing what a great historian (Zigu Ornea) says in a with what a nazi says. Just because it's published in a book, it doesn't make it reliable. Please read Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources. bogdan (talk) 23:55, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

BTW, Ornea's book has been translated to be published at the Columbia University Press. bogdan (talk) 00:06, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I get it, all the sources that doesn't fit your claims are false. What about quoting some sources when making statements about HIS bio in his article and not about his father's. I don't care where it has been published, give sources where it says about his biography and not about his father's.Adrianzax (talk) 00:08, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

http://www.fgmanu.net/ is a site of the Iron Guard

http://www.codreanu.ro/ is a site of the Noua Dreaptă

http://www.altermedia.info/ is a site affiliated with Noua Dreaptă

the Timişoara book is an interview with an Iron Guard member.

Do you see the pattern, how all your sources are fascist and/or extremist and none is written by a real historian? bogdan (talk) 00:13, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

And what's the connection between the political orientation of this site and his biography ? i'm not quoting anything from those sites, only his bio, Here's another source http://www.velesova-sloboda.sled.name/misc/codreanu-eiserne-garde.html I hope you know german. And I said quote me some sources by historians about his bio not about his father's. That article is about him.. ok, bogdan ? Adrianzax (talk) 00:20, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Is that a book published in Nazi Germany and hosted by a Russian neonazi website? Wow, you sure know how to pick your sources. ;-)

Of course the article is about him. But it's common to write a few words about his family. bogdan (talk) 00:23, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Bogdan, the man was a nazi, where do you expect to find info about him, in toy related websites? and there is already info about his ancestry...Adrianzax (talk) 00:27, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

There is plenty of reliable info on Codreanu from proper scholarly sources. Interviews with virtually anonymous squadristi are of no particular value or interest, do not bring in any reliable info, and should certainly not be used as the basis for removing info based on quality sources. Dahn (talk) 11:45, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

1. That is not unreliable source, it's the Library of Timis County, the "unreliable" sources were erased.

2. Don't make his father bio and ancestry in his article, the article is about Corneliu not about Ion

3. Don't remove actual facts and documents with what Emil Cioran, also an Iron Guard admirer. tought or believed without any evidences. Adrianzax (talk) 12:12, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

1. As you were told before, that is the opinion of a person who was politically involved with Codreanu. It is not a third-party historical study, and in fact it sets itself against a historical study. It claims no proof for the assertion, and should thus be ignored outright. As a side note, the fact that it would be hosted (not published, son) by the Timiş County Library matters naught: not only is that library not especially prestigious or at all scholarly, but the simple presence of a book in a collection does not validate its reliability.

2. A brief mention of his supposed ethnic origins, as discussed in relevant and sources, is indeed relevant to Codreanu Jr. - I should add "to Codreanu Jr. as well".

3. Cioran's statement is clearly introduced as "a speculation", not taken for garanted, and it is cited precisely because Cioran intended to place doubt on Codreanu Jr.'s ethnic origins - a doubt which is relevant for the article. The quotation is validated by its use in a proper source, and not by its utterance by Cioran.

Finally:

4. If you continue to remove referenced text and replace it with whitewash, I'll report you to WP:AN/I, for which you're long due. Dahn (talk) 12:34, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Ethnic groups

Hi. Have you perchance seen the damage here? Moving the template was bad enough (I undid most of the changes in the process, as they were too imaginative to be encyclopedic), but notice that one user has changed the names of all articles in the template. I don't really see why he did that, but should one proceed to change the names in the templates for proper highlights (you know, to have a template entry in bold when in the respective article), or do you think we should have the redirects moved back? Consider History of the Jews in Romania, which now contrasts most other articles of the kind, and which has been lost for the "History of the Jews in Europe" template... Dahn (talk) 11:41, 10 February 2008 (UTC)