Misplaced Pages

Talk:Romania: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 17:17, 13 February 2019 editCristina neagu (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,996 edits →Image spam← Previous edit Latest revision as of 18:40, 13 January 2025 edit undoNapoli0079 (talk | contribs)31 edits →Refining of Romanian History in inital page: ReplyTag: Reply 
(765 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{British English}}
{{Vital article|level=4|topic=Geography|class=B}}
{{article history {{Article history
|action1=FAC|action1date=28 July 2006|action1link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Romania/archive1|action1result=failed|action1oldid=66405337
|action1=FAC
|action2=PR|action2date=14 September 2007|action2link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Romania/archive1|action2result=reviewed|action2oldid=158006373
|action1date=20:18, 28 July 2006
|action3=GAN|action3date=21 September 2007|action3link=Talk:Romania/GA1|action3result=failed|action3oldid=159454419
|action1link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Romania/archive1
|action4=PR|action4date=15 November 2007|action4link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Romania/archive2|action4result=reviewed|action4oldid=172136445
|action1result=failed
|action5=GAN|action5date=22 November 2007|action5link=Talk:Romania/GA2|action5result=failed|action5oldid=173892009
|action1oldid=66405337
|action6=GAN|action6date=26 September 2008|action6link=Talk:Romania/GA3|action6result=failed|action6oldid=241113389

|action7=GAN|action7date=14 February 2009|action7link=Talk:Romania/GA4|action7result=failed|action7oldid=270532080
|action2=PR
|action8=PR|action8date=9 October 2010|action8link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Romania/archive3|action8result=reviewed|action8oldid=389632389
|action2date=23:40, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
|action2link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Romania/archive1 |action9=PR|action9date=12 August 2014|action9link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Romania/archive4|action9result=not reviewed|action9oldid=620981044
|action10=GAN|action10date=14 October 2014|action10link=Talk:Romania/GA5|action10result=failed|action10oldid=629237616
|action2result=reviewed
|action11=GAN|action11date=20 March 2017|action11link=Talk:Romania/GA6|action11result=failed|action11oldid=771241478
|action2oldid=158006373
|action12=GAN|action12date=24 May 2020|action12link=/GA7|action12result=failed

|currentstatus=FGAN|topic=Places
|action3=GAN
|otddate=2011-05-09|otdoldid=428164146|otd2date=2012-05-09|otd2oldid=491507005|otd3date=2013-05-09|otd3oldid=554295259|otd4date=2014-05-09|otd4oldid=607668383|otd5date=2015-05-10|otd5oldid=661689849|otd6date=2016-05-10|otd6oldid=719609623|otd7date=2017-05-10|otd7oldid=779672343
|action3date=21 September 2007
}}
|action3link=Talk:Romania/GA1
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|vital=yes|1=
|action3result=failed
{{WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors|user=Twofingered Typist|date=26 March 2020}}
|action3oldid=159454419
{{WikiProject Countries}}

{{WikiProject Romania|importance=top}}
|action4=PR
{{WikiProject History|importance=Mid}}
|action4date=06:39, 15 November 2007
{{WikiProject Europe|importance=Low}}
|action4link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Romania/archive2
{{WikiProject Eastern Europe|importance=high}}
|action4result=reviewed
|action4oldid=172136445

|action5=GAN
|action5date=22 November 2007
|action5link=Talk:Romania/GA2
|action5result=failed
|action5oldid=173892009

|action6=GAN
|action6date=17:03, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
|action6link=Talk:Romania/GA3
|action6result=failed
|action6oldid=241113389

|action7=GAN
|action7date=17:22, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
|action7link=Talk:Romania/GA4
|action7result=failed
|action7oldid=270532080

|action8=PR
|action8date=04:59, 9 October 2010
|action8link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Romania/archive3
|action8result=reviewed
|action8oldid=389632389

|action9=PR
|action9date=18:16, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
|action9link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Romania/archive4
|action9result=not reviewed
|action9oldid=620981044

|action10=GAN
|action10date=15:58, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
|action10link=Talk:Romania/GA5
|action10result=failed
|action10oldid=629237616

|action11=GAN
|action11date=15:04, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
|action11link=Talk:Romania/GA6
|action11result=failed
|action11oldid=771241478

|currentstatus=
|otddate=2011-05-09
|otdoldid=428164146
|otd2date=2012-05-09
|otd2oldid=491507005
|otd3date=2013-05-09
|otd3oldid=554295259
|otd4date=2014-05-09
|otd4oldid=607668383
|otd5date=2015-05-10
|otd5oldid=661689849
|otd6date=2016-05-10
|otd6oldid=719609623
|topic=Places
}} }}
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
{{WikiProject Countries|class=B|importance=high| b1 =yes| b2 = yes| b3 = yes| b4 = yes| b5 = yes| b6= yes}}
{{WikiProject Romania|class=B|importance=top}}
{{WikiProject Dacia|class=B|importance=Mid
|b1 <!--Referencing & citations--> = yes
|b2 <!--Coverage & accuracy --> = yes
|b3 <!--Structure --> = yes
|b4 <!--Grammar & style --> = yes
|b5 <!--Supporting materials --> = yes}}
{{WikiProject Eastern Europe|class=B|importance=high}}
{{WP1.0|WPCD=yes|v0.5=pass|class=B|category=Geography}}}}
{{Outline of knowledge coverage|Romania}}
{{OnThisDay|date1=2017-05-10|oldid1=779672343}}


{{Archive box| {{Annual readership|days=180}}{{Archive box|
# ] # ]
# ] # ]
# ] # ]
# ] # ]
# ] # ]
# ] # ]
# ] # ]
# ] # ]
# ] # ]
# ] # ]
# ]
* ]
# ]
}}
# ]
* ]|
age=90|
bot=Lowercase sigmabot III}}
{{Archive box|search=yes|auto=long}} {{Archive box|search=yes|auto=long}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav|noredlinks=y}} |archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav|noredlinks=y}}
|maxarchivesize = 100K |maxarchivesize = 100K
|counter = 12 |counter = 15
|minthreadsleft = 5 |minthreadsleft = 5
|algo = old(90d) |algo = old(90d)
|archive = Talk:Romania/Archive %(counter)d |archive = Talk:Romania/Archive %(counter)d
}} }}
{{Contentious topics/talk notice|topic=e-e}}
{{Auto archiving notice|bot=Lowercase sigmabot III |age=90 |small=yes |dounreplied=yes}}
== No source says that ==

== Errors in Romania site ==

I suggest the following two changes, which are in accordance with cited resources and information on other pages of wikipedia. Thank you for editing it!

'Romania is the 12th largest country' → 'Romania is the 12th largest country' OR 'and also the 7th most populous member state of the European Union' → 'and also the 10th most populous member state of Europe'
'forming the Danube Delta, which is the second-largest and best-preserved delta in Europe' → 'forming the Danube Delta, which is the largest and best-preserved delta in Europe'

== A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion ==
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* ]<!-- COMMONSBOT: discussion | 2018-12-26T01:35:51.136363 | Triumphbogen Bukarest.jpg -->
Participate in the deletion discussion at the ]. —] (]) 01:36, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

== Section ''2. History'' ==

For the time being, the section dedicated to the history of Romania is highly unbalanced and contains original research. For instance, the section refers to (unspecified) "migratory peoples" invading the territory (in accordance with the traditional narrative of Romanian historiography) without mentioning that many of the allegedly "migratory peoples" (Carpians, Gepids and Slavs) formed sedentary communities for centuries in the region. Likewise, the article refers to the late 12th-century ]'s report of a late 9th-century Romanian principality in Transylvania, without mentioning that the reliability of the chronicle has been questioned by many historians (including ] and Dennis Deletant). Furthermore, the article describes Transylvania as a "principality" which was a "largely autonomous part of the Kingdom of Hungary" from the 11th century. However, Transylvania did not form an administrative unit in the Kingdom of Hungary. The voivode of Transylvania (who was an appointed royal official, not an autonomous ruler) only administered the Transylvanian counties, but about one-third of the region{{mdash}}the Saxon and Székely seats (districts){{mdash}}were administered by other royal officials. The first elements of autonomy appeared with the ] which granted privileges to significant groups of ] in the 1220s. ] (]) 02:45, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

::This is the article of ], not the article History of Romania. It's general stuff (you will have to present your theory on the History of Romania). Regarding Transylvania you will have indeed to agree with other historians, including Romanian I hope. But notice we must respect eachother and keep opinions agreed by all, and most likely use the universal history! Britannia? Regards, Cristina ] (]) 09:33, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
:::Sorry, I do not understand your above answer. Do you agree that the section contradicts basic WP policies, especially ] and ]? ] (]) 10:48, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

== Ulpia Traiana ==

First of all, we do not need to present all Roman towns. Nevertheless, we could place a picture about Ulpia Traina instead of Potaissa, but we should choose a better one. This picture shows the roofs of modern houses in the background. ] (]) 11:15, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
:I did it, Borsoka! Found another one. I also shortened up the Comperorary and NATO and EU integration sections. But in my opinion the World Wars and Communism are well written. Please have some good breeding and don't touch them. Hungary also has a lot on history, still maybe more. ] (]) 17:45, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
::I think the two sections are still too long. They should be shortened. ] (]) 02:32, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
:::But look at your ]. What if I go there to do the same? It would not be nice and I want respect between us. On Hungary article they are much longer. We have communism + Kadar era, a little bit more than on Romania. Moreover the World Wars part is huge. We have Between the World Wars 1918–1941 + World War II 1941–1945 (on Hungary article). ] (]) 07:43, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
::::Sorry, I do not understand your above remark. I have never stated that you cannot edit other articles. ] (]) 08:19, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
:::::I said Hungary has a lot more info on those history sections than Romania. I compared it. And in my opinion we shouldn't shorten up. Regarding Latin, where do you see Latin on that? It says Romance language, even Britannica agrees. Can you explain me please? ] (]) 08:21, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
:::::::If you do not want to shorten it, why do you write of it? Latin is not a Romance language. ] (]) 08:29, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
::::::::But where do you say LATIN written? You added "dubious" on Romance. ] (]) 08:34, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
:::::::::Do you suggest Romanian is a Romance based creole language without directly inherited Latin words? Could you refer to books substantiate this claim? I know of a hypothesis describing Romanian as the direct descendant of the idiom spoken by Slavic peoples and deliberatelly transformed into a Romance language, but this is a quite marginal view. ] (]) 08:42, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
::::::::::{{ping|Cristina neagu}} could you refer to the relevant WP policy prescribing or proposing that the same piece of information should be repeated twice in the same article and in the same section? Sorry, I do not understand your reference to Hungary. Do you think the skull is connected to Hungarians? Yes, there are Russian scholars who say that the oldest inhabitants of Europe spoke Uralic languages, but this is a quite marginal view. ] (]) 18:13, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
:::::::::::Not at all, I said it's harmless if we also mention the dating year. And if you want you can also add its localisation. You wrote it on first place, and you did it very well. They rarely also read the lines, that why I think it's good to specify. It doesn't matter on which territory it is or would be such remains, I would be totally happy to find out they are the oldest and to go visit them. As tourism and major history part. PS. I am not into theories. Regards ] (]) 18:20, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
::::::::::::OK, I understand you cannot refer to a WP policy. The problem will be sooner or later fixed. ] (]) 23:41, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

== PISA ==

Buna ziua,

PISA a fost introdus abia in 2011 in Romania.

Dar de ce PISA e irelevant cu adevarat? Nnimeni nu stie cum aleg aia scolile in care se organizeaza testul, pe cale de consecinta "rezultatele" sunt irelevante. Procesul nu este 100% transparent e 100% opac. Un exemplu, daca alegerile din Romania s-ar face prin alegerea aleatorie a unor colegii de la tara, din Moldova, ar castiga PSD-ul.

Citez "Testarea internaţională PISA se desfăşoară odată la trei ani şi evaluează nivelul elevilor de 15-16 ani la matematică, ştiinţe şi la înţelegerea textelor. 5.103 elevi români, cu vârste cuprinse între 15 ani şi 16 ani la data testării, din 185 de şcoli au susţinut, în luna aprilie 2015, testarea PISA propriu-zisă."

5000 de elevi de unde si au lucrat aceste teste inainte cum se face in Vest de foarte multi ani? E o bazaconie prin care Vestul sa fie deasupra Estului.

Nu vi se pare o ANTITEZA uriasa? O scoala dezastruoasa conform PISA nu are cum sa ofere an de an performante la olimpiadele de matematica, informatica, fizica sau geografie.

"În toate ţările care participă la PISA 2015, alegerea şcolilor şi a elevilor se realizează de către Consorţiul PISA, cu ajutorul unui software specializat."? Ce anume face programul ala? Care sunt criteriile pe care le ia in calcul? Difera ele de la tara la tara?

PISA este o testare foarte controversata, indusa de UE.

Si nu cred ca accentuarea pe pagina Romania ne este de folos. Se discuta la nivel de minister si la UE. N-are rost sa ne taiem craca singuri, pagina Romaniei are mai mult scop turistic si de informare.

Christina -- message received from ] in my talk page
:Hi. First off, let's speak English, as we're here at the English language edition of this project. We both speak this language and it should be a courtesy to anyone else interested in this article, so they can openly enter the discussion.
:The Misplaced Pages article about Romania, like any other Misplaced Pages article, does not have this purpose. We are bound by ] to cover neutrally all subjects, so it's definitely not a showcase for touristic self-promotion. So I'm hoping you're not suggesting trimming the reality to paint a beautiful, but false or incomplete image.
:I'm not sure how well you're informed about PISA tests: you mention the European Union in relation to them, but I don't see how the EU is involved; this is a project of the OCDE that goes far beyond the EU or Europe. You call them controversial, but they are extensively covered in the press (including the specialty press) and they are called by the Romanian government itself. This warrants a mention, just like we can mention them in any country. Saying they're something that puts the West above the East is really strange, since the top spots usually taken by the Eastern education systems in Japan and Singapore.
:You're asking if that doesn't look like a huge difference. It does, but we're not here to judge that. We generally let ] do that. Anyway, I'm sure you know the answer to that question: the results at the scientific olympiads are not always great, those that are good are usually reported as great, and they're achieved by training in advance already high-performing students from good schools; something that can't be done with PISA tests, that selects students at random, without human intervention, to give a generic sample. That's why they're worth mentioning as a counterpart of that: we're trying to paint the whole picture. We can expand on that in different articles. ] (]) 11:43, 23 January 2019 (UTC)


::Svend Kreiner, a statistician from the ] in ] thinks the study is not reliable at all. He argued that although it is possible to find a task in which Denmark does significantly better than ] for example and another task that Denmark does worse than England the tests were still a valid way to compare performance.

::] wrote: "Pisa does present the uncertainty in the scores and ranks - for example the UK rank in the 65 countries is said to be between 23 and 31. It's unwise for countries to base education policy on their Pisa results, as ], ] and Denmark did after doing badly in 2001."

::It's a very controversial study, actually both PISA and OECD are. I can find dozens of articles against them. In my opinion we should solve the problem, by not mention them here (because it's the page of Romania) and if you can re-add them on ] but we must add they are controversial.

::Or the statisticians are not more important than our opinions? They don't even know how many pupils are tested, 4000 or 5000, from where. And each one is tested differently.

::Don't you think from such a score to Olympiad medals is too bigger step?

::] (]) 11:47, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
:::OK, if PISA and the OCDE are controversial, we can mention that in relevant articles. But they are both highly relevant. We're not going to remove them just for that.] (]) 11:51, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
:::Yes, ] and policymakers are more important to writing this article than our opinion.] (]) 11:51, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

::::According to ], PISA selects a sample that "represents the full population of 15-year-old students in each participating country or education system." What this means in practice is the ability of some education administrators choosing their top-performing students from smaller samples in cities or city-states such as Chinese Taipei, Macao, Hong Kong and Singapore. While most of the other results came from a sample of scores around nations, '''some countries such as Argentina and China were allowed to take their sample from their most educated cities or regions.'''


{{re|Vellutis}} Which ] says 14.3% irreligion?
::::I don't see how PISA and OECD are relevant. It's like wrong and non-transparent survey. Most of the countries on Misplaced Pages didn't publish such a thing on main article, and even Education pages.


You wrote {{tqred|When evaluating religious beliefs based on the tablets used by recensors in 2021, unanswered or missing data was not considered indicative of any specific religious belief.}} ... and "any specific religious belief" includes irreligion.
::::WHY DON'T YOU MENTION THEM ONLY IN THE ]? To be fair.


Let me tell it as it is: for about 4% there is absolutely no data about their religious beliefs, so we can never claim they are irreligious. The rest of about 9% refused to answer. We ''may guess'' they are (most of them) irreligious, however ''no ] says that.'' ] (]) 14:25, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
::::] (]) 11:53, 21 January 2019 (UTC)


== GA review request ==
===] & OECD and Pisa tests are damaging education worldwide - academics===
Administered every three years, Pisa results are anxiously awaited by governments, education ministers, and the editorial boards of newspapers, and are cited authoritatively in countless policy reports. They have begun to deeply influence educational practices in many countries. As a result of Pisa, countries are overhauling their education systems in the hopes of improving their rankings. Lack of progress on Pisa has led to declarations of crisis and "Pisa shock" in many countries, followed by calls for resignations, and far-reaching reforms according to Pisa precepts.


I am sorry to say nominators must have contributed significantly to the article and be familiar with its subject and cited sources. Nor is the article in its current state going to pass a review. {{@|Vellutis}} I suggest you get some more experience under your belt..... both with editing and the GA criteria. Pls see ] to get an idea of what is expected of a country article .....and ] for the basics of what's expected in a GA article. Please reach out to me if you have any questions. <span style="font-weight:bold;color:darkblue">]</span>🍁 01:00, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
We are frankly concerned about the negative consequences of the Pisa rankings. For example, in the US, Pisa has been invoked as a major justification for the recent "Race to the Top" programme, which has increased the use of standardised testing for student-, teacher-, and administrator evaluations, which rank and label students, as well as teachers and administrators according to the results of tests widely known to be imperfect.


:Thanks for your feedback. If I have any questions along the way, I'll be sure to reach out. Thanks again for your guidance. ] (]) 12:25, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
In education policy, Pisa, with its three-year assessment cycle, has caused a shift of attention to short-term fixes designed to help a country quickly climb the rankings, despite research showing that enduring changes in education practice take decades, not a few years, to come to fruition.


== Semi-protected edit request on 12 December 2024 ==


{{Edit semi-protected|Romania|answered=yes}}
] (]) 12:05, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
In the interest of keeping wikipedia unbiased, accuracy and avoiding false information please include in the intro the following: " Romania is a country under the neo-marxist influence, where every election cycle since 1989 to date human rights and democracy have been infringed upon with blatant disregard of Romanian people explicit vote" this is based on current evolution of the subject and can be verified from multiple sources. ] (]) 20:57, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
:{{not done}}:<!-- Template:ESp --> We don't accept ]. ] <big>(]</big> · <small>])</small> 22:26, 12 December 2024 (UTC)


== Have Iohannis removed as president from the page ==
== Origin of words ==


His tenure is constitutionally over. Put Ciuca (who is president of the Senate) as interim president. ] (]) 22:06, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
I do agree, Borsoka, it's not from Latin. Although Romance comes from Vulgar Latin, we talk about "elements of Romance". Over 20% are French words, around 5% are Italian, only the rest. Do you mind keeping the table? It's well documented. And usually we don't go to Hungary to rewrite your page and history. If you would have been fair, you should have only erased the Latin "word". Not hiding the truth of universal grammar conventions. I think we can still prove we are respectful. ] (]) 14:51, 21 January 2019 (UTC)


:Please respond us, Borsoka, Rosenborg also doesn't understand! Where we are wrong and if we are against the universal conventions. If the words are not elements of Romance, from where do they come? Is the table rigged? ] (]) 15:14, 21 January 2019 (UTC) :There would need to be a reliable source indicating that Ciuca is officially interim president and that Iohannis is not actually still holding power. A quick search on Google reveals power has not changed hands. ] (]) 00:48, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
::::I have several times explained it. Latin is not a Romance language. Inherited Latin words cannot be mixed with Romance loanwords. ] (]) 15:17, 24 January 2019 (UTC) ::Then at least put "Vacant" at the president. Iohannis is no longer legally president. ] (]) 12:14, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
:::His mandate has been extended, the office is not Vacant. ] (]) 12:36, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::{{ping|Cristina neagu}}, I have never asked you to edit pages dedicated to Hungary or Hungarian history. If you do not want to edit those pages, it is your choice. Please, concentrate on issues relating to this specific article on this specific Talk page. ] (]) 15:19, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
::::The mandate cannot be extended unless it's a war or declared emergency state. None of these are applicable.
::::::I understand now. Do you agree for a photo of ]? Our "universal" brothers at least? ] (]) 15:21, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
::::The mandate expired yesterday.
::::::::Why not? ] (]) 15:25, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
::::The position is Vacant. ] (]) 16:27, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::Misplaced Pages does not work that way. You have to ] ] for your claims. ] (]) 18:27, 22 December 2024 (UTC)


== Semi-protected edit request on 8 January 2025 ==
== Uncivility ==


{{edit semi-protected|Romania|answered=y}}
{{ping|Cristina neagu}}, your constant reference to my ethnicity is highly uncivil. Please edit the article in accordance with basic WP policies (WP:NOR, WP:NPOV), because there is no specific WP policy dedicated to the "sensitivity of your Hungarian friends." ] (]) 15:24, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
:I do apologise, you haven't explained very well and you made jokes with childless Trajan. :)) To be honest, I am only giving you credit for it partially but I said to satisfy you. And I will replace it with a photo of the Romance languages. Hoping it's fine for you. Universal history is via convention, even though we many not like things. Then regarding the Misplaced Pages policy, it's slightly different than the universal history of Britannia. :D ] (]) 15:33, 16 January 2019 (UTC)


#Have some organisation with the timelines of the formation of the state! Look how neat it is on Hungary's Misplaced Pages page, with their predecessor states and key historical changes! Take some inspiration! This is how the Formation of Romania should be set out.
== History: subdivisions ==


Historical Romanian Principalities:
I consider a rigorous separation of Antiquity into subdivisions as extremely important in the case of Romania, because of the generally poor knowledge of Romanian history both in the country and outside of it, and the very widespread tendency in Romania to mistakenly amalgamate the history of Romania as a territory, with that of modern-day Romanians as an ethnic group. The diversity of ethnicity and cultural identity among the predecessors of the Romanians in what is now Romania is regularly obscured by nationalistic claims of cultural continuity going back all the way to Stone Age cultures. Most Romanians leave school with kind of a goulash (no Hungarian pun intended) of thoughts regarding anything older than the Dacians and Romans.


- Principality of Wallachia - 1330
There are of course problems in defining the periods - prehistory only ends with the arrival of the literate Greeks, but the populations they encounter are at very different stages of cultural development; people who have studied history and archaeology should figure out the boundaries between Stone, Eneolithic/Chalcolithic, Bronze, and Iron Age and Classical Antiquity, after first checking if they all apply to the territory of modern Romania.


- Principality of Moldavia - 1359
The separate WP articles dealing with the ] and distinct periods in the history of Romania, specifically ], are not accurately subdivided either. If they were, one could arguably be more casual here in the article about Romania after indicating the proper links. So the job of indicating the historical periods needs to be done in coordination between these two levels. ] (]) 08:06, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
:::Could you refer to specific WP policies prescring that 2-6 sentences should be grouped into separate sections? Sorry, I must ignore your above remarks, because they present your own thoughts about the teaching of history in Romania. Nevertheless, you are free to create an article dedicated to the Prehistoric age in Romania, because it is missing. ] (]) 08:13, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
{{ping|Borsoka}} Logic didn't start with Misplaced Pages. Even here, tools such as red links are used in order to indicate to the user that some relevant information is missing (users can then look it up somewhere else), and encourage editors to supply it. Once you create the proper frame, by using headings and sometimes red links, the content will follow; that's one aspect on how WP works. The fact that now an important topic is dealt with in just a few lines, doesn't prove it should be further devalued by leaving it hidden in a vague umbrella-paragraph. Inviting me to write an article about Prehistoric age in Romania, a hugely interesting topic not least in the context of the Danubian culture and overall propagation of humanity and different cultures into Europe, is either flattering (I'm not a historian, and I don't have the time to patch it together from sources), or plain rhetorical: the fact that I won't write it doesn't in any way make it less necessary. ] (]) 09:02, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
::This article is not dedicated to the history of Romania, but to Romania. We do not need to explain all small details of the history of the country, because there is a separate article dedicated to it. For instance, the section dedicated to the Geography of Romania is not (and should not) be divided into sub-sections dedicated to the mountains, sub-subsections about each mountain range and sub-sub-subsections for each peak. ] (]) 09:12, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
OK, bye.] (]) 09:22, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
::I returned to the original version. ], which is a good article, applies the same approach. We do not need to keep a separate section for 5-6 sentences. ] (]) 02:03, 28 January 2019 (UTC)


Little Union - 24 January 1859
== Location ==


Independent Kingdom - 25 March 1881
Christina,


Great Union - 1 December 1918
it is hard to discuss sometimes in the edit logs, thus I would reply here. The corresponding articles I referred describe the history, evolution & other concerns based on geographical locations of countries, also regarding what is official, what is geographical, what is by view (if there are more etc.).


Socialist Republic - 30 December 1947
I don't think I said anything wrong, because:


Romanian Revolution - 16-30 December 1989
- I did not told/refer to anything about what would happen if from Iceland to the Ural mountains we mathemamatically would split Europe into three


#The principalities should be listed under the subtile "Historical Romanian Principalities" due to the fact that the next event (Little Union) is a unification between the two principalities to form the modern Romanian state.
- I never said Transylvania would not be (or had been as formerly part of Hungary) considered part of Central-Europe, I acknowledged that some parts of today's Romania are nominally not Eastern Europe
#The Romanian Revolution is a more noteworthy event since not only did it directly lead to the current constitution but it is still widely referenced in modern Romanian society today and is of unique significance since it was the only violent revolution to bring down a communist government in the Easter Bloc. ] (]) 19:28, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
:{{not done for now}}:<!-- Template:ESp --> {{u|Napoli0079}} I'm closing this request simply because your suggestion would be a fairly significant overhaul of the article's History section and is unlikely to be acted upon by editors patrolling edit requests (and who may or may not be, but likely aren't, subject experts on Romania). I would recommend one of two approaches: either edit a few more times using your current account so you become ] and can edit this semiprotected article, then ] begin implementing your changes (making sure to hew closely to how ] approach the structure of the nation's history), or enter into a discussion on this talk page regarding your proposed changes in order to come to a ] with other editors about what changes should be made. Alternatively, you can open new edit requests, but I would recommend individual, smaller suggestions using a "Change X to Y" format and using reliable sources for your proposed changes. ] (]) 15:54, 9 January 2025 (UTC)


== But I don't think I ==
- comparison with present-day Hungary is irrelevant, anyway in the Central European region based on the old Communist Iron Curtain still politicians mistakenly confuse the term so "Central-Eastern Europe" vs. "Eastern-Central-Europe", or even using Eastern-Europe, though the Americans are not mistaking such mostly as a surprise, so we should not overargue this question, as well some countries are in complex situation having their territories in the meeting or regions. Romania as before is still counted as an Eastern-European country, and there is nothing dehonestating in this, despite the territorial changes in the past century, by having mostly her territory in theis region, also by tradition, time zone, etc. (Balkan issues are always complex if you mentioned it, part of the southern territories belong there, but Romania is not treated as "Balkan country", who said it? Btw, during the midst of the last century the "Southeastern-Europe" denomination was common even including more western or nothern regions, but they became already outdated, recently I noticed a some debate on Croatia's proper classification)


Going to be in the office tomorrow so I can do it <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 13:54, 12 January 2025 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Cheers.(] (]) 20:55, 4 February 2019 (UTC))


== Refining of Romanian History in inital page ==
:Hi! It wasn't really my edit, I just also said my opinion. As you saw, I didn't even edit anything. But for me Hungary and Romania are also Central European countries. Half of Hungary and Romania are really in the heart of Europe. Bulgaria is like South. Some agree, some argue. Although in the case of "Romania being Balkan", many professors started to disagree. What's a PENINSULA? It must be a land extension bordered by 3 waters (1-Adriatic, 2-Aegean, 3-Black Sea, 1-2-3). That's why we can say Romania is only Carpathian. That small access to the Black Sea is made up by 2 counties. They must start knowning geography because they don't live anymore with the former Eastern Bloc. I am no guru, rarely pushing for my edits (1 vote in democracy). Invite him to discuss here if he wants. There is no shame we are both still included in East, at all (like some would think), just that we should start a little bit promoting our values. Regards, ] (]) 21:14, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
::Of course I know it was not your edit, but you mentioned me thus I reacted here, without any "invitation" any user may express any opinion. I agree that among many circles there are still huge problems regarding proper designations of countries regarding geography, but in this case (as EE) there is not any real flaw if we consider the evidence presented (and regarding the edit case it cannot be exluded). Regards(] (]) 23:44, 4 February 2019 (UTC))


May I understand why people are opposing my edits, I know they're bold, but they're all correct and true and unbiased and can also be backed up with historical sources. Let me explain,
== Image spam ==
- Climate in initial paragraph is archaic and isn't distinct (Even the Greek page doesn't mention climate in the opening paragraph)
- The cities after Bucharest in the opening paragraph are the next four more POPULOUS so therefore are naturally more significant, I don't know who ordered them like they are now but it's always been unsatisfactory to me.
- It feels putrid to undermine Romanian History like they do on this Misplaced Pages page, starting from 1859, really? Every country in Europe entails a brief history from the Middle Ages to the present, having Romania start from 1859 when it had not one but TWO medieval predecessors is shocking... and shows a lack of disrespect to the country, I feel my wording illustrates a better summary of it.
- The formation page should also be changed, it's just sloppy, having independence listed from the Ottomans then immediately 4 years later a constitutional monarchy established is redundant, also the Romanian Revolution far outweighs any other event in modern Romanian history and DIRECTLY leads to the Constitution, so that should also be implemented.


Tell me how I'm wrong, because I've read the wikipedia criteria and all my edits abide by it. ] (]) 17:57, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
We seem to have a little ] problem causing some ] and full of unsourced stamtment to one section. Perhaps best to talk about what images to keep so we can follow our Mos on images and policy of verifiability. Though it best to bring up here as there seems to be a lot
of editwaring in this article as of late.--] (]) 16:14, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
:First of all, hello! Secondly there is no editwaring, we made a mistake regarding some stats of economics. Regarding your edits, you are not welcomed on the page of Romania since you are bringing up justice on Misplaced Pages like you are the only user on Misplaced Pages! REALLY SPAM? When other "countries" have several these kind of galleries. This part of the Romanian '''ethnogenesis''' was established by me, Borsoka and Rosenborg Fan. First came the Hungarians who removed parts of our history in order not to be offensive to anyone, secondly you are coming and you are deleting everything. I will probably choose the most important images, because you know nothing about Romania since you are a Canadian trapper. I am just hoping you don't have other users on this page. In rest, you will get respect if you are offering one! Could have discussed first here. ] (]) 15:16, 12 February 2019 (UTC)


:My main concern is the huge history addition to the lead ,,,this is not a history of article. See ] or ] to see how much history is in the lead see also ]. <span style="display:inline-flex;rotate:-15deg;color:darkblue">''']'''</span><span style="display:inline-flex;rotate:15deg;color:darkblue">]</span> 18:37, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
<center>
::Ok I'll trim it down a little. ] (]) 18:40, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
<gallery>
File:Oase 2 skull (Homo sapiens).jpg|alt=A partially reconstructed skull|Skull from the "]" (the oldest known remain of ''Homo sapiens'' in Europe).
File:SoborulZeitelorCucuteni.JPG|alt=Clay figurine of a sitting woman|thumb|"Goddess" (an anthropomorphic clay figurine of the ].
File:Dacia 82 vChr.png|thumb|The territorial extent of the Kingdom of Dacia during ]'s reign ({{circa}} 40s BC.)
File:Sarmizegetusa Regia.JPG|alt=Remains of circular buildings in a glade|thumb|Ruins of sanctuaries at ] (Dacia's capital during the reigns of ] and ]).
File:Decebal's portrait.png|alt=A bearded man wearing a cap|thumb|left|], the last of the Dacian kings. He concluded a peace treaty with the ] in the wake of the ].
File:094 Conrad Cichorius, Die Reliefs der Traianssäule, Tafel XCIV.jpg|Roman soldiers salute ] during the ] (the war marked the downfall of the Dacian Kingdom).
File:Roman soldiers fighting against Dacians, battle scene in shallow depth with horses and horn-players (after a bas-relief on the Arch of Constantine, Rome) MET DP827716.jpg|thumb|left|Roman soldiers fighting Dacians, depiction based on a bas-relief from the ] in Rome
File:UlpiaTraianaSarmizegetusa.jpg|alt=Aerial view of the ruins of a circular building made of stones|Ruins of the ] at ] (the capital of Roman Dacia).
File:Castra Potaissa-5.jpg|alt=Ruins of a building made of stones and bricks|Roman baths at ] (a Roman '']'' in Dacia)
File:Celtic Helmet from Satu Mare, Romania.jpg|] helmet from ], near ], northwestern Transylvania
File:Dinogetia Crucifix Byzantine art.JPG|alt=A golden cross decorated with four large gems, depicting Jesus|A 4th-century pectoral cross from ] (a Roman town in Scythia Minor).
File:DonariumBiertan.JPG|The 4th-century ] from Biertan, southern Transylvania
</gallery>
</center>

Latest revision as of 18:40, 13 January 2025

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Former good article nomineeRomania was a Geography and places good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 28, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
September 14, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
September 21, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
November 15, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
November 22, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
September 26, 2008Good article nomineeNot listed
February 14, 2009Good article nomineeNot listed
October 9, 2010Peer reviewReviewed
August 12, 2014Peer reviewNot reviewed
October 14, 2014Good article nomineeNot listed
March 20, 2017Good article nomineeNot listed
May 24, 2020Good article nomineeNot listed
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on May 9, 2011, May 9, 2012, May 9, 2013, May 9, 2014, May 10, 2015, May 10, 2016, and May 10, 2017.
Current status: Former good article nominee
This  level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconGuild of Copy Editors
WikiProject iconThis article was copy edited by Twofingered Typist, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 26 March 2020.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors
WikiProject iconCountries
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of countries on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CountriesWikipedia:WikiProject CountriesTemplate:WikiProject Countriescountry
WikiProject Countries to-do list:

 Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
WikiProject iconRomania Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Romania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Romania-related topics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RomaniaWikipedia:WikiProject RomaniaTemplate:WikiProject RomaniaRomania
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
To-do list:

 Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
WikiProject iconHistory Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconEurope Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Europe, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to European topics of a cross-border nature on Misplaced Pages.EuropeWikipedia:WikiProject EuropeTemplate:WikiProject EuropeEurope
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconEastern Europe (inactive)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Eastern Europe, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Eastern EuropeWikipedia:WikiProject Eastern EuropeTemplate:WikiProject Eastern EuropeEastern Europe
Archiving icon
Archives
  1. through Jan 2005
  2. Apr 2005 - Aug 2005
  3. Jun 2005 - Jun 2006
  4. Jun 2006 - Oct 2006
  5. Oct 2006 - Apr 2007
  6. Apr 2007 - Oct 2007
  7. Reviews (FA,GA,peer)
  8. Oct 2007 - Jan 2008
  9. Jan 2008 - Jun 2008
  10. Jun 2008 – Mar 2010
  11. Mar 2010 - May 2017
  12. Jul 2017 - Apr 2019
  13. Jul 2019 -

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.
Archiving icon
Archives
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3
Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6
Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9
Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12
Archive 13Archive 14Archive 15

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

No source says that

@Vellutis: Which WP:RS says 14.3% irreligion?

You wrote When evaluating religious beliefs based on the tablets used by recensors in 2021, unanswered or missing data was not considered indicative of any specific religious belief. ... and "any specific religious belief" includes irreligion.

Let me tell it as it is: for about 4% there is absolutely no data about their religious beliefs, so we can never claim they are irreligious. The rest of about 9% refused to answer. We may guess they are (most of them) irreligious, however no WP:RS says that. tgeorgescu (talk) 14:25, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

GA review request

I am sorry to say nominators must have contributed significantly to the article and be familiar with its subject and cited sources. Nor is the article in its current state going to pass a review. Vellutis@ I suggest you get some more experience under your belt..... both with editing and the GA criteria. Pls see Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Countries#Structure and guidelines to get an idea of what is expected of a country article .....and Misplaced Pages:Good article criteria for the basics of what's expected in a GA article. Please reach out to me if you have any questions. Moxy🍁 01:00, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback. If I have any questions along the way, I'll be sure to reach out. Thanks again for your guidance. Vellutis (talk) 12:25, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 December 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In the interest of keeping wikipedia unbiased, accuracy and avoiding false information please include in the intro the following: " Romania is a country under the neo-marxist influence, where every election cycle since 1989 to date human rights and democracy have been infringed upon with blatant disregard of Romanian people explicit vote" this is based on current evolution of the subject and can be verified from multiple sources. Bdragomir (talk) 20:57, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: We don't accept opinions. Myrealnamm (💬Let's talk · 📜My work) 22:26, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Have Iohannis removed as president from the page

His tenure is constitutionally over. Put Ciuca (who is president of the Senate) as interim president. CartofulMaro (talk) 22:06, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

There would need to be a reliable source indicating that Ciuca is officially interim president and that Iohannis is not actually still holding power. A quick search on Google reveals power has not changed hands. Axedel (talk) 00:48, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Then at least put "Vacant" at the president. Iohannis is no longer legally president. CartofulMaro (talk) 12:14, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
His mandate has been extended, the office is not Vacant. CMD (talk) 12:36, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
The mandate cannot be extended unless it's a war or declared emergency state. None of these are applicable.
The mandate expired yesterday.
The position is Vacant. 170.52.81.244 (talk) 16:27, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages does not work that way. You have to WP:CITE WP:RS for your claims. tgeorgescu (talk) 18:27, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 January 2025

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
  1. Have some organisation with the timelines of the formation of the state! Look how neat it is on Hungary's Misplaced Pages page, with their predecessor states and key historical changes! Take some inspiration! This is how the Formation of Romania should be set out.

Historical Romanian Principalities:

- Principality of Wallachia - 1330

- Principality of Moldavia - 1359

Little Union - 24 January 1859

Independent Kingdom - 25 March 1881

Great Union - 1 December 1918

Socialist Republic - 30 December 1947

Romanian Revolution - 16-30 December 1989

  1. The principalities should be listed under the subtile "Historical Romanian Principalities" due to the fact that the next event (Little Union) is a unification between the two principalities to form the modern Romanian state.
  2. The Romanian Revolution is a more noteworthy event since not only did it directly lead to the current constitution but it is still widely referenced in modern Romanian society today and is of unique significance since it was the only violent revolution to bring down a communist government in the Easter Bloc. Napoli0079 (talk) 19:28, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Not done for now: Napoli0079 I'm closing this request simply because your suggestion would be a fairly significant overhaul of the article's History section and is unlikely to be acted upon by editors patrolling edit requests (and who may or may not be, but likely aren't, subject experts on Romania). I would recommend one of two approaches: either edit a few more times using your current account so you become autoconfirmed and can edit this semiprotected article, then boldly begin implementing your changes (making sure to hew closely to how reliable sources approach the structure of the nation's history), or enter into a discussion on this talk page regarding your proposed changes in order to come to a consensus with other editors about what changes should be made. Alternatively, you can open new edit requests, but I would recommend individual, smaller suggestions using a "Change X to Y" format and using reliable sources for your proposed changes. DrOrinScrivello (talk) 15:54, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

But I don't think I

Going to be in the office tomorrow so I can do it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.55.184.206 (talk) 13:54, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Refining of Romanian History in inital page

May I understand why people are opposing my edits, I know they're bold, but they're all correct and true and unbiased and can also be backed up with historical sources. Let me explain, - Climate in initial paragraph is archaic and isn't distinct (Even the Greek page doesn't mention climate in the opening paragraph) - The cities after Bucharest in the opening paragraph are the next four more POPULOUS so therefore are naturally more significant, I don't know who ordered them like they are now but it's always been unsatisfactory to me. - It feels putrid to undermine Romanian History like they do on this Misplaced Pages page, starting from 1859, really? Every country in Europe entails a brief history from the Middle Ages to the present, having Romania start from 1859 when it had not one but TWO medieval predecessors is shocking... and shows a lack of disrespect to the country, I feel my wording illustrates a better summary of it. - The formation page should also be changed, it's just sloppy, having independence listed from the Ottomans then immediately 4 years later a constitutional monarchy established is redundant, also the Romanian Revolution far outweighs any other event in modern Romanian history and DIRECTLY leads to the Constitution, so that should also be implemented.

Tell me how I'm wrong, because I've read the wikipedia criteria and all my edits abide by it. Napoli0079 (talk) 17:57, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

My main concern is the huge history addition to the lead ,,,this is not a history of article. See Canada or Japan to see how much history is in the lead see also WP:COUNTRYLEAD. Moxy🍁 18:37, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
Ok I'll trim it down a little. Napoli0079 (talk) 18:40, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
Categories: