| Revision as of 01:52, 30 October 2018 editTgeorgescu (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users55,045 edits →Dan Alexe: being gauche?← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:54, 30 October 2018 edit undoIovaniorgovan (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users688 edits →Dan AlexeTag: Visual edit: SwitchedNext edit → | ||
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
| Quoted by ] (]) 14:40, 29 October 2018 (UTC) | Quoted by ] (]) 14:40, 29 October 2018 (UTC) | ||
| ::] is a blogger, journalist and filmmaker, NOT a historian (as you can see even in his wiki entry). Whether his book was published by a "prestigious" publishing house is irrelevant since he's not a professional historian/academic. Furthermore, if his view is "in conformity with serious Romanian historians" then the views of those "serious Romanian historians" should suffice. We don't need a quote for every joe who has an opinion on the subject. Lastly, Densusianu's views have NOT been rejected by ALL major historians-- case in point, ] (his last |
::] is a blogger, journalist and filmmaker, NOT a historian (as you can see even in his wiki entry). Whether his book was published by a "prestigious" publishing house is irrelevant since he's not a professional historian/academic. Furthermore, if his view is "in conformity with serious Romanian historians" then the views of those "serious Romanian historians" should suffice. We don't need a quote for every joe who has an opinion on the subject. Lastly, Densusianu's views have NOT been rejected by ALL major historians-- case in point, ] (his last works), or Conf. Univ. Dr. Gheorghe D. Iscru (actual academics/historians). If we allow a blogger's views into this article then we surely must present opposite views by actual academics.] (]) 00:04, 30 October 2018 (UTC) | ||
| :::Been there, done that: Iscru is a ], therefore Iscru is ], while Alexe has expressed ] scholarly views. Let Parvan speak: "his fantastic novel Dacia preistorică, crammed with absurd mythology and absurd philology, which since its publication arose an unbounded admiration and enthusiasm among the Romanian archaeology dilettantes". Alexandru D. Xenopol: "The theory of this author that Dacians would have coagulated the first civilization of the humankind shows that we deal with a product of chauvinism, not a product of science". Source: Mircea Babeș, "Renașterea Daciei?", ''Observatorul Cultural'', 9 September 2003 |
:::Been there, done that: Iscru is a ], therefore Iscru is ], while Alexe has expressed ] scholarly views. Let Parvan speak: "his fantastic novel Dacia preistorică, crammed with absurd mythology and absurd philology, which since its publication arose an unbounded admiration and enthusiasm among the Romanian archaeology dilettantes". Alexandru D. Xenopol: "The theory of this author that Dacians would have coagulated the first civilization of the humankind shows that we deal with a product of chauvinism, not a product of science". Source: Mircea Babeș, "Renașterea Daciei?", ''Observatorul Cultural'', 9 September 2003. ] (]) 01:37, 30 October 2018 (UTC) | ||
| ::::We've already had this discussion on another article (]) so it's useless to go over it again. '''As you should well know''', Parvan changed his mind about Densusianu towards the end of his life (which is why I said Parvan's '''last works'''). Anyway, Parvan or Iscru are irrelevant to the inclusion of Alexe in this article (Iscru is not even mentioned in the article and, since we have a quote from early Parvan I'll make sure to add some later ones too, for balance). I only mentioned them to illustrate the ridiculousness of including a quote from this individual. '''THE POINT IS''': Dan Alexe is '''NOT''' an expert and his opinion is irrelevant to this article, as he's not ]. Does Dan Alexe teach history at a University? Where? Has he published any academic work on the subject? Name them. To boot, we already have ] opinions of actual historians in this article, all along the same lines, so why do we also need a blogger's opinion on this? That's redundant at best. If you can't answer those questions then these edits will be removed from the article. Feel free to ask for a third opinion, etc.] (]) 01:54, 30 October 2018 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 01:54, 30 October 2018
 | The Conquest of the Italian Peninsula by the Carpatho - Danubians was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 08 October 2010 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Nicolae Densușianu. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
 | This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Alexe
Dan Alexe's work has been published by the prestigious Romanian publishing house Humanitas. It is therefore WP:RS. The statement is attributed to its author, it is not stated in the voice of Misplaced Pages. But this being said, it is in perfect conformity with all serious Romanian historians who have read Densușianu's Dacia preistorica: endorsement of his work by a serious historian is seen as a symptom of Alzheimer's disease. All major Romanian historians from the past 100 years have rejected that work as fanciful pseudohistory and internationally he is no longer read, so forget about being taken seriously. This is Misplaced Pages: according to WP:ARBPS we don't do WP:GEVAL (see principle 16 of the final decision). So WP:PARITY does apply and Alexe and Ciurtin are perfectly to the point. This is a WP:FRINGE/PS article since Densușianu has a following in Romania only among nationalist wackos: serious nationalist intellectuals consider his work an embarrassment. There were luminaries of Romanian historiography, who were nationalists and found his book appalling. Example: he has stated that Orăștie is the place where lies buried Orestes. How does he know? Well, they sound similarly (which is a symptom of delirium, Alexe's claim is not rocket science). Other examples: "Atlas=Alutus=Olt=Muntii Oltului; Pharanx=Paring; Colchis=Colti (Buzau); Phasis=Buzau; Terrigenae=Tirighina; Ardalos=Ardeal; Zalmoxis=Zeul Mos; Latona=Letea; Selene=Sulina; Saturn-Noe-Novac etc. etc." (Mircea Babeș, ). Tgeorgescu (talk) 14:25, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
pe de altă parte, iubirea de adevăr se opune și mă împiedică a lăuda lucruri pe care dreapta judecată mă îndeamnă să le critic. Cred că este mai bine pentru țară să fie puse deschis sub ochii locuitorilor ei mulțimea de păcate pe care le au decât să se lase înșelați prin lingușiri amăgitoare și prin dezvinovățiri iscusite, și astfel să fie încredințați că tot ce fac ei fac bine, în vreme ce toată lumea care are moravuri mai ales critică asemenea purtări.
— Dimitrie Cantemir,
English speakers, use Google Translate to get an idea what it says. Never mind, here is the translation:
on the other hand, the love of truth opposes and prevents me from praising things the right judgment urges me to criticize. I think it is better for the country to be openly opened, under the eyes of its inhabitants, the multitude of sins they have but to be deceived through deluded complaints and skillful misunderstandings, and so be confident that whatever they do they do well, while everyone who has morals especially criticizes such behavior.
Quoted by Tgeorgescu (talk) 14:40, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
- Dan Alexe is a blogger, journalist and filmmaker, NOT a historian (as you can see even in his wiki entry). Whether his book was published by a "prestigious" publishing house is irrelevant since he's not a professional historian/academic. Furthermore, if his view is "in conformity with serious Romanian historians" then the views of those "serious Romanian historians" should suffice. We don't need a quote for every joe who has an opinion on the subject. Lastly, Densusianu's views have NOT been rejected by ALL major historians-- case in point, Vasile Parvan (his last works), or Conf. Univ. Dr. Gheorghe D. Iscru (actual academics/historians). If we allow a blogger's views into this article then we surely must present opposite views by actual academics.Iovaniorgovan (talk) 00:04, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
- Been there, done that: Iscru is a Protochronist, therefore Iscru is WP:FRINGE/PS, while Alexe has expressed WP:MAINSTREAM scholarly views. Let Parvan speak: "his fantastic novel Dacia preistorică, crammed with absurd mythology and absurd philology, which since its publication arose an unbounded admiration and enthusiasm among the Romanian archaeology dilettantes". Alexandru D. Xenopol: "The theory of this author that Dacians would have coagulated the first civilization of the humankind shows that we deal with a product of chauvinism, not a product of science". Source: Mircea Babeș, "Renașterea Daciei?", Observatorul Cultural, 9 September 2003. Tgeorgescu (talk) 01:37, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
- We've already had this discussion on another article (Origin of the Romanians) so it's useless to go over it again. As you should well know, Parvan changed his mind about Densusianu towards the end of his life (which is why I said Parvan's last works). Anyway, Parvan or Iscru are irrelevant to the inclusion of Alexe in this article (Iscru is not even mentioned in the article and, since we have a quote from early Parvan I'll make sure to add some later ones too, for balance). I only mentioned them to illustrate the ridiculousness of including a quote from this individual. THE POINT IS: Dan Alexe is NOT an expert and his opinion is irrelevant to this article, as he's not WP:RS. Does Dan Alexe teach history at a University? Where? Has he published any academic work on the subject? Name them. To boot, we already have WP:RS opinions of actual historians in this article, all along the same lines, so why do we also need a blogger's opinion on this? That's redundant at best. If you can't answer those questions then these edits will be removed from the article. Feel free to ask for a third opinion, etc.Iovaniorgovan (talk) 01:54, 30 October 2018 (UTC)