Talk:Паӂина принчипалэ/Архивэ2
Де ла Википедия ын лимба молдовеняскэ
[edit] Română/Moldovenească
First of all, this is not your Wikipedia. You can't do whatever you like with it and then go under the shell of saying "this is our Wikipedia, we're the only authority here" and then by extension saying "we don't care if we're wrong, go away". Well, you have no right to make me go away. I've done nothing wrong here, and I have as much right as you to edit this Wikipedia. Even if I'm Romanian, even if I'm Botswanan, for that matter. I wouldn't be able to add stupid things to ro.wiki and then defend them by saying that, as a non-member of the ro.wiki community, you have no right to a say. How would it be if I were to add a link to Moldovan from ro.wiki, on the main page and call that "Moldoveneasca comunistă". Would you agree to that? And would I then have the right to say "go away, don't disagree, this is our wiki, we call other language wikipedias however we like".
- If you do that, and the community supports it, I do not object.
Secondly, about the actual issue: you can't link to the Romanian Wikipedia and call that link "Moldovan Wikipedia in Latin". And, in the interwiki links at the bottom of main page, the link shouldn't be to Moldovan/Romanian in Latin but simply to "Romanian". That's what ro.wiki stands for, everyone calls it the Romanian Wikipedia and you must use the local name of the Wikipedia, which is "Română", as used by every other wiki. In brackets, in your Moldovan Cyrillic script, you can then add captions, such as [in Cyrillic] "Română (Latin)". But not Moldovan/Romanian (Latin) because the ro.wiki DOES NOT cater to those speakers who say they are speaking Moldovan. mo.wiki is for that. Yes, this subdomain over here, not ro.wiki. Finally, this mo.wiki community must be the most rigid, narrow-minded community I have ever come across in Wikimedia. When we consult you, you don't say anything and you don't participate on mailing lists or discussions, and then when we take some action that you don't agree with, you come back after and in the rudest way possible dismiss us. All of us at ro.wiki are reasonable and understanding. You should be the same. Just relax, let's work out our problems in an understanding, tolerant manner. Ronline 01:51, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC) By the way, me and User:213.164.241.16 are different people. So don't go on saying that it was me all along who kept on insisting for the change - there are now two people against your version of the main page.
-
- Why not? We can call you what we want. What do you mean, "you don't participate on mailing lists or discussions"? I have received no e-mails from you that I have ignored, and I haven't seen any messages I've ignored. Do you believe it is inaccurate to label ro.wiki as "Moldavo-ROmanian in Latin script"? You say it's Romanian. So you say Romanian and Moldovan are different languages? An absurd suggestion. You even support the opposite on your very own wikipedia with your nationalistic propaganda site "different versions of the Romanian language" which outlines ro.wiki policy towards Romanian and Moldovan differences. You allow text in Moldovan, as long as it is in Latin, and we don't believe here that the text we write is really different from wht you're writing - there's only a differnet script. We have the same languages, we just call them different things. Unless you want to turn down legitimate content contributors who want to write Moldovan in Latin for you which will be completely compatible with your existing policy, it is to your benefit to recognise tht there are such great similarities between these two that it is perfectly accurate the label we have given - your Wikipedia is in Moldovan, because Moldovan and Romanian are basically the same, and it is in Latin. Mot people at ro.wiki don't call it in Moldovan, but most visitors here searching for the content you host there will be calling it that, so it's a matter of making things least confusing and most stream lined. Also, I don't tink it makes sense to call a language a communist language - our label is definitely more accurate than the one you give in your example.
Ahm... This is going from bad to worse... Romanian Wikipedia (or Wikipedia in Romanian) adresses to Romanian speaking people (they can come from Romania, Moldova or wherever they want) and NOT to the Moldovan speaking people. Mo.wiki stands for those. If there are persons that don't accept our policies, and they claim they speak Moldovan, and don't understand Romanian (maybe they need a translator) well to hell with them, they can start their own Wikipedia. We are very understandful, and we have created this preventive policy (we didn't ever had a user from Moldova), but ro.wiki is the Romanian Wikipedia not Moldovan. A, and we don't accept writing even Romana (latin). Romanian is always written in latin, and it has been written from centuries now. There is no Romanian (Chirillic), like there is no Portuguese (Arabic) for example. "In schimb", you can sometimes find Serbian (Latin), Greek (Latin), Ukrainian (Latin), even Russian (Latin), because people tend to change to Latin alphabet (it is more used wordwidely). If you want to use Moldoveneasca (Chirillic), then do it so, but don't aply that to Romanian. Romanian in Chirillic doesn't exists. Like Moldovan in fact, but that is the problem of Moldovan speakers, because languages are very different, and not mutualy inteligible... LOLZ... A, and Romanian and Moldovan were born in different teritories. --Danutz
- What is this nonsense? Are you saying that Moldovan and Romanian are mutually unintelligible? Are you insane? Perhaps you have never heard anybody speak Moldovan, or have never read a text in Moldovan-latin.
- And quite a few of the people who use Cyrillic to write the language(s) call it "Romana". Just because you don't recognise that there are "Romana"-speaking people who write their language in the Cyrillic script, doesn't mean it's not true. I don't care who you serve - it should make no difference as long as they can understand and be understood at ro.wikipedia. We'll just link to you how we like. --node
I was joking about that part. I said :Like Moldovan in fact, but that is the problem of Moldovan speakers, because languages are very different, and not mutualy inteligible... LOLZ... A, and Romanian and Moldovan were born in different teritories.. LOLZ (or LOL) stands for "Laugh Out Loud". But if necessary, I'll stand for that, because I totally disagree using "Romanian/Moldovan", or especially "Romanian (Latin)" (as it is obvious... why wouldn't we use then English-Latin, Italian-Latin, German-Latin?). --Danutz
- Because as I have said before, the people who writes in Cyrillic calls their language variously "Moldoveana" or "Romana". If you can find me one example of some community who say they speak "English" but write it not in Latin alphabet, the same with Italian or German (well, some people use Fraktur or other local scripts for German, but it can be used as a font-variation of Latin), then it will be an appropriate label.
Well, I'm not curios of how the one that writes in Cyrillic calls it's language. It is his problem.
- You have just claimed that nobody writes Romanian in Cyrillic - that they only write Moldovan in Cyrillic. At the same time you claim: 1. Moldovan is just part of Romanian language; 2. You don't care that many of the people writing in Cyrillic actually tell they speak "romanian".
There are Ukrainian and Greek comunities that use to write in Latin (see en:Romanization of Ukrainian).
- "Used to". Can you tell me how many of these people uses these anymore? If there is still some it might be the issue but I see none.
Why are then uk.wiki and gr.wiki not labeld with they scripts (Chrillic and Greek). Albanian used to be written in Greek, Chyrillic and Ottoman Turkish alphabets, and now in Latin, and of course there are comunities that still use the alphabet (the Latin alphabet was introduced in Albanian only in 1908, in Romanian very much erlier-sometime in the XVIII century by the "Scoala Ardeleneasca").
- Actually, don't try to educate me on Albanian history, you dont' even mention the native alphabets invented in Albania of "Elbasan" and "Beitha Kukiu". Elbasan was used for some decades by some persons in the city and ditrict of Elbasani, but Beitha Kukiu was used less, mostly by its inventer and its family and friende. In earlier times there are protests to keep Albanian written in Arabic, but now all writes it in Latin, no matter their relgion.
Why don't they use Albanian (Latin)? For your information, in Kosovo (Serbia), where the Albanians form a majority (95%), Albanian was not teached in schools, the Latin alphabet less (that of course unitill recent years when Albanian was declared oficial language and Kosovo became an autonomous region in Serbia). So don't try to assert influence to ro.wiki, you don't have the right. --Danutz
- How is it relevant to alphabetics whether Albanian is teached in schools in Kosova?? And what we say o OUR mo.wiki mainpage, is OPUR worry not yors.
It is very relevant to alphabetics that Albanian was not teached in schools in Kosovo. Because Serbian used to be written before 1990 only in Cyrillic, so Albanians wouldn't have learned the latin alphabet. Dăăăăăăăă.....! --Danutz
[edit] Huge contradiction
First of all, I would like to point out that the only difference between Romanian and Moldovan is in the use of Slavic words. 25% of Slavic words are used in Moldovan as opposed to 20% in Romanian. However, many, if not all words from that extra 5% have a strictly Romanian counterpart. Which is quite understandable, since most of those words penetrated the language during the Soviet era.
Now, you are saying that Romanian and Moldovan are two different languages and yet you proceed to directly transliterate articles written in Romanian Wikipedia. If they were, indeed, two different languages, then you wouldn't be able to do that, would you? Even North-American English differs more from British English than Romanian differs from Moldovan.
I would agree if Moldovan was called a dialect of Romanian, which is perfectly understandable, but to make a separate page for it and turn it into a sort of political statement?? -- Dmitriid 14:54, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
I don't even know why there are soooo many discussions about this!!! There's no such language as moldovan or moldavian language!!! The only language that was ever spoken in Moldova is ROMANIAN. Moldavian language is a russian term that has no reasonable base, made only for separating even more the romanians from Moldova from those in Romania--like its not enough already! It's a great pity that with this kind of pages in an un existing "moldovan language" people from other countries or nations will be under the impression that this is true. In my opinion the moldovan language page shouldn't even be created as it doesn't have any logical base!
-
- I like how you imply you are Moldovan, but either you are very young or you are lying because your Cyrillic spelling is horrible.
-
- My Cyrillic? How do you know my spelling in Cyrillic??? Anyway... I hope romanians from Moldova will never have to use those awful characters (Cyrillic), because Romanian is too beautiful to be destroyed in such a stupid way like writing it with Cyrillic characters...Cyrillic is for russians, let them use it!
-
-
- I am replying to your most recent comment against my better judgement. It is so outrageous it made me laugh. First of all, not all "Romanians" in Moldova identify as "Romanian". It is only respectful to let them choose their autodenomination for themself. Second of all, if Cyrillic is awful and Romanian is beautiful, why is it that the first time anybody ever wrote Romanian it was in Cyrillic? Or do you wish to divorce yourself from that part of the linguistic history of Romanian? Nobody "has" to use Cyrillic to write Romanian or Moldovan or whatever, but many still do because it is how they learned it and they don't care to switch. It's funny that you say Cyrillic is ugly, when 2/3 of them are identical to a Latin letter, and most of the rest look very similar (most Chinese farmers cannot tell the difference). --Node ue 03:01, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
-
Hi again! Seriuosly, why do you keep contradicting me? My only poin is that this kind of pages should not exist at all. Just imagine one day someone(in our case russians) rushes into your House (Country) and makes you write your own language in foreighn characters... and makes this a priority for your education and communication and all this without your consent...How would you feel? Would you like this page? Maybe, if you're russian or a communist aderent from Moldova or just a total stranger who doesn't really care...By the way, are you any of these?
-
- BTW, you are all invited to write on the Romanian wiki, http://ro.wikipedia.org . I'm not supporting Node ue, because I don't like he as a human beeing, but I must admit he is right. If they wan't to write it that way, it is their choice, you cannot change that. But if you come in the Romanian Wikipedia, I ask you to respect the Neutral Point of View, and discuss your edits before making changes in articles concerning such delicate subjects. For further help in the Ro.wikipedia please write me on my discussion page--Danutz
No it's not their choice because the individual that supports writing Romanian in Cyrilic and calling it Moldovan cannot be someone with a netural point of view. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia and therefore, it must provide people with facts not communist and stalinist propaganda. This is why a "Moldovan Encyclopedia" cannot exist.
According to Moldovan State Law the so-called "Moldovan language" cannot be written with Cyrilic letters, hence writing the language in Cyrilic is ilegal even by communist Moldovan standards. Moreover most linguists in Romania, Europe, USA as well as Moldova itself do not consider Moldovan to be a different language then the Romanian language.
One on top of the other, this "Moldovan Encyclopedia" contradicts the very purpose of the multi-lingual nature of Wikipedia. Remember we are talking about real langauges here not Stalinisms.
-
- Well, if you are from Moldova, and speaking Romanian, I can understand you, but you should not interfere more with this Wikipedia, showing by that that mo.wikipedia traffic is increasing, but you should help us in Romanian Wikipedia, because we do need help.
-
- If you are from Romania, I don't understand what is your problem. We have enough problems, we don't need other problems. If they dont accept us, why should we accept them (I'm refering to the majority, because there are some people, that are very kin on Romania). At the end, it is the poorest country in Europe, maybe because of it's socialist, soviet mentality. But maybe in the future it will be better. I'll give you an example. If there will be tomorow a referendum for Union of Moldova with Romania, I'll vote no, because I don't like their atitude, and I would not like to have such concitizens (of course, there is also the old problem: Transilvania and other wealthy Romanian regions will support the union, by descreasing our living standard). I would prefer a referendum for giving Romanian citizenship for every Moldovan requesting that (like the Hungarians tried to do with their diaspora last year). So don't bother understanding this people, but please better help on the Romanian Wikipedia. --Danutz
I can see how this might look like Romanian nationalism but I assure you it is not. Many people(especially Russians and Communists in RM) associate the recognition of the Romanian language in Moldova with the actual Union with Romania. This is not the case. German in Austria, English in the USA are all examples of states that exist and prosper very well as national states without losing their independence to Germany and U.K. respectively.
This is only about a very simple issue: that of providing people with knowledge when they go on Wikipedia. Making a Romanian wikipedia and writing it in the Cyrilic alphabet and then calling it "Moldovan" even though right now in present day Moldova this is iligal and nobody writes in Cyrilic anymore is simply ficticious. This is the same like starting a Wikipedia in "birdlanguage" and writing Romanian with arabic letters.
What kind of a source of information would Wikipedia be then?
- Hi anonymous user,
- I would like to respond using very rude language but I will refrain...
- People write languages in different ways. Almost everybody writes English with the Roman alphabet. However, some people use private inventions, or alphabets common to a group (the International Phonetic Asssociation tries to use IPA for its English-language dealings, for example). Some people write Belarusian in Cyrillic. A minority use Latin. This is their choice. Most people write dialects of Arabic using the Arabic script. Some people use Latin alphabet though. Officially, Serbia uses the Cyrillic alphabet to write their language. However, some Serbians (especially in specific regions) use the Latin alphabet. Some Tatars write their language in Cyrillic. Others write it in Latin. Still others (mostly those in China) use the Arabic alphabet. Tajik is written sometimes in Cyrillic, sometimes in Arabic. Mongolian is sometimes written in Cyrillic, sometimes in the Mongolian script, and there are even other scripts used for ceremonial purposes. Finally, 1% of all primary speakers (excludes ethnic Russians who use Russian most often) of Romanian / Moldovan use the Cyrillic script. Their political ideologies are not relevant here. I am not a communist, but I use Cyrillic. I do not like the communist government of Moldova, nor do I like the period of USSR rule. But still I use Cyrillic because I am proud of a Moldovan - not quite Romanian, but certainly not Slavic - identity, and because it is the script that comes easiest to me for writing the language.
- Just as you are free to tell people that they are idiotic communists bent on the destruction of the world and they are free to tell you in return that you are a capitalist pigdog nazi-sympathiser, people have the freedom to write their mother tongue as they choose.
- The law in Moldova is that in the schools and the public office, Moldovan is always to be written using the Latin alphabet (but with î where Romanian uses â - as far as we Moldovans can tell they sound exactly the same and are just confusing to learn!). But it leaves freedom for people to write a letter to their grandmother in Cyrillic if they wish, or if they're a very very strange person even Chinese (I don't think anybody has tried this yet). People can write ledgers in Cyrillic, teach their own children Cyrillic, read books in Cyrillic. They can write birthday greetings or funeral announcements or hatemail or love letters in Cyrillic if they want.
- This Wikipedia doesn't say that "Cyrillic is the good and pure alphabet for writing the language". It simply confirms the fact that yes, some people do write the language in Cyrillic, and they have just as much a right to be able to read Wikipedia in their native as anybody else does. --Node ue 05:12, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
I would like to add an example to the states like Austria, USA, Belgium and other. That would be Transylvania. I live in Transylvania since I was born, in the city of Cluj-Napoca, sometimes referred as the historical capital of it. Hungarians are a big minority here (some 20% of the entire region, in my city also 20%, but in the "Ţinutul Secuiesc" - Mureş, Covasna, Harghita - more than 60%). In the census people speaking Hungarian here are reffered as Hungarians, and they always did, also during the Communist era. Of course there are unionist movements, but that never changed the reference to the language or the people, even though the group speaking it is actually divided historically in Hungarians and Szekely (secui). So using a real name for a language doesn't make bad. It can make good, because it is very visible through the city that Hungarians (from Hungary) made many investments, and increased the wealthy of the region (Transylvania is Romania's whealthier region - after Bucharest of course - with an high GDP per capita average of about 9.000 intl. dollars this year). Of course there is much drama about this thing in Bucharest, but actually here we do get along well with Hungarians. There are some exceptions of course, like the ex-mayor of Cluj-Napoca, Gheorghe Funar. --Danutz
Exactly Danutz. You brought a very interesting point. Secuii(Secklers) in Harghita & Covasna also informally known as "Seckler-land" are a different people then the Hungarians. The Hungarians and the Secklers say so themselves and although I am not from Transylvania but after talking to Hungarians and Secklers I found out that the Secklers do not exactly speak the Hungarian spoken in Hungary. Yet, nobody: not themselves, not the Hungarians in Hungary and not the Secklers in Transilvania and lastly not even the Stalinist dictator of Romania, Ceausescu, ever tried to imply that Secklers speak "Secklerian"(haha) or their own language.
This has to be compared to another Stalinist, Stalin himself and the "Maldavian" language invented by him. Before Stalin came along there was no "Maldavian", "Maldavanian", "Moldavian" or "Moldovan" language whatever you might wanna call it. The language spoken in Bessarabia or modern day Republic of Moldova was Romanian. There are reports of Russian governors in the 19th century who mentioned that most people living in Bessarabia were Romanians. But through massive deportations, arrests, shootings and all that other "good stuff" that Stalin used to do, he was able to achieve the incredible: SCARE AN ENTIRE NATION TO DEATH AND MAKE IT ACCEPT THAT IN FACT THEY ARE NOT ROMANIANS BUT SOMETHING ELSE.
- There is a difference between "Romanian" as an ethnicity and "Romanian" as a nationality. I am in a way a Romanian, but my nationality is Moldovan. I am proud of that.
How is it possible that many of these "Maldavians" have relatives in Romania who obviously call themselves Romanian? How is it possible that even in the Republic of Moldova itself, some members of a family call themselves "Maldavians", while others Romanians? If Maldavians were different from Romanians then that shouldn't really be the case now should it? Also, if "Maldavians" are such a distinctive nation as Node ue likes us to beleive then the whole Romanian/or/Maldavian argument should not even exist in the first place.
- There are people here in the US with relatives in Mexico, yet they call themselves "Americans" and not "Mexicans". There are related people across Austria and Germany where they speak the same language, yet the Austrians say they are Austrian and the Germans say they are German...
But lets go back to the language issue because that is what is discussed here.
Now what Node ue says here, I am sorry but has no base whatsoever. First of all how do you know that 1% of Romanians in Moldova like to use the Cyrilic alphabet? Wikipedia is a place where you have to cite your sourses so where is yours?
- This is incorrect - I'm talking about 1% of all speakers of Romanian / Moldovan _total_ - that's more like 10% of "Moldovan" speakers. The source I believe is an academy report, but the original usage of numbers on this page is actually on Danutz's part when he refers to 300k people who prefer Cyrillic.
Secondly, as I stated before, the nature of Wikipedia is in such a way that articles have to be presented in ACTUAL LANGUAGES. Currently, in the state of Moldova the only legal way to write the "state language" is in the Latin alphabet. But lets presume that Node eu is right and that 1% of the population(including himself) is still fond of the "Good ol'Days" when everyone was writing in Cyrilic(under the close watch of "father" Stalin). That doesn't make it a language because as Node himself says some people preffer to write Mongolian in cyrilic or in the mongolian alphabet and some Byelorussians even write byelorussian in cyrilic. Well that doesnt make it "Latinorussian" just because its Byelorussian in cyrilic now does it? Its still the same good old Byelorussian. Just the same, some russians preffer Russian written in the latin alphabet. Do you see a Wikipedia in "Russian- with the latin alphabet" that calls itself by another name other then Russian?
- Really, some Russians prefer to use the Latin alphabet? I've never heard of it. However though if you write Urdu in Devanagri script instead, even without replacing Persian and Arabic loanwords, it will automatically be called "Hindi" and we have two separate Wikipedias for Hindi and Urdu. The actual fact is that some 1/3rds of Moldovan people call the language they speak "Moldovan". Is Moldovan a different language than Romanian? Some say it is, but I don't think so. I think it's basically the same language using a different name, which it has every right to do. We don't go storming into your country trying to tell you that the language is really called "Moldovan", why do you do the same to us? We will continue to call our language as we like, whether you like it or not. You talk about poor Moldovans writing in the ugly Cyrillic alphabet and thank god they don't have to anymore - but you are obviously not Moldovan yourself. We don't need your sympathy, we do quite fine without it thank you very much.
In essence its very clear that this "Maldavanian" Wikipedia has no basis. At best it should be called the "Romanian Wikipedia in Cyrilic" and in paranthesis it should be stated that in the Soviet Union this was also reffered to as "Maldavian", not Moldovan because Maldavian was changed to Moldovan after 1989.
- "Has no basis"? Most (though not all) of the people who write the language in Cyrillic call the language Moldovan. Nobody except you ever called it "Maldavian", there was never a country or a SSR called "Maldavia", you're thinking of "Moldavian" and "Moldavia". Node ue 18:24, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
Cu respect, Duca
P.S. : If Node ue is from Transnistria where they really use Romanian in cyrilic(since romanian in latin is outlawed by the apartheid-like government there), I understand where you come from and that it's not your fault you think like that but that you are the result of decades of long brainwashing.
Also the "i" and "a" argument does not really show two different laguanges either. The Moldovan academy adopted the Romanian alphabet in its 1990 form, before romania reintroduced the "a" (as in "recensamant"). If the Moldovans would have gotten their independence in 1993, then they would have adopted the romanian alphabet of 1993 and therefore with the "a" and the "sunt" instead of "sint".
- Fine - one language. The Moldovan language, shared by two countries, Romania and Moldova. Now that I agree that we both speak the same Moldovan language, across our borders, will you leave me alone? What, no? I have to call the language I use by the name YOU want? For what stupid reason?? --Node ue 18:24, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
Why dont we call it Moldo-Romanian? That way we are both happy ;)
Again, I think you are getting me wrong. I am not a unionist and I do not think that you should join up with Romania if you guys really do not want to but this is just about accuracy, nothing more.
I would agree with you 100% that the two languages are the same but then again why dont we all start making up names for english: lets start up the "texan" language, the "newfoundlandish" language, the "yorkish" langauge, etc. etc. Then we can go ahead and say that they are in fact all the same but we just wanna call them by other names. One more thing, the Moldovan language was not chosen by the people of Moldova themselves but by a dictator who killed hundreds of tousands of Moldovans so the rest can be forced to accept it. In other words its imposed.
In any case I think the fairest thing to do is mention it like english is being mentioned: "English USA", "English Newfoundland", etc. etc.
PS: one more time, do not take this personally or as an insult. I donnot mean to attack your Moldovan pride or anything else, nor am I trying to inffer that since you are Romanians you should all automatically become part of Romania.