Misplaced Pages

Latest revision as of 03:33, 11 January 2025

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Transnistria article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22Auto-archiving period: 3 months

view · edit Frequently asked questions Q1: Why is this article titled "Transnistria" and not "Pridnestrovie"? A1: The preponderance of reliable English-language sources use the name "Transnistria" over "Pridnestrovie". See WP:COMMONNAME for relevant policy details and Talk:Transnistria/Archive 21#Requested move 17 February 2018 for the most recent move discussion.

This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary.

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Transnistria. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Transnistria at the Reference desk.

A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on September 2, 2009, September 2, 2010, September 2, 2014, and September 2, 2015.

This  level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Eastern Europe (inactive) This 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 Moldova Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Moldova, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Moldova 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.MoldovaWikipedia:WikiProject MoldovaTemplate:WikiProject MoldovaMoldova Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Russia: History / Politics and law High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Misplaced Pages. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the history of Russia task force. This article is supported by the politics and law of Russia task force. Countries This 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: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Check out the article alerts; see if anything catches your fancy. Cleanup : clean-up listing for Countries Stubs : de-stub articles in Category:Stubs by region. Other : add {{WPCountries}} to talk pages of related articles, and assess. International relations High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations 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.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Limited recognition High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Limited recognition, a WikiProject dedicated to improving the coverage of entities with limited recognition on Misplaced Pages by contributing to articles relating to unrecognized states and separatist movements. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join our WikiProject by signing your name at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.Limited recognitionWikipedia:WikiProject Limited recognitionTemplate:WikiProject Limited recognitionLimited recognition High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization: Mike Vago (26 July 2020). "This Soviet breakaway republic never fully broke away". The A.V. Club.

This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination. Discussions: Not moved, 15 December 2021, to Pridnestrovie, see discussion. Not moved, 10 September 2024, to Pridnestrovie, see discussion.

Should the name of this article be changed?

On 5 September 2025, the region’s parliament passed a bill banning the use the word “Transnistria” in public. Therefore does Transnistria remain an appropriate name to use for this article, given that use of that word within the territory that is the subject of this article is now illegal? If the name of the article does need to be changed, what would be the best option to use, the full constitutional name in English “Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic“ or the short form “Pridnestrovie”? - Source: https://balkaninsight.com/2024/09/05/breakaway-moldovan-region-transnistria-bans-use-of-name-transnistria/ https://www.euractiv.com/section/politics/news/separatist-region-of-moldova-banns-the-term-transnistria/ Dn9ahx (talk) 18:33, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

In this discussion, it was noted many years ago that this term is extremely offensive and is not the name of either the Pridnestrovian region or the Pridnestrovian republic. However, the local Romanian nationalist lobby disagrees: the name they managed to promote seems to them to be an important propaganda victory and will be defended to the end. 41.237.122.82 (talk) 20:04, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

I don’t think it’s helpful use terms like “propaganda” or “Romanian nationalist lobby” in this discussion. Please avoid using emotive language and keep the discussion civil.Dn9ahx (talk) 20:49, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

It is more reasonable to use the general name "Pridnestrovie". The official name of Moldova is "Republic of Moldova", but it is almost never used. The same is true for other countries and autonomous regions. Here the full official name is even longer, and using it constantly simply does not make sense.190.119.76.150 (talk) 05:57, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

I have changed the first sentence in the article to "The Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic, commonly referred to in English as Transnistria and locally as Pridnestrovie" Dn9ahx (talk) 12:33, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

This sounds rather strange. "Pridnestrovie" is an geographical and historical name from which the full official name of the republic is formed. That is, it is part of the official name and its short version, and not some alternative name known only locally. Moreover, as has already been noted here, in English-language sources the term "Transnistria" refers mainly to the territorial division of Moldova, and not to the state calling itself Pridnestrovie. 2A03:F680:FE04:45D2:2874:44DD:C6DA:C38E (talk) 08:06, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

This has been discussed to death. It could be changed if English-language sources, as we're in English Misplaced Pages, started employing "Pridnestrovie" more often than "Transnistria", per the policy WP:COMMONNAME. It is this policy that allows Bender, Moldova not to be titled "Tighina". But we're far from it right now . It is hard to imagine that this change in sources will come anytime soon due to the current geopolitics of the region. Super Ψ Dro 10:29, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Sorry if I have caused trouble. I only started the discussion because the government of the PMR have passed a law banning the use of the word "Transnistria" within the territory and I was not sure if it would still be appropriate to use a name which is now illegal to use in the polity in question. My personal opinion is that the title of the article be "Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic", the full English language name of the polity rather than the local short form "Pridnestrovie" which as you pointed out, has not entered common usage in the English language. This also matches how we use the full English name "Administrative-Territorial Units of the Left Bank of the Dniester" rather than "Stînga Nistrului" on the article about the the official Moldovan government designation of the territory. By using the full English name, for both claims to the territory we are not appearing to take sides in the dispute and are not breaking any local laws. Dn9ahx (talk) 22:36, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

We use the common names so as to not take sides. WP:OFFICIALNAMES are not the guiding principle for naming. Looks like the name law is covered in the Toponymy section. CMD (talk) 02:13, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

In fact, this is a lie. In 95% of cases, in English-language texts, the name "Transnistria" refers to "the autonomous region of Moldova" or "territory not controlled by the government of Moldova" (Stinga Nistrului or Left Bank Moldova), but not to the Pridnestrovian Republic. The use of the term "Transnistria" to a state where this word is banned is an invention of Misplaced Pages and has no connection to reality. This is purely an element of political bias promoted by certain vested interests. 103.82.126.146 (talk) 06:34, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

• I have summarized a little of what the esteemed Wikipedians have said above and composed a renaming request based on the facts provided. Please correct me if I have made any mistakes in this procedure. 2A03:F680:FE04:45D2:2C72:43DD:63F1:682C (talk) 11:08, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 10 September 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (non-admin closure) RodRabelo7 (talk) 12:47, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Transnistria → Pridnestrovie – In connection with the new laws adopted in the Republic of Pridnestrovie regarding the names of this state, the need to rename this article has become obvious. Let me remind you that the Parliament of Pridnestrovie amendments adopted to the laws, according to which the use of the term "Transnistria" in relation to Pridnestrovie entails arrest for up to 15 days with possible reclassification under a criminal article. The reason is that the word "Transnistria" is extremely offensive to the people of Pridnestrovie and has repeatedly become a cause of conflicts. In general terms, this is interpreted as a wish for genocide to Pridnestrovians.

The current title of the article is absolutely incorrect. WP:COMMONNAME in this case cannot justify it, since the overwhelming majority of cases of using the term Transnistria in English-language texts refers either to the administrative division of Moldova (the autonomous entity Stinga Nistrului), or to the so-called territory of the left bank of the Dniester not controlled by Chisinau ("breakaway region of Moldova"), but not to the Pridnestrovian Republic, which is described in this article. Such naming is, apparently, an invention exclusively of Misplaced Pages.

There is not a single Misplaced Pages article about a geographical or political entity whose name directly offends its population or would be prohibited by law in this country, except for this one. It would be absurd to leave an article with such a name.

I would also like to remind you that the article about the former Nagorno-Karabakh Republic was renamed Republic of Artsakh following a referendum in that republic, although the old name was unconditionally dominant in all non-Armenian texts and was not offensive at all. This did not meet with any objections in Misplaced Pages community. Of course, this cannot be a precedent, and we must be guided by the rules, however, in the case of the term "Transnistria", apparently, there is a circle of interested parties defending this absurd vicious practice in their own political interests (WP:POV). This also needs to be paid attention to.

The following suggestions:

1. Rename the article Transnistria to Pridnestrovie.
2. On the Transnistria page, put a template about a polysemantic term and list the articles it may refer to: Stinga Nistrului, Transnistria Governorate, Pridnestrovie, etc.

Why "Pridnestrovie" and not "Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic"? According to WP:OFFICIALNAMES and for the same reasons that articles are called "Moldova" and not "Republic of Moldova", "Russia" and not "Russian Federation", etc.

Links:

• The presidential initiative on the inadmissibility of using the term "transnistria" in relation to Pridnestrovie was adopted unanimously
• Transnistria must be vanished

2A03:F680:FE04:45D2:2C72:43DD:63F1:682C (talk) 11:03, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

• This RM reasoning is misplaced. The commonname argument is wrong; the "breakaway region of Moldova" is the Pridnestrovian Republic. See for example this BBC profile of Transnistria, with its President Vadim Krasnoselsky. There are also plenty of Misplaced Pages articles about geographical or political entities whose name is rejected by that entity. Ivory Coast is a perennial one, East Timor pops up every now and then, Turkey is getting there. We even have names about groups of people which can directly offend them, eg. Mormons. CMD (talk) 11:28, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose move per the 2018 and 2021 RMs. The common name remains Transnistria. O.N.R.  17:32, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
• Strong oppose A very poor RM rationale. Apparently we're being threatened with arrest by the nom if we refuse to comply with an illegitimate and repressive government. That's not how it works. Euractiv has reported that the de facto leader of Transnistria Vadim Krasnoselski has equated the term Transnistria with "fascism" and "Nazism", prefers the "Russian term Pridnestrovie" and is threatening imprisonment and fines for those who use Transnistria in "public speeches, publicly displayed works or in the mass media" as Krasnoselski considers it a "manifestation of Nazism". What bollocks. Transnistria remains the common name until evidence to the contrary is presented. Recent usage of Transnistria include by Al Jazeera, The Economist, The Guardian, TVP World and even the Russian website Eurasia Daily AusLondonder (talk) 13:33, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
• I rarely edit articles, and when I do, it's on topics very far from politics and geography (I haven't even created my account yet); however, in this case, I think it's necessary to speak out. The article needs to be moved, using a politically neutral name. I am not a supporter of separatism and I absolutely do not sympathize with pro-Russian forces, but political propaganda has no place in Misplaced Pages, regardless of its orientation. Especially if the term that was used as the title of the article is offensive. The author of the move request is right, I have never come across an article in Misplaced Pages that would contain such non-neutral names in its title. Indeed, most of the references to this region that I have come across used the name Transnistria, but I have to agree with the RM author that all these references did not refer to the state as such: they were either about a region of Moldova or about a separatist movement in Moldova, but not about this state entity with its political system, state symbols, etc. Therefore, we must be guided first and foremost by the principle of a neutral point of view and the inadmissibility of political propaganda in Misplaced Pages. 190.57.181.3 (talk) 16:30, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

— 190.57.181.3 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

• Oppose I find the Karabakh/Artsakh comparison uncompelling. The "Artsakh" name caught on rather easily and was convenient because the name "Nagorno-Karabakh" refers to the entire region and "Nagorno-Karabakh Republic" was a mouthful. While I am sympathetic to the argument that the name "Transnistria" could be offensive, the arguments made were unpersuasive as the nom did not substantiate this with sources, but instead substantiated it with a repressive law. I would like to remind the nom that Turkey requests we call it Türkiye, but every attempt to move the article Turkey to Türkiye is slapped down because "Türkiye" has not caught on as the common name in English, and I find it highly unlikely that it ever will. That's not to say that new names never catch on. They most certainly can. Swaziland -> Eswatini was broadly accepted rather quickly. But, as Chipmunkdavis mentioned, we still use the name "Ivory Coast" over "Côte d'Ivoire. Other times, it's more ambiguous. I see both East Timor and Timor-Leste used fairly often. And in my own anecdotal experience, I've actually seen the name "Czechia" used more often than "Czech Republic" these last few years, but the name remains Czech Republic. But "Transnistria" is, almost without exception, the only name you will ever see in sources to refer to this polity. And so it will remain Transnistria, no matter how many threats are made against those who use it.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 13:42, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

• Comment I hold no strong position on the article name however I note that I think it is us setting precedent w.r.t. the name here rather than the various sources. While we standardised on Transnistria from day dot (2003), sources at the time were very divergent on the name (although I don't think Pridnestrovie was ever among them). Transdniestria, Trans-Dniester, Trans-Nistru, and so on even continue to be used in certain circles.

(In 2003 the preferred term in English in Tiraspol, at least as seen in the archive of "Olvia-Press", was Dniestria, short for "Dniester Moldavian Republic".)

While precedent today certainly agrees with "Transnistria" and in English I can't see that "Pridnestrovie" was ever really common (doesn't help that it looks like a malformed English Latinate name ending in -ia (like Moldavia, Romania, Gagauzia, etc.)), I'm not sure that precedent would have favoured the Romanian "Transnistria" without our input. Bayonet-lightbulb (talk) 13:06, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm not so sure. "Transnistria" is the name applied to the area in the context of World War II (e.g., here) and the only term that really shows up in ngrams before about 1990. Srnec (talk) 04:44, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose. Flawed rationale. Srnec (talk) 04:44, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Map around Roghi: PMR or Moldova?

I've just realized I should maybe have started the debate here but I asked the question there: Misplaced Pages:Reference_desk/Humanities#Territorial_continuity_of_Transnistria. a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 11:39, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Languages on the infobox

Chipmunkdavis, I am not sure what do you intend to mean by Rv, standardized variety language name per relevant topic. There is no "Moldovan" standard, it is Romanian written in Cyrillic. Your wording is misleading as it is not only the text in Latin script that is Romanian. Moldovan is not a language per our own articles in Misplaced Pages. I've also already expressed that "Moldovan language" ≠ Moldovan Cyrillic alphabet, it makes no sense to pipelink them. Super Ψ Dro 16:04, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

The official language is called Moldovan. Our articles do not say it is not a language, they say it is a name for a language also called Romanian. The use of official language names for official languages is well-established, notably by the Serbocroatian-speaking country articles. Slightly more meta, you've made this change before and it has been disputed before, waiting awhile to make it again without discussion is not productive. CMD (talk) 16:12, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Moldovan language, opening sentence: is one of the two local names for the Romanian language in Moldova.. Here in Misplaced Pages we have a decided stance on the topic. We are also not obliged to potray a text in a language it is not, much less in respect of the legislation of an illegal breakaway entity. To suggest the latter is insulting given the low status the Moldovans' language has in the foreign-backed entity in their country that they live in. And the version you've restored still has the two issues I've mentioned. The pipelink does not make sense and both scripts, and not only the latter, are in Romanian.

The situation with Serbo-Croatian is WP:OTHERSTUFF and their social situation not analogous either. The standard in Misplaced Pages is that "Moldovan" is not given credit . There was already a discussion about a different part of the infobox, in which you participated , and a consensus was found. Now I propose the following: Moldovan (Romanian), just like in the other part of the infobox, and with the two names either marked with {{lang|ro|}} or with no template at all. What suggestion do you have? Super Ψ Dro 16:31, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

That quote seems right, it is the name of the language. My suggestion is to keep the official names in the official languages. That is part of the essence of their being official names. The situation in Serbian is entirely analogous, please don't cite OTHERSTUFF to discount something and then immediately link to various other stuff to support your view. CMD (talk) 16:40, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Under what argument do you say that we ought to give exclusive credit to a term not even official in the parent country, other than becuase we also do in a set of countries with a different social situation? Per the academic consensus, the consensus in Misplaced Pages and the official legislation of the country where the notion of a separate Moldovan language was applied in the past, Moldovan has no linguistic fundament, there is no text in Moldovan in the infobox but in Romanian, and even if we consider to give Moldovan credit, the current version of the infobox is problematic, because neither Moldovenists nor Romanian nationalists would consider the two names to belong to two separate languages by virtue of being written in different alphabets. Worth mentioning that you defend using only the official designation, but the version you restored does not even do this as the text displayed references the Cyrillic alphabet.

I proposed to maintain the official name next to the real and linguistic term. I haven't even gotten a proposal to fix the issue of the pipelink and the arbitrary use of language names, which wouldn't even necessarily bring the text closer to my desired outcome, but would fix a misunderstanding of the Moldovenist view (Moldovan in the Latin alphabet would still be Moldovan). Super Ψ Dro 17:00, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

There is no "credit" here, I don't even understand that framing. You haven't explained how a social situation affects languages getting different names being different in some cases but not others. Totally open to noting it is Moldovan in the latin alphabet, although not due to a "Moldovenist view" or similar. Both are real terms. CMD (talk) 17:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

With credit I refer to potraying Moldovan as a different language at the same level of the listed Russian and Ukrainian ones with no additional notes. I question this practice when Moldova does not use the term and when we are referring to Transnistria, which is an unrecognised entity where Russian is the main language. The official Moldovan has an almost ceremonial status and is almost lacking from public life. In this context you say we should give exclusive credit to the official view in Transnistria. I say we include the official term in Moldova too and that because the language is anyway scarcely used in Transnistria I do not agree with only potraying their fringe view. Super Ψ Dro 17:22, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

The article text in question is the official names of the unrecognised entity. This is not a view, it's a simple reflection of the status. Moldova does not think Transnistria has a different official name, it more broadly asserts that Transnistria should not be issuing anything official at all, something the article already reflects very clearly. CMD (talk) 17:39, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Templates are used to identify what language the text is in. This goes beyond their official legislation and falls within our choice. Super Ψ Dro 18:04, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

We should not choose to use templates to treat languages as if they are in some sort of competitive credit framework, especially when the purpose is to at a quick glance let readers know what the official names names are. CMD (talk) 23:52, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

It is not about a "competitive credit framework", but about giving a fringe view the weight it is due. Would you agree to removing the {{lang|mo|}} template from the text, which goes beyond the quick glance purpose and makes an assertation on the language the text is in? Super Ψ Dro 00:21, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

I don't really see the value of not letting a reader know what language the name is in. CMD (talk) 00:24, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Text in Romanian is shown to be in Moldovan. Readers are anyway not capable of seeing what language does the template assert the text to be in unless they put the cursor above the text. It also removes this article from Category:Articles containing Moldovan-language text, appropriate considering there is no text in a Moldovan language there. Super Ψ Dro 00:38, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

It isn't a helpful or productive framing to state that a name that exists doesn't exist. I suspect the category is as useful as the Croatian and Bosnian ones, which are used, so I'm surprised it is empty. CMD (talk) 02:16, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

You keep referring to the unrelated Serbo-Croatian case. The situation evidently couldn't be equal when "Moldovan" is not official in Moldova. In the Moldovan topic area the supposed language never had widespread usage. It is not used at Moldovans. You can click on links at List of localities in Moldova and try to find a village using either a Moldovan-language template or Moldovan Cyrillic. It is not used either for Moldovan institutions or authorities, click around here or take a look yourself at random Moldovan articles. Moldovan Cyrillic is used in villages located in Transnistria (we lack many articles on institutions or buildings there). Take a look here , all of them as you can see use Template:Moldovan Cyrillic and not {{lang|mo|}}, nor do they call the script "Moldovan language". This is the only article striving away from the standard practice.

I would like to ask you to research more on the situation in Misplaced Pages and perhaps even the situation of the language in Moldova as you're evidently unfamiliar. I keep getting replies from you that let me know that I haven't really been understood, such as the quotation of "Moldovenist view", or It isn't a helpful or productive framing to state that a name that exists doesn't exist. when I had already expressed intention not to remove the official designation but to mantain it with the parentheses. Totally open to noting it is Moldovan in the latin alphabet, except "Moldovan" is persecuted in Transnistria when taught in the Latin alphabet . Super Ψ Dro 13:33, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Why are you asking me to click around articles when I can see the category? I am familiar with Moldovan and its various court cases, and the situation at hand. I stated before you have never explained your opposition to Serbo-Croatian, and the not being official in Moldova doesn't explain that. Your continued use of odd phrases like "supposed language" seems a continuous distortion of the situation at hand. "Moldovenist view" was something you said. CMD (talk) 16:09, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

I don't understand you. It is very clear I asked you to click around articles so that you can see "Moldovan" is not used throughout Misplaced Pages. You had already accussed me of linking "to various other stuff to support your view". I am not "opposed" to Serbo-Croatian. I am not distorsing anything, there is not a Moldovan language, it is Romanian, and academia and our own practices in the website reflect this. Why exactly are you defending a problematic version inserted by an IP ? You had been watching the article before and had not involved yourself in this topic. I have proposed several outcomes to leave this dispute, I could right now propose to restore the edit before the IP's, but I have a feel you will come back with another message saying you haven't understood me. And all of this while a different part of the infobox potrays the version I am defending. I don't understand your stance. Super Ψ Dro 17:07, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

• Chipmunkdavis, I have restored the version that existed before the two disputed versions you or I defended. I then also removed {{lang|ro|}} from the text in Moldovan Cyrillic. I believe this is the best solution and recommend to maintain the current state. I've pinged you, however, so that you're notified of this and can express your disagrement if necessary. Super Ψ Dro 23:09, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

  What should be done is to put a footnote, at the language name and perhaps also next to the official name, explaining that "Moldovan" "is one of the two local names for the Romanian language", which actually explains to readers what you want to say without hiding it behind obscure parentheses that the reader has to click through to figure out the meaning of. CMD (talk) 01:07, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Added a note. Super Ψ Dro 13:16, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Adjust it so it doesn't continue to beg the question, as language here has done. CMD (talk) 13:58, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

The article linked in this edit summary does not support the summary. It states that there are 6-8 schools teaching Romanian using the latin alphabet, reaching somewhere below 15% of students. Even if they didn't, "always" is a very strong claim. CMD (talk) 14:35, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

: It is convenient at this point to recall the central facts of the case. The applicants are children and parents from the Moldovan community in Transdniestria who complain about the effects on their and their children’s education and family lives brought about by the language policy of the separatist authorities. The core of their complaints relate to actions taken by the “MRT” authorities in 2002 and 2004, to enforce decisions adopted some years previously, forbidding the use of the Latin alphabet in schools and requiring all schools to register and start using an “MRT”-approved curriculum and the Cyrillic script. Thus, on 22 August 2002 “MRT” police forcibly evicted the pupils and teachers from the Ştefan cel Mare School in Grigoriopol. The school was not allowed to reopen in the same building and subsequently transferred to premises some 20 kilometres away, in Moldovan-controlled territory. The children and staff were evicted from the Evrica School in Rîbniţa in July 2004. The same month, the Alexandru cel Bun School in Tighina was threatened with closure and disconnected from electricity and water supplies. Both schools were required to move to less convenient and less well equipped premises in their home towns at the start of the following academic year. Super Ψ Dro 03:05, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

That's not the article linked in the edit summary. It also doesn't support the edit summary, while leaving out "At the date of adoption of the admissibility decision, there remained only six schools in Transdniestria using the Moldovan/Romanian language and the Latin script", which seems to be what the linked article says. CMD (talk) 03:33, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages controversial topics
• Selected anniversaries (September 2009)
• Selected anniversaries (September 2010)
• Selected anniversaries (September 2014)
• Selected anniversaries (September 2015)
• B-Class level-4 vital articles
• Misplaced Pages level-4 vital articles in Geography
• B-Class vital articles in Geography
• B-Class Moldova articles
• Top-importance Moldova articles
• Moldova articles
• B-Class Russia articles
• High-importance Russia articles
• High-importance B-Class Russia articles
• B-Class Russia (history) articles
• History of Russia task force articles
• B-Class Russia (politics and law) articles
• Politics and law of Russia task force articles
• WikiProject Russia articles
• B-Class country articles
• WikiProject Countries articles
• B-Class International relations articles
• High-importance International relations articles
• WikiProject International relations articles
• B-Class Limited recognition articles
• High-importance Limited recognition articles
• WikiProject Limited recognition articles
• Misplaced Pages pages referenced by the press