Misplaced Pages

Talk:Moldova: 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 editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 00:06, 13 February 2012 editVecrumba (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers19,811 edits →Alphabet Issues: indefinite antecedant← Previous edit Revision as of 01:09, 13 February 2012 edit undoAnonimu (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers13,933 edits →Alphabet Issues: hehNext edit →
Line 92: Line 92:
::: While the section contents might need some swapping around between articles, the information about the promotion of a separate Moldovan identity is there. The "in contrast" bit is accurate because the Moldovan language was to "stick to the roots" ''in contrast'' to Romanian, which was "sold to the French bourgeoisie" and switched to Latin some fifty years ago. --] (]) 21:22, 22 August 2011 (UTC) ::: While the section contents might need some swapping around between articles, the information about the promotion of a separate Moldovan identity is there. The "in contrast" bit is accurate because the Moldovan language was to "stick to the roots" ''in contrast'' to Romanian, which was "sold to the French bourgeoisie" and switched to Latin some fifty years ago. --] (]) 21:22, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
:::: Ummm, the "change" to Romanian in Cyrillic was completely political. First, Stalin promoted the (continued) use of the Latin alphabet in the hopes that would assist in the export of Communism to Romania proper. When that failed, then the policy of "returning" "Moldovan" to its "historic roots" was instituted. (That sorry line is still repeated today in the PMR's propaganda) That being Russian Cyrillic, which does ''not'' include all the phonetic sounds of Romanian. Those sounds are included in both Latin Romanian and the original pre-Latin historical Cyrillic Romanian. The artificial manufacture of Cyrillic Moldovan ensured cutting off Moldovans from their Romanian brethren. Today's "Cyrillic" "Moldovan" is ''purely'' political. ]<small> ►]</small> 00:04, 13 February 2012 (UTC) :::: Ummm, the "change" to Romanian in Cyrillic was completely political. First, Stalin promoted the (continued) use of the Latin alphabet in the hopes that would assist in the export of Communism to Romania proper. When that failed, then the policy of "returning" "Moldovan" to its "historic roots" was instituted. (That sorry line is still repeated today in the PMR's propaganda) That being Russian Cyrillic, which does ''not'' include all the phonetic sounds of Romanian. Those sounds are included in both Latin Romanian and the original pre-Latin historical Cyrillic Romanian. The artificial manufacture of Cyrillic Moldovan ensured cutting off Moldovans from their Romanian brethren. Today's "Cyrillic" "Moldovan" is ''purely'' political. ]<small> ►]</small> 00:04, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
::::: Can you get your facts right at least for once? The reason for using the Latin alphabet (which was never used in the region except by a small romanophile minority) has nothing to do with "exporting Communism to Romania", it was a Union-wide switch to Latin for all minor languages (all Central Asian languages switched to Latin around the same time, and there surely was no neighboring country using the Latin alphabet to export Communism to). The main reason for this was speeding up alphabetization of the masses (Latin was generally seen as easier to learn). The same desire (helping people learn to read and write) stood behind the simplification of the Russian alphabet (a dozen redundant letters were dropped) and the Moldovan Cyrillic one (which did include all phonetic values of Romanian, in certain aspects being better fit to the language than the Latin one - such as using three different signs for three different sounds, all written in the Latin variant as "i"). Writing systems are inherently ''purely political'', otherwise all the world would use the same basic alphabet.] (]) 01:09, 13 February 2012 (UTC)


== Human rights == == Human rights ==

Revision as of 01:09, 13 February 2012

Skip to table of contents
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Moldova article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11Auto-archiving period: 3 months 
Skip to table of contents
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconMoldova Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis 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
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
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 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
Template:WP1.0

Template:Outline of knowledge coverage

A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on August 27, 2004, August 27, 2005, August 27, 2006, August 27, 2007, August 27, 2008, August 27, 2009, August 27, 2010, and August 27, 2011.

Archives

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

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Moldova article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11Auto-archiving period: 3 months 

Music

A lot of people are familiar with this country from Sergy Stepanov, or the "Epic Sax Guy", a Youtube and internet sensation. Should he or the music show be included in this article? 99.231.232.207 (talk) 03:16, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

"He has been fittingly dubbed "Epic Sax Guy."" This sentence displays an nonobjective association between "epic" and pelvic thrusting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.112.4.245 (talk) 01:14, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Map

The seperatist movement in Transnistria is not recognized by any country or organization in the world. The region is recognized part of Moldova's territorial integrity and sovereignty. So there really is no reason so highlight the seperatist region, it is already mentioned properly a couple times in the article. This should be correctly reflected in the map of the infobox. Neftchi (talk) 10:09, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Transnistria has minor if unconvincing recognition, but that aside, it's a simple fact that Moldova has no actual control over the territory in question, and never really has. The placing of it in a different shade of green balances both Moldovan and Transnistrian POV's. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 14:19, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
The question is what exacly is a map supposed to show? Territorial integrity and sovereignty or de-jure and de-facto control? There is no such regulation on these issues, thats why I suggest using the standard map untill this issue is solved. I also think this map needs to be a zoom in section, no offense but Moldova is a small country and a zoom in can will be helpful to many readers. Neftchi (talk) 16:01, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
I suppose it's supposed to show the country. No map can show 'territorial integrity', that being an abstract concept. As for the zoom, that'd be good, but it'd have to be standardised with other smaller European countries. Interesting proposal though. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 16:24, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
Agree with Neftchi, the shades of green and light green actually are not discernable on current unzoomed version. Brandmeister t 13:38, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

No Sax Guy???

Honestly, this is the only reason Americans have heard of this country. Run Away is an internet meme. Hamolton (talk) 15:30, 26 June 2011 (UTC) Sorry for the rant, delete as you wish.

Um, no. I heard of Moldova/Moldavia in history courses as early as the 6th grade, then very heavily in college history courses, not to mention looking at it on a large globe we had in our family. And it's mentioned in Dracula; today it is often in the current-events news. Many people will have 'heard' of this country from many different sources; and I have no idea who "Sax Guy" is. HammerFilmFan (talk) 00:31, 22 July 2011 (UTC) HammerFilmFan
Doesn't sound like encyclopedic material to me. Also, we don't want to bring down the article to the lowest common denominator. man with one red shoe 16:34, 26 June 2011 (UTC)


Alphabet Issues

This issue have been risen in the past, but I have to address it again, because the current state of the relevant Misplaced Pages section is too politically biased.

Why it is written that _IN CONTRAST_ Moldovan was written in Cyryllic while Romanian in Latin”. Yes, there were different alphabets for the same language, but this has just happened historically and not done by Soviets specifically to confront Romanian vs Moldavian identities, as it is written. Cyrillic alphabet is mainly used by countries which practice Orthodox Cristianity, and Cyryllic was used in Moldova since Stephen the Great (Prince of Moldavia between 1457 and 1504), so Cyrillic was always used in Chisinau. Why don’t we write on Misplaced Pages that the differences in alphabet were historical and religious, and not political? If you tell me that Moldovan Cyrillic was different from the Cyrillyc in Russian language, and Soviets did change Moldovan Cyrillic to be exactly like Russian Cyrillic, this was also a technical measure (alphabet/language reform) rather than a political measure. It was easier to make small adjustments in the Cyrillic alphabet to comply to the modern standards than to switch entirely to Latin. When the language evolves over centuries, so the alphabet evolves. Russia did by itself several times have made some reforms to the Cyrillic alphabet it have used for the Russian language, so why the reform of Cyrillic used for Romanian language in Moldova is considered on Misplaced Pages an act of opposition of Moldovan vs Romanian languages, and to promote distinct cultural identities? Maxim Masiutin (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:35, 1 August 2011 (UTC).

Mainly due to what is written in the Creation of Moldavian ASSR (and the next one) section of the Moldovenism article. --illythr (talk) 18:29, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
The alphabet issue is not related to Moldovenism. As you know, it was Stephen the Great (Prince of Moldavia between 1457 and 1504) who have introduced Cyrillic, long before the Moldovenism took place. ---Maxim Masiutin (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:13, 10 August 2011 (UTC).
While the section contents might need some swapping around between articles, the information about the promotion of a separate Moldovan identity is there. The "in contrast" bit is accurate because the Moldovan language was to "stick to the roots" in contrast to Romanian, which was "sold to the French bourgeoisie" and switched to Latin some fifty years ago. --illythr (talk) 21:22, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
Ummm, the "change" to Romanian in Cyrillic was completely political. First, Stalin promoted the (continued) use of the Latin alphabet in the hopes that would assist in the export of Communism to Romania proper. When that failed, then the policy of "returning" "Moldovan" to its "historic roots" was instituted. (That sorry line is still repeated today in the PMR's propaganda) That being Russian Cyrillic, which does not include all the phonetic sounds of Romanian. Those sounds are included in both Latin Romanian and the original pre-Latin historical Cyrillic Romanian. The artificial manufacture of Cyrillic Moldovan ensured cutting off Moldovans from their Romanian brethren. Today's "Cyrillic" "Moldovan" is purely political. PЄTЄRS J V ►TALK 00:04, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Can you get your facts right at least for once? The reason for using the Latin alphabet (which was never used in the region except by a small romanophile minority) has nothing to do with "exporting Communism to Romania", it was a Union-wide switch to Latin for all minor languages (all Central Asian languages switched to Latin around the same time, and there surely was no neighboring country using the Latin alphabet to export Communism to). The main reason for this was speeding up alphabetization of the masses (Latin was generally seen as easier to learn). The same desire (helping people learn to read and write) stood behind the simplification of the Russian alphabet (a dozen redundant letters were dropped) and the Moldovan Cyrillic one (which did include all phonetic values of Romanian, in certain aspects being better fit to the language than the Latin one - such as using three different signs for three different sounds, all written in the Latin variant as "i"). Writing systems are inherently purely political, otherwise all the world would use the same basic alphabet.Anonimu (talk) 01:09, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Human rights

Human rights in Moldova are discussed in two articles: Human rights in Moldova and Human rights in Transnistria. Therefore both of them are "main" articles for subsection "Human rights". I fail to see the reason why Chipmunkdavis disagrees with this. His edit summaries are self-contradictory: he writes Transnistria is part of Moldova, and thus its human rights should be discussed in the Moldovan article and under this reason he reverts my edit which serves precisely this purpose. Logofat de Chichirez (talk) 23:03, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

The main article for human rights in Moldova is Human rights in Moldova. That is the article which focuses on the topic. Human rights in Transnistria is a subtopic of human rights of Moldova, and thus the main Moldovan article should cover everything. CMD (talk) 00:18, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
OK. I understand it now. Logofat de Chichirez (talk) 01:48, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Census forms

Dear fellow editors, please stop making decisions based on stereotypes, and actually check the facts. In this case, the Moldovan census form had no checklist for nationality, every person could literally write in anything in field No. 7. The fact that you simply don't like certain facts is not reason enough to ignore them.Anonimu (talk) 10:53, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

What decision, what stereotypes? Why do you accuse fellow editors of such things? Remind us, weren't you banned a while ago for pushing an agenda and being uncivilized in discussions in talk pages? Why do you continue with this type of behavior?
It's great to see your only arguments are ad hominem. And to make it clear, I was never banned "for pushing an agenda". Again stereotypes. Anonimu (talk) 19:02, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
I'm sorry I wasn't the one who accused editors of stereotypes. man with one red shoe 23:31, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Getting back to the issue, we could probably use this source:

"The results of the 2004 census further underscored the successes of the Moldovanist project. The choice of ethnic self-identification in the census was highly politicized due to the presence of ‘Moldovan’ and ‘Romanian’ answer options in the census question that asked about ethnic affiliation. As the census results reported in the bottom left column of Appendix I indicate, only 2.2 percent of citizens chose to identify themselves as Romanians, while 75.8 percent stated that they were Moldovans. There were numerous allegations, somewhat supported by the Council of Europe observers, that ethnic affiliation numbers were rigged." -- http://www.policy.hu/protsyk/Publications/NationalisminMoldova.pdf

man with one red shoe 16:35, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Nothing in this quote supports the claim that one couldn't declare both Moldovan and Romania. Moreover, you have the census forms above, could you point out where are the answer options for ‘Moldovan’ and ‘Romanian’ ? Anonimu (talk) 19:02, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
I don't know, I don't speak Moldovan :) But, I think it's pretty clear that they had to declare there one nationality, not something like "Moldovan (Romanian)" or "Moldovan/Romanian". But again, it's not our place to interpret forms, it's a documented ongoing controversy and glossing over is whitewashing. man with one red shoe 23:31, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Categories: