Revision as of 16:37, 5 March 2007 editDimadick (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers803,364 editsmNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 09:07, 1 June 2007 edit undoJamason (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users560 edits →Economy: addition to the history sectionNext edit → | ||
Line 42: | Line 42: | ||
==Economy== | ==Economy== | ||
No composition per sector (agriculture, industry, services) figures are given (but there is a statement that MSSR was solely agricultural) and no figures how many industrial object have been built in Transnistria and the rest of MSSR, altough there is a false statement that the only region where industry was built was Transnistria. The origin of the data of this Economy section is unknown. nformation on Misplaced Pages must be reliable and verifiable. Facts, viewpoints, theories, and arguments may only be included in articles if they have already been published by reliable and reputable sources. Articles should cite these sources whenever possible. Any unsourced material may be challenged and removed. --] 14:07, 23 August 2006 (UTC) | No composition per sector (agriculture, industry, services) figures are given (but there is a statement that MSSR was solely agricultural) and no figures how many industrial object have been built in Transnistria and the rest of MSSR, altough there is a false statement that the only region where industry was built was Transnistria. The origin of the data of this Economy section is unknown. nformation on Misplaced Pages must be reliable and verifiable. Facts, viewpoints, theories, and arguments may only be included in articles if they have already been published by reliable and reputable sources. Articles should cite these sources whenever possible. Any unsourced material may be challenged and removed. --] 14:07, 23 August 2006 (UTC) | ||
==Addition to the history section== | |||
I did some minor clean up of DC76’s addition to the history section. However, I also made two substantive changes: | |||
* I changed “''communist party activists''” to “''conservative activists''”. Mostly the leadership of the OSTK was from the professional elite in Tiraspol—factory managers, shop foremen, skilled engineers, and other industrial leaders. There were a few communist party workers, but they made up less than 10% of the organization. | |||
* I took out the statement that the war took place when Russian troops helped separatists. What I think is intended is that elements of ''the 14th Army'' which was claimed by Moldova, Russia, and Pridnestrov’e took part in the fighting. It was not until most of the fighting was over that Russian troops ''under Russian command'' took part in the conflict. Or, at least, this is what most English-language scholarship maintains. If some scholars claim that Moscow ordered Russian army involvement earlier, then it should be presented as a historical debate and not an established fact. ] 09:07, 1 June 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 09:07, 1 June 2007
Soviet Union Unassessed | ||||||||||
|
Former countries Unassessed | |||||||
|
old talk
What is this??at the demographics?? Moldovans and Romanians are the same thing...there's no difference..it's as if one said that there was a German minority in Austria, or that people in San Marino aren't Italian.
There is no difference between the moldavian language and the romanaian...there are only political interests antonio.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.195.161.228 (talk • contribs)
- This situation is somehow explained in articles Moldovans and Moldovan language, but there is also the official data from censuses and from Soviet and later Moldavian constitution. That data should be kept and not changed to meet someone's POV. --Zserghei 22:26, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
- The problem is that the official data is POV. Giving only this data means expressing only the view of the Soviets/Moldovenists. bogdan 23:28, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
- Everything should be clarified either in the articles corresponding to the ethnicity and to the language or below the census like in Republic of Moldova. Changing Moldovans to Romanians in every census and Moldovan language to Romanian language in every infobox is not a proper solution. --Zserghei 23:47, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
- But what are Moldovans? I speak about Moldovans from both Romania and Moldova? Aren't they Romanians? --Chisinau 12:09, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
- yeah but back in 1989, only 3000 people were marked as romanians and not 1.8% of the population.Constantzeanu 07:27, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
civil war?
The text says:
"..civil war began in Transnistria.."
Was it really civil war? --Chisinau 12:11, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
History section NPOV
Speaking about Romanians in Transnistria is ignoring historic aspects of ethnics, culture and tradition. Somebody seem to just replace "Moldavian" to "Romanian" throughout the text. Historically, Transnistria didn't have significatnt links with Romania, which led to a formation of a distinct Moldavian ethnic identity in 19th and 20th century. Transnistria was a part of Russian Empire since 1792, Bessarabia since 1812, while the state of Romania was formed later, in 1859. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxim Masiutin (talk • contribs)
- Are you satisfied with the section as it is now? Looking at it cannot see a pronounced POV. If you believe the tag should be preserved, please list specific concerns that you have. By the way, please sign your statements. TSO1D 01:56, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
- Could you please explain what does it mean "and it gave many rights to the Romanian minority there, possibly to encourage a dissent of the Romanian Moldavians."? --Maxim Masiutin
- I removed that clause because it was confusing at best. TSO1D 21:30, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you, I have removed the POV-clause. --Maxim Masiutin 08:20, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
- I removed that clause because it was confusing at best. TSO1D 21:30, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
- Could you please explain what does it mean "and it gave many rights to the Romanian minority there, possibly to encourage a dissent of the Romanian Moldavians."? --Maxim Masiutin
Culture and Ideology NPOV
This section is not politically neutral, it is exclusively devoted to the negative sides of the Soviet propaganda and ideology. It ignores historical backgroud of that region.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxim Masiutin (talk • contribs)
- Feel free to add the possible sides of Soviet propaganda and ideology to add balance, if you can do so within the framework of rules on which Misplaced Pages operates. If you believe a part of the text diplays bias or is unsusbstantiated, please explain your issue so it can be adressed. TSO1D 01:58, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
- I don't have to say anything positive about soviet propaganda, but the title ot the section is "Culture and Ideology". By Culture I mea art, music, literature, and related intellectual activities, knowledge and sophistication. There is nothing said about culuture in this section. Only about propaganda, as though culture didn't ever exist. Don't force me to "either you write about culture or I will remove the NPOV clause", because the section is factually NPOV now, beleive it or not. --Maxim Masiutin 13:41, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
- Would changing the title of the section to just ideology solve the problem? TSO1D 21:28, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
- No, the phrase"In order to emphasize the alleged differences and to break ties with Romania, Moldovan language was written with the Cyrillic alphabet" is POV, it doesn't clarify the preceiding use of Cyrillic in Transnistria and Principality of Moldova. Also, there is no confirmation for the figures "hundreds of thousands", a citation to a trustworthy reliable source is needed. --Maxim Masiutin 08:26, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
- Would changing the title of the section to just ideology solve the problem? TSO1D 21:28, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
- I don't have to say anything positive about soviet propaganda, but the title ot the section is "Culture and Ideology". By Culture I mea art, music, literature, and related intellectual activities, knowledge and sophistication. There is nothing said about culuture in this section. Only about propaganda, as though culture didn't ever exist. Don't force me to "either you write about culture or I will remove the NPOV clause", because the section is factually NPOV now, beleive it or not. --Maxim Masiutin 13:41, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Economy
No composition per sector (agriculture, industry, services) figures are given (but there is a statement that MSSR was solely agricultural) and no figures how many industrial object have been built in Transnistria and the rest of MSSR, altough there is a false statement that the only region where industry was built was Transnistria. The origin of the data of this Economy section is unknown. nformation on Misplaced Pages must be reliable and verifiable. Facts, viewpoints, theories, and arguments may only be included in articles if they have already been published by reliable and reputable sources. Articles should cite these sources whenever possible. Any unsourced material may be challenged and removed. --Maxim Masiutin 14:07, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Addition to the history section
I did some minor clean up of DC76’s addition to the history section. However, I also made two substantive changes:
- I changed “communist party activists” to “conservative activists”. Mostly the leadership of the OSTK was from the professional elite in Tiraspol—factory managers, shop foremen, skilled engineers, and other industrial leaders. There were a few communist party workers, but they made up less than 10% of the organization.
- I took out the statement that the war took place when Russian troops helped separatists. What I think is intended is that elements of the 14th Army which was claimed by Moldova, Russia, and Pridnestrov’e took part in the fighting. It was not until most of the fighting was over that Russian troops under Russian command took part in the conflict. Or, at least, this is what most English-language scholarship maintains. If some scholars claim that Moscow ordered Russian army involvement earlier, then it should be presented as a historical debate and not an established fact. jamason 09:07, 1 June 2007 (UTC)