See Etymology of Vlach, where it states: 

 Historically, it was used to refer to all Latin people of the Balkans, but nowadays, this term is only rarely used to refer the Romanians, but rather to refer to the Aromanians, Istro-Romanians and Megleno-Romanians. 

 However, in Serbia, the Romanian minority (living especially in Vojvodina, Timok valley), although they are speaking the Daco-Romanian (standard Romanian) dialect, they are still referred as "Vlachs". In the Yugoslavian census figures, the Aromanians of Macedonia and the Romanians of Serbia were both classified as "Vlachs". 

 I hope you realise how flawed the Serbian definition of Vlach is. If Vlach was an ethnicity to refer to all Eastern Romance peoples, it would be more correct, but then it would be unfair to groups such as Aromanians. But to make a distinction between Romanians and "Vlachs" which speak the same language is particularly absurd. The fact that it's official doesn't make it right, or doesn't make it scientifically/culturally correct. Romania recognises no distinct Aromanian ethnic group. Is that right? No. Does that mean that we can't have an article about Aromanians in Romania? Not at all. Wikipedia is objective and NPOV, and shouldn't settle for the nationalistic disputes and propaganda of certain countries.