November  UTC   And no one is asking Wikipedia to do so so what is your point We can cover the influence of Russia in a way that is consistent with the facts But this is NOT how we are doing it in the current version Like Mark reposted so I will I  About Russias involvement yes the section can be improved First we have this sentence The Russian authorities contributed both militarily and politically to the creation of a separatist government in Transnistria Militarily this is debatable You have heard the old saw that winners write history right Well in this case there are no clear winners  and as a result there are two different versions of history The Moldovan side overstates Russias role The Russian side tries to minimize it ECHR was divided between a majority opinion and some fairly substantial minority arguments of a good segment of their judges Jamason has started to work on some indepth research and it has been covered by some German scholars in the recent past too As regards our sentence the word contributed is a bit imprecise but it wouldnt necessarily be inaccurate Next sentence The PMR remained under the effective authority or at the very least under the decisive influence of Russia and in any event it survived by virtue of the military economic financial and political support that Russia gave it This is crapola Even the author of the sentence knew the problem PMR is under Russian authority  erm Well maybe not but at the very least under decisive Russian influence  wait hold on maybe not that either  well at least at any event then it survives because of Russian help So what is it If we are not sure it shouldnt be included If we are sure then that should be included and it should be accurate Russia has certainly given aid to PMR but so has Ireland and the United States State Department and several other countries within the last year alone