Talk:Sibiu County

message: in accordance with Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names) page,
paragraph 2.
 
The lead: The title can be followed in the first line by a list of alternative names in parenthesis: {name1, name2, name3, etc.}. Any archaic names in the list (including names used before the standardization of English orthography) should be clearly marked as such, i.e.: (name1 arch.). Relevant foreign language names[3] are permitted and should be listed in alphabetic order of their respective languages, i.e.: (Armenian: name1, Belarusian: name2, Czech: name3). Alternatively, all alternative names can be moved to and explained in a names section immediately following the lead. In this case, the redundant list of the names in the article's first line should be replaced with the following text: (known also by several alternative namesNames). Once such a section or paragraph is created, the alternative English or foreign names should not be moved back to the first line.
Definition
^ The geographic location is considered to have a single widely accepted English name in modern context (swaEn) if the following two conditions are satisfied simultaneously: 
The English-language encyclopedias (Encyclopedia Britannica, Columbia Encyclopedia and Encarta) consistently use this name in all articles where the corresponding location is mentioned in modern context.
This name obtains the largest number (75% or more of total hits considering all possible variants) of Google Scholar and Google Books hits (count only articles and books, not number of times the world is used in them) when searched over English language articles and books where the corresponding location is mentioned in modern context. If the name of the location coincides with the name of another entity, care should be taken to exclude inapropriate pages from the count.
internet hits returned 11.800 results of "Hargita county" and 154 000 results of "Harghita county". English encyclopedias consistently use the name "Harghita county"
there was a voting meant to settle this problem, concluded with 5 votes in favour of providing the HU names against 2. the relevancy of that vote is reduced to 7 people voting,
considering the relevancy of English Encyclopedias and Wikipedia naming conventions
i here by remove the names of hungarian administrative divisions provided as alternates for names of romanian administrative divisions from the lead of the article. refer to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names) for any debate on this matter Criztu 08:19, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names) 

message: if u access the two official links in the demographics section, there you can see that the demographics are presented in the following order:
Romanians, Hungarians, Romas, Ucrainians, Germans.
this order i consider it statistical. in that no one can object about a "majority of an ethnicity in an administrative division of Romania". i hope u can see my point Criztu 10:35, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but it's absolutely illogical to place Hungarians before Roma (the standard usage is Roma, not Romas) just because Romania-wide Hungarians are a larger ethnic group. We're talking about Sibiu's demographics here, and in that context, Roma should be listed before Hungarians. The only reason that Census 2002 lists Hungarians first is because its table is Romania-wide, with Sibiu being listed as a row in that table. For that reason, the minorities are listed in order to size, Romania-wide. But here they should be listed in order to size.  Ronline ✉ 12:05, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: these are two statistical institutions, both imply same sorting order. official statistics  and  edrc Criztu 12:23, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

text: i understand that in your view, demographics "should" be listed by size county-wide, in my view, this aproach raises the ideea "which ethnicity is majoritary in an administrative division or Romania". since these two statistics institutes are recognised throughout EU, and since they have more expertise then us, I think we "should" use their sorting order as a guide. Criztu 12:23, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But their sorting order is not like that for any political reasons! Obviously the Census data can't be sorted any other way because all counties are part of the same table (hence it has to be sorted nationwide). The EDRC stats use the same template for all of the counties so they are not sorted; the way I see it, it's a technical issue at EDRC, not any meaningful choice. Obviously sorting based on size for each county is the way to go. I don't see any reason against it. Outside of Covasna and Harghita, Romanians are majorities in every county, so it doesn't raise the issue of "which ethnicity is majoritary in an administrative division or Romania". But I find it absurd that a minority that makes up, say, 15% of the population should be listed below one making up 0.4% of the population just because of the way that EDRC's database script is executed.  Ronline ✉ 12:42, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: pardon me, but edrc shouldnt have any dificulty in sorting minorities in any order. u can see both edrc.ro and recensamant.ro use the same sorting order. for me, this nation-wide ordering of demographics in counties of romania carries the additional information of "romanians are nation-wide the most numerous, then hungarians, then romas, then ucrainians, then germans, etc". i just cant help not noticing how some build all kinds of disertations starting from "an ethnicity being "greatest" majority in a county of romania". i would go with edrc.ro and recensamant.ro sorting order, it comforts me Criztu 17:24, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sorting Demographic figures 

message: One thing that would greatly improve this article would be to include a detailed map of the county. So far, there are two maps showing the location of the county in Romania, one map showing the political divisions, but no map showing the actual county. Does anyone have access to one that could be used? Or know of a link to a webpage with a good, detailed map? Emika22 (talk) 07:27, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  a proper map?