Talk:Gheorghe Funar

message: Paragraph now:
He became well-known for his very strong nationalist stance in favor of ethnic Romanians in Cluj-Napoca, which is a multi-ethnic city with an ethnic Romanian majority (79.39%) and a significant ethnic Hungarian population (18.96%). Other ethnic groups include 0.95% Roma and 0.23% Germans. Transylvania was part of Hungary (which was part of Austro-Hungarian Empire between 1867 and 1918), and the union of the region with Romania in 1918 was perceived as a significant loss by many Hungarians who viewed it as an integral part of Hungary, despite the fact that the majority of the Transylvanian population was ethnic Romanian.
Proposed rephrasing:
He became well-known for his very strong nationalist stance in favor of ethnic Romanians in Cluj-Napoca, which is a multi-ethnic city with an ethnic Romanian majority (79.39%) and a significant ethnic Hungarian population (18.96%). Other ethnic groups include 0.95% Roma and 0.23% Germans. Cluj-Napoca is considered to be the capital city of Transylvania, a historical region within Romania with historic ties to both Hungary and Romania.
Still not the best version I think, since two times "historic" doesn't sound good, but I haven't found a better solution yet. Still, what I find important in the rephrasing is:
* Say that Cluj-Napoca is considered to be the capital city of Transylvania. In the version now used Transylvania is not introduced, many people who do not know much about the subject will find the sudden mention of Transylvania very strange
* Say that Transylvania has both historic ties with Romania and Hungary, and leave it with that. This is not the article to exactly point out those historic ties, people who want to know more about these ties should take a look at Transylvania. Maartenvdbent 13:17, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I basically agree with you, I think this change would improve the article. However, as a Hungarian, I don't want to be involved in a possible edit war over a nationalist Romanian politician - this is why I did not edit the article. I hope there will be Romanian editors who support your suggestion. (Romanian friends, if you want my help regarding Csurka István and his friends, please don't hesitate to contact me.) --KIDB 14:08, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand your hesitation to edit the article. I am also hesitant to edit before there is a consensus over the rephrasing, since these issues - like you said - tend to end up in an edit war all too often. Maarten 19:28, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree that the rephrasing was needed and, in my opinion, the proposed one seems reasonable. The previous text was most certainly the result of various consecutive additions to an irrelevant (in the context of this article) phrase. As a general rule, keeping things simple and relevant is always a good thing. Alexrap 14:22, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed rephrase

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Gheorghe Funar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081205144834/http://www.realitatea.net/rezultatele-alegerilor-locale-din-principalele-orase-ale-tarii_292922.html to http://www.realitatea.net/rezultatele-alegerilor-locale-din-principalele-orase-ale-tarii_292922.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:32, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified