Talk:Obnovlenie

message: Here are some of the many, many sources which refer to this party as an opposition party. I have deliberately given a broad mix of pro-Moldovan sources, pro-Transnistrian sources and neutral sources which have no preference. They are all 3 represented here, so there is a little something for everyone.
* I got tired, I depart: "The confrontation of these groups is obvious to many, although it flows in concealed, latent form."
:Not a confrontation of Renewall with Smirnov. "And then, a small thing will remain - in the new-year congratulation, Smirnov will apologize and will say: "I got tired, I depart" - science fiction or wishfull thinking, not a serious analysis.--MariusM 23:41, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  This is a pro-Moldovan, anti-Transnistrian source which you are critizing. You know that, don't you? I personally agree with you that puls.md is not serious, but it is considered a reputable source by many (and fall without Wikipedia's criteria for reputable sources). At any rate, it doesn't really matter if you agree with them or not, or if I do. What matters is the following quote from their article: "The confrontation of these groups is obvious to many" which confirms that Renewal is in opposition to Smirnov and the rest of the executive branch. - Mauco 23:50, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For the record: is not mentioned that Renewal is between those groups.--MariusM 15:14, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Please read the article again. There are two main groups in the power struggle in Transnistria today. Guess who one of them is... - Mauco 04:39, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Tiraspol Times. I don't buy them.--MariusM 23:42, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't buy moldova.org or puls.md either, but I included sources from all political viewpoints and they all agree that Renewal is in opposition to Smirnov. If Moldova AND Transnistria say it, and independent third party outsiders as well, then you can not the sole voice who want to exclude it from Wikipedia. - Mauco 23:46, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I know that you can find articles saying that Renewall is in oposition with Smirnov, PMR regime started propaganda about it and there are also some non-PMR journalists who swalowed the bite. I consider this irrelevant as long as Renewall don't make any attempt to replace Smirnov. If they put a candidature against Smirnov or if they anounce to sustain somebody else than Smirnov for presidency in December 2006 ellection, I would accept to list it as an opposition party. If not, they are not an opposition party. I consider possible that Renewall will anounce they back Smirnov for presidency. We should wait and see, not make assumptions and not let in Wikipedia unfounded assumptions of other journalists, being them from Tiraspol Times or moldova.org. There is not long time to wait.--MariusM 15:14, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  So 8 sources are not enough? You can be an opposition party and not field a presidential candidate. Lots of examples from all over Europe and the world for that. Besides, it is not really a matter of your statement that " I would accept to list it as an opposition party". As Mikka pointed out, what really matters here is if there are sources which support the statement. - Mauco 05:03, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  With regards to '"we should wait", the answer is no. Why? Because Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. We edit on the basis of what we have today, not on the basis on what might happen in the future. This is even more true for exclusions of edits. Do not keep an edit out (which we have sources for today) based on what might or might not happen later down the road. This insistence of not accepting fully sourced facts is getting ridiculous. - Mauco 05:03, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: [CROSS-SPAMMING REMOVED]
: That is about Sheriff. This article is about Renewal. I have deleted it, but for anyone who wants to see the whole rant, the exact same list is here. MariusM just cross-spammed Wikipedia. - Mauco 03:35, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources that proves links between Smirnov's family and Sheriff

message: E-democracy commentary describes best the political situation in Transnistria: "interests of the "Smirnov clan" are represented in all three movements, including the victorious movement Obnovlenye is a proof in this regard. The famous firm "Sheriff" has among its leaders one of Smirnov's son, who has recently became lawmaker, supports the latter. Of course, no serious clan "keeps its eggs in one basket," and this thing also defines the Transnistrian pluralism that the so-called democratic elections in the region were based on. One can say the three heads of the same "separatist dragon" form the political pluralism in Transdniestria . --MariusM 16:26, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just so we all know: "E-democracy" is a Moldovan effort, funded and produced in Moldova, and they do not believe that Transnistria has a right to exist as a separate country. Can we get a reliable source, please? Any nutcase can write anything on the web, and just because someone's opinion says so - on "E-democracy" or a some other website - does not make it fact. Lots of websites say that the Democrats and the Republicans are not two separate parties but just two sides of the same coin. Still, Wikipedia treats them as separate parties. You are forced to treat Renewal as a separate party, too, MariusM, despite your personal opinion on the issue. - Mauco 20:30, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I treat (not "threat") Renewal as a separate party, don't use again straw man argument. I only doubt their real oposition against Smirnov regime, based on serious analysis of reliable sites as "e-democracy". This site is made by a non-guvernamental and politically non-affiliated organisation . This is not the only site which is questioning the reality of Renewal oposition. Just today, Andrey Safonov, who wanted to compete in Transnistrian presidential elections but had his candidature rejected by Electoral Comission, tell he is the "only oposition". That mean Renewal oposition is not real (indeed, is Safonov's opinion, I'm not backing Safonov, I want only to show that e-democracy analysis is not singular).--MariusM 21:07, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sure, there are lots of people (and sources) who also doubt that the Democrats and Republicans are really in opposition to each other. See Republicrat. That doesn't make them right. It is just an opinion, and it does not affect the main articles on neither of these two parties. Opinions like that does not "prove" anything or give you the right to remove the fact that Renewal is an opposition party. - Mauco 01:02, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: three heads of the same "separatist dragon"

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Renewal (Transnistria). 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/20070311022124/http://www.moldova.org/download/eng/529/ to http://www.moldova.org/download/eng/529/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110606071224/http://www.kommersant.com/p705753/r_1/The_Old_Guard_Wins_in_Transdniestria/ to http://www.kommersant.com/p705753/r_1/The_Old_Guard_Wins_in_Transdniestria/
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) 01:06, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified