Talk:Eastern Romance languages

message: In addition to a lot of other problems in this article concerning writing style, I noticed the description or caption on the picture of the Thracian horseman with the Latin inscription says that this form of Latin evolved directly into Aromanian and Megleno-Romanian, while at the same time the rest of the article suggests that proto-Romanian formed north of the Jirecek line, a contradiction. I think the idea that Aromanian formed directly from any supposed Latin spoken in northern Greece (it's dubious whether it was even spoken there during the Empire) is somewhat linguistically simplistic and naive, and seemingly written by someone who doesn't have detailed experience with the study of the language. Sometimes Occam's Razor doesn't always offer the best solution. I noticed many people seem to think the only thing Aromanian and Romanian have in common is that they both came from Latin, as if they were never one language after that, and like they were part of completely different Romanization efforts and periods, which is clearly untrue from a close look at both languages. They just went in different directions, one north and one further south, and received different influences on their shared core (Slavic vs. Greek and other things). Word dewd544 (talk) 20:34, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture caption 

message: Regarding the classification scheme of Eastern Romance into "North Danubian" (which only has Romanian) and "South Danubian" with all the others... where is this from? I don't see sources for this. It seems like something more based on geography (by virtue of the other 3 languages occurring south of the Danube) than actual in-depth linguistic analysis and history. Aromanian and Megleno-Romanian are fine in that category of course (although Meglenitic, as stated has a few intermediate features)... but Istro-Romanian is quite likely a medieval offshoot of Transylvanian Romanian, with very heavy Slavic influence that gradually eroded its character over time. It's very hard to see it as a natural development straight from the Roman era in Istria; it just wouldn't be so close to Romanian then. Also, languages like Istriot and Dalmatian are examples of the actual continuation of Romance in that region, not Istro-Romanian. So this is misleading in the article.
Secondly, that part toward the end about the "Vlachs of the Balkans" (referring to the ones in the Bulgarian empire) disappearing or becoming entirely "slavized" is inaccurate, as obviously Aromanians and such still exist and are Balkan... You also have Vlachs of various origins in Bulgaria today. Seems to be a statement that's a bit informal and point-of-view like. Word dewd544 (talk) 19:37, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Some issues

message: This article, along with the Western Romance languages and Italo-Dalmatian languages articles, is part of a series of three articles, developed in parallel over the last 14 years (and part of the larger project about the Romance languages). The mode of editing was similar with all sister articles, receiving too few inline citations at this time.
However, only the content of this article was deleted, while the other two were not affected. 
Why was this article destroyed? Why was not the content improvement in this article encouraged? Why do editors who have contributed over the past 14 years to this article are not treated in the same way as editors of the other sister articles (as per Wikipedia:Assume good faith)? 
I am very disappointed that Wikipedia has come to work in such an arbitrary way. Thank you. (Rgvis (talk) 13:40, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I am very disappointed that there are wikipedians who are unable to understand and apply the basic principles of editing, including WP:NOR. Can you refer to reliable sources verifying this article? Please remember, no editor has provided reference to a single reliable source for more than a decade. Instead of making dramatic statements, you should search for reliable sources to verify it. Please feel free to delete the other two articles if you think they purely contain OR. Borsoka (talk) 14:15, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mass deleted content 

message: Anon, please read the template message which was placed at the top of the article in June 2009. It clearly says that "Unsourced material may be challenged and removed". Why do you think that the deletion of sentences that have not been verified for more than 10 years is arbitrary? Which WP policy allows editors to restore content which was not verified for more than 10 years? Borsoka (talk) 12:33, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Anon, would you please answer my above questions. Unsourced material will be removed as per WP:NOR. The table both in this article and in the article dedicated to Istro-Romanian language contains a random list of words which is not verified by a reliable source. Consequently, the table contradicts WP:Synth. Borsoka (talk) 16:19, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I have restored referenced content. (Rgvis (talk) 16:52, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Which reliable source contains a similar list of words in the context of the article? Can you explain why this list of random words does not contradict WP:SYNTH? Borsoka (talk) 00:55, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

text: The editing is according to WP:EP. Similar lists are common in the articles content dealing with language groups. (Rgvis (talk) 13:04, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: , could you quote the relevant text from WP:EP? Borsoka (talk) 00:09, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I initiated a discussion on this issue at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Linguistics#Comparative tables of sample words. Borsoka (talk) 02:26, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Arbitrary" deletion 

message: The table lists that "vivre" is the French word for "alive", yet it means "to live". The proper word would be "vivant"/"en vie"Ragazzostar (talk) 13:41, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improper French 

message: The Castelmezzano dialect in Southern Italy has a vovel system similar to Eastern Romance languages but is NOT an Eastern Romance language, in opposition to other Southern Italian dialects ! The categorisation into Eastern Romance languages depends on more than just the vovel system, for example on geographocal division. If the Castelmezzano dialect is included, many other southern Italian must be includest too, maybe all dialects south of a line La Spezia - Rimini. Metron (talk) 20:06, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: We should have a more thourough discussion about it, since the infobox and the main page's content is also relevant. , would you tell what you think? Thank You.(KIENGIR (talk) 12:21, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no knowledge about Italian dialects, so I cannot comment on this issue. Borsoka (talk) 01:56, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Castelmezzano dialect

message: Hi,
I have checked some of the sources mentioned in this article as well as in the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balkan_Romance_languages article and none of them support the formula "The Balkan Romance languages, also known as Daco-Romance languages". Some of the sources (like Schulte 2009, p.230) don't even mention "Balkan Romance" at all - which is precisely the source used to support this statement (as well as the identical statement in he Balkan Romance article).Cealicuca (talk) 19:02, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Support removal. Super Ψ Dro 21:14, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Balkan Romance = Daco-Romance 

message: I just could bot find it in use any where.
Not even dictoneries... 2A02:14F:172:E50:0:0:8A48:7124 (talk) 12:59, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does vipt a real word(romanian word for food)?