Talk:Romania/Archive 8

message: In the last day there were at least 5 edits by unregistered users that were reverted due to vandalism. Is it possible to do something?Nergaal 18:35, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I actually think that entire Wikipedia should allow only registered users to post. You can't ban millions of IP addresses of each vandal, creating an account is not painful but at least would deter some lazy vandals. -- AdrianTM 18:40, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 5 edits is nothing, and no there is nothing practical to do about it.  If there's an admin around he or she might be persuaded to semi-protect the page so that only registered users could edit, but I doubt it, 5 is really mild.  Some of the Agricultural pages like Domestic pig or Chicken go for scores of edits without any change to the substance, just vandalism/revert over and over again.  Still can't get semi-protection for some of them, because "it's not serious enough" or by the time you get an admin to look at it, it's not recent enough.  Just deal with it and watch the page so you can keep fixing the vandalism.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 00:19, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Limiting editing to registered users?

message: Romania, as i learned in school in in central-south Europe. It is... 2000 km from the western most point of Europe, it it 2000 km from the eastern most point of Europe ( the Ural mountain chain), it is 2100 km from the northern most point of Europe , and 1000 km from the southern most point in Europe. So.. why does it say in the first sentence it's in eastern Europe?. 
I don't think it's wise for me to change it without approval, but i am kindly asking you guys to look into it.
Numaru7 01:21, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with this, and this has been discussed before, however we are not allowed to introduce "original research" and besides Romania has already placed in "Southeastern Europe" by... guess who.... Western Europeans, on basis that it's at East from them and on the basis of old political considerations that are now mostly irrelevant, however this geographic travesty unfortunatelly will stick unless you find couple of good references that place Romania in other geografic category, which I doubt... (also, Europe is not a square to make things easy to place) -- AdrianTM 01:54, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Geography

message: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Diplomatic_missions_of_Romania --Sambure (talk) 14:05, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: HELP!!!

message: I would like to contest the "secular state" statement. Religion is taught in school, and Orthodox priests do the teaching. Recognized religions in Romania receive government money, the Orthodox church receives much more than any other religion, and Orthodox leaders are on the board that decides new applications for a religion to be recognized, so that they can dictate who is and is not recognized and who does and does not receive money. There is only a small handful of recognized religions, and those that are not recognized must operate as non-profit organizations, paying high property taxes, making it almost impossible for a religion to grow to an officially recognized status without a massive international organization behind it. So I would hardly call Romania a secular state.
I think that the December 27, 2006 law mentioned in the article is also a manifestation of this problem. Requiring 20,000 members for a religious organization implies a need for an organizational structure which is inhibited by the property tax laws I just mentioned. I do not know of the official statements made by Romanian government that it is a secular state, but if such a statement has been made then it is very contestable. Jacobjojo (talk) 17:40, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe the constitution defines Romania as a secular state Nergaal (talk) 21:26, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, in general, Religion teachers teach religion, people that finished Theology, but are not priests. --Venatoreng (talk) 16:53, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relgion 

message: An anonymous user made some of the images huge. --Venatoreng (talk) 16:44, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: I think it's best to write the whole population of Bucharest which is about 2.5 millions. Român (talk) 17:15, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought it was 2.2. Basketball110 16:07, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Bucharest

message: I'd like the references clarified please, in English:
* This introduction tot he Etymology section claims that "The name of Romania (România) comes from Român (Romanian) which is a derivative of the word Romanus ("Roman") from Latin. The fact that Romanians have said the name is a derivative of Romanus (Romanian: Român/Rumân) is mentioned as early as the 16th century by many authors, including Italian Humanists travelling in Transylvania, Moldavia and Wallachia.[5][6][7][8]"
**Because there is no Sources section, I can not veryfy the references, besides the fac tthat they are not in English. So can I get the full sources and translation of the references please?
** "nunc se Romanos vocant" A. Verres, Acta et Epistolae, I, p. 243, assume Vatican,, but what year?
** "...si dimandano in lingua loro Romei...se alcuno dimanda se sano parlare in la lingua valacca, dicono a questo in questo modo: Sti Rominest ? Che vol dire: Sai tu Romano,..." Cl. Isopescu, Notizie intorno ai romeni nella letteratura geografica italiana del Cinquecento, in Bulletin de la Section Historique, XVI, 1929, p. 1- 90 transaltion please, and rest of source information
**“Anzi essi si chiamano romanesci, e vogliono molti che erano mandati quì quei che erano dannati a cavar metalli...” in Maria Holban, Călători străini despre Ţările Române, vol. II, p. 158–161 transaltion please, and rest of source information
** "Tout ce pays la Wallachie et Moldavie et la plus part de la Transivanie a esté peuplé des colonie romaines du temps de Traian l’empereur…Ceux du pays se disent vrais successeurs des Romains et nomment leur parler romanechte, c'est-à-dire romain … " Voyage fait par moy, Pierre Lescalopier l’an 1574 de Venise a Constantinople, fol 48 in Paul Cernovodeanu, Studii si materiale de istorie medievala, IV, 1960, p. 444 transaltion please, and rest of source information
* This reference "13. The first known mention of the term "Romania" in its modern denotation dates from 1816, as the Greek scholar Dimitrie Daniel Philippide published in Leipzig his work "The History of Romania", followed by "The Geography of Romania". On the tombstone of Gheorghe Lazăr in Avrig (built in 1823) there is the inscription: "Precum Hristos pe Lazăr din morţi a înviat/Aşa tu România din somn ai deşteptat."
** What is the full citation of the work by Dimitrie Daniel Philippide? 
** Was it published in English as "The History of Romania"? 
** Which of the two works and where uses the term Romania? 
** What is the relationship between Dimitrie Daniel Philippide and Gheorghe Lazăr? 
** Is there any literary evidence that the later used Romania in his writings?
--mrg3105mrg3105 09:09, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Clarifying references

message: I really would prefer that the tag for Etymology section not be there, and rather that if the references do prove the assertion, that they be "quoted". It looks bad to have such a tag on a country article--mrg3105mrg3105 12:27, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the useless and irrelevant references have remained, but the tag has disappeared. This is called "making it up as we go". I would therefore suggest that so far Etymology of Romania is based on a lie.--mrg3105mrg3105 21:27, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  tagging