Talk:Romanian People's Salvation Cathedral

message: Bogdane, daca tot farmitezi BOR cu articole despre Catedrala scoase din context se alege praful. "Faceti si nu desfaceti!" Nu uita etimologiile: dia-ballo, este a desface, si stii tu cine o desface ca sa o arunce! Si altii în istorie, de doua mii de ani au tot încercat to no avail sa desparta Neamul de Biserica, pe urma de catedrala, pe urma catedrala de mântuire si tot asa, toate în praf, cât mai "fin".
Citeste un pic pe situl Patriarhiei dovezile istorice si argumentarul, cu toate desfasurarile logice de acolo. Pe urma te rog, întoarce Catedrala la BOR, macar în articole :-) Si apoi te rog, lasa punerea în pagina frumos, cursiva. Este informatie si în paginatie! Totul este gândit si argumentat, asa ca deie Domnul sa punem împreuna macar putina lumina în aceste pagini anemice si tot mai subtiate.
Daca tu nu desfaci, nimeni nu va desface. Raspundere mare pe umerii tai. 
Cine altcineva dintre Fictionaristi sponzorizatori ai "umanismului socialist" wikipedist va îndrazni, daca tu nu îndraznesti?
Cu dragoste întru Hristos,
"Sa nu-l smintim pe aproapele".
Al tau, Dan
: OK. Uite care e contextul: Majoritatea bucureştenilor nu vrea catedrala acolo e prevăzut să se construiască (în Parcul Carol), primăria Bucureştiului nu a dat acordul să înceapă lucrările, iar acum se nu se ştie unde şi când se va construi. vezi articol Bogdan | Talk 21:24, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Heading

message: The article misses a lot and focuses on the scandal in the media. It says nothing about the last century efforts of building it. It says nothing about the current Patriarchal Cathedral being temporary since... 1925 (when BOR received the rank of Patriarchy). It says nothing about the POV of the BOR. Instead it quotes Le Figaro, as if it's an expert in EO, or in Romanian history. I wonder what'd happen if someone would call some Gothic cathedrals "megalomaniac". It compares apples with oranges (Casa Poporului). It blames tax money being used, but says nothing about the 85% Orthodox paying taxes, or the 50% regularly attending church. It says nothing about the requirements of space during great feasts in a 2 million souls city. adriatikus | talk 22:05, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Speculation about reliable sources will not make those sources less reliable. 'S all I have to say. Dahn (talk) 00:50, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Renaming the article 'Criticism of...' in its current shape would be better. I don't see the primary source quoted. If you manage to get over "all [you] have to say", you may check this to de-speculate you POV. adriatikus | talk 10:44, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: We don't seem to be discussing the same subject. Above and in the section you cite, you are merely constructing a speculative case against the critics, even though critics have expressed themselves through reliable sources. You are also presenting hypothetical reasons why these sources would be wrong. That goes aqgainst: WP:OR, WP:RS, WP:NPOV and WP:NOT. Dahn (talk) 21:39, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  unbalanced 

message: :The dedication to a nation instead of to a saint is unusual in Eastern Orthodoxy
::Then, the cathedral will be the Patriarchal cathedral, it will have, as expected, its patron saints (I may be wrong, one of them probably St. Andrew), and it will be titled "for the redemption of the people". That's 3 things: function (administrative level), patron saints (theological level), cognomen/designation (symbolic level). Again, that's nothing unusual.
::: Do you have a reference that it is not dedicated to the Romanian nation? bogdan (talk) 23:00, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Google helps a lot. Or:      etc. adriatikus | talk 10:05, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  You also make a confusion between the patron saint and the symbolism of this particular church. An easy way to grasp it is to understand the patron saint as the protector, and the symbolism pointing symbol as a pointer to the protected. adriatikus | talk 10:14, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dedication 

message: This article needs some pictures. There must be someone out there who can get a picture of the site plan, and put it on wikipedia commons. Can anyone do that? User:Awesome444a444 (talk) 15:02, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Pictures

message: The coordinates are wrong. They focus an existing cathedral, not the Izvor Park, where the new cathedral is being built. --Rabanus Flavus (talk) 18:59, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coordinates