Talk:History of Moldova

message: "Although it is more than 10 years after the independence declaration, the traces of the Soviet regime's propaganda are still very deep and the Romanian Moldovans are still afraid and ashamed of their origin."  I find this comment to be a bit inappropriate--certainly a qualifier must be inserted before Romanian Moldovans, perhaps "some" or even "there are a few groups of."  Perhaps the "shame" is not of their origins, but rather of their unfortunate economic situation and their communist mayor in Chisinau as well as their somewhat pro-Russian President, Vladimir Voronin.
The president Vladimir Voronin is a puppet of Kremlin, not just 'somewhat pro-russian'. The mayor of Chisinau, Serafim Urechean, is not a communist, he represents the opposition.
------------
Another variant is that was named after a river by a Hungarian noble - what hungarian noble ? -- criztu
Moldova's Latin origins can be traced to the period of Roman occupation of nearby Dacia - shouldn't the sarmatians(iazygians) be mentioned as living in Moldova ?
: The Roman cities (formerly Greek colonies) on the Black Sea shore. What's about sarmatians? --Vasile 02:43, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Was Moldova a Polish fief in 15th century ? --Lysy (talk) 11:05, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: A Polish fief ?

message: TSO1D: I think the Russian name is justified at that point, since the city (and fom that point, capital) was officially known under that name for a substantial period of time. --Illythr 16:29, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The reason I did that was that the name of the city was given in other languags in the main page about the city, and the in other sections of the article. But I guess you are right, during Bessarabia's existance as part of the Russian Empire and the USSR, both names should be given. But what version of Кишинёв should be used? Should the Cyrillic version be used, Kishinev, or Kishinyov? I don't think we should use the strange hybrid Kishinёv that was up there before. I think Kishinev was the English name for the city until independence and that should be included in paranthases. But should it say that that was the name of the city in Russian, I mean Kishinev is the anglicized form of the Russian name, but not the Russian name itself? Maybe the Cyrillic should be provided in one place to explain that that was the real official name. TSO1D 17:56, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually now that I looked at the paragraph, I think it's too brief to warrant a full explanation of the etymology of the name. I think it's enough to have Kishinev in parantheses whenever the name is encountered. TSO1D 18:12, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I believe that when existing cities are mentioned in a historical background, their official names of that historical period should be mentioned at least once, for reference. In short - I agree with your edits. --Illythr 22:37, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chisinau/Kishinev 

message: As banned user Anittas points out on his user talk page "Vlachian (proto-Romanian) Principality of Moldavia" is nonsense. "Proto-Romanian" is off by about a millennium. 
He also questions the name "Dragoş of Maramureş" suggesting that this should be "Dragos [presumably Dragoş] of Cuhea". - Jmabel | Talk 23:59, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proto-Romanian 

message: Really, when a jackass bullies you calling you an idiot, you are not necessarily one. Similarly, when an evil empire (The Soviets) forces an ultimatum on you, it does not mean the ultimatum is some sort of reference. It's just a text issued by a jackass. Dpotop 16:04, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't remember us discussing this before. Perhaps you're thinking about Anonimu? The withdrawn of the military equals to cede the territory. We were ruled by a Tatar(escu). --Thus Spake Anittas 16:28, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sorry, Anittas. Indeed, it was Anonimu, our national Communist propagandist. Dpotop 16:03, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually i'm an internationalist. Please watch the civility guidelines.Anonimu 16:17, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

text: They got rid of Titulescu because he was supporting the International Brigades. Mothaphukin fascists...Anonimu 16:59, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  They got rid of Titulescu because he was incompetent. All his work was directed at supporting the post-WWI status quo and the Society of Nations, and concocting useless alliances. This ultimately proved useless. Not only against large countries, such as Germany and the USSR, but also against Hungary and Bulgaria. Not to mention the way he let himself cradled by the promises of the Soviets, while in the end there was no result. So, when WWII started, we were completely out in the cold. Good job, Titulescu! Dpotop 19:47, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Like you really hate Romania's interwar position...Anonimu 22:13, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sorry, but I do not understand your statement. Dpotop 22:21, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ceded or occupied 

message: Page not moved. See discussion at Talk:Moldova#Requested_move. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 00:15, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You have already opened a move request at Talk:Moldova#Requested move. No need to double the discussion.Xasha (talk) 18:11, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have just requested that the terminology used should not be offensive to anyone. I have indicated that the terminology used is offensive. Please be aware, that I have indicated this in a polite manner, simply indicating that I don't see why an offensive language should be tolerated in Wikipedia. Afil (talk) 19:03, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree that we should avoid terminology that some find offensive wherever possible, although Wikipedia policy doesn't go that far. But it's not always even possible. For example, whatever we do with the name Macedonia someone is going to be offended; In that case we ended up with the DAB at the unqualified name but this compromise is probably offensive to more individuals than any other solution, see Macedonia naming dispute. This seems to me to be another of those cases. Andrewa (talk) 02:37, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Agree. And that discussion seems to be heading to an overwhelming rejection of the move proposal, so far. Andrewa (talk) 18:27, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The proper solution, as with the main discussion, is a headnote linking to the history of Moldavia; if the present wording does not make clear this is not that article, reword. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:10, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed move

message: I see two probmems here. One is chonological gap in the sections: 
# Post independence: 1993 to 1998
# Recent history: 2001 to present
Second, why exactly these years are watershed ones? More precisely: in which sources this periodization is accepted? Timurite (talk) 19:28, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess nobody just bothered to write about 1998-2001. That period was kinda uneventful, as opposed to 1993-1998 (economic decline, political stabilisation) and 2001- ("communist" rule). --Illythr (talk) 20:59, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weird periodization 

message: Huh, what's the problem? Somebody did a pretty thorough job at Flag of Romania, so the article's got them all, historical, modern, standards, whatever. --Illythr (talk) 01:41, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: The flag

message: I just got through adding a couple of paragraphs at the beginning of the article about the prehistorical period of time of the area of Moldova. I do hope that what I wrote does not inspire the same level of controversy that seems to have plagued other periods of time in this page. However, I would like to propose either altering the name of the section "Antiquity and early middle ages" to "Prehistory to early middle ages" - or - to create a separate new section just on "Prehistory". There were significant cultures that existed in Moldova territory before the Dacians arrived, and to ignore them seems unscholarly. Saukkomies 01:13, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Neolithic Era

message: Hello.  Foundation of Moldavia, a subpage of this article, has received a Good Article Review.  It is proposed the article be failed due to the poor readability of its prose throughout the article.  It also has significant (fixable) problems with the copyright status of its images.  Please visit the review page to join the discussion. - DustFormsWords (talk) 03:08, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Foundation of Moldavia]] GAR 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on History of Moldova. 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  tag to http://www.europeanairlines.no/Arcticles_Rumania1_250306.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130512230751/http://politicom.moldova.org/news/russian-troops-in-transnistria-a-threat-to-the-security-of-the-republic-of-moldova-20998-eng.html to http://politicom.moldova.org/news/russian-troops-in-transnistria-a-threat-to-the-security-of-the-republic-of-moldova-20998-eng.html
*Added  tag to http://omg.md/Content.aspx?id=2437&lang=2
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) 05:58, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on History of Moldova. 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/20100513230114/http://kishinev.info/architecture_en/ to http://www.kishinev.info/architecture_en
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927011752/http://dev.eurac.edu:8085/mugs2/do/blob.pdf?type=pdf&serial=1047909431571 to http://dev.eurac.edu:8085/mugs2/do/blob.pdf?type=pdf&serial=1047909431571
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071204031935/http://politicom.moldova.org/stiri/eng/40/ to http://politicom.moldova.org/stiri/eng/40/
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) 13:26, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on History of Moldova. 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/20071204004958/http://www.jamestown.org/edm/article.php?article_id=2368523 to http://www.jamestown.org/edm/article.php?article_id=2368523
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) 20:02, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* Bolohoveni land from A.V. Boldur description.PNG
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:09, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion