Talk:Romanians/Archive 3

message: It seems the article may suffer a little from hometown pride. I believe it was a couple of guys named Wright who performed this amazing little feat first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.79.14.15 (talk • contribs) 21 Sept 2005
: Or this fellow from Brazil? This is one of those things where several people did this in rather rapid succession, and we will probably never have international consensus who deserves credit for being first. -- Jmabel | Talk 04:59, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Actually, Santos-Dumont flew in November 1906, while Traian Vuia flew in August 1906. Of course, Wright brothers flew before both of them, but they used a catapult for launching. bogdan | Talk 06:02, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

text: I happen to believe that, but the Wrights were highly secretive, and had not publicly announced their feat at the time of the Santos-Dumont or Vuia flights, both of which took off under their own power, and Santos-Dumont at least (I'm not sure about Vuia) showed tremendously more maneuverability than the Wright's craft. In the U.S. we all learn without qualification that the Wrights were first, and accept their 3-years-after-the-fact evidence of their feat, but in many other countries the Wrights' claim that is viewed with some skepticism. -- Jmabel | Talk 02:32, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  First Heavier-than-air Flight? 

message: ::Very funny page, really funny because at population data are all the figures big lies. It was written for example that in Canada there are just 60,000 Romanians or something like that.Well just in Montreal there are over 100,000 Romanians and in Toronto, 350,000.So I doubt that those statistics are very ,,actuals.
  NorbertArthur 29 November 2005
What a f**k is this s**t of page?????????!!!!!!!!!!!!WAKE UP PEOPLE!WE ARE IN 2005! BE LOGICAL AND USE YOUR BRAINS!It ABSOLUTLY IMPOSSIBLE that there are JUST 367,000 Romanians in USA and 131,000 in Canada! Just between 1990 and 2002 2 millions Romanians emmigrated to USA!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.92.195.76 (talk • contribs) 30 November 2005
:Give some citation to this affirmation and we will be happy to add it on the main page. And pls use some proper language. --Orioane 05:30, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Before this gets too far, please remember to cite your sources when adding population figures, citing your sources is important when adding content of just about any kind. In this case I see a lot of claims but no real sources to back them up. That should be the next step, thanks! Rx StrangeLove 05:29, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Contested figures

message: An October 2005 report estimates that 1,061,400 Romanians are living in Italy, constituting 37.2% of 2.8 million immigrants in that country.   -- Bonaparte  talk & contribs 09:16, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The Prime Minister S. Berlusconi visiting in 12.10.2005 Romania said that there are at least 600.000 (http://www.guv.ro/presa/afis-doc.php?idpresa=42228&idrubricapresa=&idrubricaprimm=&idtema=&tip=&pag=1&dr=). So I think is correct. -- Bonaparte  talk & contribs 09:19, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: there are one million romanians in Italy

message: At Demographics of Canada, at the major ethnic origins nations,like Italian or Polish. But there they also should be the Romanians, becuase at List of Canadians by ethnicity, they show the same ethnic origins and the numbers of population. In Canada there are 400,000 Romanians ethnic, and there there are nations with lower number at Larger ethnic origins, like Hungarians.I judged that Romanians should be between Norwergians-Canadians and Indo-Canadians.Always when I put Romanians there somebody take it down.Could somebody tell me if I'm right please?
Norbert Arthur 11:15 04 December 2005
:There is no evidence for your claims, and the Statistics Canada figures specifically contradict them.  Please make only properly sourced claims. Jayjg (talk) 16:50, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There may be around 1,000,000 romanians in Canada. -- Bonaparte  talk 16:53, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: On what do you base that? Jayjg (talk) 17:15, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

text: FWIW, http://www.romedia.us/target/index.htm has the highest estimate I've ever seen for Canada from an even vaguely credible source, at 400,000. -- Jmabel | [[User 
talk:Jmabel|Talk]] 07:31, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

text: It may be probably but a feeling doesn't count as an official data. --Vasile 05:42, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Romanians in Canada

message: There's at least a couple editors here that are flirting with breaking WP:3RR. Please read the link I provided, as you can see reverting more than three times during a 24 hour period can result in a block. All this reverting not useful and not very constructive....please work it out here. In the mean time WP:3RR can be enforced by myself or any other admin who notices it. 
Can anyone provide links outside of Wikipedia giving definite population figures? I listed a couple sources and I'm sure there are more....let's try and work together and try to raise the level of debate...it's more useful and less stressful :) Rx StrangeLove 19:43, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reverting 

message: http://www.zf.ro/articole/Patriciu-face-cea-mai-mare-achizitie-din-istoria-Romaniei-75992.html
În Franţa şi Spania, diaspora română depăşeşte un milion de persoane. In France and in Spain the romanian diaspora is more then 1 million persons.-- Bonaparte  talk 09:02, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not want to dissapoint you guys, butI am afraid that ZF made an unhappy use of the term diaspora. I think it was better to use just "In Spain and France there are more than 1 mil romanians living". Unlike the U.S. and canada, where I don't know the situation, in Western Europe, the majority of Romanians living here, are not counted as citisens of France, Spain, Italy, Germany etc, because they do not have citisenship, they are counted as Romania Romanians and they have only a Romanian passport, so they are in the 20 mil living at home. --Mihai -talk 09:32, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  În Franţa şi Spania, diaspora română depăşeşte un milion de persoane 

message: I love the "Contribution to humanity" headline. When I look to the right, I see a photo taken from of a Bucharest club. How am I supposed to interpret that? That we contributed with a nightclub? Why in the name of all goodness is that photo placed there? Why?
And about this photo: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Rmn2.JPG
Don't you think you should say who those people are? Okay, most would recognize Dracula, but the rest? --Anittas 00:05, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I know who the first three are, but not who the last one is; but most people wouldn't know who most of them are. --Anittas 21:31, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

text: I don't know who the last one is either. It looks to me like Ion Luca Caragiale, but I wouldn't want to bet on it. If it is, it's not a picture of him that we use in our article on him. -- Jmabel | Talk 21:37, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, it's Caragiale. Confirmed by a Google image search. Here it is: . I'll add these idenfications to the image page. -- Jmabel | Talk 21:38, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes you're right Joe. He is Ion Luca Caragiale.  Bonaparte  talk 21:40, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: (This comment is not addressed to any individual in particular, but...) Please remember this the next time you are inclined to tell me that as a foreigner who only lived six months in Romania I can't possibly know much about the country or its culture. -- Jmabel | Talk 21:46, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  :::::::: That's a BS comment, because it sure is directed at someone. And at whom? I don't remember saying that to you. I don't know what your damn problem is, but I say you should chill. No one has any issues with you, but you keep searching for arguments. --Anittas 21:55, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Wow, Anittas, for a guy who recently lectured me about presuming good faith, that was quite a leap! No, you never accused me of this, so why on earth would you think it was directed at you? -- Jmabel | Talk 22:05, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't know. Perhaps because you seem a bit unconsistent in your arguments with me. First you retract your RfC, then you make some sarcastic comment on the discussion page.. pigs can fly, or something. I don't know where I have any anymore, but I still don't have any issues with you. --Anittas 22:10, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I retracted my claim that the specific remark was anti-Semitic, and am accepting your word that it was not intended as such. That doesn't mean that I generally like the way you address other people on talk pages. -- Jmabel | Talk 23:42, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

text:  :) you did check the google ...You seem more integrated in Romanian culture as other real romanians. I woudn't call you foreigner as far as I can see now.  Bonaparte  talk 21:51, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contribution to humanity 

message: I wanted to answer to my question and when I went to the page Americans I was redirected to USA. 
Now if I want to see how many americans are I see there the total population of the State: United States of America. When I look to the Romanians I see only 19,000,000 even if the total population of Romania is around 22,000,000. Now, how come that for USA is one rule and for Romania another? It's not fair. For USA do you count all that have a valid US passport right? Oh yeah. It's enough to have US passport and you're american. And don't forget how many Romanians renounced in paper to their romanian citizenship for the new one American.
Now, how do you want to compute the number of Americans? or for French people? I am very interested. 
The same principle you have there you should apply also for Romania. Have fun.  Bonaparte  talk 16:46, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Now before you tell me how many romanians are, I just asked a question how many Americans there are and how is that number computed??? I know that they compute all the people who has a valid US passport. Is this true or not? -- Bonaparte  talk 07:06, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well you see Bănăţeanule! Since they compute the number of Americans after the number of valid US passport users we should count in the same manner. I don't like double standards. The one that is applied to US should be also used here.  Bonaparte  talk 11:06, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: How many americans there are?

message: Everyone: please try to be polite, even when you disagree strongly. No progress can be made with personal attacks and prejudices. In the [slight] hope that some agreement can be reached, I will make the following points:
(1) I am not able to comment on the number of Romanian diaspora generally: I work on immigration into southern Europe, and more recently on migrations and Romania.
(2) Data on ethnicity such as the links Bonaparte provided need to be used, because the Romanians abroad are mainly the result of older migrations. But, I understood Aromanian as being distinct from Romanian. Am I wrong? Someone please comment.
: The Aromanian culture would have been a very interesting subject of study one hundred years ago, especially in Greece and Bulgaria. After the gain of the independence of 1877, various Romanian governments tried to ensure to Aromanians a cultural Roman ancestry survival. 
"Bulgăroi cu ceafa groasă, grecotei cu nas subţire;
Toate mutrele acestea sunt pretinse de roman,
Toată greco-bulgărimea e nepoata lui Traian!"
(Mihai Eminescu, Scrisoarea III)
From that moment, they could not being considered totally disconnected from the Romanians. New states appeared on the Europe's map and they lived in very difficult political conditions as they were located between Yugoslavia, Bulgaria and Greece. The Aromanians have been culturally asimilated in a quiet manner after the WWII. A number of them found a refuge in Romania after the coup of 1967, but they were considered being "Greeks", as they remembered only some Aromanian (Macedo-Romanian) origin alhough they don't speak the Aromanian. --Vasile 02:57, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: BaNaTeaN, I've restored that "uncertainty section", which I wrote. It was not written as a counter to any particular estimate or number which has appeared here, but rather to provide some context and background to the reader on the (lack of) precision associated with these numbers. On the contrary, I think it would be misleading not to contain such a passage- given that these numbers have been highly volatile, the otherwise bewildered reader would need to be shown from where this uncertainty derives, and details of how such numbers are arrived at, so that they can make their own judgement as to their accuracy. I believe the passage fairly goes into the detail and uncertainty behind both the "official" and "unofficial" calculations.--cjllw | TALK 01:03, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  This discussion is out of control 

message: Ok Romanian fellows. I think this dispute should end because this does not serve at nothing. You don't accept my figures, I don't accept yours. What you would said to put neutral true figures. For example at Canada's Romanian diaspora, we can write the official figure (131,000) and put an estimation after. For Canada I propose 131,000-400,000. 400,000 is just an estimation. At USA, we let there 367,000 Romanians, and we put an estimate of 1.2 mil, how it was before and how it is said in the Romanian diaspora sites. I'm waiting for answers!
NorbertArthur 28 December 2005
:Norbert, while your change to a more conciliatory tone is welcome, it is no more than what has been repeatedly called for here these past couple of months. If you wish to be taken seriously, I hope that you also explicitly undertake not to make any further uncivil and inflammatory comments, the like of which has already driven at least one valuable contributor away.
:As for that 1.2mil RoAm figure, as discussed above they have explicitly included other ethnic designations in that figure- to use it alone as an estimate would be misleading- or at least a distortion of what this Romanians article defines as Romanian ethnicity. The figure and its composition is already discussed anyway in the text. And as for the "ten million Romanians in diaspora" figure, if you look at the presentation available at the US Romanian embassy site, you will see that this includes 4 million in Moldva, for starters. If any of these estimates are to be included, it needs to be explained just what it is that they are estimating- none of the various estimates from these sources put forward consist only of ethnic Romanians, and many do not distinguish between Romanian nationality and Romanian ethnicity. This article is about the latter, as Joe mentions earlier, the demographics of Romania article is for the former.--cjllw | TALK 02:07, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There are 8-10,000,000 romanians abroad. That's all. I have given sources. This must be added to the text also.  Bonaparte  talk 07:08, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Romanian diaspora negociations

message: I've moved back the article to the original title. I've not seen any discussion or consensus to rename it. --Lysytalk 21:32, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I hope not many other people consider a title change from "Romanians" to "Romanian people" to be frivolous. I now accept that favoring the adjectival plural over a "XXX people" template for such titles is preferred. David Kernow 23:48, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I apologize for having used the word "frivolous" which currently seems inappropriate to me. --Lysytalk 02:00, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Frivolous rename ?

message: This article states that "The concept of who is a Romanian has varied. Until the 19th century, it denoted the speakers of Romanian, and was a much more distinct concept than that of Romania, the country of the Romanians," despite the fact that the "Romanian" apellation is a distinctly modern one that is not much older than the 19th century. In the pan-Romanian nationalism of the 1800's and early 1900's, the term was applied retroactively to what had previously been called either Wallachians, Moldovans, or Transylvania Vlachs; previously, the identity of the Romanian-speaking people was tied more to their political configuration than to their shared linguistic heritage, and the Daco-Roman continuity was not claimed until later scholarship by historians participating in the national project, beginning with the Scoala Ardeleana (Transylvanian School of  historians from the late 18th c) who first came up with the thesis that Vlachs were descended from Roman colonists. As in the rest of Europe, ethnic identity did not really enter the consciousness of Vlachs until the 19th century, nor did the Latinized name "Romanian" gain a footing with the Latinate speakers of present-day Romania until the Scoala Ardeleana created it and the later Romanian state promoted it. Until then, at most the Romanian-speakers of the different territories were identified linguistically as Vlachs, politically as something else (W, M, T), and ethnically not at all. It is really quite ahistorical to refer to pre-19th c. "Romanians" as Romanians. Andreidude 08:38, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The Ahistorical Sense of the term "Romanian" and of the Ethnicity