Talk:Historical regions of Romania

message: there is an error about Transilvania historical Region. Transilvania does not comprise Banat Crisana and Maramures. Transilvania stands alongside Crisana Banat and Maramures as historical regions of Romania. If Banat Crisana and Maramures make up the Transylvania historical region, if u take them away, then a huge area of this "Transylvania" doesnt reamains unnamed. Criztu 07:43, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know about that. I think Transylvania is more commonly referred to as spanning Crişana, Banat and Maramureş too, which are subregions of Transylvania. I come from Oradea, for example, and I would consider myself Transylvanian, as would most people here ("ardeleni"). We are also from Crişana. I suppose the situation is similar in Banat and Maramureş... I know people from both of those regions who see themselves as Transylvanian when talking to people from Bucharest or Moldavia, for example, since there does seem to be a pan-Transylvanian regional identity, at least in things like language/accent, gastronomy, etc.  Ronline ✉ 08:42, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]

message: The article contains major errors in maps and in the article. I started with the map and i will continue with the article.
First, Bucovina is not a romanian region. We should focus on romanian regions as  geographic regions, with traditional ties.
Politic borders many times don't respect traditional borders. For example today Orşova is in Mehedinţi county. Also Bucovina and Basarabia people call themself Moldoveni. So partition of Moldova in Moldova,Basarabia, Bucovina is arbitrary and not Romanian. This names are a result of political partition of Moldova not a Romanian partition. Historians from Romania never cleared this matter but that not means that those are different provinces. Also Maramureş was not part of Ardeal, Maramureş and other Marmaţia small voievodships wore transformed in Hungarian county's and wore given to Transylvania(hungarian state) în administration as Partium, but that don't means that romanians from Maramureş, Bârjava, and Ardeal wore given some choice or there wore in the same region. After 1918 the confusion between Ardeal/ Transylvania and the rest of the regions growed, also some parts of Crişana wore artificial included in Maramureş as a compensation for the loss of many parts of real Maramureş. But in this article we must expose the historical, traditional and geographical truth. If some change i will make don't make you happy please post in talk your view and we will discuss it. Also the title is rong, we should change it in Romanian Regions, Romania had only Ţinuturi, and wore made regardless of any tradition of history background of the land.
Vasile iuga (talk) 16:54, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: , first of all, you should respect your ban and study basic WP policies, including WP:NOR, in the following six months. Secondly, the map depicts territories which have never been inhabited by Romanians as "Romanian historical regions". Please also remember WP:3RR. Borsoka (talk) 13:21, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: So you state that you are not identical with banned . What is the source of your map? Are there reliable sources depicting, for instance, the whole Banat and Debrecen as Romanian historical regions? By the way, what the term "Romanian historical region" means, according to scholarly works? Borsoka (talk) 17:02, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I do not have a French map. You should study basic WP policies, especially WP:NOR and WP:Civility. You will be surprised, because all editors are in the position to question any edits which are not based on academic works, according to WP:NOR. If I understand your logic, whole Romania is a Hungarian historical region: Romania has its own borders, there are Hungarians living in Romania and there are no sub-regions in Romania which were not dominated by the Hungarians for a longer or shorter period. Or we could state that whole Southeastern Europe is a Bulgarian historical region, because there are Bulgarians living in Southestern Europe and large territories in Southeastern Europe were under Bulgarian rule for longer or shorter periods. Or we could say that whole Eurasia is a Spainsh historical region, because Eurasia can be easily identified on the map as large region and Spain is in Eurasia. I think this is a quite strange approach, similarly to the approach that territories which were never inhabited by Romanians and were never part of Romania could be depicted as parts of "Romanian historical regions".  Borsoka (talk) 02:19, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

text: Sorry, you misunderstand something. We need a reliable source based on which this map could be presented.  Borsoka (talk) 15:19, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ok my sources are in the map description. My map is not a copy of any previous map, it's an exact map of what romanians consider their regions. FO example Ardeal political border was Almaş river, but in some periods was another border, and the romanians consider that Border, Meseş Mountains,  as border of the region, not Almaş. This is a map about Romanians view, i hope you understand. I will not go and say Hungarians cannot make their own map, they have Partium in that area, we have other regions. The area was a multicultural one.
Vasile iuga (talk) 15:04, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: You may not know, but WP is not a forum where editors can publish their own views of history or geography. Please read WP:NOR. Borsoka (talk) 04:07, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Huge mistakes 

message: A little history of each region, and other stuff.
More regions, Partium was not a Romanian region, but a Hungarian one, this is a article about Romania.
If you don't like what i have done, post it hear and we can change it or we can discuss it.
Vasile iuga (talk) 15:23, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest that you should discuss your proposed edits on the Talk page of WikiProject Romania before making them. Borsoka (talk) 04:09, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  I suggest to cry less and say what is your problem with my changes, on topic, point by point, you revert changes, so tell me your arguments point by point. 
And what is your problem with my map. Make a list, you have no right to change without any argument. All data are known facts, you have similar maps.
So you can go on that talk page, because this page have a talk page and you are the king, the Hungarian King of Wiki. So tell us from your wisdom, what is rong ? Debrecen nem Debreţin?
Vasile iuga (talk) 13:15, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: No, you misunderstand the case. Please read WP:NOR: the publication of maps which are not based on academic works is forbidden. Borsoka (talk) 16:52, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  I made some changes. 

message: I strongly suggest that you should seek assistance in Wikipedia:Teahouse or on the Talk page of WikiProject Romania, because you do not understand the basic principles of Wikipedia. For instance, you do not understand what a reliable source is and you have not realized that our community emphasizes the ban on original research. Maps which do not state that a region is a historical region of Romania, books written in 1900 can hardly be used to edit this article. If you do not stop destroying this article, our community will conclude that you are not here to build an encyclopedia. Borsoka (talk) 19:03, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  I will report you for vandalism, you revert the page with no reasons, you and other nationalists. That's was the history of the region, Crişana was partitioned, you are to stupid to continue argue with you. 
What are the „sources”, the hungarian ones ? That book is in latin and hungarian, with original diplomas of the Kingdom, you are a Hungarian vandal with Trianon malaria. I will not talk with idiots, you can report me. 
So reference based on direct sources are bad ? :) You are to hateful and to stupid to continue arguing with you. And you can report me, because i will not retract my words, i have been kind to you, but you are to idiot to be that way. You say i am not trying to improve the page? Oh yes, i write history of the regions, give refences and you delete all.
Go  read your rules you idiot(yes you can report me, you have nowa  reason).
Good bye. 
Vasile iuga (talk) 05:45, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  {{U|Vasile iuga}}