On 18/01/06, Liviu Andronic landronimirc@gmail.com wrote:
You know what, I think everything one says is a POV.
Yes, and on Wikipedia, people try to work together to make it more neutral. However, Pavel was not open to that.
This is why Moldovan Wikipedia ought to be deleted. It can never be a *neutral* place. It is from the very start of it a POV. And Pavel, he is just one of the Moldovans and Romanians that strongly disagree to its existence. He is just showing his feelings more than others.
That's a weird conclusion. If you want to just exprewss your opinions, that's fine, but if you're trying to actually respond coherently to somebody else's e-mail, your responses should follow directluy and logically (or at least demonstrably, if not logically) from the previous e-mail. Please, read the other messages in this thread.
Well, what's the point of keeping mo., if it's just like ro. ?
Please re-read that paragraph again. It wasn't just like ro.wiki until Pavel moved pages and replaced their contents...
It is not Pavel to be blamed for the similarity of mo.wiki and ro.wiki[...] http://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random.
Again, are you trying to respond to my e-mail? Your points are all valid and if you meant to make them independently, I will be happy to respond to them, but they don't seem to fit as responses to things I said.
Furthermore, this mo.wiki is full of errors [...] low-quality content.
Please go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia
The entire point of a Wikipedia is that anyone may edit it. If you see an error, FIX IT! Don't just complain that there are so many errors here, it's so horrible... either do your part and try to fix it, or stop complaining -- you have no right to complain if you don't try to help with the problem.
Romanians are not foreigners on the Moldovan Wikipedia!
Ro.wikipedians are. Romanians who are established mo.wikipedians, like Ronline, are not "foreigners". But most -- Bogdan, AdiJapan, Bonaparte -- are foreigners.
Read the previous messages. Any Romanian is directly concerned by mo.wikipedia and has all the right not to be considered as foreigner there.
I would dispute that.
Now, please take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldova#Demographics , especially at the correctness of the 2004 census: "About 2004 census".
That page says 0 about languages. Just ethnicities. We are talking about languages. You and your unionist buddies too often confuse the two. Don't forget that there are ethnic Moldovans who don't speak the Moldovan language well, only Russian, and also Ukrainians or Russians who don't speak Ukrainian or Russian well only Moldovan. You can't equate language with ethnicity, especially not in modern Moldova.
First of all this is the the name given by the Moldovan Constitution to the Romanian language. I have also found a nice example here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldova#Comparison_with_Romanian
I, for one, would debate such a comparison. It was selected out of the entire two constitutions for just the 3 or 4 lines which are similar. If you look at constitutions of, say, Portugal and Spain, you can probably find the same thing.
Secondly[...]Moldovan.
Whether or not you write in the real Moldovan language is up to you. In Rep. Moldova, not many people do. It actually seems more common in Romanian Moldova, where you can find it in poetry and such. Unfortunately Moldovans seem to use Wallachian writing exclusively since about 100 years ago.
Thirdly ... contents are disputed.
Always imposed? In Transnistria, some of the Latin schools were re-opened. If Moldovans love the Latin alphabet so much, why are some kids (in fact, the majority) Moldovan in Transnistria still going to the Cyrillics schools?
And Node, do you know [...].html
Anittas wrote that absurd paragraph. If you take an actual look at the chronicles, Ureche never said anything so apparent. Instead, he mostly said things about a close kin, or mutual understanding, never anything about them being the same language.
Mark