ok. let me present you the hole situation, from my side, the one who wrote the article, Danutz from ro.wiki. I had many contributions to Wikipedia since September 2003, some two mounths after it was lauched. Gutza could confirm that I wrote a lot in Wikipedia. Well, i'm a catholic, so in respect to my church, I wrote the article at Isus Cristos.

Look what I found on the portuguese Wikipedia, about the use of Portuguese and Brazilian versions of Portuguese language:

Por exemplo, na página principal aparece em vários sítios a palavra "projecto". Esta palavra está escrita na norma seguida em Portugal e em África. No Brasil, escreve-se "projeto".

Qual das duas versões está correcta? Ambas.

Simplesmente uma versão é usada no Brasil e outra em Portugal, África e territórios asiáticos... Como acontece nas outras grandes línguas internacionais, não existem versões superiores ou inferiores: são apenas diferentes. Por isso, não veja algo que não está escrito no seu Português como incorrecto apenas por isso.

Esta Wikipédia é de língua portuguesa. Ou seja, é de todos os falantes do português, seja qual for a norma que utilizam. Consequentemente, é má educação mudar da norma "A" para a norma "B", porque isso implica uma falta de respeito com todos os utilizadores da norma "A" da língua portuguesa.

It tells about the use of the versions of Portuguese language. Now adapted to the situation, it would be like that:

E.g., the the article "Isus Cristos" is written in it's catholic form, a church that compromises some 10% of the romanian speaking population. The ortodox form is "Iisus Hristos.

Wich of those two versions is correct? Both.

It's just that a version is used by the Orthodox Church, and the other one by the Catholic Church... Like in other international languages, there is no version better or worse: there are just diferences. That's why, you should not consider something written in you church's form as not correct just because of this.

This Wikipedia is for the Romanian-speaking countries. In other words, for all the speakers of this language, even though they are orthodox or chatolic. So, it is rood to move from the A to B, because this is a lack of respect for the users using the form A of the romanian language.

So, one of the arguments is that the article was originally written at the chatolic form, and not the orthodox. So it should be bad education being moved, acording the Wikiquette generaly used in all international Wikipedias.

Second. The form Isus Cristos is widely spread in Romania, and it has majority in the region Transilvania, because of the influence of the Catholic Church here, that being for much the official religion of the region (when Transilvania was part of Hungary). In many writings, like press and books the form Cristos is used, and the majority of romanians (at least in Transilvania where I live, the city of Cluj-Napoca) tend to pronounce Cristos. Ronline, a romanian user that lives in Oradea, confirmed that.

Third. Romanian is a romance language, and in all Romance languages the form Cristos is used. Many say that the form Hristos, comes from the greek version of the name, but in fact it comes from the slavonic form of the name.

As I created the article, and as both forms are accepted, and widely spread in regions of Romania I belive that the article should remain at it's current place, Isus Cristos.

BTW, only 35 milion people speak portugues do Portugal, and some 174 milion people speak portugues do Brazil, still the minority has the right to impose herself in the pt.wiki, with the method, presented to you above by me.

Thank you for your time. Danutz.

Yahoo! Companion - Scarica gratis la toolbar di Ricerca di Yahoo!