[Foundation-l] Please delete mo. wikipedia

Zugravu Gheorghe zugravu.gheorghe at gmail.com
Wed Oct 13 12:57:49 UTC 2010

On 13.10.2010 13:41, Gutza wrote:
>  On 13-Oct-10 13:32, David Gerard wrote:
>> On 13 October 2010 11:19, Gutza <gutza at moongate.ro> wrote:
>>> Nobody says the current content should be deleted -- just stop
>>> serving it.
>> Here you are playing with language, not advancing the discussion. By
>> "delete", the thread starter meant precisely "stop serving it."
> No, I am not playing with words -- saying that something will be deleted
> implies a loss. I am contending that my proposal doesn't involve any
> loss: Mark's work invested in creating content would not be lost from
> the face of the Earth (because the content would be preserved in the
> database), and no Transnitrian would feel any loss from the fact that
> the content is no longer served, for the simple reason that such a
> hypothetical Transnitrian (i.e. one that would be interested in such a
> Wikipedia) doesn't exist for the time being. Whenever he/she will make
> their presence known, the current content will be restored, so there
> will be no loss at that point either.
> Not at all the same thing as deleting the content.

Short point of view regarding the deletion or not of mo:wp:
I think that we discuss not about the content of the mo:wp, since it is
almost absent at this moment (the actual content present there now its
sounds more as a joke for me - and also showing the interest of people
to cooperate in this language), but we are discussing about the
existence or not of such a language as "moldovan" in opposition to
Romanian language. And this is a bigger question than the content.

The arguments brought into discussion was more about who, where and by
whom kirilic script was used to write down the language entity, later
known as romanian. M. Williams himself accepts and agrees that:
> Cyrillic has been and is currently used, including in schools, for the Eastern
> Romance/Daco-Romanian/Romanian/Moldovan/whatever variety spoken in all
> or some parts of Moldova (and/or, depending on your chosen political
> reality, the Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic)
thus, IMHO, he says that romanian and "moldovan" are actually the same
language, one using the latin script and the second - kirilic. And that
kirilic was a historical period in the development of the language,
which no one says its not true. Writing English with Thai or whatever
alphabet will not stop the language from being english, the same point
with romanian in kirilic - it will not cease being romanian, *but* is
not *"moldovan"* also.

with respect,

More information about the foundation-l mailing list