[Wikipedia-l] Minority/majority question

[Ralesk Ne'vennoyx]

Gutza wrote:

> Ok, I hoped I could avoid saying what this is about, but I should have 
> seen the RO/HU assumptions coming -- and it's only natural.

Worry not, and please don’t higher your defences, I really didn’t mean 
to offend in any way.  As you said, yes it’s natural to suspect it mught 
be such a difference — which is the exact reason why I tried to 
elaborate on such issues.

> The article 
> in question is the one about Jesus. The Romanian (Eastern) Orthodox 
> Church says that the name should be spelled "Iisus Hristos". Other 
> religions in Romania (mainly Catholic branches) say that the Romanian 
> name is Isus Cristos.
> 

On that one, I can sadly not offer many suggestions, maybe that you 
could go with the more common one then.  Take a look at demographics and 
default to the bigger group, and don’t forget to detail the differences 
in naming in the article.  If there are more differences between the 
eastern and western “interpretations”, it might as well be a good idea 
to make a separate entry with links to each other.

> So now you know. It's not about Timisoara, and on a personal note I 
> mildly resent the way you presented the analogy, as if Timisoara is 
> natively spelled Temesvár in the same way as Vienna is spelled "Wien"; I 
> honestly don't understand why you had to bring that into the discussion 
> out of nowhere. But let's not get into this now, it would be a waste of 
> our time.
> 

It was the only city whose Romanian name I was 100% sure how to write 
and went out of my way to get the squiggly thing work under the s :P 
Nothing more, just wanted to give examples otherwise.  If it had been 
such an issue of spelling, I still believe it is a good idea to favour 
the name in the host language, instead of favouring a “foreign” name in 
order to please some minority.  Redirects, of course, are welcome.

Then again, had you said what this was about, I hadn’t jumped into this 
whole thing at all :)

> Anyhow, the dispute is basically not about the language itself, because 
> all religions who dispute the name do it in Romanian. On a side note, to 
> put your mind at ease before you assume it as being the case, no Magyars 
> are involved in the dispute itself.
> 

Wasn’t worried about that factor at all; again, no need to higher your 
defences.  I just hope I can be of help.