Jump to content

User talk:Dahn/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3→Archive 5

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy being a Wikipedian, and I wish you well with your edits. Wikipedia is a fun place, and there is always something new to do. Here are some helpful links for you...

When you edit talk pages, don't forget to sign your name by adding four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your message. This will automatically add your username and the time of your signing.

If you have any questions, you may contact me, Linuxbeak, at my talk page. Again, welcome to Wikipedia! Linuxbeak | Talk 02:47, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Diacriticals

Hi. I saw you had problems with the links that contain "ă" because you put a different character instead: a with hacek instead of a with breve.

ǎă


A with breve, the one in Romanian is a bit to the right in the toolbar: "Ŵ ŵ Ŷ ŷ Ă ă Ğ ğ Ŭ ŭ"

bogdan | Talk 22:11, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

List of Moldovian rulers

Hi, I've seen you have started correcting errors in the list of Moldovian rulers. Keep up the good work. I intend to enlarge the list, to contain at least some summary information about everyone in that list. Some help will be appreciated. -Orioane 09:52, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Mda, cu voievode/voivide e o greşeală pe care încerc să o corectez. :D -Orioane 10:06, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Moldavian Magnate Wars

Tnx for help on this article. What country are you from? I wrote this article using Polish sources, but I am sure it can greatly benefit from input from the sources you have access to. With some expantion, more references and less red links it can become a Wikipedia:Featured Article. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 16:14, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

That's great. You may want to put a note on languages you speak on your userpage (see Wikipedia:Babel for a nice template). As I wrote on Talk:Moldavian Magnate Wars, I did invent the name of this article, and I am not entirely happy with it (besides, Wikipedia policy is NOT to invent names). How are those events reffered to in Romanian sources? The problem is that they don't really have a name in Polish sources, there are various terms like Moldavian war, Moldavian campaingn, or southern politics of the Commonwealth (sic!), reffering to various events described in our article. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 16:50, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Regarding the George Ioan Bratianu (I know the proper spelling is Brătianu, but Amazon doesn't) book, you may want to add it to the reference section of the articles you used the info from it in (consider using Wikipedia:Footnotes to references specific paragraphs), and to the 'further reading' section to other articles you think it is relevant. Unfortunately I don't speak romanian (I assume that's the language he is using) and can't read his books myself (Amazon link I cite above indicates he has not been translated). In other words, it's up to you and to other editors speaking the relevant language to translate the relevant info into English and share with rest of the world (I have been doing much of this with Polish sources). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 20:24, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Moldovan language

I think that may be of interest to you: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Deletion_dispute:_.22So_called_Moldovan_language.22_and_romanian. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 06:23, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Re:Iuga of Moldavia

I fixed the category - it was strange, but pasting over a working category helped. My guess it was some kind of strange symbol which looked similar, but wasn't the same. First time I have seen this. There are indeed some Polish sources on the Koriatowicz family. They don't mention much, however - this is all I found:

Both Fedor and Konstanty are mentioned in Polski Słownik Biograficzny, see User:Piotrus/List_of_Poles/Kisielinski-Korzelinski. I am afraid this is all that I can find online - since I am not in Poland, I don't have access to PSB. Koriatowicz family existed in the 19th century as well [7] See also Gediminids, the only Wikipedia page at present to mention 'Koriatowicz'.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 02:37, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

I asked at Wikipedia:Wikiportal/Ukraine/Ukraine-related_Wikipedia_notice_board#Zakarpacie.2C_Koriatowicz. Hopefully there are more sources in Russian or Ukrainian to shed some light on this. Most of the available sources, no matter what country they are from, lack details - and this is why Wiki is so great: it not only gathers all our knowledge, but systematizes it in an easy-to-find way :) As for naming headache, seee Talk:Boleslaus_II_of_Poland - I got a good kick out of counting the name variants - and those're just English versions :)--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 03:58, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Category

Sounds familiar?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 01:16, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Your query

Dahn, I'm afraid that my scarce knowledge of Romanian prosopography is insufficient to be of help to you. As best I know, Koriat ruled Podolia in 1362-63, although I never claimed that he did. In my previous online reincarnation, I contributed much of this page and even compiled this family tree of the Bassaraba dynasty. IMHO the patronomic of "Koriatowicz" should be enough to prove Koriat's paternity. --Ghirlandajo 17:08, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Moldova

ro:Listă de domnitori ai Moldovei--Dacodava

Moldovan language

Hai si participa la discutiile privind Talk:Moldovan language. Bonaparte talk & contribs 11:24, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Our forum

Welcome to the Romanian Wikipedia notice board! This page is a portal for all Romanian-related topics and a place for Romanian editors to gather and socialize and debate. Discussions are encouraged, in both English and Romanian. Post any inquiry under their relevant cathegory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Romanian_Wikipedian%27s_notice_board

--Anittas 18:10, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Alexander for Admin

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Alexander_007 ,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship#Alexander_007 . I've nominated User:Alexander_007 as admin. Let's vote for him! -- Bonaparte talk & contribs 19:56, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Ioan Potcoavă

Salut, On the Talk page about Ioan Potcoavă two users have demanded that the article be moved at Ivan Pidkova - the Ukrainian name. I've asked them to wait also for your opinion, so pls check it out. --Mihai -talk 14:46, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Cantemireşti

Hi, to make a redirect, just create a page with the following: 

#redirect [[page you want to redirect to]]

So to make Cantemiresti redirect to Cantemireşti, I recreated the page as: 

#redirect [[Cantemireşti]]

There you go. Have fun editing! Johnleemk | Talk 09:38, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Vlad Ţepeş

Salut,

A new user, User:Axi made some heavy modifications to the Vlad Ţepeş page. I o not agree with all his modifications, but I think you are the most appropriate person to have a look at it. I don't think it can be cathegorised as vandalism, but I do not quite agree with his POV.

Multzam fain. Aştept răspunsul tău. --Mihai -talk 20:47, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

If you say that it looks ok, I'll try and wikify the paragraph. Mabye the fisrt sentences need rephrasing, they look quite harsh in my opinion. --Mihai -talk 22:46, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Mavrocordat

Salut,

Just that you know ,about the Mavrocordats, I've found this morning some existing articles. Mabye when you will have some time you could take a look at them. I've linked them to the list of Moldavian/Wallachian princes. There is a small list of them (Mavrocordato). --Mihai -talk 17:08, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Nicolae Milescu

I added a rough translation of the Russian article - details of his Siberian-Chinese mission mostly - on the talk page for further processing. It seems like the rest of the data is accurate too. Returning to our previous discussion, I found that another Koriatovich, Iuga's brother, is mentioned in the article on Mukacheve. Cheers, Ghirlandajo 17:55, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Salut Dahn! De ce nu participi la discutiile privind Moldovan language? Tu ai argumente puternice.-- Bonaparte talk 16:44, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
Salut Dane! Mai intai iti multumesc pentru mesajul tau. Iti multumesc pentru parerea foarte pertinenta pe care ai expus-o pe pagina mea, ceea ce denota faptul ca nu m-am inselat in privinta ta. Te inteleg perfect, e OK, oricum cand vei avea nevoie de ajutor vom fi alaturi de tine. Continua ceea ce ti-ai propus, ai potential mare. M-as bucura sa colaboram in viitor. Bonaparte talk 18:59, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Stefan Batory, Stephen Bathory or Stefan Báthory?

We are now standarising the names of Polish kings and the issue of Stephen Bathory, King of Poland has came up. Your input would be appreciated at Talk:List_of_Polish_monarchs#Naming.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 19:14, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

I see you're helping with "Communists" (moved from User talk:Wknight94)

Hi. Do you want to help me clean up the categories in there? I suggest we get as many as we can on categories in "Communists by nationality". In the end, I'd wish for the category to include only "Communists by nationality, "Communist rulers", "Marxist theorists", "Old Bolsheviks", and those articles which stand for communists which are the single entries for their respective countries (I think ther's but one for Jamaica - forgot his name). Contact me on my talk page, if you wish so.Dahn 10:53, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

I can certainly do some grunt work moving articles from Category:Communists to subcategories of Category:Communists by nationality — but I'm definitely no expert in the area so I wouldn't want to touch the other three subcats. Let me know if you want assistance for the nationality one or if that would just cause more work for you when you populate the other three. (And you can leave this discussion here — I'll put this page on my watch list). wknight94 12:22, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
E.g., I have no idea what the difference is between any of the following:
To me, they all sound the same and I could never tell how they should be arranged judging by their categorical hierarchy. The first one is the supercategory of the other three but only Category:Party leaders of the Soviet Union is a subcategory of Category:Communist rulers. There seems to be many examples like that. The categories and articles are breaking a lot of the standards for categories and are very unhelpful to the user. In general, the whole thing is a mess. If you know the difference between all these categories, try drawing out a category diagram so you and/or I can get it all in order. Even down to the articles — there are so many that are members of Category:Soviet politicians and one of that category's subcategories. That alone is a clear violation of the standards. wknight94 14:49, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
Well, the difference is quite important. Leaders is in the generic sense, or in the sense of "real leaders" - for example, Lenin never held offices in the state, but rather in the Party (and not throughout his life after the Revolution). Head of state was an honorary position - Stalin was almost never head of state, for example (he left Mikhail Kalinin the honor). Head of gvt. is the equivalent of Prime minister. The three four may meet over some areas, but they also ought to be different.Dahn 14:54, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
Ahhh, so maybe I'm simply not qualified to even attempt this. First, I think the distinctions you just made should probably be explained in the text of the category pages themselves so laypersons like myself could understand the difference. Maybe the real chore is just making sure that every article is in the correct category and that articles aren't in categories and subcategories at the same time (that's a real no-no that can confuse people pretty badly). wknight94 16:10, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm aiming for getting people from being in categories and subcategories at the same time. Of course, that doesn't mean they can't be in several subcategories in the same category. Thanks for helping, by the way.Dahn 16:15, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

I cleaned up the articles under Category:Soviet politicians (and other miscellaneous articles and categories) to conform with the current category hierarchy. There are still quite a few articles in that Category:Soviet politicians root category — you might want to see if they fit into any of its subcategories. I'll move on to other related categories soon. Feel free to look at Special:Contributions/Wknight94 to see what I've changed. wknight94 01:24, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

I personally wouldm't have erased "Soviet politicians", but now that I think about it, it looks to be a very good idea (sindce Old Bolsheviks are in the "Soviet politicians" one). Excellent.Dahn 01:28, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

We shouldn't have Serbian - it ought to be Yugoslavian (just as you don't have Armenian, Russian, Ukrainian, Azeri etc., but Soviet). Being Comunist in that time meant that you were in favor of Yugoslavia, more than any internal division.Dahn 03:47, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Sounds good. Although we do have Category:Moldovan communists — weren't they Soviet similar to Ukraine and Belarus, etc.? wknight94 03:58, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, most in there are post-Soviet Communists. The others I added because I wanted to express a nuance in regard to Romania. People like Ecaterina Arbore declared themselves neither Romanian, nor Russian. It's cause it's very hard to detect what they were were in fact: Ecaterina Arbore, because she had other things on her mind (I guess); Serghei Lazo probably did not have the time. For an analogy of Soviet and something else, see Angelica Balabanoff. Anyway, we could have subcategories for the USSR and Yugoslavia, but not only would they be small, they'd be problematic (I've seen those who defined categories for them gave them Croatian WWII people or whatever but, aside from the fact that I canot agree with it, it does no service to someone who is trying to find out who was fighting whom in the Partizan war)Dahn 04:09, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

You are better at this than MacCarthy :).Dahn 05:04, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Heh heh.  :) Hey, do you ever sleep?! A listing of your contributions looks like you've been updating consistently for over 24 hours! BTW, one issue which you might have noticed is that we made each of the country-specific communist categories a subcategory of the country-specific politicians category. That may have been a mistake as not all communists are/were politicians! Personally, I don't feel like breaking up those categories into communists vs. communist politicians but be prepared for someone to point out the disparity at some point... wknight94 13:35, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Actually, I guess I have been doing this around the clock. It's been a slow week, and I got caught up (I have insomnia, just as well). I don't think it matters that they are not all politicians - it's tidy and logical, at least more so than what they did in "China". I cannot possibly imagine what those guys were thinking; not only do you have people from 600 AD listed as "politicians" alongside Mao, but you also get this link: "Chinese politicians" includes "Party leaders", which includes "Chinese WWII people", which includes "Chinese Generals" (Chinese! like, from all history) and "Leaders of Taiwan". I started foaming at the mouth when I had to figure out how I get one without dragging all of China into Communism. That's it, though - I have to go. Nice to have met you, keep in touch.Dahn 13:46, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Leon Trotsky Categories

I'm wondering why you removed Trotsky from the categories "Communists" and "Russian Revolution people"? I see you've been taking people out of the category Communists and putting them in national Categories. Why can't they be in both?

As for "Russian Revolution people", I can't imagine why Trotsky shouldn't be in this category. Even J.V.Stalin would include Trotsky in this category.

I've added Trotsky back in, and left a note on the Talk page. If you want to respond, it'd probably be best if you left your response there.

Camillustalk|contribs 23:55, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

OK, I got your explanation, and better understand what you're doing. Still, I think it may be useful to post an explanation on the relevant talk pages, in case a revert war starts. Looking at the Communists by Nationality cat, I notice there's no entry for "Russian Communists". An omission surely? Camillustalk|contribs 00:21, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for your response. It seems I've come in in the middle of a project by you and WKnight to tidy up these categories, and so didn't understand what was going on. WKnight left a note in the edit summary which explained what he was doing. I don't mean to criticize your efforts, but I think you should have either left a similar note or put a short note on the talk page to explain your rationale. Camillustalk|contribs 00:44, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
Yes, the explanation can be found in Wikipedia:Categorization#Creating subcategories in the 4th paragraph. There's another mention further up that same guideline article. When people appear at every level of hierarchy, the usefulness of categories as a grouping tool greatly decreases. wknight94 01:16, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Armenians in Romania

Generally great work at Armenians in Romania. Do you have something to add to the "References" section, which currently cites only Iorga? -- Jmabel | Talk 04:56, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Similarly on the Greeks. News to me that Ion Luca Caragiale had Greek heritage. What's the story on that one? - Jmabel | Talk 08:58, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Orphan category

Hi there. I've been going through Special:Uncategorizedcategories, and I noticed you recently removed the category Hungarian communists from all of its parent categories, leaving it an orphan. In the future, can you please nominate unneded categories for deletion at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion or request that they be speedy deleted using the {{db}} template, whichever is appropriate? Thanks, SCZenz 05:53, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Edit summary

Hello. Please remember to always provide an edit summary. Thanks and happy editing. JoaoRicardotalk 13:59, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Bukovina

This seems more up your alley: Wikipedia_talk:Polish_Wikipedians'_notice_board#Bukovina.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 14:01, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Indian Communists

Hi, just saw ur msg. on my talkpage. It is a good idea to have subcats such as these. Great work, keep it up. I'll keep my eyes open for adding to the category. btw, you may want to rope in User:Soman, who has done a lot of work on communism-related articles, just have a look at his user page and you'll know what I mean. --Gurubrahma 05:11, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Request for comment

It may not be up your alley, but very few people have came through RfC I posted about History of the World, and there is a slow but pointless revert war there (see Talk:History_of_the_World#Graph_straw_poll), so I am now down to asking fellow Wikipedians to take a look if you have time and will.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 17:05, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Categories

Thanks for your great categorising! When you add entries into categories, please consider marking them as minor changes. It will help me to focus time onto the pages on my watchlist that seem to need to most corrections. --DuncanBCS 00:16, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Ploutis Servas

Dahn, in your article on Ploutis Servas, you mention one of his works, "Portraits in Palmer's Era". I would be very much interested if you could inform me as to the availability of this book/essay. Do you know of any libraries holding a copy of it? Thank you.

Ceauşism

Much nice work, but also some issues. Please see my questions at Talk:Nicolae_Ceauşescu#A_rough_sketch_of_.22Ceau.C5.9Fism.22:_Misc_issues.2Fquestions. -- Jmabel | Talk 04:55, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Decency

First of all, I don't like your tone and I don't consider it polite either. Beside that, there is no need to threaten me with a report. If you feel the need to report me, be my guest. But please, don't disturb me anymore, especially if you are not capable to communicate in a decent manner. I simply don't consider Gyr a fascist. Under his supervision the Jewish Theater was build and I don't think that a fascist, a Nazi like you said (because there's no difference, isn't it?), would act like that. Even more, Gyr is not remembered as a fascist, but as a poet... a jailed and sad poet...--R.S.ro 23:17, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

CV Tudor talk, Ilascu

(I also should mention that Vadim has backed people who armed themselves, namely Ilascu. I will not judge Ilascu's reasons as unfounded, but you get the idea.)Dahn 18:33, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Do you have knowledge of any (trusted or not) written document containg details about Ilascu trial in Tiraspol? --Vasile 00:11, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

I have seen an analysis of it when I was knee-high, in Tinerama. I have also looked through European reports (but cannot really be a reliable source myself, since I never aimed to memorize them). If you were asking me wether I was sure he had armed himself, I can tell you I am pretty sure. His supporters inside Romania have presented him as a freedom fighter, and he was more likely than not involved in fights with the separatists. To my knowledge, this took the form of paramilitary action (since I do not think he was drafted in the Moldovan army). I cannot possibly say he was wrong at any point, nor can I say that I share his ideals for the sake of Romanianness. As for documents, will this help you? Dahn 00:25, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Nichifor Crainic and other translations

Please observe this and this.--R.S.ro 00:18, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Petru Groza

Whatever do you mean? Hitler and Mussolini imposed something on Romania. Romania, AN ALLY of the UK up to that moment, lost its territory through dirty arbitration. The gesture was condemned by the Peace of Paris, which means you are denying the very purpose of the international treaty (unless they all don't matter to you ever since Trianon); the Treaty of Paris also makes the Romanian nationalists' requests in Bessarabia unteneble (so you can see, I am not an ardent and biased nationalist). You cannot possibly be right about this one. I have to say Northern Transylvania was occupied by Hungary. Under the definition of international law, and under logic. Now, let me think about it. You might be right, and then Sudetenland was not occupied by Germany, nor was Bohemia-Moravia, hell, nor was Austria or Alsatia. Please, for the love of it, do not consider that this is a biased speech. I am known on Wiki for my balanced views, and I've consistently upheld criticism of any nationalism. The word "occupiers", if indeed offensive, is less so than a "reevaluation" of Nazi international politics. Even for a POV, it's sinister. Plus, you are implying that all Hungarians should agree with Horthy and/or Szalasi. More sinister still. Dahn 15:16, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. I assume "occupation" is the usual way to describe these events in Romania. Many people (mostly Hungarians) would, however, not agree with this expression. They would say that the occupation happened in 1919 and in 1944. I don't really wish to enter into a debate about this because the issue is too complicated to be expressed with only a word "occupation" or "liberation". There are the ethnic issues, the long common history of the two nations, the European powers always using us against each other to reach their own goals, etc. All these issues will hopefully go to the waste bin of the history with Romania joining the EU and the borders disappearing.
I just would like to advise not to use expressions that are debated by the other side. --KIDB 15:37, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Now I see you reverted again, I am sorry. Don't worry, in a coulpe of weeks or months there will be a couple of people again who will not agree with you.--KIDB 15:40, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Prague Spring

I have feeling that the article should stay more on topic and not divert so much into Romanian's history. Pavel Vozenilek 01:57, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[8] (Sorry for answering late - I've been busy elsewhere.) I think these details belong rather into Romanian history page.
Jan Palach suicide was n 1969 and apart of shock value it has no effect. List of exilech Czechs and Slovaks may be useful but my experience is that such lists are very hard to maintain (unless someone is really dedicated). Hundreths of thousands left Czechoslovakia, most of them still live or have relatives and sorting who is important feels like maintenance nightmare.
The current coverage of Prague Spring and related event is IMHO quite lousy, a professional historian would be really handy here. Pavel Vozenilek 16:18, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

A vandal (perhaps not the place)

Hi. Sorry, I did not know where to post this. There is a guy that seems to want to be banned (I reverted his edit on the Corneliu Vadim Tudor page and noticed that he had made another such edit out of the three he's ever made. The third one, however (the one for a computer game) is probably not POV. In case I got it wrong, to whom should I address such issues? Dahn 13:46, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Try Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress. Jacoplane 13:52, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Oltenia

Hi there, Dahn! This is just to let you know that I've reverted the article to your last version. I've seen the talk page, but I know the anonymous editor in question, it gives us a hard time on Romanian wiki, too! Maybe you can come & give a little hand on cleaning the Romanian version of the Oltenia article? Thanks! --Vlad 12:02, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Dahn, thanks for the reply! :) The problem is that he doesn't log in & has a different IP every time. I hope you're a little high with the 85% percentage, otherwise it means that there are more bad contributors than good ones. Here it's more difficult to work on article because you've got plenty of nations that have different views on some sensitive subject. On Romanian wiki there are mostly Romanians. Anyway, it's your decision & I respect that! Keep up the good work here & come there whenever you like. It's funny, before seeing your user page, I've never knew that there was a level 5 for a language! :) --Vlad 22:07, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm really sorry you have to endure such an ordeal with this article. But it seems that this person is well... I don't think that there is a adjective good enough for him. See Talk:FC Universitatea Craiova. --Vlad 14:36, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Gheorghe Lazar

Salut,

I've seen that you've added the info about the controversial statue in Sibiu, on the bust photo I've added. The thing is that that statue is a different one from that in the photo which is one in a small park in front of the ASTRA Palace - Here. The controversial statue was one with Lazar sitting on a chair and was on the right side of this photo, and is now dismanteled as you can see here. I agree that this bust is also not a very happy one, but I couldn't get into the Lazar College to take a photo of the best one :D. Thx Mihai -talk 11:48, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

No problem, you haven't lost uch if you hadn't noticed the statues. Anyways, thank you for rephrasing the article. Mihai -talk 11:55, 31 January 2006 (UTC)


Missak Manouchian

I added the name in Armenian per your request. Fortunately the name doesn't contain any letters that would be used differently in Eastern and Western Armenian. What may be an issue though is the English trasliteration, since Manouchian is the French transliteration, which would be Manushyan in English. However, an English-only Google search for "Missak Manouchian" gives 384 results, "Misak Manushyan" gives 5, and "Missak Manushyan" gives 2, so the French version should be fine. --Aramգուտանգ 18:53, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Batory naming

If you know any users who would be interested in this discussion, invite them to Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(Polish_rulers)#Stefan_Batory.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 16:20, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Vadim

I answered you on my talk page. Dpotop 19:06, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

To keep the thread in one place, I answered on my talk page, again. Dpotop 10:51, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Hey Dahn, get a grip and a life. I didn't 'write' Turks in the article, it was already there. All I did was highlight it. I KNOW the difference between the 'Ottomans' and the 'Turks'. You wanna communicate further, we will.

Blaj

Sebes river is actually quite far from Blaj . Yes, they get their drinking water from it but it comes through a rather long pipe sistem starting near Alba Iulia. Dunemaire 11:29, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

  • No problem, you probably got the reference from the mayory's page - and the phrasing there can be misleading. You did a good job with the rest, by the way. Dunemaire 11:33, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

To Do

Salut,

I've just created this: Wikipedia:Romanian Wikipedians' notice board/to do. If you can, would you please help with populationg the lists?

Multzam Mihai -talk 13:07, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

List of East European Jews

Question: was the missing (or superfluous) Central Europe here somehow resolved? I've spotted the problem now but do not want to touch anything what is in the middle of progress. Pavel Vozenilek 09:46, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Just finding Eastern European cuisine :-( There's no hope. Pavel Vozenilek 10:00, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
I fix such mictakes whenever I find them (being in article name is exception). Don't know how the others but for me this is the only thing here able to upset me. You may notice User:Halibutt who is quite active with this. Pavel Vozenilek 13:37, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Some dude made improper changes

You're against Protochronism and nationalistic or pseudo-scientific history: so am I. There is a current situation in the Origin of Romanians article which you may want to get involved in. Alexander 007 06:01, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Curzio Malaparte

Categories should be the most defining for a topic, not cover everything.

Anyway: you may took look on Talk:Curzio Malaparte, there were discussions about historical reliability (or unreliability) of Malaparte with User:Oesterling. He was /very/ active on few topics and put his opinion that Malaparte's book depict the reality into them. If you have time and interest you may take look as a third person (and no, this is not luring you into an edit war, it is not very important issue). Pavel Vozenilek 00:47, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Article: Andreu Nin

Hi Dahn, can you please check a comment I posted on the discussion site of the article relating to Andrés Nin? I saw in "history" that you have contributed several times to the article, and I would like some feedback from other wikipedians on what I propose on the "discussion" site. No one has commented anything yet.--Hvitlys 14:21, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

  • Thanks, Dahn. I tried to move the page myself but it didn't work (probably something to do with redirecting). So I added a move request at the administrators site.

Comintern people

I think your suggestion Comintern people is very good. Bronks 23 feb 2006.

  • Okay. We've fixed it. I think this is an improvement. Bronks 23 feb 2006.

Hungarian minority in Romania

I appreciated our discussion today. Still, regardless of it, could you take a look at Hungarian minority in Romania and tell me if you believe my positions to be incorrect (of course, from your point of view). My version of the article is [9], and the version that prompted me to edit is [10]. There is a new editor (Dutch) that I fould more extremist than the Hungarians themselves. My edits concern the history section, and what really made me edit was the World War II section. I would appreciate an oppinion. Dpotop 00:07, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I needed a check. I had also seen the KIDB collaboration with that new guy. What can I say: I only said what I believed is truth, and I reconsidered my position in view of new data. As for the userbox, I can only say that I have relatives in Rep. Moldova. I can't give this up. But I'm not an extremist. For instance, I gave up editing on "Moldovan Language" when I discovered that the things got nasty. Si nu fac parte din "Noua Dreapta" (insa nici nu stiu ce e asta).  :)
I've seen your note on KIDB's page. Thanks.
BTW, I looked onto your edits on "Romanian Voivodships in 1600". I do agree with you that Transylvania was not a Romanian voivodship in 1600. However, you also write something like "I do not think that Slav serfs and Romanian serfs made a distinction among themselves as for the sake of it."
I believe you are wrong here when you assume that people choose their nationality "for the sake of it". I believe that nations are defined by difference w.r.t. the neighbor. And in this sense, a sense of difference already existed. After Renaissance, the concept was even assimilated by some members of upper classes, such as Silvio Piccolomini (Pius II) which also mentioned in the Chronicles of Nurnberg the Vlach origin of the Hungarian prince (and which assumed Vlachs descended from a Roman general Flaccus). :)
Of course, you are right that nations, in the modern sense of the word, did not exist at that time. Dpotop 18:53, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment on my user page. I suppose you did not read my sentences carefully enough. You forgot to comment about these sentences of mine, proposing collaboration between Hungarians and Romanians: "I think there must be other ways (other than banning) to protect neutrality in these articles, like building inter-ethnic groups (Romanian+Hungarian+Other independent). Maybe starting a notice board for non-extremists who are willing to work for the objectivity of Transylvania-related topics."
Any reactions? --KIDB 14:38, 27 February 2006 (UTC)


Hello Dahn. Maybe I'm not understanding well your contribution on KIDB's talk page, but it seems to me that you consider myself an extremist, even if not one that holds "remotely extreme" positions. This seems weird to me, from three points of view:

  1. First of all, you would probably agree that among Romanians in general my oppinions would be considered as very moderate.
  2. Second, you used at several occasions in the past few days our discussion as a proof of you being less nationalistic than I am. My impression is that our fundamental difference is not about actual facts, but about their interpretation. What we actually disagreed on is:
  • democracy -- you maintained that democracy alone can give the foundation of a society, whereas I maintained that democracy alone cannot (it needs to be accompanied by a "common sense" organization in power networks -- what many call the civil society, but which in Romania does not yet exist).
  • the definition of nationalism -- for me, promoting truth about your country is patriotic/nationalistic, while for you it is not. For you, the fact that negative attitudes can be associated with nationalism makes nationalism bad. For me, nationalism is like any other thing, for instance eating. Eating is necessary, but eating too much is harmful. Similarly, promoting your nation is apriori good. It becomes bad when the means used are fraud, lie, ethnic cleansing, etc.
  1. I believe that saying that some Hungarian editors are wrong is not a proof of anti-Hungarianism or extremism.Dpotop 08:31, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Ardeal

Salut,

While I agree with the fact thet Areal is most probably of Hungarian origin, the modiffications I reverted were in contradiction with a wider article Historical names of Transylvania. About the Transylvania article my oppinion is to be very careful with the users who edit it and generaly I check twice before reverting an edit made by a registered user, but I have a more brutale way of approach in the case of unregistered users: once I see the smallest discrepancy I revert it, or else we will be losing track of the edits made there. Mihai -talk 20:47, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Stavisky affair

I see you've been editing the Stavisky Affair article lately. I was the person responsible for using Janet Flanner to enlarge it, and now I feel rather guilty - Ms Flanner is a great journalist, but not perhaps a great historian. I have Alfred Cobban on my shelf and might use him to set the record slightly straighter. Do you have any comment/reaction/ideas? PiCo 22:55, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Don't be shy if you want to substantially change what I wrote - of course Flanner was Americocentric (I'm Australian, by the way), and that's a very good reason for seeking other sources. She's very witty and quite a wonderful stylist, but even I wouldn't like to see her used as the sole or main source for this article. Anyway, I'll have a go at using Cobban - but please have a look at anything I do and feel free to critice and change as you wish. (Probably have this done sometime tomorrow). PiCo 00:26, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

List of unusual deaths edits

Sorry about that. It seems you were caught in a vandalism-revert crossfire.

YOUR edits were fine, however they came in the middle of someone deleting the majority of later death listings.

I'll see what I can do to patch it up with your changes.

Béla Kun

Thanks for cleaning up and englishifiing( :-)) ).

♥♥♥Gubb ✍

12:28, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dahn/Archive_1&oldid=1141745002"