Wikipedia:Romanian Wikipedians' notice board/Archive2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] News and announcements

[edit] Polish minority in Romania

Please take a look at Polish minority in Romania that I've recently edited. Maybe you could help with Romanian names of the Polish villages in the article ? Thanks. --Lysy (talk) 21:11, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Problem articles

This is an incomplete list of articles where conflicts involving Romanian interests have occured, or which have involved Romanian Wikipedians (add any others):

Mulţumesc, Ronline ✉ 13:51, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Apel

2006 este un an provocator. Depinde de noi daca vom avea succes sau nu. Daca vom fi uniti, vom fi o forta. Trebuie sa fim uniti pentru ca numai asa vom putea sa ne aparam interesele. Toti isi apara. Uitati-va la sarbi, unguri, evrei, rusi, etc. Trebuie crescut nivelul de organizare. Trebuie sa avem mai multi utilizatori romani. Trebuie sa aparam interesele Romaniei. Daca ne lasam la altii ne pierdem credibilitatea. E destul la un articol sa aratam ca nu suntem uniti si e gata. Nu vedeti cum se baga Mikka peste tot si sustine un punct de vedere nefavorabil noua? La cate pagini unde noi ar trebui sa fim acolo ei deja ne blocheaza? Uite cele mai recente pagini Cernauti, Herta, Moldova, Moldovans, Anti-Romanian,...etc. Trebuie sa aratam ca suntem uniti. Succes mai departe. Bonaparte talk 09:43, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Ce unire, ma? Romanul mai bine da in cap la alt roman, decat sa-l ajute cand se ridica. Toate natille de pe pamantul asta sunt unite, afara de noi; pentru ca noi suntem fraieri. Mai bine ne dam aere, decat sa ajutam unul pe altul. Eu nu spun sa nu fim obiectivi si ca suntem nationalisti, dar putina fratie ar fi bine. --Anittas 09:47, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Da, agreez, dar cred că unitatea trebuie făcută într-un fel profesional. Adică, trebuie cu toţii să susţinem un punct de vedere, calm, profesional dar convingător. Cred că cea mai mare problemă în acest an a fost nu doar o lipsă de organizare dar şi, dacă vreţi, o lipsă de tact. Să ştii că mulţi nu ne văd foarte bine aici pe Wiki, fiind că prea ne certăm la orice conflict şi suntem prea agresivi, până la punctul de a fi descrişi ca "nationalist Romanian trolls". Asta nu este bine, dacă îmi permit să spun! Cred că tocmai noi trebuie să fim cei mai curaţi şi calmi dintre toţi, şi să le arătăm la utilizatori tip-Ghirlandajo că punctul lor de vedere este unul incorect, că istoria adevărată este asta, şi că noi doar vrem dreptate şi nu facem din motiv naţionalist. Asta înseamnă că deseori trebuie să fim chiar preparaţi să îngăduim... PDV român nu este cel absolut. În final, cred că totul este despre imagine. Ţelul nostru aici este 1) să informăm lumea despre România - asta prin articole despre România, care deja există multe; 2) să îmbunătăţim imaginea României. Cred că cel mai bun fel în care putem îmbunătăţi această imagine este prin respect, profesionalism şi "civlizaţie". Să arătăm că românul nu este certăreţ ca sârbul, sau ultranaţionalist ca rusul (exemplele nu sunt reale). Cred că mai bună imagine ne facem aşa - ca o bandă de utilizatori prietenoşi, aproşabili, calmi, "europeni", care poate nici nu îi interesează ce s-a întâmplat la Hotin, sau ce se întâmplă în Rep Moldova, fiind că are atâtea alte lucruri de lăudat (totul de la Eminescu până frumosul Bucureşti, Iaşi, Cluj, Sibiu, Braşov, până la sistemul nostru de căi ferate!) Poate că este o chestie personală, dar eu nu judec o ţară bazat pe istoria sa... adică, da, poate românii au făcut masacru la Hotin, dar e mult mai important că românii de astăzi au valori libere şi moderne. Din cauza asta nu cred că are rost să sacrificăm imaginea acestor valori numai ca să salvăm acţiunile noastre istorice, care lumea oricum nu le judecă.
Uite - eu am lansat idea Wikipedia:Ombudsman, adică avocatul comunităţii Wikipedia. Ştie lumea că sunt român, şi atunci lumea - europenii de vest, americanii - se gândeşte "la români le placea libertatea, democraţie, toleranţa... sunt exact ca noi - şi la ei este ombudsman, ca la noi. Şi la ei este respect pentru drepturile omului, ca la noi". Asta este imaginea dorită! Da, sunt chestii mici, dar împreună, putem să arătăm la lume că România sau românii sunt acolo, printre primele locuri, când vine la deschidere, la toleranţă şi la respect pentru alţii!
Să fac o comparaţie - nu e mai bine să ştie lumea că un român a scris articolul despre Decade of Roma Inclusion şi a lansat idea unei Wikipedie în rromani, decât se ne spălăm pe mâini încercând se spunem că noi nu trebuie să suportăm aceste iniţiative că la noi nu sunt romi!? Nu e frumos aşa? Să spună lumea că deşi sunt romi în Ungaria şi Slovacia şi Serbia, utilizatorii din România au făcut cel mai mult pentru această minoritate? Asta este imagine! Noi trebuie să fim role model', să fim admiraţi. Şi asta nu se face neapărat prin protejarea intereselor... asta ne facem să fim admiraţi, dar nu într-un fel prea plăcut. Nu, ce ne trebuie nouă este să fim admiraţi pentru valorile noastre moderne. Eu îi admir teribil pe estoni pentru ce au făcut cu ţară lor în 10 ani. La rândul nostru, trebuie să fim admiraţi pentru cine suntem, pentru ce "modele" de indivizi suntem. Mulţumesc tuturor utilizatorilor care au lucrat pentru a promova intereselor României, că să ştiţi că deşi unii dintre noi au fost criticaţi, pot să spun că toţi din noi pot să închidă capitolul 2005 ştiind că au făcut ceva bun pentru România! Un an nou fericit!! (Sper că n-am scris prostii... doar e anul nou :) Ronline ✉ 11:35, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Da, este si despre imagine, dar nu stiu daca sunt de acord cu tine, Ron, cand spui ca istoria nu ar fi prea importanta. Eu nu ma laud cu istoria, dar o gasesc necesara. Cat despre Hotin, etc., daca ceva nu este in regula, categoric ca vrem sa corectam greseala. In fine, Ghir-ul ala a fost blocat iar imaginea lui nu cred ca este asa de buna, dar daca Bogdan si altii care au avut probleme cu el, ar fi spus, "oameni buni, Ghir este un ticalos", dar in tip diplomatic, atuncea ar fi fost o fratie. Nu uita-ti ca Ghir a fost acela care l-a insultat pe Bogdan in RfA. Iar Ron, eu inteleg ca tu vrei sa lucrezi pentru United Nations, dar incearca sa fii mai aspru, cand este nevoie. --Anittas 11:54, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Anittas - mi-e îmi place tare istoria, şi cred că este importantă pentru contribuţia sa la criteria 1 de mai sus, adică "să informăm lumea despre România - asta prin articole despre România". Deci, am apreciat ce ai făcut de exemplu la Battle of Vaslui. Istoria este necesară, bineînţeles. Problemele se formează când se iscă conflicte de istorie. Când este ceva incorect, ca la Hotin, trebuie spus într-un fel foarte diplomatic care este problemă. Eu de multe ori am fost aspru - adică, ferm - dar niciodată nu am vrut să insult oamenii sau să îi critic personal pentru ideile care le susţin. Este mai important critica - sau dezbaterea - ideilor nu a oamenilor. Ronline ✉ 13:14, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Trebuie sa ne concentram in viitor la doua aspecte esentiale. Viitor si trecut. Invariabil viitorul este legat de cel al Uniunii Europene iar trecutul este legat de Romania Mare. Tot ce deriva din aceste doua proiecte trebuie sustinut si aparat. Ca sa fim model de admirat trebuie sa avem verticalitate si sa ne sustinem punctul nostru de vedere. Altfel apar incalcari, utilizatori sunt blocati pe nedrept...si nimeni nu ia nici o masura pentru ai ajuta. Ma gandesc la unele masuri luate de Mikka care sunt foarte partinitoare si chiar anti-romanesti. Daca acceptam inseamna ca ne meritam soarta. Asa niciodata nu vom fi puternici si vom fi calcati in picioare de orice copilas.. Cum vreti sa fiti puternici si respectati daca nu sunteti in stare sa va articulati impreuna eforturile? Cum ati vrea sa aveti o tara ca si Germania sau Franta daca voi nu sunteti in stare sa va aparati interesele? Uitatt-va cum si le apara ei. E drept ca suntem inca foarte putini si cam fara putere de decizie. Penetrati structurile, ajungeti administratori, faceti-va prieteni, comunicati.
Vezi, Bonaparte, eu pentru acestea lucruri te admir. Exact la asta mă refer - noi trebuie să fim şi plăcuţi şi respectaţi, şi asta se poate realiza numai dacă ne involvăm în structuri ca şi administratori, etc. Trebuie să ne facem relaţii aici, să comunicăm cu alţii. Aşa facem la alţii o imagine bună a românilor. Nu trebuie să folosim aceste poziţii, tip admin, pentru abuz, dar pentru justiţie. Să zică lumea "uite ce mulţi români admini sunt, dar toţi dintre ei sunt băieţi buni". De aceea am propus Ombudsman-ul. Ronline ✉ 13:20, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Eu cred ca putem fi respectati si chiar considerati un model de conduita pe masura ce rezolvam si avem un precedent in care sa fim uniti. Este important de castigat prima batalie. Apoi vom castiga si altele. In privinta asta nu trebuie sa existe concurenta intre voi. Fiecare sa-si faca treaba la locul lui. Am lansat ideea cu aderarea Romaniei la UE. Din pacate pentru noi mai mult un moldovean m-a sustinut acolo. Unde sunteti voi? Anul acesta este decisiv pentru UE si putem scrie mult pe aceasta tema. Trebuie combinat efortul pentru trecut cu cel pentru viitor si aici ii dau dreptate lui Ronline. Ideea cu Wikipedia:Ombudsman e foarte buna, daca poti ajunge ar fi foarte bine. Bonaparte talk 12:13, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Omule, ti s-a spus ca despre viitor, nu poti sa scrii; adica, nu poti sa speculezi. Wiki nu este un "crystal ball". Eu spun ca deocamdata, sa ne bazam pe istorie. Noi suntem destul de multi. Peste 31 de utilizatori si-au scris numele aicea. Aceasta pagina este printre cele mai populare pagini din domeniul asta. Numai vointa ne trebuie. Deci, nu trebuie sa ne legam de orice chichita, dar cand este un conflict de genul lui Hotin sa Bukovina, atuncea nu stati in banca voastra! In fine. Eu totusi spun ca 2005 a fost un an bun pentru noi. Bonaparte a inceput cu ideea de a face pe toti romanii admin; iar acuma avem multi romani care sunt admin. Am avut un Featured Article cu CFR, iar am creat multe articole noi despre istorie. Node nu mai are asa mare influenta cum a avut inainte. Si asta este un lucru bun. Plus ca ne-am adunat cu totii aicea, care iar ne-a ajutat. --Anittas 12:39, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Da, aşa este. Şi eu cred că comunitatea română este destul de mare şi organizată în comparaţie cu altele la en.wp. Cât cu articole de tip Hotin, nu cred că trebuie să fim o armată tip gherilă. Adică, nu ştiu cât de bine este felul acesta de a aproşa probleme: hai, veniţi băieţilor să ne apărăm ţara! Trebuie ceva mai profesional şi poate puţin mai calm. Ronline ✉ 13:20, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Amin. Energie exista, vointa deasemenea.. putina temperanta si putem muta muntii. (De articole, evident) Dunemaire 16:10, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Ronline hit upon a lot of things I also encourage. Being too nationalistic or rude here in Wiki can backfire for Romanian interests. I once explained this to anonymous editors who were striking the Moldovan language page. Nationalism hasn't entered my edits in a long time, though a few times it may have (or may not have, I don't even remember any nationalistic edits by me, I'm just being cautious). Alexander 007 04:07, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Translation

2006 is a provoking year. It is depends on us whether we will succeed or not. If we will be united, we will be powerful. We must be united because only in this way will we have the power to guard our own interests. Everyone guards theirs. Look at the Serbs, the Hungarians, the Jews, the Russians, etc. The level of organisation must rise. We must have more Romanian users. We must defend the interests of Romania. If we let ourselves be defeated by others, we will lose our credibility. It's enough at only one article to show that we are not united, and that's it. Don't you see how Mikka involves himself everywhere and sustains a point of view unfavourable to us? At how many pages where we should've been was he already there to block us? Look at the most recent pages: Cernauti, Herta, Moldova, Moldovans, Anti-Romanian,...etc. We must show that we are united. Success for the future. [Bonaparte's sig]

What union, [mate]? The Romanian is better at backstabbing [lit. hitting the head] of the other Romanian, rather than helping him when he's trying to rise. All nations of this earth are united, except us; because we are fools. We'd rather give ourselves kicks than help each other. I'm not saying that we shouldn't be objective and that we are nationalistic, but a bit of brotherhood would be good. [Anittas' sig]

Yes, I agree, but I think that union must take place in a professional manner. That is, we must all sustain a point of view, calm, professional but convincing. I think that the biggest problem in this year was not only a lack of organisation but also, if you want, a lack of tact. You must know that many don't view us [Romanians] well here at Wiki, because we always argue and fight at every conflict and are too aggressive, up to the point where we're described as "nationalist Romanian trolls". This is not good, if you'll let me say! I think that we should be the ones who should aim to be the cleanest and calmest out of everyone, and to show users like Ghirlandajo that their point of view is incorrect, that the true history is this, and that we are only right and are not doing what we're doing from a nationalistic point of view. This means that often we must be prepared to give way... the Romanian POV is not absolute. Finally, I think it's all about image. Our aim here is 1) to inform people about Romania, through articles about Romania, many of which already exist; 2) to improve Romania's image. I think the best way to improve this image is through respect, professionalism and "civilisation" [in Romanian, this means something akin to "good manners"]. To show that the Romanian is not someone who squabbles like the Serb, or is ultranationalistic like the Russian (these examples aren't real). I think the best image for us is this - a band of friendly, approachable, calm and "European" users, which may not even be interested in what happened at Khotyn, or what's happenning in the Republic of Moldova, because there are so many other things that we can promote ourselves with (everything from Eminescu up to the beautiful Bucureşti, Iaşi, Cluj, Sibiu, Braşov, up to our railway network!) Maybe this is a personal thing, but I'm not one that judges a country based on its history... I mean, yes, maybe Romanians were involved in a massacre at Khotyn, but it's much more important that the Romanians of today hold liberal and modern values. Due to this, I don't think it's worth sacrificing our image and these values just to "save" the image of our historical actions, for which people don't judge us anyway.
Look - I've launched the idea of a Wikipedia:Ombudsman, that is - a community advocate for Wikipedia. People know I'm Romanian, and then people - Western Europeans, Americans, think to themselves "Romanians like liberty, democracy, tolerane... they're just like us - they have an ombudsman too, like us. They have the respect for human rights, like us". This is the image we should aspire to! Yes, they're small things, but together, we can show the world that Romania and Romanians are there, at the top, when it comes to openness, tolerance and respect for each other!
To make a comparison - isn't it better that people know that a Romanian wrote the article about the Decade of Roma Inclusion and launched the idea of a Romani Wikipedia [Wikipedia in the language of the Roma, or Gypsy, people], instead of washing our hands trying to say that we shouldn't support these initiatives because we don't have Roma people!? Isn't that nice? For people to say that although there are also Roma in Hungary and Slovakia and Serbia, it was Romanian [Wikipedia] users who did the most for this minority? This is image! We must be a role model, we must be admired. And this is not necessarily done through the protection of our interests... this makes us admired, but not in a very good way. No, what we need is to be admired for our modern values. I admire the Estonians a great deal for what they did to their country in ten years. In our way, we must be admired for who we are, for the "models" of individuals that we are. Thanks to all users who've worked to promote Romanian interests, because you must know that although some of us were criticised, I can say that all of us can close the chapter of 2005 knowing that we've done something good for Romania! A happy new year!! (I hope I haven't written stupid things... after all, it's the New Year :) [Ronline's sig]

Yes, it's also about image, but I don't know if I agree with you, Ron, when you say that history is not that important. I'm not one who boasts about history, but I do find it necessary. As to Khotyn, etc., if something's not right, then we must firmly correct the mistake. Anyway, that Ghir[landajo] was blocked and his image isn't that good, I think, and if Bogdan and others who had problems with him, would've said "[good] people, Ghir is a bad person/rascal," but in a diplomatic tone, that we would've had brotherhood. Don't forget that Ghir was the one who insluted Bogdan in RfA. And Ron, I understand that you want to work for the United Nations, but try to be harsher, when it's necessary. [Anittas' sig]

Anittas - I like history very much, and I think that it's important in order to meet criteria 1 above - taht is, "to inform people about Romania, through articles about Romania". So, I appreciate what you've done, for example, at Battle of Vaslui. History is necessary, of course. The problems begin when we have conflicts over history. When something is incorrect, like at Khotyn, we must say it in a very diplomatic way. I was harsh - that is, firm - many times, but never did I want to insult people or to criticise them personally for the ideas they sustain. Criticising - or debating - ideas is much more important than criticising people. [Ronline's sig]

[edit] RfC contra Rusului

(Fi-ti atenti ca avem urechi neplacute printre noi.)

M-am saturat de tampenile rusului, iar eu cred ca este cazul ca noi sa ne organizam si sa facem un RfC contra lui. Avem destule dovezi despre abuzul lui; incepand cu insultarile lui contra lui Bogdan si articolul "anti-romanian discrimination", continuand cu Bonaparte, Vasile, si cu mine. Avem nevoie de cel putin doi admin pentru asta. Eu pot cerceta nebuniile lui. Ce ziceti? --Anittas 12:12, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Anittas, I'll have to add new facts of your disturbing disregard for other editors to your ongoing RfC. You should understand that your and Bonaparte's unilateral POV-pushing will never bring the results you crave for. You need to cool off. --Ghirla | talk 12:24, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
DE ACORD! --Bonaparte talk 12:25, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Uite ce zic baietii aici:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Ukraine/New_article_announcements#Announcements

--Bonaparte talk 14:12, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Translation, as requested

Attempting translation, as requested. The following is a good faith attempt; please remember that my Romanian is short of fluency; if I have misinterpreted something, feel free to edit. -- Jmabel | Talk 04:11, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Title: RFC against the Russian


(Be aware that we have hostile ears among us.)

I'm fed up with the Russian's tommyrot, but I believe that this is the case for us to organize and make an RfC against him. We have enough evidence about his abuses; beginning with his insults against Bogdan and the article "anti-romanian discrimination", continuing with Bonaparte, Vasile, and me. We need at least two admins for this. I can examine his lunacy. What do you say? [Anittas' sig]

[English passage]

I agree! [Bonaparte's sig]

Look what the boys say here: [Link and English]

[edit] Conflict cu Rusii

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Romanian_discrimination

Am intrat intrun conflict cu rusi si ucranieni despre Khotyn si Bukovina. Eu, Bogdan si Vasile, am incercat sa tinem piept acestelor draci. Ei nu accepta faptul ca romanii din Bukovina au votat sa se reuneasca cu romania si tot sterg (rv) aceasta dovada. E timpul ca cei cu autoritata mai mare decat muritori ca mine sa se implice mai mult si sa i-a masuri. Nu o mai faceti pe a diplomatul. Lasa-ti jocul la o parte si faceti ce trebuie de facut. Citite ca s-a spus pe articolul lui Khotyn si uitati-va cum s-a cmoportat Ghir. Bonaparte, te rog sa nu te implici in conflictul asta. --Anittas 12:13, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Care to say it in English? If you forget that this the English-language encyclopedia, I have to remind you about it. [a threat removed] --Ghirla | talk 12:17, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
And you watch yours. Because so far you've been doing all the shouting. Remember, WP:CIVIL. Ronline ✉ 01:35, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
We are allowed to speak Romanian. --Anittas 12:23, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
De ce sa nu ma bag? E dreptul meu! Bonaparte talk 12:18, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Te rog sa nu te bagi acolo, ca ai sa faci caca din tot! --Anittas 12:23, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
And please don't bring your pet troll Bonaparte into it. --Ghirla | talk 12:20, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Hey Ghirlo, here is not allowed to say such things...you might be banned for good with all these romanians sysops you never know ...Bonaparte talk 12:40, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

HAHAHA! Ghir asked Node to translate my message for him. This will be fun to watch. Node probably understands one-fifth of Romanian/Moldovan. Let me give you a headstart, Node. The first sentence reads: Conflict with Russians. Don't cheat, Node. Don't ask Oleg to translate it for you. That would be too funny! --Anittas 12:25, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Anittas, this counts as a personal attack. In fact, I translated the whole thing and sent it to Ghirla via e-mail. Never imagine that you can use language as a tool of exclusion, because you can't. --Node 22:37, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
I do not give a fuck what you sent to Ghir. Chris already translated the text. You can't translate shit. Happy New Year! --Anittas 07:34, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
Wow! =) That is something to be seen =)) --Just a tag 12:52, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
Alright! HA HA! HA HA HA HA! It's so true. It was already translated. Node is a sham. Alexander 007 07:47, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Now, now, kids .. shouting things all of us here learned in history hours during school without citing neutral sources (I'm thinking Anittas/ Khotyn here) won't win that battle. Okay, we know those are facts. Cool down and start looking for references. And I'm not touching the issue of Bonaparte's behaviour and the paragraph about the romanian admins ... not even with a 10 meter pole Dunemaire 13:06, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Translation, as requested

Attempting translation, as requested. The following is a good faith attempt; please remember that my Romanian is short of fluency; if I have misinterpreted something, feel free to edit. -- Jmabel | Talk 03:40, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

I've entered into a conflict with Russians and Ukrainians about Khotyn and Bukovina. Me, Bogdan and Vasile have tried to keep up the fight against these draci [I hesitate to translate, because I may not match the tone. Literally "devils", but it can convey a wide range of meaning]. They don't accept the fact that Romanians from Bukovina voted to reunite with Romania and they keep erasing (reverting) that evidence. It's time that those with greater authority than mortals like me get more involved and take measures. It won't do any more to make like a diplomat. Leave the game aside and do what must be done. Read what they've written in their article Khotyn and look how Ghir is behaving. Bonaparte, I ask you not to get involved in this conflict. [Anittas sig]

[then an exchange in English]

Why shouldn't I jump in? It's my right! [Bonaparte's sig]

I ask you not to jump in there; you'll make a mess of it. [Anittas sig]

In this context, "draci" is best translated as "bloody". --Anittas 04:23, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
No, "bloody" is an adjective, draci is a plural noun. I don't agree. "Bloody bastards" or "Blood suckers", maybe. Alexander 007 04:27, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
If I say "bloody Romanians", the best translation would be "draci de romani". Even if "bloody" is an adjective, so is "draci". Bloody doesn't look like it's plural, because you can't use the plural form in that context. --Anittas 04:38, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Acestelor draci literally means "these devils", no? It's a plural noun in that sentence, ain't it? I don't see how you can translate it as "these bloody". Or is my Romanian that bad? Alexander 007 04:41, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Fine, it means devils. And they are devils. --Anittas 04:43, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Where do you find the word "bastards" in the text? --Anittas 04:39, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Nowhere, the word is literally "devils". Alexander 007 04:42, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Isn't it supposed to be acestor draci, not acestelor draci, in that sentence? Alexander 007 07:29, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Maybe it should be. My Romanian is a little rusty. Do you want a cookie, now? --Anittas 07:32, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Give me your address and I'll send you a cookie. --Anittas 07:34, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
No baby, I'll settle for a glass of Fanta, that corny Euro soda. Alexander 007 07:35, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Romanian wikipedia project

Hi fellow! I want to propose a project for expanding the Romanian wikipedia that I had already started. We should translate the pages from the English wikipedia in Romanian, so this will increase the number of articles written in Romanian. We don't need to hurry. If somebody accept my project, please tell me. NorbertArthur 29 December 2005

Yes! It's a good idea. Bonaparte talk 07:17, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you mean, NorbertArthur. You started what? We have been working on expanding the Romanian Wikipedia for quite some time. Have I seen you there? In any case, you're welcome to contribute. --AdiJapan 09:41, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] [1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mediation_Committee

Ronline is our man! --Bonaparte talk 19:14, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, Bonaparte! Ronline ✉ 11:33, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
You're welcome! si la mai mareeeeeeeeee! Bonaparte talk 11:37, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] add category [[ro:

Hey! You should start adding [[ro: to all the articles you edit! --Bonaparte talk 15:36, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Lighten up

I'm putting this here as I notice that the news section has become HQ and propaganda office for the war fought for defending national interest ;-). IMHO some of you guys are exagerating - WP is more about facts and knowledge and less about nationalist fights and flames.

Take a look at Bozgor and its edit history. If you find something remotely funny/ironic in there then there might still be some hope :-) - AdamSmithee 22:54, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, that article was ironic and quite funny. But I deleted it nonetheless (in fact, what amused me more was how some editors actually believed it and tagged it as cleanup and transfer to Wiktionary! Ronline ✉ 08:53, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
My thoughts exactly. That is why I said look at the history of edits :-). I did not delete it myself only because I wanted you guys to see it - AdamSmithee 19:38, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bias edits of mikka

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk_talk:Mikkalai --Bonaparte talk 18:49, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

This links to a non-existent page. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:56, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
Was deleted before by Mikka. Bonaparte talk 07:44, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
Is he actually allowed to delete a non-empty non-nonsensical (I presume) talk page to which he wasn't the only contributor? Dunemaire 08:12, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
In his own user space? Sure. -- Jmabel | Talk 08:53, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
And so, I learned something new today also.Dunemaire 20:17, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
Maybe the link was simply wrong in the first place: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Mikkalai --Vlad 01:02, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Transylvania

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transylvania Watch this page--Bonaparte talk 16:58, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Node si propaganda lui

Boul ala de Node iar a inceput cu prostiile lui; de data asta, iar vrea sa gaseasca diferente intre romana si moldoveneste. Pur si simplu ce spune el acolo sunt prostii, iar as dori ca Bogdan si Alex sa se duca acolo si sa-i arate unde greseste.

Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Moldovan_language#Node_and_his_propaganda

--Anittas 02:03, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Don't imagine I don't know Romanian.
Ar fi bine un admin sa-l si blocheze pentru catva timp. --Bonaparte talk 14:18, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Translation

Attempting translation, as requested. The following is a good faith attempt; please remember that my Romanian is short of fluency; if I have misinterpreted something, feel free to edit. -- Jmabel | Talk 03:40, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Title: Node and his propaganda

That ox of a Node has continued with his foolishness; this time, again, he wants to find differences between Romanian and Moldovan. Purely and simply, what he says there is rubbish/folly, but I'd like Bogdan and Alex to to go there and show him where he's mistaken.

[link] [Anittas' sig]

[response in English presumably from Node]

It would be good if an admin would block him for a while. [Bonaparte's sig]

[edit] Palatul Telefoanelor

I've started an article on Palatul Telefoanelor. I think I've written a fairly strong short piece on the building itself, but could not quickly find references on exactly what activities have taken place there at what dates. Obviously, it was at one time the central telephone exchange for Bucharest; I assume that must have ended or modified, at least temporarily, during reconstruction, but I don't know the details. Also, while I know that antennas on its roof are used for broadcasting, etc. I don't know what broadcasts from there.

Further, the article needs citation for the information about ownership; I took that from our Romtelecom article, but that article gave no citations.

If someone in Bucharest could take a picture or two of the building, that would be great; I've linked to two interesting pictures, but I can't really see a fair use justification for using them, since we could so easily take our own. -- Jmabel | Talk 00:46, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

I put a picture, but it's rather bad, as it was taken from a moving car. (although the concept of moving car apparently has a different meaning on Calea Victoriei during the peak hours :-) bogdan 10:30, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Especially if it's not a taxi. -- Jmabel | Talk 11:31, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Projects

Advertise or ask for assistance for your Romanian-related Wiki projects

[edit] Romania's_potential

Let's expand this article Romania's_potential - Bonaparte talk 17:23, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:57, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Vaslui, again

Do we have someone here who is good with graphics? I need a map of the battle. I found one here, but I don't know if it's copyrighted; and besides, it's in Romanian: http://efnord.eforie.ro/stefancm/harti/imagepages/image6.htm

I need someone to make a new map based on that information. That information cannot be copyrighted, since it belongs to history. Any volunteers? --Anittas 22:28, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

I'll make a new map. bogdan 22:32, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
Thank you!!! Let us know when it's done. :) --Anittas 22:35, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
Done. See: Image:Vaslui Battle map.png. bogdan 23:16, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
Wow, dude, that was fast; and it looks great! That's a lot! I'll upload it now! --Anittas 23:24, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
You don't need to. It's on the Commons, so it can be used in all Wikimedia projects. bogdan 23:28, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
Oh, I meant to say, adding it to the article. Well, I've tried, but the text becomes weird, leaving too much space in-between. Do you want to give it a shot? Otherwise, I might have to create a gallery. Oh, and I'll be forced to remove the photo of Stefan's statue because it has no info about its copyright status. --Anittas 23:32, 16 December 2005 (UTC)



Okay, I was forced to make a gallery, or otherwise it would all be messed up. I think it looks okay, but the background headline looks a bit messy. I don't know Wiki html commands, but can we make the text look better? --Anittas 00:10, 17 December 2005 (UTC)¨

I think I fixed it and I think it looks good now. I'll fish for some new info, and perhaps, in the near future, the article can be featured. --Anittas 00:13, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Romania's integration in EU, again

Romania will join EU in 2007. This is one of the most important process from recent history of Romania. Here a lot of things to be debated. I need help to expand this article. The article is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accession_of_Romania_to_the_European_Union , Accession of Romania to the European Union any help is welcome! --Bonaparte talk 11:13, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 40.000 new articles

Dictionarul Enciclopedic Romin aparut la editura politica Bucuresti 1962-1967 are in conformitate cu legea drepturilor de autor valabila pana in 1994 (cred), drepturile de autor expirate din 1987. In consecinta se poate face ceva similar cu enciclopedia britanica 1911.CristianChirita

Good ideea. Not bad. But who has time and patience to translate so much amount? Some articles related to Romania are very welcomed indeed. Bonaparte talk 21:55, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Bonaparte has a valid point. Maybe we should use them in the rowiki then first?Dunemaire 22:12, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
The point is that somone with an scanner and an OCR software shall start the project.

But please consider that the images are not mandatory to be translated:)CristianChirita

From the Romanian copyright law:
Durata drepturilor patrimoniale asupra operelor colective este de 70 de ani de la data aducerii operelor la cunostinta publica.
So, since the copyright for collective works is valid 70 years after the publishing, it is still protected for another 27 years. bogdan 22:25, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
From the Romanian copyright law 1956, (legea 8 din 1996 nu cred ca poate modifica retroactiv drepturile de autor.)

No law can be applied retroactive. Art. 7. - In cazurile aratate mai jos, autorul nu are folosinta drepturilor patrimoniale decit:

a) pe termen de 20 ani de la aparitia operei cu privire la cei care alcatuiesc enciclopedii, dictionare si culegeri;
b) pe termen de 10 ani de la aparitie cu privire la autorul unei serii de fotografii artistice;
c) pe termen de 5 ani de la aparitie cu privire la autorul de fotografii artistice separate.

http://www.cdep.ro/pls/legis/legis_pck.htp_act_text?idt=8999

Deci conform legii vechi, drepturile de autor au cam expirat inainte de intrarea in vigoare a legii noi adica in 1982-1987. Dar daca este cineva care a facut dreptul poate ne poate lamuri. CristianChirita Dar situatia din punct de vedere al legii internationale eu o vad oarecum similara cu cea a rusilor care nu au drepturi de autor pe perioada in care legea nu prevedea acest lucru. mai ales ca articolul 8 spune: Art. 8. - La expirarea termenelor prevazute la art. 6 si 7 sau, in lipsa de mostenitori, din momentul mortii autorului, dreptul patrimonial de autor se stinge.

I don't know. In some countries, the copyright laws applied retroactively. See for example, the Directive on harmonising the term of copyright protection in the European Union.
Unlike some other copyright term extension acts, this act retroactively restored copyright to works that had fallen into the public domain in their source countries (see grandfathering).
bogdan 12:23, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Legea 8/1996:
se abroga Decretul nr. 321 din 21 iunie 1956 privind dreptul de autor, cu modificarile - ulterioare, precum si orice alte dispozitii contrare.
bogdan 12:31, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Corect. Se abroga incepand din 1996. Ceea ce inseamna ca pana in 1996 a fost valabila, ceea ce inseamna ca drepturile de autor au expirat in 1982.CristianChirita 12:51, 3 January 2006 (UTC) Daca ar fi asa pentru orice articol copiat si distribuit in perioada 1982-1995 am putea comite o infractiune conform legii din 1996. Ceea ce nu este in regula.

Puten folosi aceste imagini scanate de mine dintr-o carte din 1987? Link --Anittas 13:07, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Anittas, uite ce zice decretul 321/1956 in articolele 14 si 15: (sub incidenta caruia se afla imaginea din 1987)

Art. 14. - Sint permise fara consimtamintul autorului si fara plata vreunei remuneratii respectindu-se insa celelalte drepturi ale acestuia:

c) publicarea, chiar integrala a operelor literare, muzicale sau stiintifice ori reproducerea operelor de arta plastica in manuale didactice, cursuri universitare, culegeri sau alte asemenea lucrari destinate invatamintului, cu exceptia operelor care au fost comandate special in acest scop si pentru care autorul pastreaza dreptul de remuneratie;

e) extrase de mica intindere din opere literare, muzicale, cinematografice ori stiintifice, sau reproduceri, precum si prezentari cu ajutorul aparatelor optice a unor opere de arta plastica, servind exclusiv ca document explicativ pentru continutul scris sau vorbit in conferinte sau publicatii cu caracter stiintific, in lucrari de critica ori in darile de seama asupra expozitiilor publice, sau pentru popularizarea acestor opere prin radio si televiziune;

h) reproducerea operelor de arta plastica in filme, diafilme sau prin televiziune cu titlu de informare sau de prezentare accesorie.

j) fotografierea, copierea si reproducerea in orice mod a unei opere de arta plastica, daca aceasta nu se valorifica.

Art. 15. - In cazul folosirii operelor conform art. 13 si 14, trebuie sa se indice opera originala, numele autorului acesteia, al traducatorului sau al autorului operei derivate prevazute la art. 10, iar la operele de arta plastica trebuie sa se indice si locul unde se gaseste originalul precum si numele celui care a efectuat copia.

Altfel zis, poti s-o lasi pe Wiki linistit daca precizezi sursa si autorul. Dunemaire 14:19, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Nu-i adevărat. Imaginea din 1987 se află sub incidenţa legii valabile în momentul actual, care nu are o asemenea prevedere. bogdan 14:31, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
Legile nu se aplica retroactiv in Ro, deci e imposibil sa fie sub incidenta celei din 1996. Dunemaire 14:42, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Mersi, Dune! --Anittas 14:22, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Daca conform legii vechi dreptul de autor expira in 1997, atunci din 1996 a intrat sub incidenta legii noi, pentru ca dreptul de autor nu expirase, daca dreptul a expirat in 1992 atunci este PD din 1992. Parerea mea..CristianChirita

Dear all, even such things like copyright laws are of interest to the community. Besides, speaking non-English is simply impollite. Please, stick to English, when possible as Polish, Rushian and Ukrainian editors do on the other boards. Thanks, --Irpen 03:19, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

The short of it is that the massive Communist-era Dictionarul Enciclopedic Romîn fell out of copyright under the old, rather minimal Communist-era copyright law, and they are trying to work out if new, extended copyright laws apply. If I follow the above correctly (I haven't read it closely) anything that was still under copyright when the new, stricter laws came into effect is covered, but once something passed into the public domain, there is no turning back; I gather that the particular materials in question are now public domain, but not (for example) a photo from 1987, which gets the benefit of the new law.
I should add that as far as I know, no one involved is a lawyer, and some comments are qualified with remarks like "Parerea mea" ("my opinion").
If I misstated anything in that summary, or missed anything significant, could someone please fill in? Thanks. -- Jmabel | Talk 11:41, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Romanian Article

Hey! The article SolvIT Networks was found on the English Wikipedia. Could someone with a more fundamental understanding of the Romanian language please translate it? Or, if it is mostly advertising (i guess it is), confirm that?

Thanks, --mmtux talk 00:43, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, it is mostly advertising. The website it cites (here) is in English, you can check what this is all about. I'm not sure where Wikipedia decided to draw the notability limit, but as far as I can see this is not really a very notable company. I could be mistaken though. Cheers. --AdiJapan 10:00, 25 December 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Voronet, Sucevita

Images of the painted monasteries would be very useful. --Vasile 04:40, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Mircea Cartarescu

Somebody recently created the article in Romanian here and I translated it. It gives me a feeling of not being complete and up to date though (there are at least two of his books that weren't included on the list, for example). Anybody care to gather some recent data about the guy and integrate it in the article? Dunemaire 23:11, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

He has some books translated in English or French. --Vasile 00:01, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
The article in the Romanian wiki existed for some time now. IMHO, it would be a nice thing to put the corresponding interwiki link especially when the Romanian article was used for translation into English, don't you think? ;) Thanks! --Vlad 09:54, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
A big thank you for the quick and efficient response.Translating while being in a major lack of sleep sucks, so I knew I made mistakes but I wasn't able to come with some good synonims for the life of me and felt way too tired to look them up. You'll empathize with me when your first kid will get his/her 2 year molars, trust me . Dunemaire 16:57, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Sa-ti traiasca! Works section still incomplete. --Vasile 17:44, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
[2], [3] If somebody has too much spare time in the next few hours ..if not, I'll do it.Dunemaire 17:56, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/o/m/Wikipedia%7ERomanian_Wikipedians%27_notice_board_Archive2_1b51.html"