Talk:Zoia Ceauşescu
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Stub | This article has been rated as stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Romania, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Romania-related topics. Please visit the the Wikipedia:WikiProject Romania if you would like to get involved. Happy editing! |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. |
 |
edit · history · watch · refresh To-do list for Zoia Ceauşescu: |
|---|---|
|
No to-do list assigned; you can help us in improving the articles in the same category |
|
[edit] Name
Is her correct name Zoia or Zoe? Some newspapers (i.e. Gardianul) present her name as Zoe while others (such as Evenimentul Zilei) give Zoia. The Romanian Wikipedia article is at ro:Zoe Ceauşescu. 
Ronline ✉ 05:20, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
- Both seem to be widely used. I personally prefer 'Zoia', but we should probably go with what the Romanian Wiki uses. - Francis Tyers · 10:33, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- Why? bogdan 10:43, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I dunno, one would have thought that as Romanians they would know what they were doing with members of the "dictatorial family". Maybe I'm wrong ;) - Francis Tyers · 10:59, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Well, I don't know, but her name must have either been Zoe or Zoia. There's no two ways about it :) Is there any official source to check this? We can't use Zoia if she was actually called Zoe, or Zoe is she was actually called Zoia. I personally think it's Zoe. UPDATE: According to Monitorul de Sibiu, "Zoe Ceausescu, fosta Zoia Ceausescu, sau Zoica, cum era alintata de parinti". So, it seems the "official" name was Zoe and Zoia may just have a nickname (perhaps a Romanian-articulated version of Zoe?). Ronline ✉ 11:01, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
- Well, I don't know, but her name must have either been Zoe or Zoia. There's no two ways about it :) Is there any official source to check this? We can't use Zoia if she was actually called Zoe, or Zoe is she was actually called Zoia. I personally think it's Zoe. UPDATE: According to Monitorul de Sibiu, "Zoe Ceausescu, fosta Zoia Ceausescu, sau Zoica, cum era alintata de parinti". So, it seems the "official" name was Zoe and Zoia may just have a nickname (perhaps a Romanian-articulated version of Zoe?).
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- I'll second that. In the 22 articles listed on MathSciNet with her as an author or co-author (as mentioned in the article), she is listed consistently as either Zoia or Z. So, whatever the press choses to call her (even if Zoe was indeed her birth name), I'd go with her professional name. On the other hand, if a reference can be found that she was really named Zoe on her birth certificate, that info could be mentioned in parenthesis in the beginning of the article, I think. Turgidson 15:34, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
[edit] A question
To quote from the article: A confirmed relation that she had prior to her marriage was with Petre Roman, the person that later overthrew and killed her father, became prime minister, and kept her and her husband in jail. This sounds really over the top to me. Did really Roman kill Ceauşescu? I thought he was executed by a firing squad. Turgidson 05:10, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
- The entire paragraph added on january 5 is POV, and would be nuked under BLP. As a recently deceased, I think it's reasonnable to nuke it as unsourced POV. Circeus 17:47, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- For the record, I still asked User:Nareklm to have a look at this.Circeus 18:48, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks -- I wasn't sure what to do about that edit, but it did look awfully out of line to me. I'm still relatively new at wikipedia, so I'd be interested in finding out, for future reference, what is the recommended course of action in such a case: should one (1) simply revert an edit that looks so over the top, or (2) leave a message on the talk page, like I did, or (3) contact an admin (which one? how?). Turgidson 19:56, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- I would say just remove it, theres no significant importance of it plus its unsourced, causes more trouble either remove it or reword it. Nareklm 23:10, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks -- I wasn't sure what to do about that edit, but it did look awfully out of line to me. I'm still relatively new at wikipedia, so I'd be interested in finding out, for future reference, what is the recommended course of action in such a case: should one (1) simply revert an edit that looks so over the top, or (2) leave a message on the talk page, like I did, or (3) contact an admin (which one? how?). Turgidson 19:56, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
