User talk:Mentatus/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Mentatus. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Azuga

Although I'm sure you had the best of intentions, please do not remove again that link to diap.com. I live in Azuga and that is the representation of a project already approved by the local authorities. When complete, I will replace the link with a picture. (I have, however, moved it in the newly created "External link" section.) I live very close to the site (my home is somewhere in the lower part of the plan) and I do not necessarily endorse the whole project. But building WILL start in a matter of weeks and I think that letting people know what will be done in my town (it's a 150 million € investment) could be called useful, not spam. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Razvan NEAGOE (talk • contribs)

Nice work on the Rumanian Campaign WWI

Just a quick note, thanks for the work on the Rumanian Campaign WWI. Nice to see some of those links fixed and the explaination of what happened in the Rumanian crossing of the Danube. I personally don't agree with the description of the Battle of Mărăşeşti as "an important victory for Romania". At best I'd call it a stalemate which worked to Romania's temporary advantage. But I'm not willing to argue about it (much). Cglassey 18:49, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Cindrel Mountains

Salut,

I write to you about the change you have made to the Cindrel Mountains article. I have added on it's talkpage the reason for naming it Cindrel Mountains and not Cândrel Mountains (most usual naming and the one used on the official county's website. Pls revert Mihai -^talk 09:08, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Beştepe

Thank you for correcting the meaning. It seems I confused Turkish "baş" (big) with "beş" (five). :-) bogdan 18:05, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome, Bogdan. I passed through Beştepe a couple of weeks ago for the first time, that's why it rang a bell when I saw your edit about the etymology of the place. Mentatus 18:23, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Stop messing up indexing

Will you please stop messing up the indexing sort keys as you did at this edit of Săcele, and go back and fix the problems you have created in this and any other articles by doing so? Gene Nygaard 13:24, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Limba română

Pe voi vă apucă aşa pe rând? Se mai întâmpla ca o pagină să nu se salveze bine şi eu să nu observ, da voi veniţi repede să daţi revert şi se pierd celălalte modificări făcute de bine (cele intenţionate). Logic, că nu vă puteţi uita puţin în istoric, sau să daţi o diferenţă şi să copiaţi şi modificările bune în revert. Grea viaţa. Şi de unde vandalism de nivelul trei, nu te supăra? Aşa-i ordinea? 2,3? 1 nu se mai pune (Format:Test - n.r.). --Danutz

Sigur, grea e viaţa asta - dacă te uiţi atent, lângă butonul "Save page" mai e un buton, "Show preview". Nu mi-o lua în nume de rău, încearcă doar să fii mai atent altă dată când editezi un articol. Cât despre vandalism, eu nu am făcut decât să incrementez nivelul anterior, setat de Winhunter. Mentatus 14:37, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Advisor vs. Adviser

Hello! If an edit is useless, is not undoing that edit equally as useless? I did not realize both forms were correct. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tidaress (talk • contribs) 05:46, 24 October 2006 (UTC).

Hi. Of course both edits are useless :) - my point was to make you realize your change was not necessary. I saw lots of similar reverted edits with users changing the spelling variants from AE to BE or vice versa (although it is not the case here) - don't take it personally, but check the dictionary when you're not sure if the word you correct is misspelled or not. Regards, Mentatus 07:31, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Union of Transylvania with Romania

Am vazut ca ai creat in pagina Union Day (Romania) un link la pagina Union of Transylvania with Romania, pe care eu am creat-o ieri. Am mai primit si alte comentarii despre acelasi articol. Cum crezi ca e mai bine sa facem:

• sa mutam Union of Transylvania with Romania (schimbam denumirea si lasam un redirect permanent) in articolul (care ar fi nou creat) Directory Council of Transylvania (e vorba de Consiliul Dirigent al Transilvaniei, creat la 2 dec 1918, adica guvernul Transilvaniei) (asa sugereaza Dahn, dupa cate inteleg eu). Acest nou articol are trebui atunci completat cu vevnimente de dupa decembrie 1918, adica "timeline"-ul meu sa fie decat o introducere
• sa mutam Union of Transylvania with Romania in articolul Union Day (Romania) (de fapt vroiam sa vad daca are sens sa fac asta, si cand am citit inca o data articolul Union Day (Romania) am observat linkul pus de tine)
• poate exista si alta solutie mai buna?

Problema mea e ca articolele pe wikipedia (cu exceptia a 1-2% care sunt bine scrise si organizate) nu sunt organizate deloc: daca vreau sa caut ce exista pe o tema data, nu prea exista liste unde sa ma uit. Poate ar fi bine sa sugeram:

1. crearea unei categorii Sandbox list of articles that have or might have something to do with Romania
2. sa rugam pe careva din administratorii romani sa treaca prin titlurile absolut tuturor articolelor noi create in fiecare zi, si cand gaseste vreunul care poate fi adaugat in aceasta lista, sa faca acest lucru
3. in plus, administratorul poate chiar sa lase un template specific in articolul nou creat, pentru a instiinta (pe autor si pe primii cititori) despre lista, sugerandu-i sa caute prin ea si inca pe undeva (pe unde?) daca cumva articolul sau nu ar fi mai bine organizat in articole deja existente. Ca sa nu fie intrusiv, se poate face un programel, care sa scoata automat acest template in momentul cand articolul nou creat are sa zicem 100 de editari
4. acelasi lucru ar trebui facut si pentru toate articolele deja existente, adica cineva chiar trebuie sa citeasca 1,590,000 de titluri si sa marcheze cele care par sa aiba vreo referire

Vede cineva vreo solutie mai buna? Apropo, un utilizator simplu are acces la lista completa de articole nou create sau articole nou create pe o tema data (exista asa ceva?) ?:Dc76 23:44, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Mersi foarte mult pentru copyedit-ul articolului. Ai avut ceva de cautat (nume, ani, etc) - imi dau foarte bine seama ca e un lucru care ia f mult timp. Pana la urma cred ca o sa trebuiasca sa lasam articolul asa cum este, fara a-l "merge" cu altceva, eu nu vad o solutie mai buna. Daca tu vezi, esti binevenit sa faci cum crezi mai bine, doar sa nu stergi informatii fara a le pune in alte articole. Am pus link-urile care mi s-au parut logice.

Dupa parerea mea trebuie sa mai elaboram evenimentele din 1919-1920 si eventual sa mai punem niste poze, de exemplu Bratianu, Maniu, Vaida, Ferdinand, Bela Kun, Karolyi, - evident nu toti, ci vreo 2-3; poze cu lupte (as prefera din Transilvania sau de pe Tisa, nu din Budapesta), vreo poza de la Verseilles, vreo poza din Transilvnia din octombrie-noiembrie 1918, daca gasim. Si cam atat. A, vreo harta ar fi excelent.

La inceput m-am gandit sa scriu ca Maniu si Vaida si-au facut partide exact pe ideea luptelor interne dintre politicieni pana la constitutia din 1923 si ca acesta a fost factorul major pentru aducerea lui Carol in 1930, dar pe urma m-am razgandit. Locul cel mai potrivit al acestor detalii este in articolele despre acesti oameni si despre politica interbelica. Asa cum e acum - incepe cu "Statele Unite ale Austriai Mari (1906)" si se termina cu "Constitutia din 1923" mi se pare cel mai logic. Ar fi trebuit sa-mi dau seama de la bun inceput.:Dc76 20:34, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Salut si multumesc frumos pentru mesaj. Eu sunt de acord cu tot ce zici tu (in privinta planului). Dar e o mica problema: asta necesita timp si dedicatie, pe care cel putin in momentul de fata eu nu le am. Nu ma aflu, din pacate, nici eu in Romania, o sa ajung abia la vara. O sa incerc sa fac rost de carte (poate o gasec in biblioteca aici, poate o cumpar la vara). Cartea as putea s-o citesc de placere si atunci nu-mi va fi greu sa fac mici rezumete pentru articolul de pe wikipedia. De fapt, de asta si m-am apucat sa scriu un "timeline", fiindca imi era mai mult decat clar ca pentru mai mult trebuie timp. Propun asa: acceptam solutia ta ca varianta pe termen lung si cautam o varianta pe termen scurt: ceva care sa mearga cu datele si timpul pe care-l avem acum si totodata sa fie mai mult sau mai putin organizat in sensul la ce avem de gand sa ajunga articolul. Toate informatiile astea trebuie sa le punem si pe talk-ul articolelor vizate, ca altcineva sa le gaseasca.:Dc76 21:55, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to the Military history WikiProject!

Hi, and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:

• Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
• The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can watchlist it if you're interested; or, you can add it directly to your user page by including {{WPMILHIST Announcements}} there.
• Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
• The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, peer review, and project-wide collaboration.
• We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
• Our requests page has extensive lists of requested articles, images, maps, and translations.
• We've developed a variety of guidelines for article structure and content, template use, categorization, and other issues that you may find useful.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the project coordinators, or any experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Kirill Lokshin 13:46, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Horthycolor.jpg

Sorry for answering only now. I had read your message 5 days ago, but I forgot to answer it. (Silly me!) Well, actually I do not know where this picture was taken, except that "somewhere in Transylvania". But, if you are really interested, I have a large film about the well... about the Second Vienna Award, filmed at and after the time it had been signed. This film also tells about Horthy's stops, so if You would like to, I can collect his stops. (I don't know if you know he had a tour around Transylvania in 1940?) He surely visited Cluj-Napoca and Targu Mures, but now I don't know more by heart. See you, -- Cserlajos ^(talk) ^(contribs) 15:05, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

From Gligan

Greetings. You told me to feel free to write the Bulgarian for all Romanian towns which were in my country; but your countryman Anonimu removes them without any reason (Orsova, Severin, Turnu Magurele). You told me that the Romanian for Caliakra and Balchik were official and I accept that, but the Bulgarian for these towns above was also official; while the Romanian for Vidin was not (he is trying to add this). He also deletes my edits to Tulcha with sourses, while he has no sourses. Please tell him to stop this insulting atitute and revert the Bulgarian names for these towns. --Gligan 11:19, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, you are right. And in the Middle Ages when Wallachia did not exist, the official names of these towns above was the Bulgarian one, this is why I insist on putting their Bulgarian name. Thank you : ) --Gligan 12:41, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

there are no bulgarian minorities in either of those town, and there's no proof that they existed during the first bulgarian empire rule, so they don't meet either criteria. However, around Vidin there was an important vlach community (now greatly reduced to about 200)Anonimu 12:44, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry that I am waisting you time, but he contunues to provoke me and to remove the official Bulgarian names, please tell him to stop; see his talk page and look that he totally neglects all my effords to prove him my statements without reason. --Gligan 13:02, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

TO mentatus: I generally agree with you criteria. However i'll never accept to put a foreign name to a city that didn't exist during the foreign rule over a region. This is just protchronism. Like i'd put the Tatar name for Bucharest just because in the 13th century the territory of the city (but not the city itself, first mentioned at the end of the 15th century) was more or less under tatar ruleAnonimu 14:05, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Would you please have a look on Anonimu's page and write your opinion for the Bulgarian names simply with yes or no? He continues to remove them without reason. --Gligan 14:14, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Dacian words

Thanks for helping with the list of Romanian words of possible Dacian origin. It takes a whole lot of time to go through so many dictionaries, and any help is welcome. I just want to make a couple of points about this article:

1. As you may have gathered, that list contains Romanian words about which at least one linguist believed they were of Dacian origin. Until now I have found only three sources about such words: the works of Hasdeu, Russu and Vraciu mentioned in the article. But then you added the word bîrsă, and the meaning of my "citation needed" note was that we need a source to say that this word too is believed by someone to be of Dacian origin. You deleted my note and said that the source is this word's entry in the DEX. I'm sorry but that dictionary doesn't say anything about the Dacian origin. Did I miss anything?
2. I'm sure you are aware that changing the British spelling with the American spelling is not okay, and neither is mixing the two in an article. Well, just as bad is replacing one of the Romanian spellings with the other (at the Romanian Wikipedia we have a strict policy about this) or mixing them. The whole article on the Dacian words was spelled with î and I expect you to respect that.

I hope you won't take it personally. — AdiJapan ☎ 07:14, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

My bad. I hadn't seen the Cuv. autoht. note -- must be because I tend to disregard NODEX, most of which is obviously copied and rephrased from DEX'98. But of course, you're right, this is another source that can be mentioned, so I added it in the article. Cheers. — AdiJapan ☎ 12:06, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Flămânda Offensive

Salut! Yes, you're right, it really is Ryahovo (bg:Ряхово) in Slivo Pole municipality. I didn't pay much attention to it, so it's clearly my mistake :) Todor→Bozhinov 17:38, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XII - February 2007

The February 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 15:49, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Populaţia Bucureştilor

Salut. Dacă vă uitaţi aici, o-să vedeţi că populaţia oraşului tot fluctuează (schimbări fără referinţe). Propunerea mea este să stabilim un număr clar. Eu aş zice 1,926,334, după recensământul din 2002. Care e părerea dvs? Biruitorul 20:42, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Ştiu că multă lume lucrează în Bucureşti, dar trăieşte prin împrejurimi sau chiar mai departe. Plus mulţi turişti, care la recensământ sunt altfel număraţi. Poate de asta cifra pare prea mică unora. Poate ar avea sens de adăugat între <ref> </ref> o observaţie în acest gen, adică că cifra nu include... Pe de altă parte, 27322 de ţigani ... e de râsul lumii. N-am nimic cu ei, chiar am cunoscut ţigani de treabă. Da, se declară români, ce să le faci, n-o să le impui.:Dc76 23:14, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Chiar articolul nostru despre ei recunoaşte acest fapt: spune că sunt juma' de milion oficial dar 1,8-2,5 mil în realitate.

Oricum, întradevăr nu ar strica un mic anunţ la noticeboard, că chiar sunt prea multe discrepanţe şi aiureli. Părerea mea este că un singur standard - cifrele oficiale din 2002 - să fie numărul de bază, şi dacă există numere mai noi, strânse de statisticieni de profesie, atunci putem să le pomenim şi pe alea. Poate să şi comparăm puţin cu prezentarea acestei probleme la paginile oraşelor occidentale - Chicago, Londra, etc. Biruitorul 15:23, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Bucharest Stock Exchange

Ce spam frate? Esti dus cu pluta? Citeste ce e acolo inainte de a-ti da cu parerea... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.210.44.116 (talk) 23:26, 2 March 2007 (UTC).

Only because the site is using the www.blogger.com platform, you can not categorize it as a blog or personal webpage. It is a general use website with news focus on the companies quoted at BSE. Furthermore, the Wikipedia policy sustains this kind of pages: What should be linked: ... Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as reviews and interviews. (talk)

Florin Lupu/Foundation DEEP

Mentatus (whoever you are), if you have anything constructive to add, or relevant modifications to make, please feel free. but snide and negative comments and marking an article for deletion is unprofessional and unwarranted. please refrain. JohnGongwer 11:27, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Mentatus, the articles were removed as I am unclear regarding the policy criteria. However, nearly a quarter of the Wikipedia articles on individual non-profits seem to fail to meet the same criteria to which you referred. The Foundation for Development through Economic Education and Development (2000-2005) was instrumental in launching numerous community based economic development initiatives in Romania's Jiu Valley and sustainable development partnerships with coal mining communities in West Virginia. It was instrumental in getting international donor attention to the needs of the region.

How does this organization appear less notable than the blatantly self-promotional Clarkstown Summer Theatre Festival, or entries like Use.ro? Are Romanian entries less credible than American? --Kyrja 15:08, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

=

In your experienced view (I notice you have been commenting on entries since 2004), what qualifies a non-profit organization to be mentioned in an article in Wikipedia? I have read the policy criteria for notability, for conflict of interest, and spam, among your other accusations, and do not see the articles as worthy of deletion, although modifications were warranted. You obviously have set opinions on this, so I would appreciate understanding in detail these issues. Kyrja 20:59, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Lupeni strike

Salut. Am scris Lupeni Strike of 1929 - acolo se vede că există multe variante cu privire la câţi au murit şi câţi au fost răniţi, pe când la Jiu Valley scrie clar 32/56. Să schimbăm al doilea articol la ceva mai vag ("dozens were killed and injured"), sau ştiţi cumva dvs. că acele cifre sunt corecte? Biruitorul 02:32, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Mulţumesc pentru link; l-am folosit. Cred că, tentativ, am să includ numerele din Jurnalul Naţional în articolul despre Valea Jiului, şi dacă cititorii vor amănunte, pot să se ducă la articolul despre Lupeni. Biruitorul 19:43, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Bună. Te-aş ruga să stai pe fază cu privire la articolul ăsta: cică n-am fi fost ocupaţi! Vezi istoria şi pagina de discuţii pentru amănunte. Biruitorul 04:33, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Mulţumesc pentru intenţiile bune; nici eu nu prea am timp (sau surse destule). Oricum, trebuie păzite asemenea articole. Ceea ce mă îngrijorează mai tare e că unul din ăia vrea să mute articolele "Occupation of Baltic states" şi "Occupation of Latvia", deci chiar dacă scrim un articol complet, cu tot cu surse, nu ajunge. Nu vreau să fiu melodramatic, dar din câte ştiu şi "the Holocaust" este un "judgmental term" - dar nici un om în toate firele nu zice să numim acel articol "Mass murder of Jews by Nazi Germany" sau ceva de genul ăsta. Biruitorul 15:52, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Da, cam ai dreptate - dar fii pe fază! Biruitorul 00:19, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Război total - la luptă! Biruitorul 19:18, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Am văzut că ai pus ghilimele în jurul numelor şcolilor la care a predat Murat Iusuf. Nu-i chair o problemă, însă a fost o discuţie mai demult în care s-a decis să nu facem asta fiindcă nu se face pe englezeşte. Deci aş recomanda scoaterea lor pentru conformitate, dar nu insist. Biruitorul 23:26, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Da, adică nici o problemă - nu că încercam să mă impun - dar e totuşi bine să fie un singur standard. Oricum, mersi. Biruitorul 06:43, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Scuză-mă că te tot deranjez, dar să dai şi tu cu părerea la Talk:Fântâna Albă incident dacă vrei. Biruitorul 23:20, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Se votează! Biruitorul 07:36, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

IAR

Hi, i've seen your interrest regarding articles about Romanian Air Force (military leaders, air bases). Please have a look on the IAR 316 and IAR 330 pages and say your point of view about the merge requests of this articles. I really think these helicopters are very popular in Romania and there are not only licensed copies of the Aérospatiale Alouette III and Aérospatiale Puma. As I strongly oppose the merge of this pages, I would like to see your oppinion in this case. Best regards, Eurocopter Tigre 10:34, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I insist that you might have a look on these 2 helicopters talk page because there are in danger to be merged. Please say your oppinion about this as quickly as you can, the IAR 316 is to be merged in 8th April if we don't take serious action. Best regards,Eurocopter tigre 13:18, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Kofta

Salut Mentatus, What is the correct Nume de Köfte in Romınca. Mic sau Köftele? What is the difference. Regards Must.^T^C 15:55, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

HMS London and HMS Coventry

What I am attempting to do is seperate the service of the ships in the Royal Navy from their service in the navy of Romania. In case you hadn't noticed, there are many many instances on Wikipedia of ships who have served in one navy under one name and then in another navy under another name having seperate articles. I suggest you do some reading before renaming articles willy nilly as it suits you. Hammersfan 29/03/07, 18.25 BST

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XIII - March 2007

The March 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 19:38, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

A request

Hi, Mentatus. I want to ask you to pay a little more attention. As announced in the notice board, I was working on the PM templates here, and yours give conflicting results. Looking into the templates you just created, I also note that they have inaccurate info - they present all ministers as belonging to the FSN/PDSR, which is not the case. Granted, it is a complicated matter (some affiliations are very hard to verify), but we should do a good job rather than a fast job, especially since templates that intricate are very hard to correct. Feel free to join me there until we get all of them sorted out. Btw: in the instance where all ministers belong to the same party, it makes little sense to assign them colors, wouldn't you agree? Also: I also tried to assign a particular color to each party, throughout the templates (with the FSN-to-PSD having the same shade of light blue). Dahn 19:45, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Mentatus, I didn't mean it like that (in fact, I invited you to join me there, and Biruitorul has been working on those as well). Furthermore, the message from Biruitorul on the talk page aimed at clearing up potential edit conflicts, since we were going to do it in one go, and then link them to pages (it was not necessary for us to it together or even in one place - it was just that we faced giving several templates the same title). I welcome any contribution you bring forth, but the situation was such that it required us to be aware of what else is out there (and I would have publicized the common effort more, but it seemed that no one was interested at the time). If you still want to (and I hope you do), you can help me sort out the others.

I hereby request your permission to change your Roman template into one for the Provisional Government of 1989-1990 - I have already created templates for the other two.

I realize this may have upset you, but I assure you that I meant no disrespect. Hope there is no hard feelings. Dahn 20:08, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. Btw, I think that, aside from Nastase (which I see you're working on) and, just possibly, Averescu's first cabinet (I'll have to look into it a bit more), we're pretty much done with cabinets that require colors. (In theory, Roman's first does not call for colors, since they were all one big happy family.) Dahn 20:23, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Soviet occupation of Romania, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.

Chiar mă gândeam că poate te pusesem un pic aiurea pe listă. Eu zic să-ţi scoţi nu numele (ca să nu pară dubios) cu un rezumat de stilul "not an active participant to the dispute". Oricum, nu prea cred că trebuie un înlocuitor; opt participanţi ajung. Biruitorul 15:43, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Bogdan Oprea

I have removed the wiki-link from Ploieşti as the sentence is referring to the football club SC Astra Ploieşti, not the city. I'm not sure about wiki guidlines but surely that would be correct to exclude them for the reason I outlined?DmanDmythDledge 16:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Sălaj

Şi etimologia sa - aceste două legături ar fi suficiente ca dovadă, sau mai trebuie? Biruitorul 06:37, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Ah, acum înţeleg. Mulţumesc pentru explicaţie. Biruitorul 07:39, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Prefects of Romania

Hi again. First of all, a belated thank you for all the initiatives and assistance in sorting out the various categories. I think that "Prefects of counties in Romania" is a more accurate and explicit title than "Prefects of Romania" (not least of all, because it clears the ambiguity posed by the existence of "police prefects" before 1945, and because it may lead to the impression that Romania itself had prefects). Do you suppose we could change and redirect to that, or am I missing a detail? Dahn 19:14, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I just realize something: will "counties" affect the inclusion of Mantale and other Bucharest prefects? I mean, I suppose that Bucharest functions as a county in this respect (at least), but am I right in assuming that it does, or do we need to rephrase the cat to something else? I was not actually suggesting a "police prefects" cat myself, so I fully agree with you - aside from the pertinent point you make about the police officers cat (where all police prefect would fit nicely), I'm pretty sure most police prefects are not notable enough. I have been spending a lot of time searching for some basic biographical data on Gavrilă Marinescu, the arguably most notable of the bunch, but all I found were oblique mentions in various texts (no date or place of birth, no where he went to school...). The main reason I mentioned police prefects was that, in case someone will create such an article, users would likely be tempted to include it in the "Prefects of Romania" cat, since he was a "kind of prefect". Dahn 19:47, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

This of course raises an interesting question - how deeply are we committing ourselves to this? Are we in principle going to have articles on each prefect, preşedinte de consiliu judeţean and consilier judeţean who ever held office? That would take lots of work. Biruitorul 20:40, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

By God, I hope not. Dahn 22:18, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Romanian Land Forces

I see some huge potential for the Romanian Land Forces article to become a Good article (or, why not, in the future it could be a featured article; see Russian Ground Forces - a former featured page). I'll do my best to expand and improve this article, but I think it's not enough and I may need some help. Are you interested in cooperation? Best regards, Eurocopter tigre 18:28, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XIV (April 2007)

The April 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 14:29, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Oana Frigescu

An article that you have been involved in editing, Oana Frigescu, has been listed by me for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oana Frigescu. Thank you. --Strangerer (Talk) 17:01, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XV (May 2007)

The May 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 15:24, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XVI (June 2007)

The June 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 14:23, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator selection

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by August 14! Kirill 03:46, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators from a pool of fourteen candidates to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by August 28! Kirill 01:12, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XVIII (August 2007)

The August 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 09:53, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XIX (September 2007)

The September 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 10:03, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XX (October 2007)

The October 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 14:32, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Romanian liberal parties

Category:Romanian liberal parties, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. –

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXI (November 2007)

The November 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot 02:14, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Murfatlar Vineyard

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Murfatlar Vineyard, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Murfatlar Vineyard. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 21:49, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Ovidius-Constanta.PNG

Thanks for uploading Image:Ovidius-Constanta.PNG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 20:52, 18 December 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Mangostar (talk) 20:52, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Merry Xmas

I wish you a very Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! --R O ^A M A T A A| msg  18:10, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXII (December 2007)

The December 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:21, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIII (January 2008)

The January 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:36, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator elections

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 14! Kyriakos (talk) 21:21, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Milhist coordinators election has started

The February 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fifteen candidates. Please vote here by February 28! --Eurocopter tigre (talk) 18:07, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIV (February 2008)

The February 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 05:05, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXV (March 2008)

The March 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Law Enforcement Barnstar Proposal Poll

Hello there Mentatus/Archive 1,

We here at Wikiproject Law Enforcement are currently in the process of deciding wither or not to make this WikiProject Law Enforcement's official Barnstar award. Being that you are a member of Wikiproject Law Enforcement, we are humbly asking you to voice your opinion here about our new Barnstar.

Thank You and All the Best, Mifter (talk) 20:37, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

--Mifter (talk) 20:37, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVI (April 2008)

The April 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:36, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008)

The May 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:25, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

eastern europe grading systems

Given your edit at Talk:GPA in Central and Eastern Europe#Proposed demerger, I'd like you to know that I stumbled across that in the middle of a task I started a while ago, to split the overly long grade (education) article into several articles for each country. See Talk:Academic grading in Denmark for more details.

So, there are now articles for the academic grading system in Russia, Ukraine, Hungary, Lithuania, Romania, Poland, Latvia, the Czech Republic and Slovakia, all moved from their respective sections on Grade (education), except Russia, which already existed under another name, before I moved it to standardize the naming of this series of articles.

Grade (education), though, didn't have a section for Russia, but had a section for Russia and Former Soviet Union/CIS (without Moldova and Belarus). That section only refers directly Russia, Ukraine and Hungary (even though the latter two had their own section in the same article!).

So, to sum everything up: I now added "demerge" tags to all articles involved, linking to the discussion you started in February 2007. I thought you could be interested in helping on the splitting Grade (education)#Russia and Former Soviet Union/CIS (without Moldova and Belarus) and the sections of GPA in Central and Eastern Europe and merge them into the existing articles.

Thanks, and sorry for the long message. Waldir ^talk 21:57, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Welcome back!

Hi Mentatus, welcome back! I'm very glad to see you around again, and looking further to collaborate within Romanian Military history-related articles. As you may have noticed, I created the Romanian Military history task force, in which you would be also welcome to add your name in the list of members. Many changed since you've left, as I managed to expand/create lots of Romanian Armed Forces-related articles (you might want to have a look on my user page to see what I have done in this time and if there is anything you can improve). I sincerelly hope that we would be able to start working together, in order to further improve Romanian-related MilHist articles. All the best, --Eurocopter (talk) 18:22, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Have a look over the Romanian Land Forces article. I worked a lot on it and managed to bring to GA status. However, it failed two A-class review due to a gap infos regarding certain periods of Romanian history (for example 1878-1917). Cheers,--Eurocopter (talk) 07:55, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Let me echo those sentiments: welcome back! Biruitorul ^Talk 16:43, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, thank you and yes, if I may say so myself, it's good to have serious people who know their way around, so to speak. As for practical matters: well, the silly Moldova conflict continues - see for instance the war of the asterisk or Moldovan language - that's always something to watch. Also, I've been doing a project (as the only participant so far) on communes - see the idea here. More broadly, my plan (after finishing the commune articles) will be to eliminate (through merger) the several dozen articles we have on villages. This makes sense to me for two reasons. One, we don't need 13,000 tiny articles; we can have 3,000 slightly longer ones structured as follows: introduction (covering the whole commune), followed by sections on each village. Two, village articles would be more confusing, for a rather obvious reason. Say there's a commune A with villages A, B, C, D and E. Article A deals with the commune, while B, C, D and E with the villages. But what about village A? So you see, it's best just to have them all in one place (introduction, A, B, C, D, E) - I hope you agree.

If you do decide to do a few counties, here's my advice. First go to the ro.wiki page on that county, since their lists are newer, and make sure the communes on the en.wiki list match. Then just go ahead and start the articles. In the interests of speed, I've been making mine very basic (eg, Giurgeni) - you may either apply that model or go more slowly by adding iw links, coordinates, and other information from ro.wiki. Biruitorul ^Talk 19:36, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Or, put another way, projects requiring intellectual exertion are more rewarding, but also more difficult - I quite agree. For instance it would be just great to translate ro:Mircea cel Bătrân, but who has the time for that just now? (Although if we divided it into 4-5 pieces it might become manageable.) And I'm glad we agree on the villages - for instance what is probably the most famous Romanian village, Humuleşti, is now a neighbourhood of and part of Târgu Neamţ - so we can easily just mention it there, and have a section on it in the article.
Anyway, I do have something you can comment on: this. Let us know if you like the idea or not, and then we could start creating categories. Biruitorul ^Talk 15:58, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Italics

Indeed, it's not worth spending much time on this. What bothered me about those quotation marks was that they were simply (and visually unpleasingly) doubling the brackets, which already made a clear distinction between the foreign words and their English translations. Italics are necessary just to point out that those words are mentioned, not used (see the Use–mention distinction). I think quotation marks should only be used when quoting someone's words. — AdiJapan ☎ 07:37, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVIII (June 2008)

The June 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:35, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIX (July 2008)

The July 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:07, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on September 14!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:57, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXX (August 2008)

The August 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:45, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The September 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fourteen candidates. Please vote here by September 30!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:50, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXI (September 2008)

The September 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:18, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXII (October 2008)

The October 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:28, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIII (November 2008)

The November 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:01, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIV (December 2008)

The December 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:57, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Romania during World War I

Please check the dates of the edits next time, ok? I reverted it before your letter has arrived on my talkpage.Baxter9 (talk) 09:08, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Poster

Hi. I removed the poster, false information was given in the magazine (according to the internet). The text is: "Hungary, 1914. Foldes. Tavaszi Reszvenysor. Elso Magyar. Reszveny Serfozode. Budapest Kobanya. A favorite, this reproduction of a Hungarian beer company poster created in 1914 (World War One) translates roughly, The beer from the spring hops has arrived: the enemy is surrendering. The Allied soldiers - among them a French poilu, a Scotsman, and a Russian - would rather drink beer than fight, and are surrendering to beer drinking Hungarian troopers and their German allies who stand near the big guns of WW1 surrounded by beer kegs". Baxter9 (talk) 19:50, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Also, if you have problem with me than please tell it, you dont have to "ask" others.[[1]] "doesn't go overboard with his nationalistic frenzy": it was you who added a pro-Romanian picture showing an event which is mentioned with only 2(!) sentences in the whole article, not me [[2]](occupation of Budapest by Romanian forces)...Just one thing: "dont question images just because you do not like them and add others just to make your point. You're new to Wikipedia, take your time to learn more about not being disruptive and highly opinionated"RegardsBaxter9 (talk) 19:57, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

WP:NPA

Hi, please observe WP:NPA in your interactions with other editors [3] especially in disputes arising from the fact that you are trying to add material that belongs to a different article. Clearly a WWI article covers 14-18 and we have many articles that cover other periods such as material from after the end of WWI. Hobartimus (talk) 21:52, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Removed the said picture. It's more than enough to have it in the article that's main topic covers the time period (1916) in which the picture was taken. I don't think there is a need for controversy for the sake of controversy. Hobartimus (talk) 23:36, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Romania in WWI

Happy New Year to you as well! I was rather alarmed at his edits about a week ago and then I thought he'd calmed down, but I see I was wrong. Thank you for tipping me off. - Biruitorul ^Talk 03:32, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Anything we can do on Social structure of Romania? I'd really rather have deleted stuff like this -- text dumps from the Library of Congress that don't even mention post-1953 (!) developments -- rather than have it sit around forever. - Biruitorul ^Talk 06:12, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Good work on redirecting some of those villages: not many left. And, if I could ask a small favour, could you please take a look at this and this? I'd hate to revert entirely, but it's clear both modifications need lots of work. - Biruitorul ^Talk 04:31, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Excellent! As for posting the policy: well, you'll see the direct continuation of this message in your e-mail. - Biruitorul ^Talk 17:22, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to see more questions raised, but it looks like people are OK with our little project, plus we have just 9 villages to go. Of those, I think just Giurtelec will give us trouble. By the way, what do you think of my suggestion regarding Vama Veche and 2 Mai? - Biruitorul ^Talk 03:25, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Romanian nacionalism on Wikipedia

LOL. Recent edits have nothing to do with this. But if you mentioned it... Here is a user who is pushing Romanian nacionalistic POV. Some edits:[4], [5],[6],

[7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15] Of course he removed the warnings from his talkpage.[16] Dont you want to ask User:Biruitorul to help? I hope some users are not more equal than others, or are they?Baxter9 (talk) 15:46, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Bologa

There seems to be enough info to warrant an individual article. Elm-39 - T/C 13:47, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Alright, that's cleared up. Just wanted to be sure, as it seemed kinda sudden. Thanks. Elm-39 - T/C 14:15, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Căbeşti

Why did you move the article of Josani to the article of Căbeşti?

Josani had a standalone article which you redirected to Căbeşti and put a short paragraph referring to Josani in the article of Căbeşti!

What was the reason for doing that? Scooter20 (talk) 21:44, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I see (I read your post on my talk page), but why do you have to blank the article of the village (by redirect)? Why isn't it better to keep them both (village article and village info in commune article, without redirect)?.

Scooter20 (talk) 21:56, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXV (January 2009)

The January 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 04:39, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Mentatus. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2