Talk:Rîbnița

propose move to Ribnita
As this is the official name in current use by the Transdnistria authorities.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠ ♥ ♦ ♣ 00:47, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
 * And what about the official recognized authorities? Do you forget that belongs to Moldova? AtomAtom (talk) 16:13, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Question: does the 1993 spelling reform by the Romanian Academy (changing î to â) apply in Moldova? I'm not sure if this is relevant, but let's think this over before deciding on a title. Biruitorul (talk) 17:07, 8 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Its not relevant. Wikipedia records information as it is, not as it ought to be. The reality of the situationis that Transdnistria is not under Moldova's administration, and certainly not subject to anything the Romanian Academy does.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠ ♥ ♦ ♣ 03:43, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Do they call it "Ribnita" or "Rybnitsa"? Moreover, the fact that no one recognises Transnistria does complicate the situation, and means we should perhaps take into account the view of the Chişinău government as well. (Given that the town has no common English name, it's bound to be that or Tiraspol.) Biruitorul (talk) 04:40, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Probably Rîbnița is the best. It's official name, and it's the standard approved by the US Board on Geographic Names . The â variant is unnaceptable.Xasha (talk) 22:06, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Danutz has explained to me in December that the Moldovan (not Romanian) Academy instructs (since 2007) to use â. With all due respect, mrg3105, but Moldovan Academy has jurisdiction on the territory of Moldova. I assume, in practice the transition from î to â would be gradual, and there will be no particular fuss if one uses on or the other. Look at Romania, even 10+ years later, there are still people that use î. Personally, I don't see a disagreement between mine and Xasha variant - it is just a matter of taste. De gustibus non disputandum were wisely remarking the Romans. If it comes to that, we can just throw a coin. Dc76\talk 14:31, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Moldova's official language is Moldovan, and the Academy of Science of Moldova has no power over the Moldovan language. That link proves that the Romanian language in Moldova uses â, not that the state language uses it. Just search all laws approved after 2001 (the date of that book), and you'll see none uses â, except when talking about Romania and derivatives. Xasha (talk) 20:38, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * How can the Academy of Science have nothing to do with the usage of the Molodvan/Romanian languagage in the country? Think better, it becomes ridiculous, with all due respect. I said 2007, if you observed. Dc76\talk 20:58, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Show me an act of the Moldovan government that says Moldovan is regulated. The book that editor used as source is from 2001, so how come you came to the conclusion that such thing was adopted in 2007? Please, find a 2008 law that uses â.Xasha (talk) 21:05, 10 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The Moldovan government sites use both spellings, sometimes in the same document:
 * Pe dimensiunea activitatii legislative mentionez, in primul rand, ca Programul calendaristic in contextul cooperarii cu Consiliul Europei a fost, practic, realizat, ramanand o singura restanta care se refera la Codul Educatiei. Sper foarte mult ca acest document, deosebit de important pentru sustinerea dezvoltarii in continuare a sistemului educational, va fi, totusi, prezentat Parlamentului pentru examinare si adoptare.
 * but only a few paragraphs later:
 * Nu in ultimul rind vreau sa pun in evidenta ca, pe durata acestei sesiuni, vom incepe un proiect de infratire, de colaborare interparlamentara pe dimensiune europeana, avind ca parteneri parlamentele Frantei si Ungariei.
 * Discurs al Dlui Marian LUPU, Presedintele Parlamentului RM, cu ocazia inceputului sesiunii de primavara-vara 2008, 7 februarie 2008
 * bogdan (talk) 23:22, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I moved this page a little too earlier. Let them get used to the "new" spelling, and in 6-12 months, we'll move it back. :Dc76\talk 00:16, 11 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The site to use is http://gnswww.nga.mil/geonames/Gazetteer/Search/GazFrame.jsp
 * The code there is ru, as much as Romanian editors don't like it.
 * Currently the city is not under Moldovan administration. What happens in future is anyone's guess.
 * The site used for reference uses Rybnitsa.
 * Seems to me this is another attempt to expand Greater Romania in the English Wikipedia.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠ ♥ ♦ ♣ 02:52, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Currently, the city is legally in Moldova. And that is recognized by the Russian Federation, as well. What holds the future is indeed a different question.Dc76\talk 21:28, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok, so see the English version of the official site of the Ministry of Culture and Tourism http://turism.md/eng/hotels/ and how they spell city names in English to attract English-speaking tourists.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠ ♥ ♦ ♣ 04:04, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * They write it without diacritics, in an inconsistent way. For instance Sangerei, but Ribnita... bogdan (talk) 10:20, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

And? You will have to take that up with the Government of Moldova.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠ ♥ ♦ ♣ 11:29, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

The official Moldavian legislation provides for Rybnitsa
The official Moldavian legislation, Law on Functionig of languages and specifically the 2005 Law on Transnistria clearly establish Russian and Ukrainian as two of the four official languages in Moldova. Taking in consideration the majority of population in Rybnitsa is composed of Russian or Ukrainian speaking Moldavians, and most importantly the 2005 law on Transnistria which also gives the three of langauges "state language" qualification, the correct spelling in English is Rybnitsa.

I suggest to express those inetrested their opinion and vote below:--Moldopodo (talk) 08:31, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Coordinates
According to the page, the coordinates are: ______ N and _____ W. In fact, they should be ____N, _____E but i dont know how to what to edit that sort of thing. Can someone please help?--Coin945 (talk) 12:14, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Rîbnița. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110319064231/http://rybnsovet.idknet.com/ to http://rybnsovet.idknet.com/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120321201253/http://dir.icm.edu.pl/pl/Slownik_geograficzny/Tom_X/61 to http://www.dir.icm.edu.pl/pl/Slownik_geograficzny/Tom_X/61

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:35, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

"Râbnița," listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Râbnița,. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 7 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Super  Ψ   Dro  13:45, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Romanian names
, please stop removing the Romanian name. It is a historical name of a population that for sure at least used to live there no matter what do modern censuses say. This is enough for Wikipedia's naming conventions for a name to be kept and is precisely the reason why we have a Yiddish name. The controversy regarding the ethnicity and language of Moldovans also adds to the name's relevancy. You also broke, again, the WP:3RR rule. You can undo this by reverting your fourth revert and it will be if as nothing happened. Super  Ψ   Dro  14:28, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Also, "Relevant foreign language names (one used by at least 10% of sources in the English language or that is used by a group of people which used to inhabit this geographical place) are permitted." Per Naming conventions (geographic names). See these two edit summaries .  Super   Ψ   Dro  14:31, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * You continuously reverted your own edits and proceeded with accusing me of the same thing after I have to clean up after you. I did not want to bring it up again (as you accused me of following you the last times I pointed it out), but I apparently have to tell you: stop it! You should have taken it to the talk page the first time I took issue with your edit, but you did not; instead you reverted over and over again, seemingly only to prove a point. Why? What is the point of this?
 * Furthermore: no, I do not think the Romanian name is relevant. If you want to reintroduce it, I would suggest that you also bring with you a source showing that the town has a Romanian population or that it previously had one. I want an encyclopedia that is based on good sources. I cannot see that the Romanian name is relevant in this case, but if you want to start a discussion about it, it is fine by me. I will have to adapt if more users agree with you. I am prepared to change my view, but I believe unsourced information does lower the quality of the article (and I think you agree about that).  Åttiotrean   226  ☭  15:45, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * There! I reverted my last edit, despite the fact that it was you who introduced the new information the last time. It is of course completely wrong; you should have been the one reverting your edits before, but I let you have your way! I fear that I will get more accusations if I am not careful.  Åttiotrean   226  ☭  15:55, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Newspapers using name of Râbnița:    . These are all Moldovan newspapers, some notable enough as to have their own Wikipedia page. Be also aware that there's a Romanian-language school in the city (or was at least, I wouldn't be surprised if the Transnistrian government already closed it) . I imagine it wasn't there just to decorate the street, right?  Super   Ψ   Dro  14:59, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I saw it. Thank you for understanding. Super   Ψ   Dro  15:00, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I am not. I do not understand anything. I reverted my edit for one purpose: the fear that you will once again accuse me of being unfair to you. I followed the rules and you did not; yet I am the one feeling that I have to accept what you did, lest I once again will be accused of something. At this point, I am even afraid to warn you or use words like “disruptive” or “edit warring”.  Åttiotrean   226  ☭  16:15, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't revert my edit if I felt so confident about it being right, so I think you know it really isn't too much. By the way, it's ironic that you are saying all of this when you left three warnings in my talk page. And if you don't understand anything, consider reading WP:3RR and Naming conventions (geographic names). If you want to leave me another warning, go ahead. It will help me get more evidence. Super   Ψ   Dro  15:21, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I thank you for your reply on your talk page. This discussion can go on without me.  Åttiotrean   226  ☭  17:18, 7 April 2021 (UTC)