Talk:Union of Bulgaria and Romania

Sentene rewriting
, I am willing to hear new proposals as I don't like how that part is currently written either. Super  Ψ   Dro  11:01, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I will get back to you with a proposal soon.  Åttiotrean   226  ☭  11:08, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Native names
Here's the first sentence from the first version of the article:"The union of Bulgaria and Romania (Bulgarian: Съюз на България и Румъния, romanized: Sǎjúz na Bŭlgariya i Rumŭniya; Romanian: Unirea Bulgariei cu România) was a project for the unification of Bulgaria and Romania into a common state."The Bulgarian name (whether in Cyrillic or Latin) is no longer present, and the Romanian name is present only in the quoted title of a newspaper article at the very end of the "Bulgarian crisis of 1886–1887" section. Why are these terms no longer included? Seems to me that it's helpful to include the concept's native-language names. Nyttend backup (talk) 18:16, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
 * "Union of Bulgaria and Romania" is not a proper name, so I was proposed removing the native names in the FA review and I agreed. Similar pages like Unification of Albania and Kosovo or Greek–Yugoslav confederation don't have any foreign language names either. Super   Ψ   Dro  18:32, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Despite all this, the emergence of the European Union, of which Bulgaria and Romania have been members since 2007, has revitalized the idea.
Please provide sourcing for such a dubious statement. With whom exactly has this idea been revitalized? Certainly not with the absolute vast majority of either Romanian or Bulgarian citizens. --46.142.62.137 (talk) 21:44, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The source is at the end of the "Failure" section. But the wording is wrong, it should be "may revitalize" rather than "has revitalized". Super   Ψ   Dro  09:19, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

I have to agree. That shouldn't be in the opening paragraphs especially without a source. The phrase "could revitalize the idea in the future according to some scholars" is vague and clear MOS:WEASEL. According to what scholars? Are these scholars of any merit? It's certainly not a widely held opinion. --Spekkios (talk) 02:08, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Again, the source is at the end of the "Failure" section. There's no need for a source in the lead. The scholar is Blagovest Nyagulov, he ends his paper stating that at page 61. Your edits don't address the problem and simply remove this statement and now that both countries are in the EU is stated directly and seemingly without connection to anything else. That's why I reverted you. We should focus on rewriting the statement to get a better solution rather than just removing it. By the way, the IP didn't state the same as you. They complained about a source, not about weasel words. Super   Ψ   Dro  14:38, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I can discuss something similar here without starting a new section. I don't think we should have a statement like that in the lead based off what one scholar stated. That's quite a weak reason to include it given it isn't a widely held opinion. --Spekkios (talk) 20:44, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, the issue hasn't been discussed by many other scholars. I think Nyagulov was the first one to make an article dedicated to union proposals between Bulgaria and Romania. Perhaps something like "Despite all this, the emergence of the European Union, of which Bulgaria and Romania have been members since 2007, and its values and integration efforts in the Balkans could revitalize the idea in the future. Such an idea has been made in the academic world." or something along the lines could work. Super   Ψ   Dro  21:29, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * If it hasn't been discussed by any other scholars apart from one single person then it isn't notable. --Spekkios (talk) 09:57, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I do not agree. It is a harmless statement that doesn't propose anything out of this world and it's a nice way to end the lead. The current way is not. And again, there are no other authors that have made an article completely dedicated to union proposals between Bulgaria and Romania. Nyagulov's paper is the single most notable one out there for this topic. If the problem is weasel words, I'll just rewrite and readd the sentence in the next few days. Super   Ψ   Dro  14:23, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Regardless of whether the statement is harmless or not the statement is only corroborated by a single person. One person making that statement does not show that the idea has had increased support or may have increased support. --Spekkios (talk) 23:53, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I rewrote the statement. Super   Ψ   Dro  13:16, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

The Status of This Union
On 24th of January 2023 three Bulgarian provinces have send multiple referendums to Sofia,the capital of Bulgaria,to get permission for an supposed Union with Romania.On 26th of January rumors on Romanian Television say that Bulgaria as a whole has sended an Referendum to the Romanian capital Bucharest for an union.Sources are unknown for now but the public thinks it is for the best for it to be accepted.People also say the country wont last 2 years because of the language barrier due to Romania being Latin and Bulgaria being Slav. 109.166.138.239 (talk) 14:48, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Hello. Please send a source confirming any of this. Super   Ψ   Dro  22:02, 28 January 2023 (UTC)