User talk:Anonimu/Complete Works/Tom 5 (2019)

Disambiguation link notification for January 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1948 Romanian legislative election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Democratic Peasants' Party ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/1948_Romanian_legislative_election check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/1948_Romanian_legislative_election?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:38, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

PSD
Hi Do you have a source that the PSDR and the PDSR merged as equal? If it is the case we should have an article about the PDSR. In another hand, we saw that the FDSN became the PDSR. And for the FSN, it have been renamed as PD-FSN, PD, then PDL. --Panam2014 (talk) 19:55, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 * The official party history (online) lists the history of the two parties as part of its legacy, with the PSDR listed before FSN. Regarding the merger, it says they "fused together", not that the PSDR fused into PDSR. Admittedly, the PDSR, being the greater party, de facto absorbed the PSDR. You should note that parties merged into the PSDR (e.g. the Socialist Party) and the PDSR (e.g. PAUR) before the merger or into the PSD afterwards (such as the Socialist Labor Party and the National Revival Socialist Party in 2003) are never mentioned, indicating that they are not seen as equal in footing with the PSDR.Anonimu (talk) 14:35, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Sure, it is the Party's claims. The Party also said that he have as legacy a party founded in the 19th century. But do you have secondary sources who said that PSDR and PDSR are in equal footing? For 2003 merging, the parties fused into PSD. If the two parties are in equal footing, the solution is to create article about PDSR. But for name change from FDSN and PDSR, is it a name change or a merging in equal footing? --Panam2014 (talk) 18:41, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello
What are your thoughts on Boroska and other Hungarian editors here on Wikipedia? Fakirbakir, Koertefa, KIENGIR, Norden1990 etc. Destroying Romania's image on Wikipedia for years and nobody cares. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.15.94.211 (talk) 19:34, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
 * As long as they respect the pillars, I have nothing to say. Nobody can stop someone who thinks they’re destroying Romania image from adding reliable sources (if any are available) to balance their POVs.Anonimu (talk) 21:19, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

June 2019
It would be great if you could stop edit-warring in 2019 Moldovan constitutional crisis. Everybody, not just BBC, calls Dodon pro-Russian. The article about Dodon is pretty clear about this, with a number of sources cited. If you do not agree with this, I am afraid, you would need a strong source to counteract the claim.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:48, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Ion Iliescu
You undid edits I made on the present situation in Romania, stating that "wp is not a crystal globe". I would like to know what about my edits gave you that impression and to discuss what can be done to comment on recent developments. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.148.146.185 (talk) 19:57, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Your edit implied Iliescu had been proven guilty and now he is waiting for the sentence. Currently it is just an indictment, which may or may not be proven in court.Anonimu (talk) 07:59, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Radu Gyr as being a 'criminal' unsubstantiated
Hello, I've been wondering about the multiple edits/reverts that you did on the Radu Gyr English page lately, mainly concerning Gyr's status of being a 'criminal'. In my knowledge, this is referenced nowhere and such a conclusion cannot be substantiated, at least not with the documents available. Gyr was condemned several times, under several regimes, but not for crimes. Not even the communist regime did such a thing, as the 1958 sentence was for 'serving and applying himself for the dissemination of fascist ideas and as such working against the workers class' ( please see the link to the IICCMER institute provided on the Romanian Gyr article). Sure, Gyr was a fascist and an antisemite, but not a criminal. So please change the abusive 'criminal' denomination, as this does not reflect the reality, unless you can come up with a historical reference that does not break the Wikipedia guidelines from where such a conclusion can be drawn.Ioan Abdi (talk) 08:10, 24 December 2019 (UTC)