User talk:Anonimu/Complete Works/Tom 5 (2021)

Your edit removal at Unification of Romania with Moldova
Hey, I always appreciate a good revise over some edits, but I would appreciate to know the reason why you removed my edit from Unification of Romania with Moldova. Thanks! Cheers! --JOrb (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 15:34, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Hey, the infobox you used is dedicated to existing countries, not to projects for new countries. Since most of the time there are different views regarding how a projected country should look like (in this case see different views regarding the inclusion of Gagauzia or Transdniester in the projected countries), it is impossible to include any detail in the infobox, thus making it useless. Anonimu (talk) 17:07, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I thought it would be a problem to include details in about a possible future country, but i only included a location map within Europe, which i don't think it is a problem since Moldova, as a country that takes in consideration an unification with Romania, considers to join as a whole, as the political entity that it is. Even if it would lose control over territories, the political map would look the same, because it is de jure (see the map of Ukraine that includes Crimea even though it is not de facto controlled). Even if the map of Moldova would change that's impossible to know, as per now it is right to say that a map of the eventual union with Romania would look like that. The second thing was the area, which is basically totally predictable (area of Romania + area of Moldova). I didn't intend to give country infobox a proper use, but i found it the best fit for what i intended to do. If you know another infobox that would work better, please let me know. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by JOrb (talk • contribs) 17:22, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Also, I've noticed your interest in Romania - Moldova related topics. Would you mind to take a look on Talk:Unification of Romania and Moldova where i made a renaming proposal that the page would be named Reunification of Romania with Moldova? Your thoughts on it will be much appreciated. Thanks!--JOrb (talk) 10:41, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Controversial topic area alert
Renat 14:23, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

A report was created at the administrators noticeboard about Лобачев Владимир's constant malicious activity
Hello, I am writing to inform you that a report was created about Лобачев Владимир's constant, systematic malicious activity in Wikipedia. Since I noticed that you encountered such actions of his recently, I strongly invite you to provide your opinion about him. Additional evidence would very welcome.

You can find this report here: Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring. -- Po  fk  a  (talk) 19:41, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Unification of Romania and Moldova
Hello, sir ! I've seen that you said that those ethnic maps of a unified Moldova-Romania are from my blog. I want to tell you that they are not mine. I saw them on reddit. I made research, and I realised that they are correct. And since they are free for using, I decided to use them on wikipedia, because they are useful. I think that we can discuss things here, so that you won't undo my edit RAMSES$44932 (talk) 16:04, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Specifically because "you made research" they are not acceptable on Wikipedia.Anonimu (talk) 19:14, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

King Michael's coup
Please do not purge this phrase from Wikipedia just because the article was moved. See WP:NOTBROKEN and WP:NOPIPE. Srnec (talk) 17:21, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * In none of the articles I have change is the phrase used in the referenced sources. Is not a purge, is fixing an improper usage. I take care not to change it when the sources actually use it.Anonimu (talk) 17:26, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * It is not an improper usage. It is not necessary to use the exact same phrase as the cited sources. Srnec (talk) 17:39, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Considering that almost none of the sources use it, I think the abuse of the phrase on WP is detrimental to its quality.Anonimu (talk) 18:22, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * The exact phrase "King Michael's coup" is used in dozens of works published before 2000. I cannot find a single one that uses the exact phrase "1944 Romanian coup d'état". Likewise, I get zero hits on Google Scholar for the latter, but at least a dozen from before 2000 (so uninfluenced by Wikipedia) for the former. I did not participate in the RM because I am neutral on the title. The new title is a fine descriptive title, but there is nothing improper about the old title. I have no problem with replacing it where a better wording is possible, but please do not attempt to suppress it because you don't like it. Srnec (talk) 02:13, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I manually checked the sources for all articles I have edited, none of them used the phrase. When I was unable to get access to the source, I preserved the existing phrase.Anonimu (talk) 08:21, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

State Capture in Moldova
Hi,

I am trying to insert a mention of state capture in Moldova as well as an academic reference in the description of the country under the entry Moldova. You keep removing it without solid grounds. Why is it an issue for Wikipedia to mention state capture in its entry about Moldova? This is a well-documented case of state capture and I believe it belongs on wikipedia. Please explain.


 * Hello, . I have reverted the edit yet again and suggested that the matter be taken to the talk page. I did not want you to be accused of edit warring, so I made a little space for you. LynwoodF (talk) 18:25, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Moldovenism and politics
Hello, sir ! Are you from Moldova, or from Romania? I would like to talk to you about Moldovenism. As I see, you removed Moldovenism from Socialist Party, Communist Party and Șor Party. Well, maybe you know that these parties are associated with moldovenism. When you say "moldovenism", you think about șor, dodon or voronin (leaders of these 3 parties). I left sources this time on these pages, as I hope that you won't remove it. Personally, I am against moldovenism and I regard it as "pseudohistory", but these paged are not about me. RAMSES$44932 (talk) 11:48, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
 * None of the parties in question identify as "moldovenist", the term being coined by Romanian nationalists to disparage Moldovan nationalists. Therefore, we are going to describe exactly what reliable sources say and not "general knowledge" in Romania.Anonimu (talk) 12:59, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

It is the official name. Dodon said that he is "proud to be a moldovenist" (check socialistii.md). If you don't like how it sounds, call it "moldovan nationalism" or "moldovan statalism". Moldovan, not moldavian RAMSES$44932 (talk) 20:48, 1 September 2021 (UTC)