User talk:Bogdangiusca/Archive15

RFC/USER discussion concerning you (Bogdangiusca)
Hello, Bogdangiusca. Please be aware that a request for comments has been filed concerning your conduct on Wikipedia. The RFC entry can be found by your name in this list, and the actual discussion can be found at Requests for comment/Bogdangiusca, where you may want to participate. -- AKoan (talk) 21:28, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Moldova, Moldovan language
As I expected, the provocations of User:Xasha become clearer, and there is an involvement of User:El C and User:Mikkalai. There is also Bonny, but I'm concerned another edit war will start. Dpotop (talk) 10:54, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I also resent the message on User:90 1 AQ. I have seen no such message before. At last news, chauvinism (including Romanian one) is not punishable here. Or, if we choose to write it, then we should also say "Russian chauvinist", "Communist extremist", etc. Maybe Mikka should be warned about this policy breach. Dpotop (talk) 10:57, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, there's Irpen, too. And I got warned under the blanket "Eastern Europe" decision of the Digwuren ArbCom. By El_C, of course. Dpotop (talk) 12:32, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Graphics problem
Hello, Bogdan. I know I made a habit of pestering you with all sort of requests lately, so I apologize in advance. Tis one is gonna be a bit tricky.

I just got started with inkscape, and I'm still trying to make sense of it all (I never actually worked with svgs until now). I drew one map that looked a-ok in the program window, then tried to convert it to a png - but failed miserably, because it just didn't display properly. I then tried saving it as a svg and uploading it directly: the result is not as crappy as what the png gave me, but it leaves much to be desired (to say the least). For the love of me, I cannot understand why it has flattened the script in the legend (leaving words to cross over each other), and why it displays the two large rectangles over the contours in the background (the one at the top replaces the title, the other one... I have no idea what it stands for). I'm sure there's something I forgot to do (especially given that the transparency is all over the place), and I would like to salvage the image, if possible, through reediting and saving over it. Do you happen to know what I should do, and perhaps how I should check to see if it saves properly the next time, before actually saving? I looked through the manuals, but they were little help. Thanks, Dahn (talk) 00:19, 8 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I think the problem about is about the font which you use, "Bitstream Vera Sans", which is not found on the Wikipedia server. When trying to render the vectorial (SVG) image to a bitmap (PNG), it can't find that font and it replaces with another one available. I'll try to look more into it tomorrow. bogdan (talk) 00:49, 8 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Hm... it seems there is that font in the list of fonts on Wikimedia servers. Then I can only guess that the font is a different version...? bogdan (talk) 00:54, 8 March 2008 (UTC)


 * In any case, on my computer (MacOSX), in Inkscape, it is rendered the same way as on Wikipedia's servers, so I guess it's a font issue. I don't know why the rectangles appear there. bogdan (talk) 00:58, 8 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Hm. Yes, the fonts may be part of the problem - alas, the inkscape I have did not let me change to any other font (it prolly doesn't have them installed - I was just too lazy to check). However, many of the ones actually on the map display quite nicely, even though some have unexplainedly moved to the right from where they were in the original version....
 * I'm thinking that the problem with the rectangles may be the same as whatever it is that makes all the image partly transparent (I assume that's what the gray and white squares stand for). I have no idea how to fix that, not how or if I should try to make all levels merge into one image before uploading... Dahn (talk) 01:16, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Multumesc frumos pentru citatul din discuţia de la Râbniţa. Va trebui să aşteptăm până lumea se deprinde cu ortografia "nouă". practic e vorba doar de un singur articol. apropo, am înţeles că v-aţi certat de la nu ştiu ce prim-ministru din sec 19, acum săracul este crucificat, îmi pare rău că l-am înhamat la carul ăla, nici nu-mi închipuiam că e aşa de greu şi tehnic.Dc76\talk 00:49, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:License plates
I have nominated license plates for renaming to vehicle registration plate. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Russavia (talk) 16:12, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Slavery in Romania
Great job, Bogdan. I'm considering adding to the article (for example, we already have others that go into more detail, and it could be summarized there; we also have plenty of RSes to cite). Since that may require some info jumping in in the middle of the already-existing paragraph, I would be grateful if you'd look over my shoulder: since the citations are for the paragraphs, is it safe to assume that they are for each phrase in the paragraph? also, in case I add content that can be found in both the sources I'll add and Achim, could you perhaps "double" mine with yours?* Dahn (talk) 18:48, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

* It would look weird if we cite one book for just a number of facts, and then add detail from other sources for facts that can also be found in the original source. Does this make sense?


 * Thank you. I'll look and yes, the citations are for each phrase in the paragraph. bogdan (talk) 19:23, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Great. I'll add something from Djuvara for now. More later (I'll be off for a couple of weeks come Saturday.) Btw: I just revisited rowiki after a long pause, and I'm smiling with glee. Dahn (talk) 19:32, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Great work, indeed. A minor suggestion would be to add a little etymological flair, by including words like rob/robie (distinct from sclavagie/iobăgie/şerbie), Dezrobire (a day that is still celebrated), robi mănăstireşti, etc. This also opens up the possibility of an article on serdom. Also: what about Bessarabia and Transylvania? This says Transylvania had its own dezrobire in 1785. Biruitorul (talk) 19:51, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, also interesting is the word for "to free (a slave)" iertare (< Lat. libertare). About Transylvania, I didn't tackle it yet, although Achim has a chapter on it. bogdan (talk) 20:28, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

About Shook2008
Two fellow editors have pointed out that User:Shook2008 may be a "sock(puppet) of Bonny". He keeps editing the page about my user name and it seems to me that he broke the rule stating you can restore edits only 3 times a day per article on the page about the Balti steppe. Do you think any action is required? (This message was also sent to User:Future Perfect at Sunrise).Xasha (talk) 14:21, 14 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh, well, it seems FPaS was faster at blocking him. :-) bogdan (talk) 21:55, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Cluj-Napoca
Am propus articolul pentru a primi statutul de articol de calitate, însă cererea mea a fost repsinsă. Au existat multe obiecţii (chiar multe care nu aveau nicio legătură cu criteriile pentru WP:FA), şi le-am îndeplinit până acum pe toate (mai puţin unele dintre ele care erau păreri personale, şi nu ţineau strict de criteriile pentru articole de calitate). Acest lucru îl poţi vedea pe această pagină, unde se află conţinutul de la Featured article candidates/Cluj-Napoca/archive1, la care am adăugat comentariile mele despre ce s-a făcut şi ce nu. A mai rămas doar textul articolului (proza), care după cum relatează ceilalţi utilizatori nu este foarte corect (calitatea limbii engleze folosite este slabă). Am înscris articolul pe pagina WikiProject League of Copyeditors/Requests, numai că va dura destul de mult până ce se va găsi un corector ortografic, care să verifice articolul. De aceea dacă ai timp, te invit şi pe tine să faci unele corecturi la articol. Cu mulţumiri, --Danutz (talk) 11:06, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Naming convention for human name pages
Hi, I noticed that you moved Hillary (name) to Hillary at the start of the month. You may be interested to join in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anthroponymy, about a new guideline which would reverse that. - Fayenatic (talk) 18:39, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

GRMA ETH.jpg
Hi, i uploaded an image called GRMA ETH.jpg and it was deleted i was wondering WHY? and how u could help me replace it. I think u might have deleted it. The image was in regard to linguistic groups in greece thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by P m kocovski (talk • contribs) 09:12, 23 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Because that particular image is copyrighted by the SIL organization and it should not use it on Wikipedia unless released under a free license. Please see Image use policy. bogdan (talk) 10:09, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Stuermer1934.gif
Thank you for uploading Image:Stuermer1934.gif. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Ricky81682 (talk) 00:44, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Catavencu December2004 first page.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Catavencu December2004 first page.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 00:48, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Romanian science fiction
Any updates on that? Thanks, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 02:34, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Moldovan language #2
What is the problem with mentioning the status of Moldovan language? All international bodies acknowledge that, and " irrespective of the fact that it might present similarities with other existing official languages" (to quote he EU Commission), its one of the few NPOV things that can be said about the Moldovan language. Also, I don't understand why you don't agree with an infobox. Here's a list of European "languages"/"dialects" that have infoboxes, despite their uncertain/disputed status (Note some of them are not even official and don't have an ISO code, like Moldovan does): Latgalian language, Samogitian dialect, Arbëresh language, Gheg Albanian, Twents, Gronings, Stellingwerfs, Westphalian language, Scots language, Swiss German, Swabian German, Austro-Bavarian, Cappadocian Greek language, Eastern Lombard language, Tuscan dialect, Romanesco, Neapolitan language, Venetian language, Saintongeais, Walloon language, Valencian, Cantabrian language, Leonese language, Macedonian language, Montenegrin language, Bunjevac language, Bosnian language, Pannonian Rusyn language, Slavic language (Greece), Warsaw dialect and I could still go on for a time.Xasha (talk) 19:31, 27 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't think you understand the purpose of the article: it's not an article on linguistics, it's not about the Moldavian dialect, but about the politics: it's just about the name. bogdan (talk) 19:52, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Am I and the other 2,5 millions who spoke Moldovan idiots?Xasha (talk) 19:55, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It's a political issue, not a linguistic issue. Linguistics is a science and the consensus on the Moldovan language is quite clear: the linguists consider it as a synonym for Romanian in Moldova. I'm not arguing that the spoken language Moldavian doesn't have its own peculiarities, but the standard language is identical with Romanian.
 * Your government's websites calls "maize" "porumb" (which is the Wallachian and standard Romanian word), instead of "păpuşoi" or "cucuruz", the Moldavian vernacular words. bogdan (talk) 20:19, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * So you say that 2.5 mil people, including at least 300 EU citizens, are paid by "the communists" to say they speak another language? The literary form of Moldova is the same as the literary from of Romanian (most of the time), but this has no relevance on language spoken everyday by Romanian-speakers, and Moldovan-speakers. How come porumb is Wallachian? (judging by what your dictionary says about this word's origin, Roman-Mesoamerican contacts must have been fairly common. I wonder why nobody mentioned them.)Xasha (talk) 20:43, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Xasha, the census results from Moldova might habe been falsified. Read this: "Membrii mişcării "Patrioţii Moldovei" invocă datele recensământului populaţiei din anul 2004 în care două procente din populaţia Republicii Moldova s-a declarat română şi 76 de procente – moldoveană. Aceste date au fost contestate de către observatorii europeni care au monitorizat recensământul." And yes, maybe this article could also help you a little bit. Though you're a Russian (not a Moldovan), I hope you understood the text (it is wrtiten in the official language of the country where you come from). If you have some problems, ask me and I'm going to translate the text. I regret that I didn't obeserve this discussion in March 2008. --Olahus (talk) 19:04, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Urgent help needed!
Hey Bogdan, contrary to a reached consensus there is a splitting going on instead a merging: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kosovo#Split_completed --Tubesship (talk) 04:31, 28 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Dear Bogdan, I want to thank you for rescuing the article. You did a great job! :-) --Tubesship (talk) 10:41, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Romanian
Heh, guess I should've asked you this instead. :-) Regards, Hús  ö  nd  22:02, 30 March 2008 (UTC)


 * heh. well, Bozgor is a derogative term for Hungarians, apparently derived from "a boscorodi", to speak gibberish. (the word is not in the Romanian dictionary and I heard this etymology from a Transylvanian Hungarian bus driver, so I'm not 100% certain of it). împuţit means "stinky" (cf. Italian 'puzzo'). bogdan (talk) 22:12, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Why?
Whoa, Bogdan: I don't know why they gave me a DYK credit for Slavery in Romania, as I clearly specified that it was your article and that you had done most work on it! Dahn (talk) 14:20, 31 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Eh. It doesn't really matter. :-) bogdan (talk) 11:54, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Bancanationala_anii1920.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Bancanationala_anii1920.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 17:37, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Barbu_Fundoianu_photo.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Barbu_Fundoianu_photo.jpg. 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 Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See 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 Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:46, 31 March 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 17:46, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh no, they did it again and moved Kosova
Lord, have mercy upon us... it is just outrageous what is going on there! --Tubesship (talk) 08:07, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Same old
An old acquaintance has again uploaded the same image with uncertain copyright status and again he claims to have esoteric knowledge of what the copyright status is: Image:Roumanians.png. Dahn (talk) 13:34, 2 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Heh. bogdan (talk) 11:54, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Help!
He's at it again!
 * [+1] --Illythr (talk) 21:51, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Not really "Help!" this time, but looks like same old again . --Illythr (talk) 20:06, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Next one. --Illythr (talk) 18:41, 11 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Blocked. bogdan (talk) 18:48, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

"Princess Daniella"
I'm quite sure this is a hoax. Biruitorul (talk) 14:57, 5 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh, and could I please ask you to move Dǎnuţ Dobre to Dănuţ Dobre and delete the first one (and I suppose fix the redirects, though I can handle that). Thank you. Biruitorul (talk) 15:35, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Caradja/Caragea
Dupa parerea mea trebuie limpezita confuzia intre numele familiei princiare Caradja (care nici o data in vechia lor istorie nu s-au iscalit cu numele "Caragea", ci cu Caradja) si numelor personalitatilor cu numele Caragea care nu au nici o legatura cu familia Caradja). Am ales anume denumirile prenumelor frantuzesti pentru ca in toata corespondenta familiei, persoanele iscaleau cu prenumele frantuzesc, ne fiind Romani.

Cu stima, stenic74 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stenic74 (talk • contribs) 12:38, 6 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia nu foloseşte denumirile "corecte" ci denumirile "populare", cele care sunt cele mai des întâlnite. În nicio carte de istorie nu am văzut scris "Ciuma lui Caradja", peste tot folosindu-se ortografia românească, "ciuma lui Caragea". bogdan (talk) 13:01, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Am inteles, poata putem gasii un compromis in care folosim numele corecte pentru membrii familiei si numele popular pentru "ciuma lui Caragea". Ce ziceti? Cu stima,

stenic74 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stenic74 (talk • contribs) 13:07, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I had those discussions with Stenic74 for the romanian Wikipedia. For the english language Wikipedia the name of family should be Caradja as the family is a bizantine family who signed the name in this name. Recent members of the family use the ortography of Caradja. If the name Caragea was used for the members of the Caradja family if would create confusions, because there are persons in Wikipedia - such as romanian sculptor Boris Caragea - who are not members of the Caradja family. Maybe that in Romania, for some excessive nationalistic reasons, some historians have used the name of Caragea for the voivodes. This does not justify generalizing an improper name.

I think that you are wrong in stating that Wikipedia does not use correct names but popular ones, because that would imply that wikipedia uses incorrect names. What wikipedia should do is to use the CORRECT names and have redirects from the incorrect ones (whether popular or not).

Caradja is not the only example. Take for instance general Pavel Kiselyov. For some reason, in Romania he is called incorrectly Kiseleff. This is not a reason to correct the title in the english wikipedia (or other languages) from Kiselyov to Kiseleff. The same argument goes for Eugène Ionesco for instance. Afil (talk) 21:46, 7 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Possible - though, no matter what the case, we should go with what is most used in English contexts (that may turn out to be the Romanian name, I just haven't checked). BUT (and this goes unanswered): why oh why would you even consider changing to French given names ("Jean Georges")? Not only is that bizarre, it is illogical, and, if anything, contradicts the very argument you present above in favor of using "Caradja". Furthermore, here and elsewhere, you repeat a claim that the man used "Jean" in signing his name. Care to substantiate that? Dahn (talk) 21:59, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Funny you should mention Kiseleff. If you look into it, you'll notice that Kiseleff (like "jean Georges") is a Francization, and that Kiselyov itself is one of the possible Latinizations of Russian (presently the standard one or just about). Romanians almost never turn Slavic "-ov" words into "-off" words, unless they take them from French. In fact, Kiseleff is the exception in Romanian, and, although consecrated by use in Romania, it is arbitrary. The Romanian-proper transliteration would be neither Kiseleff not Kiselyov. It would be "Kiselev" for the term as commonly pronounced, and could even be "Kiseliov" for those who want to reflect the pronunciation in Russian. Dahn (talk) 22:29, 7 April 2008 (UTC)


 * This was posted on Mr. Dahn's discussion page. As indicated in his biography Jean Georges Caradja lived 90 years out of which he lived in Wallachia from 1812 to 1818 (approx. 6 years). I was notified that he signed his name in french. I do not know if he spoke romanian, but if he did he probably didn't do it very well. Actually other members of the Caradja family also used their french names, for instance Nicolas Caradja. Using as title of the article a romanian name for a person who never used it would be strange.It is logical to use the way signed his name. Afil (talk) 22:03, 7 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Answered on your talk page. Dahn (talk) 22:22, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Rivers
The problem of the rivers and their notability had been previously raised and was the object of an extensive discussion. Though the wikipedia rivers project had stated before that there are no criteria for a minimum size or of any other nature for a river to qualify, this was again discussed and a consensus was reached that all rivers qualify.

Each river has a story and has features which can be presented in an encyclopedia. I cannot take any responsibility for extending all the stubs into full-fledged articles and actually do not have all the information. You may know that I am an american and have no access to part of this information.

You should however be aware that wikipedia is the ONLY source where this information, however scarce is available. There is no dictionary, encyclopedia or atlas where this information can be found. I have worked in many developing countries and have always missed this kind of information which in cases of emergencies can be of vital information. I intended to compile articles for the rivers of Bangladesh - unfortunately I have difficulties in reading the bangla alphabet and was obliged to abandon that attempt and instead, switched to Romania. If you have the slightest doubt about the utility of the exercise, try to find any warning issued by the romanian authorities and then try to find where the river is located. Try to look at the list of rivers in Romania and you will find out the same name is used for many rivers and also that many rivers have several different names. My main concern is that you raise the problem again though a decision has been reached according to wikipedia procedures. While I am convinced that the exercise should be replicated for all other countries I am willing to abandon the exercise and to delete all 8000 articles. It would have been fairer to raise the question before I spent over one year to compile the information.

I am also surprised by the timing of your message which coincides with the moment in which we disagree on another issue - actually I am still awaiting your response on how that matter should be dealt with. I would appreciate a response and a frank discussion to settle our disagreaments. I just want to remind you that my previous messages sent months ago are still unanswered. Afil (talk) 00:52, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Gourmet
I have nominated Gourmet, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Gourmet. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. —  Dæ dαlus[mailto:Daedalus969@gmail.com →]quick link / Improve 21:04, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Northern Cyprus
why are you deleted to template of the Northern Cyprus? All other non-independence countries's templates is exist, but Northern Cyprus's template isn't exist... I'll create to this template again, and not delete this template... Wikipedia is neutral... OK? *** Эɱ®εč¡κ ***and his friend 12:22, 10 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't think I deleted any template related to Cyprus. Can you please tell me which template are you talking about? bogdan (talk) 12:38, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Bender, Moldova mediation
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 Requests for mediation/Bender, Moldova, and indicate whether you agree or disagree to mediation. If you are unfamiliar with mediation on Wikipedia, please refer to Mediation. Please note there is a seven-day time limit on all parties responding to the request with their agreement or disagreement to mediation. Thanks, Anthøny  22:37, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Request for mediation not accepted
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Copăceni
Copăceni has been a separate commune for a couple of years now; perhaps could be updated to reflect that. Biruitorul (talk) 03:03, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, and about Tricolorul: have we decided it's on the same level as Altermedia? Granted, I think we should avoid using it wherever possible, but given that the article was apolitical, written by a member of the Air Force, and the principal source for an article on a rather obscure topic, perhaps we should exercise some flexibility here. Biruitorul (talk) 18:35, 19 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, the link was broken, anyway. 18:50, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Sort of. Biruitorul (talk) 02:05, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Antonio_Salandra_1.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Antonio_Salandra_1.jpg. 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 Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See 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 Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 13:12, 22 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Kelly hi! 13:12, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Tighina article
Hi there, I notice you were involved in the Tighina article, but haven't edited recently. Well there's a bit of a civilised discussion and vote going on, so take a look at the discussion page if you are still interested! Rapido (talk) 21:40, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Here we go again
Bogdan, please see this (more here). Dahn (talk) 09:39, 25 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh, and, check this out. Dahn (talk) 00:40, 2 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I reverted: it has at least a dozen inaccuracies and misunderstandings. Heh, I see the Bulgarians still use the name "Bulgarian" for Old Slavonic languages. bogdan (talk) 01:03, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * My thoughts exactly. Could I bug you with another couple of requests? As you may remember, I'm unsure about my IPA skills (blame it on my musical deafness). Would you please add IPA keys to Sfarmă-Piatră, Mihail Sadoveanu and Simbolul? I'm likely to pop up such requests again, but this is what I have for now. Thank you. Dahn (talk) 03:48, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Romanians of Serbia
Romanians of Serbia needs to be on your watchlist. --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 23:50, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Knock-knock. :) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 13:04, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Nicolae Iorga portret.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Nicolae Iorga portret.jpg. 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, 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, 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 Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See 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 Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 20:10, 10 May 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fun Pika  20:10, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Kogaionon
Hi again. I received this message from Plinul cel tanar, and I will say that he is right to say that the page needs to be moved back. The name already exists: could you please use the admin function and move it to where it should be (from Kogaion to Kogaionon)? Thanks. Dahn (talk) 15:42, 13 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Hm... Kogaionon already exists as an article about something else. bogdan (talk) 15:53, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * How about moving that one to Kogaionon (animal) or Kogaionon (fossil)? Dahn (talk) 17:16, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Moved to Kogaionon (genus). bogdan (talk) 21:39, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Image:Bancanationala_anii1920.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Bancanationala_anii1920.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Kelly hi! 06:47, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Join it on the Project:MoldovanWines
Hello, maybe you will be interested in development of the Moldovan Wine articles. If yes, I am pleased to invite you to join it on the Project:MoldovanWines project page. Best regards, --serhio talk 10:58, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Palace of Justice
If you've got some more information on this building, I'd be glad to see a little expansion. Biruitorul (talk) 22:58, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Template:Bulgarian Empire
Thank you : ) Well, I think that it should remain in one piece because after all some topic are related - the wars, the article for literature, aristocracy and economy which I intend to write one day... There is also one portal and in a different aspect, I don't know whether it will look good if split in two - I like the pictures in the right column ; )

As far as Tihomir of Wallachia and Gesta... I think that the first mention of Romanians (and I think as a language, not people) is from 16th century, so according to me everything before that should be called Vlach and Wallachian, not Romanians and Romanian. About Gesta... even some Romanian historians consider Glad a Bulgarian, there is a mentioning that Menomorut met the Hungarian emissaries with "Bulgarian lordliness/haughtiness" (a term which the Byzantines used for us as well) and in the separate articles for the Dukes of Banat and Transylvania is mentioned that they were most probably governors of the Bulgarian Empire. Regards, --Gligan (talk) 20:01, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Help fixing a bug
Hello again. I've been meaning to ask for your input on this one for a while now. It would seem that Anittas' WPRO template has a bug: it probably does not acknowledge the "listas" parameter, which means that, even when it is added, the articles are still sorted by their first letter. If you have the time, could you please look into what's missing? Thanks yet again, Dahn (talk) 23:28, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Macedoneni tu România
Salut Bogdan. Could you please translate the information in the three sections here? This info seems useful for the Ethnic Macedonians in Romania page. Thanks in advance.  Balkan Fever  08:46, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Moldopodo's campaign
Moldopodo seems to insist on spuriously connecting medieval Moldavians with present-day Moldova (visiting random articles and removing references to Romania, adding references to the "Moldovan language", and pretending that references to Moldavia allow him to turn the articles into Moldovan bios). Check out his recent edits. Dahn (talk) 14:26, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Disruptive editing
Please stop disruptive editing on the Template:Countries of Europe article. --Moldopodo (talk) 17:43, 31 May 2008 (UTC)


 * And you should stop posting nonsensical warnings. :-) bogdan (talk) 17:49, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Please, do stop disruptive editing and provide a verifiable source for what you assert. There is nothing funny and if Wikipedia rules make you laugh, we can discuss it somewhere else on Wikipedia with a third party.--Moldopodo (talk) 18:00, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Moldova
Bogdan, nu e dreptul tau, al meu sau al altuia sa introducem informatii sau argumente "din burta". De aceea este nevioe de surse. Eu aduc surse. --Olahus (talk) 20:19, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Voting
Hi! Here is a voting about Bendery/Bender/Tighina: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bender%2C_Moldova#Statement_of_Title_Solution —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.142.252.220 (talk) 18:16, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Translation request of ro:Artur Reşetnicov
Could you please translate the Romanian article on him ?

It would be worthwile.

Kind regards, Sarcelles (talk) 13:42, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Re:golden horde
Actually the Golden Horde is quite important in Moldova's history. They've built the first urban settlements in inland Bessarabia (the only other towns in the region being the Genoese colonies in the extreme south), they were the first to issue coinage from Bessarabia (thus the local Mongol settlements had a degree of autonomy from the Khan) and their way of raising building out of stone (as opposed to earth and wood) still endures in some regions (and I mean peasant houses, not administrative strucutres or modern ones). Also, part of the Mongols remained here after the Horde (or better said the local Mongol vassal of the Khan) was defeated. The Cumans didn't have an important role. Maybe just some toponyms, but even those could be explained very well by Mongol influence.Xasha (talk) 16:37, 11 June 2008 (UTC)


 * First of all, the people living in Moldova weren't Mongols, they were Tatars. In fact, most of the Golden Horde's people were Tatar, but that's beside the point. Also, the area wasn't ruled directly by the Golden Horde, but they were just vassals for a while. That's why I think an article on Tatars is more appropriate in this case. bogdan (talk) 17:10, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * In English language, all the mixture of Altaic people that entered Europe in 1241 and later made up the Golden Horde, are referred as Mongols. Tatar is used only after the creation of the Crimean Khanate. So those people in Moldova were Mongols

(in Russian and some other eastern European languages they call all those people Tatars indeed, but this is not the case for English). It was not ruled directly by the Khan (who directly ruled only the lands around Saray anyway), but it was part of the Golden Horde nevertheless (it was not a vassal of it, in the sense of Russian principalities or Bulgaria)Xasha (talk) 17:52, 11 June 2008 (UTC)


 * No, the Mongols are the ethnic group from Mongolia, they are not Turkic. That mix of Turkic people are always referred as Tatars. The Golden Horde originally had a Mongol leadership (Genghis Khan's grandchildren) and that's why their invasion is known as the "Mongol invasion", because often people don't care who fights in the army, but who are the leaders (and the leaders were indeed Mongols), hence being considered a "Mongol state". Anyway, in time, the Horde got controled completely by the Tatars and all the Mongol traces disappeared.
 * There is a lot of English-language historical literature speaking about the "Tatars" before the Crimean Khanate was founded, for instance Cumans and Tatars: Oriental Military in the Pre-Ottoman Balkans, 1185–1365 by István Vásáry bogdan (talk) 18:14, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Tatars also originated from Mongolia, so that's not a problem. No, they're reffered as so only in some eastern Europe languages. For example Mongol invasion of Europe is called the "Tatar invasion" in older Ruusian literature and in all Hungarian one (that's why Vasary uses the term). And BTW, if the Golden Horde was Tatar, what's the problem with including it in the history of Moldova? They ruled Moldova longer than Romanians anyway.Xasha (talk) 18:36, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

New Roma article
Hi - could you please look at Roma (Romani subgroup)? Is this really distinct from Roma people? Biruitorul Talk 15:10, 17 June 2008 (UTC)


 * There is a small subgroup of the Roma who calls themselves Sinti and were distinct from the "true Roma", but I don't see a point in having two articles, because the Sinti are almost extinct as a group, being mostly exterminated by the Nazis and the remaining were assimilated by Roma groups. I think it should be AfD'ed. bogdan (talk) 15:21, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * You are not familiar with the problem: Sinti are not a subgroup of Roma. Sinti, Roma and at least 4 other groups are divisions of the Romani people. There is a need for more clarifications about the Romani groups and subgroups. I hope I'll have the time to work a little bit on that. AKoan (talk) 20:23, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Romani is the same thing as Roma. Show me a reliable source which says otherwise. bogdan (talk) 20:41, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, not quite. See, for example, We Are the Romani People, p. xix: "...the word Rom originally meant 'married Romani male', but after arrival in Europe, it diverged in two directions. For some it kept this interpretation but restricted it so that it applied to themselves and no one else, while for others, it came to mean only 'husband'. Thus the Sinti, for example, or the Romanichals or the Manush use the word only with this narrower meaning, and not as a self-ascription for their entire group. On the other hand, all groups use the adjective Romani to describe themselves." --Kuaichik (talk) 21:00, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * On any source that talks about the Romani divisions you will see that Roma only refers to the Eastern Europe group (which is the bigest, but not the only). All the other groups (Sinti, Manush, Kale, etc..) are NOT Roma.
 * I added the previous comment. AKoan (talk) 07:58, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Bulgarians, Ethnogenesis
Would you please comment on this fragment from Bulgarians article: "In physical appearance, the Bulgarian population is characterized by the features of the northern European anthropological type[48][49] The ethnic contribution of the indigenous Thracian and Daco-Getic population, who had lived on the territory of modern Bulgaria and established here the Odrysian kingdom has been long debated among the scientists during the 20th century. Some recent genetic studies reveal that these peoples have indeed made a significant contribution to the genes of the modern Bulgarian population, which is however comparable, to the contribution to other Balkan (Albanians, Romanians and Central European groups.[50] This is also apparent in the Nordic racial anthropological type of the modern Bulgarians. [51]"--Bluehunt (talk) 09:54, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Romani-Romanian image/identity/name/etc. issues
Hi! Regarding your activity in Romani-related articles, I considered necessary to contact you on your user page, hopefully to solve the issues on dispute. I detailed here my views on this issue, concerning also your edits. Besides what is written there, I want to tell you that I find unacceptable your last AfD, pretexting you have no idea about the Roma as a Romani subgroup, while every serious writing is keen to make clear the Romani branches. Also it is hard to digest your move from Romani people to Roma people, without discussion, only with an unsustainable reason (this considering the fact that you are an administrator and you should know how to proceed). Desiphral-देसीफ्राल 16:49, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Sustain your claim
From what you've written on the Roma (Romani subgroup) AfD page I understand that you've read several books that use the words "Roma people" and "Romani people" as synonyms. Can you name one of these books, please? AKoan (talk) 11:02, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Church of the Resurrection Bucharest
Thank you Bogdan for putting us on the map! We much appreciated seeing our lovely Anglican church featured in Wikipedia. Keep up the good work and if you need any additional information about our church please contact me. I'm John Barker and I write the church blog (aresurrectionearyou) John —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.121.200.241 (talk) 12:01, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Template:Cold War figures
Hi there, if you see room for improvement to Cold War figures, or feel that the addition of a name is warranted, then please by all means add it. Is that not what Wikipedia is about? :) I created the template as a spin-off from Cold War per this diff because that template is much too long and does not have room for notable Cold War figures. But if you of any other editor feels that a name should be added from any country, anywhere, then please take the initiative and do it rather than delete a helpful navigation tool.

Would you consider closing the TfA discussion and instead taking your quibbles to the template talk page, where I would be happy to engage in further discussion with you? Best, Happyme22 (talk) 16:08, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

1345
You wouldn't happen to have any more info about 1346 or 1347 (which I'm working on here)? Wrad (talk) 00:45, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Rezistenta
Dude he blocked again and Khoikhoi again blocked him and he been abusing him and stuff... look at this annoying matter again. Your pal,

Snoring

(Btw.. hope you are alright) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.71.53.196 (talk) 12:28, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

The unsolved problem of the move from "Romani people" to "Roma people"
On 12 March you have moved unilaterally the "Romani people" page to "Roma people", although this is against the Wikipedia policy. I have to ask you to revert your move and proceed according to the Wikipedia policy if you wanna make such move. AKoan (talk) 10:25, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Salut, Bogdan. I also ask you to kindly reconsider your decision to move the page from "Romani people" to "Roma people."
 * I believe I have explained part of the reason why I disagree with the move to "Roma people" above, i.e. in this edit. But another reason (perhaps the more important one) is because "Roma" is a noun, even in English. So far I have found neither a dictionary that claims that "Roma" is an adjective nor a scholar in Romani Studies who used "Roma" as an adjective.
 * So, if you could move the article back to its original title ("Romani people"), that would be great. Thank you for your time. --Kuaichik (talk) 03:31, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Oops
False alarm! Sorry (and scuzaţi), I tried to officially inform you of the RfC, because I failed to notice that you had already been (officially) informed. But now that I've made this mistake anyway, I guess I'll just use this post to say, "Please respond" :) --Kuaichik (talk) 00:15, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: IRC
Yeah, two things:


 * 1) There's a new user named who has created several very short articles, that I'm not sure whether they should be deleted or not. I don't want to bite the newcommers, but I was wondering what your opinion is of the following pages: Vasile Stoica, sportiv, Pietriş, Bocşa, Bucharest Village Museum, Horea Flamându, Coasta lui Damian. I think several of them could possibly be speedied per CSD A1.
 * I redirected three of them to the appropriate articles. bogdan (talk) 07:48, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) I removed the Serbian name from Moscopole because I wasn't sure how it was relevant. I then noticed that a mini-edit war broke out and the Macedonian and Bulgarian names were removed as well. Upon looking at the history of that page I noticed back in 2005 you restored the Serbian name because the etymology of Voscopoja was Slavic. I was wondering whether you think the Macedonian and Bulgarian names should be restored now too. Khoikhoi 03:12, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, if there's no local Slavic community (and has been none for the last few centuries), I think those names are not needed in the lead, maybe in a section explaining the origin of the name. bogdan (talk) 07:48, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks. Khoikhoi 19:46, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Şerbeşti
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Şerbeşti, 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  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because 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. B. Wolterding (talk) 16:39, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

NowCommons: Image:1883 5lei Romania.jpg
Image:1883 5lei Romania.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:Image:1883 5lei Romania.jpg. Commons is a repository of free media that can be used on all MediaWiki wiki's. The image(s) will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 11:06, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Independent Principality of Transylvania
Would you please check the article and its discussion? Is the article redundant or merits its existence?--Bluehunt (talk) 09:41, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

River Olt
Dear Sir,

You have moved the list of tributaries of the Olt River to a separate article. There are however about 10,000 articles in the Category: Rivers of Romania which all, except the Olt River are included in the articles themselves. It is extremely unpleasant to see that after a structure for these articles has been used and after working on the project for nearly two years to change the structure. It is simple to do this for the Olt River. How about all the other rivers of Romania. At present the solution you have chosed is applied in a single case. What do you suggest? To go back to square no. one and rework all the articles. The problem you are raising does not concern only the Olt River. Afil (talk) 22:13, 11 August 2008 (UTC)


 * In Wikipedia, it's more important to be useful to the reader rather than have a standard structure for the articles. It's an encyclopedia, not an almanac. If we were to be just a database with standard structure, we'd have chosen XML instead of Wiki-markup. bogdan (talk) 22:18, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for MyWikiBiz
An editor has asked for a deletion review of MyWikiBiz. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Neıl   ☄   13:20, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Children of Presidents of Romania
Category:Children of Presidents of Romania, 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. Cgingold (talk) 23:33, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Palin dab
This was me and I reverted to that revision again. It's pure recentism, and the dab is perfectly fine at Palin. user:Everyme 22:32, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

"Disputed"
I don't think you wrote this in the article but I'm bringing it to your attention as one of the long-time Romanian contributors here (besides me...). I want Romanian editors to be on the lookout for statements such as this:. Such sentences can easily confuse people who know next to nothing about Romanians. It creates the false impression of some vast and uncouth "uncertainty" or problem. There is no such problem here. Your average American knows nothing about Romanians; such a person reading in a Wikipedia article that the origin of Romanians is "disputed" gives that person a false impression. They do not know about the "North or South of the Danube problem", "Native to Romania or not" problem. Saying the origin of Romanians is disputed creates a false impression and opens the door to confusions and issues regarding Slavic peoples, rroma, etc. I may also post this at the RWNB. Thank you, Alex contributing from L.A. (talk) 10:39, 30 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Indeed, it was very unclear. BTW, I just noticed in how bad a state is the Origin of the Romanians article. I think it should be rewritten completely. bogdan (talk) 00:18, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Could that be...
Bonaparte? I'm talking about .Xasha (talk) 15:53, 1 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I think it's not quite Bonaparte's style, but I might be wrong. Ask User:Khoikhoi, I think he has a degree in Bonapartology. bogdan (talk) 21:39, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Ciocănari
Another editor has added the  template to the article Ciocănari, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also What Wikipedia is not and Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the  template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 10:53, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

RFAR alert
One of the arbitrators has asked that every admin who is arguably involved in the events at Sarah Palin be notified of an arbitration case covering it. I therefore draw your attention to Requests for arbitration. In your case, you are, like me, one of those who made an edit to the article while it was full protected. GRBerry 19:26, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Sarah Palin
Hi, can you point me out to the discussion on the talk page with consensus for your edits ? We already had major problems with edits by administrators to this page recently. Have you remarked the notice at the top of the page ? Thanks, Cena rium  Talk  00:55, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi, I have reverted the edit for now, per the request at Talk:Sarah Palin. Kevin (talk) 09:36, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Renewable energy by country template
The consensus is to keep this short, there is a link to all the renewable by links at the top of the template. This template is actually the group that used to be called "alternative" energy, but it now known as "renewable" energy. It clearly states on the template that it is only for wind, solar and geothermal. 199.125.109.27 (talk) 14:06, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Sir Tim Burners Lee
You Suuuuuuuuuuuuuck u changed everything i did!!! Could u change it back? Pretty Plz? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Redmanhot (talk • contribs) 00:03, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Pergatitur
Years ago I noticed that Albanians have the word përgatitur, which in Romanian is pregatit. Now what is strange and probably erroneous, the DEX states that the pre- in pregatit is a late borrowing from French, while gati is a substratum word. If so, why does Albanian have përgatitur, which is made up of two indigenous Albanian components: për and gatitur, etc. The Albanian and Romanian words have about the same meaning, if not identical:

English (5 entries.) Shqip (5 hyrje.) qualify (verb, p.t., p.p. qualified) përgatis (kr. thj., pj. përgatita, përgatitur), kualifikoj set up (verb) përgatis (kr. thj., pj. përgatita, përgatitur) mount (verb) përgatis (kr. thj., pj. përgatita, përgatitur), mbështes (kr. thj., pj. mbështeta, mbështetur) skilled (adjective) i/e përgatitur profesionalisht in the pipeline duke ardhur, duke u përgatitur A is putting the smack down (talk) 09:36, 12 September 2008 (UTC)


 * The Online DEX is more comprehensive than my DEX book that was purchased from Bucharest in December 2004 or January 2005. It has an entry that one may read "perhaps from French, but cf. Latin prae ". The existence of the Albanian word makes me skeptical that it is from French. It may not even be from Latin, maybe in that word pre- was simply from an early Albanian dialect. A is putting the smack down (talk) 09:44, 12 September 2008 (UTC)


 * According to the current standard DEX edition:


 * PRE (1)- Element de compunere care înseamnă „înainte“, „anterior“ şi care serveşte la formarea unor substantive, a unor verbe, a unor adverbe şi a unor adjective. – Din fr. pré-.


 * PREGĂTÍ, pregătesc, vb. IV. Tranz. 1. A aranja ceva din timp, a face ca ceva să fie gata; a prepara. ♢ Expr. A pregăti terenul = a crea condiţii prielnice pentru... ♦ Refl. A fi pe punctul de a..., a fi gata să... 2. A instrui, a forma în vederea unei activităţi; a da lecţii, a medita. ♦ Tranz. şi refl. A studia temeinic; a învăţa. 3. A preveni pe cineva cu privire la un eveniment (neplăcut), a anunţa cuiva un lucru pe ocolite. 4. A găti o mâncare. – Pre (1)- + găti (după lat. praeparare sau germ. vorbereiten).


 * A is putting the smack down (talk) 10:19, 12 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I presume the linguists who made DEX assumed that if they didn't find the word in some old Romanian texts, it must be a more recent coinage. Before being borrowed from French, Pre- was not a common prefix, being found in words which already had a form which started with pre-.
 * However, based on the Albanian word, I think that it can be indeed wrong. It could be an obscure word which got more popular in the 19th century.
 * It would be useful if there was a dictionary which had the oldest occurence of each word in Romanian, like Oxford English Dictionary has. The oldest occurence I was able to find was in the 1840s. bogdan (talk) 23:02, 12 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Also, "pregătit" ("trained") and "përgatitur" ("skilled") have similar meanings that were not found in Latin praeparare. bogdan (talk) 23:07, 12 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Yup, Oxford Latin Dictionary says:
 * praeparare = 1. to furnish beforehand, provide in readiness 2. to plan in advance 3. to prepare, get up (a speech, case) 4. to put in a state of readiness or preparation. bogdan (talk) 23:13, 12 September 2008 (UTC)


 * The DEX means to say that pregăti was coined relatively recently (19th century?) with the sense taken after Latin praeparare (not an adjective) or that German word, using a prefix taken from French (pre-). The DEX then leads one to conclude that the adjective pregătit was formed from pregăti. However, after looking at the Albanian material, it strains credibility to assume (it is never good to assume like this in science) that they were created independently, i.e. that the Romanians did not know about the Albanian word and happened to coin practically the same word by happenstance in the 19th century using the same root (gati) but with a different prefix from French. I have the suspicion that the DEX editors did not even know about the Albanian examples. I hope that a linguist will look into this. A is putting the smack down (talk) 00:00, 13 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Pre (1) was not a common prefix. However Bogdan, Pre (2) was common. See the Romanian words prelucra, precum, precumpani, etc. In fact, I'm not convinced that the pre- in pregati cannot be encompassed by pre (2), which was inherited from Latin super, per. The pre- in pregatit is more likely akin to Albanian për, however pre(2) from Latin is interesting. There is also a Slavic one such as in the Romanian word precupet. A is putting the smack down (talk) 06:04, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Răchitiş
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Răchitiş, 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  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because 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.

I discovered the page via the random article link. Neither Răchitiş in Bacău nor Răchitiş in Harghita have Wikipedia articles. When at least two places named Răchitiş have articles, then the disambiguation page would be approriate. —J.P. Doul (TALK/CONTRIBUTIONS</SMALL>) 17:28, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

FOP and Ro = no-no?
Hi, Bogdan, and sorry for not getting in touch in so long. I have a quick question for you, because it looks like there may be serious consequences that you may be able to help avert. This bot edit caught my eye - apparently, commons users are into deleting photos of Ro public places, arguing that there is no FOP in Ro (where "FOP", I presume, stands for "freedom of panorama"). Is it actually so? It sounds absurd to me, but I wouldn't even know where to start looking into it. In case you do, please intervene - we risk losing some thousands of photos based on what may be a faulty rationale. Best, Dahn (talk) 18:02, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Actually, it seems the Romanian copyright law has a freedom of panorama exception to the copyright law:


 * reproducerea, cu excluderea oricăror mijloace care vin în contact direct cu opera, difuzarea sau comunicarea către public a imaginii unei opere de arhitectură, artă plastică, fotografică sau artă aplicată, amplasată permanent în locuri publice, în afara cazurilor în care imaginea operei este subiectul principal al unei astfel de reproduceri, difuzări sau comunicări şi dacă este utilizată în scopuri comerciale; (cdep.ro)


 * so, it only covers cases when it's not the central subject and when it's not used for commercial purposes. So Arcul de Triumf, Casa Presei Libere and other buildings of which the architect hasn't died more than 70 years ago are protected by copyright.
 * Yes, it's an absurd law and there's not much to do about it. bogdan (talk) 19:00, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Ew... I dread the thought of what comes next... Dahn (talk) 19:26, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, our laws, good or bad, are usually copies of the French ones and there's the same problem about this. See Image:Louvre pyramids at night.JPG. bogdan (talk) 23:45, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * By the way, could I please direct both of you to this housekeeping matter? Biruitorul Talk 22:36, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Dialect continuum
Hi, Bogdan. You deleted this paragraph altogether and I think I'm partly to blame. In an edit war with Xasha I had to rephrase the beginning of that paragraph, which made it less relevant as an example of a dialect continuum. However, as Daco-Romanian is in fact a dialect continuum, I think the paragraph can be rephrased so as to make it clear that Aromanian, Megleno-Romanian and Istro-Romanian are not part of the continuum, but more distant relatives. What do you think? — Adi  Japan  01:29, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Korochun/Koroksun
Hi, should you have the time please take a look at this one, too: Koroksun. Plinul cel tanar (talk) 11:07, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Hiroshima Dome 1945.gif
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Hiroshima Dome 1945.gif. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 11:51, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

October 2008
Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. And don't stalk me. 77.42.183.86 (talk) 11:35, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of 100 greatest Romanians
I have nominated 100 greatest Romanians, an article you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/100 greatest Romanians. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. <span style="color:#0D670D; font-family:Georgia, Helvetica;">rootology ( C )( T ) 17:24, 7 October 2008 (UTC)  <span style="color:#0D670D; font-family:Georgia, Helvetica;">rootology  ( C )( T ) 17:24, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Name
This information about the name appeared in the reaction of the Romanian government, that's why I moved it to the other comments of the government. Or some other reference there supports this? Squash Racket (talk) 10:16, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Eastern Romance speakers in Bulgaria
Hey there, I've been thinking about writing a summary article on all Eastern Romance speakers here, but I'd like to hear some input on the idea first. What I plan to do is include all the info on the Vlachs around Vidin (Greeks would call them "Romanophone Bulgarians" because they have a Bulgarian identity according to the census and some research), the few Aromanians in parts of the Western Rhodopes (Peshtera and some villages) that may also have a Bulgarian identity today, and the Romanian/Vlach-speaking Roma, who seem to be the largest group of people with a Romanian consciousness around here (at least I haven't heard of any other Romanian-identifying population in Varna, Tarnovo, Shumen and Razgrad Provinces but Roma…).

At the moment, the Romanians in Bulgaria article implies the Vidin Vlachs have a Romanian identification, which they don't, and neither do the Aromanians as far as I know. By contrast, the Roma who have a Romanian and Vlach ethnic consciousness are, well, not ethnic Romanians by any standard. So you may agree that the title is inaccurate and even misleading and the article needs some better tackling of that situation than the current one.

Have you got any ideas as to how we can name that umbrella article and would you have anything against that? I've been thinking about Eastern Romance-speaking people in Bulgaria ("Vlach-speaking" is very ambiguous and easy to misunderstand) since that would allow me to cover all groups (that's actually the only thing they certainly have in common). Also, if you can suggest any good online sources besides those in "Romanians in Bulgaria" (I've noted and I'm going to use those), that would be great.

By the way, thanks for the review of Bulgarians in Romania and the additions to it :)

All the best, Todor→Bozhinov 13:58, 20 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm wondering if it wouldn't be better to separate the Romanian-speakers and Aromanian-speakers. They have a different history and origins (separated by at least a millenium), they live in different regions of Bulgaria, they usually have a different traditional occupations (Aromanians were shepherds and merchants, Romanians were farmers, maybe also fishermen along the Danube).
 * Also, I don't think it's that uncommon to lose their identity. I've noticed the same happened in Romania with the Bulgarians: the Catholic community of Popeşti-Leordeni were of Bulgarian origin, but it seems that now, none of the 5300 Catholics in the town identifies as "Bulgarian". bogdan (talk)


 * Of course, that's a common thing: not only those Catholics of Bucharest, but also the Transylvanian Bulgarians and many of the Orthodox settlers in the Wallachian countryside have been Romanianized; that doesn't imply any explicit actions by the state, it's just a matter of cultural and ethnic diffusion and isolation from the homeland.
 * I understand your suggestion, but I'm not sure if I could write an entire article about Aromanians in Bulgaria: I simply lack good enough sources for that. It is clear that all of those groups are of different origin and occupation (the Aromanians are traditionally shepherds, the Vidin Vlachs/Romanians are farmers and stuff and the Roma are craftsmen and entertainers, if I can say that :)) A clear separation can be made within a single article, it's just a matter of language: my desire was to include all-in-one in order to cover the census identity issue and to explain the large number of Romanian and Vlach-identifying people in regions without a traditional population. Todor→Bozhinov 11:58, 21 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I say it's better to start it and later, when it gets bigger, it can be split. :-) bogdan (talk) 19:39, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Translation
If you get a chance could you check Pagina Storia and compare it to Accademia Militare and see if it looks like a cut and paste, but obviously translated? You can post your reply here: Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion Thanks Soundvisions1 (talk) 21:04, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Featured article review/National emblem of Belarus/archive1
I got note of this, so work with me on this one and I can fix the article so we can avoid an FAR. Right now, I removed or fixed everything that had a citation needed tag. I notice there are some dead links, so I am going to try and fix those next. There are books about Belarusian symbols, but I just need to get my physical hands on them. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 17:27, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

watching Wikipedia article on Petre Tutea
Please see the discussion page of the Wikipedia article on Petre Tutea, which has become unacceptable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Botean (talk • contribs) 23:16, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Goldfaden
At I did my best to transcribe what I could of the poster, but my guess is that with native Romanian you may be able to make something out that didn't cohere for me. Care to take a shot? And thanks much for turning that up. - Jmabel | Talk 00:02, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

RfD nomination of a template redirect
I have nominated a redirect to a template for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you.  MBisanz  talk 14:52, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Q
Just to make sure: did you e-mail me? (In case you did, please excuse this extra precaution, but you know what's been happening around here, and you don't have the e-mail function activated.) Dahn (talk) 18:28, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I did. bogdan (talk) 22:10, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Great. Well, since this is still the easier way: yes, and thank you so much! Dahn (talk) 13:44, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
 * But I don't know your email address. I used the email feature of Wikipedia. bogdan (talk) 14:24, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, do the same - at your convenience. It's just that I can't e-mail out from where I'm at. And I'll give you the exact details once I e-mail back (which should be some time over the next days). Dahn (talk) 14:29, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, wait, I get what you mean (it won't let you attach, will it?). Ok, then, I'll still get back to you with an e-mail this weekend or early next week. Dahn (talk) 14:33, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Make that "late next week" (it was a crappy week...). Dahn (talk) 22:59, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi
I'm sorry to tell you this, but you are editing subjects out of your expertise. Having your own opinion regarding the Church/Christianity/Religion/whatever is one thing, and you obviously have this right. But it would be nice to acknowledge you own bias when editing, by at least trying to get the proper sources. I seriously doubt Lavinia Stan and Lucian Turcescu know what are they writing about. The same, I would not quote the Church on (e.g.) matters of human rights because it deals with ethics using other means.

To get to the point, phyletism is about jurisdiction. That's administration, not theology. I.e. it's the principle&mdash;condemned indeed, only long before the 19th century &mdash;of ethnical jurisdiction. The canonical jurisdiction of a a bishop is a territorial one.


 * Actually, it seems that currently, phyletism is used both about nationalism within EO and about jurisdiction, but you are right, the original meaning of the term was different. bogdan (talk) 22:57, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

On the other hand, Anania talked about salvation (redemption). This is a theological concept, not an administrative one. And talking about collective redemption is a coherent thought if you know what collective means in the expression. For the EO, one can be saved only through the Church, which is a collective body by definition. Thus, having a symbol (the cathedral) for the salvation (redemption) of the members of a local church (which in this case, historically circumscribes a nation) is in accord with EO theology.

Then, the cathedral will be the Patriarchal cathedral, it will have, as expected, its patron saints (I may be wrong, one of them probably St. Andrew), and it will be titled "for the redemption of the people". That's 3 things: function (administrative level), patron saints (theological level), cognomen/designation (symbolic level). Again, that's nothing unusual.

adriatikus |  talk  22:01, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Another thing. Saying "the doctrine of the Orthodox Churches" is wrong. Doctrine is theology, and theologically there is but one single Church. Instead it's OK to say "Orthodox churches" when you talk about administration/jurisdiction. Each EO local church exist only administratively, and nothing more (mutatis mutandis, it's like the diff between the schools in a country and the Education Ministry). adriatikus |  talk  22:54, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Romanian regions
Hello,

I`he noticed that you removed the map on the article about Romania. I have read the policies, but i don`t understand, why are the sources used on creation of this map illegal ? Many sources i used in creation of this map are sources already used and verified on wikipedia. I don`t understand, can you please help me? This image does not promote any irredentism at all, i am just trying to make a composed map with historical meanings for Romanians. Thanks iadrian (talk) 11:26, 7 November 2008 (UTC)


 * from WP:SYNTH:
 * Wikipedia does not publish original research or original thought. This includes unpublished facts, arguments, speculation, and ideas; and any unpublished analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position.
 * That map was created as a synthesis of published material. bogdan (talk) 11:34, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Ok. I understand. It is acceptable to make maps for every region individually ? iadrian (talk) 11:42, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

I guess i can. iadrian (talk) 01:19, 11 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, of course, but it also matters how you use them. bogdan (talk) 01:43, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I was thinking making every region individually, and to add them to the article, ex: "Crisana" , or "Banat" , and so on for every region. Of course, naming them something like "Region with historical meanings for Romanians", or Ex: "Historical Romanian region of Crisana". In a couple of weeks i will give it a try. Thanks iadrian (talk) 13:46, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

History of the Moldovan language merge
Based on the discussion in this article's talk page, I made a proposal and gave its rationale. You are receiving this standard message because during the last 12 months you have editted either this article or its talk page, or both. Dc76\talk 00:54, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Carlos Slim
I am on an editing war with user 77.42.190.17 and others regarding Slim, can it be temp. protected, or can user 77.42.190.17 be blocked for vandilism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jesusmariajalisco (talk • contribs) 22:19, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Email
I there! I why just wondering why you don't have email enabled. I believe it is encouraged for users and admins especially to have one. They are very easy to create. Please consider creating one. Thanks! ѕwirlвoy  ₪  15:53, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

"Ion" Cuza!
Hi. Ever since this article existed, it seems there were users who simply did not want to understand that monarchs may have Anglicized names. Be that as it may, somebody upped and moved the article to "Alexandru Ion Cuza", which is just plain stupid! Could you please move it back? Dahn (talk) 16:36, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Image:MainPage_Opera_7.x_full_screen.png listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:MainPage_Opera_7.x_full_screen.png, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:01, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Roma people to Romani people
Hi Bogdan. I've tabled an RM to the above effect. When I did so, I hadn't realised that the present situation arose from a revert by you on 12th March. It may be that you have missed the present proposal, or that you have since changed your position. Either way I thought I should bring it to your attention. Its currently under discussion here.Regards. RashersTierney (talk) 08:26, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Bridges by continent
Category:Bridges by continent and '''Category:Bridges in Europe, which you created, have 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. Cgingold (talk) 23:19, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

The Day the Earth Stood Still
Any follow-ups? You cannot dismiss points just by typing "MOS". Alientraveller (talk) 15:32, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Bellu
If this move stands, then Category:Burials at Bellu should be renamed accordingly, right? - Biruitorul Talk 05:53, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Bucharest mayoral candidates
Category:Bucharest mayoral candidates, 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. Cgingold (talk) 02:15, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Art by subject
I have nominated art by subject for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Clubmarx (talk) 02:27, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Petre Ţuţea
Hi! Is there some problem to add an internal link to "Marxist ideology" in the article? Noroc, --Males (talk) 10:51, 6 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Ah, sorry, I mistakingly reverted your edit. I reinstated the link. bogdan (talk) 11:41, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Mulţumesc! :)--Males (talk) 17:32, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

File:Spo... er... myself.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Spo... er... myself.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Skier Dude ( talk ) 07:08, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Antonescu
Why did you erase my edits, cited from Jewish sources and with ample evidence? The information of the actions of Ukranians at Bogdanovska and the German SkR are very relevant to the article.Romano-Dacis (talk) 10:56, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Seyam
I'd rather discuss this on the article's talk page (I started a discussion a few minutes ago), but to reply to your edit summary, Hamas itself is social, military, and political organization, not just a military one. Seyam was the Interior Minister, head the Strip's or the city's police forces, not a leader of a military wing. Also, even if he was a military leader, it's still an assassination since he was not killed on the battlefield, or by a stray bullet or missile, but by a targeted strike at his brother's house. --Al Ameer son (talk) 00:50, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Categories
I am sorry, it is indeed difficult to see if something is worth until things are completed. I hope, however, that you understand it requires ca. 1,000 edits to do what I started, and it's something that needs good thought at every edit, hence it is a very slow process. But I promiss I will not leave things mid-way, because that indeed would be a mess.

The short answer to your question is: there are a lot of articles in Category:History of Romania and Category:History of Moldova, and they ought to be distributed along the category trees. Also there are many uncategorized or poorly uncategorized articles.

When creating a category I merely introduced 1-2 articles in most of them to jump-start, but I considered the potential (I have the number 50 in mind, I did not aim as high as 100). The reason for that is that sometimes articles have to go to several subcats. For example a history article must be categorized by period (always), by theme (always), by people (if it's a person), by year (if it's a short event), by locality/county/small region (if it is about a locality/county/small region). If I would move now all articles by period, then I would populate all the categories I have created, but would have problems later dealing with theme, people, locality, etc. So, rather I think the opposite way: I take an article, and try to place it place in all proper categories. However, I am only at the begining. Once because it is a slow process. Second, because many categories are missing. Just compare with Category:History of the United States to see how far behind are we.

The things I accomplished so far are: Category:History of Romania by period, Category:History of Moldova by period (it's not 100% done, but it's close). Not all periods for all regions are needed for everybody. The periods correspond to the standard division of history into Early Middle Ages, High Middle Ages, Late Middle Ages, Early Modern Era, Modern Era (18th century), and Modern Era (19th century). For Romania, there is only one category for Early Middle Ages, 3 categories for High Middle Ages (Transylvania, Moldavia and Wallachia), ditto for LMA, EME, and ME(18). For ME(19) we have 2 categories for Transylvania (1848-1867 and 1867-1918), one each for Moldavia and Wallachia (1821/22-1859), one for Bessarabia (1812-1917), one for Bukovina (no division by period here, just one 1775-1918) and two for old kingdom (1859-1881, called United Principalities, and 1881-1947, called Kingdom of Romania - which has 3 subcats, and only the 1881-1918 one is relevant for 19th century, the other two, 1918-1940 and 1940-1945 being in the 20th century). That's the picture with the reasons: i.e. to correspond to the universal division of history, so that it is easier to integrate in world history. Now, there are a couple articles that make overviews, such as Romania in the Middle Ages and Early Modern Romania, and I think that is absolutely fine. When making this structure I compared with UK, France, and Poland.

It will take me more time to think about themes. (USA is a good example for themes, France is not.) And only then I can start systematically moving articles along the tree ladder. However, if you want me to start systematically moving the articles before, that's also ok. I can do that first. Dc76\talk 16:01, 29 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I appologize I did not leave you a note, as well. Dc76\talk 16:21, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

RE: Moldavia
I have no idea. And I'm not sure why you're asking me. :-) - Rjd0060 (talk) 16:52, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Re:inhabitants of Isaccea, from Budjak
Chiar Lejean confirma ca a existat o deplasare de populatie dinspre Basarabia catre Dobrogea. Ok, acest lucru nu spune daca majoritatea Isaccenilor de trag din Basarabeni sau nu. Drept urmare am dat revert la ultimul meu edit. --Olahus (talk) 01:05, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Am incarcat astazi. Este trecuta si fortificatia Isaccei. De remarcat si toponimiile din Dobrogea (care inca apartinea otomanilor in acea perioada iar Cahul, Bolgrad şi Ismail apartinea Romaniei). --Olahus (talk) 01:11, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Bezbozhnik
Shubinator (talk) 22:38, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Danube Delta Horse(s)
Hi, Please don't keep moving this article. Wikipedia naming conventions discourage plurals. If you want to discuss the status of the animals, take it to the talk page, but an article rename isn't working, so please don't keep doing this. The definition of a horse "breed" is quite a debatable issue, especially with feral populations, but for purposes of navigation, the definition on wiki is deliberately kept quite broad (otherwise we have wound up with things like three different articles on the same kind of horse, all linked to different categories!). So please discuss and don't keep moving the article. Montanabw (talk) 06:59, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Houston, we have a problem
Hi again. Would you be so kind as to look into this? My objection to the "source" is simple: it's neofascist brushwork straight from The Man ("Europe Nova" publishing house is one his pet projects). Thank you, Dahn (talk) 17:58, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I reverted him. I usually keep an eye on that article. I have Deletant's book and I should probably fact-check the parts that aren't currently referenced. :-) bogdan (talk) 01:29, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * That would be great. Dahn (talk) 03:05, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

What say you to a sandbox, Bogdan? You add from Deletant (and whatever else you want to throw in the mix) and I have a gazillion sources that would complete the info. And we can both source from the Wiesel report. It's time it was "bulletproofed" from head to toe. It's bound to be exhausting, but I for one feel Paris vaut bien une messe. Plus, I want what I do to be compatible with your fine editing, and not risk losing any of your edits in some turmoil. Dahn (talk) 02:37, 28 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Sure, that's a great idea. The article on Antonescu has long been rather poor, although it's a very important subject. bogdan (talk) 00:25, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Great. I dropped your last version it in one of my sandboxes. When you plan to use it, just ass above it; I'll be doing my first edits some time tomorrow, or whenever it is you'll say it's okay. Dahn (talk) 02:04, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

A bit tardy, but here I am again: I've been gathering sources in addition to those I already had access to, and I'll start editing later today or, at the latest, some time tomorrow. If you want to work on it in the meantime, please go ahead. Oh and: do you perchance have access to Achim's book in its entirety? It would make a great addition (I already plan to quote him with another text, which I could read almost integrally). See you there, Dahn (talk) 09:22, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, I do have access to all th book. bogdan (talk) 15:32, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Awright. Well, counting the report, I have collected some 40 or 50 sources ready to use. But the one thing I find very hard to source is Antonescu's life before the late 1930s. Dahn (talk) 04:30, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * If you can find any info on his marriages, it would be great. Right now, the article says that he was married to a "Raşela Mendel", but, although it's all over the same old neonazi forums as some sort of idiotic statement ("see? how could he have hated the Jews?"), I could not find a single confirmation of this from any reliable source whatsoever. The two mentions of this on goggle books are highly dubious and unreadable. What does Deletant have to say? If this info is false, it has already infected all adjacent wiki articles, and should be dealt with sooner rather than later. Dahn (talk) 06:31, 4 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Deletant doesn't mention any Jewish spouse of Antonescu. But he does mention that his wife, Maria (nee Niculescu), had a Jewish ex-husband.
 * Also about his marriage: (p. 45)
 * Carol’s hostility towards Antonescu turned to vindictiveness. Antonescu’s wife, Maria, had been married and divorced in France. In June 1938, with Carol’s connivance, Maria’s former husband was brought at state expense from Paris to bring an action of bigamy against Maria with the aim of discrediting Antonescu and putting an end to his career. The action collapsed when Antonescu’s lawyer, Mihai Antonescu, produced the original French certificate of divorce. Ion Antonescu’s fury with Carol served only to widen the gulf between the two men. At the same time, his wife’s victory confirmed Antonescu’s reputation in the army as a man of honour and further tarnished Carol’s own standing with his senior officers.
 * bogdan (talk) 09:38, 4 March 2009 (UTC)


 * So now we know it was all bull. I'll remove it from the sandbox, and leave you to assess if it needs to be removed from the article now (it pierces my eyes, but so do many other "subtle" things in the article). This looks like another case where wikipedia helps propel marginal propaganda into the limelight, by purpose of the bad faith editor or by accident of the good faith editor (I've dealt with the by "by purpose" instance on Latin Europe, just days ago...) Dahn (talk) 10:12, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Proposed new policy
As a recent contributor to Deaths in 2009, you may be able to help decide on a proposed new policy. It is proposed that:
 * A month should be deleted from the "Deaths in [CURRENT YEAR]" page ONE WEEK after the month ends.
 * A month should be deleted from the "Deaths in [CURRENT YEAR]" page ONE WEEK after the month ends.

Please opine at Talk:Deaths_in_2009. Don't just say or Also state your reasons and participate in the discussion. Michael Hardy (talk) 16:38, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Support.
 * Oppose.

Image copyright problem with File:Forced labour camps canal.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Forced labour camps canal.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
 * That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 07:00, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

You rock.
I just checked it. As the title says, and a great thank you. Hope it don't mean you're not still interested in editing the sandbox ;). Dahn (talk) 04:26, 8 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, I'll try to contribute to that, too, but for the last few days I've been rather busy. bogdan (talk) 15:17, 8 March 2009 (UTC)


 * No problemo. The inuse template actually covers some periods when I'm doing something else myself - I just leave it there when I hope to get back sooner than later, or when I'm not quite finished with one source. There's no pressure, of course. Dahn (talk) 15:59, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Btw, maybe you could undo this. Dahn (talk) 16:52, 11 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Check out these moves. Here we go again!! Dahn (talk) 20:23, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Slavery by location
Template:Slavery by location has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Neelix (talk) 00:54, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Romanian Wikisource
Bogdan, for about 2-3 weeks I will not be able to access a computer. If you have some time, please keep an eye on changes and vandalism on Romanian Wikisource. Thank you! Mvelam (talk) 17:07, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay, I'll keep an eye on it. bogdan (talk) 19:01, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Speaking of wikisource: this is abusive on several levels, and I would strongly suggest deleting it. It's part of a self-promotional tour that has engulfed several wikipedias, and about which something should really be done. Dahn (talk) 17:17, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I mean, for crying out loud, aside from being utter nonsense by a writer of no notability whatsoever, it is self-published. Yes, it had a publishing house, but it has no claim to notability or reliability whatsoever, and its editorial policy is most likely nil - as evidenced by the fact that the "copyright release notice" attributes all those rights to the author...
 * Evidence (including, but for sure not limited to, the incriminating release) shows that the whole thing is in manifest and nonchalant breach of WP:COI and WP:NOT.
 * Like all the spree of related articles on nonentities (aside from this guy, who is notable but the target of a dubious monopoly, virtually all not only non-notable, and the texts are extremely poorly sourced - either from self-published bull or simply from posts in internet forums and the like). In fact, the related issue has been known for months now and scandalously tolerated by the rowiki people, who even told me once that the user can forfeit copyrights because he is related to the people he writes about (when he doesn't simply write about himself).
 * If anyone is reading this: I am seriously considering a formal request for comment, and taking special time to contain this negative phenomenon in the name of sheer informative quality. At the risk of having the user blocked - though I don't wish it, I think it is clear that it has become a distinct possibility, particularly since he is systematically ignoring all suggestions of improvement. I would welcome any input. Dahn (talk) 01:31, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

YouTube
Please explain what is wrong with this edit.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 13:04, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I didn't mean to revert you. I think I clicked the "Rollback" button out of mistake. bogdan (talk) 16:09, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Slavery
Hi, Bogdan! I made here a proposal for renaming. Cheers! --Olahus (talk) 10:21, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

2009 Moldova civil unrest
Hi! Could you please protect this article? We have this guy who permanently reverts and disrupts the article. --Olahus (talk) 18:21, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Now he's back as this guy. --Olahus (talk) 06:34, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

File:Marieroumania1900-6.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Marieroumania1900-6.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Calliopejen1 (talk) 12:00, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Strange moves
How many of these recent moves look like they need to be reverted? A couple might be OK, but Arad, Arad looks absurd. - Biruitorul Talk 21:53, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * What do you mean "absurd"? Don't you know the song?... If I can make it there, I'll make it anywhere... Dahn (talk) 23:30, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Heh. Speaking of absurdity, he's also doing this sort of thing, creating three columns out of six items, and two asterisks next to each column heading - personally, I see nothing wrong with the old version, but some people don't know where to stop "improving" things. Sort of like the guy who's still relentlessly spreading the "related information" heading no one asked for... - Biruitorul Talk 00:18, 24 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I moved them all back, since they were all towns and cities, for which we have "Town, Romania", whereas for communes and villages, we have "Village, County". bogdan (talk) 22:54, 23 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, that's right. Thank you. - Biruitorul Talk 23:17, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Do you still do maps?
B, I'm hoping you still edit maps and will enjoy helping me on this. With the overview of sources outlined in Ion Antonescu, it may be worth transforming Transnistria as it appears here into a hachure or something (whatever you feel is consistent with the style you effectively introduced with the original maps). While Ro certainly occupied and administrated the region, sources note that it was not actually/clearly part of Ro territory - even though it appears Antonescu hoped to turn it into one once a particular dystopia was to take hold of Europe. Since I once tried editing vector maps and ended up with a small disaster you may remember, and since I'm no more educated in it than I was back then, I'm not touching it myself. Dahn (talk) 01:14, 27 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, I'll try to do it. bogdan (talk) 21:29, 28 April 2009 (UTC)


 * No rush. Dahn (talk) 22:49, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

The 'spam links' on the names pages
>> You wrote on my page: "Please do not add advertising or inappropriate external links to Wikipedia..."

Hello Bogdan, thanks for your message on my discussion page. I regret that you have removed a lot of links on the pages I have recently edited (by the way, you have left a lot of empty 'References' sections in those documents when removing the links). I should say that my goal is not to promote any web site or spam the Wiki pages. I just think that any article (I am working on the names pages, since this is my favorite topic) should cite reliable sources, otherwise people just won't be able to trust the information they see, since you know that all the pages are being permanently damaged. I usually revert several vandalisms on the names pages a day. So, when you see that the name John means "carrot" you need to check and verify this information somehow. Regarding what I am doing - I always do some research before editing an article, fix its errors, add some additional information and a link. I am the member of the WikiProject Anthroponymy project, and I did get an approve of the group founders/members to do this work. Regarding the external links I usually add - I use that web site since I really like its quality and the way they present the information. I do see hundreds of similar links to the web sites like behindthename.com or thinkbabynames.com, and I do not think that anybody needs to look through all those pages and just remove the links. I could use some other web site, but I do not see a big difference here - you could rebuke me for promoting any other web site, as well (for instance, behindthename.com). All the links I add to the articles are highly relevant to the topic, so this is definitely not a spam. When I started doing this work several months ago, the founders of the WikiProject Anthroponymy project did tell me that my work is quite useful, but if you think that I should stop editing the names pages, and this work is harmful - I can just tell the project members that I stop doing this.

thank you,

TedSwarovski (talk) 19:02, 11 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, neither of those sites are Reliable references according to the definition we use in Wikipedia, as all of them are made by hobbyists, without any publication process, peer-review, etc. A google book search showed that there have been plenty of books about given names written by actual scholars and printed by famous publishing houses. Your contributions are welcomed and appreciated, but adding references using a an hobbyist's webpage is not something that improves the quality of Wikipedia. bogdan (talk) 19:16, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Ahmed Deedat Page
I would like an explanation for your Revert of my last edit on the Deedat Page. No explanation has been provided. I have made an External Links Page with several Deedat videos linked to youtube and as far as I can tell it is all legit in the rules of Wikipedia. The links are an improvement to the Deedat page. I have supplemented the additions with rationale in the Talk Page as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dungsniffer (talk • contribs) 11:21, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Torgut dialect moved
Hi Bogdan! You moved Kalmyk dialect back to Kalmyk language some time ago, probably after reading the discussion on its talk page. Now 虞海 (Yú Hǎi) (talk) who originally and without establishing consent made this MOVE became angry again and moved Torgut dialect to Torgut language -- which it isn't. The whole system on Mongolic on Wikipedia differentiates between languages (Moghol, Kamnigan etc., Mongolian, Oirat) and dialects. Kalmyk happens to be a literary language, thus "language", but Torgut appears to be a regiolect, thus dialect. Yuhai doesn't argue that it is not a regiolect by addressing the subtle differences that may have come about by language contact, but just maintains that Kalmyk and Torgut ought to be on the same level. I don't intend to waste my time with another discussion as on Talk:Torgut dialect, so I'd be glad if you could undo Yuhai's move and protect Kalmyk language and Torgut dialect from movement. I don't say that it's completely out of question to use other terminology here, but it has to be argued for and discussed beforehand. G Purevdorj (talk) 15:47, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:King's Murderer.png
File:King's Murderer.png is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Alekos King's Murderer.png. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 16:41, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Vikings-Voyages.png
You might want to look at Talk:L'Anse aux Meadows where your map is being, er, questioned, Dougweller (talk) 20:19, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Map
Dear Bogdangiusca, do you think you could make a correction to ? User:Gwyonbach has pointed out (see: Talk:L'Anse aux Meadows) that the region appointed on the map as Rollo's reign in 911 is in fact not placed in the proper part of Normandy. The spot that is coloured now is West Normandy, but Rollo started out in East Normandy around Rouen, which was his first capital. Can you change the map accordingly? Best regards, Notum-sit (talk) 08:40, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Gurghiu
I have nominated Gurghiu, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Gurghiu. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 16:01, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

File:Sclavi Tiganesti.jpg
Hello, as I see from the logs, you have deleted the local File:Sclavi Tiganesti.jpg as it was transferred to Commons under the same title. Could you please check in the inaccessible deleted history of the local file whether some essential information has remained untransferred during this process? I am especially interested whether the original source of the image has been provided, because without it, the image risks second deletion, in Commons. Actually, it is even more interesting to understand the original source of the image, because it depicts an announcement from 1852 written with Latin-based alphabet, while as far as I know at this time Romanian Cyrillic alphabet was only in use. Thank you in advance, → Spiritia  08:10, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
 * If I may budge in: I don't know where the image was taken from originally, but it is clearly PD. One source to attest as much (and feature the picture) is Isabel Fonseca, Bury Me Standing. The Gypsies and Their Journey, Vintage Departures, New York, 1995. ISBN 0-679-73743-X (which I have around the house). The lettering is indeed an anomaly, but not as big as one would think: the poster comes from a period when the Cyrillic was already being dropped and a transitional alphabet adopted. By then, educated people understood the Latin alphabet, even if no standardized version had been imposed. Also by then, the Romanian language had actually been recorded in all-Latin alphabets (the first of which was experimented with by the Jesuits in the 18th century, incidentally using the same diacritics as the modern Romanian one; others I think had been adapted by the Transylvanian School). Yes, Latin use was tentative and unregulated, but it was in use; in fact, even after being officially adopted, it remained tentative and unregulated for some 50 years (meaning that several variants were still in circulation). Hope this answers your query. 09:54, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Roa-rup
Hi, and welcome back. Do you happen to know how I could change this redlink into something reading "Aromanian"? It apparenly has an ISO 639-2 entry, but the template only does ISO 639-1. Dahn (talk) 07:33, 20 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks and done. :-) bogdan (talk) 08:22, 21 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Great, thank you. And since we're on it: are there any redlinks in Ion Creangă that you find interesting? I'm thinking of making it an FA by, say, November (so it'll hopefully be on the main page on December 31), and the less redlinks the better. I'm sporadically working on random ones, but if you want "dibs" on any such article, they're there for the having. Dahn (talk) 08:54, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Again
Greetings. Fairly obvious this time. --Illythr (talk) 13:55, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Mustelus hacat 2003.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Mustelus hacat 2003.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 14:47, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Your edit
This edit whose sole purpose is to prevent other users from moving the page back is totally inappropriate. If you want to move the page you should first discuss it in the talk page. You should play by the rules, no matter if you have sysop access or not. Alefbe (talk) 04:54, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * There was no consensus for moving the page in the first place, I simply restored the very controversial move you made. If you want to move the page to "Tajik Persian", see Requested moves. bogdan (talk) 21:36, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Coada la ulei.jpg
File:Coada la ulei.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Bucur Obor (1986).jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:54, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Radu Duda
Bogdan, I see one of the single-purpose accounts editing only the Duda and King Michael articles has yet again moved to Radu al României Duda. Would you be able to move it back, and should move protection be considered? - Biruitorul Talk 00:55, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

I moved it and now he can't move it back. bogdan (talk) 00:58, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Many thanks. - Biruitorul Talk 23:55, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Friedrich Kellner
I am hoping you can help me with the Friedrich Kellner article, to translate it into Romanian. There is a version in Magyar and German, if that is easier to translate from than the English. I have a condensed version of the English article that I can send to you (about 1500 words) by email. Thank you, Scott Rskellner (talk) 00:05, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Merry Xmas
I'm not the guy to walk around doing this, and we're both religious skeptics (I for one am not really celebrating the holiday in any way), but it would already look like I'm ignoring you were I not to say it after I've said it to so many others: Merry Christmas! Dahn (talk) 15:45, 25 December 2009 (UTC)


 * And, when you have the time, could you throw an eye over what goes on in articles such as Burebista? I'm afraid the protochronist international may be at it again. Dahn (talk) 04:10, 27 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the greetings. Since it's a bit late for the Christmas, I can only wish you a great new year! :-) I'll look at the article, the Dacia-related articles tend to attract nutcases. bogdan (talk) 19:08, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's how I got to be there :). You are entirely right, though: it's spreading like wildfire. It's probable that we'll still bump into each other's edits for the few days that remain to be spend, but sure: a great new year to you too! Dahn (talk) 11:00, 29 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I have rewritten the article and sourced every claim from acceptable sources, but it's still far from being a balanced and comprehensive article. bogdan (talk) 22:46, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Kudos. I'll be there too sooner of later - I promised myself I'd finish some stuff first. (New Year's resolution? Hardly... but still.) Dahn (talk) 11:00, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks.
 * ...and Zalmoxis seems to be in an even worse shape. bogdan (talk) 13:32, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! The link itself is gold, and it's good for several articles I can think of (including the one I'm working on). I vaguely remember something about "Correggio" being in use as a pseudonym at the time of Ileana, but I can't really remember where it was, or if it was about someone in particular. Btw, I noticed there's another unsigned sketch of the guy in the same book (which reminds me that I once bumped into B-P's drawn portrait by Luchian, but could not scan it...). Anyway, I'm adding it to the article and sending you kudos. Dahn (talk) 11:44, 6 January 2010 (UTC)


 * In other news: Bonaparte or Greier? Dahn (talk) 12:32, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

RfD nomination of Βeta oxidation
I have nominated for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. — the Man in Question (in question)  08:17, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Bogdangiusca! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created  are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the list:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 07:36, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Radu Vasile -
 * 2) Victor Ciorbea -

You want to keep the wrong info? Transnistria on the Moldovian SSR page
I am confused as to why you removed the claim that part of the Moldovian SSR became Transnistria... Certainly the sovereign territory of Transnistria (which is difficult deny, no matter how unjust their sovereignty is) comes exclusively from the territory of the Moldavian SSR. This place has been independent for nearly 20 years. When I traveled to Moldova, they wouldn't let me into Transnistria... Its recognition is independent of its legitimacy. There are many wikipedia articles on it. Without this link wikipedia would be blatently inconsistent. --Frozenport (talk) 23:48, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

You want to keep the wrong info?
Why did you reversed our (legit) changes on the Romanian Parliament page? You want to keep the wrong info on that page or what? This is why Wiki has such a bad reputation as an unreliable source: anybody can 'decide' to keep the wrong info on a page, simply because he has time to waste as an 'official editor'? The World records Academy is the ONLY organization which recognized the building as the biggest civilian administrative building, the most expensive, etc. Why didn't you checked the discussion page there, to see that we have mentioned the wrong info, but nobody cares to change them?! Does Wikipedia managers want to have a quality project or a place where anybody can be 'important' and be an ' official editor' ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by WorldRecordsAcademy (talk • contribs) 21:49, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Galaxy
Out of curiosity: did you see my edit to RJHall's talk page or did you add the Number of known/named galaxies question to the Galaxy page in sheer coincidence? 71.234.215.133 (talk) 12:03, 24 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Nope, I didn't see it, it's just a coincidence. :-) bogdan (talk) 12:05, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I do not understand. I thought wiki did not use common text formatting ( :-) ) . The addition of it confuses me. Did you or did you not see my comment before posting your own? 71.234.215.133 (talk) 12:41, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Night (book)
Hi, I saw your name on the list of Romanian-English translators. I was wondering if you could translate the left-hand plaque for me in this image for the article on Elie Wiesel's Night. Cheers, SlimVirgin  TALK  contribs 08:35, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. :) bogdan (talk) 10:33, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Gabor Bethlen
Hello Bogdan! Thank you for providing the G. Bethlen site with his picture on the horseback. I am searching for pictures of G.B., because I need them for a historical exhibition about "conquering & discovering" (Austria) that I work for. Could you please tell me where you got the picture from or where I could find it? Thank you in advance and greetings from Austria --Freezenecc (talk) 14:01, 8 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Hello. I extracted the image from File:Bethlen and Bocskay.jpg, which says:
 * Photo taken by Scott Moore in April 2001 at an exhibition in the Kis Alfold region of Hungary. The photo shows reproductions of prints of Gabriel Bethlen and Stephen Bocskay, successive Princes of Transylvania.
 * bogdan (talk) 22:30, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanx!!! --Freezenecc (talk) 20:31, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Tzara
Hello! Can you keep an eye on Tristan Tzara? A determined set of IPs are defacing the article by adding the same tidbit to the lead in what is more a subversive attempt than proper editing (the totality of their edits relates to this issue). I've tried to explain it, but they don't listen and nobody else seems to have noticed what's been happening. Dahn (talk) 17:36, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure. I added it to my watchlist. bogdan (talk) 22:18, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Iaaasi
Hi again. I'm facing an issue of some urgency and scope, which has gone unnoticed - I consider referring it through the usual channels, but this is beyond AN/I and I can't for the love of me figure out how we're supposed to be filing out new sockpuppet investigations. User:Iaaasi, who made himself known primarily for this monstrosity, edits to weed out all references to dual citizenship for some Romanians and Hungarians, various forms of xenophobic edit warring, all sorts of inflammatory rants on talk pages, and his almost instant familiarity with the subtleties of wikipedia, is almost certainly our old friend Bonnie. As Michael put it: Do you remember the time... If you can offer some advice on how to handle this, one way or another, please assist. Dahn (talk) 22:46, 5 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Blocked. bogdan (talk) 16:57, 6 March 2010 (UTC)


 * 1. I was accused, based only on the ortographic similarity between the usernames "iaaasi" and "Iasi" that my account is a sockpuppet of User:Iasi


 * False, because i have many id-s wih this name; one example: the youtube acoount http://www.youtube.com/user/iaaasi, created in 2007

My ip is from Craiova, not from Iasi

2.I was said to be famous for "edits to weed out all references to dual citizenship for some Romanians and Hungarians"


 * False, because I only reverted only a 2-3 edits of the user Rokarudi, who was engaged in an edit war on this subject and started modifying Romanian biographies after others reverted his edits on Hungarian biographies

3. I was accused of anti-Hungarian behaviour I. I added the German and HUNGARIAN names for Timisoara II. I corrected the description of a Dutch map representing Hungarian settlements in 12th century and modern Romanian ethnographic zones from Transylvania (and not "Hungarians and Romanians in 12th century Trasylvania" as it was suggested before)
 * False, because

I also replaced the map with its English version (which was meanwhile deleted) ,even if its content was against my "anti-hungarian" interests

III. I added HUNGARIAN name of CFR Cluj IV. I commented about a fancy map of Romania

3. I created my xenophobic profile page when I was angry on Squash Racket's anti-Romanian edits, and I deleted it after a single day V. I made many constructive edits: A. I reverted vandalism B. C. I corrected Matthias Corvinus' ethnicity : "the second son of John Hunyadi, a successful military leader of Hungarian[3] and Cuman[4] descent" before my edits to "the second son of John Hunyadi, a successful Hungarian General probably of Romanian[4][5][6][7][8][9] descent" now (79.117.149.121 (talk) 12:04, 8 March 2010 (UTC))