Обсуждение участника:Illythr

Материал из Википедии — свободной энциклопедии

[править] Добро пожаловать

Здравствуйте! От имени участников Википедии — приветствую Вас в её разделе на русском языке. Надеемся, Вы получите большое удовольствие от участия в проекте.

Ниже приведены некоторые полезные для начинающих ссылки:

• Википедия:Правила и указания
• Википедия:Руководство для быстрого старта
• Википедия:Именование статей
• Википедия:Как править статьи
• Википедия:Первые шаги
• Википедия:Изображения

Вы можете подписываться на страницах обсуждения, используя четыре идущих подряд знака тильды (~~~~), или нажав на соответствующую кнопку на панели инструментов. Если у Вас возникли вопросы, воспользуйтесь системой помощи. Если Вы не нашли в ней ответа на Ваш вопрос, задайте его на форуме проекта.
И ещё раз, добро пожаловать!  :-)

Obersachse 18:57, 1 февраля 2006 (UTC)

Данке шён, я просто расползаюсь по Википедиям, перешёл вот с английской...

Того - я тут как аноним пару байтрагов сделал... их мне сюда присвоить нельзя?

Не, не получится :). А насчет DK2 - там правда был Час колдовства? Сколько играл, не помню такого :) --winterheart 12:59, 6 февраля 2006 (UTC)

[править] Кишинёв

Внимание Началась совместная работа по улучшению статьи о Кишинёве. Присоединяйтесь!

--Zserghei 10:09, 7 июня 2006 (UTC)

[править] Мессианство ИИсуса

Приятно пообщаться, но мы видимо, принаблежим различным филосфским школам: Я "идеалистическое понимание истории" Вы "материалистическое понимание истории" Давайте определимся, начнём от печки. Пиотровский Юрий 19:54, 16 июня 2006 (UTC)Пиотровский Юрий 19:58, 16 июня 2006 (UTC)

Последнее изменение этой страницы: 19:50, 16 июня 2006. Содержимое доступно в соответствии с GNU Free Documentation License.

[править] Судьба Молдавской Википедии

На Форуме обсуждается возможное удаление Википедии на Молдавском языке (mo:). Интересно было бы увидеть Ваше мнение по поднятым в форуме вопросам. --Kaganer 13:51, 23 июня 2006 (UTC)

[править] ПМР

Thanks for your message and your cooperation on the PMR article. I believe the article is a bit more neutral now, and that was my original intention. I understand that every community will have its own perspective on various issues, so it's impossible to expect to see the same text everywhere, but I felt that the original version of the article was a bit too one-sided and too negatively oriented against the Moldovan leadership and populace at the outbreak of the conflict. I don't believe there were any factual errors, but the way the information was presented and the selection of the words used appeared (to me at least) a bit biased. Tijones 18:32, 30 июня 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I believe the article in its current state is rather incomplete, being mostly but a chronology of the *conflict* and telling very little about the unrecognised state itself. Not surprisingly, many of the English articles (en:History of Moldova, en:History of Transnistria, en:Moldova) have similar problems in presenting mostly the Romanian point of view on the situation. See, for example, the discussions on the en:talk:Moldova#The History section.

A good example is the very sentence you mentioned: «The language laws — introducing the Latin alphabet for written Moldovan and requiring proficiency in the Moldovan language [...] for public servants — presented a particularly volatile issue as a great proportion of the non-Romanian population of the Moldavian SSR did not speak Moldovan. The problem of official languages in the Republic of Moldova has become a Gordian knot, being exaggerated and, perhaps, intentionally politicized. This displeasure with the new policies...»

1) This sentence gives the wrong reason for the whole ensuing conflict, making the position of the protesters rather absurd. The "displeasure" was not with the public servants having to be proficient in the state language (as the sentence implies), but rather with the native languages of significant minorities being left out of the public sphere.

2) The problem is *currently* being exaggerated and intentionally politicised, since the Moldovan government eventually offered Gagauzia and Transnistria autonomy, the right to determine their own official language and the right to secede from Moldova, should it, at any time, lose its independence (exactly what the regional leaders wanted and were refused back in 1991), after the nationalist sentiments died down. However it was *not* exaggerated back then, when the language law threatened to isolate non-speakers from the state, especially seniors, for whom the sudden need to learn another language based on a different alphabet within such a short period was pretty much impossible. Sure, the law was eventually softened and Russian is now almost always used as a second language by many institutuions, but at the time the situation looked rather grim.

I'll raise the issue on that page tomorrow. --Illythr 01:22, 1 июля 2006 (UTC)

I actually meant the comment for you, but of course if you believe there is something noteworthy in this discussion and it is relevant to the more general discussion on the PMR page, please translate that part. 1) I agree with you, the English page is a bit to vague on this aspect. I suppose fact that public servants could only use Romanian implicitly implied that Russian would be excluded from the public sphere of official affairs, however this point must be emphasized as it was crucial to the initial conflict. 2) I believe that the ethnic aspect of the conflict was much more powerful in the beginning, and in part the fears of the non-Romanian population were justified. As many did not speak the new state language, they felt that they would be isolated from many societal institutions and thus be at a disatvantage and even discriminated against. What you said about senior citizens is especially true (look at Estonia for example where knowledge of the state language was made a prerequisite for citizenship). Having said that though, some politicians still greatly exagerated the truth. Some argued that citizenship would be denied to non-Romanians (a fact rapidly disproved by the authorities who introduced some of the most liberal citizenship laws), that violence was being carried out against Russian-speakers (a fact with little substantiation), etc. Also, most Western ex-Soviet states only preserved the language of the majority as the state language in an attempt to increase its usage. For instance, even in Ukraine, with a large Russian population, Ukrainian is still the only state language. Thus the actions of the Moldovan leaders even at the height of the wave of Romanianism were not out of the ordinary and certainly not that extreme in comparison to what other states did (again the Baltics). Tijones 02:13, 1 июля 2006 (UTC)