Talk:Moldova–European Union relations

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

European Union Low‑importance

	European Union portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the European Union on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European UnionWikipedia:WikiProject European UnionTemplate:WikiProject European UnionEuropean Union articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Eastern Europe (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Eastern Europe, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Eastern EuropeWikipedia:WikiProject Eastern EuropeTemplate:WikiProject Eastern EuropeEastern Europe articles

Moldova High‑importance

	Moldova portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Moldova, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Moldova on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MoldovaWikipedia:WikiProject MoldovaTemplate:WikiProject MoldovaMoldova articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

On October 2013, it was proposed that this article be moved from Moldova–European Union relations to European Union–Moldova relations. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

Untitled

Is [1] a reliable source? And is it important enough to be included in this article? (58.188.97.134 12:13, 2 February 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Aren't the things written in this article a little too europhile? For example, the situation in Pridnestrovie isn't mentioned at all, and reading Enlargement of the European Union#Moldova, it seems that the situation is somewhat different from what's stated here. I'm adding an NPOV tag on the article page. If anyone disagrees to this, feel free to remove it again. (58.188.97.134 12:13, 2 February 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Reducing versus expansion

I prefer expansion rather than reducing the articles. The latest version looks very reduced now. I ask the editors to work to expand and not to cut the papers. --Tones benefit 16:12, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Huh?

Any reason pretty much any content added has been reverted or simply deleted? And not a single comment in talk? PētersV 01:07, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? See "Page history". If you can convert the cut and pasted texts into a summary that does not smell plagiarism and is related to the article title, you are very welcome. `'Míkka 01:14, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very well aware of page history, after all, that's how I saw all the whittling down to nothing. :-) I had just expected to see some discussion here. If it's simply plagiarism, that should be reasonably simple to remedy. PētersV 01:35, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This was a piece from a huge mess from this bunch, and not very imoportant to waste any time beyond reverting: just a bunch of newspaper reports about intentions of politicians. Nothing definite, i.e., suitable for wikipedia. If we start adding each and every move of every stateman from USA to Zamunda, it will be one big unreadable shitload of wikipedia. `'Míkka 04:35, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, you have to admire persistence! I need to get to the library in the next week or two for something else, I'll see what I can turn up that's more analysis than pronouncements. PētersV 01:39, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Names order

This is to mention, that in the bilateral relations boxes, will name first the name of the country itself, and AFTER it the name of the country with relations are discussed in the article. See relative articles {{Foreign relations of Moldova}}.

As example I always bring the German articles. Well, see the Foreign relations of Germany, also {{Foreign relations of Germany}}.

well, Moldo-German and not Germano-Moldovan, in the articles Foreign relations of Moldova, and vice-versa in articles with [[ Foreign relations of Germany...

A general rule can be formed in order do not unusual duplicate the articles.

--serhio ^talk 20:45, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In all articles like this one, countries' name are written after EU in bilateral relations boxes. Look at these articles please.. Azerbaijan and the European Union, Armenia and the European Union, Ukraine and the European Union, Norway and the European Union, Georgia and the European Union ... --Aegean Boy (talk) 18:30, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

unificaton with romania movement

maybe worth a mention? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.217.59.87 (talk) 23:57, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Recent events

I think, it's worth to follow recent events on this topic. There are already talks about association agreement and situation looks like preaty interesting. Btw. good source on this topic would be: http://moldpres.md/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.113.9.150 (talk) 15:31, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Georgia (country)–European Union relations which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 06:01, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Georgia–European Union relations which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 09:46, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New article?

Any else think that there should be an article titled "Accession of Moldova to the European Union", they're obviously intrested and so is the EU. Charles Essie (talk) 17:16, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Has there been a formal application yet? --Edroeh (talk) 22:04, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

i guess it's time now. --MiskoGe (talk) 12:24, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Moldova–European Union relations. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:54, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

eu

It is necessary to make changes to the article, excluding phrases like "official Chisinau is actively seeking to enter the EU." it is not true. Such a phrase would suit, for example, Albania or Georgia, where all the main parliamentary parties and where all the authorities have a real consensus on this issue. for example, in Albania, there really is an active desire in the EU. including broad popular support. In Moldova, the situation is very complicated. and society, and parties, and even authorities — the president, the government, the parliament, autonomous regional entities — all have directly opposite opinions about integration with the EU or vice versa with Russian structures and unions. therefore, please avoid using phrases in the article that “EU membership is the main foreign policy goal of Moldova.” it is not true. As of 2019, Moldova is so divided that it has no goal to join either the EU or the customs union with the Russian Federation 46.72.199.115 (talk) 13:20, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Map

Colours of different areas in orange and green? Could not have picked worse combo for colour blind readers 2A06:6880:222:2B00:110E:D8D9:5C79:61DD (talk) 06:28, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Granting a perspective

We're told that:

On 17 June 2022, the European Commission formally recommended that the European Council grant the Republic of Moldova the perspective to become a member of the European Union and candidate status for accession [...]

I'm lost. What does it mean, to grant a perspective?

I note that a reference is provided, but unfortunately I'm unable to read it. -- Hoary (talk) 23:42, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When the EU recognises a state has a EU perspective, it is effectively just acknowledging that it is a potential candidate for membership. See here: [2]. TDL (talk) 04:38, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for attempting to get the meaning into my thick head, TDL, but the only mention of "perspective" in that page (which of course ought to be authoritative) is "In 2008 the EU repeated its willingness to assist the economic and political development of Kosovo through a clear European perspective"; and sorry but the adjunct at the end (starting "though") means absolutely nothing to me. -- Hoary (talk) 04:50, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]