User talk:Plinul cel tanar

Disambiguation link notification for July 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Relationship between the Romanian Orthodox Church and the Iron Guard, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aromanian. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 07:17, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi [redacted]

(Redacted) Do you want to join the Intelligence task force, This is an invitation. Thanks Danielbughi999 (talk) 02:19, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Right.Plinul cel tanar (talk) 14:12, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:46, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Relationship between the Romanian Orthodox Church and the Iron Guard

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Relationship between the Romanian Orthodox Church and the Iron Guard you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 21:20, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Relationship between the Romanian Orthodox Church and the Iron Guard

The article Relationship between the Romanian Orthodox Church and the Iron Guard you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Relationship between the Romanian Orthodox Church and the Iron Guard for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 20:01, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Relationship between the Romanian Orthodox Church and the Iron Guard

The article Relationship between the Romanian Orthodox Church and the Iron Guard you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Relationship between the Romanian Orthodox Church and the Iron Guard for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 21:41, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 10

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Visarion Puiu, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page French.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 23

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Nicolae Macici, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page RFI.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Paliga, Vinereanu

Good evening!

I'm talking about your edit in Historical names of Transylvania. Paliga and Vinereanu are part of the few challengers of the Hungarian origin theory in Romania, as far as I know, the only notable in modern linguistics/historiography, and quite important for that reason. So why not include them in the Romanian view section? Unreliable source doesn't rule out someone from Wikipedia, or does it? Gyalu22 (talk) 19:35, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In most cases WP:Fringe does rule the source out of wikipedia unless it's notable enough to be discussed as as a fringe source. Vinereanu certainly isn't notable for anything. Paliga's case is debatable. His Dacianism might have just attracted enough attention to make him notable as a fringe source (see Dan Ungureanu's[1] text here[2]) ... although I would argue the contrary. Also, this is a slippery slope. There is a bunch of other "sources" out there. An Orthodox seminary teacher out there claims Ardeal derives from "har" (divine grace) and "deal"(hill). I'd rather err on the strict side here. Furthermore I don't understand why there is a "Romanian view" and a "Hungarian view" on this issue. Plinul cel tanar (talk) 02:19, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So we can exclude Vinereanu, but why Paliga? I think he's notable enough to be included in the article. WP:FRINGE writes this:

There are people who are notable enough to have articles included in Wikipedia solely on the basis of their advocacy of fringe beliefs. Notability can be determined by considering whether there are enough reliable and independent sources that discuss the person in a serious and extensive manner,

The link you've sent proves that my point. Gyalu22 (talk) 07:47, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notability can be determined by considering whether there are enough reliable and independent sources that discuss the person in a serious and extensive manner. I think one source in one article is not enough. Furthermore, Dan Ungureanu's text was published on a blog. A blog with major following but still a blog. If we had a research paper on pseudoscience referencing Paliga directly this would help... Plinul cel tanar (talk) 07:54, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I mean if a random lexicon with a legendary figurative explanation can go through the filter... Gyalu22 (talk) 13:24, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I won't make this my Alamo but hear me out. There is a difference between an obsolete source and a fringe source. An obsolete source may legitimately be presented because it reflects the state of knowledge at a certain moment in time. The Budapest Lexicon is a landmark in Romanian linguistics (it still has uses some uses in modern research but that's a different story). A contemporary, fringe, pseudo-scientific source should not be used because it fuels pseudoscience. It is only when the pseudo-science becomes notable per se that we present it as such. As a side note, I don't know if you realize how strong Drăganu's argument is. Lazăr Șăineanu in his celebrated 1929 dictionary already indicated only the Hungarian etymology. The "l" in Ardeliu is an inter-vowel "l", there is no way for it to have survived in Romanian from ancient times - see Rhotacism. This is a smoking gun proof that the word is a high medieval loan. Plinul cel tanar (talk) 15:02, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, thanks for giving a fair reason. Gyalu22 (talk) 17:45, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:45, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Michael the Brave

Michael the Brave has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 01:04, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]