509:, where the German-speaking population is significant, and I've never thought of it as disturbing or offensive that the German name of the town is also written out on the sign, or that it's mentioned in their articles in Knowledge. So I can't really understand why certain people consider it different. It may be some deep-seated fears or memories or whatever but it shouldn't be the matter of Knowledge but that of psychology (no offense intended). I think that in no way would that hurt the political integrity or sovereignty or whatever of Hungary or Romania, respectively; it's just being realistic.
452:
section). The alternative names DO exist and they are used by some of the population that lives in those counties. In some counties (Harghita and
Covasna) the part of the population that uses those names is more than 50%. About the possibility of "misleading the reader into thinking that administrative division has a legal status shared with Hungary", I agree that the lead paragraph should be formulated in such a way that to avoid this confusion (like Olessi suggested, for example). However, we should keep in mind that
686:- the convention is, there are no legacy names in a foreign language for county Mures (which is an administrative division of Romania, it cannot exist outside Romania). it does not "flow" through Hungary, county Mures of Romania was not a county of Hungary (it is an impossibility), there are no english maps using a hungarian name for county Mures, there are no english sources speaking of an administrative division of Hungary named Maros which is now an administrative division of Romania named Mures county.
415:), so I can't see why we need to reopen the discussion at all. I also think that the page on Knowledge naming conventions, though it is only proposed policy yet, makes things clear: alternative names belong in the lead, unless there is a separate section (likely the first one after the lead anyway) dealing with the name only, which in most cases wouldn't make sense, since there's nothing more to it than a Romanian and a Hungarian name (and maybe a German one in some cases).
700:
of the Mures county (or
Harghita county) where mention of the hungarian minority living in that county is given. It is that simple. There are no romanian or english documents using the hungarian name of Mures county, or Harghita county. i gave u google results 158 000 results for "Harghita county"(romanian name), and 12 000 results for "Hargita county" (hungarian name), barely 8% (and these are mainly pages on Hungarian servers, thus not dealing with english sources)
601:
more open-minded so this not an interethnic strife between
Hungarians and Romanians. This a question of tolerance and common European values versus old-fashioned nationalistic hatred with a wish to erase the language, culture and every sign of other peoples who lived or still live on the same territory. It should be noted that we are speaking about other alternative names of Transylvania also (Saxon, Roma, Serb, Ukrainian etc).
322:, for example, one can notice by the census that it, along with all the other counties in Transylvania was a part of Hungary for thousands of years, and is today 84.6% Hungarian. If one ever goes there they will see that almost all of the street signs are in Romanian and Hungarian as well. This whole attempt of deleting Hungarian names from these articles is seen by myself (and I am sure others) as an attempt to erase history. —
42:
781:
an administrative division of
Romania has a history outside of the state of ROmania (eg, a county could have had diferent borders or names within Romania, but its history does not coincide with the history of a county of Hungary, how do we treat then present day Bihor county in Romania and Hajdu-Bihar county in Hungary), while a historical region of Romania can have a history outside Romania
438:
Knowledge should offer information to the reader, but information should be offered in a way that is not misleading. I think that providing a hungarian name for an administrative division of
Romania is misleading the reader into thinking that administrative division has a legal status shared with Hungary. I was busy for the last year, i didnt make any edits to wikipedia during that period.
807:
demonstrated earlier where I needed to click through a bunch of
Kingdom of Hungary county articles in order to find which county corresponded to present-day Harghita. Also you don't make any sense. What does it mean that an administrative division of Romania cannot have a history outside of the state of Romania but a historical region of Romania can? --
983:
finally getting a move on cleaning up, turning relevant, and making accurate and non-partisan all
Transylvania-related articles. We have an opportunity to reach a consensus on what is factual, not on what is symbolic: as a Romanian, I aim to help along in bringing these pages to a higher level of quality and to indisputable accuracy, with focus on what
718:
translation from the first paragraph of the Mures county article (also since
Hungarians are a minority in that county). The article unfortunately lacks historical information and it was only from looking at the Knowledge articles "on the Hungarian side" that I found the Romanian Mures county has an historical connection to the old
977:
Also, the mediator has noted that it finding the connection between, say, Harghita and Csik is difficult. It certainly is. The articles certainly need some sort of
History section, and a link to the former administrative units (with explanations of administrative changes in-between). As it is, I have
780:
well, this is very simple, i consider
Britannica has expertise, and Britannica gives no alternate name in hungarian language for an administrative division of Romania, as it also does not give alternative name in romanian language for an administrative division of the Kingdom of Hungary. I dont think
758:
In all, I think this case is a waste of time because it just 1) demonstrates people's inabilities to creatively compromise, 2) demonstrates attempts to obfuscate historical information for the sake of nationalistic POV, and 3) is another thinly disguised and tired old "Hungarians vs. Romanians on the
485:
and his own brand of territorial marking. As a Romanian, I do not feel represented by Criztu's version of history and geography - just in case a mediator may think this is between "what Romanians know" and "what others know". Also note that the only thing Criztu cites in the way of an argument is his
944:
switch to Romanian when they have to use the name of the county in plain conversation!). Thus, the Hungarian name of the county is a present-day reference, and not a reference to the Hungarian counties of yesteryear! To the notion that "they should not be used because thay are not official, I answer
717:
I understand Criztu's point now. I agree that it is impossible for there to be an alternate, historical name for a county in Romania that was created later and does not share the same borders as the historical divisions of the same area. To that end I would support Criztu in removing the Hungarian
418:
The personal part of it is that I think the very existence of Hungarian names in Romania-related articles hurts Criztu's (a bit maybe too intensive) patriotic feelings, a fact that I can understand even if I disagree; but Knowledge is an encyclopedia, not group therapy, so this won't prevent me from
699:
I have nothing against informing the english reader how the hungarian minoriy living in Mures county calls that couunty, but the hungarian name is not an alternate name, and by alternate name i understand a name that is used in english sources. I proposed to move the hungarian name to the paragraph
600:
etc. I don't think there is anybody who really wish to erase all this information collected by thousands of wikipedians. The same should be applied to Hungarian names of Transylvania even if a user (or some users) are not able to tolerate them. I'm happy to see that other Romanian editors are much
836:
When an english citisen travels to Romania, buys a map of Romania, made in England. The name of Mures county is written on that map, not the hungarian name Maros county. When an english citizen watches a report about Romania on CNN, he sees a text Mures county, not hungarian Maros. When an english
500:
I think it's natural if a Hungarian settlement or county has a considerable German-speaking population, the German name variant should be mentioned in the first paragraph, and similarly I'd think it's natural if a Romanian settlement or county has a considerable Hungarian-speaking population, the
841:
for more. There is a hungarian ethnic minority living in Mures county, as there is a hungarian minority living in London. Yet, the presence of an ethnic minority living in London does not make Knowledge list the name used by that minority when refering to London as an alternative name of London.
518:
To repeat my remark that someone quoted above: "Ultimately, the issue here is what serves the reader." The focus here happens to be on counties, but the issues strike me as being the same for the many geographic entities in Transylvania: the Romanian names are certainly the official ones, should
451:
I would like to add my opinion on this subject, if I may. The fact that "Britannica does not offer an alternative hungarian name for a county of Romania" does not mean that alternative names for Romanian counties do not exist (as Criztu implied in the "What would you like to change about that?"
982:
page, where I had provided a link to the counties of Hungary. Let's see if you guess who started a mediation against me for "POV"... why, the very person who requested this one! I ask meditors not to give in to an attempt of obscuring relevant data. I consider this the very first requirement to
825:
That whole historical argument is totally unreasonable, and I am sure that Criztu knows this as much as anybody. These names are not mentioned because they are "historical" (the pre-Trianon counties were not always the same), or had any connection with the state of Hungary but because Hungarian
931:
I note that Criztu has let a spurious conclusion pass into acceptance, an I need to stress what precisely is bogus in one claim of his. County X in Romania has name Y in Hungarian; we happen to note that name Y was also used by a county (indeed, with separate borders etc.) during the time when
744:
mentions the Romanian name for that historical county in the first paragraph when there's no source from which we can deduce that it was an administrative division under Romanian suzerainty. And unlike with Mures county, Hungarians are the majority in Harghita so it might be too biased with a
996:
Looking over what I have posted just above, I wonder if I have made my point obvious. Let me reduce it to this statement: I support both a Hungarian name in the lead and reference in the History section to the county in the Kingdom of Hungary. I think it is common sense, valuable information,
437:
This is an effort from my part to resolve a dispute on naming convention of Administrative divisions of Romania. I think the convention that Britannica uses in this matter is best suited for Knowledge also. Britannica does not offer an alternative hungarian name for a county of Romania. Yes,
353:
While I personally feel that including the regional Hungarian name for a county is most useful in the introduction, I have no objection to it being listed later in the article instead. I have always maintained that commonly used alternate names should be listed, however. Here is a possible
806:
Are you rewriting the Encylopedia Britannica or writing Knowledge? I like what Jmabel wrote about serving the interests of the readers, not the editors. To not make any connections (wiki-links) between present day territories and historical territories is a disservice to the reader as I
611:
I haven't been part of this discussion, but I'd like to add that in addition to alternative geographical names being mentioned in the "lead" on other Knowledge geographical articles, alternative names (and spellings) also appear in the "lead" for other types of articles too. See
284:
While using the talk page of the article in question to solve a dispute is encouraged to involve a larger audience, feel free to discuss the case below if that is not possible. Other mediators are also encouraged to join in on the discussion as Knowledge is based on consensus.
410:
In fact, this discussion was already over a year ago, with Criztu being the only one against having the Hungarian names out of all those who ever edited any article about a judet in Romania. Even some Romanian editors seem to openly disagree with Criztu's standpoint (see e.g.
957:
article: "Breton is not an official language of France", with the same officially-sanctioned level of bilingualism: " the regional and departmental authorities do use Breton to a very limited extent insofar as they feel able, for example in signage"). The names' usage
842:
sure, you can put information on how all nations of the planet call Mures county or London, there is enough space in the article. But providing these names as alternative names for Mures county or London i consider a mess, a propaganda, a lack of standard.
1009:
All the Transylvanian county articles became battlegrounds with a lot of reverts, heated comments, appearance of sockpuppet-like users, page protections. There is a Hungarian proverb (I don't know the English version): Trees are known by their fruit.
739:
after multiple clicks because the Harghita county article, like all the Romanian county articles, lacks a history section so it isn't easy to find which historic division Harghita is composed of. I find it interesting that the article on
910:- this is oversimplification, to say the least. There have often been edit wars around some touchy topics, but the overwhelming majority of registered Hungarian and Romanian editors who edit here regularly respect each other. Also,
1084:
If one wishes to begin historical research with the Knowledge then one certainly must readily see the Hungarian names as these were almost exclusively used before 1918. Not including them would diminish the value of Knowledge.
671:- the convention is, hungarian name is a legacy name, meaning there are recent english documents (whithin the last 100 years) (like Britannica old editions, english maps, etc.) refering to this city with its hungarian name.
620:, etc. It also seems it would be a hinderance to someone researching to remove historical and common alternative names if someone didn't know the current name to a place. I suppose there should also be redirects... --
224:
I am taking this case. I would invite users Hottentot, Kiss, and Olessi to please make a submission below in Discussion as to why Hungarian names should be in the leading paragraph of an article about Romania.
192:". I propose the names by which Hungarian ethnic minority refer to these counties be given in the Population section. The other party propose having the Hungarian names in the leading paragraph.
576:
It is commonly accepted that Knowledge mentions alternative geographical names - both the historical and the present-day used ones in the lead. There are countless examples for this, see
918:(see the diff I cited above), both Romanian editors, have disagreed with Criztu on this particular point, a clear sign that this dispute is not simply between Hungarians and Romanians.
937:
997:
provided for the sake of thoroughly presenting a topic. I also think that Criztu's claim that "the Hungarian name=the Hungarian administrative tradition" is bogus agitprop.
422:
If it helps, the leads can be reworded per Olessi's proposal above, or in any other way, so that it emphasizes the non-official nature of the Hungarian names somewhat more.
882:
Having hungarian names it's a bullshit. No need for hungarian irredentist POV here. Koiule go away, you're just a jewish hungarian from Transylvania. You told me once. --
722:
or Marosszék. So I recommend the addition of a history section (in all the Romanian county articles) like can be seen on other Hungarian county articles as a compromise.
350:, specifically his closer: "Ultimately, the issue here is what serves the reader, and in this case I cannot imagine how removal of Hungarian names serves the reader."
481:
From what I can see, Criztu is, yet again, the only one to oppose an existing text, without making (or seemingly aiming to make) a point that is not linked to pure
108:
of the mediation case by anybody but the mediator is likely to be reverted. If you are not satisfied with the mediation procedure please submit your complaints to
1104:
1089:
1078:
1062:
1044:
1030:
1014:
1001:
991:
970:
925:
900:
886:
876:
859:
846:
830:
811:
785:
763:
704:
690:
675:
660:
637:
624:
605:
571:
547:
513:
490:
468:
442:
431:
405:
328:
313:
258:
243:
234:
131:
855:
There are maps sold in Cluj ideal for foreign tourists that do indeed show the name of everything in both Romanian and Hungarian, and German where applicable.
303:. To me it seems that Criztu is pretty isolated on the view that historical names should not be mentioned in the lead. Also, he hasn't edited since the 19th.
940:). All of this adds does not contradict the simple and obvious fact that the present-day counties have names in Hungarian: simply because Hungarian-speakers
401:
Also, it was a little surprising to find myself listed here as involved "on the other side", considering I last was involved in the discussion a year ago.
826:
minority living in present-day Romania use them. They are not official names but widely used alternatives by the most numerous minority of Transylvania.
1095:
I am closing this case as there has been only one update in almost the last three months. Anyone can ask me on my talk page if they need further help.
837:
citizen sends a postcard to Romania, sends it to Mures county, not hungarian Maros. etc. these are modern usages of the name of Mures county, read
1119:
1070:
I didn't know that it's Biblical, my parents simply used liked this - although we are non-religious people from Bp. So the English version is "
21:
109:
394:
464:
are three different things. Using a hungarian name for something does not necessarily mean that it is linked to Hungary.
182:
78:
202:
I would like to explain them that there are no alternative names for the names of administrative divisions of Romania.
519:
determine the article location, and should come first, but that's it. By way of comparison, the first paragraph for
932:
Transylvania was part of Hungary. Please note that counties in Hungary with names that fall into category Y have
342:
has now agreed that the Hungarian names can be included, but should not be listed in the beginning. I agree with
335:
334:
It might be helpful to note the original dispute concerned whether or not to include the Hungarian names at all (
300:
33:
17:
104:
in disputes. If you submit complaints or insults your edits are likely to be removed by the mediator, any other
872:
guideline that is against mentioning alternative names. No wonder as it is customary all over wikipedia...
869:
838:
883:
539:
simply because it is in Spain, even though the Spanish-language name no longer has any legal status. -
908:"another thinly disguised and tired old ‘Hungarians vs. Romanians on the English Knowledge’ battle"
187:
97:
945:
by joining my message with the 1,000 posts that have made it clear why this is by no means a rule
386:
105:
249:
Not really. I'm closing with the option for anyone to message me if they want more discussion.
666:
633:
I will present what I think is a Naming Convention of a real encyclopedia, namely Britannica.
987:
may wish to know, not on localist arguments of zero quality (be they Romanian or Hungarian).
1100:
656:
an alternative hungarian name used in english (on english maps, where Mures enters Hungary).
544:
520:
292:
254:
230:
72:
1059:
954:
922:
428:
319:
143:
681:
650:
river (in romanian; Maros in hungarian) rises in Romania and flows into Tisza in Hungary.
953:
and other millions of articles out there - in case this is not clear, I quote from the
893:
597:
564:
378:
160:
1052:
1113:
1026:
856:
808:
760:
621:
324:
309:
240:
979:
915:
652:- the convention is, since Mures flows through both Romania and Hungary, the river
382:
101:
1096:
1086:
843:
782:
719:
701:
687:
672:
657:
634:
554:
540:
510:
465:
439:
402:
343:
339:
250:
226:
213:
168:
156:
128:
68:
735:
But then again this Case is in reference to Harghita county... So now I found
41:
1075:
1056:
1041:
1011:
919:
897:
873:
827:
602:
585:
568:
506:
425:
164:
998:
988:
978:
tried to make this relevant connection available in at least one point: the
967:
911:
613:
581:
502:
487:
482:
536:
385:. Although it is not officially known as such, the county is also known in
745:
minority POV to not include the Hungarian spelling in the first paragraph.
950:
647:
589:
370:
366:
531:; the Cambodians last ruled that region in the 16th century. Similarly,
593:
374:
91:
Mediation Case: 2006-07-17 names of administrative divisions of Romania
669:
city (in romanian; Marosvasarhely in hungarian) is a city in Romania.
617:
577:
532:
535:(in the Autonomous Region of Catalonia, Spain) mentions the Spanish
592:
etc. This is also common in Hungarian geographical articles like
208:
Would you prefer we work discreetly? If so, how can we reach you?
741:
736:
501:
Hungarian variant should be included there. I've been e.g. in
270:
This section is for listing and discussing compromise offers.
949:(see the alternative names provided for the French region of
318:
Ok, I guess I see what you're saying. Anyways, if you take
185:
that is also the Britannica naming convention, by which "
412:
347:
299:
We actually had a huge discussion on this last year at
190:
dont have alternative names given in the lead paragraph
381:, is located in the east of the historical region of
1055:... I don't remember a Hungarian proverb like that.
938:
Category:Kingdom of Hungary counties in Transylvania
1020:
Is it "the apple doesn't fall far from the tree"? (
64:
56:
48:
32:
1040:. That's the case with Criztu's campaign I think.
419:restoring the Hungarian names to the articles.
966:belong in the lead. This has gone far enough.
8:
198:What would you like to change about that?
563:- Sockpuppet of permanently banned user
365:
29:
947:as long as the name's use is relevant
7:
377:. The county, whose capital city is
305:Do you suggest we have another vote?
1072:By their fruits you will know them
28:
1022:Az alma nem esik messze a fájától
553:I think Critzu is right here. --
348:comments at Talk:Harghita County
139:Where is the issue taking place?
40:
1038:Gyümölcséről ismerszik meg a fa
759:English Knowledge" battle. --
239:Is this case still active? --
110:Knowledge talk:Mediation Cabal
1:
1120:Knowledge Medcab closed cases
212:i prefer total transparency.
1105:13:48, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
1090:05:00, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
914:(see his opinion above) and
259:13:48, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
244:14:53, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
523:not only mentions the name
1136:
1079:16:36, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
1063:10:20, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
1045:23:30, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
1031:23:19, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
1015:23:00, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
1002:23:29, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
992:20:29, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
971:20:05, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
926:09:52, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
901:17:25, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
887:08:23, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
877:17:20, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
860:18:30, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
847:07:31, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
831:23:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
812:23:43, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
786:21:13, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
764:20:54, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
705:19:52, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
691:19:52, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
676:19:54, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
661:19:54, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
638:19:52, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
572:11:00, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
962:for Hungarian names, and
625:16:02, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
606:22:35, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
561:14:42, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
548:21:05, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
527:, but also the Cambodian
514:20:35, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
491:20:19, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
469:17:16, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
443:15:32, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
432:10:04, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
406:22:10, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
336:Talk:Harghita County/Vote
329:21:30, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
314:21:08, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
301:Talk:Harghita County/Vote
235:20:17, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
132:16:03, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
39:
34:Knowledge Mediation Cabal
18:Knowledge:Mediation Cabal
892:Good to see you again,
870:Knowledge: Lead section
684:is a county of Romania.
936:(you may find them in
839:Knowledge:Lead section
809:Stacey Doljack Borsody
761:Stacey Doljack Borsody
622:Stacey Doljack Borsody
460:and the country named
1036:No, I thought about:
868:There is nothing in
395:Hungarian population
1074:", I almost hit :)
393:by its substantial
373:) in the center of
188:Counties of Romania
120:Request Information
102:Talk Page Etiquette
98:Knowledge:Etiquette
458:hungarian language
1065:
265:Compromise offers
220:Mediator response
183:naming convention
181:I am proposing a
171:on the other side
159:on one side, and
85:
84:
1127:
1050:
1029:
559:
521:Ho Chi Minh City
454:hungarian people
368:
364:
327:
312:
293:User talk:Stifle
177:What's going on?
126:Request made by:
44:
30:
1135:
1134:
1130:
1129:
1128:
1126:
1125:
1124:
1110:
1109:
1051:Maybe you mean
1025:
955:Breton language
555:
369:) is a county (
362:
359:Harghita County
323:
320:Harghita County
308:
287:
281:
272:
267:
222:
151:Who's involved?
144:Harghita County
122:
114:
96:Please observe
93:
26:
25:
24:
12:
11:
5:
1133:
1131:
1123:
1122:
1112:
1111:
1108:
1107:
1082:
1081:
1067:
1066:
1034:
1033:
1007:
1006:
1005:
1004:
974:
973:
934:separate pages
904:
903:
880:
879:
865:
864:
863:
862:
850:
849:
823:
822:
821:
820:
819:
818:
817:
816:
815:
814:
795:
794:
793:
792:
791:
790:
789:
788:
771:
770:
769:
768:
767:
766:
751:
750:
749:
748:
747:
746:
728:
727:
726:
725:
724:
723:
710:
709:
708:
707:
694:
693:
678:
663:
643:
642:
641:
640:
628:
627:
598:Gyula, Hungary
498:
497:
496:
495:
494:
493:
474:
473:
472:
471:
446:
445:
399:
398:
379:Miercurea-Ciuc
338:); apparently
332:
331:
316:
297:
282:
280:
277:
276:
275:
268:
266:
263:
262:
261:
221:
218:
217:
216:
210:
204:
203:
200:
194:
193:
179:
173:
172:
161:User:Hottentot
153:
147:
146:
141:
135:
134:
121:
118:
116:
94:
92:
89:
83:
82:
66:
62:
61:
58:
54:
53:
50:
46:
45:
37:
36:
27:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1132:
1121:
1118:
1117:
1115:
1106:
1102:
1098:
1094:
1093:
1092:
1091:
1088:
1080:
1077:
1073:
1069:
1068:
1064:
1061:
1058:
1054:
1049:
1048:
1047:
1046:
1043:
1039:
1032:
1028:
1023:
1019:
1018:
1017:
1016:
1013:
1003:
1000:
995:
994:
993:
990:
986:
981:
976:
975:
972:
969:
965:
961:
956:
952:
948:
943:
939:
935:
930:
929:
928:
927:
924:
921:
917:
913:
909:
902:
899:
895:
891:
890:
889:
888:
885:
884:203.109.33.34
878:
875:
871:
867:
866:
861:
858:
854:
853:
852:
851:
848:
845:
840:
835:
834:
833:
832:
829:
813:
810:
805:
804:
803:
802:
801:
800:
799:
798:
797:
796:
787:
784:
779:
778:
777:
776:
775:
774:
773:
772:
765:
762:
757:
756:
755:
754:
753:
752:
743:
738:
734:
733:
732:
731:
730:
729:
721:
716:
715:
714:
713:
712:
711:
706:
703:
698:
697:
696:
695:
692:
689:
685:
683:
679:
677:
674:
670:
668:
664:
662:
659:
655:
651:
649:
645:
644:
639:
636:
632:
631:
630:
629:
626:
623:
619:
615:
610:
609:
608:
607:
604:
599:
595:
591:
587:
583:
579:
574:
573:
570:
566:
562:
560:
558:
550:
549:
546:
542:
538:
534:
530:
526:
522:
516:
515:
512:
508:
504:
492:
489:
486:"I propose".
484:
480:
479:
478:
477:
476:
475:
470:
467:
463:
459:
455:
450:
449:
448:
447:
444:
441:
436:
435:
434:
433:
430:
427:
423:
420:
416:
414:
408:
407:
404:
396:
392:
388:
384:
380:
376:
372:
367:
360:
357:
356:
355:
354:alternative:
351:
349:
345:
341:
337:
330:
326:
321:
317:
315:
311:
306:
302:
298:
295:
294:
289:
288:
286:
278:
274:
273:
271:
264:
260:
256:
252:
248:
247:
246:
245:
242:
237:
236:
232:
228:
219:
215:
211:
209:
206:
205:
201:
199:
196:
195:
191:
189:
184:
180:
178:
175:
174:
170:
166:
162:
158:
154:
152:
149:
148:
145:
142:
140:
137:
136:
133:
130:
127:
124:
123:
119:
117:
113:
111:
107:
103:
99:
90:
88:
80:
77:
74:
70:
67:
63:
59:
55:
51:
47:
43:
38:
35:
31:
23:
19:
1083:
1071:
1053:Matthew 7:16
1037:
1035:
1021:
1008:
984:
980:Transylvania
963:
959:
946:
941:
933:
907:
905:
881:
824:
682:Mureş County
680:
665:
653:
646:
575:
556:
552:
551:
528:
524:
517:
499:
466:Razvan Socol
461:
457:
453:
424:
421:
417:
409:
400:
390:
383:Transylvania
358:
352:
333:
304:
291:Copied from
290:
283:
269:
238:
223:
207:
197:
186:
176:
155:at least me
150:
138:
125:
115:
95:
86:
75:
57:Request date
960:is relevant
720:Maros-Torda
667:Târgu-Mureş
344:User:Jmabel
340:User:Criztu
214:User:Criztu
169:User:Olessi
157:User:Criztu
106:refactoring
65:Mediator(s)
985:the reader
586:Burgenland
529:Prey Nokor
279:Discussion
165:User:Kissl
894:Bonaparte
614:Fish_soup
582:Jerusalem
565:Bonaparte
503:Budakeszi
483:semiotics
413:this diff
387:Hungarian
1114:Category
1027:Khoikhoi
951:Bretagne
857:CRCulver
590:Sardinia
325:Khoikhoi
310:Khoikhoi
241:Ideogram
79:contribs
20: |
916:Ronline
507:Solymár
462:Hungary
391:Hargita
375:Romania
60:Unknown
1097:Stifle
1087:Istvan
942:do not
844:Criztu
783:Criztu
702:Criztu
688:Criztu
673:Criztu
658:Criztu
635:Criztu
618:Cumans
578:Aachen
557:Eliade
541:Jmabel
537:Lérida
533:Lleida
525:Saigon
511:Adam78
440:Criztu
403:Olessi
251:Stifle
227:Stifle
129:Criztu
69:Stifle
52:closed
49:Status
1076:Zello
1042:Zello
1012:Zello
898:Zello
874:Zello
828:Zello
648:Mureş
603:Zello
569:Zello
371:judeţ
22:Cases
16:<
1101:talk
1060:issL
1024:). —
999:Dahn
989:Dahn
968:Dahn
964:does
923:issL
912:Dahn
896:...
742:Csik
737:Csik
594:Pécs
545:Talk
505:and
488:Dahn
429:issL
363:IPA:
255:talk
231:talk
100:and
73:talk
906:Re
654:has
389:as
346:'s
87:]]
1116::
1103:)
616:,
596:,
588:,
584:,
580:,
567:.
543:|
456:,
257:)
233:)
167:,
163:,
112:.
1099:(
1057:K
920:K
426:K
397:.
361:(
307:—
296:.
253:(
229:(
81:)
76:·
71:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
