Talk:Transylvania: Difference between revisions
→Etymology of Siebenbuergen: Added topic of trimming down the introduction. |
m Signing comment by Samueldee - "→Etymology of Siebenbuergen: Added topic of trimming down the introduction." |
||
Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
== Introduction Section == |
== Introduction Section == |
||
Most of the good information in the "introduction section" is covered in the "Origin of the Romanians" and "History of Transylvania" pages. This has to be trimmed down. Very little has citations. In the end, it does no good for Transylvania's current residents to do this. The controversies about historic ethnic dominance of the region can go on, just move them elsewhere. The introduction section of this page shouldn't be a forum for this kind of discussion. It should prepare the reader for learning about Transylvania, an interesting, beautiful place that has been inhabited by people for a long long time and like all such places it has a rich history of inter-ethnic cooperation and conflict. It has mountains, forests, engangered species, special crops, dances, rivers, old cities, and cultural relics from pre-historic, roman-era, medeival, and renaissance times. Many of its people practice a simple way of life with a high level of civlization, but a low environmental impact. Native wild vegetation includes fruits and nuts that are now enjoyed worldwide. The dairy products are superb especially when the milk comes from the local bivolitas. Its people practice a variety of religions and speak a variety of languages. It is a peaceful place with good healthcare, people like living here. It is a place with a large number of skilled workers who speak English ... get the picture? My question is why does the page have to start with ethnic conflict? If the people on all sides of the conflict really value what they are fighting for, the land, then why can't they talk about how nice it is there instead of who was there first? |
Most of the good information in the "introduction section" is covered in the "Origin of the Romanians" and "History of Transylvania" pages. This has to be trimmed down. Very little has citations. In the end, it does no good for Transylvania's current residents to do this. The controversies about historic ethnic dominance of the region can go on, just move them elsewhere. The introduction section of this page shouldn't be a forum for this kind of discussion. It should prepare the reader for learning about Transylvania, an interesting, beautiful place that has been inhabited by people for a long long time and like all such places it has a rich history of inter-ethnic cooperation and conflict. It has mountains, forests, engangered species, special crops, dances, rivers, old cities, and cultural relics from pre-historic, roman-era, medeival, and renaissance times. Many of its people practice a simple way of life with a high level of civlization, but a low environmental impact. Native wild vegetation includes fruits and nuts that are now enjoyed worldwide. The dairy products are superb especially when the milk comes from the local bivolitas. Its people practice a variety of religions and speak a variety of languages. It is a peaceful place with good healthcare, people like living here. It is a place with a large number of skilled workers who speak English ... get the picture? My question is why does the page have to start with ethnic conflict? If the people on all sides of the conflict really value what they are fighting for, the land, then why can't they talk about how nice it is there instead of who was there first? <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Samueldee|Samueldee]] ([[User talk:Samueldee|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Samueldee|contribs]]) 23:04, 4 May 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
Revision as of 23:05, 4 May 2011
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
European history B‑class High‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Romania B‑class Top‑importance | |||||||||||||
|
Etymology of Siebenbuergen
As far as I know, the meaning of "Siebenbürgen" is not exactly known. It is suspected, that it might stem from the seven chairs.
TakWah (talk) 13:45, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
Introduction Section
Most of the good information in the "introduction section" is covered in the "Origin of the Romanians" and "History of Transylvania" pages. This has to be trimmed down. Very little has citations. In the end, it does no good for Transylvania's current residents to do this. The controversies about historic ethnic dominance of the region can go on, just move them elsewhere. The introduction section of this page shouldn't be a forum for this kind of discussion. It should prepare the reader for learning about Transylvania, an interesting, beautiful place that has been inhabited by people for a long long time and like all such places it has a rich history of inter-ethnic cooperation and conflict. It has mountains, forests, engangered species, special crops, dances, rivers, old cities, and cultural relics from pre-historic, roman-era, medeival, and renaissance times. Many of its people practice a simple way of life with a high level of civlization, but a low environmental impact. Native wild vegetation includes fruits and nuts that are now enjoyed worldwide. The dairy products are superb especially when the milk comes from the local bivolitas. Its people practice a variety of religions and speak a variety of languages. It is a peaceful place with good healthcare, people like living here. It is a place with a large number of skilled workers who speak English ... get the picture? My question is why does the page have to start with ethnic conflict? If the people on all sides of the conflict really value what they are fighting for, the land, then why can't they talk about how nice it is there instead of who was there first? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Samueldee (talk • contribs) 23:04, 4 May 2011 (UTC)