Talk:Târgu Mureş

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Extremely POV

I had to remove the sentence suggesting that "Fascist Hungary's anti-Romanian and anti-Semetic policies seriously undermined the cities economic and demographic development" this is incredibly biased and lacks any factual basis. There is no mention of Ceauşsecu's anti-Hungarian policies under his leadership, and his systematic dilution of the Hungarian population by bringing in migrants from south-eastern Romania.Sch. Dávid

"Ceausescu bringing in migrants from outside Transsylvania, in order to dillute the Hungarian minority" is a well known urban legend in Transsylvania, perpetrated by Hungarian extremists and belived generally by illiterate Hungarians. Of course, during the last 90 years, 550.000 Romanians from South and East settled in Transsylvania and 250.000 Romanians from Transsylvania settled in South and East Romania. The balance (difference) of abb. 300.000 results in a migratory increase of 4% of the populatiaon of Transsylvania. The explication is simple: Transsylvania has a population density of 69 inhabitants per square km and large mineral ressources, many industrial job opportunities, etc. The South Eastern regions of Romania have a population density of 107 inhabitants per square km and fewer oportunities for industrial employment. Internal, economical motivated migrations within a country are common place in the world: Rheinland in Germany, Manchester and Glasgow areas in UK, Florida, California, Alaska and Texas in US, Provence in France, Northen Italy, etc, etc.

A the statistical archives revealed, most of the incoming Romanians settled in cities whitout Hungarian majorities and found employment in industry. Moreover, there is no trace of communist involvment in the migratory trend which started in fact long before communism (during the inter-wars period). Therefore PLEASE REMOVE IMMEDIATLY THE CRAP PARAGRAPHS ABOUT ROMANIAN COLONISATION OF TARGU MURES !! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.105.123.228 (talk) 13:59, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I do think that there is no bilingual institut operating in Targu Mures.

[edit] POV?

Some of this seems a bit POV, especially the paragraph that begins, "In March 1990..." The person who wrote this is obviously trying to be even-handed, but on delicate matters like this, it would probably be better to cite conflicting view from responsible sources. -- Jmabel | Talk 01:31, Nov 18, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] POV2

The following paragraphs are extremely POV:

"After 1918 the city of Târgu Mureş, like the rest of Transylvania, was taken out of the control of the Austro-Hungarian empire and become part of Romania. As a consequence it started to have a significant economic success that lasted until World War II. The old provincial appearance changed greatly in this period. The spectacular city hall was built thanks to the economic success of the 1920s.

From 1940, under the Second Vienna Award, the city of Mureş was temporarily occupied by then-fascist Hungary. The anti-Semitic and anti-Romanian policy promoted by fascist Hungary seriously undermined the economic and demographic potential of the city. It re-entered the Romanian administration after 1944 when the Romanian army succeeded in liberating it."

During the period in question, the huge majority of the inhabitants were Hungarians, so it's unlikely they objected to Hungarian rule and that they felt liberated by Romanian forces. --Tamas 15:43, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

There is some true in it, but I agree that is written from the romanian POV. It should be re-written in a more neutral way. MihaiC 19:26, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] 1944

The entry originally stated Romanian forces liberated TM in 1944. While Romanians living there must have indeed felt liberated, Hungarians (who were at the time a dominant majority in the city) probably did not, to put it mildly. So liberated seems highly POV in this context, therefore I changed it to more neutral reoccupied.--Tamas 22:05, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Population

I note that someone recently slightly changed the population number (and what percentage are Magyar). We could use a citation for both of these numbers (total and %), though these are certainly not way out of line. -- Jmabel | Talk 21:41, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)

I changed them too and added a citation. Staniol 04:44, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Supression of minorities

The article talks about the "anti-Romanian policy promoted by Hungary" in 1940-1944, and rightly so. However, there is not a single word about the anti-Hungarian policies of the nationalist-communist regime from 195x to 1989. This is a gross imbalance which we have to address somehow. Any ideas?--Tamas 30 June 2005 15:26 (UTC)

[edit] Comments on Tamas' addition

Tamas, it's very good that you explained the demographic change, but there's one word that should be changed, because it doesn't fit the dictionary definition:

immigrant n.
A person who leaves one country to settle permanently in another.

Also, it would need a bit of clarification on the origin of those Romanian people: In early 20th century, in most regions of Transylvania (with the notable exception of the Szekely land), Romanians had a majority in rural areas, while the Hungarians in the cities. With the industrialization, cities grew and people from around the villages around the cities moved in the cities and changed the ethnic balance. This has not happened in areas where there were compact populations of Hungarians, both in rural in urban areas, like the Szekely Land, where the ethnic balance is pretty much unchanged. bogdan ʤjuʃkə | Talk 30 June 2005 16:33 (UTC)

Well, I just found out that there is already information about this in the article, a the end of paragraph 5. And I think that's enough, I mean, Criztu got really crazy about my addition, so I cut it, I mean, it's already there, in a shorter form, so there is no need to overemphasize it. Off the record, the funny thing is that Targu Mures is in the traditional Szekely Land, although in a sense it is on the brink of that region. So I agree that this process was generally a natural one, but in the case of TM, there were some manipulations, so I heard, like many workers were actually moved in from the Old Kingdom. But of course I can't prove it. And also, if you look at Miercurea Ciuc, pre-1920 it was something like 95% Hungarian, and now it's only 80%, although it is in the middle of a compact area. So, in short, the main reason was really this natural phenomenon you referred to, but probably there were some manipulations as well. But anyway, I'm fine with the formulation at the end of paragraph 5.--Tamas 30 June 2005 22:05 (UTC)

According to the 1992 census there were 51.66% ethnic Hungarians in Targu-Mures, yet in 2002 that percent dropped to 46.68 (in just 10 years hmm), do you suppose that this is also the result of some governmental scheme? Regarding Miercurea Ciuc, if I remember correctly a military garrison was formed there, couple that with the romanian speaking people (because most locals didn't speak romanian) brought into local administration by the communist regime, and take into account the fact that the city had a rather small population, and I think you'll be able to account for the most part of the missing percents (not all). In any case, since you've already agreed i removed that sentence. Staniol 05:26, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Felix Moldovan

Felix Moldovan listed as a native: may I assume that's the jazz drummer? Probably not a unique name. - Jmabel | Talk 01:31, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

The name (the combination) is not that common, in any case that young drummer is not famous and certainly doesn't belong in the same sentence with the other names. I never heard of another notable Felix Moldovan either. The user who made the addition also seems to have other random clownish edits (like this one or this). I'm removing it.

[edit] Panorama

The panorama was moved to the bottom with the comment "moved picture below according to Wiki's rule". What rule would that be? -- Jmabel | Talk 23:44, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

The famous Wiki Panorama Rule. :-) bogdan 23:50, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
All the pages concerning cities begin with info box. There is somewhere this rule. I've seen this reason somewhere. Still searching. Bonaparte talk 05:56, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hyphenated name

Hi. I noticed that Jmabel moved the page from Târgu Mureş to Târgu-Mureş. Is there any reason for this? The town is often written with the hyphen, but often also without. I don't object to the move, I just think that the hyphenated form may be less common (and stylistically, it is quite questionable, even if common, to hyphenate toponyms, in the form Miercurea-Ciuc, Târgu-Neamţ, etc.) Thanks, Ronline ✉ 06:08, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

The correct name is is with "-" like in the case of "Cluj-Napoca". I agree that there must be a redirect link from Târgu Mureş to Târgu-Mureş. Bonaparte talk 07:24, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Move was based on the fact that that was how it was written in the article. I figured the title should match the article. - Jmabel | Talk 06:51, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

You have no idea what is the official name of the city. You are just playing with the name. The official name of the city is Tîrgu Mureş. You can't change it just because the Romanian orthography changed. The name of a city can be changed only by the government's decision. Even a change in a person's name requires the approval from the Ministry of the Interior. There is no hyphen in it. There is no "â" in it. Tell me, your name changes when there is a change in the orthography? You are contributing to this article and you even don't know the correct name. The example with "Târgu-Neamţ" is also incorrect. Those who hold a birth certificate or a driving license from Tîrgu Mureş, can confirm that the name is written like this: Tîrgu Mureş, even after 1989. So PLEASE stop playing with the name of the city.

on the city hall site [1] (the reference site) it's spelled Tîrgu-Mureş, while on the county council site [2] it's called Târgu Mures. I believe the later is wrong. If both the city hall and the county council are wrong, then it wouldn't be a big deal if wikipedia is wrong too. Qyd 22:35, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

the corect name is Tîrgu-Mureş...it's with î not with â - —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.196.40.109 (talk • contribs) 23 May 2006.

I don't really care where the article unds up, just that the title match the article itself. Again, the reason I moved it is that the title did not match the article. If something else is more correct, fine, but please correct the article if/when you move it. - Jmabel | Talk 03:29, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
According to Romanian alphabet the î in the middle of a word (as in Tîrgu Mureş) was abolished in 1993. About the hyphen: in Romanian wikipedia it's "Târgu Mureş", without hyphen, so I guess we should follow that. Markussep 21:38, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
If there are no ojections, I'll request a move to "Târgu Mureş". There's edit history, so I can't move it myself. When it's moved I'll make sure the article text is adjusted. Markussep 08:56, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
I've moved the page. Khoikhoi 02:22, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Markussep your wrong, the correct name is with "î" Tîrgu

[edit] Târgu Mureş or Tîrgu Mureş?

I think, that is Tîrgu Mureş .. I did not hear that names were changed from letters with 'î' to 'â' ..

I don't know very much, but see http://www.tirgumures.ro/e107/news.php << I think this is relevant .. If my name was one with 'i' in it, than my name will be changed?? I don't think so ..

Just as a suggestion :)

Sorry now seen, that this is discussed ... Correct one with 'î' .. I think also .. Somebody?

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.250.59.34 (talk) 09:57, 31 January 2007 (UTC).

It is not "a" and "i", but "â" and "î" which in Romanian correspond to the same sound (/ɨ/). After the 1993 ortographic reform, the "î"'s which occur in the middle of words were replaced by "â". It is just an ortographic change, the pronounciation is the same. For more info, have a look at the Romanian language#Romanian alphabet. Mentatus 10:49, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
I understand that .. That means .. If somebody who left Romania in 93 .. and sends a message to "Tîrgu Mureş", he get the letter back with a message "Inexistent city"? And if it was changed .. than the senior of Tg-Mures why put a table on city hall with "Tîrgu Mureş" and also on the net? That's just not right "CHANGING NAMES"? Who has this power? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.250.59.34 (talk) 09:04, 1 February 2007 (UTC).
The letter will be sent correctly for both spellings. Even now in 2007 both can be found on inscriptions and companies official papers, so a lot of people still confound it. Most of us, however, tend to use "Tg. Mureş" instead, just to be sure. :) --V. Szabolcs 05:41, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Correctly with "Î" until it's not published in the Official Monitor of Romania Csabaengel 05:32, 15 August 2007 (UTC)


See ID cards, city hall tables, table at the entrance in the city and this letter from the mayor:

"Stimate domn,

În mod oficial, denumirea care prin lege a apărut în nomenclatorul localităţilor este ,,Tîrgu-Mureş". Aceasta nu a fost încă înlocuită printr-un alt act normativ, însă prin modificările gramaticale operate de Academia Română, este utilizată tot mai des denumirea ,,Târgu-Mureş". Aceasta nu a fost încă validată printr-o lege.

Purtător de cuvânt al Primăriei Tîrgu-Mureş, dir. exec. adj. Marius Paşcan"


Also see this comment from romanian wikipedia (sadly the city name is incorrectly written there too) >>

"Nu este vorba de cîrcoteală, ci de pura realitate (părerea mea e că faptul că numele oficial este ÎNCĂ Tîrgu Mureş este o informaţie utilă de trecut în Wiki). Oricine are un BI/CI de Tîrgu Mureş, vă poate confirma. Orice schimbare a denumirii unei localităţi se validează (conform legii) NUMAI în momentul în care apare în Monitorul Oficial (de altfel acest lucru este valabil pentru orice lege, nu numai pentru aceasta). De exemplu, numele Târnăveni este corect deoarece oraşul s-a ridicat la rang de municipiu şi atunci s-a publicat noul nume în Monitorul Oficial. Nimeni nu se înghesuie să facă shimbarea de nume pentru că acest lucru implică o groază de cheltuieli (schimbarea ştampilelor, a formularelor, a "firmelor" şamd). Aşa e cînd se votează legi fără ca nimeni să gîndească la consecinţe.

În ceea ce priveşte informaţiile de la Camera Deputaţilor, nu ar fi prima oară cînd se folosesc greşit informaţii. Dacă s-a dat vreo lege în care se foloseşte numele Tărgu-Mureş, probabil că aceasta ar putea fi lovită de nulitate..." Csabaengel 06:05, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


Hi Dahn ..

I can't see your point, because in ID cards , city hall and all other official documents are written with "î" ... In Romania (and many more countries) the names cannot be modified just like that. ... if you see my point... So I have an ID card from this year .. which says that i live in Tirgu Mures .. Also the letter above explains all ... In this momment the city where I LIVE is Tirgu Mures .. and NOT Targu Mures as you are suggesting. Probably in few years will be renamed .. but until than Targu Mures does not exist officially, that's the sad reality Elmao 12:08, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Elmao, please don't mix criteria. For starters, in order for your theory to stand, you would need to find a text using "î" in "Tîrgu Mureş", but "â" in all other words (with the academic exceptions I'm sure you are familiar with - composite words et al). Secondly, I have provided you with official texts that use "â" in all cases applicable, including in "Târgu Mureş" (their nature, btw, overrides the local inconsistencies). What you have managed to bring up so far is, as I have stressed before, the notion that not all the people who write Romanian write it according to academic rules (the situation is by no means new or unparalleled). Leaving aside your deduction, which is well-intentioned but spurious, I have to point out that this project has to apply a single rule, and that the rule in question would most logically be that of the language regulator (the most recent one passed).
As I side note: i don't particularly endorse this system otherwise than acknowledging that it is official; I have gotten used with â a long time ago, but I'll never get use nicio and niciun in my personal messages (as opposed to mainspace, if this should be the case). Dahn 12:21, 26 September 2007 (UTC)


Also .. when all was written with 'i' .. and Romania with 'a' .. then were were the academic rules? Elmao 12:10, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Those were the academic rules at that time, Elmao. Dahn 12:21, 26 September 2007 (UTC)


To write only Romania with 'a'? :) ... oh .. and i'm not talking about rules or others .. I simply talking about ID cards .. and that says that I live in Tirgu Mures .. any objection? They wrote bullshits in my ID card?? on city hall? at the entrance of the city?? Elmao 12:27, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes, that was the academic rule at the time, replacing the earlier ruling that made no exception for the country name. Anyone who was in school back in the day will remember this being the case. Btw, the exception was not just for the country name, but also for its derivatives and for personal names that were never spelled with an "â" by their "owners" (such as "Brâncuşi" and "Agârbiceanu").
I don't see any merit in the "ID cards" argument, and I have explained above why it is of no relevancy to this discussion. For your claim that it is "official", you need to find a document saying that the "â" form is official, as opposed to the "î" form (good luck with that). The simple fact that the spelling varies, which is something we all knew in advance, does not weigh anything on the fact that, at least in this case, wiki guides itself by academic rules. Dahn 12:35, 26 September 2007 (UTC)


You don't have to be an academician to figure it out in which city do you live. So this story about academic rules does not matter.. the fact is that I live in Tirgu Mures according to all my official acts .. and what i already said .. And what do you say to the mayor's office? They are also wrong? funny .. So from now i will undo the article how much will require .. (if you don't have with talk about .. f*ck the rules .. and think logically .. the politics are greater then all rules Elmao 12:43, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

The above does not strike me as a logical argument. The rules I mention apply to the Romanian language as a whole, and "Târgu[l]" is a word in that language (as is "Târgu Mureş" a name in that language). You say it is weird that they should apply to a city who, you contend, has not adopted the single rule due to some technicality. It is not the city's responsibility or privilege to regulate Romanian language, just as it is not its responsibility or privilege to regulate Hungarian or Chinese. I would find it exceptionally weird if that would be the case, and I have provided you official documents which designate the city with an "â", without ifs and buts. As for the mayor's office, it apparently uses both forms in chaotic fashion (it also uses no diacritics, but that doesn't mean that the city "is officially spelled without diacritics"...). Dahn 12:51, 26 September 2007 (UTC)


"academic rules are academic rules, and they are universal; any document you cite does not use â at all, and replaces it with î everywhere, not just in the city name. see my point?)" << you said .. >>> any document you cite does not use â at all, and replaces it with î everywhere .. that's right .. so it's used with 'i' .. officially . Elmao 12:49, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

You don't seem to understand. it is common, both colloquially and officially, for people to drop "â" altogether, and replace it with "î" everywhere (except for "România" and its small lexical family). The academic rule is that this not to be done at all: we follow it in mainspace here (because we have to follow one rule), but people are at liberty to use whatever form they want in all other contexts. To complete my point, I have given you examples (official ones) where the â is not discarded anywhere, and as such is used in the city's name as well. The main thing you should focus on is that, if a document refuses to use "â" in all cases, it is not not proof that "Târgu Mureş" is an exception (since it will write "Tîrgu Mureş" in the same way someone would write "cîine" instead of "câine", "brînză" instead of "brânză" etc etc). See my point? Dahn 12:57, 26 September 2007 (UTC)


So this means .. the city has 2 names? Anyone knows about a city with 2 official names? Why do you insist to use with 'â'.. if oficially is with 'i'? I wish to know another opinions ... everyone? Elmao 06:28, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

What this means is that the language has two spellings, both of which can be used officially, only one of which is academic. The quirk in legal procedures adds nothing to this debate, since academic norms are prioritized in spelling every place name in central official documents, and since the fact that Târgu Mureş officials are unsure what to use makes no difference.
As a side note, beyond the point of this discussion: there are plenty of cities with two or more official names. This is the case of various cities in Finland, Belgium, India, Ireland, Wales, China, etc. Not to mention Krung Thep Mahanakhon Amon Rattanakosin Mahinthara Yuthaya Mahadilok Phop Noppharat Ratchathani Burirom Udomratchaniwet Mahasathan Amon Piman Awatan Sathit Sakkathattiya Witsanukam Prasit. Dahn 12:48, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

That city has also 1 official name ... also in thai 1 .. and another which is the shortest version .. so 1 name ... Elmao 13:39, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Erm. If this is what is discussed here: "known in Thai as Krung Thep Maha Nakhon or Krung Thep etc.". You say: "That city has also 1 official name ... also in thai 1 .. and another which is the shortest version". If that is supposed to indicate that "there are no two names", but that it is acceptable to have names of two different lengths, let me point out that the "two names" of Târgu Mureş are actually one, of the same length, written in two different ways. Which means that you are contradicting yourself.
And way to selectively pick comments to reply to. Why not do a little looking into the double names for Finnish cities, or for those in Xinjiang.
But, again, all this is beside the point, since I have made my case about what was of interest here a long time ago. Your apparent disbelief is evidence of a false dilemma, and relies on what is and is not familiar to you. Dahn 13:49, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Once and for all, the correct spelling is Tîrgu-Mureş. If you don't belive me please see http://www.tirgumures.ro/. This is the official web page of the city hall. Also, if this is not enaogh, please contact city hall in order to ask what is the correct speeling of the city. I did, and they said it's Tîrgu-Mureş. so please make all the changes, and if you insist to keep the wrong name I'll will contact someone in the wikipedia management. Hideg Andras

[edit] Hungarian name

Why Hungarian name is added in the first sentence of this article? On the talk page of Odorheiu Secuiesc there is only "agreement" that Hungarian names could be used for places with Hungarian majority, but this is not one of those places. Therefore, since this is English Wikipedia, names for the articles should be those that are most commonly used in English language, and in this case name Târgu Mureş is also name that is most common English name, as one can see here: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=Targu+Mures&btnG=Search The Hungarian name Marosvásárhely is not used widely in English sources, but only in the Hungarian ones: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Marosv%C3%A1s%C3%A1rhely&btnG=Google+Search Also, Hungarian name is already written in the brackets, so what is a reason to be written bolded after official Romanian (and most common English name)?. Please somebody explain, not just revert. Tarile Romane 17:29, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

The best place to discuss the workings of the compromise is Talk:Odorheiu Secuiesc. Olessi 17:32, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
But Odorheiu Secuiesc has 96.7% Hungarians and Târgu Mureş is majority Romanian. We speak about this article now, so please explain your revert and please say why Hungarian name is added into this article? Tarile Romane 17:38, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
The cut-off point between bolding/not-bolding is still being discussed. If you would like to express your opinion of the compromise and how it should be worded, the proper place is at the aforementioned talk page, not here. Olessi 17:45, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
No, it has nothing to do. In Tg. Mureş is a clear Romanian majority so there is no need to egualize other names too.--R O A M A T A A | msg  17:21, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
L.O.L. Maybe because there are 70.000 hungarian souls in the city, maybe that's why Elmao 06:42, 21 August 2007 (UTC)