Jump to content

Talk:Timișoara

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Famous natives

[edit]

I have removed Gheorghe Ciuhandu from the "Famous natives" list because he does not belong there! I know people like him (I also voted for him the last 2 times) but this still does not make him proper for the list!

Famous is somebody who has has gotten known outside the community that we are talking about. Ciuhandu is known just inside the community and also does not have any historical relevance! If we continue like this, we could directly put 350000 names and that's it! We have all of them!

Nobody wrote about for ex: Florimund_Mercy, and he has been the first Governor of Timisoara (not written in Wikipedia, Yet!) and you can even find him in Encyclopædia Britannica.

Cheers! SiSoie


Hey guys, I didn't change any content but there were a ton of English grammar mistakes I tried to clean up. The article could use some more corrections by a native speaker though.

ok. Ciuhandu apparently doesn't belong to the list, but we have Zoltan Mesko, a rather obscure US college player. now isn't that great? it's not like he won 3 superbowls in a row or something. why shouldn't we add "Remus Tziganu'" to the list too? after all he has a YouTube video. oh my! Dead-cat (talk) 11:18, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Huge history section

[edit]

Shoudn't the history section be a little smaller for this main page? I guess we could do some Timisoara's History file and just leave here the important part. Dent

if what remains in Timişoara page presents a balanced view I agree with keeping the history part small and having the info moved to History of Timişoara AdrianTM 16:33, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Just don't delete the sentence, give me some time to find a source. If I can't find it, then I'll remove it. —Khoikhoi 17:04, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well... I deleted the sentence based on the argument bellow, I don't think "ethnically cleansing" is appropriate. I think we should have more precise language: were killed, or forced to leave, or encourage to leave, or they left for better life, or combination of some of those (reference needs to be included too) "Ethnic cleansing" is a very fuzzy (and loaded) term. AdrianTM 17:25, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm, you're right, but ethnic cleansing is when a group is forced to leave. It will most likely be removed however.
Incedentally, part of my family was from Transylvania, most of the ones who didn't leave Europe died in the Holocaust however. So the part about Jews is essentially correct. —Khoikhoi 17:31, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry to hear about your family. My point was about precision. I prefer to have a text that says that Communists (or Romanians, or whatever) killed 10,000 Jews or Hungarians or others (with proofs and references), than to say without precision that Jews were "ethnically cleansed". Do you agree? Also the part about Jews is not clear to me and in that form it implied that Communists made them disappeared. I have to proclaim my ignorance in this subject though, I just wish it to be clear. Thanks for help. AdrianTM 20:54, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, as far as I know Israel and Germany paid the Communists to let Jews and Germans to emigrate (we can't mix all that population movement into "ethnic cleansing") AdrianTM 21:55, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I see what you're saying. Let's see what Fz22, the user who added the info has to say. —Khoikhoi 23:05, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Some German families (who were 'suspected' to have had connections with the Third Reich) were send to concentration camps in Siberia by the Read Army when they occupied the area. Then, there were the deportations to Bărăgan, but the deportees belonged to all ethnicities. Finally, there were part of the Jews and Germans who left for Israel and Germany, under a treaty between those countries and Romania: they had to pay a sum to reinburse their education (AFAIK, there were different sums for high-school graduates, university graduates, PhDs...), but no one was ever forced to emigrate. bogdan 22:21, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not "some" but everybody between 17 and 45 they could get a hold of with few exceptions. and not only "suspects", but bulk. Dead-cat (talk) 12:32, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Original research in history part

[edit]

Please provide quotations and references. Also please remove POV and don't use loaded terms as "ethnic cleansing" rather please explain what happened. For example, if Germans were forced to leave say "Germans were forced to leave by this ruler and by this law (or agains the law)" not "Germans were ethnic cleansed" since that introduce ambiguity. For example who forced the Jews, Germans and Hungarians to leave? Where they forced? If the were: how and by whom? Did some of them leave for better life in richer countries? Were they killed or were they forced to leave? See "ethnic cleansing" is not a precise term therefore I don't think it should be used, anyway not without clear explanations and references. AdrianTM 21:53, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to find sources. If I can't find them, then I'll remove the sentences. BTW, don't remove the reference to the atlas, I can scan the page for you if you want. Peace. —Khoikhoi 23:34, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Idrisi / Idrisi

[edit]

mayor of Timisoara

[edit]

Robert Musil ..

[edit]

..was born in Klagenfurt, his father Alfred was born in Timişoara Ekem 18:25, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

About History

[edit]

Was Timisoara regained from the Turks by Hungary? In the History of Timisoara article, it is stated that Timisoara was taken by the Habsburg imperial troups. Did Hungary exist as a political entity in 1716?

is a multicultural city?

[edit]

7% Hungarians, 2% Germans and 2% Serbs versus 90% Romanian?. I don't think so ... Maybe before 1950-1960, but not anymore. --fz22 14:23, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, statistically it isn't, but the city hall is quite worked up over making sure that the city's heritage is proclaimed as multiethnic rather than as solely Romanian. For this reason, there are quite a lot of minority cultural events, and the city does have a multiethnic feel. Ronline ✉ 11:07, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

truth on population statistics

[edit]

I am not even Hungarian but feel that it is hugely misrepresentative to show the population statistics the way they are presented on the page. Temesvar is and always has been a German/Hungarian city, if you want to believe the Dacia Romanian theories you read in your Ceacescu history textbooks fine by me, but don't be afraid to say the city only took on this character after the Romanians ethnically cleansed it and moved in.

There's a difference between who ruled that part of the contry and who was the majority, read the history, read about Banat on Wikipedia, see older statistics: for example in 1774 there were 2400 Hungarians and Bulgarians in all Banat. That has nothing to do with Ceauşescu who lived 200 years after. Numbers speak. --AdrianTM 06:35, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Remember taht the ruller of the town and whole region was Pál Kinizsi aka Paul Cheazul(Chinezul) back in 1479. He was quite romanian, and eaven cneaz wich mean that old romanian social organization such as districts were still in place in the banat region. Remember that austrians also made some ethinical cleasing, in their attempt to make a german only land north of Timis river. Whole romanian villages were deported south of the river.

Cities in Romania often had German majorities because the Germans did not allow Romanians to live in the city proper, Brasov is a case in point. The Hungarians tended to dominate certain industries (though not as much as the Germans). The villages surrounding the cities were mostly ethnic Romanian. Under the communists, people from villages were encouraged to move to the cities as part of 'industrialisation'. This is where the large ethnic Romanian majority comes from, there was no ethnic cleansing. A lot of people in Timisoara are of mixed ancestry and tend not to show up in statistics as being a minority.GordyB 13:19, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

population statistics

[edit]

The hatred between romanians and hungarians was huge after 1848. Let this page be free of such bullshit. I removed the info about population statistics. It has no place here, and it is a lie. Plese use as references the archives of the Austrian or Ottoman Empire not hungarian or romanian sources written after 1848. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.24.22.66 (talk) 13:30, 19 March 2007 (UTC). For example Mathias Bel- hungarina historian who visited Timisoara sometime between 1720-1730 - wrote that the only language spoken in the town in that period was romanian - hic est ut nihil sermone valachico Temesvarini sit vulgatius . Why would a hungarian lie about this back in 1720? Let's agree that is hard to find an independent source of information, so please remove the whole section , since it may not be true.[reply]

Persecution of Germans?

[edit]

Is not true that "many ethnic Germans left because of Communist persecution, most going to Germany". Ethnic Germans left TImişoara (and Romania) because in Germany it was a better life, not because they were persecuted. A short period of persecution was only immediatelly after WW2 (when ethnic Germans were considered nazis), but was over when German emigration started. Even in Comunist period, in Timişoara existed German schools, a German theatre, a German daily newspaper (after the fall of Comunism, the daily newspaper disappeared, as consequence of lack of readers and new Capitalist economic laws). --MariusM 10:59, 27 August 2006 (UTC) Remember that 45000 romanians were deported from the Banat region by the comunists in the same period. Don't confuse comunism with nazism. The comunists hated classes not rases. Also, is not true that the great drought of the 50's in Moldova was during the Ceauşescu era. Ceauşescu era started in 1965, when the drought was over. Resettling Romanians in Timişoara was a consequence of city development (population increased with a factor of 4 after WW1), not of the drought of 50's.--MariusM 11:11, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

that's correct, also I think that most of the history part should be moved to History of Timisoara since this article is mainly about the city not the history. -- AdrianTM 12:12, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I corrected the article.--MariusM 13:48, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zurobara

[edit]
Classical Balkans

Regarding "Zurobara", is this camp really near the location of present-day Timişoara? Because according to this map (pictured), Zurobara appears to be at the location of present-day Hódmezővásárhely. It would be nice if some sources could be provided—this info isn't even at the History of Timişoara article. —Khoikhoi 06:15, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

mall

[edit]

i tought the mall in timisoara was the largest in all romania, not just the west..

I just checked on http://www.iuliusmall.com/timisoara/, it is the biggest in romania.
Thanks! I'll add that to the article. —Khoikhoi 01:32, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Timişoara - feature article

[edit]

Timişoara should eventually reach feature article status. In order to do so we must first identify what the article lacks or where its quality should be improved. This should be a collaboration, and any contribution, either from experts in the subject or from laymen is needed and welcome. The Timişoara article from Wikipedia is probably the best source of information about the city found on the net. If it's not then it should be. Currently the Timişoara article is maybe a good article. Our efforts should be targeted onto making it a feature article. I can only hope that this goal will be reached as soon as possible. Tavilis 17:16, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Culture to Overview

[edit]

I've changed the Culture headline to Overview, because I think that article it's more about the city than its culture. I've extended it a bit, but it could be further extended. It would be nice if it were something about the arts and culture of our city (for example bands, artists, theaters, a.s.o.). Somebody could start it, maybe I'll write too of it later on. Till then I'll write about the architecture of the city. --Zsolt Dudás 15:41, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Transport

[edit]

The article should mention the massive disruptions of service in the public transportation field caused by Ciuhandu's endless "infrastructure renewals" that last years and only finish before local elections. And the abysmal state of the road network. AND the totally absurd one-ways, AND the even more absurd speed-bumps. In fact it shoud say in bold, "transportation (by any means) in timisoara SUCKS!". In an NPOV and objective way, of course. A little brown amongst all those shades of pink to reflect the situation in the field. --Tase 16:26, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

True, agreed... but i'm not sure if there's a way to express that in a NPOV way... anyways, i just added a pic of a tram. :D Just to give an idea of what it looks like. --AlexDuarte (talk) 11:02, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

District, county

[edit]

You said that the data is relevant about the ethnicity of the region - yes but not the given town in 1910. This is relevant data when speaking about the population of the Banat or Temes county but why we should mention in the Temesvár article what kind of people lived Vrsec or Lippa or any other settlement kilometres away from the given town????

And the Central District wasn't the municipal area of Temesvár, it was an administrative unit with 20 independent villages. The town wasn't even part of it. Zello 22:14, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't, but it is now, right? Then it's part of the history, you can't exclude that on the basis that it wasn't part of the municipal are at that time (if I got this right). -- AdrianTM 23:06, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, it isn't part. Of the 20 villages of the former Central District only two is incorporated now into the town, 18 remained independent. Zello 23:19, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Even so, see what comments this demographic issue can provoke: Talk:Timişoara#truth on population statistics this is a very relevant issue in the context of demographic evolution of the city. -- AdrianTM 23:42, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

These statistics even didn't prove your point as they show that the surrounding region was also ethnically mixed. Seeing the data the first thing I notice how many Germans disappeared not only from the town but also from the coutryside. Healthy demographic evolution in this area should produce a multicultural town with 3-4 different nationality. Zello 11:27, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Should? If you were a German and make $100 per month working hard in Romania and you can go in Germany where only the unemployment benefit is... I don't know... $1000 (don't actually know the number, but you get my idea), what would you do? It's a sad situation but hardly "ethnic cleansing". -- AdrianTM 15:14, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A whole people didn't go away only for money in a few decades without pressures. But the debate now is not about ethnic cleansing, I didn't use this word. We are speaking about why there is a mention of other settlements ethnic data in the Timişoara article. I said that this statistics aren't even proving your point as they show a multinational town in multinational surrounds. I'm simply saying that the Timişoara article should contain the population data of Timişoara, not neighbouring villages, Vrşec or Sydney. Zello 21:31, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yet it's interesting that the Germans left even though I didn't hear of many tensions (if any) between Germans and Romanians while the majority of Hungarians remained (or less have left) even though it was much less distance to travel to Hungary than for Germans to move to Germany, that alone and it's pretty telling. But, as you said, it's kind of irrelevant in our discussion, I do think that it's relevant to keep the info about at least about municipal area, I wasn't the one who added and I think the person who added made the same point. I'm not sure about Sydney though ;-) -- AdrianTM 21:46, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"A whole people didn't go away only for money in a few decades without pressures." -- you also forget that at that time even Romanians were fleeing the country even risking to be shot at the border, if they could more than 80% would have left the country, Germans were the people who could leave, they didn't need any special encouragement. -- AdrianTM 21:50, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't have any objection against the municipal area but Központi járás ISN'T that. That district means exactly these villages: Giarmata, Cerneteaz, Covaci, Sânandrei, Dudeştii Noi, Becicherecu Mic, Beregsǎu Mare, Sǎcǎlaz, Utvin, Sǎnmihaiu Romǎn, Sǎnmihaiu German, Chişoda, Giroc, Urseni, Moşniţa, Ghiroda, Remetea Mare, Şag, Parţa + three other now incorporated into the town. Does that mean anything for the 1910 Timişora?

Panonian who added the data did the same with many other town recently. That's a misconception of the former administration of the Kingdom of Hungary. In present-day Serbia "municipal area" means a dozen villages subordinated to one bigger town but in Hungary or Romania (past and present) municipal areas are much smaller, clearly defined territories of the given town itself. Zello 22:28, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds reasonable then... leave Központi járás out, keep municipal area in. -- AdrianTM 22:34, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discrepancy in population

[edit]

In the introduction (and elsewhere in the article) it states that Timişoara had a population of 336,089 in 2006. However, in the box it states that Timşioara had a population of: 317,660 (2002 census)

307,265 (as of July 1, 2004)

Both 336,089 and 307,265 are sourced, so I presume both are accurate - they merely show change over time. However, they are in conflict, so I suggest that we remove the older results and put in the most recent statistics possible so as to make the article as accurate as possible. 

I'm new to Wikipedia, so I don't really know how to edit very well. Sorry to bother you all, otherwise I'd do it myself.


Twin cities

[edit]

Is Zrenjanin, Serbia, twin town of Timisoara, Because link to official web site of Timisoara can be found at official web site of Zrenjanin? Alexzr88 17:13, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just in: 3000 year old fort found

[edit]

Near the Romanian city of Timisoara a 3000 year old settlement with defences has been found. The complex covers 2000 hectare and archaeologists think it's the biggest excavation site of Europe.

Not only the size of the find is striking, but also the quality. The settelment is completely intact. The researchers don't have any idea of who the builders of the fort might be yet.

The discovery has been made using satellite imagery and Google Earth. For more investigation a lot of money is necessary, according to the researchers. The help of Unesco has already been enlisted for this.

3000 jaar oude vesting ontdekt NOS, 20 februari 2008

Shinobu (talk) 09:53, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, huge mistake.

[edit]

The city is spelled Timișoara, not Timişoara. ş is a turkish letter. ș is the correct romanian letter. There is no "cedilla" on Romanian letters. I don't know how to change the title but someone should fix it - HUGE mistake. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.181.97.102 (talk) 07:56, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the page and updated the redirects, but the links I left with the cedilla under the s, since those pages will have to be moved first, and then the links can be changed. --Robert.Allen (talk) 03:30, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, it's not a "huge mistake", it's not even an official mistake - it merely parts with the strict (and one would say myopic) guideline imposed by the Romanian Academy, which virtually no one else - and this includes academic publishers, widely circulated media etc - uses. We've been sticking with this spelling for practical and logical reasons, here and everywhere else over several wikipedia projects, from day one (meaning that it was here way before me). Changing this rule of thumb would have to be a consistent global effort, not just "I changed it in a couple of articles, now you do the rest" - something which would have to be applied in every random combination of letters identified as a Romanian (not Turkish) transcription, and which by now looks borderline unfeasible. Feasible or not, it is entirely unnecessary. Dahn (talk) 08:55, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can see your point. A lot of work for very little return. Shouldn't something be posted about this practice on the Wikiproject:Romania page? (Although honestly I doubt I would have seen a notice before I started making the change.) --Robert.Allen (talk) 09:09, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alas, WikiProject Romania is me and a mop, and I'm not even the one who created it :). A lot of things happened since it was started, and there's little holding it together, but I'm hoping it will reemerge from its ashes at some point in the future. Plus, it was never really the venue for global discussions - that used to be the notice board, but even that is pretty dead. The reason behind that is that so many Romanian editors are gripped by a sort of "suicide epidemic" - they decide they want to become trolls, vandals and POV edit warriors, and the natural way for them is out the door. The rest of us manage as we can, so it was never an issue of things needing to be advertised. Dahn (talk) 09:26, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think we should be giving Romanian alphabet lessons in an English article. I think it should be Timisoara with no modifiers. I realize that we have other articles with cedillas, omlauts, and Lord knows what else, but basically we should be using the English version of the Roman alphabet in all articles. I may even be able to find a reference someplace, if pressed.  :) Student7 (talk) 19:45, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We have the redirects, and most search utilities these days will turn up modified characters as well as the unmodified ones, so it's not so much of a problem as it once was. --Robert.Allen (talk) 20:18, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

serbian cathedral

[edit]

in photo section is picture of The Serbian Church. it's not a church, it is a cathedral. саборна црква means cathedral. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.175.118.173 (talk) 17:49, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Demographics

[edit]

Why does this section not list the number of inhabitants who are Hungarian, Serbian, German, and Jewish versus Romanian -- and historically (1880s, 1910s, 1920s, 1940s, 1980s, today)?

Who is afraid of that? And why? ------- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.245.73.167 (talk) 20:53, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Information is inserted by editors when they have reliable information and it appears the article needs that information.
If you have this information with a WP:RELY citation and it pertains only to Timisoara, not outlying districts, then insert it by all means. The statistics should include all prominent minorities, but probably not so minor they don't amount to one percent.
If you don't feel comfortable doing this yourself, place info here with a verifiable online reference, and one of us will insert it.

Timișoara or Timişoara

[edit]

? In romanian is right Timișoara Szajci pošta 07:47, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Timișoara is right. DouglasHeld (talk) 08:25, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:50, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Timişoara → Timișoara –

ş --> ș (the same rule for all Romanian city names) (Rgvis (talk) 14:56, 2 November 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Take a look here: Timișoara at Encyclopædia Britannica.

Thanks,

(Rgvis (talk) 15:18, 4 November 2011 (UTC))[reply]

According the s-comma article, this character does not render on XP unless an add-on is installed. Over 34 percent of personal computers have XP installed. Isn't that a pretty good reason not to use the character? Romanian Wiki uses the s-cedilla. Kauffner (talk) 06:55, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Constanța, Iași, Galați, Brașov, Ploiești, Botoșani, Focșani, Pitești, etc., are other examples (already using s-comma); so, or we rename Timişoara, Piatra Neamţ and Târgu Mureş, too, or vice-versa!
(Rgvis (talk) 08:55, 5 November 2011 (UTC))[reply]
Actually, the Romanian Wikipedia have recently changed their policy and now uses the correct commas, rather than the workaround cedillas. Your link (using the cedilla) is a redirect. MTC (talk) 09:23, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oic. The article's title proper has the s-comma, but the default preference is to display title it with an s-cedilla. That's pretty kludgy. AgerPres, the Romanian national news agency, uses the s-cedilla in Romanian, but no diacritic in English. IMO, this is an excellent usage model. Kauffner (talk) 11:58, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Timisoara Mercedes bus 1.jpg Nominated for Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:Timisoara Mercedes bus 1.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Timisoara Mercedes bus 1.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 11:48, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

other names

[edit]

modern wiki pages have Other names section Readder (talk) 06:44, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

other names

[edit]

Wiki rules ask the presence of other names section for more than 2 names Readder (talk) 18:51, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

'Wiki rules' are clear on sock puppetry. RashersTierney (talk) 00:32, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Names of the City

[edit]

Well, a sockmaster is back (this time using open proxies). We can again have discussion on the different suggestions of Wikipedia on alternative/historical geographical names, etc. The option of moving them into a separate section is just one of the options, a possibility. The main guideline actually supports the original lead, which contains the other name variants. Please, read this again (quote from the second point of the guideline):

  • The lead: The title can be followed in the first line by a list of alternative names in parentheses, e.g.: Gulf of Finland (Estonian: Soome laht; Finnish: Suomenlahti; [Финский залив, Finskiy zaliv] Error: {{Lang-xx}}: text has italic markup (help); Swedish: Finska viken) is a large bay in the easternmost arm of the Baltic Sea.

Please, also observe how many alternative variants are displayed. Four, yet, this is in the main guideline (and the cherry-picked version is in the last section of this point which discusses an alternative possibility). Moreover, the original lead is in line with the convention and consensus of similar articles. It was a stable variant for a long time, it should only be changed based on a consensus. Cheers, KœrteFa {ταλκ} 12:35, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PS: If we think that the lead is too long now, we can move some of the versions to a later section. For example, the Serbian, Bulgarian and Turkish variants are not widely used by English sources, thus they do not necessarily have to be in the lead. KœrteFa {ταλκ} 12:35, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nationalities protesting in 1989

[edit]

In December 1989, Timișoara witnessed a series of mass street protests by Romanians, Hungarians and Serbs. I removed the bolded part, cause it looks POV. What's the source for this? Why are Germans and Roma people (other important ethnicities in the city) missing? 86.126.32.82 (talk) 10:07, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Timișoara. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:49, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Timișoara. 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) 18:07, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Culture and contemporary life

[edit]

this section should only include notable entities, otherwise it's WP:NOTDIR. LibStar (talk) 07:21, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Economy addition IMO necessary

[edit]

Timisoara is also the oldest IT centre of Romania, with a bit of tradition (the first computer was built here in 1961, being the second computer built in Romania), thousands of programmers were working in Timisoara before an IT industry even started to take shape elsewhere in Romania, after 1989, and it still employs a large number of programmers, even if Bucharest and Cluj have also caught up. Still, thousands of programmers work for global companies such as Continental, Nokia, Microsoft, IBM, Accenture and others out of the offices of those companies in Timisoara, and many more work for small, anonymous software boutiques or startups. Also, several successful Romanian startups originated in Timisoara - such as Symme3D, who set out to build 3D printers for human organs, Movidius, who created a very performant AI chip and was bought by Intel, and then some more. A European player in the field of fleet monitoring - safefleet - also originated and has its headquarter in Timisoara. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:2F09:31E0:63:54C1:23B5:EEC6:BD08 (talk) 16:31, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question

[edit]

@KIENGIR: Do you agree that Timișoara was under the Ottoman Empire and then Habsburg/Austria from 1552 to 1867? And then under Austro-Hungary 1867–1918? Because if you agree, then you can't say the town was under Hungary until 1918. Britannica says this, and Wikipedia doesn't. Hungary led it until 1529, but after only in 1867–1918. Regards, Christina Christina (talk) 15:43, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can you be more specific via some universal sources, please? If Hungary had any influence between 1552-1867? Christina (talk) 15:46, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"Habsburg/Austria from 1552 to 1867" -> disagree, because it is false. Britannica is not the best source sometimes. I strongly recommend you to analyze the Siege of Temeşvar (1716) article for the complex situation. Nevertheless, when it became part of the Kingdom of Hungary again, Habsburg rule meant mainly the Habsburg King of Hungary, not Austria, thus saying it was under Hungary is fair, because Kingdom of Hungary was a separate state as well during the times of the Austrian Empire and Austria-Hungary.(KIENGIR (talk) 15:55, 17 February 2019 (UTC))[reply]
@KIENGIR: Ok, so from Hațegan and Preyer (according to them). Good. Fortress and city. It was not very accurate. I can understand both were still involved. You are still fair, because you mention that it was a Habsburg rule. Regards, Christina (talk) 16:04, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:51, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

[edit]

I reviewed this article and I have some (3) questions about:

  • you say that the territory was conquested in 895-896 but there is no evidence it happened so early since Glad and Ahtum were ruling the area (my source is even from your Szegfű, not just from Haţegan); I did mention a Hungarian conquest, so where is the problem? Certainly we must remove the years because that's only the PRELUDE, and also we should mention Glad and Ahtum but without any tribute or no tribute to the Hungarians because it's unclear
  • do you agree to remove the Hungarian census? we had many censuses several of them saying differently and were not commune; many Hungarian censuses are fake because the Romanians at that hour were treated as 2nd hand citizens, living in the suburb of the big towns, that's why some other Hungarian historians have a lot of different numbers and really not in your favour.
  • the name is not Hungarian, it comes from the river Timiș

In rest, not so important:

- there is no rising Ukrainian community in Timisoara, we should remove it in my opinion - lit by electric lamps in 1884 or 1882, no idea, it is not so important

If you are fair.

—Ioan Haţegan (talk) 10:14, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Basically I rewrote the conquest and origins of the name parts. I hope you will enjoy it. Nothing much really changed, besides the addition of Glad and Ahtum (Ajtony). With the census, I don't know, maybe we should also find Romanian opinions or different Hungarian opinions. Otherwise it must be clearly stated being Hungarian it might be a source of manipulation. Or not, depends, but a census under a Hungarian administration stays as a Hungarian census. Or even Austro-Hungarian. Basically it was an empire and the rulers wanted to keep it. Certainly at 1920 the European census was different. But if you want to vanish Trianon... We should allow all the opinions! —Ioan Haţegan (talk) 11:12, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, the answers:
- The are more evidence for 895-895, than for the statements for Gesta Hungarorum, but no problem, we if mention both of the theories
- I would not agree and as well with your invalid statements, the censuses were not "fake" and your theory of "2nd class citizens" is rather a romantic far-fetched claim, escpecially in connection with the censuses. However, as an other editor pointed out, the city is not located in the historical Transylvania, it may be ignored.
- No, the name "Timișoara" is the phonetic transcription of Temesvár, this article is not about the river Timiș (and contrary of your mistaken WP:OR in the edit log, "oara" is the common Romanian transcriprion of vár). Lajos Kiss said just the first part of the name derived from the river obviously, but it is different from the citi's full name and the latter adoption and inheritance.
You can be sure I am fair and I think you should drop such statements like If you don't want to say the truth or similar suggestions. However it is not good if you do not agree with some facts, as it not about not allowing all the opinions, but we should not alter the facts.(KIENGIR (talk) 19:58, 15 August 2019 (UTC))[reply]

Names in other languages

[edit]

There is no need, in an English language encyclopedia, to have the names and pronunciations of the city in numerous different languages. The articles for London, Paris, Berlin, Moscow etc. do not begin with a list of foreign language names and pronunciations, and there is no need here. It is not helpful to the reader to have to wade through such names before reading what the article subject actually is. Any historical use of different names can be handled in the main text. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 12:43, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

London, Paris, Berlin and Moscow has not been belonged for more hundred years ot outher countries and cultures, however, in Central and Eastern Europe, massive changes have been not just in the past century, but in the last millenia. We list only the most relevant names on other languages, that are unalienbly attached to the city, it's history and culture, that is a common in those articles where these circumstances hold, per a longstanding practice (more thousand articles, etc.) Cities located in the Banat are very important for Germans, Hungarians, Romanians, Slavs and as well the Ottoman Empire shared as well it's history. But I'll againtry to satisfy you, thus I remove the two older version of the German names, not to have multiple formulas fo each; shortening again.(KIENGIR (talk) 21:10, 24 August 2019 (UTC))[reply]
The article currently has twelve different versions of the name (UK, US, Romanian, German, Hungarian, Yiddish, Romanised Yiddish, Serbian, Romanised Serbian, Banat Bulgarian, Turkish, and Slovak) before readers are eventually told what Timișoara is ("...the capital city of Timiș County, the 3rd largest city in Romania"). Apart from the Romanian and UK/US versions, all the others can be dealt with in the main text, in the history of the city, if they are sufficiently important enough. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 08:08, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well, then you should accept the following, generally in Romania-related articles - as depending on the context - mostly German and Hungarian alternatives are relevant. Moving the Yiddish, Romanised Yiddish, Serbian, Romanised Serbian, Banat Bulgarian, and Slovak down may be negotiated, but Turkish should remain by the arguments mentioned before.(KIENGIR (talk) 20:06, 24 December 2019 (UTC))(12:12, 25 August 2019 (UTC))[reply]

Changes in history

[edit]

Because of Britannica which avoids to discuss about delicate things:

1. I removed the Hungarian conquest of the Carpathian Basin (895-896) part. You have no accurate proof and there is not one. 2. I even removed the Romanian part of Glad and Ajtony (Ahtum), although it's written in your Gesta Hungarorum.

You can keep your theories for yourself, we can keep our theories for ourselves.

3. I wrote that Charles I of Hungary rebuilt the city, instead of Charles I, in order the readers to draw conclusions. It is understandable from here you could have built and probably built Timișoara. Glad and Ajtony even if they ruled something thereby (there are proofs, I mean evidence), they might not have ruled actual Timișoara or former Temesvár.

4. The royal palace of the future capital was built by Italian craftsmen and architects.

5. I added a citation needed tag for "Crusaders met at the city before engaging in the Battle of Nicopolis in 1396." Because did they meet in town or somewhere in Banat which is known?

6. You said "the city was repeatedly besieged by the Ottomans in 1462, 1476, 1491, and 1522." Actually in our history books I only found Banat was besieged in 1462 and 1476, and Temesvár was 100% later besieged in 1491 and 1522. I corrected in order to be sure.

7. I removed this crap. "Subsequently, the city came under Habsburg rule, and it remained so until the early 20th century as part of the Banat of Temeswar, Kingdom of Hungary, Austrian Empire and Austria-Hungary, except for the Ottoman occupation between 1788–1789 during the Austro-Turkish War." I put "Subsequently, the city came under Habsburg rule, except for the Ottoman occupation between 1788–1789 during the 1787–91 Austro-Turkish Warr." IF YOU WANT TO PUT THIS BACK, PLEASE BRING EVIDENCE FROM THAT CANADIAN SOURCE. Unfortunately I didn't read it because I considered it's too useless since it's really long and Britannica only speaks about the Habsburg rule.

8. "I added "The city was colonised colonized with Swabian Germans." This is important and part of the history. I mean after all the city was heavily populated by them. It's in Demography.

9. I removed the Gustave Eiffel bridge crap. Is that for History? No way, that bridge sucks anyway.

10. I put back all the names of the city back, when starting. In all the language.

11. You may not like it, I removed the hilarous ORIGIN OF THE NAME part. If you want you can prove Timișoara comes from Hungarian Temesvár, but "-oara" does not mean CASTLE or anything at all. Better is not to discuss part, from both sides (Romanian and Hungarian) in order to avoid conflicts. Because in my opinion Timișoara name comes from the Latin word of the Timiș River. Who did baptise the river? The city? Who was first, the egg or the chicken? Even you said Temes comes from Timiș River which was also known as Teyss in antiquity. There is no evidence than an invention or inventions of some.

So basically there is nothing to bother you. I hope you accept these changes. It should be more universal on these important articles since we all request a consensus between parts.

Gargara (talk) 00:24, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The origin of the name of a town is an important part of an article dedicated to it (read, for instance, London and Paris). Consequently, we also have to explain the origins of the name of this town based on reliable sources. Borsoka (talk) 03:24, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Gargara,
many of your changes goes again former talks and consensus, those will be restored, however keeping some of your other improvements.(KIENGIR (talk) 16:46, 27 August 2019 (UTC))[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:23, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:39, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Timișoara&oldid=1212316300"