Talk:Atlas of Romania

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

Talk from the em-wiki Good job! But I think that the map for 1600 is a little inexact - at that time Ottoman empire controled all the coast (Drobudja and Bugeac)MihaiC 07:34, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Check the map at http://www.euratlas.com/various.htm MihaiC 08:18, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I would like to change the map of Mihai Viteazul reign to the standard used in the other maps, but i'm not quite sure what was the statute of dobrogea and danube rayas-Braila, Giurgiu and Turnu- (all were atacked before 1596, but Mihai made an armistice/peace with the turks that year, and i don't know if they remained under his rule; the fortresses in Bugeac were taken for him by Baba Novac in 1600, so i guess Mihai controled them during the 6 months or so while he ruled all 3 countries.) I don't know what to do with the map of Dacia (let it as it is now or make a "standardized" version). Suggestions? Anonimu

Wouldn't it be more in line with Wikipedia policy if this was moved to Border history of Romania? [jon] [talk] 17:18, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

In 1941 Romania annexed the territory between Nistru and Nipru? I thought that I was just administrated for the duration of the war, with no intention of making it part of Romania proper.MihaiC 06:15, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

what is that bulgarian territory south of danube shown as romanian teritory in 1920? And what should "expansion in Ukraine during WWII" mean? (anon 30 July 2005)

  • On your first question: Southern Dobruja, a.k.a. The Cadrilater (Quadrilateral). On your seconf question: (I assume) temporarily conquered territories during the advance to the east (probably in northern Bukovina), but someone else may be able to give you a better answer. -- Jmabel | Talk 20:22, July 30, 2005 (UTC)

i added 3 new maps. if you have any suggestionn about them or the labels please feedback. there would be another 3 maps for the 19th century : 1812-1829 (moldavia without bessarabia and wallachia whitout the rayas), 1829-1856 (walachia with rayas of Giurgiu, Turnu and Braila) and 1859/1861-1878 (romania with southern bessarabia, without dobrogea). and then would be before 1920: 1913-1918? (romania + cadrilater) and 1918 (romania according to treaty of bucharest, 1918). they would had minor changes and i don't know if they are necessary i don't understand what's "expansion in Ukraine during WWII" . and if we show a map with romanian occupied transnistria in 1941, shouldn't we show a map with romanian occupied hungary in 1919 also? i also think we should put a map of 1400 with maximum expansion of wallachia( ruling dobrogea, fagaras, severin) and maybe also a map of 1500 with maximum expansion of moldavia (ruling pokutia, kilia, akkerman) Anonimu 21:11, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Maps for 1878 and for 1940 are a little flawed.[edit]

It would suggest that Romania controlled the area north of the Mouth of Chilia( in other words the areas around Vylkovo). This map here shows pretty clearly that they did not: http://www.sephardicstudies.org/romania.jpg


Also the Russians asked for the same territory in 1940 as well as after WWII so it would not make sense that the areas north of the Chilia Mouth would be included in Romania in the first map and in USSR in the second map. Constantzeanu 16:09, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

ok, i repaired the maps. i exagerated a bit, i put all Kilia Delta instead of Limba Ostrovy. But moldo-bukovina border had greater flaws. And i corrected the 1800 map too... Anonimu 18:58, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

1785 Map[edit]

on that map, wallachia looks smaller than dobruja, and transylvania looks as great as danubes delta. i'd say it's pretty illusive. and what's wrong with the other maps? Anonimu 11:14, 6 February 2006 (UTC)