Talk:Transylvania

the regions
I have removed Maramures and Crisana, because these are separate regions in the main Romania article, should be treated as such. I have thought for a long time about how to divide Transylvania. I decided to use a cultural criterion on this multicultural area of Romania, so that I put Mures together with Covasna and Harghita, due to the strong Hungarian influence in all of this region. Sibiu and Brasov are strongly Saxon influenced. It was not so easy with Hunedoara and Alba, but I considered that compared to other regions in Transylvania, these have a greater relevance for Romanian culture. Cluj and Bistrita do not really have a predominant culture, I think. However these two counties have very strong ties and exchanges of population so they belong together. I am open to other ideas or arguments. (WT-en) Deni120 07:30, 10 August 2008 (EDT)

Sinaia is NOT in Transylvania

City names
Why do all the city names listed here have other names attached?: --(WT-en) Burmesedays 11:59, 2 April 2010 (EDT)
 * Braşov / Brassó / Kronstadt
 * Aiud / Nagyenyed / Straßburg am Mieresch
 * Cluj-Napoca / Kolozsvár / Klausenburg
 * Sibiu / Nagyszeben / Hermannstadt
 * Sighişoara / Segesvár / Schässburg
 * Sfântu Gheorghe / Sepsiszentgyorgy / Saint George / Sankt Georgen
 * Targu Mures / Marosvásárhely / Neumarkt


 * it's the Romanian, Hungarian and German names. The area used to be Hungarian and part of the (German-speaking) Austro-Hungarian Empire. That's why all the towns have three names. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 06:20, 13 July 2010 (EDT)


 * Obviously, they way they are listed at the main page now is not ideal (just like the double regions we use now). This page needs some desperate clean-up. --(WT-en) globe-trotter 19:34, 7 August 2010 (EDT)

Edits not showing
I have added some points about the getting around on bicycles and about the Armenian minority, but they don't show up in the article. Can anyone help me out? Thanks —The preceding comment was added by (WT-en) 88.134.17.199 (talk • contribs) 22:08, 12 July 2010


 * As far as I can see from the revision history of the page, your edits are still there. Wikivoyage has a caching problem lately, that's likely why you cannot see your edits (or the most recent edits for that matter) in the article page. To solve this, you can force purging cache by going into the edit window, scrolling to its bottom and then clicking the "Purge Cache for this page." link. Or you can simply click here, which will provide the same action. – (WT-en) Vidimian 05:16, 13 July 2010 (EDT)


 * And don't forget to refresh your browser window ;) --(WT-en) Peter Talk 18:49, 13 July 2010 (EDT)

Regions
The regionalisation of Transylvania is right now a mess. According to this article and the map, it is split in South-east, East, South-west and North-west. But no articles are made for these subregions. Instead, it is actually done as follows:

Romania
 * Transylvania
 * Alba County (empty article, 3 linked cities)
 * Bistrita-Nasaud County (empty article, 1 linked city)
 * Brasov County (empty article, 5 linked cities)
 * Cluj County (empty article, 4 linked cities)
 * Szeklerland (almost empty article)
 * Harghita (almost empty article, 1 linked city)
 * Covasna County (almost empty article, 1 linked city)
 * Mures County (empty article, 1 linked city)
 * Hunedoara (almost empty article, 14 linked cities)
 * Sibiu County (empty article, 3 linked article)

I suggest we change this in order to accomplish (1) that the map corresponds to the regional structure and (2) that there is only one level below Transylvania, which should really be enough with a total of 33 linked cities. The question is then whether to split it in the nine administrative regions or in the four as suggested on the map. To avoid having a number of region articles with only one linked city, I suggest we use the latter solution. Comments, please, --(WT-en) ClausHansen 16:56, 5 August 2010 (EDT)


 * Dividing along the lines of regions provided at the map gives us:
 * East (which incidentally is equal to Szeklerland, which I think is a better name since it implies a coherent, culturally distinct region) - 3 cities
 * Southeast - 8 cities
 * Southwest - 17 cities
 * Northwest - 5 cities
 * Not bad, although Szeklerland is below and Southwest is way above 5-9. Attaching Alba to Northwest gives us 8 cities, and Southwest (which then equals to Hunedoara) would have 14 cities. Still over 9, but better. However, naming Bistrita-Nasaud, Cluj, and Alba as "Northwest" would be a stretch, and "West" isn't much better either, since then Hunedoara (or "Southwest") would actually be more western than "West". A quick read on Transylvanian/Romanian geography and history at Wikipedia didn't yield better names for these regions, either. – (WT-en) Vidimian 04:40, 6 August 2010 (EDT)

Restarting this discussion
I think should merge the county articles into the subregion articles as they remain largely empty. I propose a five sub-region approach: Ground Zero (talk) 02:56, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * East Transylvania (Covasna County, Mureș County, Harghita County) — 11 cities with articles (according to Szeklerland, the modern definition of Szeklerland does not include all of Mures County, so I don't think we should use that name)
 * Southeast Transylvania (Sibiu County, Brașov County) — 14 cities with articles
 * Alba County — 6 cities with articles
 * Hunedoara County — 12 cities with articles
 * Northwest Transylvania (Bistrița-Năsăud County, Cluj County) — 6 cities with articles
 * Or, should we cut to the chase and eliminate the subregions, leaving only the 9 county articles? That might be a better idea. Ground Zero (talk) 10:58, 23 May 2021 (UTC)


 * I think it's better to leave only the 9 country articles. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | en.wikipedia) 11:00, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Done (a while ago). Ground Zero (talk) 11:53, 25 August 2021 (UTC)