Talk:Moldovan premier invites Romanian counterpart to pipeline start

Newsworthiness /relevance
Why would such a piece of news have any relevance? The prime ministers of two neighbouring countries having a meeting on Moldova's independence day and starting building a gas pipeline?

Moldova became independent (from the USSR) in 1991, but is still dependent on Russian gas. The was "frozen" because Russia had interrupted providing Moldova with any gas. Moldova population is about two thirds of Romanian ethnicity. So, Moldova is "de iure" independent, but economically dependent on Russia and culturally and historically it has strong connections with Romania.

By inviting the Romanian prime minister on their Independence Day, Moldovan prime minister is telling Romania: "See, we are independent. We are good neighbours, but you have to respect our independence". Then, on the very Day of Moldovan independence, the Moldovan premier shows the world and Russia that they chose to pursue a "de facto" economical and political independence from Russia. Moldovan politicians often accuse each other of having either Romanian or Russian biases, that is why their independence is very important to them.

I hope you may now understand the "symbolism" of this kind of meeting on that special day for Moldova.

P.S. No, I won't mind if you don't consider the article newsworthy. I've grown to understand (accept) that not everybody considers interesting the things I like or do. So you may review the article following your (wikinews') principles. Cheers. Calusarul (talk) 20:46, 10 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Off hand, it seems quite newsworthy to me. Sorry I haven't had time to review it yet.  --Pi zero (talk) 21:16, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Don't worry. I'm glad you find it interesting, I don't care so much about newsworthiness and have news published. If I write 100 and have on or two published, I'll be happy. Calusarul (talk) 21:56, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Review of revision 1949080 [Not ready]

 * Well, on Tuesday, July 9, the Moldovan prime minsiter visited the Romanian one and officially invited him to come to Moldova on August 27, when it's Moldovan national day (Independence Day) and the two prime ministers also inaugurate the building of a gas pipeline between the respective countries on that very day. I guess I should have mentioned that, but my main focus on what will happen on the 27th of August. The invitation might have arrived any other day, that was not important, the important fact I focused on was how the Moldova premier will spend his country's national holiday. As for Saturday, I don't see any Saturday mentioned in the article or any mention of the 6th of July. What Saturday are you referring to?
 * I re-wrote the lede, maybe it's more clear now. I understand criticism, but I don't know why you lost confidence. Yes, my news is not very clear and it's not bare facts. This one wouldn't have any significance as just facts, I tried to explain people who have barely ever heard of Moldova, a small East-European country, how this country is still struggling between the East and the West while still trying to be independent.
 * On one comment, you said it was somewhat an analysis. Well, why wouldn't it be? Let's assume I read the latest Transparency report on corruption and re-arrange the data, point out some facts, draw some conclusions. Aren't analysis articles allowed here? Only synthesis? Calusarul (talk) 16:41, 11 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I lost confidence that I understood what happened when.


 * We don't draw subjective conclusions. WN:NPOV.  Quite separately from that issue, the two basic kinds of articles we publish are synthesis and original reporting.  --Pi zero (talk) 17:39, 11 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Suddenly realized I'd forgotten to mention another difficulty when writing my review:
 * You say "Moldovan citizens see their country as the second most corrupted country in Europe"; I think you've said that not quite right, and I was having trouble working out, from the report, what it was you meant to say so that I could tweak it to say that. Presumably Moldova was the second worst on some criterion or other in the report, but I didn't find it off hand.  Perhaps I can find it on a second attempt.
 * --Pi zero (talk) 17:51, 11 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Well, analyses aren't original reports ? Never mind, I didn't really analyse anything there, I just explained why that visit is important for Moldovans.
 * Moldova is the second most corrupted European country in the latest report of Transparency International, and the things is they make those reports by asking people, you know, making surveys, polls. So, the place each country has on that report is a mirror of its own citizens' opinions. So, Moldova being the second most corrupted country in Europe is not a fact (how could corruption be measured, knowing that it's hidden?), it's the result of a survey among Moldovans shows.
 * I could never tell when or if my article is ready for another review and I feel people are not really interested in my stories here, maybe because they don't know much about those things and probably because I don't write them very clearly or in total agreement with wikinews policies. Calusarul (talk) 18:47, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
 * But I also don't see where I drew subjective conclusions. Calusarul (talk) 18:49, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Is there something in the review concerns you haven't tried to address? I'm not aware of anything.  Unless you know of something I've overlooked, there seems no reason for you not to resubmit.


 * I don't know why you think we're not interested. I've put a lot of effort into reviewing this article; I wouldn't do that if I weren't interested.  --Pi zero (talk) 18:58, 11 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I appreciate all your efforts. I mean, besides you, I doubt anyone else finds this article interesting. Maybe I should stick to writing on ro.wikinews. Anyway, I'll click the review button, but don't feel obligated to pass it. If you have other quastions, I'm here to answer them. Thanks for the help in copyediting too. Calusarul (talk) 19:06, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Review of revision 1949837 [Passed]

 * Well, even if the article passed, I don't like to leave things unclear.
 * (1) (ro) Inivitaţia a fost adresată la întâlnirea avută, marţi seara, de cei doi premieri la Palatul Victoria. "Sunt convins că discuţiile pe care le-am avut astăzi, foarte punctuale, ne vor permite ca pe 27 august, atunci când vom sărbători la Chişinău Ziua Independenţei, împreună cu domnul prim-ministru şi în prezenţa comisarului UE pentru energie, să putem lansa construcţia gazoductului Iaşi-Ungheni", a spus Leancă. = (en) The invitation was addressed on Tuesday at the bilateral meeting of the two prime mininsters at Palace Victoria (the building of the Romanian government). "I am convinced that the discussions we had today, very practical, will allow us - on August 27, when we celebrate the Independence Day in Chișinău, together with prime minister (the Romanian one) and in the presence of the EU energy commissioner - to start buliding the gas pipeline Iași-Ungheni", said Leancă (the Moldovan premier). (Source Mediafax)
 * (2) (ro) Cei doi prim-miniştri vor discuta despre dialogul politic pe linie guvernamentală pentru perioada următoare, vor stabili prioritățile, vor vorbi despre proiectele de interconectare energetic, de cooperare bilaterală în baza asistenței oferite de România etc. = (en) The two premiers will discuss about (how to improve) governmental communication, they will establish priorities, talk about the energetic interconnecting process, bilateral cooperation with Romanian assistance. (source: Jurnal.md) (The European Commission (kind of EU government) encourages and assists EU member states and partners to interconnect their energy networks (gas, oil, electricity) so that they can help each other when needed. Romania has already built gas pipelines with its neighbours Bulgaria and Hungary and will now build that pipeleine with Moldova. Moldova is a partner of the EU and they want to sign an Association Agreement, which means they will one day be part of the EU, when social, economical and political factors are according to EU standards.)
 * Mediafax is a private Romanian news agency, it has no connection to Adevărul Holding or Jurnal.md (other sources I mentioned). It is connected to and I think Time Warner or Turner Entertainment now has more than 50% of its shares. Other newspapers sometimes don't edit the news they get from Mediafax, that's why they resemble too much. I think they have a sister news agency with the same name in the Czech Republic.
 * The "energy independence" that Moldova is trying to achieve means that they try do diversify its sources of energy. Currently, Moldova imports all its gas from Russia and when Russia and Ukraine didn't get along too well, Moldova feared they would have problems, because they get the gas via Ukraine. (Also check this out if you will Lithuania supports Moldova’s aspirations for energy independence and European integration)
 * Yes, you are right about the new focus, I'll try and focus better next time. If more explanation or Calusarul (talk) 11:26, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
 * "For years, Moldova struggled wth the burden of importing 95 percent of its fuel. When gas was cheaper, national policies promoted its use, including by connecting almost all rural communities to gas lines. Then prices began to soar, skyrocketing six times over the past six years. The government responded with a commitment to increase the share of renewable energy to up to 20 percent of national consumption by 2020. (Moldova is part of the global Sustainable Energy for All initiative.)Biomass fuel brings jobs and energy independence to Moldova Calusarul (talk) 11:41, 12 July 2013 (UTC)