Talk:Transnistria

From Wikivoyage
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Formatting and language conventions

For articles about Transnistria, please use the 24-hour clock to show times, e.g. 09:00-12:00 and 18:00-00:00.

Please show prices in this format: 100 rubles, and not PRB 100 or 100 RUP.

Please use American spelling.

Infobox[edit]

I'd suggest restoring the infobox -- regardless of legal niceties, Transnistria is as de-facto independent as, say, Northern Cyprus. (WT-en) Jpatokal 10:04, 2 July 2006 (EDT)

isIn[edit]

Currently, this article is not listed on the Eastern Europe page, but is listed under Moldova#Regions as a "territorial unit" together with the explanation "...break-away region east of the Dniester River, on the Ukrainian border, where Russian forces are supporting the Slavic minority population, mostly Ukrainians and Russians, who have proclaimed a unrecognized "Transnistria" republic."

So I changed the isIn back from {{isIn|Eastern_Europe}} to {{isIn|Moldova}} for hierarchical (and geographic?) consistency - if this isn't appropriate, maybe Transnistria could/should be added to the Eastern Europe page. ~ 203.144.143.8 06:28, 21 December 2006 (EST)

Mf. I hate issues like this, but my thinking is that while some Transnistrians would violently object to being "in" Romania, pretty much everybody can agree that it is in Eastern Europe. De facto, for the traveller, it is a separate country — but as Moldova claims it, it should also be listed under Moldova. (WT-en) Jpatokal 10:03, 21 December 2006 (EST)

I just performed a very lengthy update of the entire page. I'm a volunteer with an NGO stationed in Moldova, and I travel to Transnistria quite a bit. It's a great place, but it also presents a lot of problems for travellers. I've added quite a bit about the border crossings to the page, and have fleshed out many of the other sections based on my experiences and on the experiences of others foreign nationals who have attempted to travel in Transnistria. I don't normally edit Wikipedia, so I have no account. But you can check this IP! It's Moldova! 83.218.213.6 08:37, 5 February 2007 (EST)

I hope you (or someone else) can update the article again. The following sentences are contradictory — it's a strain to see how both quotes could be true: "Due to the ongoing hostilities with Moldova proper (since July 2004), it is generally not advisable to travel there," and "And despite the political situation with Moldova, there is essentially no threat of being caught in a military action. As of this writing (Feb. 2007), there has not been fighting in Transnistria for almost 15 years." 68.127.171.94 00:37, 21 September 2007 (EDT)

Trains; bribes[edit]

Hello, I have travelled three times to Transnistria and I have always used the train Odessa-Tiraspol, which runs frequently. I have heard of infrequent disruption of trains between Moldova and Transnistria, but as far as I'm aware the trains between Odessa and Transnistria run.

About bribes: During my time in Transnistria (altogether more than two months) I had never needed to bribe any policemen, soldiers etc. The situation is much worse in Ukraine or Moldova. 84.171.201.175 April 2008

I have travelled to Priednestrovie about five times, crossing the border pretty much every way that is possible, and I never paid a bribe or heard of someone paying a bribe. If anything I was met with more respect and professionalism by the border police than in Ukraine and Moldova. This article is full of prejudice, russophobia and unnecessarily scares tourists. (Unregistered User, February/2022) —The preceding comment was added by 79.136.41.98 (talk • contribs)
Dear Mr./Ms./Mx. Unregistered User: Would you like to complain about an article on a Wiki that anyone can edit, or would you like to edit anything in the article that is inaccurate? Though having established already that you have a chip on your shoulder, it would be better for you to itemize the things you consider inaccurate and get a consensus behind changing them. You have to be willing to respect consensus to participate on a Wiki, and you've already insulted what the preexisting consensus has written in this article and established that you have a motive to scrub anything remotely negative from the article even if it were accurate. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:24, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the parts about bribes at border crossings -- I crossed the border without any hassle, and I take the anon editor's statement about border crossings at face value. I ignored the rest of their rant as there was nothing specific in question. Ground Zero (talk) 19:17, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with missing Moldovan entry/exit stamps due to entry/exit through Transnistria[edit]

I could not find any reports people have ever had problems because of this. If there are, please point them out! After all, there will be an entry/exit stamp from Ukraine, containing date and name of the Ukraine/Transnistria border crossing so it is obvious how the passport holder has entered/left the country. I have traveled UA-PMR-MD-UA this January (2011) and wasn't even asked any questions on leaving MD. That said, I'd like to remove/rephrase this "warning" accordingly as it'll only worry people needlessly. (WT-en) T 18:05, 15 January 2011 (EST)

Next Russian-occupied area to be absorbed by Russia[edit]

Reports state that moves are now afoot to make Transnistria part of Russia, just like Crimea. We need to watch and act accordingly. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:44, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

... still watching. Ibaman (talk) 20:11, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Russia's a bit busy lately, as I think you've noticed. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:15, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
yeah, but not in this region, so far, contrary to many expectations, including mine (Donetsk and Lugansk have been claimed to be officially annexed into Russia but Transnistria has not; I was kinda expecting some such military or official action since 2014, actually but, alas, nothing has happened). Let me also express my happiness about the Pridnestrovie name-pushing by anonymous IPs being long inactive here AND in Wikipedia. Ibaman (talk) 20:26, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You were hoping for death and destruction (military action)? Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:58, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
oh please IK. You know me. I would never "hope" or "cheer" for something like this, I was aware of the possibility and vigilant whether it might or would happen. Listening closely for news and their ramifications. Ready to replicate here any official statements or developments relevant for travellers.
I'm actually glad to mark the time that the war never came close to Transnistria, hopefully it never will. Just look at this timeline, since 2014 we were FEARING for something like this to happen. Yet, it didn't, and this, yes, makes me glad. At a personal level, my main hope is that the conflict be over and the region can be safe for travel and tourism again. Ibaman (talk) 21:23, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I know you, but I also know you're pro-Russian and anti-Ukrainian. But in this case, you misused the word "alas." Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:31, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For Wikivoyage:Geographical hierarchy, we should follow the principles of Wikivoyage:The traveller comes first, with regards to transportation, immigration rules, and other practical concerns. Transnistria has no land connection or scheduled transport to Russia proper, and will probably remain as such. Kaliningrad is an exclave, but is an integrated part of Russia, and still has scheduled transportation to Russia proper, though the sanctions have complicated the situation. Crimea is a similar case, though the Russian occupation violates international law, but this can change on short notice. /Yvwv (talk) 21:59, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Safety[edit]

Any information on how safe it is to visit this area in 2018? Marathonian (talk) 19:07, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I visited in September this year, and it felt as safe as other European countries. Ground Zero (talk) 20:07, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Mostly safe. Be careful with taking pictures of administrative buildings, police, military, and anything related to that (Moldova is even more paranoic, so Transnistria may feel more relaxed if you go there after Chisinau). You may encounter youngsters who roam around and sometimes approach strangers in a rather annoying manner, but they should be harmless unless you provoke them. And they probably won't be able to speak English.
Do not overstay. Better ask registration for a longer period than you actually need, or make sure that you leave on time. --Alexander (talk) 20:47, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See section[edit]

Why doesn't this article have any, unlike other country or region level articles? 147.147.52.22 22:10, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Because no-one added one, I guess? Perhaps you'd like to add one and add content to it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:44, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There are only three city articles for Transnistria. Why would it be subdivided? Unless, of course, more content were added, which would be supergood. Ground Zero (talk) 06:39, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think you misread the thread-starter's question, which is why there's no "See" section in this country-level article. There should be one. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:50, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I missed the point entirely. Thanks for pointing that out. Ground Zero (talk) 07:06, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pridnestrovie[edit]

Every once in a while, since the beginning of this community, the occasional complaint about using the Latin or the Russian term for this region comes back again. I hope the newly-written "Respect" section is enough to keep everybody happy about this subject matter. Ibaman (talk) 20:55, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If "Transnistria" is so offensive, someone should tell the country's biggest tour operator, Transnistria Tour. Ground Zero (talk) 21:26, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What does Krasnoselsky have to do with it, when a tourist can simply be beaten up by random people because he said this "transnistria" just by negligence or ignorance? 31.31.13.73 21:56, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide evidence that this has happened? A link to a news report, for example? That would help. Thanks. Ground Zero (talk) 22:03, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd like to elaborate on this discussion, as I happen to be Brazilian, speak Portuguese (that derives from Latin) as my mother tongue, and also happen to enjoy studying Russian language, history and culture. The standard term in Portuguese for the country is "Transnístria" (that is, "beyond the Dniester river"; from the geographical point of view of every Latin-derived language spoken inside Europe, it is indeed). Brazil's political situation right now is well-known on world news, with a right-wing government keen on spreading biased information through Twitter. There's a lot of misinformation going on about Ukraine and Syria et cetera. When I discuss world politics (which I do very often), I like to ask the interlocutor "Ever heard about Transnístria? (hardly any bolso-hooligan has ever. That's when I explain geography and history and language and present situation) By the way, don't use this name to their face, they call their land Pridnestrovie ("at this side of the Dniester river", the Russian geographical point of view)." I reckon it would be futile to dream the Latin term will become obsolete in a foreseeable future, specially when it comes to the Latin linguistic branch. I say this as a polyglot student. Speaking as a traveller, I hope I can one day get to know Tiraspol, preferably on a road trip from Kishinev to Odessa. Ibaman (talk) 23:03, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm fortunate to have been to Tiraspol, and really enjoyed my visit. I recommend the tour company that I linked above as they gave me great perspective on how people live in an unrecognized country. Also I recommend trying the Kvint brandy. It's really good. Ground Zero (talk) 02:08, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • This is actually not a Latin term, but a Romanian one ("Nistru" is the Romanian name for the Dniester River). It really literally translates as "through the Dniester", "on the other side of the Dniester" - of course, from Romania. And this term appeared as a designation of the territory of the modern Odessa region of Ukraine occupied by Romania during the Second World War, where they committed genocide of the civilian population, killing more than 300 thousand people. This term has nothing to do with the PMR, especially since this region lies on both sides of the Dniester River and even less so not "beyond the Dniester" (because it is not Romania). Local residents remember and know this very well, which is why I say that tourists should be warned not to offend people, because this word is an extremely rude and derogatory insult for the inhabitants of this country who suffered from the Romanian aggression in 1918-40, 1941-44 and in 1992. It can sadly end for them, then they will whine on the Internet in their stupid blogs, that Pridnestrovie is a barbaric country and what kind of evil and inhospitable people are there. I wonder if you, as a native speaker of the Portuguese language and a polyglot student, know where this word came from in your language? I understand that saying that this is an established term is stupid, because not even a fraction of the percent of native speakers have heard about Pridnestrovie, but you used exactly it. 31.31.13.73 08:11, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, we should clearly state that this term can offend, and I think a brief version of why also provides a useful context, but what is the likelihood of a foreigner who in most cases wouldn't know any better being physically attacked for using that name? The point really is to provide as strong a warning as necessary, but not to overstate things. If it's not likely for ignorant foreigners to be assaulted, what is likely? For them to be yelled at? Stared at hostilely? Or simply requested to use the other name, which will be harder for non-Slavs to pronounce but which they should certainly try saying? Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:20, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
1234. Of course, no one was killed or crippled here to write about this in the news, but I have come across such conflicts more than once personally: today these ignorant "tourists" travel to Tiraspol with whole buses. And the reason is precisely in such articles on the Internet, which not very smart people perceive as common truth that does not need to be checked. 31.31.13.73 08:22, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've moved your reply to the bottom because it was the last reply. I understand why you put it where you did, but it's easier to follow discussions in a straight chronology. That said, please describe the conflicts you've witnessed. What happened? Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:33, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The biggest tour operator? All local tour operators work for the local population, organizing trips abroad. This is a small individual entrepreneur who advertised himself on the Internet. There are actually several of them, among the local population they are known for being associated with the organization of gay tourism. What else to expect from gay prostitutes, other than "transnistria"? 31.31.13.73 08:30, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you're trying to establish credibility by insulting people and making apparently anti-gay remarks, try a different method. I suggest you state very clearly what the consequences have been for foreigners using the term that a local travel agency - however you want to characterize them - also uses. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:37, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, this is also an important note: in Pridnestrovie one should not openly declare non-traditional sexual addictions and orientations, here such behavior is not understood; in general, sexual licentiousness is highly discouraged. However, this is characteristic of all countries of Russian culture. 31.31.13.73 08:55, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In fact, the locals are quite friendly if they do not see malicious intent. Most likely, using their school knowledge of English, they will simply correct it: "Not transnistria, but Pridnestrovie". But if this tourist will be stubborn, even worse, if he starts to talk about Romania or Moldova, then it all depends on who he is talking with. People here are different too. Incidentally, I doubt that "Pridnestrovie" is more difficult to pronounce than the ugly Romanian word "transnistria" for any speaker. 31.31.13.73 08:40, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. So what do you think needs to be changed in the article? Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:45, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The smartest thing is to correct the title of the article by setting the name of Pridnestrovie as title, to remove all references to "transnistria", with the exception of the comment about the insulting words. Although I understand that the local lobby of the Romanian nationalists will not allow this, so decide for yourself. 31.31.13.73 08:55, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There is no such lobby at Wikivoyage. I would like you to read Wikivoyage:Naming conventions. As long as Transnistria is used more often in English than Pridnestrovie, we are duty-bound to use that as the title of the article, per site policy. So in view of that, what else do you think should be changed in the article in the interest of travelers? Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:09, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It exist at least in the English Wikipedia, and very aggressive. I’m here for the first time, so I don’t know yet, but I suspect that no discrepancies with Wikipedia are expected.
As for use: in English there is no established designation for Pridnestrovie. Just for the reason that almost none of the native speakers have even heard of this country. The term used is determined solely by context. You tell the common man Pridnestrovie or Transnistria - without explaining what you talking about, he simply won’t understand in any case.
The name "Transnistria" appeared in 1992 during the Moldovan-Pridnestrovian war, when the aggressive nationalists who came to power in Moldova needed to somehow name the breakaway state. It was then that they recalled the term of Romanian Nazi criminals, because they could not use the "Russian" name. Then it leaked to the West, because (for obvious reasons) the Western media broadcasted Romanian and Moldovan sources in connection with this war.
Over time, this word was almost forgotten: official sources used either "Stînga Nistrului" if it was about the administrative division of Moldova, or "PMR" if it was about the breakaway state itself. It received a “new life” with the spread of the Internet and the advent of Wikipedia, which became the main distributor of the term in the Internet environment. Refer to Wikipedia to confirm the meaning of the term in Wikipedia itself? It’s ridiculous.
In English, the most common name of the subject now is "Stînga Nistrului" or "Left bank of the Dniester", as follows from official documents of Moldova. This is natural, given that the main area where English is used in relation to this subject is the issue of resolving the frozen conflict and the diplomatic relations of the participants in the negotiation process, including EU and USA. All the use of "transnistria" comes down to Internet dumps, the source of which is Wikipedia, nothing more. To declare on this basis that the subject under discussion, which almost no one had ever heard of outside of ex-USSR, has some kind of an established designation in the language, it is simply meaningless. A designation may appear only with recognition of the independence of this state and the inclusion of its name in official norms and standards. Today we should be guided by the official documents of the state that is described here, and the self-name of the people, and not engage in promoting biased and offensive terminology.
While I await your reply: I think we can make the language in "Respect" a little stronger. How's this?
The term "Transnistria", with its Latin etymology, evokes memories of the brutal Romanian occupation during World War II and the Holocaust. According to president Vadim Krasnoselsky's statement in 2019, the Latin name is "unacceptable for Pridnestrovie", and "foreigners should get used to saying its true name".
I repeat: the etymology of this word is Romanian, even the prefix "trans-" is not Latin, but Romanian, borrowed from Latin. And in content, this term expresses the claims of the time of the Antonescu regime. We should indicate to travelers not only how this term is treated in the country, but also that it should not be used at all. 31.31.13.73 10:42, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
About LGBT folks being discreet: Sure that should be mentioned, but that doesn't mean people should be making anti-gay remarks on talk page threads. Is it better to add a caution for LGBT people in "Respect" or "Stay safe"? Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:21, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t think that fagots are so stupid as to go to Pridnestrovie and arrange gay parades. In my opinion, we can skip information about it, it’s better just about the inadmissibility of sexual licentiousness. 31.31.13.73 10:47, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You are participating on an international board now. Continuing to use bigoted language will not be tolerated and could get you blocked from posting here. Keep your hatred and bigotry to yourself. And I studied a year of Latin. "Trans" is Latin for "across" and is indeed used as a prefix in Latin. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:12, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
And I've never heard of "Stînga Nistrului", so that's obviously not the term most often used in English. And please just post each new remark at the end of the thread, because it's hard to see your posts, otherwise. Wikivoyage explicitly does not use official names unless they are the most often used in English. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:15, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • At this point I think it's useful to remember the example of Hungary, which in their own language is called the "Magyar Republic", and in every other language "the land of the Huns". They would like to correct this, and have been trying for more than a hundred years, unsuccessfully. I also have never heard of "Stînga Nistrului" and can testify that "Transnistria" is a very natural word in Portuguese, as it is in Spanish and Italian, as is "Transnistrie" in French. It's pure lingustics, nothing to do with any political bias whatsoever. Ibaman (talk) 11:24, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've been to Hungary, and I didn't know about this campaign. It's strange because Magyars clearly consider themselves in some ways a continuation of the Huns, in spite of the fact that the Huns were a Germanic tribe and the Magyars are not Germanic. Whereas Attila is a fearsome name outside of Hungary, Magyars consider him a national hero, and Attila is a very common man's name in Hungary. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:31, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've never been to Hungary; my road trip took me from Bratislava to Vienna, Zagreb and Ljubljana, I passed along. So it seems I have just repeated a hearsay, and the Hungarians don't mind being called Hungarians. I'm glad to have brought up this example. Ibaman (talk) 11:59, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ After seeing the unregistered user's hateful comments, I no longer care what he thinks on this or any other topic. His comments show that he is just some ignorant bigot with an agenda to push. He should not feel welcome here. He should move on to some dark corner of the web where where his/her hatred will be acceptable. It isn't here. Ground Zero (talk) 12:19, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, but with one caveat: The traveller comes first remains the guiding principle of this site, so if that means a slightly stronger caution about the name and a caution for LGBT people to be discreet, that's what should be in the article. So let's just agree on a form of words. I think you're the only registered user on this thread who's actually been to Transnistria. What do you think? Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:39, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've changed it a bit:
"The name "Transnistria", while commonly used in English, evokes memories of the brutal Romanian occupation during World War II and the Holocaust. President Vadim Krasnoselsky, in 2019, said that the Latin name is "unacceptable for Pridnestrovie", and "foreigners should get used to saying its true name". Calling the country by this name could avoid giving offense, and may win you friends."
What do you think?
As far as LGBT people, I don't know if there is any more concern there than any other country in the region. I wouldn't take the bigot's word for it. I was only there a couple of nights, and the issue didn't come up, but then husband and I don't wear rainbow-flag t-shirts when we travel. Ground Zero (talk) 17:49, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm good with this. Thanks! Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:05, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Although I haven't been there, my understanding is that homosexuality is not as well-accepted in Russia and some of the former Soviet Union countries as it is in Western Europe. If people who are openly gay are likely to face harassment from locals, that is something we should state. That said, I highly doubt that the situation is as bad as in a place like Uganda, where most of the population wants to rape all lesbian women and kill all gay men.
As for the unregistered user, perhaps we should extend the ban to a permanent one, just as we did for ArticCynda. I think we should definitely make a strong statement that bigotry is not tolerated on this site. The dog2 (talk) 18:38, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In Russia, there have been lots of cases of egregious attacks on and government persecution of LGBT people. Our article goes into some detail about this, appropriately. With this country, we have no reliable information. I don't think we would want to go much further than saying, "Like other countries in the region, there is less acceptance of LGBT people than in many developed countries." Ground Zero (talk) 18:59, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The dog2, I don't think we can permaban an IP. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:28, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The user in question is registered on Wikipedia, and tried to do the same exact additions to w:Transnistria and w:Names of Transnistria. So far, he's been | rolled back on all edits except his own talk page. I'm vigilant, and shall report any situation that might deserve some actoin from our part. Ibaman (talk) 19:36, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020[edit]

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Here's a travel vlog from an English tourist in the area: [1]. It doesn't look like using the name "Transnistria" got him assaulted by locals. The dog2 (talk) 21:07, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

He was told this directly at 5:00, what are you talking about? Further, he did not dare to publicly use this word. 217.19.215.63 16:34, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The person above is wrong. I work as a journalist for a local media outlet and have access to Pridnestrovian police reports. So, in the center of Tiraspol near the central square there is a "flea market" where the local population, mainly pensioners, sells all kinds of household items, souvenirs and the like. About a year ago, a tourist came there and asked for "symbols of transnistria" or "flag of transnistria", I don't remember exactly. As a result, one salesman smashed his face. Then the police decided to quietly hush everything up and simply sent this narrow-minded tourist out of the country in order not to make the case public. This is just one of the cases that recently caught my eye. I really do not recommend provoking the local population, especially the elderly who remember the Romanian occupation. 217.19.215.63 16:29, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think this was one isolated incident? It's OK with me if you think that it's in the interests of travelers to warn them that using the name Transnistria while in the country could possibly provoke a violent reaction, but I wouldn't go overboard based on a single incident. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:10, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No, this is not an isolated incident, but it is that I can personally vouch for this case, since I am directly acquainted with it. Besides I can say about the attitude of people to such a careless attitude towards their feelings and the history of their country, which is extremely negative, therefore I am sure that the case is not single case of provoked abuse. But the local government prefers not to advertise this cases for not create a negative image of the country for tourists. 217.19.215.63 18:15, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
More importantly, is this the same person again that posted earlier in the year and was blocked for incivility? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 17:28, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Are you surprised that Pridnestrovian monopolist Internet provider[2] has the same IP range for all ADSL connections for one city or region? By the way, just about the disagreement with him I wrote above, because he did not report that a more serious conflict could arise. 217.19.215.63 18:15, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I reckon the IP range is identical. If I was to bet money, it'd be on a Yes option. Ibaman (talk) 17:31, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • The linked video tells us that Pridnestrovia is the preferred term. It does not tell us that it could "provoke a violent reaction", so we have no evidence of that. I am opposed to adding such a warning on the basis of an unsupported claim by an abusive jerk. I think it more likely reflects his own violent feelings on the issue than any actual threats. I took tours with two diffent guides, and I do not recall either of them mentioning any problem with using "Transnistria ", and I am sure than neither of them corrected my use of Transnistria — I would remember that and use the "correct" term if I were told to do so. To be fair, both of them work for Transnistria Tour, the largest tour operator to the country. Ground Zero (talk) 18:08, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • I just told what I know and see, because I live here and work with public opinion professionally (unlike a foreign tourist that stayed here for several hours). By the way, this is the first time I've heard about the mentioned "largest tour operator", here are the sites of local travel operators: niagara-pmr.com, intour-travels.ru, bon-voyage-pmr.com, vladora-tour.com, elittur-travel.com, poehalisnamipmr.com that actually work in Pridnestrovie. 217.19.215.63 18:25, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Since you are asking what can be useful for tourists to know, I consider it necessary to mention one more point. You probably know that WWII Victory Day, May 9, is widely celebrated in Pridnestrovie; this holiday is even higher in importance than Republic (Independence) Day. This is not an element of state propaganda: in every Pridnestrovian family without exception there was or is a person who fought or died in this war, or worked in the rear, or suffered in the occupation or concentration camps.
So, in the Criminal Code of the PMR there is article No. 242-1 "Insulting the memory of the Great Patriotic War":
Public actions or statements expressing clear disrespect for society and aimed at distorting reliably proven information about the Great Patriotic War, or belittling the merits of the participants in the Great Patriotic War, as well as persons who died in the fight against fascism - shall be punished with a fine in the amount of 500 (five hundred) to 1000 (one thousand) calculated levels of the minimum wage, or correctional labor for a term of up to 2 (two) years, or imprisonment for a term of up to 5 (five) years.
The use of the terminology of Nazi war criminals in relation to the modern Pridnestrovie directly falls under this article. I suppose a tourist would not like to come here for a few hours, but stay for 5 years, and in a prison. 217.19.215.63 11:53, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Is this law ever applied to tourists? If it were, you'd think that tour companies like Tour Transnistria and GoTransnistria would warn their customers in order to avoid problems. If the law isn't applied to tourists, then we don't need a warning here. The existing wording is sufficient Ground Zero (talk) 12:45, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The law applies to everyone (articles No. 4 and 10). Think for yourself: if you come as a tourist to a foreign country and you kill a person there, then do you really think that you will not end up in jail just because you are a tourist and do not know local laws? Apparently, the PMR Government decided to deal with this issue more thoroughly than before, if even the President of the PMR himself made a speech on this matter. I am not aware of the companies mentioned, because I have never dealt with them: how they earn and how responsibly they treat their clients is exclusively their business. I do not work in the tourism sector, but for professional needs as a media representative I have close contacts with law enforcement agencies, courts and parliament members, so I know what I am writing about. 217.19.215.63 13:29, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
People expect governments to prosecute tourusts for murder. Prosecuting tourists for using the common English name of a country instead of the government's preferred name would be a hostile way of treating visitors, lead to international ridicule, and destroy what tourism there is in the country. So I don't think that the PMR government is going to prosecute tourists under the stupid law. If you cant provide evidence that it is a credible threat, we don't need a warning. Ground Zero (talk) 14:08, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt that the claims about "common English name" and "stupid law" will be taken in court as arguments in favor of the accused. Especially if this case is not dealt with by the police, but by the Ministry of State Security. I warned that I know; if there is other information, I will provide it if it will be possible.
Note: the share of tourism in the GDP of Pridnestrovie is ~0.03%. This includes domestic tourism and Russian-speaking visitors. So think, what is more profitable for the Pridnestrovian authorities: to anger their own population or to rein in fools who have not even familiarized themselves with the name of the country to which they have arrived. 217.19.215.63 14:46, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm here to build a travel guide; you're here to push your agenda on the name of this country. The official name is included here, along with advice on not giving offence. That's enough. I'm going back to building a travel guide. Please take your campaign elsewhere. Ground Zero (talk) 15:20, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Did you expect me to register and participate in writing an article titled Transnistria? No thanks. I have already shared with you the first-hand information that I saw fit; how to use it, decide for yourself. 217.19.215.63 17:25, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes, discouraging tourism! Since you're not here to serve travelers, best to go elsewhere, and have a good day. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:42, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
During my brief visit to PMR, I found people to be pleasant and welcoming. I don't think that this unhappy, cranky dude is representative of the people of the country. Ground Zero (talk) 19:46, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I can't exactly be quite sure exactly what name you should objectively use to locals. I'm getting conflicting reports from all types of people. I can recall a video made by a Romanian travelling couple [3] on Youtube (you know, the stereotyical kind) where they used "Transnistria" in front of a lady selling meat in the market in Tiraspol (most prominently at 26:30). I don't believe that you shouldn't use Pridnestrovie in the country itself. In fact, you really should, because it's respectful to the people there, but I don't quite believe you will be beaten up when you made a mistake as an obvious tourist. TheElectrifiedFreak (talk) 19:26, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Commonly used name in English[edit]

For anyone who still has concerns about the name of the country commonly used in English, I will note that the foreign affairs ministries of the five English-speaking countries cited in the Warning Box — UK, USA, Canada, Australia, and Ireland — all call the country "Transnistria". Ground Zero (talk) 20:01, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Part of Eastern Europe?[edit]

Currently, Transnistria is categorized as part of the Balkans. I would argue that it should be categorized with the new region Eastern Europe. Transnistria i culturally East Slavic and post-Soviet, more than Moldovan or Romanian. We already make a stretch of the word Balkans by including Moldova. /Yvwv (talk) 21:07, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You started this discussion at Talk:Eastern_Europe#Transnistria in July. I think it is best to continue the discussion there so that I don't have you repeat what I wrote there. Ground Zero (talk) 21:15, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bender or Bendery?[edit]

Hey there, you might've seen me edit this page a lot. No reason other than being very bored, but I've come across a difficulty, and that is: is the name of the city on the right bank of the Dniester weirdly belonging to Transnistria (formerly called Tighina) called Bender or Bendery? I know in Russian latinization the letter ы in English is y, but on the other hand most English and non-Russian or Ukrainian foreign sources also call it some variation of Bender without a drop-off like sound ы makes. A lot of instances of Bender and Bendery are found on the page, so I just want to make this clear for further simplification. Thanks. TheElectrifiedFreak (talk) 19:32, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Our friends at Wikipedia have concluded here, that "Bender" is the common name in English, and that "Bendery" would be the Russian version. Wikivoyage uses English names over others, so we should stick with Bender, unless the common English usage has changed since Wikipedia considered it last. Ground Zero (talk) 21:46, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikivoyage.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Transnistria&oldid=4698953"