Talk:Romanichal

message: Two facts caught my attention and made me remove a misleading and unproven information on this article (regarding Elvis Presley supposed Romanichal background):
- The provided reference concerns to Michael Caine ancestry and not Elvis ancestry.
- There was no valid and well-accepted reference supporting the claim of Elvis Romanichal ancestry in the article.
Since the citation failed to meet validity criteria to be taken into account, I removed Elvis Presley name from the section that mentions people with Romanichal ancestry.
Please, don't undo the modification unless clear and valid references surfaces. --Δ Mr. Nighttime Δ (talk) 17:00, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misleading information removed 

message: Are Romnichal ethnic Gypsies or simply considered Gypsies because of their way of life. I have seen images of Romnichal, never met one in person, and they do not look of Indian origin as do the Gypsies of Spain and the Balkans.--Burgas00 11:55, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  . 

message: Many true Romanichal from the families such as Lee, Cooper and Boswell are very dark in appearance but nowadays what tends to happen is many other British travelling groups try and go under the Romani banner and give a false impression. The other problem is with the title 'Gypsy' as every travelling people gets branded as gypsy and it disguises the distinction betweens the different groups. The proper word should be "travellers" such as Irish traveller or showground traveller or Romani traveller. Not all Romanichal travel and Romani is a racial type and not a word to be associated to all travelling people.
True Roms know who is Romani by their Nav (pronounced Nahv which is Romani for name). The real truth it seems is that most travellers in the UK are actually of a European origin such as Irish and Scottish travellers, Show people, circus people and a large number come from the east end of London who took to living in caravans and tents during the summer to supply the much needed work force required for the farms of Kent and Sussex that fed London. The many different origins can be seen in the differences in appearance to some of the families. 
At the turn of the 1900's it becoming very much harder to travel and the British councils forced all travelling groups to stay on council sites putting the many different groups together. There is now a majorly mixed breed travelling people who speak a mixed language.
Some families such as some Lees, Coopers and Boswells have been stricter with their laws of marrying out the Romani group and are still dark in appearance where as some others have not been so strict and can be quite fair.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.34.227.166 (talk) 17:08, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Romanichal 

message: Romnichals are considered gypsies because they are of gypsy descent that emigrated to The British Isles expecially England , Ireland, & some in Scotland and do use the gypsy language Romnes ok just telling you
chav
: Since Wikipedia itself states that Romanichals and what you must call "regular gypsies" are the same (see romanichal), there's no need to redeclare it. And yes, Romanichals and "gypsies" are the same people and they call themselves Roma people and not "gypsies". --Δ Mr. Nighttime Δ (talk) 16:47, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Word for thought 

message: I made a History section with info from here. For the first part, I used the word Romani(es), as in the acception of Ian Hancock, that is politically correct for naming any Romani groups (since all use this as adjective when describing the personal culture, be they Roma, Romnichals, Kale, Sinte) and after the crystalization of the Romnichal group I used this name.Desiphral-देसीफ्राल 10:37, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good stuff... I thought this entry could do with a bit of work, particularly when I saw that it had been recommended for deletion as a potential hoax(!), but I've been pretty busy in real life. Dinlo juk 12:28, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: Is used throughout to distinguish a contrast from a life on the move. Surely static or settled would be better as I believe sedentary to mean sitting rather than standing?
Jatrius (talk) 10:56, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The term 'sedentary'? 

message: I've tagged the legislation section as it could do with a bit more on the government's POV of legislation - right now it seems very anti-gov. Paulbrock (talk) 13:19, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutral point of view

message: I am from a Romani family and I was shocked to come on Wikipedia and notice Gaje / Gorja (non-Romani) writers presenting incorrect facts about our heritage.
Under the title 'diddkoi' it says that this is a word we use for non-Romani travellers which all true Romanichals will know is wrong.
Didikai (as we now usually spell it) is a word meaning mix bloods and Pikey is a word we use for either non-Romani travellers or Romanis that have been expelled from the tribe.
**My family always used the word diddikoi to mean a friend who wasn't gypsy. But word meanings get changed up depending on region and generation. Pikey is just what we call non romani travelers, but Pikey is its own subgroup of non roma travelers. 63.133.134.18 (talk) 22:56, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Explaining the words Didikai & Pikey 

message: I think this page should be moved to Romanichal, which is more popular and probably more accurate.AKoan (talk) 13:07, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: it turns out that, as by the article's own admission, "Romanichal" is a neologism, and per WP:NAME the article should probably reside at English Romanies instead. --dab (𒁳) 09:53, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think that is that new. It completely replaced "Kale", which was the designation that they historical used. AKoan (talk) 10:39, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move to Romanichal 

message: The claims that famous celebrities are English Romanies (in the strict sense of the term) have already been criticized by professional journalists (the next best thing to academics) and especially by David Altheer (researcher on gypsy culture) as misleading: see Spiked-Online & Dailymail. Ignoring this serious criticism in the article is blatantly POV. In my opinion, encyclopedias must be purely descriptive and should not be related to any kind of ethnic pride or role-model promotion. But even in the case that one is to seek those goals via WP, the propagation of anecdotes is not a legitimate way to do it. Here is a suitable quote by Altheer: "There are plenty of potential role models for gipsies who are quite happy to put themselves up as such. I object to these myths being propagated among schoolchildren when the idea is to be educating them about gipsies." --Omnipaedista (talk) 08:36, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't had the time to pay much attention to this article, but as far as I know only Elvis Presley's ancestry is anecdotally. You can remove him if you want. Kenshin (talk) 10:04, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Opre Rom, I dont think the article is bias and actually most of the famous people listed are in a cited source from the book We are the Romany people [] ok it says unless a person comes out with their descent its not 100% but it also says most famous people with Romany heritage are reluctant to say such things as they are scared what the non Romany people might do. Also Dr. Ian Hancock who wrote the book is himself a Romany, has done some reserch on the genaeology of Elvis and does conclude that he was of Romany descent. On the point made above in the articles by the Daily Mail. Really when has this paper with its middle English conservative views had anything good to say about my people? The answer is never! I take anything they say with a pinch of salt. Also when the gypsyologist David Altheer says comments like talking about those people ie Michael Caine's family with no traditional gypsy trades. Well my familly 100 years ago were full blooded English Romany who were fishmongers so your trade doesnt mean your ethnic background. Thank youSunset through the clouds (talk) 00:00, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  People, to being labeled Roma, must reach certain conditions such as mother and father or a serious and well-proven ancestry. Elvis Presley "ancestry" simply is not factual, there's no proof of it, so it must be removed until someone bring something solid to here. --Δ Mr. Nighttime Δ (talk) 14:44, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Misleading infobox

message: I nearly choked when I read this intro to an article from Russia Today's website: "Love them or loathe them, travelers in Britain are thriving, lapping up laws there to be exploited. With their population increasing dramatically, gypsies in the UK cannot be ignored." And RT prides itself on "quality" journalism... Do such stories count as manifestations of anti-Romanichal, antiziganistic stereotypes? —Zalktis (talk) 13:25, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Poorly written, self-publicising, patronising, populist drivel! (lest there be a misunderstanding I am referring to the journalist concerned; I wouldn't take it as seriously as she would like) RashersTierney (talk) 14:10, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prejudicial images of Romanichals being spread abroad 

message: "Jumping the broom" was practiced among English Romanichal Gypsies and the Welsh Kale Gypsies until the 1900s. However, the Jumping the broom article neglects the Romani origins of this custom, and deals with it as an African American and/or USA topic. I felt that this is inaccurate and misleading. Drawing from the original article, I created an independent article entitled Jumping the broom (Romani people. There is now a discussion about this Romanichal and Welsh Kale practice at the discussion page on the Jumping the broom article. Please go there, and participate in the discussion to help ensure that the article will be fair, accurate and true to historical reality.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by George Peterson (talk • contribs) 20:23, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jumping the broom 

message: How come there is no mention of the Romanisæl of Scandinavia or the Erromintxela of the Basque lands (Erromintxela is spelt with Basque grammar and is therefore misleading as when it is spoken its sounds as "Eromanishala")
It is obvious by name and also language that these two are originally of the same group as the Romanishal / Romanichal.
Romanisæl 
Erromintxela (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erromintxela_language)
Tsigano (talk) 10:24, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  No mention or links to the Romanisæl & Erromintxela 

message: At least in common speech, "English Gypsies" seems to be a relatively well understood concept, but typing that into the search box doesn't lead anywhere. This article seems to be talking about the same people - is that right? Or, if it's a different concept, where should it go? I can't believe that there is no article about the concept, so surely there should be a redirect somewhere? Also, is "Romanichal" a Britishism?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.189.73.197 (talk) 17:20, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are "English Gypsies" the same people as the subject of this article? 

message: "...by Constantine, Prince of Moldavia in 1776: "In some parts Gypsies have married Moravian women, and also Moravian men have taken in marriage Gypsy girls..."
Are you speaking about Moldavia or about Moravia (from Czechia)? 84.250.158.224 (talk) 18:30, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed after checking the sources. Thanks. Unfortunately wikipedia managed to spread this blunder over the internets. Staszek Lem (talk) 23:09, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moldavia or Moravia? 

message: According to the infobox, there are 620,000 Romanichals in Romania. On the other hand, the article says that Romanichals live in UK and the English speaking world. Umm .... something is obviously wrong there, having visited Romania, I know all too well that this is not a part of the English speaking world at all :P Lebatsnok (talk) 18:17, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It was an inept edit of 73.95.137.50. Reverted. Thanks for noticing. In the future, if you see something really suspicious, you may want to check the article history whether this was vandalism.  Staszek Lem (talk) 02:38, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Romania part of England?? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Romanichal. 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:
*Added archive https://archive.is/20070218153756/http://www.llc.manchester.ac.uk/Research/Projects/romani/files/21_angloromani.shtml to http://www.llc.manchester.ac.uk/Research/Projects/romani/files/21_angloromani.shtml
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120118212743/http://www.irishtraveller.org.uk/images/providing_traveller_sites.pdf to http://www.irishtraveller.org.uk/images/providing_traveller_sites.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071011112335/http://cre.gov.uk/gdpract/g_and_t_facts.html to http://www.cre.gov.uk/gdpract/g_and_t_facts.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:59, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: It has been reported that an unusually high percentage of English Travelers are incarcerated, yet there is no discussion of this or of crime (or injustice). Why not? Nicmart (talk) 02:52, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crime 

message: At the moment this article deals with several ethnic groups who have no contact with each other, although they share common ethnic origins. At the moment it definitely covers American Romanichals and English Gypsies, as well as other Pararomani groups in the English-speaking world. There needs to be some kind of a split here, as each of these ethnic groups merit their own article.
I'll bring sources re the English Gypsies to illustrate what I mean later on. Boynamedsue (talk) 15:04, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Splitting this article

message: This number is way out of line. It might refer to people of Romany descent in England, but in that case I would say that the real number there would be in the tens of millions, but there is no way there are half a million Romany Gypsies in the UK, they are a tiny minority even in places like Leeds where Angloromani is widely known.
The figure quoted is cited to this website, which itself casts doubt on the number, giving a figure of 57,000 for all GRT groups combined. The 500k figure is attributed to the council of Europe and is for all GRT not just English Gypsies.
I will delete and add context. Boynamedsue (talk) 16:33, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  500,000 

message: Revirvlkodlaku, I would like to discuss any issues you may have with the current revision of the article, although, please note my recent edits where I restored the improvements you made. If you are happy with the current revision I would like to hear if you have any thoughts on how the article could be improved further? I personally feel like more could be added to various sections of the article, and paragraphs could be better structured. 
Please see the difference in the History section between your last revision and the current revision,
Previous revision-
“The Romani people have origins in the Indian subcontinent, specifically Rajasthan, and began migrating westwards in the 11th century. The first groups of Romani people arrived in Great Britain by the end of the 16th century, escaping conflicts in Southeastern Europe(such as the Ottomanconquest of the Balkans)”
Current revision-
“The Romani have origins in the Indian subcontinent, specifically Rajasthan, and began migrating westwards in the 11th century. Travelling through Western Asia and the Balkans, they migrated through regions such as Armenia and Turkey before reaching modern day Bulgaria, Serbia and Romania. Due to conflicts in the region, particularly during the Ottoman Conquest of Southeastern Europe, they continued their migration farther north and west. By the end of the 15th century, the first groups of Romani people had arrived in England and Scotland.”
The previous revision has gaps in the migration pattern, failing to mention that the Romani people migrated northward as well as westward. 
The use of brackets appears messy, whereas the current revision imo offers more detail and is better structured, with sources provided. 
Current research indicates that the Romani people first arrived in the UK at the end of the 15th century or the early 16th century, not the end of the 16th century.
Imo, moving the image of Romanichal doing their laundry to the Travel section is appropriate, as it complements the text describing traditional laundry practices, and allows a better image to be used in the Culture section. The image of a traditional wagon alongside various pieces of Romanichal artwork at a fair provides a more vibrant depiction of Romanichal culture in the 21st century. Arman522 (talk) 15:38, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi @Arman522, I'm fine with the bulk of the changes you've made to the article at this point. With complex topics such as this one, ones of which I have limited knowledge and interest, I tend to not devote too much time to expansion or adding content. Instead, I focus on doing a general copy edit, and I monitor for questionable edits afterward. All this to say that I'll leave it to your discretion to expand and improve the article as you see fit, and I'll periodically glance over your shoulder and do a proofread. How does that sound? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 04:00, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current revision