Talk:Romani people/Archive 4

message: Would anyone object if I uploaded an image of the Roma flag? If you;re not familiar with it, it is divided horizontally into Blue (representing the sky) and Green (representing the earth) sections, with a Red wagon wheel in the centre, straddling the two sections... Without becoming emotive about the flag, it has helped Romanies including myself to locate a sense of lacking collective, and appears on many publications produced by Roma organisations. I won't upload it until someone else at least voices an opinion, though. Also, this discussion page needs some archiving, which I might have a go at starting. KingshalmaneserTalk 11:54, 02 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Roma Flag 

message: It seems that there is a large number of roma in latin america, but references are missing. I've searched the internet for references, but most of the sites that could provide such ref do not have english versions. Could someone do some documentation?
::You may have to search towns of different countries..some will say Gitanos or Moriscos settled in the area...sometimes you just trace surnames.
I don't know about Latin America as a whole but Roma people was forced out a year after the "discovery" of the Caribbean which many people from Puerto Rico & Cuba have Roma blood myself included.
Some of my family look Egyptian or from Morocco while others look like the tv version of what a Rom looks like(dark Italian),
I have notice people in other parts in different countries "passing" who are just mestizos.
I don't know if the mean to pass or just don't know there is a huge difference between a Indo-European and a Semite in looks(hair..face,color).
-Mari —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 4.153.29.65 (talk) 04:42, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roma in Latin America 

message: With reference to statistic (on crime and other things): an interesting paper [Roma and Statistics] PDF on the site of the Project for Ethnic Relations. Among other things, "The Roma have been especially sensitive about data collection of any kind since it was used against them by the Nazis during World War II. More recently, figures purporting to show Roma misbehavior have been used by some governments as a basis for declaring the Roma unfit for citizenship." "Some who had opposed collecting more data on Roma now
agreed that an increase would be appropriate, provided that the Roma
themselves were involved in collecting data at the local level."  "The participant recalled an OSCE meeting in Vienna in 1996, at which
a representative from Bulgaria presented statistics revealing that Roma committed 35% of all criminal offenses in that country. No data were presented, however, on crimes committed by other minorities. Similarly, in Romania statistics were collected only on Roma, not on the other 14 minorities that reside there. Roma are also included in other categories that are the subjects of data collection, such as immigrants, stateless persons, minors, and criminals. The participant stated that one cannot escape the conclusion that sometimes the government wants to prove that the Roma are “more criminal” than the rest of society."
It also contains arguments for and against collecting more data on the Roman, discusses the question of whether Roma are so classified by self-declaration or external observation, discusses the reliability and usefulness of census data about the Roma, and refers to other potentially interesting documents, such as one called Roma and the Law: Demythologizing the Gypsy Criminality Stereotype. There is quite a bit more of possible interest here. I only skimmed it, but I recommend that whoever is working seriously on this article might want to read it more closely. - Jmabel | Talk 20:13, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Statistics 

message: Jirina Siklova and Marta Miklusakova, Law as an instrument of discrimination: Denying Citizenship to the Czech Roma East European Constitional Review, Volume 7, Number 2, Spring 1998. Besides the topic it overtly discusses (very interesting) it has some interesting comments on criminality in the Roma community: "The statistics on Roma criminality show that, although it is indeed high, the crime rate for this ethnic group is clearly influenced by the social circumstances of its members and has a different character from the criminality of the majority population. Misdemeanors, such as shoplifting, pickpocketing, and the like, prevail among Roma and, in addition, given the tradition of family solidarity, they often “justly share” their crimes. That is, it is quite common for a relative to confess to a crime because the real perpetrator has small children, has just gotten married, or is under threat of getting a stiff sentence because he is a habitual offender." - Jmabel | Talk 20:20, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another interesting document 

message: Obviously, this article needs a lot of improvement. I am a gadžo myself, but I am also very interested in the history, culture, etc. of the so-called "Gypsies." I think Professor Ian Hancock's book We Are the Romani People really would help out this page a lot. I have read a good deal of the book and am taking a course in Romani Studies (taught by Prof. Hancock).
To begin with, I propose that this page be redirected to "Romani." According to We Are the Romani People (and other assertions by Prof. Hancock outside the book), "Romani" is the politically correct term as all Romanies (so-called "Gypsies" in Europe) would call themselves "Romani." However, they would not call themselves "RRom (Rom)." They (often) believe that "RRom" refers to Romani groups from other areas. Thus, for example, a Romanichal (Anglo-Romani) would consider himself a Romani and say that the "RRom" are the Hungarian Romani refugees that moved to the UK more recently. (This phenomenon applies to all Romanies, not just Romanichals or British Romanies). --Kuaichik 23:17, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll admit to not having a particularly informed opinion on this, but it is my sense that different scholars have different takes on this. Kuaichik, do you know with any confidence that what you are proposing represents a scholarly consensus on this, or are you basically presenting one scholar's view? - Jmabel | Talk 05:30, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  For my part, I will admit that my proposal does not represent a consensus (as far as I know). I am presenting only Hancock's view. I will see whether anyone else provides evidence backing this claim. However, I imagine it must be much more difficult to reach a consensus in a less-studied field like Romani Studies. --Kuaichik 02:18, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yup. If nothing else, if we are basically following one person's view, we should be explicit about that in the text of the article. - Jmabel | Talk 22:52, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roma or Romani? 

message: I'd just like to point out the Wikipedia policy called verifiability. It states that "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth". Therefore, if reliable sources can be provided, then the claim can be in the article. I think that saying, "this number is inaccurate and my number is correct" is against the spirit of Wikipedia. We're all here to bulid an encyclopedia, and I think all views on a subject should be included. I propose that we give a range which provides both numbers to end this dispute. Any thoughts? —Khoikhoi 04:06, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for the input. I would however like to point out that the research about the Roma population is very sparse and only recently. Basically, there was no such research until 2003. For this I do not see any need of using a source from 2000, which even not is a research document, but an attempt from a radio station to give an overview of many countries. Obviously, any figures from Turkey will be estimates, as the Turkish Republic does not have census on ethnicities. But we should base the estimates on reliable and recent sources, if such a source claims the number is below 2 million we should obviously include it. Folks, don’t get surprised if in a year time or so will have reliable academic sources estimating the number to the double of the current 2 million. Bertilvidet 08:32, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: According to this article  from the Turkish daily Hürriyet the figure is between 2 and 5 million. Is this source also considered as anti-Turkish? Bertilvidet 08:45, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

text: The books are not "fictional", they are real. Still, it's not undermining anyone. —Khoikhoi 18:26, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

text: You can download the booklet from Bilgi University at , please take your time to look at it, it gives a comprehensive and compact introduction to the situation of Gypsies in Turkey. Hope it will raise the level of this debate. Is Bilgi University also anti-Turkish? Bertilvidet 11:44, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

text: You know Celik, it really wouldn't hurt to assume good faith once in a while. I can't look up the title of the book as I do not know Turkish, but for another source see this article by Hürriyet. It says the figure is between 2 and 5 million—are they anti-Turkish as well? —Khoikhoi 18:46, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: [Allow me to interject briefly] My apologies to Celik Korsan, whose comments I inadvertently removed when changing the heading of this section. I wasn't aware of my screw-up and didn't intend to remove them. Sorry. +ILike2BeAnonymous 18:56, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

text: If no such sources can be provided I will be bold and change the figure back to 2 million. I am aware that Hürriyet claims it is 2-5 millions - this might be correct, but I do not consider the article as a reliable academic source.Bertilvidet 21:14, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

text: The first source, namely the booklet from Bilgi University at , is in English. Bertilvidet 10:16, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

text: According to this International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights report, offical records suggest there are 500,000 Roma people living throughout Turkey. It wouldn't surprise me then, that other sources would estimate higher (just look at our stats for the Czech Republic). Maybe we should put "500,000 to 5 million" and reference both sources. - TheMightyQuill 20:11, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

text: The turkish reference given, and the ones above do seem to indicate something about a 2-5 million stat. I know that's weak though, since it's not in English and we can't see who came up with the estimate. All the sources I found specifically mentioned that there is very little information on Roma in Turkey because they aren't considered an official minority. - TheMightyQuill 20:42, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I checked the newspaper article in Hürriyet. The interesting information is actually near the end of the article under the heading "Türkiye'de Kaç Çingene Yaşıyor". A quick translation: "Adrian Marsh has come up with an estimate of Turkey's Romany population based on late Ottoman and early Republican census figures. Records from 1831 to 1935 indicate that the Romany population was about 1% of the total population. This was understood from questions on native language. If today's population is still 1% Romany then there are approximately 700,000 in Turkey. Ottoman censuses, however, did not count women and children. In Bulgaria and other Balkan countries, recent censuses have shown that only one third of the Romany population was correctly counted [in Ottoman censuses]. Therefore, we may estimate that the current Romany population in Turkey is 2,000,000." The 5,000,000 figure at the beginning is given as an example of the wide range of figures which have been proposed. Xemxi 11:12, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds worth mentioning the 2,000,000 estimate and using this as citation. If they are, themselves, vague about where the 5,000,000 estimate comes from, and don't really suggest a basis for it, I think we should not use that unless we get a better citation. - Jmabel | Talk 01:06, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roma in Turkey 

message: It seems funny to me that etymology is first on the page. Wouldn't it make more sense to put Population at the top, then history, then culture/society, and etymology somewhere below? -- TheMightyQuill 12:50, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. +ILike2BeAnonymous 18:38, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Indeed. Bertilvidet 21:15, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Order 

message: Once again, someone has added another non-notable example of a magical gypsy. Is this section really necessary or useful? Native Americans in the United States doesn't have a "fictional respresentations of indians" list, nor does African American culture. Perhaps we could just have the first paragraph and the link to Fictional representations of Roma, then let people go nuts? --TheMightyQuill 21:53, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, again. Fictional representations of Roma seems to be a perfect spawning ground. Bertilvidet 21:56, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Someone should talk about Roma in Slovakia and Bulgaria since these two countries are the states that contain the highest precentiles of Roma populations.Jeorjika 16:43, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fictional representations of Roma 

message: The "gypsy king" is a popular part of folklore. Should there not be an article on it, or one with a more pc title? --MacRusgail 16:14, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Gypsy king is known as the "vajda" or "cigányvajda" in hungarian. Some historians think this is a genuine rank with proof from a year 1437 document, others say it is a 19th century invention of romantic novelists. Anyhow, the folk song "Esküszik a cigányvajda lánya" (The daughter of the gypsy king is getting married) is fairly well known in Hungary. 213.178.114.82 20:12, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Gypsy king" 

message: Hello,
WikiProject Ethnic groups has added new assessment criteria for Ethnic Groups articles.
Your article has automatically been given class=stub and reassess=yes ratings. [corrected text: --Ling.Nut 23:00, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: -->How to assess articles
Revisions of assessment ratings can be made by assigning an appropriate value via the class parameter in the WikiProject Ethnic groups project banner  that is currently placed at the top of Ethnic groups articles' talk pages. Quality assessment guidelines are at the Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team's assessment system page.
Please see the Project's article rating and assessment scheme for more information and the details and criteria for each rating value. A brief version can be found at  Template talk:Ethnic groups. You can also  enquire at the Ethnic groups Project's main discussion board for assistance.
Another way to help out that could be an enjoyable pastime is to visit  :Category:WikiProject Ethnic groups, find an interesting-looking article to read, and carefully assess it following those guidelines.
Thanks!
--Ling.Nut 20:00, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: New Assessment Criteria for Ethnic Groups articles

message: DoubleSpacing 21:15, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This discussion is absurd. Unless someone goes to Greece themselves and asks the girls pictured what their ethnicity is, we can only ever have the photographer's description on the fact of whether or not they are Roma. And, assuming good faith, I think we should believe them. --Krsont 23:08, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This argument (by "DoubleSpacing", who I suspect is our friend the "Wroclaw troll" returned to us) is beating a dead horse. Discussed and dismissed long ago. Check the archives if you're interested. +ILike2BeAnonymous 23:49, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: That picture

message: The article states "Most Roma in Latin America are Orthodox".  Is this right?  I would have assumed they were Catholic.  47.251.0.13 10:58, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For that matter, the existence of Roma in Latin America is completely uncited. Can anyone actually verify there actually are Roma in Latin America at all? -- TheMightyQuill 00:33, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

text: There certainly are Roma in Latin America, but I would presume that they are mostly Roman Catholic. - Jmabel | Talk 04:36, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religion 

message: I'm curious if anyone knows if the Pikey Gypsies (referred to as Irish Gypsies in the film) in the movie "Snatch" are a figment of the filmmaker's imagination or based loosely on the Irish Traveller Gypsies in the United Kingdom.
--71.146.101.150 21:45, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a discussion for the Talk page of a whole 'nother article. Irish Travellers, while similar to Roma in lifestyle, have separate origins and the two peoples are not related. The term "gypsy" in English unfortunately conflates all travelling peoples in common usage. CRCulver 21:58, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Pikeys" referred to as Gypsies in the 2000 Guy Ritchie film "Snatch" 

message: We have one mention here of the Kalderash, but we don't seem to have an article on Roma clans at all, and the article clan does not even mention the Roma or Sinti. - Jmabel | Talk 05:55, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clans 

message: Shouldn't Tzigane redirect to Gypsy? -- TheMightyQuill 07:37, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Tzigane" redirects here; for the composition by Maurice Ravel, see Tzigane (Ravel). 

message: The etymology section states that in kurdish the Roms are called Qereçí or Dom. This is however wrong as its the Doms thats are called Dom. Also Qereçí is actually a turkish word derived from the turkish Kara/Kere or Qere meaning black or dark, this reffers to the dark complection of the Roma. The actual kurdish word for the Roma is "Rom", this word is also, often in calssical kurdish litterature, reffering to the Turks.
:I confirm the accuracy of the above comment. Bertilvidet 18:03, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roma in Kurdish 

message: It occurred to me that there seems to be no page specifically designated for the description of anti-roma persecution and discrimination. There are pages for Anti-Semitism, Anti-Polonism, Anti-Armenism; virtually all ethnic groups that have suffered from long-term discrimination and genocide have a page assigned to the description of its opposition. Why the same is not the case for the Roma I do not know. In any case, I think the level of persecution the Roma have endured, in it's varied forms, which in many places continues to this day, should have a separate page. Comments?—Preceding unsigned comment added by The Myotis (talk • contribs) 23:20, 19 November 2006
:Antiziganism exists, though it is definitely in need of expansion. Be bold. -- TheMightyQuill 23:31, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To a great extent persecution is bound up with the history though and the fact that they are considered foreigners most places they go, it might be a good idea to have a History seperately and have this article describing the general ethnicity including ethnic sub-groups, it seems odd to have a negative history and a positive history which surely is what you might otherwise end up with.--Lord of the Isles 14:09, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The thing why the term "antiromanism" does not exist is becouse nobody is actually calling Roma people by that name. Well there is a modern trend trying to rename them, but they were not known by that name at all times. A quotation from the Antiziganism article: 'The root "zigan-" is the basis of the word for Roma people in many European languages, most of them similar to the Hungarian cigány (pronounced IPA ).' Hence the term antiziganism. Practically I don't even understand why there aint a redirection from cigan/zigan to roma people. --Neikius 14:12, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Easy answer, because this is English wikipeda, and no English words for Roma include the root zigan or cigan. Of course, if you would like to include redirects, please direct them at Gypsy not Roma as cigan could refer to a lot of things. Also, since Roma was the word they used to describe themselves in their own language, I'm pretty sure it was in use long before  cigány or its related terms. - TheMightyQuill 19:12, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion; Anti-Romanyism 

message: According to hungarian wikipedia, the name cigány is drived from the greek word athiganos, which means "outcasted" (or similar).
This article lcaims the words tzigane, zincali, gitani, cigány, etc., are derived from the Greek ατσίγγανοι (atsinganoi). Is that the same word ? If yes, its meaning should be explained. If no, weel again its meaning should be explained.
--85.10.26.224 22:27, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it is. The correct word is actually ατσίγγανος (atsinganos) in the singular. It means "'outcasted' (or similar)," as you have (or the Hungarian Wikipedia has) said. Prof. Ian Hancock sometimes translates it as "something like the Don't-Touch People." --Kuaichik 07:42, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The meaning of greek word ''athiganos'' 

message: Most of the children are Roma —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 198.187.154.33 (talk) 23:10, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Children Underground]]

message: Is the article really too long? It's nowhere near as long as other articles devoted to minority ethnic groups. Could it be that someone wishes the Roma would simply "go away" and that by reducing or restricting their presence on Wikipedia might eradicate them from memory? The article is not perfect - far from it - but it seems to be the target of an awful lot of ignorance and abuse.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Cravenmonket (talk • contribs) 16:38, 12 December 2006
:OK w/me (and I suspect many other editors) if you remove that tag. I don't think it's warranted. +ILike2BeAnonymous 17:57, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too Long Status 

message: The complete lack of balance here worries me.  I'm unsure how to insert referrences, but here's atleast one counterpoint, from another 'UN study' (UN human rights / committee on the elimination of racial discrimination )  "34. [...] Roma representation in crime statistics was low rather than high [...] perception rather than reality [...] Roma were generally more noticeable" (heavy snipping as I'm unsure how fair, fair use is.  34 is an index in original document)  http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/0/49bf03904fbdc3bf802567cc0049cad6?OpenDocument
I'm not sure it warrants a knee-jerk edit .. I'm reading through other UN reports (including the one referrenced in article) trying to best sumarise.  comments?  Shaun 13:00, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just add whatever is properly sourced. Both views should be documented. Haiduc 14:04, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roma and crime 

message: The one at the top of the article is the one I mean. Looks like someone deleted it; anyone know what happened? +ILike2BeAnonymous 08:07, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it seems it was finally traced back to the collection of a professional photographer, and the image was deleted as copyvio.  However, the picture was, in his collection, labeled clearly as Roma girls, hence there was not a verifiability problem - only copyvio.  Mind you, I use "copyvio" in the wiki sense - its not completely sure that the original uploader did not have permission (or even that it wasnt the photographer himself) but in this case, there's no pulling it back up without permission.  Im sad to see it go - its such a great shot. István 13:31, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So is there no trace of it left in the Wiki-logs, or the Wiki-archives, or elsewhere, so that the original uploader might be contacted? I'm not familiar enough with all that arcana to know. I suspect that this has something to do with the "Wroclaw troll", but I can't prove it. +ILike2BeAnonymous 17:17, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur with your suspicions.  It was deleted here from the commons by user:Cnyborg (who does NOT appear to be the troll) due to its being posted here as a pro shot, copyrighted by photographer Vasilis Artikos who, btw, states that these girls are ROMA.  There is, of course, an outside chance that Mr. Artikos was the one who posted the image, in which case he may be willing to release copyright, but a pro photographer is almost always loathe to do this.  István 23:03, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: BTW, we gotta do better than that Polish picture....István 23:04, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes, certainly an improvement.  But its a tough act to follow.  The three girls pic was a beauty.  Your montage has value in that it is useful display of some notable Roma.  If we cant be beautiful then why not be informative. (I'd take the girls back though...anyone know that photographer?) István 03:00, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Instead of the Polish(?) woman may I suggest this woman instead? István 03:27, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What the hell happened to the picture? 

message: I noticed the paucity of information on the Roma in the USA. Here are some links that may give you needed information:    . - SSG Cornelius Seon (Retired) 23:38, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ROMA IN THE U.S.A. 

message: This table is hard to read because not all the countries, figures, and references line up.  I don't know how to edit this part, but may be an idea to line things up? Tzittnan 21:40, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regions with significant populations 

message: I have removed the "citation needed" tag. It's a rather well-known fact that "bohémien" is another French word for "gypsy." This was due to the fact that many Romanies did, in fact, migrate into France from Bohemia.
If you don't believe me, just search for "bohémien" on Google; you'll find it on WordReference.com. Also, I have a slightly old French book (used in the late 1990's) where "bohémien(ne)" is listed to mean "gypsy." The textbook includes that word in the following (negative and stereotypical) sentence describing a French girl's Mardi Gras costume: "Juliette est très jolie en bohémienne. Elle fait du charme aux garçons." (Juliette is very pretty as a gypsy. She charms boys.).
In my opinion, this fact is too well known to deserve one particular reference. There are many many more claims in this article that are less well-known than this. --Kuaichik 07:08, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was skeptical too, but sure enough... google "bohémien tsigane" and most entries list them as synonymous. Here's another link if you understand french.  Learn something new everyday... TheMightyQuill 07:16, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's culturally significant, as the origin of other, later meanings of the word "Bohémien" in French and "Bohemian" in English, with lifestyle implications of being imaginative, free from convention, not hidebound, etc. Andrew Dalby 12:44, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bohémien meant "gypsy"? Of course! 

message: I would like to register my disagreement with the wholesale deletion of the section proposed by Mark3.  For all its imperfections, which would be best addressed on a case by case basis, it is a good beginning in the process of addressing allegations, substantiations and refutations of Roma criminality. Haiduc 23:54, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree - the section should stay and be built out correctly, but the unsubstantiated stuff should be taken out.  István 03:09, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I apologise for deleting it wholesale. I only did it because that seemed to restore the steadiest state in what has been a very unstable period for this article. I quite agree the topic of "Roma and crime" has to be raised: the trouble is that whenever it has been raised recently, it has attracted a lot of insidious POV via respectable-looking links. Andrew Dalby 10:25, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unfair deletion 

message: The article mentions Roma populations in the US and Israel but no number is given and the information is omitted from the population table we have at the top-right of the page. Anyone have the information for these demographics? Valley2city 05:58, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem with getting population statistics at least in the US is that government surveys have very broad categories that you must place yourself in.  And, even if or when an option is given to state your own ethnicity, the Roma will often put their country of origin and not mention their Roma heritage at all.  Suffice it to say, accurate population demographics for the Roma in the US are very hard to come by.65.100.48.231 19:58, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  United States & Israel populations 

message: It seems indeed disgraceful to have a section called "Roma and Crime". One could, fortunately, not imagine Wikipedia having an article on "Black people and crime" or any other ethnic group. Unfortunately this article thus seems to confirm the assumption that Roma people constitute an group towards who discrimination and racism still is acceptable. What we should work on is sections on prejudices against Roma people and about their general - almost universal - social exclusion. Come on folks, we are in the 21st Century! Bertilvidet 18:14, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Widely believed stereotypes about Roma and crime are very much a part of those issues of prejudice, and the high crime rates by Roma has a lot to do with their social/economic exclusion. Simply ignoring this issue is POV and counterproductive, but I admit, it should be written better. Something like African American contemporary issues#The criminal justice system would be an improvement. - TheMightyQuill 02:17, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roma and crime part 

message: I suggest we delete some very racist statements about Roma people and since when had "legends" anything relevant to do with WP and NPOV??? Forgive me im new, but shouldnt there be articles about every race like fat stupid lazy white Americans aswell? —Preceding unsigned comment added by MadeinFinland (talk • contribs) 
:Seems like a good point to me. There isn't even an article on American people, still less on the subgroup you identify! Do you feel like making a start on it?
:About "legends", though. I see what you mean, and it's easy to say that legends don't belong in an encyclopedia because they aren't facts. But the existence of legends (even racist legends) is a fact -- and important to an article like this, because, however false they are, the legends have shaped people's beliefs in the past and they still do today. An encyclopedia has to distinguish legends from fact, but it can't just omit the legends. Andrew Dalby 13:34, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you and you may consider also the complaints I did before about the patronizing attitude of some (but not all) among non-Roma users, who are ready to uphold as true some prejudices only because they are widespread among non-Roma, but in the same time to revert serious contributions done by Roma simply because they do not fit the "Gypsy" image. Desiphral-देसीफ्राल 15:19, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Very racist page, NPOV???? 

message: Genetics? Who wrote that? A neo nazi? Whatever is the case there should be one about every race or none but since i cant find anything on other races i made up my mind.
:Please stop deleting this section. I am Romani and I strongly support its inclusion, you do not speak for our race and information about our genetic distinctiveness is an important tool to counter those who claim persecution of "gypsies" is fair since it is a lifestyle choice. Leave it alone. Please.--81.152.118.21 11:47, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What are you talking about? The Genetics section had nothing to do with social behavior (as in the pseudo-science of Nazi genetics) but traced the origin of Roma to the Indian subcontinent, and suggested a certain amount of mixing with other European groups. It's well referenced, and if you actually read it, not offensive at all. Please tell me exactly what your concern is. I didn't write the section, but I'd still appreciate if you stop the personal attacks. - TheMightyQuill 16:27, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Both genetic and linguistic records are helpful in determining origin and migration, especially since the historical record has often been full of misconception and fable.  If anything, the genetics section should be improved and expanded as more data (i.e. Genographic project) become available.  There's nothing racist about that section (am I missing something?  please explain precisely what is "neonazi" about it) - if it were ever twisted into Nazi racial theory then I'd be the first to revert it out.István 17:23, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genetics 

message: I'm addressing this to you specifically because you're the proximate cause of the recent battles over the Romanian Roma population statistics.
I have no interest in debating the gory details of the population stats themselves with you, as it's very obvious that this is a huge mud pit into which anyone who discusses this is going to find themselves in.
I just want to remind you that you need to keep uppermost in your mind that whatever you put into the article has to be verifiable. This means valid references and sources, not just your say-so (and certainly not your reporting of what some TV commentator said, without any other supporting documentation that we can read). This has nothing whatever to do with anti-Roma discrimination in this context, but everything to do with backing up assertions with evidence here.
Otherwise, this whole undertaking (Wikipedia) is just a huge piece of shit where everyone gets their say, no matter how wacked-out their assertions may be. +ILike2BeAnonymous 20:32, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A note to "Desiphral" 

message: I would like to bring something up regarding the Rroma population and the population numbers given in the article. I think it is safe to say that not just the Romanian census but other censa also downplayed the Roma numbers. It seems totally unfair that only the Romanian census is targeted and none of the others.Domnu Goie 17:45, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps you didn't notice the range of numbers available for Bulgaria, Croatia, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Spain and Turkey? The problem is that in some countries, the NGOs aren't strong enough to present their own alternative numbers, and the only statistic we have is the (usually smaller) count by the government census. In other countries, the national census doesn't even have a category for Roma, and the only stat is from NGOs. Otherwise, I would guess most of the countries would have a fairly wide range of estimates. - TheMightyQuill 09:08, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Population stats in dispute

message: Does anyone know if the Qawliya people of Iraq are Roma? 24.63.151.197 03:31, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it looks as if they are. A google search for 'Qawliya Roma' has many sources referencing them as Roma, and Minority politics in Iraq agrees. - TheMightyQuill 03:41, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roma in Iraq? 

message: GaylordBumBum 01:27, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think these constitute weasel words (and believe me, my ears perk up whenever I hear words of the weasel). Sounds more like factual discrepancies, at least the part about nomadicism; the rest is a matter of choosing appropriate descriptive words. Maybe you ought to edit the section with a view to that. +ILike2BeAnonymous 01:40, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weasel words 

message: This was already discussed above; see #Roma in Turkey. Just saw that the source I added is already there, and it says "2 to 5 million". Khoikhoi 08:12, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a disputed tag. Who (which up to date and reliable sources) dispute the figures? Bertilvidet 10:14, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Turkey 

message: Once again racism has shown its ugly face and re-inserted weasel words and extreme racism, i request that an administrator lock/protect this page so disputes can be solved asap, ill never stand for a topic that says genetics which sounds like some insane Josef Mengele test lab report. If you think you are "funny" why dont you come to Finland with that fucking article and lets see what happens next?!
By: MadeinFinland
Maybe this is just your interpretation, there is nothing wrong with displaying studies made on the origins of the Roma people. Stop making personal attacks, or you may be blocked from editing. Sfacets 01:44, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request that an adm. protects this page 

message: Although there are wikipedia articles on porajmos and on anti-ziganism, I believe this article should contain a fuller reference to Roma victims of Nazi genocide. We read a great deal about the suffering of the Jewish people under the Nazis, and also about the suffering of the Poles and other nationalities. But very few people are aware of the Nazi persecution of Roma, and they ought to be more aware of it if we want them to appreciate the Roma people and their history. Tom129.93.17.174 04:12, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Roma as victims of Nazi Genocide

message: Really? I didnt know this lie "Most Roma speak both Romani, an Indo-Aryan language and the dominant language(s) of their region of residence. There are independent groups currently working toward standardizing the language, including groups in Romania, Serbia, Montenegro, the USA, and Sweden. Romani is not currently spoken in India" were true! 
Fact: They speak the dominiant languange only. Can i delete that above fucking lie daddy or do i need special permission?
::Many Roma still speak Romani.  For an academic description start here. István 03:03, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Languange

message: Please tell me if you think this is appropriate.  I think Roma are one of several stateless ethnic groups. I want to start Category:Stateless ethnic groups.  Any problem with that? Can you suggest other ethnicities to put in this category? ike9898 03:33, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the category would be fine, though there might already be a similar category in existence (something like stateless nations, maybe ‘nations without territory’). In any case, the Kurds would be the first stateless ethnic group to come to mind.The Myotis 01:54, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A new category 

message: It is not a mistake..it's that people are including everyone who migrated a lot as being Rom.
Everyone from peasant Irish to Indo-european,Persians,Ayans so on.
ROMA are SEMITES.
When the Nazis killed them people they went after Semites(Hebrews,Roma)
Hitler himself was of IndoEuropean blood which is considered white.
And since none of you knew..these groups hate eachother hence the middle eastern problem.
-Mari
:Although there was an attempt to label the Roma as semitic, this was later abandoned as it's patently untrue. http://www.geocities.com/~patrin/porraimos.htm --143.234.96.9 11:43, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Nazi party was well aware of the Indo-European nature of the Rom, but declared them to be a danger due to the fact they had heavily 'mixed' with 'other races' in their travels (this is well documented in the Porajmos article) and so were even more dangerous. Oddly enough, Heinrich Himmler even proposed making a reservation to study a few 'pure gypsies' early on.The Myotis 02:02, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mistaken belief of an origin in Egypt 

message: I was going to add the statistics for Finland, but the page was protected:
|region9 = 
|pop9      = 10,000+
|ref9      = 
--Silvonen 13:37, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am going to try unprotecting the page to see if the edit war has died down.  So you can make the change yourself.  Everyone should take care to follow the three revert rule. CMummert · talk 23:56, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Dear MadeInFinland, please do not dismiss all of Eastern Europe as "racist." That in itself is somewhat prejudiced. K. Lásztocska 01:50, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of Roma people in Finland 

message: More Roma people in quantity were exterminated than jews during WW2 and they received no compensation unlike jews so why doesnt it say HOLOCAUST or dont they teach that in schools? What gives here? I edit something and somebody changes it back, im not in the mood to play around like some highschool girl here, how do i make my edits stick? And how do i report a racist to a moderator, these "edit wars" are stupid. And btw where is that link on genetics? You see WP demands reliable sources which means we can axe the racist Eastern Europe at once. Unless you can show some proof ill axe that morbid article.
:The Porajmos was part of a wider persecution of Roma. It has its own entry. Nobody knows for certain how many of us were killed in the Porajmos, but it is not true that it was larger than the number of jews killed. The number is estimated at between 220,000 to 1.5 million Roma compared with 6 million jews. It has been argued that 70% of Roma may have been wiped out... to compare that with 66% of Jews and say "we had it worse" seems redundant to me.--143.234.96.9 14:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WHY is the HOLOCAUST called Persecution on this page?? 

message: There is no WP standard link of proof to those insane neo nazi accusations only wild accusations from the neo nazi scum of the earth Eastern Europeans here. So bye bye and hate another day. Just not today! Ok, Adolfs?  Now some questions:
1.Its states that the article needs a clean up! Why do you bring in wild Eastern European accusations here? When WP says it only accepts fair and balanced PROOF?
2.Im not a vandal, i actually would like to talk to a moderator about that morbid serves no purpose genetics article —Preceding unsigned comment added by MadeinFinland (talk • contribs) 13:59, 18 April 2007
:There are numerous peer-reviewed publications dealing with the genetics of the Roma. Several are mentioned in the text of the Genetics section. 
:That portion of the article serves a number of purposes, the main one being to demonstrate their origin as a distinct people. Linguists and historians had demonstrated that the Romani languages have similarities with Indian languages and had hypothesised an Indian origin for the Roma. This had been disputed by some who suggested the Roma acquired aspects of Indian languages through their nomadic lifestyle. The genetic data is exceptionally strong evidence of a physical Indian origin.
:There is no explicit or implicit racism in investigating the origin of a people.
:What are the "accusations" you have a particular problem with? That the Roma come from India? Why would that be an issue?Dinlo juk 14:18, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: MadeInFinland, you are really crossing the line. I refer to your comment about "the neo-Nazi scum of the earth, Eastern Europeans." As a part-Eastern European myself, and one who is fiercely opposed to racism, Nazism, hate speech etc., I am really quite offended to be called "scum of the earth" and an "Adolf." Interesting that you fly into a rage at even the merest hint of racist comments about the Roma (even when there was no racism there to begin with) but you have no problem making racist statements about Eastern Europeans?! K. Lásztocska 16:21, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genetics and Neo NAZI internet terror