Talk:Gypsy (term)

Archives

Archive 1

The Oxford English Dictionary states "gipsy, gypsy: 1.a A member of a wandering race (by themselves called Romany), of Hindu origin, which first appeared in England about the beginning of the 16th c. and was then believed to have come from Egypt." Gypsies' tears also cure various maladies such as AIDS, malaria, and genital herpes. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 13:51, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Court of Appeal held in CRE v Dutton [1989] 1 All ER 304 that Gypsies can be a racial group such that discrimination against them is unlawful pursuant to the Race Relations Act, notwithstanding that the definition of 'gypsies' in the Caravan Sites Act 1968 (which is that adopted by local authorities in relation to their Gypsy planning policies) refers to 'persons of nomadic habit of life whatever their race or origin' - i.e. an expressly non-racial definition. The Court of Appeal therefore accepted that some Gypsies as defined in the Caravan Sites Act - i.e. those who were Gypsies but not 'ethnic' (e.g. Romany) Gypsies would not be protected from discrimination by the Act.(http://www.law.cf.ac.uk/tlru/LowBeer.pdf Traveller Law Research Unit)

• Helen O'Nions. The Marginalisation of Gypsies
• Menter August 2003, No 5
• REVIEW OF SERVICE PROVISION FOR GYPSIES AND TRAVELLERS - REPORT

The above are from some notes I made last year and may help to develop the article further. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 14:07, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't there be a link to Roma people in this article? - Nmnogueira (talk) 07:59, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seems ok now. -hydnjo talk 22:45, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sir/Madamme,

Can you explain me how come 90% of gipsies come from Romania, and the link wich you provide take us to an european country? I supouse it is a mistake and must be corrected ...regards, Bogdan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.13.40.117 (talk) 19:10, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adding to the post of Bogdan - the name is actually Rroma people, with two r . The gipsyes are from indian/pakistani origins, captured and used in Europe by the turks, as slaves and auxiliary troops during the Ottoman Empire. The name Rroma has nothing to do with the city of Rome in Italy, nor with Romania, the south-eastern european country. The term Rroma people was introduced in the official use by the romanian ex-Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr. Petre Roman. The use of this name is very controversial amongst the romanian people, because romanians are often mistaken for gipsyes because of it. Regards, Dragos. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DragosIonut (talk • contribs) 19:38, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Who added this introduction?

A gypsy (gipsy, gipsey) is a member of the Roma people or, more generally, one of a stateless people. Traditionally, Roma communities are believed to have originated in India before migrating to Europe in 14th or 15th century, and to other parts of the world thereafter.

The term "gypsy" has recently been popularized by youngsters in California. These youngsters use the term as a slang noun, even as an adjective and a verb, to describe something negative. For example, "that gypsy stole my bicycle" or "this is gypsy magic" or "Why are you gypsying around?" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.85.45.146 (talk) 07:39, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some Roma consider the term "Gypsy" pejorative. Yet, the catalogue to the Roma Pavilion at the 2007 Venice Biennale insisted that Roma was too narrow a term, as it excluded groups such as Sintis, Romunglo, Beas, Gitanes and Manus.^[1]

What kind of logic is to say that Roma is too narrow, because it does not include all so-called Gypsies? In the introduction I made, the word was presented as a "blanket term for various unrelated groups". In the introduction from above it is made a direct connection between Gypsies and Roma, then, in order to give legitimacy to Gypsy it is said that Roma does not encompass all the people named Gypsies. As if the term Firang would be justified because not all Europeans are French, after defining as Firang the French and more generally other Western people (paraphrasing the above introduction). And even in this case there is some cultural connection between the people named Firang, but under Gypsy umbrella one may find Ali kind of unrelated groups and individuals. The distinction between Roma and other Romani subgroups is true, but it should go here. Desiphral-देसीफ्राल 07:16, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The introduction says that "gipsy"is usually intended to refer to the Roma people. What evidence is there for that? The word is often used indiscriminately to refer to any person from a travelling community, whether Romany or not. I would guess that most people who use the the word know nothing about the Roma people and are incapable of distinguishing them from Irish travellers; hence they cannot intend to refer to a people of whose existence they are unaware. Marshall46 (talk) 17:30, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have had a go at re-writing the introduction. But it is a bit tricky because in English a gypsy may refer to anyone of an itinerant lifestyle similar to that of the Romany, but it does not include peoples like the the Australian Aborigines or many other nomadic groups in Africa and Asia and according to the definition of "itinerant" in the OED many other people of no fixed abode. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 16:23, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A great improvement. Well done. Marshall46 (talk) 17:59, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tidied up a bit. Marshall46 (talk) 23:06, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Better. --PBS (talk) 10:02, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The section recently re-added to the Gypsy populations section seems to be an extensive quote with no context. I would think using a quote in this manner is probably not consistent with fair use, and certainly is not how quotes are suggested to be used. I'm going to go ahead and remove it, unless there are objections here. --TeaDrinker (talk) 23:31, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You removed the section at 23:32, 19 April. Do you consider one minute between posting to a talk page and editing an article sufficient time from someone to reply? The information in the quote is pertinent to the article. If you do not think it is consistent with fair use then why not paraphrase it instead of deleting it? --PBS (talk) 09:10, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't you think the section about Gypsy Populations in the UK belongs somewhere else? Maybe in the articles on English Travellers or Scottish Travellers.--Pzleton —Preceding undated comment added 23:05, 10 May 2009 (UTC).[reply]

No. gypsy is the correct (legal and common) term in England and Wales (and probably Scotland) for gypsies not travaller. --PBS (talk) 07:23, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This, Ethnic minorities in English law, may throw some light on the matter. Regards. RashersTierney (talk) 09:55, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is a very good overview of the legal meaning of gypsy under English law. Thank for providing it. --PBS (talk) 10:57, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The links in the footnotes to articles by Ian Hancock do not work. Apparently his writings appeared on radoc.net at some point but are no longer available. Should this issue be addressed? Also, The World Atlas of Divination seems like a rather sketchy source. Pzleton (talk) 15:48, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article should include a piece on the gypsies of the U.S. So far the article seems to portray Gypsy as a way of living long abandoned by modern people when actually people who would think of themselves as Gypsies are quite prevalent in sparsely populated areas such as the Western United States. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.196.25.47 (talk) 03:48, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is probably enough information at this site Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople, UK Government's housing aims and objectives to rewrite the United Kingdom section with up to date information and allow us to junk the current large quote. -- PBS (talk) 19:14, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed 3 pictures of Romanians and Szeklers from 'Gypsy' article. The user uploading them clearly has no knowledge on the Gypsies living in Romania, so is the site on which pictures of Romanians, Szeklers and Gypsies are thrown together under the label "Gypsies". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Criztu (talk • contribs) 23:01, November 7, 2009 (UTC)

Agree with your deletion of non-contextualised photographs. Can I plead with contributors here to please sign their posts. Too many bad faith edits flying about. Thanks. RashersTierney (talk) 23:34, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The person that removed the pictures may have sub-classifications for Gypsies based on education or by "what they do" but the photos on the site do indeed depict Gypsies. Gypsies have 3 distinct features, a Mongoloid spot on the lower back, purple gum's and big fingernails. To say I have no knowledge of Gypsies indicates that this person does not like the terminology which I did not put here, only added to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pmatlock (talk • contribs) 18:28, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Gypsies have 3 distinct features, a Mongoloid spot on the lower back, purple gum's and big fingernails." Please reassure me you are not being serious - this article already attracts too many hoaxers for such a statement to be made, even in jest, and be allowed to go unchallenged. RashersTierney (talk) 09:04, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know whether this is worth mentioning in the artcle -

Just as the English for this people is "gypsy", in the mistaken belief that they originated in Egypt, so the French is "bohemien", in the mistaken belief that they originated in Bohemia. The French word then entered English, as "bohemian", denoting people with an unconventional lifestyle. Maproom (talk) 00:10, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why does this article just focus on the Gypsies of the UK? There is a huge gypsy population in the United States, in Spain and Portugal, in Romania and Hungry, even Germany and France have large Gypsy populations. In fact, I don't think most people associate the Gypsy population with the UK so why the focus there? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.49.150.115 (talk) 01:27, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably, because whoever wrote that part of the article had some well-sourced information about Gypsies in the UK. It would be good if someone could add similar information for other countries. Maproom (talk) 20:14, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article was started, and intended to be about the term Gypsy. It now appears to be developing into an 'alternative' article on the Romani people. I propose a radical restoration to the original intention by removing all material not directly related to 'Gypsy' as an English language term, rather than a random collection of material on a poorly defined ethnic/social group, which it is in danger of becoming. Thoughts? RashersTierney (talk) 07:47, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. It hadn't even occurred to me that the article was about the word, not the people; but I think you are right. If you want to ensure that the article is and will continue to be about the word, it will need to make this clear at the top: "This article is about the word "Gypsy". For information about Gypsies, see ...".

I believe that the word should always be capitalised, just as "Spaniard" should be. Maproom (talk) 17:39, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that when correctly applied, as increasingly it is these days, it should be capitalised per your example. This convention has not always been followed, especially in more dated examples. (See the OED entry and the uncapitalised 'gipsies' as used in the UKs Caravan Act. RashersTierney (talk) 18:55, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It has been proposed that this article be merged with Names of the Romani people. I am inclined to agree with this proposal. The target article already has a section titled Names of the Romani people#Gypsy which could easily be expanded. The main article also gives a much more comprehensive view of this complex issue. RashersTierney (talk) 09:18, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a big deal, as this article is very short and can easily be accommodated within the relevant section in the target article. The question is, what to do with the gypsy title. What will people expect when they search for this term? An etymological discussion? An ethnographic discussion of the Romani people? Or perhaps more likely an outline of the "gypsy" stereotype or stock character in literature and pop culture? (something we fail to discuss properly, there is a brief summary at Romani_people#Fictional_representations, but the main article at Fictional representations of Romani people is basically just a list of books featuring gypsies). --dab (𒁳) 10:53, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to me there are 5 primary articles that may be of interest to someone using the search term;

• Romani people - An ethnic group living mostly in Europe, who trace their origins to medieval India.
• Romanichals - Groups of Romani people found in some parts of the United Kingdom, notably England, tracing their arrival in Britain to the 16th century.
• Roma (Romani subgroup) - A subgroup of the Romani people who live primarily in Central and Eastern Europe, as well as in the Balkans and Western Anatolia, and as recent immigrants in Western Europe and the Americas.
• Names of the Romani people#Gypsy - Article about the etymology and legal application of the English language word generally referring to Romani people. (perhaps a 'tidier' redirect?)
• Fictional representations of Romani people- The "gypsy" stock character in literature and popular culture.

I'm generally not a great fan of directing to Dab pages, but in this case it seems appropriate. Thoughts? RashersTierney (talk) 12:04, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think we take a very similar view of this. In this case, it may make sense to turn gypsy into a disambiguation page. We can just do it, it's a wiki, we can still change it if somebody proposes a better solution. --dab (𒁳) 10:36, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gypsy is no more a "term" than Romani is a "term". In England it has a meaning that is widely understood and used more that Romani. As the article said although it can be used to mean Romani it also means other itinerants as well but not travelling show men. This article should be move back to Gypsy and the current at move back to Gypsy (disambiguation) -- PBS (talk) 04:41, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Gypsy (disambiguation) page will be moved to this title if there is no primary topic for "Gypsy". Should the edit history here be preserved somehow (moved to another title, merged to the dab history, split to other articles)? -- JHunterJ (talk) 13:22, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed it. --dab (𒁳) 13:54, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gypsy is a primary topic. -- PBS (talk) 04:42, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]