I recently queried some information in the Tarogato page. I wrote my query in the Talk page, and added a comment to the main page pointing to it. I thought that might be the best way to get the issue resolved. Another user, who seems to think he now owns that particular page, simply deleted my comment on the main page, without making any effort to address my query. I've no interest in getting into an edit war. Since you are obviously the tarogato expert here, maybe you'd like to look at it David Peacham ( talk) 18:21, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
I know my claim can't be substantiated, but it's surely true :) Gareth E Kegg 20:29, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that recently you carried out a copy from
Madjid khaladj and paste. Please do not move articles by copying and pasting them because it splits the article's history, which is needed for attribution and is helpful in many other ways. If there is an article that you cannot move yourself using the move link at the top of the page, follow the instructions at
Wikipedia:Requested moves. Also, if there are any other articles that you copied and pasted, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at
Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you.
Dancter
18:23, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to
talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should
sign your posts by typing four
tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --
SineBot (
talk)
14:27, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Salut! I guess this is a somewhat awkward moment to ask this, but:
Would you like to join? -- Kuaichik ( talk) 04:17, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
...and Happy Birthday!!! Now let me look for a good cake...:) -- Kuaichik ( talk) 19:16, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
-- Kuaichik ( talk) 19:48, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Pg8.GIF. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or provided a license tag. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.
To add this information, select the appropriate license tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you can't find a suitable license tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. -- ImageTaggingBot ( talk) 11:06, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Can you be more specific about your decision here? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RR#User:Rezistenta_reported_by_User:Desiphral_.28Result:_24h_.28Re.29.3B_36h_.28De.29.29 Although the user Rezistenta violated the 3RR rule, the user Desiphral was blocked just as well, and for even more time. Can you explain your decision, please. AKoan ( talk) 13:55, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Weasel5i2 already is part of the Romani Wikiproject :) -- Kuaichik ( talk) 02:12, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
1. Rezistentza does not represent "all Romanian nationalists". 2. As I've said, proper sources will readily cause me to change my opinion. Biruitorul Talk 13:04, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
Please feel free to list this at Wikipedia:Deletion review. Tim Vickers ( talk) 13:49, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Why don't you keep the discussion on a single page so that people can follow it more easily? :) AKoan ( talk) 08:56, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
The inactivity was on his end. When RfCs are brought on a user, there's generally supposed to be a response from them or some outside views; there were neither. As for what to take to mediation, the dispute would be whether the article should be on the Roma people or the Romani people, and whatever else it is that the dispute is encompassing editorially. Wizardman 13:52, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
I've actually met him and his sockpuppets before. It's unbelievable how he can keep pushing his POV agenda, and use his sock puppets, and still edit on wikipedia. I'm not an easy pushover though. :) -- Buffer v2 ( talk) 17:18, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
In response to your message, the following discussion contained the discussion on the phrasing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Roma_people#Where_and_how_many.3F_Cont.27d Lihaas ( talk) 02:03, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
I posted a question on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Romani people#Help needed. Please have a look. Thank you. Sebastian scha. ( talk) 00:48, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Please feel free to add your 2¢ worth to this re-started article, since you have argued for keeping its predecessor in an AfD discussion. — Zalktis ( talk) 17:03, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
I answered here to your edit. Personally, I must admit that I feel somehow disappointed about you. Personal attacks have been the last thing I expected from you. Regards, -- Olahus ( talk) 17:11, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Please undo your revert. You do not seem to appreciate the concept of consensus through discussion. I waited very patiently for your reply to my questions at the talk page which for a long period you simply ignored. Your confrontational approach seems designed to invite edit warring and is very discourteous. RashersTierney ( talk) 11:59, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Don't take it confrontationally cause its not. Kenshin (ex AKoan) ( talk) 12:31, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
I've rollbacked all the edits you did in relation to changing the term animated series to cartoon due to the long-standing consensus that animated series is the acceptable term for the subject matter involved. Sometimes, you also changed some terms to animated cartoon which is something of a tautology and should be avoided. treelo radda 10:49, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
I find that the two banners are inappropriate for the following reasons. 1. The article has 37 references which is more than 99% of all articles of the same category (pick random Romania related article of the same size, see how many refs), so an unreferenced is definitely odd. 2. You stuck it on a section where the info is trivial and non controversial. If you want more refs there you should simply find them and put them into the article. 3. The unbalanced and similar templates require that you actively address the issue on the talk page -What do you find problematic -What should be done to fix it -Backing your argument up with sources, wikipedia policies etc. Hobartimus ( talk) 19:47, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
For every category you create, you should specify parent categories to which it belongs. You do this by listing the parents near the bottom of the page, each enclosed in double brackets like so:
[[Category:Romani history]] [[Category:People of World War II]]
Contact me if you have questions about this. Best regards, -- Stepheng3 ( talk) 20:52, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
I haven't done any work on Wikimedia, so I doubt I can help you with categories there. -- Stepheng3 ( talk) 22:03, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Kenshin, you can do the suggested cleanup yourself, you don't need my permission. As regards the moves to "Romany", I'll look into it. Btw, tsigani is an ok romanization of τσιγγάνοι for Modern Greek. You are right of course that for Ancient Greek it would be tsinganoi. In fact it is just how Greeks spell /tsigani/ upon loaning it. It isn't directly derived from ατσίγγανοι within Greek, but loaned back from the Balkans. -- dab (𒁳) 09:40, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
I've done lots of clean-up lately, when I could. The moves I'm talking about are this ones (they were done some time ago when the "R-word" was of great concern among some Romanian users):
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Balkan_Romany_language&diff=208979075&oldid=208978890
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Baltic_Romany_language&diff=209000820&oldid=198151317
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Serbian_Romany_language&diff=208977542&oldid=171850358
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Vlax_Romany_language&diff=209003381&oldid=184017581
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Welsh-Romany_language&diff=208991182&oldid=179573849 http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Welsh-Romany_language&diff=next&oldid=208991577
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Angloromany_language&diff=208993694&oldid=201839334
I added the Romani knowledges in your balbel. I suppose you're a Romani speaker. If you're not, remove it and excuse me for the change of your userpage. Cheers! -- Olahus ( talk) 19:28, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
The census results from 1930 to 1992 are taken from here. The estimated data from 1886 from here. However, the census data from that time must give a lower number of Roms (see the census results from 1899). The 210,806 "others" included around 100,000 Dobruja Germans, Bulgarians, Turks, Tatars, Csango's/Hungarians, Lipovans etc. I suppose that around 100,000 Roms have been counted, but without a source how should I put it in Wikipedia?-- Olahus ( talk) 18:27, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Already left the same message for Olahus. Is it possible for an editor in Romania to access the book in question to see if there is additional info. about this image? Should be easily accessed in any academic library over there. Photo would be a good addition if it could be salvaged and I think the book as a reference could be a good source for several articles. Regards. RashersTierney ( talk) 16:47, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
The button above is redirecting your messages to User talk:Ohconfucius. You may need to tweek the code if you did a cut and paste. RashersTierney ( talk) 16:50, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Concerning your question, I ment that this source doesn't use the form "Romani", but "Roma" (or even gypsies, however). -- Olahus ( talk) 19:59, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
PS: I never heared about Anca Parghel to be a Roma. Are you really sure about it? -- Olahus ( talk) 20:00, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I hope I didn't mess up too many. I did use that map and really read both of the pages and tried to link appropriately. J04n( talk page) 14:39, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
From an MOS viewpoint, that version was a nightmare; what I've restored is just a stub, but at least more legible. I won't object if you restore the prior version, but do keep that in mind. - Biruitorul Talk 14:57, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:RomanyChaj#Romani_terminology RomanyChaj-रोमानीछाय ( talk) 17:13, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Kenshin! I made here a proposal for renaming. Cheers! -- Olahus ( talk) 10:21, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Este intr-adevar ceea ce a scris autorul, dar nu cred ca a fost in vreun fel gresit ceea ce am scris eu. Dimpotriva, cred ca ceea ce am scris eu e mai aproape de realitate. Sau poate ma insel? O zi buna! -- Olahus ( talk) 17:54, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
I'll take it step by step:
About your map:
What I would support: two other maps like the one made by dab (hope that he still has the vector version) with the official data and with the highest estimations.
PS: Am scris in engleza ca s-ar putea sa-i intereseze si pe altii. Toate bune! Kenshin ( talk) 14:18, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Mersi pentru raspuns. Iti voi da raspuns in cateva zile ca acum am putin timp si e mult de scris. Oricum, in cele mai multe privinte ai dreptate. -- Olahus ( talk) 20:27, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
See the section " Page style" "Each bulleted entry should, in almost every case, have exactly one navigable (blue) link; including more than one link can confuse the reader." Hope that helps. -- PBS ( talk) 09:23, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
I knew my ppeople were somehow related to the Gypsies and I had read recent reports but I could not find them. Thanks for finding them and including them. Great Work!-- Sikh-history ( talk) 13:53, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi Kenshin. I saw you revert a statement on Roma in Romania re population figures. This same edit has been made across several articles by the same editor and I was considering removing them all as I could not see how the added anything, but if they were 'true', then it might lead to a long drawn out process. Are you saying the figures are not derived from a national census? Regards. RashersTierney ( talk) 09:08, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Hey Kenshin
This is 3swordz, who corresponded with you a few months ago. I decided to incorporate the other source regarding the genetic studies that I showed in the previous discussion. That study, that drew upon larger representative samples of Jats and Roma as opposed to a single family, strongly suggested that the two groups are rather unrelated in terms of male descent, which was the focus of the study.
About your recent source, I do have my doubts about its content, although I am in no position to debate it. This form of glaucoma associated with the Roma (1 in 1250) also occurs in other populations: "estimated at 1:10,000 in Western countries and higher in inbred populations such as those of Saudi Arabia (1:2500), Slovakia Roma (1:1250), Arab Bedouins of the Negro region in Israel (1 of 1200),and Andhra Pradesh in India (1:3300)," and "the incidence of PCG is geographically and ethnically variable." SOURCE: http://lib.bioinfo.pl/pmid:15322984 mutation history of the roma/gypsies. I believe the mention of Andhra Pradesh in Southern India is of note. There are no standout populations in north India, I think due to greater variability (I read in another article), and the Jats don't have this condition at a noteworthy rate, which would also imply that they don't have some kind of monopoly on this gene, which seems somewhat silly to name the gene after them. Some of the other info regarding Roma origins struck me as a little incorrect, but whatever. I did take the liberty of changing the wording from 'confirming' to 'suggesting,' which struck me as especially unscientific, with no actual group studies of PCG prevalence, along with the haplogroup stuff sharply suggesting otherwise.
I pulled some of the y-dna prevalences in different populations from other wiki articles (cited ones), just so you know. I also nixed the subheading due to the contradictory study.
A lot of sources say that Roma language is related to a multitude of Indo-Aryan languages (no surprises there), among them Hindi, rajasthani, Punjabi, Sindhi, etc. I decided to look at some Romani vocab to see if I could see a trend. Most Romani words aren't really recognizable anymore unsurprisingly, but I do think that the language is most related to Hindi; the few words that were immediately recognizable to me were in Hindi, and if anything was in common with Punjabi, it was the same in Hindi as well. An example of this was the Romani word "amaro" (Our), which was more akin to Hindi ("hamara") than to Punjabi ("saadda") The pronunciation of "haath" [long "a" sound] (hand) was the same as Hindi ("Haath", also long "a",) than to Punjabi (huth, or h'th, it is hard to capture the phonolgy, but there is no vowel, let alone extended, in that pronunciation. Languages have a trend to simplify pronunciations/grammar over time but not to add to them. So Romani probably retained the pronunciation)There were other examples, these were among the more striking. It jives, at any rate, with the notion that the Romani originated farther south. Just a few more interesting facts. If the semantics doesn't suit, again, feel free. I do think my source is rather valid, and I will keep yours as well of course. 3swordz ( talk) 10:38, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi Kenshin. Some thoughts I have is that the study actually mentioned the discovery in a single Pakistani family, not a Romani one. They were comparing it to Romani populations. The team studied four Pakistani families and isolated it in one. If you have any studies regarding this form of PCG regarding Jatt populations, that would be cool. I was a little thrown by how momentarily the article gleaned over the mutation besides calling it a name. The particular strain, or PCG in general, isn't unduly present in Jatt populations to my knowledge. Jatt Sikhs and Haryans Jats also make up about half of all Jats roughly as well so it's pretty significant, even being "endogamous".
In terms of looks (if you really want to bring that up), Jatts tend to be rather fair skinned actually, either that or a few shades darker. The younger Punjabi populations, Jatts especially in the West (myself included, never got the "farmer's tan," lol) don't really have that "indian" look or how you want to call it; I can tell you out of experience that a lot of Punjabis in general but Jatts in particular are immediately distinguishable from "Indian looking" people, the ones raised here especially, it's quite a vast departure. Perhaps you may have seen some Sikhs (religious or not)like this. Their looks just scream "not indigenous" at any rate. I know that Romani are at least on average 50% European genetically by now (may even become mostly European in due time maybe), but before they started to mix (fairly recently, picked up in the 1800s) they were commented on their darkness of skin and even now some are quite dark and Indian-looking, at least from pictures I have seen and comments made in texts.
I didn't want to get into the whole "looks" thing because it struck me as a bit unresolvable (we could go on all day about looks of Romanis and whatnot) but that is my take on it. The genetics and such showed a large discrepancy, along with my look at the language vocab, as well as the traditions and dances and such, there is little in common, like the dances (the lively spinning dances and skirt style and the presence of distinctly Hindi words/syntax) just don't jive as Punjabi at all, but look like Rajasthani dress and movement. I honestly don't think people can just pick up traditions like [forgive my stereotyping for a sec] fortune-telling, itinerancy, musical entertainment and entertainer class traits, whatever, especially from a settled "warrior past" that strikes as being more self-empowering than factual, like black nationalists claiming Zulu descent or whatever. I am not trying to denegrate them , don;t take it that way, but some things just don't fit at all. I also read of in quite a few articles (for however much this counts) a mannerism of Romani, the "head bobble" or something, where some shakes their heads from a sort of side-to-side to indicate "yes," and I immediately knew what they were talking about, this is a distinct Hindi-speaker trait that I see often; Punjabi speakers don't do this at all (I think the drastically different diction and tone don't allow for it, honestly.)
Here are some more examples of distinctly Hindi or Punjabi words with Romani. They match a lot more with Hindi most of the time. (eng-rom-hnd-pun)
Only these have more of a resemblance to Punjabi.
Didn't mean to ramble, I have just been learning a lot about Romani as of late, some of which I wanted to share. I'm cool with the new body section, the one thing I would change is the subheading to "Speculative" as there are sharply conflicting studies, at least until more detailed studies come out regarding the mutation's prevalence in subcontinental populations, as I'm sure they will. I just don't think two lines mentioning a Jatt mutation really cuts it with no detail, more should be divulged. Like actual population studies for one. I also think my study and the mention of R1awhich is a quandary which cannot be counted out (R1a is the most common male lineage in northern India, not just Jatts, of which Romani populations have literally none; this is unreconcilable to me) and should be incorporated back in, which was really the most head-on direct study of Jatt/Roma comparison I have come across. Also, the presence of Hindi words kind of contradicts the "origin" in Punjab, unless they dipped back down to Rajasthan before their sojourn. The presence of a few distinct Punjabi (and Dardic, Persian, Slavic, etc) loanwords simply indicates their migration to me.
Notwithstanding, this is a fascinating topic. PS This may warrant a "duh" from you, but are you a Romani? And have you seen the PBS Romani documentary film with Johnny Depp in it? Interesting stuff. Anyway, I will do the heading, fell free to reply. 3swordz ( talk) 14:24, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
I also have a few images regarding Haplotype H's prevalence, in addition to "Haplogroup H is frequently found among populations of India (approximately 27%[8]), Sri Lanka (approx. 25%[8]), Nepal (approx. 12% in Kathmandu and 6% in Newars[6]), and Pakistan (haplogroup H1-M52 in 4.1% Burusho, 20.5% Kalash, 4.2% Pashtun, 2.5% other Pakistani)[7]." and 47% of Roma lineages is H, with no R1a. PU/PUN=Punjab, GU=Gujarat, etc. here here. In a nutshell: H is extremely scarce in Punjab, R1a is scarce in Romani, no detail of Jatt PCG prevalence (not unduly present, and extremely brief mention with no explained basis for naming), the discovery in only a single Pakistani family (sample size?), cultural/linguistic/genetic affinities farther south, etc. This is my basis for using "speculative," and calling the source under question. (Keep in mind that the new study doesn't necessarily trump the old one; one dealt with common haplogroups and the other with a gene. 3swordz ( talk) 18:02, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
On the other hand, as far as I saw, the Rajastan nomads are really to dark as compared with the Romanis.
We don't know actually how mixed are the Romanis with the Europeans and when exactly this mixage happened. And coming back to probabilities, is hard to believe that the Romanis mixed with Europeans in some hundreds of years more than the Jatts mixed with the "native" Indians in 3500 years, especially considering that the cultural distance between Romanis and Europeans is greater than the one between Jatts and other Indian groups.
Considering the general Jatt look, they maybe whiter than "pure" Indians, but for me, as European, they are still brownish on the average. And, if a group of Jatts would come to Romania today and, for some reason, they would have some conflict with Romanians, you can be sure that they would receive the "fucking crows" tag.
The skin color comparisons I've made were between "dressed" Romanis and "dressed" Jatts, I haven't seen farmer Jatts. And my general impression is that on the average Romanis are a little lighter than Jatts.
Yes, I have also thought about this aspect of the Romani haplogroups, the absence of R1a, even if they traveled almost exclusively in R1a areas. This would rather support a reduce mixage with other peoples. Even if they would assimilate more women than men, it is still very improbable that they wouldn't have acquired some R1a lineages. So, the Romani genetics puzzle is even more complicated :)
Indeed, small human groups evolute faster because the new genes/mutations spread faster the smaller the group is. (That was my digression :) )
About the reliability of the study, I don't know about South Asian academics, but the study was done at the University of Leeds which is a very respected university. But I also hope to hear some more details to clarify things.
The Romanis were not that itinerant. There have been only a couple of important migration in their history, triggered by some events (usually violent events). Other than that, the Romanis of Romania have been here for hundreds of years, the Romanis of Germany (the Sinti) or the Romanis of Spain (Iberian Kalos), just the same. I thing that their nomadism is exaggerated just like their darkness.
I do agree that the other genetic findings should be put into it, I trimmed the paragraph not to undermine those other aspects, but because I think that details aren't needed. I think it's enough to say that the Romani haplogroups don't match the Jatt ones, but I don't think that supplemental details about those haplogroups help. Especially since the article is already to large.
It has been a nice discussion:) Kenshin ( talk) 11:37, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Just send it to WP:RFD; there are instructions there for listing redirects. I'm thinking of taking a wikibreak (back to university soon) so I don't have time to nurse it through myself. Ironholds ( talk) 13:19, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello. You removed a merge tag [9] without discussion. It would be better to take it to the talk page so that other editors can discuss it. — Sandahl (♀) 02:11, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Atunci, te rog, nu ezita sa adaugi asta ca sursa suplimentara si sa reformulezi portiunea din text dupa cum crezi necesar. Personal, as tinde catre o abordare de genul aleia din sursa Antohi: "origine disputata, plauzibil roma". Cu atat mai mult de vreme ce, oricat de mult am cadea de acord ca acele surse traditionale care omit sau exclud originea roma a lui Pann sunt de rea credinta, ele exista si sunt in general considerate la fel de respectabile. Pastrez aceeasi rezerva si in ce priveste schimbarea categoriei: Pann este foarte relevant pentru istoria romilor romani (fie si doar ca folclorist al culturii romanes), si exista un temei mai mult sau mai putin solid pentru revendicarea lui ca membru al etniei, dar nu putem sa driblam celelalte perspective asupra originii lui.
Stiu si ca argumentul asta al meu are o aparenta doza de filistinism, dar mi-e teama ca nu putem lucra decat cu asemenea certitudini in asemenea dispute... Dahn ( talk) 13:45, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
The article Florin Niculescu has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{ prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Blanchardb - Me• MyEars• MyMouth- timed 13:28, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
-- Codrin.B ( talk) 04:20, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
I have just cleaned up the English in the article on the doina. One thing I changed was the content contributed by you which says the new popular music has "degenerated" the peasant styles. I have substituted "diluted" but I'm not sure I have captured your meaning. Did you mean that the peasant styles have degenerated or that knowledge of the peasant styles has degenerated, or both?
Kemp231252 ( talk) 12:20, 20 February 2012 (UTC)Bernard Kemp (kemp231252)
Hello,
where did you take the data for this picture - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Romanis-historical-distribution.png ? I am trying to verify it, and I think verifying the picture will add to the verifiability of other Romani-related pages, since I could use the same source for more wikipedia articles...
--- Ɍưɳŋınɢ 21:26, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
16:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
The article Ionică Minune has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{ prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Melmann 22:27, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ionică Minune until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
I recently queried some information in the Tarogato page. I wrote my query in the Talk page, and added a comment to the main page pointing to it. I thought that might be the best way to get the issue resolved. Another user, who seems to think he now owns that particular page, simply deleted my comment on the main page, without making any effort to address my query. I've no interest in getting into an edit war. Since you are obviously the tarogato expert here, maybe you'd like to look at it David Peacham ( talk) 18:21, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
I know my claim can't be substantiated, but it's surely true :) Gareth E Kegg 20:29, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that recently you carried out a copy from
Madjid khaladj and paste. Please do not move articles by copying and pasting them because it splits the article's history, which is needed for attribution and is helpful in many other ways. If there is an article that you cannot move yourself using the move link at the top of the page, follow the instructions at
Wikipedia:Requested moves. Also, if there are any other articles that you copied and pasted, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at
Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you.
Dancter
18:23, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to
talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should
sign your posts by typing four
tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --
SineBot (
talk)
14:27, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Salut! I guess this is a somewhat awkward moment to ask this, but:
Would you like to join? -- Kuaichik ( talk) 04:17, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
...and Happy Birthday!!! Now let me look for a good cake...:) -- Kuaichik ( talk) 19:16, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
-- Kuaichik ( talk) 19:48, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Pg8.GIF. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or provided a license tag. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.
To add this information, select the appropriate license tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you can't find a suitable license tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. -- ImageTaggingBot ( talk) 11:06, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Can you be more specific about your decision here? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RR#User:Rezistenta_reported_by_User:Desiphral_.28Result:_24h_.28Re.29.3B_36h_.28De.29.29 Although the user Rezistenta violated the 3RR rule, the user Desiphral was blocked just as well, and for even more time. Can you explain your decision, please. AKoan ( talk) 13:55, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Weasel5i2 already is part of the Romani Wikiproject :) -- Kuaichik ( talk) 02:12, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
1. Rezistentza does not represent "all Romanian nationalists". 2. As I've said, proper sources will readily cause me to change my opinion. Biruitorul Talk 13:04, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
Please feel free to list this at Wikipedia:Deletion review. Tim Vickers ( talk) 13:49, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Why don't you keep the discussion on a single page so that people can follow it more easily? :) AKoan ( talk) 08:56, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
The inactivity was on his end. When RfCs are brought on a user, there's generally supposed to be a response from them or some outside views; there were neither. As for what to take to mediation, the dispute would be whether the article should be on the Roma people or the Romani people, and whatever else it is that the dispute is encompassing editorially. Wizardman 13:52, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
I've actually met him and his sockpuppets before. It's unbelievable how he can keep pushing his POV agenda, and use his sock puppets, and still edit on wikipedia. I'm not an easy pushover though. :) -- Buffer v2 ( talk) 17:18, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
In response to your message, the following discussion contained the discussion on the phrasing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Roma_people#Where_and_how_many.3F_Cont.27d Lihaas ( talk) 02:03, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
I posted a question on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Romani people#Help needed. Please have a look. Thank you. Sebastian scha. ( talk) 00:48, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Please feel free to add your 2¢ worth to this re-started article, since you have argued for keeping its predecessor in an AfD discussion. — Zalktis ( talk) 17:03, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
I answered here to your edit. Personally, I must admit that I feel somehow disappointed about you. Personal attacks have been the last thing I expected from you. Regards, -- Olahus ( talk) 17:11, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Please undo your revert. You do not seem to appreciate the concept of consensus through discussion. I waited very patiently for your reply to my questions at the talk page which for a long period you simply ignored. Your confrontational approach seems designed to invite edit warring and is very discourteous. RashersTierney ( talk) 11:59, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Don't take it confrontationally cause its not. Kenshin (ex AKoan) ( talk) 12:31, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
I've rollbacked all the edits you did in relation to changing the term animated series to cartoon due to the long-standing consensus that animated series is the acceptable term for the subject matter involved. Sometimes, you also changed some terms to animated cartoon which is something of a tautology and should be avoided. treelo radda 10:49, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
I find that the two banners are inappropriate for the following reasons. 1. The article has 37 references which is more than 99% of all articles of the same category (pick random Romania related article of the same size, see how many refs), so an unreferenced is definitely odd. 2. You stuck it on a section where the info is trivial and non controversial. If you want more refs there you should simply find them and put them into the article. 3. The unbalanced and similar templates require that you actively address the issue on the talk page -What do you find problematic -What should be done to fix it -Backing your argument up with sources, wikipedia policies etc. Hobartimus ( talk) 19:47, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
For every category you create, you should specify parent categories to which it belongs. You do this by listing the parents near the bottom of the page, each enclosed in double brackets like so:
[[Category:Romani history]] [[Category:People of World War II]]
Contact me if you have questions about this. Best regards, -- Stepheng3 ( talk) 20:52, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
I haven't done any work on Wikimedia, so I doubt I can help you with categories there. -- Stepheng3 ( talk) 22:03, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Kenshin, you can do the suggested cleanup yourself, you don't need my permission. As regards the moves to "Romany", I'll look into it. Btw, tsigani is an ok romanization of τσιγγάνοι for Modern Greek. You are right of course that for Ancient Greek it would be tsinganoi. In fact it is just how Greeks spell /tsigani/ upon loaning it. It isn't directly derived from ατσίγγανοι within Greek, but loaned back from the Balkans. -- dab (𒁳) 09:40, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
I've done lots of clean-up lately, when I could. The moves I'm talking about are this ones (they were done some time ago when the "R-word" was of great concern among some Romanian users):
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Balkan_Romany_language&diff=208979075&oldid=208978890
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Baltic_Romany_language&diff=209000820&oldid=198151317
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Serbian_Romany_language&diff=208977542&oldid=171850358
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Vlax_Romany_language&diff=209003381&oldid=184017581
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Welsh-Romany_language&diff=208991182&oldid=179573849 http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Welsh-Romany_language&diff=next&oldid=208991577
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Angloromany_language&diff=208993694&oldid=201839334
I added the Romani knowledges in your balbel. I suppose you're a Romani speaker. If you're not, remove it and excuse me for the change of your userpage. Cheers! -- Olahus ( talk) 19:28, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
The census results from 1930 to 1992 are taken from here. The estimated data from 1886 from here. However, the census data from that time must give a lower number of Roms (see the census results from 1899). The 210,806 "others" included around 100,000 Dobruja Germans, Bulgarians, Turks, Tatars, Csango's/Hungarians, Lipovans etc. I suppose that around 100,000 Roms have been counted, but without a source how should I put it in Wikipedia?-- Olahus ( talk) 18:27, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Already left the same message for Olahus. Is it possible for an editor in Romania to access the book in question to see if there is additional info. about this image? Should be easily accessed in any academic library over there. Photo would be a good addition if it could be salvaged and I think the book as a reference could be a good source for several articles. Regards. RashersTierney ( talk) 16:47, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
The button above is redirecting your messages to User talk:Ohconfucius. You may need to tweek the code if you did a cut and paste. RashersTierney ( talk) 16:50, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Concerning your question, I ment that this source doesn't use the form "Romani", but "Roma" (or even gypsies, however). -- Olahus ( talk) 19:59, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
PS: I never heared about Anca Parghel to be a Roma. Are you really sure about it? -- Olahus ( talk) 20:00, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I hope I didn't mess up too many. I did use that map and really read both of the pages and tried to link appropriately. J04n( talk page) 14:39, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
From an MOS viewpoint, that version was a nightmare; what I've restored is just a stub, but at least more legible. I won't object if you restore the prior version, but do keep that in mind. - Biruitorul Talk 14:57, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:RomanyChaj#Romani_terminology RomanyChaj-रोमानीछाय ( talk) 17:13, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Kenshin! I made here a proposal for renaming. Cheers! -- Olahus ( talk) 10:21, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Este intr-adevar ceea ce a scris autorul, dar nu cred ca a fost in vreun fel gresit ceea ce am scris eu. Dimpotriva, cred ca ceea ce am scris eu e mai aproape de realitate. Sau poate ma insel? O zi buna! -- Olahus ( talk) 17:54, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
I'll take it step by step:
About your map:
What I would support: two other maps like the one made by dab (hope that he still has the vector version) with the official data and with the highest estimations.
PS: Am scris in engleza ca s-ar putea sa-i intereseze si pe altii. Toate bune! Kenshin ( talk) 14:18, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Mersi pentru raspuns. Iti voi da raspuns in cateva zile ca acum am putin timp si e mult de scris. Oricum, in cele mai multe privinte ai dreptate. -- Olahus ( talk) 20:27, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
See the section " Page style" "Each bulleted entry should, in almost every case, have exactly one navigable (blue) link; including more than one link can confuse the reader." Hope that helps. -- PBS ( talk) 09:23, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
I knew my ppeople were somehow related to the Gypsies and I had read recent reports but I could not find them. Thanks for finding them and including them. Great Work!-- Sikh-history ( talk) 13:53, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi Kenshin. I saw you revert a statement on Roma in Romania re population figures. This same edit has been made across several articles by the same editor and I was considering removing them all as I could not see how the added anything, but if they were 'true', then it might lead to a long drawn out process. Are you saying the figures are not derived from a national census? Regards. RashersTierney ( talk) 09:08, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Hey Kenshin
This is 3swordz, who corresponded with you a few months ago. I decided to incorporate the other source regarding the genetic studies that I showed in the previous discussion. That study, that drew upon larger representative samples of Jats and Roma as opposed to a single family, strongly suggested that the two groups are rather unrelated in terms of male descent, which was the focus of the study.
About your recent source, I do have my doubts about its content, although I am in no position to debate it. This form of glaucoma associated with the Roma (1 in 1250) also occurs in other populations: "estimated at 1:10,000 in Western countries and higher in inbred populations such as those of Saudi Arabia (1:2500), Slovakia Roma (1:1250), Arab Bedouins of the Negro region in Israel (1 of 1200),and Andhra Pradesh in India (1:3300)," and "the incidence of PCG is geographically and ethnically variable." SOURCE: http://lib.bioinfo.pl/pmid:15322984 mutation history of the roma/gypsies. I believe the mention of Andhra Pradesh in Southern India is of note. There are no standout populations in north India, I think due to greater variability (I read in another article), and the Jats don't have this condition at a noteworthy rate, which would also imply that they don't have some kind of monopoly on this gene, which seems somewhat silly to name the gene after them. Some of the other info regarding Roma origins struck me as a little incorrect, but whatever. I did take the liberty of changing the wording from 'confirming' to 'suggesting,' which struck me as especially unscientific, with no actual group studies of PCG prevalence, along with the haplogroup stuff sharply suggesting otherwise.
I pulled some of the y-dna prevalences in different populations from other wiki articles (cited ones), just so you know. I also nixed the subheading due to the contradictory study.
A lot of sources say that Roma language is related to a multitude of Indo-Aryan languages (no surprises there), among them Hindi, rajasthani, Punjabi, Sindhi, etc. I decided to look at some Romani vocab to see if I could see a trend. Most Romani words aren't really recognizable anymore unsurprisingly, but I do think that the language is most related to Hindi; the few words that were immediately recognizable to me were in Hindi, and if anything was in common with Punjabi, it was the same in Hindi as well. An example of this was the Romani word "amaro" (Our), which was more akin to Hindi ("hamara") than to Punjabi ("saadda") The pronunciation of "haath" [long "a" sound] (hand) was the same as Hindi ("Haath", also long "a",) than to Punjabi (huth, or h'th, it is hard to capture the phonolgy, but there is no vowel, let alone extended, in that pronunciation. Languages have a trend to simplify pronunciations/grammar over time but not to add to them. So Romani probably retained the pronunciation)There were other examples, these were among the more striking. It jives, at any rate, with the notion that the Romani originated farther south. Just a few more interesting facts. If the semantics doesn't suit, again, feel free. I do think my source is rather valid, and I will keep yours as well of course. 3swordz ( talk) 10:38, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi Kenshin. Some thoughts I have is that the study actually mentioned the discovery in a single Pakistani family, not a Romani one. They were comparing it to Romani populations. The team studied four Pakistani families and isolated it in one. If you have any studies regarding this form of PCG regarding Jatt populations, that would be cool. I was a little thrown by how momentarily the article gleaned over the mutation besides calling it a name. The particular strain, or PCG in general, isn't unduly present in Jatt populations to my knowledge. Jatt Sikhs and Haryans Jats also make up about half of all Jats roughly as well so it's pretty significant, even being "endogamous".
In terms of looks (if you really want to bring that up), Jatts tend to be rather fair skinned actually, either that or a few shades darker. The younger Punjabi populations, Jatts especially in the West (myself included, never got the "farmer's tan," lol) don't really have that "indian" look or how you want to call it; I can tell you out of experience that a lot of Punjabis in general but Jatts in particular are immediately distinguishable from "Indian looking" people, the ones raised here especially, it's quite a vast departure. Perhaps you may have seen some Sikhs (religious or not)like this. Their looks just scream "not indigenous" at any rate. I know that Romani are at least on average 50% European genetically by now (may even become mostly European in due time maybe), but before they started to mix (fairly recently, picked up in the 1800s) they were commented on their darkness of skin and even now some are quite dark and Indian-looking, at least from pictures I have seen and comments made in texts.
I didn't want to get into the whole "looks" thing because it struck me as a bit unresolvable (we could go on all day about looks of Romanis and whatnot) but that is my take on it. The genetics and such showed a large discrepancy, along with my look at the language vocab, as well as the traditions and dances and such, there is little in common, like the dances (the lively spinning dances and skirt style and the presence of distinctly Hindi words/syntax) just don't jive as Punjabi at all, but look like Rajasthani dress and movement. I honestly don't think people can just pick up traditions like [forgive my stereotyping for a sec] fortune-telling, itinerancy, musical entertainment and entertainer class traits, whatever, especially from a settled "warrior past" that strikes as being more self-empowering than factual, like black nationalists claiming Zulu descent or whatever. I am not trying to denegrate them , don;t take it that way, but some things just don't fit at all. I also read of in quite a few articles (for however much this counts) a mannerism of Romani, the "head bobble" or something, where some shakes their heads from a sort of side-to-side to indicate "yes," and I immediately knew what they were talking about, this is a distinct Hindi-speaker trait that I see often; Punjabi speakers don't do this at all (I think the drastically different diction and tone don't allow for it, honestly.)
Here are some more examples of distinctly Hindi or Punjabi words with Romani. They match a lot more with Hindi most of the time. (eng-rom-hnd-pun)
Only these have more of a resemblance to Punjabi.
Didn't mean to ramble, I have just been learning a lot about Romani as of late, some of which I wanted to share. I'm cool with the new body section, the one thing I would change is the subheading to "Speculative" as there are sharply conflicting studies, at least until more detailed studies come out regarding the mutation's prevalence in subcontinental populations, as I'm sure they will. I just don't think two lines mentioning a Jatt mutation really cuts it with no detail, more should be divulged. Like actual population studies for one. I also think my study and the mention of R1awhich is a quandary which cannot be counted out (R1a is the most common male lineage in northern India, not just Jatts, of which Romani populations have literally none; this is unreconcilable to me) and should be incorporated back in, which was really the most head-on direct study of Jatt/Roma comparison I have come across. Also, the presence of Hindi words kind of contradicts the "origin" in Punjab, unless they dipped back down to Rajasthan before their sojourn. The presence of a few distinct Punjabi (and Dardic, Persian, Slavic, etc) loanwords simply indicates their migration to me.
Notwithstanding, this is a fascinating topic. PS This may warrant a "duh" from you, but are you a Romani? And have you seen the PBS Romani documentary film with Johnny Depp in it? Interesting stuff. Anyway, I will do the heading, fell free to reply. 3swordz ( talk) 14:24, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
I also have a few images regarding Haplotype H's prevalence, in addition to "Haplogroup H is frequently found among populations of India (approximately 27%[8]), Sri Lanka (approx. 25%[8]), Nepal (approx. 12% in Kathmandu and 6% in Newars[6]), and Pakistan (haplogroup H1-M52 in 4.1% Burusho, 20.5% Kalash, 4.2% Pashtun, 2.5% other Pakistani)[7]." and 47% of Roma lineages is H, with no R1a. PU/PUN=Punjab, GU=Gujarat, etc. here here. In a nutshell: H is extremely scarce in Punjab, R1a is scarce in Romani, no detail of Jatt PCG prevalence (not unduly present, and extremely brief mention with no explained basis for naming), the discovery in only a single Pakistani family (sample size?), cultural/linguistic/genetic affinities farther south, etc. This is my basis for using "speculative," and calling the source under question. (Keep in mind that the new study doesn't necessarily trump the old one; one dealt with common haplogroups and the other with a gene. 3swordz ( talk) 18:02, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
On the other hand, as far as I saw, the Rajastan nomads are really to dark as compared with the Romanis.
We don't know actually how mixed are the Romanis with the Europeans and when exactly this mixage happened. And coming back to probabilities, is hard to believe that the Romanis mixed with Europeans in some hundreds of years more than the Jatts mixed with the "native" Indians in 3500 years, especially considering that the cultural distance between Romanis and Europeans is greater than the one between Jatts and other Indian groups.
Considering the general Jatt look, they maybe whiter than "pure" Indians, but for me, as European, they are still brownish on the average. And, if a group of Jatts would come to Romania today and, for some reason, they would have some conflict with Romanians, you can be sure that they would receive the "fucking crows" tag.
The skin color comparisons I've made were between "dressed" Romanis and "dressed" Jatts, I haven't seen farmer Jatts. And my general impression is that on the average Romanis are a little lighter than Jatts.
Yes, I have also thought about this aspect of the Romani haplogroups, the absence of R1a, even if they traveled almost exclusively in R1a areas. This would rather support a reduce mixage with other peoples. Even if they would assimilate more women than men, it is still very improbable that they wouldn't have acquired some R1a lineages. So, the Romani genetics puzzle is even more complicated :)
Indeed, small human groups evolute faster because the new genes/mutations spread faster the smaller the group is. (That was my digression :) )
About the reliability of the study, I don't know about South Asian academics, but the study was done at the University of Leeds which is a very respected university. But I also hope to hear some more details to clarify things.
The Romanis were not that itinerant. There have been only a couple of important migration in their history, triggered by some events (usually violent events). Other than that, the Romanis of Romania have been here for hundreds of years, the Romanis of Germany (the Sinti) or the Romanis of Spain (Iberian Kalos), just the same. I thing that their nomadism is exaggerated just like their darkness.
I do agree that the other genetic findings should be put into it, I trimmed the paragraph not to undermine those other aspects, but because I think that details aren't needed. I think it's enough to say that the Romani haplogroups don't match the Jatt ones, but I don't think that supplemental details about those haplogroups help. Especially since the article is already to large.
It has been a nice discussion:) Kenshin ( talk) 11:37, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Just send it to WP:RFD; there are instructions there for listing redirects. I'm thinking of taking a wikibreak (back to university soon) so I don't have time to nurse it through myself. Ironholds ( talk) 13:19, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello. You removed a merge tag [9] without discussion. It would be better to take it to the talk page so that other editors can discuss it. — Sandahl (♀) 02:11, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Atunci, te rog, nu ezita sa adaugi asta ca sursa suplimentara si sa reformulezi portiunea din text dupa cum crezi necesar. Personal, as tinde catre o abordare de genul aleia din sursa Antohi: "origine disputata, plauzibil roma". Cu atat mai mult de vreme ce, oricat de mult am cadea de acord ca acele surse traditionale care omit sau exclud originea roma a lui Pann sunt de rea credinta, ele exista si sunt in general considerate la fel de respectabile. Pastrez aceeasi rezerva si in ce priveste schimbarea categoriei: Pann este foarte relevant pentru istoria romilor romani (fie si doar ca folclorist al culturii romanes), si exista un temei mai mult sau mai putin solid pentru revendicarea lui ca membru al etniei, dar nu putem sa driblam celelalte perspective asupra originii lui.
Stiu si ca argumentul asta al meu are o aparenta doza de filistinism, dar mi-e teama ca nu putem lucra decat cu asemenea certitudini in asemenea dispute... Dahn ( talk) 13:45, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
The article Florin Niculescu has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{ prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Blanchardb - Me• MyEars• MyMouth- timed 13:28, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
-- Codrin.B ( talk) 04:20, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
I have just cleaned up the English in the article on the doina. One thing I changed was the content contributed by you which says the new popular music has "degenerated" the peasant styles. I have substituted "diluted" but I'm not sure I have captured your meaning. Did you mean that the peasant styles have degenerated or that knowledge of the peasant styles has degenerated, or both?
Kemp231252 ( talk) 12:20, 20 February 2012 (UTC)Bernard Kemp (kemp231252)
Hello,
where did you take the data for this picture - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Romanis-historical-distribution.png ? I am trying to verify it, and I think verifying the picture will add to the verifiability of other Romani-related pages, since I could use the same source for more wikipedia articles...
--- Ɍưɳŋınɢ 21:26, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
16:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
The article Ionică Minune has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{ prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Melmann 22:27, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ionică Minune until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.