Talk:Romani people in Poland

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 January 2021 and 10 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Coreou. Peer reviewers: Bradyscheiner.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:11, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:11, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Untitled

April 27, 2021: Added information to the Historical Backdrop section Coreou (talk) 07:09, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Hey fellow editors, I'm currently working on this stub as part of a uni course and would really appreciate your feedback! Rima (RimaB99 (talk) 13:34, 17 May 2021 (UTC))

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Desertarun (talk) 08:28, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that the Roma people were persecuted alongside the Jews in the Holocaust? Source: "The motives invoked to justify the death of the Gypsies were the same as those ordering the murder of the Jews, and the methods employed for the one were identical with those employed for the other." (https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9780230524507_18#citeas)

5x expanded by RimaB99 (talk). Self-nominated at 20:21, 24 May 2021 (UTC).

• Under review. BusterD (talk) 04:41, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: This expansion doesn't seem sufficient to meet the criteria of five-fold expansion: 00:28, 12 May 2021 (6199 characters, 943 words), 18:56, 17 May 2021‎ (18332 characters, 2787 words). There was no significant expansion in the seven day interval prior to nomination. I'd be happy to find out I was incorrect. BusterD (talk) 08:07, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

• Comment. At the suggestion of a more experienced DYK reviewer I was wondering if there would be any objection to including expansion by User:Coreou in the total. Both of these editors are students studying Wikipedia (at different schools on opposite sides of the world, if I read correctly) and together their work easily surpasses the length requirement, taking the article from this to the much better this. Excellent work for new wikipedians. The new numbers would be 06:46, 24 April 2021‎ (242 words, 1559 characters), 17 May 2021‎ (2787 words, 18332 characters) a 11x expansion. Technically this is actually 23 days of work instead of 7, but with both editors being enthusatic new students, I'm wondering if this could be allowed for. The downside is that both editors would take credit for the expansion, but I see that as a positive, not a negative. Issues? Agreement? BusterD (talk) 21:15, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

• Comment. Both of these student editors contribute very occasionally. User:Coreou last edited on 1 May, User:RimaB99 last editing on 1 June. I'm going to give this MY approval, based on my comment above. If I'm wrong in stretching the time frame in order to include both editors (one in Tennessee, one in Australia) in 11x expansion, then I'll cop to it. I think this is a great Wikipedia story, and I want to endorse such world-wide collaboration by student editors. BTW, QPQ not required for these new contributors. BusterD (talk) 05:46, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Designation

The word Cygan itself isn't pejorative, it's an informal term. The problem is that the ethnicity itself has a bad reputation in Poland, no matter what word you use to refer to them. Cygan and ocyganić don't really share an etymology, but ocyganić was newly created based on negative stereotypes of the ethnicity. Similar to the word Żyd. Because of the bad reputation of Jews in Poland, żyd became used as an insult, and many verbs based on stinginess were created like zżydzieć, zażydzać, pożydzić, żydzieć, żydzić and zażydzić. But that doesn't mean that the word Żyd itself is pejorative with a shared etymology with stigniness. It's just people being racist and making normal names look bad. The name Cygan was based on a Christian denomination after all. Lisqiii (talk) 07:26, 26 August 2023 (UTC)