Talk:Romani Americans

Who knew?

To me, 'Roma' was a new term learned today via surfing the web. Do a Google-search on [Roma Time Magazine] to see how Time Magazine is promoting visibility. Also, the recent news of returning kids to their parents helped visibility. — Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 12:11, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Oregon

The article is a good idea but the content is rife with truth claims that either lack authority and/or validity. For example: to identify Oregon as a hotbed of Romani settlement or activities in the USA in the past or at present is unreasonable. Why would Romani peoples flock to Oregon? While it can be documented with some authority that a large city like Portland in Oregon has attracted some Romani peoples at various times in the past for various reasons (see 1983 Portland State MA in Anthropology thesis by Anne Sharp) but there is no rhyme or reason why Oregon would have more appeal for Romani peoples than California, Texas, Florida or Massachusetts. So, the article is off to a rough start. I recommend that anyone interested in Romani studies in the USA and their distributions from coast to coast first learn about the economic strategies and stratagems of Romani peoples and how they vary from group to group as a starter. The Wiki article on "Romani peoples" would be a good place to begin to systematically learn about Romani peoples. I advise beginners on this topic to join the Gypsy Lore Society (founded 1888) and learn from the present and past members who have studied Romani peoples and Scotch and Irish Travelers in the USA for more than a century; for example, Dr. Ian Hancock who was a member of the GLS several decades ago and wrote of the Gypsies in Texas and is still a Professor at the University of Texas at Austin. He is the author of We are the Romani People (2002), which is an excellent textbook about Romani peoples though its major focus in on European Romanies (Roma)and their historical experiences. That would be a good start. Good Luck!Bullybasha (talk) 23:25, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Unsourced sections

There are entire sections that are marked for rewrite that are also completely or almost completely unsourced. I think these should be removed and that someone should take a crack at restoring the sections from scratch with an encyclopedic tone and valid sourcing. I think that was part of the issue the IP user had with the article. I was fine with the removal of the actually unsourced material. My issue was the claim that Google Books is somehow an unreliable source. Plandu (talk) 18:47, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

I've removed the culture section as the whole thing was lifted from Every Culture dot com /multi/Du-Ha/Gypsy-Americans.html (The URL is on a blocklist, but I thought it important for anyone who wants to verify that the content was indeed plagiarized.) Plandu (talk) 19:31, 10 June 2021 (UTC)