Jimmy Wales on why Wikileaks should be cautious

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/clic...ine/9211077.stm

Note the BBC have referred to Jimbo Wales as the founder of Wikipedia.

That's interesting. So now we have a Reliable Source that he's the founder, by Wikipedia logic we should stop this "co-founder" nonsense. Especially as he no doubt self-identifies as the founder. OK, Milton?

Except that in this case I can give you a dozen sources to the contrary about Jimbo's role, all just as reliable. Besides, some of this is semantic, as credit for being THE "founder" of wikipedia is sort of like deciding who should be THE "father" of the atom bomb. This doesn't compare with the gypsy thing, where absolutely NOBODY in the media contravened the many reports that this 10 year-old mom was a Roma from Romania. Nor has anybody since, that I know of. Enlighten me if they have.

Ladies and gentlemen,

I hadn't intended to, but I seem to have provided a beautiful textbook demo of why it's so often impossible to correct errors on Wikipedia. Does anyone think that any newspaper is going to bother to publish an explicit statement that the girl isn't a gypsy/Roma? Basically, I've been defeated by WP:Anythingsaidinanewspapermustbetrue and WP:AnyonewhodisagreeswithMiltonisaworthlesstroll. The fact that the girl doesn't have a Roma name, doesn't lead a traditional Roma lifestyle and has behaved in a way that would horrify most Romas (with the alleged approval of her grandmother), evidence that in a serious academic environment would be given great weight, is of course irrelevant under WP:OR. So is the very plausible suggestion that most journalists can't tell a Romanian from a Roma.

And as for "I can give you a dozen sources to the contrary about Jimbo's role, all just as reliable", surely Milton knows WP:Thelatestsourcetrumpsearlierones; clearly the BBC, as a very reliable source, is well aware of earlier arguments about Jimbo's status, and come to a conclusion that must be better than earlier ones, because it uses the latest evidence. And if that isn't a real WP policy, we can soon fix that!

I rest my case.

Okay, my turn to speak to the jury, then.

You want a textbook: Here instead is a longish academic article on Roma marriage and sexual traditions, in The Journal of Transnational Law and Policy. It's not a news article or something from the BBC. It's a peer reviewed journal, as good as it gets:

WHEN HER FEET TOUCH THE GROUND: CONFLICT BETWEEN THE ROMA FAMILISTIC CUSTOM OF ARRANGED JUVENILE MARRIAGE AND ENFORCEMENT OF INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS TREATIES The Journal of Transnational Law and Policy. Vol. 13:2, (Spring, 2004)

http://www.law.fsu.edu/journals/transnatio...2/timmerman.pdf

The first part of the article title comes from a Romani proverb: “Sit your daughter in a chair and if her feet touch the ground, she’s ready for marriage.” And being an academic study, it even has an academic cite for the proverb itself: Romany Information Service, Roma in the Czech Republic, Adolescence (June 4, 2000), at http://www.romove.cz/en/article/18091 .

The article itself is about Roma underage marriage traditions, and how they conflict with international law, something you should have guessed, when I first gave you the cite for the stink about the EU ambassidor at the Romani wedding, some years ago. But no, you did not pick up on the clue that this might not be a good topic to go into. Instead, you simply go on repeating yourself like a broken record, crying lack of evidence. But yet, you go on to say:

.

First, she does have a Roma name. Roma who live in Romania (which is where most of them do live, as a minority there) very often have Romanian names.

Second, if a Romani girl and boy "elope," the community considers them married WITHOUT a ceremony, and after chastisment, they are allowed back into the community. Afterall, not every family can come up with a bride price. There are elaborate marriage ceremonies among the Roma, but the ceremony doesn't constitute the marriage. Living together as man and wife constitute the marriage. Just as in days of old in every culture (marriage ceremonies, particularly church and civil ceremonies, are a somewhat modern invention, you know. Common law marriage came earlier).





Read the above again, and you'll find you've been pwned in this argument. The "grandmother" quoted in the newspapers is quite right about Roma customs. The numbers in the above are to cites in other literature, and are available within the legal article which is fully online, at the http address above.



Now, now. The first policy is technically SlimVirgin's. We don't hold to it at WR, if a better source can be found. As for the second rule, I like it! But people who disagree with Milton Roe on WR are subject to a different set of rules than on WP. They have to come up with academic evidence. They can't just get their friends together and ban or block or revert me. They must either continue to play, giving better and better sources (hey, sometimes I'm wrong!), or else, at some point, quit and slink off with tail between their legs. Ottava Rima has added a new variation previously invented by Nixon before Ottava was born (declare victory and leave, after use of some profanity), but it hasn't worked for him very well on WR. You wanna try that one?

This is amazing. How does this reference support the case that this particular girl is an ethnic Roma and not an ethnic Romanian? Is there some original research necessary?

"Sit your daughter in a chair and if her feet touch the ground, she's ready for marriage."

In other words, she's not ready for marriage until her feet touch the ground when sitting in a proper chair, or in other words 10 year old child brides are out.

"self-declared Romanian Gypsy king Florin Cioaba" and "Gypsy bride Narcisa Tranca" obviously don't have Romanian names, casting doubt on the idea that the fact that our 10 year old friend does have a Romanian name might suggest that she is not Roma.

Life isn't long enough to list all the ways that this paper is mostly irrelevant and indeed strengthens my case. However, Milton will no doubt now be convinced that he has won. So be it; why should anyone else care? This isn't Wikipedia, after all.

I suggest that a mod closes the thread.

Actually, I suggest going one step further than that, for all the good it will do me.

Not so fast, varmint!

I am of distant Roma ancestry, although they would consider me gadjo.

Child marriages (arranged) are still extant, and often involve girls very young. Ten and even younger are not unknown. These marriages aren't supposed to be consummated at the time of settlement.

The eloping thing is real, also.

Milton: although on the face of it, and judging by the grandmother's attitude, the family is Rom, this incident lies somewhat outside of custom. The girl and boy were living together through circumstance, as if they were brother and sister, and hormones got in the way. In a traditional family setting, the boy would be lucky to get off with a horse-whipping.

These statements are merely my opinion, and worth just that, of course. Nais tuke.

*Just now noticed this is the WikiLeaks thread. Could the Rom posts be moved to the original thread away from here?