Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard/RFC on Hungarian Romani

RFC on Hungarian Romani
Please specify which of the following changes should be made to the article. A Survey section follows each of the questions; please answer Yes or No (or any equivalent) in the Survey. You may engage in threaded discussion in any of the sections for the purpose, remembering that civility is the fourth pillar of Wikipedia.

Which of the following changes should be made to the article on Hungarian Romani? Should a subsection be added at the end of the section on Discrimination, Racism, and Social Exclusion, on Anti-Roma Sentiment?

Subsection on Anti-Romani Sentiment
Please choose A, B, or C is neither, in which case no subsection will be added.

In the Survey section, please specify A, B, or C. You may engage in back-and-forth discussion in the Threaded Discussion section. Be civil and concise.

A.
Anti-Roma Sentiment

Anti-Roma attitudes and discrimination have existed continuously in Hungary since the dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian empire, and these views have often been mirrored or encouraged by anti-Roma policies and rhetoric from political parties and several governments. A 2019 Pew Research poll found that 61% of Hungarians held unfavorable views of Roma. According to the Society for Threatened Peoples, the Roma are "consciously despised by the majority population," while anti-Roma attitudes are becoming more open. A range of negative views of Roma are common among the majority population, research in 2011 showed that 60% of Hungarians feel Roma have criminality "in their blood" and 42% supported the right of bars to refuse to allow Roma to enter.

In 2006, in the town of Olaszliszka, a schoolteacher was lynched by family members and neighbours of a Roma girl who he had hit with his car, the locals erroneously believing that the girl had been killed or seriously injured in the incident. This crime was utilised by the extreme-right racist political party Jobbik to introduce anti-Roma discourse into the Hungarian media, characterising the murderers as a "gypsy mob" and demanding a solution to supposed "gypsy crime". According to sociologist Margit Feischmidt, this identification of gypsies with crime, which is not supported by statistical evidence, is fomented by new media accounts linked to the far-right, leading to further racism, discrimination and violence against the Roma. The "Gypsy Crime" narrative serves to present majority ethnic Hungarians as an in-group who are victims of an inherently criminal Roma out-group, serving the racist nationalist narrative of far-right groups. The moral panic around so-called "gypsy crime" has been identified as a contributory factor to the very real racial violence suffered by Hungarian Roma, which police authorities frequently refuse to identify as hate crimes.

Members of mainstream Hungarian political parties have been accused nationally and internationally of having racist anti-Roma views and positions according to the prevailing standards in the EU. The police chief of Miskolc, Albert Pásztor, who was dismissed from his position and reassigned to another after being accused of making anti-Roma statements, then reinstated following protests, was selected as joint mayoral candidate for the Hungarian Social Democrats and Democratic Coalition in 2014. He declared that certain types of crime were committed exclusively by Roma people and when challenged reiterated his views and claimed they were summarized from the local police reports. As the keeping of ethnic crime statistics contravenes Hungarian law, a representative from the Alliance of Free Democrats enquired as to whether Pásztor had compiled a private archive of crime statistics. Pásztor replied that his statements were not based on statistics, but on mentions of offender ethnicity in reports made by victims of crime.

In 2013, Fidesz, the largest party in the governing coalition, refused to condemn the comments of their leading supporter Zsolt Bayer,    who wrote: ""a significant part of the Gypsies is unfit for coexistence... They are not fit to live among people. These Gypsies are animals, and they behave like animals... These animals shouldn’t be allowed to exist. In no way. That needs to be solved - immediately and regardless of the method.""

However, some members of the party openly criticised the statement's style and form or condemned it as not suitable. Deputy Prime Minister Tibor Navracsics initially strongly criticised the statement, but later defended Bayer, suggesting that Bayer's comments were not his genuine opinion. Fidesz communications chief Máté Kocsis was even more supportive of Bayer, saying critics of Bayer's article were "siding with" Roma murderers, even though nobody had been murdered in the attack to which Bayer had referred. Later Bayer declared his words had been taken out of context and misunderstood, as his goal was to stir up public opinion, he denied racial discrimination and stated that he wished to segregate from society only those Roma people who are "criminal" and "incapable and unfit for co-existence". The comments led to an advertising boycott of Bayer's Magyar Hírlap newspaper.

In 2013, Géza Jeszenszky, the ambassador to Norway provoked protests in Hungary and Norway due to statements in a textbook which suggested that Roma suffered from mental illness because "in Roma culture it is permitted for sisters and brothers or cousins to marry each other or just to have sexual intercourse with each other." Jeszenszky claimed that these statements, which he said were based on wikipedia, were not racist, and he received support from the Hungarian foreign ministry. Due to these comments, the Norwegian Institute of Holocaust and Religious Minorities asked Jeszenszky not to attend its International Wallenberg Symposium event.

Explanation by Proponent
Version A's added text contains sourced material explaining the nature of anti-Roma sentiment in Hungary, and giving examples which are considered to constitute anti-Roma racism and/or hate speech by reliable sources.

The differences between this version and version B are the following:


 * Version A uses the title "Anti-Roma Sentiment", version B uses "Anti-Roma Sentiment and Controversies".


 * Version A does not include two comments by Attila Lakatos, a self-styled "Roma Voivod" and minor media figure, with close links to the governing Fidesz party.

Reasoning for differences


 * Difference 1. The title here is Anti-Roma Sentiment rather than Anti-Roma sentiment and controversy. The reason for this is that all the content of the section relates to incidents which reliable sources refer to as anti-Roma, racist, or constituting hate speech. The addition of "and controversy" suggests that some of them may not constitute examples of Anti-Roma sentiment, which contradicts the Reliable Sources.


 * Difference 2: This is excluded from version A: Attila Lakatos, the Roma Voivode of Borsod-Abaúj-Zemplén County (inofficial historical title among the Roma community) approved and openly declared that gypsy criminality is an existing phenomenon: "Some type of crimes are connected to Roma primarily. Not exclusively, but mostly. It's undeniable." (This refers to the racist, per RS, talking point of "gypsy crime".)


 * 1. Grammatical errors notwithstanding, this does not make sense. There is no indication in the text of what Lakatos "approved".


 * 2. The source does not meet the criteria of notability. It comes from an interview with boon.hu, a regional Hungarian language website, for which no evidence of fact-checking exists. Regional sorces are not supposed to be used for national level stories, so as well as WP:RS, WP:WEIGHT is relevant.


 * 3. Even if the source were valid it would still be WP:UNDUE to include the personal opinions of only one individual. If we include Lakatos a broad range of comments from individuals of differing political views would also be needed to satisfy WP:BALANCE


 * Difference 3 This is excluded from version A: Afterwards, Attila Lakatos declared - by referring to the preceding incident, the manslaughter in Ózd - that there is no excuse for such crimes and approved Bayer's description (This refers to the hate speech, per RS, of Zsolt Bayer.)


 * There is one valid national level source for this quote, in a myriad of international and national sources relating to the racist diatribe of Zsolt Bayer. Dozens of individuals and writers gave their opinion on this matter, the only one (except government officials) quoted in Version B is Lakatos. This is a textbook case of WP:UNDUE. The quote is deliberately selected with the aim of legitimising Bayer's hate speech.

TLDR: The title "Anti-Roma Sentiment" is justified by Reliable sources relating to each incident. Including only the personal opinions of Attila Lakatos is giving undue weight, makes neutrality impossible, and is designed to legitimise racist points of view.

Boynamedsue (talk) 17:28, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

B.
Anti-Roma sentiment and controversies Anti-Roma attitudes and discrimination have existed continuously in Hungary since the dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian empire, and these views have often been mirrored or encouraged by anti-Roma policies and rhetoric from political parties and several governments. The 2019 Pew Research poll found that 61% of Hungarians held unfavorable views of Roma. According to the Society for Threatened Peoples, the Roma are "consciously despised by the majority population," while anti-Roma attitudes are becoming more open. A range of negative views of Roma are common among the majority population, research in 2011 showed that 60% of Hungarians feel Roma have criminality "in their blood" and 42% supported the right of bars to refuse to allow Roma to enter.

In 2006, in the town of Olaszliszka, a schoolteacher was lynched by family members and neighbours of a Roma girl who he had hit with his car, the locals erroneously believing that the girl had been killed or seriously injured in the incident. This crime was utilised by the extreme-right racist political party Jobbik to introduce anti-Roma discourse into the Hungarian media, characterising the murderers as a "gypsy mob" and demanding a solution to supposed "gypsy crime". According to Feischmidt, this identification of gypsies with crime, which is not supported by statistical evidence, is fomented by new media accounts linked to the far-right, which leads to further racism, discrimination and violence against the Roma. The "Gypsy Crime" narrative serves to present majority ethnic Hungarians as an in-group who are victims of an inherently criminal Roma out-group, serving the racist nationalist narrative of far-right groups. The moral panic around so-called "gypsy crime" has been identified as a contributory factor to the very real racial violence suffered by Hungarian Roma, which police authorities frequently refuse to identify as hate crimes. Attila Lakatos, the Roma Voivode of Borsod-Abaúj-Zemplén County (inofficial historical title among the Roma community) approved and openly declared that gypsy criminality is an existing phenomenon:

""Some type of crimes are connected to Roma primarily. Not exclusively, but mostly. It's undeniable.""

Members of mainstream Hungarian political parties have been accused nationally and internationally of having racist anti-Roma views and positions according to the prevailing standards in the EU. The police chief of Miskolc, Albert Pásztor who was dismissed from his position and reassigned to another one after being accused of making anti-Roma statements, then reinstated following protests, was selected as joint mayoral candidate for the Hungarian Social Democrats and Democratic Coalition in 2014. He declared that some type of crimes are only commited by Roma people and when challenged reiterated his views and claimed they were summarized from the local police reports. As the keeping of ethnic crime statistics contravenes Hungarian law, a representative from the Alliance of Free Democrats enquired as to whether Pásztor had compiled a private archive of crime statistics. Pásztor replied that his statements were not based on statistics, but on mentions of offender ethnicity in reports made by victims of crime.

In 2013, Fidesz, the largest party in the governing coalition to condemn the comments of their leading supporter Zsolt Bayer, who wrote:

""a significant part of the Gypsies is unfit for coexistence... They are not fit to live among people. These Gypsies are animals, and they behave like animals... These animals shouldn’t be allowed to exist. In no way. That needs to be solved - immediately and regardless of the method.""

However, some members of the party openly criticised the statement's style and form or condemned it as not suitable. Deputy Prime Minister Tibor Navracsics initially strongly criticised the statement, but later defended Bayer, suggesting that Bayer's comments were not his genuine opinion. Fidesz communications chief Máté Kocsis was even more supportive of Bayer, saying critics of Bayer's article were "siding with" Roma murderers, even though nobody had been murdered in the attack to which Bayer had referred. Later Bayer declared his words were taken out of context and misunderstood, as his goal was to stir up public opinion, but denied racial discrimination and reinforced he wish to segregate from the society only those Roma people who are "criminal" and "incapable and unfit for co-existence". The comments led to an advertising boycott of Bayer's Magyar Hírlap newspaper. Afterwards, Attila Lakatos declared - by referring to the preceding incident, the manslaughter in Ózd - that there is no excuse for such crimes and approved Bayer's description.

In 2013, Géza Jeszenszky, the ambassador to Norway provoked protests in Hungary and Norway due to statements in a textbook which suggested that Roma suffered from mental illness because "in Roma culture it is permitted for sisters and brothers or cousins to marry each other or just to have sexual intercourse with each other." Jeszenszky claimed these declarations, which he claimed to be based on wikipedia, were not racist, and he received support from the Hungarian foreign ministry. Due to these comments, the Norwegian Institute of Holocaust and Religious Minorities asked Jeszenszky not to attend its International Wallenberg Symposium event.

Explanation by Proponent

 * Differences: there are more differences, than the user presented above (e.g. wikilink to Jeszenszky, or other changes as well), I am very sorry the respresentation starts immediately in an imprecise way, nevertheless the reactions to that representation:
 * DIFF 1 - Obviously the Pásztor and Bayer cases are controversial as well, since they were not motivated by racism, but they referred to specific subroups of criminals dealing with social issues, as an existing phenomenon inside the community (as the user lacks of expertise knowledge in the subject, commited reccurently inaccurate or misleading edits in the past, which was needed to be repaired/amended all the time)
 * DIFF2 - the user repeats mostly the already refuted views, the Romas elect in their community voivodes, the suggestion to link it to any party is an obsessive part, despite other invidual opinions are three-times more are really connected to a party which surprisingly does not bother the user, etc.
 * 1. grammatical mistakes - if exist - may easily be corrected. As well, any copyedit may be performed, the statement is clearly understandble (what see now is again a new desperate n+1 invention against it, boring)
 * 2. Nope, the source is an RS, as well approved by other editor, and the source exactly from that region the the issue and phenomenon exist, on first hand, so as well WP:WEIGHT does not play here (the user adamantly tried to pursie erronous assertions for removal, finally an admin had to intervene end enlight him/her)
 * 3. I am happy the user realises the source is valid, after having added so many individual and one-sided opinions, he/she opposes any other addition because of personal dislike, just beucase different from those he/she added...that's all about WP:BALANCE, indeed what we would have here would be a clear violation of WP:NPOV, which in fact have been the general problem of the user's additions, WP:OWN is not an option (both versions constitute nearly 90% of the user's sole additions)
 * DIFF 3 - There is a source that is the main voice of the opposition media, the greatest nationwide conglomerate, which among other individual opinions considered this as highly relevant (funnily the user first tried to argue it as it would be a pro-goverment media, which was quicly refuted, so new arguments had to be invented...). It is spuriously stated that it would be quoted, it is a misleading statement (alarming from now on) it is mentioned along with the other opninons, which the RS consider relevant, so WP:UNDUE does not play here, we've seen again a false assertion based on a false premise. Furthermore, the next statement is amazingly incorrect, since the only aim is WP:NPOV, which the user recurrently ignored, it cannot have connection to any legitimization by nature (the user possibly do not understand the meaning of the word, any declared statement of an individual has no legal affiliation, neither the one who comment on it).


 * TDLR: The title "Anti-Roma sentiment and controversy" is justified by reliable sources relating to each incident, since the user added by itself controversial issues to the article under the same section, we don't ignore parts of the sources we don't like. As well not just Lakatos's statements are included, but other personal opinions which the user added by itself (!), so WP:FALSEBALANCE would only play if it would be ignored since we don't only represent one-sided views per WP:NPOV, as well it cannot legitimise (oh..again) racist POV, since the subject who opined is member of the Roma minority, so it is a complete BOOMERANG, as well and ardent example of WP:JDL and WP:OWN.

C.
(Neither of the above. No additional subsection.)