Jump to content

Talk:Sister Souljah

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

{{hangon}}

[edit]

Sure, this is a substub, but is it really a candidate for speedy deletion? --Timc 02:01, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Copyedit

[edit]
WikiProject iconGuild of Copy Editors
WikiProject iconThis article was copy edited by MuzikJunky, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 21 April 2007.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

I think this portion of 'Early Life':

She became a controversial figure during the 1990s as a frequent guest on American talk shows. Unwilling to separate her pro-Black stance from her disdain for "white" people, Souljah shocked many viewers with her racially charged statements. She became known for the line "I'm not saying there aren't any decent white people; I've just never met one."


Needs a citation or source. The comments attributed to her -- which I believe ARE accurate -- could use a reference.

The first sentence "She became a controversial figure during the 1990s as a frequent guest on American talk shows" - seems a bit overreaching. I think the sentence in the opening paragraph concerning the Bill Clinton "Sister Souljah moment" is a more accurate description of her rise to prominence within American culture.

I'd suggest editing or possible deletions to this paragraph -- I think the quotes should stay, but need references. The somewhat vague and authoritative-but-without-a-reference statement about how she became a controversial figure should probably go. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.147.38.85 (talk) 21:03, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why is black capitalized, but not white?

[edit]

I would say that not only does this article needlessly slant towards celebrating this repellent individual and contain some questionable assertions, the capitalization of black, but not white, smacks of POV. At the very least it's distasteful. HedgeFundBob (talk) 17:19, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to give an opinion on Sister Souljah herself, but I, too, came on here to ask about the capitalization of "black." The problem with leaving "white" uncapitalized in the same article speaks for itself, but just as much my objection is on something like style. Capitalizing "black" in this context immediately gives me a picture of daishikis, giant afros, and velvet paintings of taught-muscled, pin-up African-American women astride lions and wearing pseudo-Egyptian vestments and tiaras. Pretty cornball 70s stuff. 205.208.238.105 (talk) 09:14, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalizing the word 'Black' gives this person a rush of Stereotypical images right out of a 1970's Blacksploitation Satire? Just saw 'Undercover Brother' on DVD? If then the word 'White' were capitalized, what would the imagery be conjured in your mind? The Leave it to Beaver family or the David Duke Family? Milk Maidens prancing across a green field in Bavaria? White Hooded Horseman?

That is no more or less incendiary than your minds imagining. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dudestein1958 (talk • contribs) 16:12, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I came to this talk page to ask the same thing (about Black being capitalised when white is not). 86.174.188.81 (talk) 00:57, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

POV

[edit]

Is it just me, or does this article read like a championing of this person? It hardly strikes me as NPOV, and unless any other editors object I may go through and try to tone it down. Vincent Valentine 16:40, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that it quite reads like an article championing her. To me, it reads like an ordinary list of a famous person's activities, some of which are accomplishments that paint her in a good light, without presenting enough of the criticism she's come in for. In other words, I think it's mostly reasonable content, but it has gaps. JustinBlank (talk) 04:03, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"All of Souljah's novels deal with universal themes of faith, love, and integrity" - is this specific enough to be informative, or is it simply the kind of thing that'd appear on a book jacket?

Regards to all Notreallydavid (talk) 05:02, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

[edit]

These novels, prequel and sequel to The Coldest Winter Ever, do not have much material, and there seems little interest in developing either of them. Not much page views using stats from WP:DYKSTATS

  1. Midnight 2: Word is Bond as of April 2010, per Ztzou
  2. Midnight: A Gangster Love Story as of July 2010

Author Section

[edit]

Sister Souljah's author section didn't have a ton to say, and I found that there was a lot of critical information missing from this part of the page. Saragogo (talk) 19:24, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Education?

[edit]

In the education section on the sidebar it has silly information like where studied abroad. It also has something about cornell university, but it aint clear if this person got an actual degree.

I don't know if these education sections have any guidelines, but I would think it should only list places where you attended. Check out the sidebar for that lunatic Sarah Palin. That lady went to like 4 different schools and wound up graduating from some university in Idaho. The sidebar don't be listing all of the schools she went to. Just where she did get her degree.

Someone fix this. I don't really care where Sister SoleJah went for study abroad. If the lady got a degree keeps it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.1.107.145 (talk) 17:46, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sister Souljah Moment

[edit]

This critique made by former U.S. president Bill Clinton should be in its own category, and not mentioned in the opening statements to describe Sister Souljah. Sage Cadence (talk) 14:37, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

When you say that something is "out of context" you're implying that in context the meaning or implications would be different. The full context of her statement is reproduced in the entry for "Sister Souljah Moment," and it's if anything more horrifying than the snippet reproduced here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.29.230.74 (talk) 05:48, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't this editorializing?

[edit]

"In reality she was saying that the mindset of a gang member, who casually kills their own demographic, would have no qualms about killing white people. She stated that it would not be a surprising development, given the state of urban chaos in Los Angeles, that the violent mindset generated by that lifestyle would bring one to kill someone, regardless of demographic."

Seems like that is a subjective opinion that many disagree with. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheSukis (talk • contribs) 23:07, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Sister Souljah. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:01, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Sister Souljah. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:04, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sister_Souljah&oldid=1256086203"