Talk:Wanda Sykes

message: An ignorant fool who thinks she's funny. She should leave politics to the professionals.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.81.232.59 (talk) 02:23, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this is is an unusual statment. Comedians would argue the essence of stand-up humor is delivery and timing. Dubkiller 10:34, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Humor 

message: Didn't she work at the National Security Agency? That's probably worth adding if someone can verify.
Either way Wanda is FAWKEN funny01:41, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NSA 

message: Is Wanda related to Brenda Sykes (who appeared in the film Mandingo)?  -Grammaticus Repairo 22:59, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brenda Sykes 

message: Yes, she is officially gay, it's true, there is no need to remove it from the article or ask about it one hundred times over. JayKeaton (talk) 13:32, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but I can question how it is phrased! "Officially homosexual"? What? Did she have it notarized by the Secretary of Sexuality? SterlingNorth (talk) 20:53, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

text: Fortunately, somebody already rephrased that bit from the article before I got to this... SterlingNorth (talk) 20:55, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Lets just say there has been strong speculation of it for a while now, but now speculation is over because it is fact. It is officially true, instead of just rumors. 219.90.163.163 (talk) 13:41, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The key point related to the insertions and removals I've been seeing is that hasn't suddenly become one of the primary features responsible for her notability. It isn't any more appropriate to mention it in introductory sentences than it is to identify Noah Wyle as a Jewish actor or Benjamin Bratt as a Peruvian-American actor. If it's worth mentioning later on in the article, fine. In this case, it probably is because Sykes came out in a newsworthy way. —Largo Plazo (talk) 14:17, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

text: It was still a poorly chosen word. A better way to have phrased it would have been to say "she has confirmed that she is gay". Phrased as "she is now officially a homosexual", it sounded like she was sworn in as gay after passing a gayness test and getting a certificate. SterlingNorth (talk) 23:33, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Many articles say things like "English actor" in the lead. And no she hasn't only just now received her gayness certificate, don't be so silly. She would have received that years ago at her first secret gay agenda meeting. JayKeaton (talk) 19:13, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the difference is that the vast majority of article introductions note the subject's nationality no matter where the person is from.  Since we would never open an article by calling someone a 'straight actor,' we should also refrain from using 'gay actor' in the intro. -Ddawn23 (talk) 09:29, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yes, she is officially gay 

message: It seems odd to me that the name of her partner is not mentioned in this article. Sykes had a legal marriage ceremony, then she came out to the press and to the people about her marriage and yet her wife is not mentioned by name in this article? Any straight celebrity on Wikipedia would have their partner's name in their bio.  Is this omission on behalf by Ms. Sykes or her partner's request or is it a media oversight?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bnmc 07 (talk • contribs) 15:04, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's unknown who her wife is, or why she never mentions her by name. --Phildog (talk) 18:57, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

text: Even if it were known to the media, Wikipedia might not print it unless the wife were independently notable, per WP:BLPNAME. Skomorokh 00:57, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is her wife's name? 

message: Lets get the ball rolling on what is sure to be many reverts about this event.  To start off with I rolled back due to vandalism  the addition "'s socialist policies" because no where in the cited material does it say "socialist policies" and it is clearly vandalism to make stuff up without citing to proper sources.  As it stands now is completely unaccaptable, per the origional comments by Mr Limbaugh in Jan. From rushlimbaugh.com "Okay, I'll send you a response, but I don't need 400 words, I need four: I hope he fails." (interruption) What are you laughing at?  See, here's the point.  Everybody thinks it's outrageous to say.  Look, even my staff, "Oh, you can't do that."  Why not?  Why is it any different, what's new, what is unfair about my saying I hope liberalism fails?  Liberalism is our problem.  Liberalism is what's gotten us dangerously close to the precipice here.  Why do I want more of it?  I don't care what the Drive-By story is.  I would be honored if the Drive-By Media headlined me all day long: "Limbaugh: I Hope Obama Fails."  Somebody's gotta say it." .  No "socialism" in there.  TharsHammar Bits andPieces 15:47, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Soxwon has resolved this to my satisfaction.  Your definition of vandalism, however, is not in line with Wikipedia's.  Please review WP:VAND.  Cheers, Tomertalk 16:45, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that TharsHammer brought up a good point, that she herself was responding to that particular statement (I hope he fails), rather than the point of hoping Obama's policies fail. However, unless she comes out and says that's what she meant, there's no way to prove it. Soxwon (talk) 16:48, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, Sykes clearly either didn't hear what Limbaugh said or couldn't be bothered to relate her remarks to it, since she incorrectly (and somewhat controversially, although I think the President's visible glee at her remarks will ultimately be more controversial) asserted, as part of her "joke", that Mr. Limbaugh's statement, which was quite clear to anyone who has listened to the piece and/or has read or heard his clarifying remarks since then (it's been 4 months now...), said "I hope America fails", says that his hopes are the same as Osama bin Ladin's, etc. Tomertalk 17:02, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

text: I had noticed that too, but I think it's more explaining the reasoning rather than saying it was controversial. Still, with a lack of MSM sources, I for one wouldn't be against removal. Soxwon (talk) 16:59, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: In case anyone hasn't seen Sykes' performance at the Correspondents' Dinner, the part where she's talking about Rush Limbaugh is available at http://www.breitbart.tv/html/336173.html as well as a plethora of other sites, I'm sure.  Tomertalk 17:11, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

text:  I would say it's perfect now  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.124.14.13 (talk) 15:46, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

text: If there isn't a controversy, as you say (despite the fact that the President distanced himself from her remarks), then all that is notable is her appearance as the headliner.  AyaK (talk) 20:31, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it really that notable? The president distances himself from a lot of things. Soxwon (talk) 00:32, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The White House Press Secretary, Robert Gibbs did the distancing, not the President. And Soxwon is right, that occurs all the time. TharsHammar Bits andPieces 00:55, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought the White House Press Secretary was the official spokesman for the President, so your comment makes no sense.  Also, look at this discussion for an example of whether such speeches generate notable controversy.  But I'm not interested enough in this article to continue with this debate; others can pick it up, if they care to do so. AyaK (talk) 21:13, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correspondents Dinner 

message: To start off with, can we at least pretend to use the talk page when people delete information using well reasoned edit summaries?  I undid this twice today  and , to avoid 3RR I won't do it a 3rd time, but it must go from the article.  Simply put WP:OR says we cannot interpret what is on a video and use it in the article.  Also there is the additional reasoning that it is not true. TharsHammar Bits andPieces 21:41, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't have any political axe to grind here, either for or against Obama.  I was trying to neutralize the rhetoric in this section, which is why I got involved in it in the first place.  I saw all of the articles that said that Obama did or did not laugh, as if the act of laughing conveyed some political meaning.  In watching the video, I thought it was obvious that Obama did laugh at the jokes, and I thought that dwelling on the controversy as to whether he laughed or not was counterproductive.  No one will even care a week from now.  If you think that is controversial, I'm happy to remove it and say something more neutral such as "Obama appeared to be amused by the routine", because I don't think it really matters whether he technically "laughed" or not.  Would you prefer that? AyaK (talk) 22:02, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I would prefer if we stick to what Reliable Sources have to say about it.  Its a clear violation of original research to add descriptions based on what we view in a video. I don't think the suggestion "Obama appeared to be amused by the routine" is reasonable, since he could have been smiling at a whole host of things, maybe even smiling because he was thinking "Oh god, the right wing echo chamber is going to eat this up."  But it doesn't matter what I think, what matters is what reliable sources have reported about the matter. I suggest we remove all mention about Obama's physical response until a proper reference can be found. TharsHammar Bits andPieces 22:06, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No.  I've left the language the way that I suggested above, and cited to the Canadian Press article which said this: "Obama laughed at the joke, took a sip of water and continued to chuckle."  That's exactly what's on the tape, but it also satisfies your objections regarding WP:RS.  Or do you think we should add a discussion about possible partisan perspectives as to how media members interpreted Obama's reaction -- which doesn't really seem to belong in an article about Wanda Sykes?  Really, this is a tempest in a teapot.  AyaK (talk) 22:30, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: And the New York Daily News says "That brought groans and guffaws from the crowd while Obama smiled nervously and took a sip from his glass." .  Why don't we delete all mention of Obamas reaction from the article. TharsHammar Bits andPieces 22:45, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Since a debate over Obama's reaction is irrelevant to an article on Wanda Sykes (although it might be relevant to an article on Obama), I don't want this to continue to be a distraction.  My intent was to take out the partisan debates.  I failed to realize that whether he laughed was an active part of the partisan debate.  OK, I'll delete the Obama passage entirely. AyaK (talk) 23:05, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:OR]] on the laugh v smile 

message: I think I recall that she was in one of the "That's So Gay" commercials, if that's worth mentioning. 151.203.213.209 (talk) 01:02, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  "That's So Gay" commercial 

message: Ira Berlin may not know of any other free black families that are traceable from the 17th century to the present, but other people do know of any such families. I propose that this sentence be removed.Pokey5945 (talk) 23:54, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, Berlin is a reliable source in my book -- especially as he is being used as a source for what he said. You may know of cases where it is possible to trace a black family rooted in freedom from the late 17th century to the present. Berlin states he does not. - SummerPhD (talk) 00:58, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Ira Berlin quote

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Wanda Sykes. 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:
*Added  tag to http://www.advocate.com/printArticle.aspx?id=73773
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131023095437/http://www.creators.com/opinion/joseph-farah/long-live-rush-and-free-speech.html to http://www.creators.com/opinion/joseph-farah/long-live-rush-and-free-speech.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110829061947/http://www.afterellen.com/blog/karmankregloe/wanda-sykes-accepts-her-glaad-award to http://www.afterellen.com/blog/karmankregloe/wanda-sykes-accepts-her-glaad-award
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:28, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Wanda Sykes. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090105194121/http://www2.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid66219.asp to http://www.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid66219.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081203200016/http://www.afterellen.com/people/2008/11/wanda-sykes-comes-out to http://www.afterellen.com/people/2008/11/wanda-sykes-comes-out
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131025020937/http://www.pridesource.com/article.html?article=42165 to http://www.pridesource.com/article.html?article=42165
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:10, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: Wanda Sykes is problematic as she quit the TV show Rosanne because of Rosanne Barrs racist tweet, but Ms Sykes has been racist on twitter too!
this should be acknowledged in her article, as the racist behaviour of other celebs is on their pages!
https://twitter.com/iamwandasykes/status/930999556606640128?lang=en
the tweet from her official twitter account reads "White people don't steal wallets"  they steal countries.
i will add this information to her article in a day or so if there is no debate on this issue.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.9.94.243 (talk) 09:58, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  her racism