Jump to content

Talk:Azealia Banks/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Protection Request

Every time I fire up Lupin, I see this page in some kind of dispute with an IP editor trying to change genres, should this page get Semi-Protected? - Cnbr15 (talk) 12:47, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

I agree, it's always an IP Address who resorts to WP:Shouting and swearing, protection seems like the best action to me. Azealia911 (talk) 12:54, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
It is done, and I've seen this on more than one day. It's just a genre, odd to see someone get so.. err.. passionate? - Cnbr15 (talk) 13:14, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Singles

She's had a few singles before she blew up with 212 and she's had plenty afterwards. They should go under the singles section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.234.45.253 (talk) 18:42, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

(known simply as Azealia Banks)

I took this part out since it seems unnecessary... Most people are known simply by their first and last names.122.57.185.79 (talk) 19:04, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

New singles/mixtape

Some songs, apparently from the mixtape, are on youtube. "Aquababe", "Jumanji", and "Fuck up the Fun". New to editing such an article, should they be in the article yet? Jumanji may be from a different mixtape, Fantastic, also out this year. Oh, i see they are in the body of the article, but not the discography. Also, she was profiled in Vanity Fair this month.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 04:05, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

UK funky is not Electro house

All I am here to say UK garage is Electro House. She is in a whole other scene in the UK. "212" is clearly a UK funky song and she is rapping in a mild British accent.Picaxe01 talk 01:55, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Azealia Banks

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Azealia Banks's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Jeffries":

  • From Cruel Summer (GOOD Music album): Jeffries, David. "Cruel Summer - Various Artists". Allmusic. Rovi Corporation. Retrieved October 3, 2012.
  • From 1991 (EP): Jeffries, David. "1991 - Azealia Banks". Allmusic. Rovi Corporation. Retrieved 2012-06-11.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 17:13, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Broke With Expensive Taste

Why isn't there a page yet for "Broke With Expensive Taste"? It's released tomorrow, there should have been one already. --Matt723star (talk) 14:50, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Is no one going to answer my question? --Matt723star (talk) 21:24, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 Done Broke with Expensive Taste --Bgatzby (talk) 02:34, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Azealia Banks never feuded with Karmin

Azealia Banks never feuded with Karmin. Earlier this year they vaguely "dissed" her in their remix of Drake's song "Started from the Bottom," but Azealia stated on Twitter she doesn't even know who they are. I'm removing them from the "Controversy" section. --Bgatzby (talk) 04:47, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Broke with Expensive Taste vs. Broke With Expensive Taste

Hello all. So recently in this article I've noticed that there has been some fighting over the proper capitalization of Banks' upcoming album. I just wanted to post here as a reminder that according to most grammarians, prepositions in titles should only be capitalized when they are more than four letters long. In the case of Banks' album, the main point of confusion is regarding the word "with." Since the word "with" is considered a preposition and does not exceed four letters, the proper capitalization would be Broke with Expensive Taste and not Broke With Expensive Taste. I hope this clarifies the argument over grammar. --Bgatzby (talk) 00:11, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Banks on Iggy Azalea, T.I., race, and cultural appropriation

Is it notable to include a section about Bank's recent statements (via twitter and interviews, such as with Hot 97[1] ) about racial issues in the United States and cultural appropriation of hip hop? -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 06:41, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Genre

Please discuss the genres related to the artist below and avoid being a WP:GENREWARRIOR. Include appropriate references and do presume WP:GOODFAITH. @HĐ: @IPadPerson: @Azealia911: feel free to share your thoughts, especially why rap should not be included. I have put in a semi-protect request. Karst (talk) 11:57, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Karts.
Overall, that's my explanation. — HĐ (talk) 11:59, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
It's simple. Raps are "spoken or chanted rhyming lyrics", which she does, but it doesn't describe her as a genre. IPadPerson (talk) 13:21, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 February 2015

AZEALIA BANKS MAKES TRADITIONAL STREEP HIP HOP AND CLASSIC DANCE POP STOP ERASING THAT BECAUSE YOU LIKE CATEGORIES 70.208.225.124 (talk) 18:40, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Not done: as you are WP:SHOUTING and you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 18:47, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 March 2015

I HAVE A REQUEST. THE REQUEST IS THAT THE GENRE FOR AZEALIA BANKS' MUSIC HAVE THE SINGLE ADDITION OF "Dance-Pop." SHE MAKES "Dance-Pop" MUSIC. AND I "Witch hop" IS IN NO NO WAY A GOOD REFLECTION OF HER OVERALL SOUND. THIS IS BOTH MY OWN OPINION AND THE OPINION OF HER LABEL BOSS. HER FANS. AZEALIA BANKS HERSELF. HAVE AN AMAZING DAY.

HERETOHELPMUSICISLIFE (talk) 20:27, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. --I am k6ka Talk to me! See what I have done 20:36, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

--184.167.114.134 (talk) 21:28, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Racism is OK for Azealia Banks

PLEASE INCLUDE this absolutely pertinent information...

Rapper Azealia Banks hates “fat white Americans” and believes that those who live in middle America are “these racist conservative white people who live on their farms,” according to a recent interview she did with Playboy magazine.

Banks, 23, also said that a part of her knows that she’s “not supposed to be worshipping Jesus Christ,” calling it, among other sentiments, “unnatural.”

When asked if she wants to leave the U.S., the rapper said “Yes!” and proceeded to explain her reasons.

“I hate everything about this country. Like, I hate fat white Americans,” she said. “All the people who are crunched into the middle of America, the real fat and meat of America, are these racist conservative white people who live on their farms.”

Banks, who was raised in New York City, continued, “Those little teenage girls who work at Kmart and have a racist grandma — that’s really America.” — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.167.114.134 (talk) 21:25, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

For starters, can you produce reliable sources for that information? Second, any such information needs to comply with WP:BLP. 331dot (talk) 21:30, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
I was curious if she really said all that so googled "Azealia Banks" and "fat white America" and got numerous hits appearing to confirm this info....here's just a few:
http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/azealia-banks-hates-fat-white-americans-slams-lorde-kanye-2015163
http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2015/03/16/azealia-banks-hate-everything-about-this-country/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/17/azealia-banks-playboy_n_6885026.html
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/azealia-banks-blasts-middle-america-782014
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2997482/I-hate-country-Azealia-Banks-attacks-fat-white-Americans-covers-Playboy.html
--BoboMeowCat (talk) 21:54, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Why are you removing notable controversial statements?

Notable, controversial statements are repeatedly being removed from Controversy section. I also see that the incidents being removed could be perceived as unflattering to Banks's public image. Because of this, I suspect that the person removing them is not operating from a NPOV, and is likely either a fan or someone working for Banks. I don't think that a reasonable person would agree that these statements are not notable or controversial. Mister Tog (talk) 12:38, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

PLEASE don't think that my intentions are to try and recover Banks' horrific public image, although I am a fan of hers, in fact it's quite the contrary. I'm currently in the process of making a "List of Azealia Banks controversies" article, because some of the feuds listed in the intro section need expanding, but my reason for removing the text about White americans, Sunderland and Perry was due to the fact that the "Controversy" section accumulated larger than Banks' career section altogether, so I trimmed it down. Don't worry though, the controversies you recently reinstated will be on the article I'm making. Azealia911 (talk) 12:55, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
Azealia Banks, IMO, is not that relevant to make another article about her. "List of Azealia Banks controversies" with tweets there sounds like a joke. It would be better if all that information stays here. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 22:21, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Cornerstonepicker, the article has already been made, and patrolled, here, adding that much information back into this article would be extreme, the page accumulates to more than all of this article put together (ok, that's an exaggeration, but it's still over 16,000 bytes of text). Azealia911 talk 22:25, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't know why certain people keep removing items from the Controversy section. These have all received widespread media attention and are notable by any reasonable standard. Mister Tog (talk) 04:14, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

There is a danger that this becoming a running commentary of her Twitter activity. It also needs further WP:RS. The Sarah Palin comment was in reaction to a satirical piece and reported by a tabloid newspaper. Karst (talk) 06:33, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
My question is, why does your account only seem to become active when major changes are made to this section of this article? I removed large chunks of text from section because many of the events won't be remembered in six months time (the fact she argued with Erykah Badu on Twitter for two days, who cares?), and also because the section was becoming too large, beginning to take up more space than actually encyclopedic sections. Like I said in my edit summary, the woman's a complete nutjob, but she makes these kinds of comments day-in, day-out, and her article is starting to look like a gossip rag. My suggestion is to strip it down to a short sentence about her online ridiculousness, followed by prose on her now-growing legal issues, which would be the delta incident, the Break Room 86 club incident, Up&Down club indident and Sarah Palin's legal threats towards her. Azealia911 talk 15:22, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Agreed. This section needs to be kept encyclopedic and move away from WP:SENSATION and lack or reliable sources. Karst (talk) 09:58, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
As far as I can tell, the sources quoted are reliable. Obviously, not everything she says needs to be covered, but there have been many separate instances that generated enough notoriety on their own to warrant a mention. She has been involved in other feuds that are not mentioned here, so this is actually a relatively small sample of them. I don't see how an exchange that involved a legal threat from a former vice presidential candidate can possibly be omitted. Many of the other controversies mentioned illustrate her, typically pointed, stances on sexuality, race and women. They are especially notable because of their application to larger cultural discussions. Mister Tog (talk) 01:57, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Azealia Banks. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:21, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Birth place

Harlem is part of the borough of Manhattan. Karst (talk) 19:11, 5 April 2016 (UTC) On May 11, 2016, Ezekial Banks died from being scalped to death by 14 year old Skai Jackson. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marbeeno18 (talk • contribs) 07:15, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 May 2016

68.185.229.192 (talk) 00:33, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. --Cameron11598 (Converse) 00:45, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 February 2017

ADD KAYTRANADA AS AN "ASSOCIATED ACT"

They have further unreleased collaborations Benstevens (talk) 07:35, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

 Not done they need to release an album together before they are an "associated act" - unsourced claims of unreleased collaborations do not count - Arjayay (talk) 14:33, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Twitter suspension

As with every previous Twitter spat, detailed exchanges are not encyclopaedic (see WP:NOTNEWS). The controversy should mention that she was suspended from Twitter due to the Zayn Malik issue. Some detail can be added to that, as for instance the cancellation of her appearance at a London festival. On a more general note, social media spats/conflicts and musings tend to generate a lot of tabloid fodder. It currently is the bugbear of online reporting with sites such as tmz.com that gets picked up by some of cheap dailies. As the previous instances concerning Ms. Banks have shown she is very apt at this type of publicity drive. And I'm sure she will wear the Twitter suspension as a badge of honour. But all that needs to be put into perspective and cannot be the overriding feature of this article. For an example of a high-profile singer and public persona see for instance Madonna (entertainer) Karst (talk) 07:14, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Has Twitter given any reasons for the suspension? The "Zayn Malik issue" also led to her insulting a teenage actress's femininity online; I can't help but think the Skai Jackson thing was as much part of the suspension as well (it certainly got as much news play here in the US in relation to the suspension as the Malik issue, which of course also got her kicked out of the festival she was supposed to be in)—I understand not going into exacting detail, but certainly it could merit a passing mention in that paragraph? Daniel Case (talk) 07:16, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
Twitter is unlikely to give any reason as there are legal issues around disclosure. The Skai Jackson page on wikipedia does not make reference to the incident. And I would be hesitant to include it as she is a minor. If there are reliable sources that mention it then one sentence on it would be appropriate, yes. However, I do not think we would want to overstate it. Karst (talk) 13:26, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
Not a problem, then. (Although I am really wondering if we should have a separate Azealia Banks on social media article, or at least consider it, the way things are going). Daniel Case (talk) 03:02, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
Well, this might be the end of it, for all we know. And there would be the danger of it becoming running commentary on social media issues on Azealia. Karst (talk) 09:17, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Azealia Banks. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 00:44, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Situation of career today

FLOP, VERY FLOP — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonardekalvyn (talk • contribs) 00:14, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

On the homepage, when searching for her the subcaption reads "American Flop rapper and singer". I assume this is vandalism unless this has some different meaning that I'm not aware of - is there some way to fix this?

Thanks! 68.119.153.181 (talk) 00:51, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Regarding vandalism

Why is it that every time I link this page, it says "American Flop rapper and singer" beneath her name in grey? How do I fix it? --Aleccat 13:27, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 February 2017

ADD "LUNICE" AS A "ASSOCIATED ACT". 2602:306:C518:BC0:A537:78A4:99E0:8861 (talk) 01:14, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 February 2017

Add Lunice as an associated act Benstevens (talk) 01:16, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Done — Train2104 (t • c) 03:10, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Sexual assault/rape

Starting a section to discuss if and how to add the recent news about Banks' sexual assault/rape. (Example sources: [2] [3]) EvergreenFir (talk) 22:38, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Controversies addition: Animal sacrifices

Added information regarding her animal sacrifices. It's definitely something relevant for the controversies section, and was in fact admitted to by Banks herself. Jparenti (talk) 12:23, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Failed Verification in Controversies, not really failed?

Hey I wanted to ask about that claimed failed verification. There is a reference like this:

"I would really love to see someone bomb the shit out of this place Lmfao. Give y'all white asses something to fucking cry about. Ugly blonde pigs you swedes are."[1][failed verification]

References

  1. ^ "Amerikansk rapper rasende på Sverige: – Ville elsket å se noen bombe dritten ut av dette stedet". www.vg.no.

But when I check the article there is actually a screenshot of her saying the things that were claimed. Why is this marked as a failed verification, is that an error? Joel Busch (talk) 15:07, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

airline incident doesn't make sense, not supported

Banks made a wordplay of the Irish airline Aer Lingus, calling it "Air Cunnilingus", and had to leave the plane due to an altercation with an air stewardess in January 2019, after calling her "fucking ugly" on Instagram

This sentence is very confusing and much of it is not supported by the citation. It reads like she was kicked off a plane for her instagram posts, theres no mention of this in the article, nor of "air cunniliguns". Its also unclear if the two mentions of "January 2019" are separate incidents.

--Thesowismine (talk) 05:27, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Someone please update the end of the "Personal Life" section

The "news" is that Azealia Banks has been publicly struggling with severe mental illness and expressing political anger for several years. And now this page is locked on "Azealia Banks announced that she intends to end her own life" as if this is still her plan, 3 months on. Pretty needlessly morbid at this point in time. I suppose everyone who is interested in Azealia Banks is feeling pretty morbid these days.203.211.98.50 (talk) 00:45, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 January 2021

Under "Controversies," in paragraph beginning "In October 18," regarding feud with Lana Del Rey, change the sentence, "Banks clapped back by calling her a 'cokehead Oxycodone turnaround', and . . . " to "Banks responded by calling her . . . " I suggest this because "clapped back" feels like editorializing, biased language, and really not befitting an encyclopedia, anyway . . . "Clapped back" is Buzzfeed article language.

The source linked at the end of that sentence says that particular quote of Banks came from an Instagram post, anyway, not Twitter like the paragraph here on Wikipedia suggests (source: " . . . a topic she also raised in a separate rant on her Instagram Stories, describing Del Rey's performances as consisting of moves like a "cokehead Oxycodone turnaround") . . . and the quote in the source doesn't immediately link it to this specific back-and-forth, etc . . . that whole part of the sentence including that insult seems messy, and in my opinion, maybe it isn't necessary to include that particular insult at all (there are plenty elsewhere in the paragraph if people really want them). In any case, the "clapped back" change to "responded" is my primary suggestion . . . Bhakti84 (talk) 09:28, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

 Partly done: "Banks clapped back by calling her..." --> "Banks responded by calling Del Rey...". Jack Frost (talk) 09:44, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Controversy section - too much detail?

Having just come across this article, I'm concerned by the length of the 'controversy' section, and tagged it with {{Overly detailed}}. Clearly, this is a biography of a controversial figure. But do we really need to include every controversial or offensive thing she's posted on social media, or list every person she's had a 'feud' with? The level of detail here seems completely excessive for an encyclopaedic biography. While I appreciate that it is sourced, so I'm not disputing the accuracy of the content, I have to ask 'do Wikipedia readers really need this'? This, for instance:

Banks has had feuds with people including Pabllo Vittar, Grimes, Elon Musk,[114] Remy Ma,[115] Cardi B, Kim Kardashian, Kanye West, Lorde, Lana Del Rey, Marina Diamandis, Charli XCX, Lady Gaga, T.I., Iggy Azalea, Action Bronson, Lil' Kim, Skai Jackson, Rita Ora, Kendrick Lamar, Pharrell Williams, Erykah Badu, Kreayshawn, Rihanna, ASAP Rocky, Baauer, Nicki Minaj, Sia, Dominique Young Unique, Jim Jones, Beyoncé, Angel Haze, Lily Allen, RZA, SZA, Rico Nasty, Lupe Fiasco, Doja Cat, Eminem, RuPaul, Perez Hilton, Nick Cannon, Diplo, Shea Couleé, Funkmaster Flex, The Stone Roses, K. Michelle, Shystie, Amanda Brunker, Troy Carter, Cupcakke, Mariah Lynn, DC Young Fly,[116] Disclosure, Lizzo, Kim Petras, Slayyyter, Adrian Grenier, Busta Rhymes, Dave Chappelle, Anthony Fantano and Wendy Williams, among others.

What's the point of that list? Wouldn't it be more effectively replaced by just something like 'Banks has had feuds with a large number of other musicians and public figures'? Robofish (talk) 19:20, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Robofish, I just annihilated that entire section. Thanks for the tag! It's one of those things that kept accreting under the radar. Jorm (talk) 19:29, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
OK, wow. I wasn't expecting that comment to provoke a response that quickly! Thanks for making the edit, entirely justified in my view, but let's see if other editors approve of this rather drastic reduction in content. Robofish (talk) 19:33, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
Robofish, It popped on my watchlist and I had a couple few minutes. I feel like someone's going to have to have a really, policy-based argument for returning it, to be honest. It's already mentioned in the lede. Jorm (talk) 19:40, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
@Jorm: Regarding your deletion of the entire section – it doesn't make much sense to both say that "she gets more attention for her public feuds than she does for her music" and yet all but a sentence or two on those feuds are not notable. These controversies are a very significant part of her notability, as the sources in the article attest to. It was definitely too much previously, but a sentence or two making a passing reference to what someone is largely known for in a Wikipedia article of this length is woefully minimal. I don't see the argument for the correct amount of due weight to be placed here as "none". Volteer1 (talk) 13:31, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
If you can figure out how to do that without an exhaustive, pointless, ugly, and non-informative list of links, I'm all for it. But if the only thing we can say about it is `She has feuded with ${array_of_enemies.join(', ')}` then no, it's not worth expanding on, because that reduces to "she fights with a lot of people".--Jorm (talk) 18:02, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

::::It needs a summary, not blow by blow of each news source.VikingDrummer (talk) 19:06, 29 May 2021 (UTC) sock puppet of banned user-GizzyCatBella🍁 14:15, 11 June 2021 (UTC)


I have once again reduced the "controversies" section to what is WP:DUE. The play-by-plays and excessive details are not needed or relevant. It is very clear that she is a terrible person to interact with; if folk want the prurient details they can read the cites.--Jorm (talk) 20:18, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

This is a chart-topping, award-winning, world-touring singer who has publicly made disgusting racist comments about certain ethnic groups, which were reported in mainstream news sources. Why should we not include a brief summary of those two incidents in this article? And why should we not mention that cabin crew ordered her to be taken off international flights on those occasions? The detail was not excessive: the two incidents were summarized in two sentences each, with only short snippets of what she said.
Merely saying "She has made several offensive remarks concerning foreign countries" doesn't tell us much. It's vague and inaccurate, especially as her remarks were also racial and attacked ethnic groups themselves. WP:DUE doesn't really apply here, as it deals with how Wikipedia presents majority and minority viewpoints. As far as I can see, the bit about her racist remarks was in the article for a long time and was fairly WP:STABLE until recently. It seems you're the main or only editor who keeps removing it lately, and it's been re-added several times by several other editors, so there isn't a WP:CONSENSUS to remove it. I agree that the section was too detailed before and needed trimmed, but I think cutting this out is overdoing it. ~Asarlaí 21:43, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
"Why should we not include a brief summary of those two incidents"? Because there are so many of them that the article will become nothing but a list of times when she was a shitty person. If you can think of better language than "she makes offensive remarks about x or y" than feel free but Wikipedia is not a drama regurgitation factory. Show me one incident where including the play-by-play improves the article or serves any purpose beyond hammering home that she's terrible or amplifying hate speech? Jorm (talk) 22:00, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
I'm not talking about all her petty feuds with people. Of course Wikipedia isn't a place to regurgitate petty drama, and there's no need to mention individual cases unless they were particularly serious.
I'm talking about the two incidents where she publicly went on racist tirades against whole ethnic groups (after performing to people of those ethnicities) and had to be removed from international flights. That's a whole other kettle of fish and is much more serious than most of the controversies. Mainstream news outlets also saw those two incidents as noteworthy enough to report, so they're noteworthy enough to be given a brief mention on Wikipedia, and had been in the article for years. It wasn't a blow-by-blow account of everything she said or did. It was a very short summary of the two incidents, no more than two sentences each, giving the reader just enough detail. Cutting that down to "she made several offensive remarks" removes key detail about the nature and seriousness of the remarks. As the editor above said, the article notes that she gets more attention for her controversies than her music and yet now some of the worst controversies are glossed-over. ~Asarlaí 12:01, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 August 2021

In the second paragraph of "Disputes and Controversies", change "while attempting to exit a Delta Air Lines" to "while attempting to exit a Delta Air Lines flight" to be grammatically logical. Kerpow99 (talk) 19:20, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

 Done @Kerpow99: Thank you for the succinct request. Cheers! ––Sirdog9002 (talk) 19:31, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Racist

10th of May 2016 Azealia Banks verbally abuses Zain Malik form One Direction. She firstly accuses him of copying her music video to which Zain denies, however it doesn't end there she spews racist comments aimed at his background of Pakistani heritage. Calling him and his mother names to the effect of "sand monkey" "immigrant" etc. When an English radio station takes Zain's side she goes off and lashes at the English government claiming they should offer free dental healthcare to its citizens as they all have terrible teeth Her slurs don't end there she claims to be the only number 1 female artist left in America. Rihanna and Gaga are over as she says! Lets see shall we.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.47.96.216 (talk) 11:11, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

She's making a perfectly well-informed point about the steady extraction of UK dental services from the NHS, surely? Emmentalist (talk) 08:22, 14 December 2022 (UTC)


I'd like to suggest that in the description of her latest controversy*, the phrase "racist tirade" be put in quotation marks, since it is the exact phrase used by the headline of the Daily Mail article currently being used as a source.

  • "In December 2016, Banks was criticized for posting a video on Instagram, where she showed the aftermath of three years worth of sacrificing chickens for witchcraft. Banks responded to the criticism by launching a racist tirade on social media.[90]" 73.164.8.201 (talk) 21:52, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

azealia's feud list

there was a list of all the people azealia has had altercations and now it's gone.

i think it was of public interest and a really important contribution to her page and it should be put back.

her page is locked from editing which makes sense but the person responsable for it should add it back.

reference links were also extremely useful for research.

it was not only a meme or something to make fun of her, it genuinely had a lot of sociological value. 2800:810:511:8603:1542:B832:6CEF:B55C (talk) 01:39, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Yeahh i was wondering where that list went, seems it was removed around July or August 2021 (here's an old version of the page) Spiderwinebottle (talk) 18:54, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
i strongly support bringing this section back. but i think it would be worth bringing it up for discussion. Ayyydoc (talk) 03:15, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
Here’s another vote for adding it back. There’s a hatnote at the top of that old section saying that the section is overlong. Well, crap. If the subject of this article wasn’t so relentless in her desire to promote discord and controversy, there wouldn’t be such a long section. Anyway, mine makes it four votes for being it back, with none against. Enough, right? Boscaswell talk 20:13, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Anti-Australian sentiment

She hates Australia and accuses the nation of racism after someone assaulted her with a bottle, vowing to never tour again. Should be worth mentioning, given her already controversial nature and willingness to attack and make enemies with entire groups over the actions of a vocal minority. 2001:8003:AD13:F800:A912:7D1C:4BC9:14B0 (talk) 12:09, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for this. Two points worth considering here, I think. First, Australia, like most highly developed nations, is certainly host to a great deal of racist behaviour. At present, the 'schlock'-style reportage around the recent incident in Australia is an unreliable indicator of whether there was racist behaviour on this particular occasion - although in my view it seems highly plausible. Second, Banks, who has certainly experienced much racism in her lifetime, like most black people, seems to be going through a difficult psychological period. Racism is likely highly pertinent to such difficulties. Her Wikipedia article should not become a giant list of apparently erratic comments and schlock reportage. I am not a fan of 'controversies' sections - I think they are generally lazy and often a device to put up negative copy about a subject - but in any case I think an article about a highly successful black artist should pay particular note to the need for proportion and context. Emmentalist (talk) 08:23, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
It’s not right to make generalised comments such as saying that Australia is just to a good deal if racist behaviour. As an Australian, I resent that remark. And suggesting that it’s the result of being a highly developed nation is just ridiculous, frankly. Boscaswell talk 20:09, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
"Australia is just to a good deal if racist behaviour"? You what, mate? Emmentalist (talk) 23:30, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
Sorry. I blame the spill chucker. It should have read: "It’s not right to make generalised comments such as saying that Australia is host to a great deal of racist behaviour." Boscaswell talk 07:03, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
Here you go [4]. Emmentalist (talk) 13:34, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 December 2022

change website from cheapyxo.com to cheapyxo.net Croomp (talk) 03:15, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Well spotted, fixed. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 18:55, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Disputes and Controversies section

I've removed 'racist' and 'insulting' from this section. The former because it isn't racist for a black person to be offensive about Swedes (some of whom are black) or to use terms like "white asses", and these are the terms reported in the cited source. The latter because it's a subjective judgement: It's perfectly possible that some Irish people found the comments funny or ironic of performative or whatnot. Emmentalist (talk) 08:20, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

I've also edited out 'racist' in respect of reports of a black woman using the n-word.Emmentalist (talk) 08:54, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Finally, I've taken out trivia and trivial references. 'Controversies' sections in articles are often the weakest part, where editors have, albiet in good faith, sometimes put in negative stuff which should either be integrated elsewhere in the article or is too trivial or subjective to be in it at all: This was the case here, in my opinion.

A final point, I imagine editors might want to put in references to a recent incident in Australia. I'd urge them not to for the moment. The trend here, expressed in much of the style of the article, in respect of incidents involving the subject alleging racism, tends towards scepticism. There is good evidence to suggest that she was in fact racially abused in Australia (I am not including re: WP No original research) and it is highly likely, it seems to me, that she is a frequent victim of racism in other places. This shouldn't be treated superciliously or superficially here. For now, since we don't know enough, it's best left out for the moment. All the best, Emmentalist (talk) 12:54, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Huh?!
I mean, really!?!
Info about her stating that she has a dungeon for practising witchcraft and about her digging up and boiling her dead cat… is there anything more notable, outside of committing murder?
But it’s described as "trivial"?
That description is breathtaking, *stunningly misleading*.
This info has been in the article since June 2021, which is 18 months ago. As such, agreement to do so must be reached on here before it is deleted again. But I simply cannot imagine that anyone else could possibly describe this material as trivial. Unless you happen to dig up and cook your dead cat every day, in between some routine witchery. Which hopefully isn’t the case. Boscaswell talk 04:20, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
Haha! Not every day, no. But this story certainly has plenty of dead cat bounce! Thanks for this, @Boscaswell, it provided a cheery start to my day. My thinking is that the subject of the article is a highly successful black woman artist: The milieu in which she lives and works is quite a complex one characterised by racism, sexism and quite likely violence at the margins. Her story is really quite extraordinary; she is an extraordinary person. Success in rap and hip hop often involves a complex relationship with stark and harsh social realities faced mainly by black people. It's not uncommon to see black artists struggling with the need to stay in the public eye in the way performers need to while at the same time staying true to some other sense of who they are beneath it all. Ye might be another example? The dead cat story is trivial, in my opinion. It seems to be either a desperate call for help or a desperate bit of daft PR. Either way, since it's one of many recent 'schlocks' involving this artist, it shouldn't be taken too seriously. Wikipedia articles shouldn't shouldn't be a list of daft PR stunts. We should take racism seriously, though. Accusations of black people being racist towards white people are, on the whole, poorly thought through. Moreover, it seems highly plausible that some white people in Banks' audiences have indeed been racist. As I say, 'controversies' sections add little to an article - they often seem designed to enable editors to get something off their chest (albeit even such editors do mainly edit in good faith of course). In the case of this article, in my opinion, the controversies section unintentionally amplifies borderline borderline racist tabloid attitudes and conveys the impression that Wikipedia does not take racism very seriously. This impression starts with a quote from a publication called 'Complex' and get worse from there.
Would you agree to taking out descriptions of Banks as racist and generally softening the tone of the section? All the best, Emmentalist (talk) 09:02, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
Emmentalist happy to bring smiles to editor's faces! 😊 I don’t have a firm opinion either way about use of the word "racist", but I do have a very strong one about the two pieces of info I wrote about. Who has ever heard of anyone digging up and boiling the body of their dead cat? It’s so out there that it has to stay in. Further, I can’t see it being a publicity stunt, as it brought her disfavour. Likewise the declaration "guess what! I have a dungeon and I practise witchcraft!" (not her precise words, obviously) Again, it’s bizarre and therefore highly notable and should definitely stay in. Lastly…she has the money now to go and live in any "milieu", so I don’t go along with making excuses for any of her unpleasant behaviour. It’s all down to her, really. But like you suggest as a reason for the cat cooking, her frequent unpleasant outbursts, now they could well be calculated to provide the kind of publicity she seeks and, speaking from music business experience, her manager will I’m sure be giving her advice about them…but they keep on coming. All the best. Boscaswell talk 09:56, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
Emmentalist, I'll repeat some of what I said in the earlier discussion above. This is a chart-topping, award-winning, world-touring singer who has publicly made racist comments about certain ethnic groups, and has had to be removed from international flights for rowing with crew and passengers. You may think this is "trivial" and "not racist", but Wikipedia isn't based on editors' own opinions, it's based on what reliable sources say. Mainstream news outlets saw these incidents as noteworthy enough to report, so they're noteworthy enough to be given a brief mention on Wikipedia. If sources call her comments racist then we must report what they say. We would do the same if the comments were made by a white artist. It's not for us to decide if these were "PR stunts". The controversies section is only a small part of the article and has been stable for a long time, even tho' the article notes she often gets more attention for her controversies than her music. – Asarrlaí (talk) 09:57, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
Thanks @Boscaswell and @Asarlaí. I'm just going to have to yield on the dead-cat-digging-up-but-probably-not-cooking shenanigans. And unless anyone else comes in on this discussion, I'll just leave it at your revert in its entirety. I don't agree about repeating mainstream news reports uncritically, though. That really isn't the Wikipedia default. Newsrooms are dominated by white people looking to get a daft story out of a black artist doing something angry; there's really no attempt to unpick the racism at all. That means the racist take ends up here at Wikipedia. As for money; I don't think she's especially rich, actually. In any case, black artists find it extraordinarily difficult to stay clear of the more challenging aspects of the cultures which have helped raise them up. White artists really don't. Finally, it's nonsense, imho, to equate a black person saying something rude about white people with pervasive white racism towards black people. Black and indigenous people suffer in ways Irish, Aussies, Asians and all the rest (as generic groups, for what they're worth, which is not always much) don't. Emmentalist (talk) 13:09, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
Making comments about specific ethnic groups is not racist, it’s xenophobic by definition. Racism is based on race, which swedish and irish are not, they are both of the white race. No matter your opinion on the matter, using the word racist is incorrect by definition. I have changed it to xenophobia for accuracy. Despressso (talk) 05:41, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 June 2023

49.181.65.246 (talk) 11:09, 1 June 2023 (UTC) you know the addy pull up i know you wont, i wont not fuck you the fuck up - lana del rey 49.181.65.246 (talk) 11:09, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Actualcpscm (talk) 11:16, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 June 2023

Add back the list of beef that Jorn removed in https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1031078069 because contrary to his opinion, the list of beef IS an improvement. Megasteel32 (talk) 13:55, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 14:01, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 December 2023

THE HOTTEST DOLL ON EARTH AND THE MOST FAMOUST SUPER VILLAIN Thehottestdoll (talk) 14:23, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Rehsarb (talk) 17:43, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 June 2024

Remove the caption under the profile picture “Banks preforming in *ISRAEL*” it is highly inappropriate in the current climate and against the political views of Banks in the current day. She doesn’t want this caption on the picture. Just take the caption off. She does not want to be associated with Israel & she did not authorize this caption. 76.170.39.131 (talk) 21:19, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: See WP:NOTCENSORED. Jamedeus (talk) 21:37, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Azealia_Banks/Archive_1&oldid=1247091363"