Talk:White power music

Clarification of racism in punk rock

I'm concerned that this article, as well as the Nazi punk article aren't very clear in indicating that the vast majority of punk is quite far left, and generally not at all pro-nazi or racist. It concerns me that this article could lead people to form negative opinions of this culture. Can anyone suggest a good way to edit to clarify? I added a undue weight tag. WP:POV recommend that in articles about minority viewpoints that appropriate reference be made to explain how it differs from the majority, and this article fails to do so in a way that creates a negative impression of multiple forms of music. I'm posting a similar message in the Nazi punk article. "In articles specifically about a minority viewpoint, such views may receive more attention and space. However, these pages should still make appropriate reference to the majority viewpoint wherever relevant and must not represent content strictly from the perspective of the minority view. Specifically, it should always be clear which parts of the text describe the minority view. In addition, the majority view should be explained in sufficient detail that the reader can understand how the minority view differs from it, and controversies regarding aspects of the minority view should be clearly identified and explained." Skrelk (talk) 04:17, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi! I will work to address concerns in this article. I think I've addressed this concern and it may need to be broadly addressed in the opening as well. Each genre of Racist music was itself a sub-genre of other music forms. So, like country, folk, punk and metal, there are sub-genres that are specifically racist. I think the minority viewpoint for this article would be those who think the music is not racist. In any case I saw how I needed to add some context for the punk genre specifically and I hope that addresses the problems you point out. If not please let me know and I'll research the issues further. Jnast1 (talk) 21:56, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look. I saw the changes, and I'm still quite concerned, although I appreciate your work. The discussion of the history of punk in this article implies that punk is a form of racist music, and it is anything but. I'd like to replace that with a discussion of the origin of right-wing punk, and it's differences from the mainline punk culture, which is an important distinction. Would that be alright with you? I'd be glad to collaborate on it, I'm just very concerned that this article implies punk is racist. Skrelk (talk) 04:05, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Deleting the entire section is not helping, Racist music covers many genres and most people have no clue how music genres developed and split. Jnast1 (talk) 00:23, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

An article about racist music/racism in music is not the appropriate place to discuss the evolution of music genres(a fascinating subject), except the specific divergence of racist elements. When you discuss it generally here, you imply that the genres discussed are inherently or historically racist.Skrelk (talk) 19:37, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Well i appreciate that you feel the original version was too broad. Seems to me a reasonable effort would be to find a middle ground instead of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Jnast1 (talk) 05:22, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Title

Is there really a need for this article? If one wants to 'research' this topic, maybe it'd be better to seek a website that isn't so 'neutral'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.127.255.232 (talk) 02:23, 20 April 2012 (UTC) I suppose I'll be the first to wade into this brutal firefight and note that this article's title blatantly fails WP:NPOV and should be moved (perhaps to white power music or something). I've no interest in carrying on a tendentious political argument with people who have dogs in this fight, one way or another, so I'll leave it to you all to spill reams of ink on the pros and cons. But "racist music" is inherently stating an opinion about the music (calling something "racist" is a value, not a fact) and is thus in contravention of Wikipedia guidelines. Chubbles (talk) 02:47, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Before I started looking into this unique subgenre I would have agreed. However you'll see that white power music redirects to Rock Against Communism, and I think that's the correct place. This area of research has been unevenly built up on Wikipedia and the terms for what is understood to be 'racist music' has also changed, in the article's opening we note seven different terms. Mainstream sources seem to concur that racist music is the overarching name for now. And we have several articles in this area but nothing that overviews all of them. That's where this article comes in. If the sources all called it hatecore (which is yet another subgenre of racist music) that's where this information would be. Instead I tried to get out the most crucial points and overview this area. Not all racist music is neo-Nazi, or heavy metal, or tied strickly to punk. So I think this is the most NPOV title. Jnast1 (talk) 07:38, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

• This article only discusses white racist music, so the either the title is inaccurate or the article is incomplete. It doesn't discuss racist music by other racial groups.Spylab (talk) 19:49, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
  • What do the mainstream sources say on the subject? If non-white racist music is also called and considered racist music then we should look what they say and incorporate them. I'm looking now but nearly universally this is associated with neo-Nazi and white supremacy. (UPDATE) There were a few, very few, that talked about race music which is itself derived from racism against blacks, and the music of Richard Wagner or apartheid. Accordingly I have linked to each of them in case anyone is looking for that information. The vast majority use the term as it is presented but I agree that there will certainly be more discussion and I look forward to learning how to better present this information with continuity as well as neutrally. Jnast1 (talk) 21:30, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

By the way I thought of White racist music or similar but sources predominantly use "Racist music" and variations on that. Jnast1 (talk) 13:44, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Which are the top, most reliable sources that use 'racist music'? It doesn't appear to be a proper title. Niluop (talk) 23:55, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm going to be a little controversial here and say this isn't really a proper article. It seems more like an attack on popular music than a neutral encyclopedic article. Far better would be an article entitle 'racism in music' discussing the historical factors of racism in music — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skrelk (talk • contribs) 03:33, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

A generalized article about racism in music would be welcome but that is not this article. At best this article could add sweeping generalized statements that are very well sourced stating that most genres have racism in them, if that's even true. It might be but I don't know. Jnast1 (talk) 00:27, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Arguably the authority on Racist music since the 1990s is the Southern Poverty Law Center, you can see some of their reports; "Intelligence Files: Racist Music", "Money, Music and the Doctor: Aided by a GOP strategist, America's leading neo-Nazi has put out nearly $250,000 to acquire the nation's powerhouse distributor of racist rock", "Essay: Racist Music", "They’re Back: Racist Music Sampler to be Distributed to Schools", "Active Racist Music Groups".
* Other readily available sources; "Racist Music Just a Download Away on Mainstream Music Sites", "Racist Music Goes Digital", "RACIST MUSIC: (SONGS OF BIGOTRY AND RACIAL INTOLERANCE)" - BTW, this is the first source I've seen to implicitly state "Other races and nationalities beside African Americans were used in racist music including Germans, Chinese, Dutch, Native Americans, and Irish." they also list songs from 1896 to 1920s, but i have not had time to follow-up on that research so I did not add it or anything else that i could not source reliably. "Vh1 Special Goes Behind The (racist) Music" (of their "Behind the Music" series), "Brighton council calls for a ban on racist music" (this was a part of the Stop Murder Music effort), "Transcript: Internet Battle Over Racist Music Ends Tonight", "Was That Racist or Not? I Can’t Tell: The Music of Prussian Blue", "SWEDISH BIZ DECRIES RACIST MUSIC."
* Other related issues; "Star attacks 'racist' music industry", "Panel Targets Racist Music", "Judge reserves decision over 'racist' music video", "Using African American (Negro) Spirituals in Coping with Stress by Creative African Americans Who Perform Piano and Vocal European Classical Music in a Racist Industry and Oppressed Society",
* Some related book searches; "racist music" intitle:music, "racist music" intitle:racist, "racist music" intitle:race, "racist music" intitle:jewish, "racist music" intitle:black, "racist music" intitle:mexican, "racist music" , "racist music" intitle:nativism, ""racist music" intitle:klux" and "racist music" intitle:discrimination. I hope anyone who surveys some of the sources i have been looking through will confirm that "Racist music" is indeed the proper name for this article and that many sources exist. Jnast1 (talk) 00:27, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Racism in the music industry

"Racist music industry", seemingly only in reference to black artists getting abused by what as seen as a racist industry, is a phrase I keep seeing as a false positive. I don't note any articles on Wikipedia that address race and music in this context so if anyone has a lead please mention it. Jnast1 (talk) 22:15, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Original research

This article is full of original research, POV-pushing and off-topic content. I deleted the "Roots" section again because it was not actually about the roots of racist music. The roots of racist music go way back before the white power rock scene. The first paragraph said nothing at all about music, and the rest was just an exact copy/paste of the music section from the skinhead article, and most of that part had absolutely nothing to do with racism.Spylab (talk) 02:21, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

I very much appreciate how invested you are in this topic however I must again ask you to produce reliable sources for your claims. If reliable sources contradict anything we have here then let's compare which ones say what and how best to represent mainstream verses WP:Fringe views. I have again looked for more sourcing and will amend the article according to them rather than what I may think is correct. If you do find any sources please feel free to post them here for all to see how to reconcile any differences. Meanwhile I have yet to find anything substantiative to lead away from that Racist music is considered by the mainstream to be tied to neo-Nazis and White supremacists. I'm open to any constructive ideas but simply deleting (sourced) content you don't agree with is unacceptable. I will try to write a better continuity from classism to racism but it will take a few hours. Jnast1 (talk) 12:11, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

• Your reponse did not address my concerns at all. This article is a jumbled mess.Spylab (talk) 02:49, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Your opinion is noted but just as non-constructive as your disruptive deletions. Please note specific problems which can be addressed by those willing to do the work. I will try to clean up the music section today. Jnast1 (talk) 09:44, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Please do not remove legitimate tags when the problems have not been corrected. This article has serious deficiencies that need to be addressed. Also, please see WP:OWNERSHIP.Spylab (talk) 22:26, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Each of those tags is pretty serious yet you keep ignoring that you are not providing any specific reasons for them. I also removed the off-topic tags as an article about racist music logically would cover both racism and music. Jnast1 (talk) 02:42, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

• I give up. This article is garbage and does not belong on Wikipedia in its current form.Spylab (talk) 01:39, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Spylab here, this article seems to contain quite a bit of original research, and seems a bit panicky, with some FUD.Skrelk (talk) 04:19, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm alarmed by your claim of original research and ask the same as the previous editor, what specific statements do you feel are original research? What specific statements come off as panicky and how could they be presented better? Jnast1 (talk) 21:59, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

This seems very sensationalist, and it doesn't seem to contain adequate sources. Parts trail off into discussions of overall genres in ways that falsely imply racism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skrelk (talk • contribs) 04:07, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

• The lead sentence, which is the basis of this whole article, is very dubious. It says: "Racist music is music associated with and promoting neo-Nazism and white supremacy ideologies." The claim is supported by a single reference, but the reference does not include a quote supporting that argument. The reference is listed as:

Intelligence Report: a project of the Southern Poverty Law Center, Issues 133-136; Southern Poverty Law Center, Klanwatch Project, Southern Poverty Law Center. Militia Task Force, Publisher Klanwatch, 2009.

When you go to the Southern Poverty Law Centre website and look up Intelligence Report, there are four different issues in 2009. http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues?year=2009 Which issue is it, and what is the exact quote showing that the term racist music is only used to describe neo-Nazi and white supremacist music?Spylab (talk) 01:07, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

That's not original research but a simple matter of sourcing. I had other sources there but in editing I must have dropped them off. I'll look to adding impartial sources and even quote them. Jnast1 (talk) 02:48, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

If it's just a "simple" matter of sourcing, you should have been able to correct the problem by now. It's been a few days -- a simple thing shouldn't take that long.Spylab (talk) 17:38, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Between you and one other editor you have fundamentally altered, and not for the better in my opinion, the entire article while littering it with tags registering your disapproval. If you really believe I am going to edit war and play a game of pulling up each and every source, again, and re-confirm everything again, and then provide to someone who seems to be entrenched in their opinion exact quotes which logically leads to them trying to pick apart someone else's research. Well, you've made any work on this article unpleasant and rather frustrating despite your promise to leave it alone. First I'll wait to see if the article is deleted. I doubt it will but I also have a low tolerance for your assuming bad faith against everything I do. Then I will work to improve it with anyone willing to actually do the research into the most reliable sources and follow what they state rather than what I believe about certain genres. If you decide to be more collaborative then combative it would be nice to have addition constructive criticism. Jnast1 (talk) 05:22, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Have you actually read the books and articles you have used as references? Do you have them in your possession? How can you justify using them as references if you can't point to quotes that supposedly support your claims in this article?Spylab (talk) 03:25, 28 April 2011 (UTC) I deleted the Intelligence Report reference because it doesn't say which of the four 2009 issues it is from, and it does not point to a specific quote to support the claim in the sentence. The reference is useless without those two vital pieces of information.Spylab (talk) 03:33, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

After the deletion discussion has resolved i will look to addressing all legitimate concerns. I've read and tried to accurately summarize all of the sources represented which does represent the mainstream views on the subject. If you read all the sources and come to different conclusions then let's work through any potential inaccuracies. Until then simply accusing me of falsifying information and engaging in synthesis is hostile and mean. Jnast1 (talk) 08:41, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

"Institutionalized racism in the U.S." section

That section is way too long, and gets too off-topic. The history of segregation is better covered elsewhere; all that that section needs to say relevant to this article could be reduced to a single graf about the role of music in the civil rights movement with a more general link elsewhere. I also submit that the picture of the segregated water fountain doesn't need to be there either. Daniel Case (talk) 00:50, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Racist music comes from institutionalized racism, some history of racism which born racist music has to remain even if the scope is not agreed on. If you have specific ideas how this 100-year period can be condensed yet remain to show how divided the US was and how 'wounded' the South was is welcome. Additionally racist music was born as a reaction to the Civil Rights Movement, not having some explanation why that could have happened is a disservice. You may be well versed in US history and racial politics but the rest of the world likely is not. Also the image is a perfect example of how institutionalized and dehumanizing Jim Crow laws were, if you have a better image what is it? Jnast1 (talk) 01:25, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

This is an online encylopedia article, with links, not a school paper (And you'd lose points on your grade for having such a lengthy detour from your subject. Certainly if I were grading the paper). You have links in the text people can click on. You have a wonderful guideline on summary style. I wouldn't presume to rewrite it for you. Yet. Daniel Case (talk) 01:40, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Seriously! I have been trying to figure out how to capsulized a hundred years of racism to show how the music came around to be specifically and blatantly racist, additionally the fact that popular music was becoming increasing sympathetic to civil rights for blacks was a part of the formula. I'm open to any constructive ideas! Jnast1 (talk) 01:45, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Well ... I would suggest that section would make more sense if you could keep the connection to music alive. Does your research show anything about how music sustained that institutionalization? You might want to have something about, say, minstrel shows and the traditions around them. Daniel Case (talk) 01:56, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

That's a great idea, I have seen a lot about how racism kept black musicians from being recognized and getting fair deals and royalties but simply trying to show how music evolved during this period may help. I found Music history of the United States during the Civil War era, Music of the American Civil War and Music history of the United States in the late 19th century and will look to what information is appropriate and can be sourced. Jnast1 (talk) 02:00, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, that too. The focus should be on how music, during that period, supported institutionalized racism primarily by promoting racial stereotypes (and, also, how black music was discriminated against and suppressed, although that might be better treated in an article on something like "Racism in the music industry") as opposed to later racist music like what you have so ably documented in the later sections of the article which directly and explicitly promoted a racist ideology in the absence of an officially sanctioned racism. Daniel Case (talk) 02:26, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Racism in the music industry is a huge topic area which probably should not be dealt with here as the reasons the music industries were racist are quite complex and spread much wider. Racist music is a specific niche so I foolishly thought I could wrap it up nicely but obviously it needs a bit more work. The research in this area used to trace this genre to the early 1970's but over the last decade the roots in the 1950s have been studied, logically there might be earlier racist music we don't know of but that's not for me to decide. I will start reading up and look to how this section should change, thank you for the ideas! Jnast1 (talk) 02:34, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

• It makes considerably more sense just to strike the section in its entirety, as having no direct connection to the topic of the article. This article doesn't need to demonstrate the scope and history of racism, generally ... there are articles which already do that, and you can link to them as necessary.  Ravenswing  02:11, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

If I hadn't read the research in this area I might think that as well. But racist music cannot be seen as just appearing out of nowhere - as some of the white power bands have even stated it did. There is a logical progression of colonial Americans embracing populist ideals and Southerners maintaining those ideas so much as they tried succeeding from the nation and were 'beat down'. In response was a different brand of institutionalized racism coupled with white supremacy which, in turn, triggered the Civil Rights Movement which the Racist music genre developed in response to. As noted above Wikipedia has some articles on the music of the times so I will see if utilizing some of that will help resolve the issues. I'd much prefer to rework what is there than remove everything that adds too much context. Also I'm still adding material from 1990s to current so the article is incomplete in that regard. Jnast1 (talk) 02:34, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

How do you conflate not having a separate "history of racism" section in this article with assuming that racist music "appears out of nowhere?" That would be the "linking to other articles" part, the more so in that the Institutionalized racism in the U.S. section does not, in fact, attempt so much as a single tie-in to the subject of this article. Quite the opposite, in fact, with the paragraph tying the civil rights movement to progressive folk singers, and doubly odd given your belief that a "racism in the music industry" section is inappropriate - surely it's a great deal more so to the subject of this article than a precis of the '50s-'60s progressive folk era!  Ravenswing  10:02, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I don't conflate that belief myself. Researchers noted specifically that musicians in the Racist music genre believed their music appeared out of nowhere. Likewise there needs to be some tie-in as to why Racist music formed as a response to the Civil Rights Movement. I'm looking into how to incorporate more music history to show how the subjects are intertwined. On the other hand Racism in the music industry is an entire - and very large - subject area that is distinct from Racist music, in fact the majority of customers on Johnny Rebels' label were blacks recording their own songs. Racism in the music industry could be summed up here but I feel it would be more of a disservice. However if you feel there is a way to make it work and are up to the challenge I'm open to making it work. Do you want to write a draft? Jnast1 (talk) 22:12, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

• • Actually it makes more sense to fix that problems that can only be effectively addressed here - that is how does institutionalized racism in the US and Racist music intersect. I can't use original research so this section will take a bit of time to flesh out. Jnast1 (talk) 00:30, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

POV/Questionable Sources and statements

I'm concerned about several POV or questionable statements that do not appear to be adequately or appropriately sourced. Rather than fix them myself, and create the appearance of having an 'angle', I'd like to discuss them here.

"The documentary VH1 News Special: Inside Hate Rock (2002) noted that racist music is 'a breeding ground for home-grown terrorists.'" Terrorism is a serious accusation, and neither VH1 nor a report on it is an appropriate reference for such a serious accusation. A government report or one by a respected, independent academic would be better.

"Brian Houghton, of the National Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism, said racist music is used 'to grab these kids, teach them to be racists and hook them for life.'" This line is from a local news article, and the quotes contains ellipses in the article. The context is unclear, and the local news article appears sensationalist. In addition the quote is a serious accusation, and somewhat fantastic in that implies that music has the ability to transform a good happy kid into a violent racist. The supporting quote that follows is from the director of the ADL, a group that has an interest in creating and spreading fear of racism. This quote would be fine if it had more support besides a single statement from a POV source.

The paragraph that follows("it is not a simplistic cause and effect relationship...social outcasts") is largely comprised of POV quotes, and as such is not written in an encycloped or NPOV manner. In addition, it appears to argue for censorship and acts as an outlet for the for the views of those quoted, not as a source of encyclopedic information. It should be verified and backed with neutral sources, and rewritten in a neutral, encyclopedic manner.

"It is a multi-millon dollar industry which helps finance and recruit for "hate groups in the Western world", the internet and low air fares have helped internationalize the efforts." One source(which unfortunately, I cannot view) is not enough to call 'racist music' a multi-million dollar industry propped up by the internet and air fares. In fact, this flies in the face of logic.

"Racist music is also becoming less taboo as the Internet allows users to purchase quickly and anonymously as compared to having to go into a physical store.[17] Mainstream music retailers cite the first amendment and slippery-slope logic to defend racist music the right to be sold online.[17]" This statement is POV as it implies that the internet's anonymity is problematic, and the phraseology of 'defend' and 'slippery-slope logic' implies that music retailer are wrong to support the ability to distribute questionable music. In addition, Spin magazine is not an adequate source to judge changes in cultural taboos or other complex sociological factors.

"Nazi punk music is similar to most forms of punk rock, although it differs by having lyrics that express hatred of Jews, homosexuals, communists, anarchists, anti-racists and people who are not considered white. In 1978 in Britain, the white nationalist National Front (NF) had a punk-oriented youth organization called the Punk Front.[44] Although the Punk Front only lasted one year, it included a number of white power punk bands such as The Dentists, The Ventz, Tragic Minds and White Boss.[45][46] The Nazi punk subculture appeared in the United States by the early 1980s, during the rise of the hardcore punk scene." Discusses the association of punk and racism without adequately explaining the dramatic contrast between more common/'mainstream' punk politics and the racist version. This unfairly paints punk as racist, insulting everyone who associates with punk in anyway. This should be rewritten to adequately explain the difference and avoid unfairly insulting a large group of people. For example, the anti-nazi elements of hardcore punk could have been mentioned, and the difference clarified.

"As hardcore punk music became more popular in the 1990s and 2000s, many white power bands took on a more hardcore-influenced sound. This music is sometimes known as hatecore." Unsourced/original research/anecdotal. Unfairly conflates punk with racism without adequately explaining differences.

Anyone have any suggestion or statements on how to improve this? I think I've made my case about the issues in this article. A collection of largely POV quotes containing serious implications and accusations, often sensationalist is not appropriate on a encyclopedia that is intended to be neutral.

I feel inclined/compelled to point out that I am not remotely racist. I oppose racism VERY strongly. I also oppose unfairly painting innocent parties with a broad brush. I also oppose the use of a resource like Wikipedia to spread sensationalism and exaggeration. This article, in it's present state is not a discussion of racism in music. Indeed, the history and sociological origins are barely touched upon. This article largely consists of claims about it's dangers and problems caused by it. Skrelk (talk) 08:55, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Once the deletion discussion has ended I will work to address the concerns mentioned ob the article, at the discussion and on this page.

Since this was not replied to, I went ahead and removed the above statements. This is not intended to offend you, but to remove inadequately sourced or questionable statements. Skrelk (talk) 21:38, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

"All-female bands"

I am very skeptical about the following paragraph, and I would like to see the actual quotes that support the claims.

A newer trend[citation needed][dubious – discuss] is for all-female white power bands to form and be marketed, because all-male white power bands are limited in venues they can play. Additionally, the female-fronted bands are much less likely to encounter violent anti-racist protests.[16][clarification needed][dubious – discuss] Another aspect of female racist bands is their general disdain of performing heavy metal and hard rock music and their preference for a variety of post-feminist sensibilities in lyrics, style of music and performance.[16][clarification needed][dubious – discuss]

I've only heard of one all-female white power group, Prussian Blue. One instance is not a trend; it is an exception. The other claims in this paragraph also seem very dubious, and don't seem to be based in reality.Spylab (talk) 17:34, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

I believe the context was in discussing Prussian Blue and some of their contemporaries but I had not completed research for that section yet. Google books isn't showing me the pages i was looking at before right now so for now I'll simply cite the "about this book info" -Inside organized racism: women in the hate movement by Kathleen M. Blee, 2003 - Following up her highly praised study of the women in the 1920s Ku Klux Klan, Blee discovers that many of today's racist women combine dangerous racist and anti-Semitic agendas with otherwise mainstream lives. The only national sample of a broad spectrum of racist activists and the only major work on women racists, this important book also sheds light on how gender relationships shape participation in the movement as a whole.
She was specifically talking about the difference between men and women in the racist movements. She notes that female bands were a newer trend, that male bands were routinely subject to anti-racist protests and that female ones were not. Etc. I'm no expert in the field so if there was few if any female bands I have to rely on someone else's research. I still have little doubt in believing her despite the tag-bombing and "dubious" flags alarmingly added. Jnast1 (talk) 18:05, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

So you agree that there is no reliably sourced evidence for the claims you made in that paragraph. Thanks for clearing that up.Spylab (talk) 20:25, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

I agree that you are again assuming bad faith and acting combative, as to the sources, no her book is rather clear. Jnast1 (talk) 05:22, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Jnast1, although that last statement by Spylab was a bit irritated, no one is assuming bad faith but you. You repeatedly make references to me and Spylab implying that we're trying to disrupt your article. I doubt he is, but I can assure you I'm not. I'm trying to prevent the dissemination of inaccurate/unverified or sensationalist information. You apparently posted a one sentence reply to my very long description of multiple issues in the article. To avoid the appearance of bad faith, I'm not going to delete those lines myself yet, but we're approaching an edit war. Reverting that edit with a tag of 'please stop' implies that your assuming that he is being malicious, which doesn't appear to be the case. The reference you used is an academic source, so I doubt the paragraph is totally out of line, although I suspect it's exaggerated. I think you need to have a two way, open-minded discussion on this talk page with those who are voicing concerns, let's not have an edit war. Skrelk (talk) 05:38, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

It's hard to misinterpret So you agree that there is no reliably sourced evidence for the claims you made in that paragraph. Thanks for clearing that up. I won't play your edit wars and I won't compromise the quality or sourcing. If you do want to help I look forward to it but I also am not going to step to your deadlines for fix it or I delete it really soon. You readily admit to posting very long list of issues, if the article is kept I will address those one by one. It's unrealistic to expect me to drop everything to do your list or to expect that researching items takes less time than deleting items. I'm going to take a break for the moment and fully expect to again be disheartened in what condition the article has again been chopped into. All in all it has been very distressing and disappointing and seems to be directly against WP:Civility. Jnast1 (talk) 05:51, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

World-wide view

This article reflects did and will again reflect an accurate view of Racist music as noted in sources covering The US and Europe and to a certain extent Australia. If there is any reliable sources discussing racist music elsewhere or in other languages please note them here before re-adding a spurious tag. We reflect what sources state, not what we think is true to avoid WP:Original research. Jnast1 (talk) 17:48, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Synthesis

Since this accusation has also been leveled against me it would be considerate to offer examples of actual synthesis and possible ways to fix the issues. Jnast1 (talk) 06:30, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

See my rather long post that you didn't respond to entitled POV/Questionable Statements. Please stop being personal about this. Skrelk (talk) 07:50, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

I did respond to it but if you choose to ignore everything I've done and persist in mistrusting every sentence i write I wonder why you would bother accepting my word on anything. I'll note that this talk section is to specifically address WP:Synthesis accusations so please list specific items you are proving are indeed synthesis or we can remove this tag as another baseless attack. If you read all the sources and come to different conclusions then let's work through any potential inaccuracies. Until then simply accusing me of falsifying information and engaging in synthesis which is hostile and mean. Jnast1 (talk) 08:41, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

The synthesis allegations are in the very long post I made. To be more specific, the points regarding the 'multimillion dollar industry', the effects of it on the internet are examples of synthesis. There are also several that were removed earlier. The issue isn't so much using two references to synthesis a third view, as much as it is using two quotes together and out of context to present a synthesis. For example, the Role in the White Power movement section presents the idea that the internet and slippery-slope logic allowing racist music to be sold online is supporting a white-power movement recruitment of young people who could potentially become homegrown terrorists. None of the quotes or refs credibly states this idea, but that section combines them in a way that presents that idea. Skrelk (talk) 09:49, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

So to clarify, you have looked at the sources themselves and believe the summaries are inaccurate or synthesized? Or are you assuming they must be? There is a big difference between what I know and believe and what the sources verify, the statements made were verified, not simply true. I will address these matters after the deletion discussion has run its course. Jnast1 (talk) 21:29, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Post a verification of the statements and a verification of the implied statement that the use of the internet and slippery-slope logic allows racist music to be sold online and supports white-power movement recruitment of young people who could potentially become homegrown terrorists. If you could post some quotes from the sources, it would be helpful. Skrelk (talk) 23:19, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I'll take that as a no, you did not read many or possibly any of the sources. That makes the entire discussion more clear. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jnast1 (talk • contribs) 00:57, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

I read every available reference. Some I couldn't access, you have the burden to quote these references and provide appropriate verification. Skrelk (talk) 01:09, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Other race's racist music

First post so sorry if this was out of the guidelines. I agree with most of the others, that this article is very biased. I have not researched a ton, but there is a lot of rap music directed at hurting white people. The first thing i could find is this post someone else posted on a forum, but maybe it could be a start. http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t411416/ . I know the website is questionable, but the song lyrics can easily be verified. I think it is very naive to say that all "racist music" is by whites. I almost would rather see no "racist music" article than one that should be labeled "white racist music" or something along those lines. Again, first time, don't yell at me. Aguywithfeet (talk) 02:27, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

There's the dragon, and there's the knight that must slay it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.42.102.141 (talk) 09:55, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move. Cúchullain ^t/c 13:51, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Racist music → White power music – All of the content in the article is about white power music. It doesn't describe or even mention any other types of racist music. There is no specific genre called racist music, and there is no logical reason why the term should only refer to white racist music. The current White power music page is a redirect. --Relisted JHunterJ (talk) 11:16, 29 May 2012 (UTC) 10:48, 19 May 2012 (UTC) Spylab (talk) Orig. time stamp: 00:07, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

• Moved from WP:RM#Technical requests. Topics in this general area are not famous for being uncontroversial. Favonian (talk) 10:48, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
• Comment if this is renamed, "racist music" should not redirect to "white power music" afterwards, a stub should be placed at that title instead. 70.24.251.208 (talk) 04:23, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

• Support. Proposed title more precisely reflects the contents of the article (which also has a heavy US bias). I also agree with 70.24.251.208 that "racist music" ideally should have its own stub but what would it say? "Racist music" as used in English usually refers to white racist music in majority-white countries and not to other types of racist music. Good luck. —  AjaxSmack  05:20, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Though since Wikipedia covers more topics that just those found in the English speaking world, I would say we can cover racist music from various other portions of the world, like those from East Asia that denigrate white people. And depending on the definition of race, where various groups of people denigrate each other. 70.24.251.208 (talk) 04:20, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

• Support. Yeah, this is better; more precise. White power music is generally racist, but it's not the only kind of racist music. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 09:58, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose. Rename to Racist country music, which is predominant in the US and seems to be what this article covers well. Currently I get redirected from White power music to Rock Against Communism which says it started in the 1970s, so this article actually predates it. Why not just rename this one to Racist country music and move the White power music section to White power music and summarize the main forms of racism music there? It seems the organizing of the articles could be clearer and that way you still have one main article that overviews the other forms.Insomesia (talk) 09:04, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
  • This sounds reasonable. However, I suggest moving the current racist music article to white power music and then splitting the country music sections to a new racist country music article. Two reasons for this are: 1) the original article started as an article on white power music so the edit history should remain with that article and 2) structure of the current article is more suited to white power music than to racist country music. I will be happy to conduct the split if so desired. —  AjaxSmack  03:47, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
    • As I give it more thought it would seem that Racist music would be the parent summary article and the current racist country music content here could be moved to racist country music and summed up here. White power music is a form of Racist music, and both branches, white power music and racist country music can be summarized here.Insomesia (talk) 19:34, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

• • • Whatever happens, Racist music should not be the title of the article, since the article only discusses white racist music, not any other kind of racist music. The title does not accurately describe the content that appears in the article.Spylab (talk) 21:52, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
      • I think it could and would discuss forms of racist music although Wikipedia currently only covers some forms. I think both White power music and Racist country music would be summarized here. Are you suggesting that all racist music is white power music? I'm not seeing that presently.Insomesia (talk) 22:04, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
        • I'm saying (and have been saying right from the beginning) that this article only discusses white power music, so the title should reflect that. Since the article only discusses white racist music, it should not have a title that misleads people into thinking they will be reading an article about all forms of racist music. White racist country music is not a different topic from white power music; white racist country music is a form of white power music. If this article is to remain, it should be called white power music.Spylab (talk) 23:41, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
          • I understand your point. What I'm saying is that this should be the parent article that welcomes all racist music and should reflect that. It's true, as far as I know, that all white power music is racist, however not all racist music is white power music. I see you've gone ahead and shifted the article to being only about white power music. If you intended to that all along I'm unclear why you asked for this rename before re-aligning everything. In any case it seems you have a plan for this so I'll move on to something else.Insomesia (talk) 00:43, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
• Relisting comment: I've added a note to Talk:White power music and to Talk:Rock Against Communism, since this move affects navigation through/to those pages. -- JHunterJ (talk) 11:16, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
• Support move - "Racist music" is a bizarre and unused phrase; if this music is for and about white power, then that should be the title. Although, grammatically, it should be white-power music, because it is not "power music" that is white (just as "white-power metal" is very different from white power metal). ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 02:37, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Vote for deletion

I would not even classify this page as any genre of music at all, so it should not be classified as one until a enough reliable sources can call it one. This topic is rather a social movement that uses music as its form of expression more than anything. At the very least it should be moved. --Xavier (talk) 02:51, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Introduction to Political Communication

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 12 September 2023 and 20 November 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Christian.Moreno44, Jillian0000 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: LeviTyler77, Taliafrankel.

— Assignment last updated by Deparkozee (talk) 21:35, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Needs serious work

The sections on this page read more like a school presentation than a Wikipedia article. 67.4.194.216 (talk) 06:21, 10 January 2024 (UTC)