Talk:Ben Shapiro

Latest comment: 5 days ago by Uamaol in topic Andrew Neil Controversy?

Occupation edit

Even after the semi protection template that @EvergreenFir instated on this page, we still are getting deconstructive edits in regard to ‘Rapper’ being added to occupation. I’m wondering if invisible comments would help in this matter. What are everyone’s thoughts? @Cannolis Wanted to ping you as well in this discussion! Elvisisalive95 (talk) 14:27, 29 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Can't hurt, though probably wouldn't help either, in my experience the kind of people that would add this sort of thing won't read those comments. The number of confirmed users that would(like the person you had to revert) is relatively small though, you could also wait and see if you get more of these edits before acting. Cannolis (talk) 20:52, 29 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
Roger that. Sounds like a plan, thank you very much. Elvisisalive95 (talk) 21:10, 29 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
My thoughts roughly match Cannolis'. In case it ever helps, I oppose adding "rapper" to the lead and any rapper categories to the article, per WP:BALANCE, WP:ROLEBIO, and WP:CATDEFINING, among other reasons. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 21:20, 29 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Comment - His rapping "career" is not even established as notable enough to include. A youtube link is insufficient. We need reliable secondary sources covering this song to even include it. EvergreenFir (talk) 23:59, 29 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

I just added a reliable secondary source per Wikipedia:RSPSS to your revert . I too don’t believe by any means it merits being included as a career at all. That’s why I originally just wrote a simple sentence on the page stating the fact that it happened, which i believe should be included on this page in the capacity it is now. Elvisisalive95 (talk) 00:16, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
A piece from one of the blogs at The Hill, which are not as reliable as the news articles from the site. I'm not sure that's enough to demonstrate that the content is notable (with a lowercase n, not talking about WP:N). Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 00:20, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
I simply grabbed from one of the approved sources per Wikipedia:RSPSS as stated above. Nonetheless I truly appreciate your input, value your opinion & went ahead and added another source Here. Elvisisalive95 (talk) 01:00, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply


Ben Shapiro as a rapper edit

The definition of a rapper, according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, is "One who performed rap music." Rap music is defined as "A form of popular music emphasizing spoken rhymes over heavy rhythmic backing tracks." Using this definition, Ben Shapiro can be objectively classified as a rapper by definition, due to his performance in Tom MacDonald's new music video "Facts."

https://spectator.org/ben-shapiro-a-chart-topping-rapper/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kGpohEpuTE

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rapper

https://www.wordnik.com/words/rap%20music UnregisteredSkeptic (talk) 02:28, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Shapiro has paricipated in one, count 'em, one rap video. As far as I know, he has never performed as a rapper in public or toured as a rapper. No awards as a rapper. That is an avocation or a side hustle or a hobby. Shapiro is not notable as a rapper, and it simply does not belong in the lead at this time. Cullen328 (talk) 02:36, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
Are we still doing this? Thanks Cullen328. Drmies (talk) 02:37, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
Now we're done. Drmies (talk) 02:43, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
See MOS:ROLEBIO. Ben Shapiro is not notable for being a rapper as he has only been featured one song very recently. His other professions largely overshadow this. We do mention rap feature, However we don’t mention it in the lead for this reason. SKAG123 (talk) 20:29, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
There is a nice mention of his rap debut in the body of the article. I agree that that is sufficient.--FeralOink (talk) 08:30, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Wikiprojects and assessment edit

I removed invalid parameters for Wikiproject Politics. (There is no "fascism" subcategory in the template!) Not sure why he is a member of so many Wikiprojects. Ben Shapiro is NOT of "mid importance" to the United States! As a member of that project and of the Internet culture project, I am downgrading him to low importance. As for Judaism, we don't include every person who is Jewish and has a BLP or biographical article in that project, but rather, in the category. (He is in several varieties of Jewish people categories.) He is definitely not of mid importance to southern California. I do believe that the article is better than merely C class, and should be upgraded to B class. I have not made any changes to quality assessment.--FeralOink (talk) 08:30, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Andrew Neil Controversy? edit

I get that he's a contentious guy and wikipedia has to maintain some semblance of balance but I'm surprised there's no subsection for controversies and even more surprised that there's absolutely no mention of his fairly unflattering Andrew Neil Interview since this is what he's most famous for in the UK 2A00:23C6:740D:A401:38A2:1444:4B0:A97B (talk) 16:27, 3 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thing is, he isn't really famous in the UK at all so the Neil interview doesn't count for that much in the grand scheme of things. We try to avoid "controversy" sections anyway, including the controversies in the main flow of the article instead. The interview might be worth mentioning but only very briefly. I think one sentence backed by a couple of good independent sources might be OK. DanielRigal (talk) 18:03, 3 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
I think the IP user means "most notable" as opposed to "most famous." I've known Shapiro for almost a decade thanks to the internet but most in the UK had no idea who he was before the infamous interview. I am surprised it's not mentioned anywhere in the article as it was a pretty significant event in coverage of him and was widely covered internationally. It was an absolute disaster and showed him to be completely out of his league. I disagree about not having criticism sections, as they can be useful in summarising content about individuals, especially as these are usually popular parts of articles. Far too much weight in this article has been given to his views, which is very unusual for an non-politician. At this point, the interview is vital to be included, even if it's given merely a sentence; where it would be placed, however, is difficult to say. UaMaol (talk) 01:40, 14 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
The IP OP supplies no links, so I'll guess it's about a BBC interview in 2019. If so, I'd put it on a level with an event in 2019 where [insert sports team here] played poorly and was ridiculed for a while, but the team plays many times per year and it had no lasting significance. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 15:06, 14 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
haha, yes perfect! UaMaol (talk) 19:21, 14 April 2024 (UTC)Reply