Talk:Candace Owens

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Candace Owens article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4: 30 days

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Connecticut Low‑importance

	Connecticut portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Connecticut, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Connecticut on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConnecticutWikipedia:WikiProject ConnecticutTemplate:WikiProject ConnecticutConnecticut articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Conservatism Low‑importance

	Conservatism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Journalism Low‑importance

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics: American Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Low-importance).

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women writers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women in Red

This article was created or improved as part of the Women in Red project. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in RedWikipedia:WikiProject Women in RedTemplate:WikiProject Women in RedWomen in Red articles

African diaspora Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Internet culture Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Internet culture To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles
Expand : Pick an article from here or here
Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images
Stubs : All stubs are located here
Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}}
- See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

You must be logged-in to an autoconfirmed or confirmed account (usually granted automatically to accounts with 10 edits and an age of 4 days)
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on this article (except in limited circumstances)

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 2 times. The weeks in which this happened:

Section sizes

Section size for Candace Owens (38 sections)
Section name	Byte count	Section total
(Top)	10,503	10,503
Early life and education	6,598	6,598
Early career	19	6,634
Degree180 and anti-conservative blog	3,743	3,743
Privacy violation, Gamergate, and political transformation	2,872	2,872
Conservative activism	10,674	21,028
BLEXIT Foundation	5,843	5,843
Product promotion	4,511	4,511
Political views	7,722	88,181
Anti-black racism and Black Lives Matter	15,197	15,197
Women's rights	4,373	4,373
LGBT rights	7,792	7,792
Donald Trump	4,072	4,072
Immigration	2,343	2,343
Science	838	838
Climate change	2,772	2,772
Welfare	460	460
Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany	9,364	9,364
COVID-19 pandemic and vaccination	15,401	15,401
Russia and Ukraine	4,829	4,829
Jews and Judaism	9,271	9,271
Israel and Palestine	3,747	3,747
Legal issues	20	7,652
Kimberly Klacik lawsuit	4,870	4,870
Other	2,762	2,762
Controversies	20	25,199
Dispute with family of Mollie Tibbetts	2,986	2,986
Support of Kanye West	7,347	7,347
Promotion of conspiracy theories	4,844	4,844
Mention in Christchurch shooter's manifesto	5,440	5,440
Proposed 2024 Australasian tour	4,562	4,562
Personal life	5,413	5,413
Bibliography	687	687
Filmography	1,283	1,283
Notes	24	24
References	28	28
Further reading	290	290
External links	2,683	2,683
Total	176,203	176,203

Removal of "far-right" descriptor

Since some editors are objecting to the inclusion of the term Far-right without discussing it on the talk page, I'll start the discussion.

I believe the use of the term is appropriate here. There's quite a few news sources (provided in the Special:Diff/1215197468) that use the term when referring to her, and a quick search finds even more.

Other American politicans pages such as Marjorie Taylor Greene use the term with a similar number of citations. Funnyfarmofdoom (talk to me) 20:42, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

She's far more commonly called conservative. MTG is a rare exception for this extreme tag, see the discussion at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Marjorie_Taylor_Greene#Neutrality_Dispute_Tag --FMSky (talk) 21:07, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with using the label of far right. As is the standard on wikipedia we use what the media uses to describe her. There are 6 different citations in listed Special:Diff/1215197468. Chefs-kiss (talk) 21:09, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Most sources call her conservative --FMSky (talk) 21:11, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Variety, CNN. However I think since this is very recent news and determining how the media is describing her I suggest waiting a bit more to see what the language around her is. I suggest we wait til the 24th and wait to see how this develops. Chefs-kiss (talk) 21:19, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just a bunch of examples for 'conversative': 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, including one calling her "the face of black conservatism". And we literally have a section titled "Conservative activism", so unless someone wants to rewrite her entire Career and Views section, this should not go in the lead --FMSky (talk) 21:16, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point. I did find her article a bit unorganized but its true. As i said i think we should wait to see Chefs-kiss (talk) 10:02, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that conservative is the more common label. "Far right" is a contentious label given that Wikipedia's article on the subject links the label to Nazis etc. The original edit trying to justify the label contained some OR in order to justify the label. Even if we have some sources that use the label, given the BLP concerns here we should scrutinize them for quality. Such labels are often reporter opinion mixed into factual reports on what she said. Springee (talk) 13:24, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I think this is linked to the very recent anti-semitic/blood libel stuff. Whilst Owens may have some views commonly linked to the far-right, I don't see a preponderance of sources calling her that. This is not a situation like Greene or Boebert (yet). Black Kite (talk) 19:01, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I like that you added "yet" to this comment back in March, because the situation looks much different now in August, post-Mengele comments. I am proposing putting far right back in the descriptor. Accipio Mitis Frux (talk) 10:49, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the removal of far-right here. The sources are insufficient to use this label in the lede right now; of the ones added with the original edit to the article, the only RSP I see there is The Guardian, as the article from The Hill doesn't even use the term far-right. She's much more widely described as a conservative commentator (as opposed to the above examples of MTG and Boebert who are expressly called "far-right politicians" in many articles) and unless this changes the sources aren't overwhelming enough to justify it being in the lede. ser! ^{(chat to me - see my edits)} 19:04, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per above, I agree that this doesn't belong in the MOS:FIRST, as is not a widespread description. Also agree with the MTG and Boebert comparison; she's not quite there yet, probably one more antisemitic controversy away at present. I have however replaced the MREL reference with multiple GREL in the body per this edit [1], as it appears very much due at this point. I don't really see how this can be summarised in the lead without regurgitation, apart from in the final paragraph at a stretch, but I do wonder whether multiple GREL makes it relevant in the infobox under movement, given the quantity and quality of current references. CNC (talk) 16:19, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can we re-visit this conversation? The discussion of whether or not Owens is far right took place in March, when she was considerably more mainstream. Since then, she has had countless comments that would put her safely in the neo-Nazi camp, to a much greater extent than others (such as MTG) that carry the label of far right. I propose adding "far right" to the descriptor. Accipio Mitis Frux (talk) 10:47, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per the sourcing of far-right, it's pretty shocking to have "Described as "the new face of black conservatism" by The Washington Post" in the lead from a single source, compared to the WP:DUE description of far-right from a bunch of RS. For starters the description from 2019, while relevant back then, seems considerably outdated and no other sources appear to describe Owens as such. As someone on the right that has delved into antisemitism, being described as far-right also appears entirely accurate. CNC (talk) 13:03, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the additional information and insight. I am implementing both of these changes; if anyone takes issue please respond to this thread with your input. Accipio Mitis Frux (talk) 11:33, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:RECENTISM --FMSky (talk) 16:38, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry but I do not think that this is at all reasonable ground for a revert. Looking at this issue historically, Candace Owens was already carrying the far-right label at the beginning of this debate and the fact that the events of the last 6 months have established "far right" as being an appropriate descriptor makes this update more relevant, not less. Furthermore, I gave ample time for others to interject on this topic and you could have contributed to the discussion and waited for consensus. I did that, and I added sources. Please make suggestions to the talk page and show that other users agree before simply reverting changes. Accipio Mitis Frux (talk) 10:57, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We dont usually put these labels in the 1st sentence anyway. I can be mentioned elsewhere --FMSky (talk) 11:03, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would disagree. Once there is consensus that a pundit or activist is far-right, that is always in the descriptor, at least in every page that I have seen. If it is a gray area, I might agree, but that is not the case here. Try googling "Candace Owens far right" and seeing what comes up. If there is another place in the article you think it is better placed, than feel free to suggest it. But if you are going to simply revert my edits without any sort of consensus, that is not proper decorum. Is this your plan moving forward or are you willing to open up the discussion and wait for consensus? Accipio Mitis Frux (talk) 11:15, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think about the current version`--FMSky (talk) 11:17, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wish you had asked before doing two instant reverts in close proximity to my edits. I simply don't have time for edit warring so I am okay with the descriptor as it is until we hear from more contributors. However, I think that the 2019 Washington Post description is not relevant and I think it should be removed. If you disagree, please explain. Accipio Mitis Frux (talk) 11:26, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think its very relevant but since you and another user have objected to its inclusion i've removed it FMSky (talk) 11:35, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the WaPo descriptor is very relevant, hence referenced in the body, but is far from due for the lead based on weight of soruces. At present being described as both conservative and far-right appears accurate, based on references above describing her as both. CNC (talk) 17:26, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anti Gay Uganda bill

She also praised the Uganda anti gay bill 41.59.151.25 (talk) 08:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide RS links if you want this added into the article? TomaHawk61 (talk) 03:25, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Section needed for Antisemitic Statements

In the last couple of months, Owens has moved far beyond "Israel-Palestine" in terms of her comments that veer into antisemitism. For example, she has suggested multiple times that the "Jewish lobby" killed JFK, defended the Nazis explicitly (i.e. "the Germans were the ones being ethnically cleansed"), doubting the experiments of Dr. Josef Mangele and denouncing them as propaganda, and most recently declaring that anyone that criticizes Israel needs to fear getting killed. This is after many other extreme comments that blatantly veer into antisemitism.

Since I have sources for all of the above, I would like to put these in the article. However, I don't think that "Israel-Palestine" is an appropriate place to do so as this is more in the realm of Neo-Nazi rhetoric and should have it's own section with a title like "accusations of anti-semitism." If anyone opposes this please post here, otherwise I will create the section in the coming days. Accipio Mitis Frux (talk) 08:23, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I second this. Her statements about USSR being part of the “Jewish cabal”, that mainstream Judaism is a “pedophile-centric religion that believes in demons”, her whole speech about “Frankists” who kill babies to bake matzos — it’s all much more extreme than anything that is currently reflected here. Please do add the section. Amayorov (talk) 14:28, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Student Loan

Can we verify that as reason for leaving. From White Plains to Stamford and with family successfully bringing lawsuits, financial trouble does not ring true. 2603:8001:6A44:C0DE:788B:7E3D:721:60B3 (talk) 23:00, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]