Talk:Sarah Silverman/Archive 1

Archive 1

Older discussion

There seems to be a controversy about whether or not Silverman made the jury duty joke on Conan. Not only did I view the episode in question in July 2001, but I point those in doubt to the following sites which quote the joke (including a transcript from [Politically Incorrect] where Silverman and several other guests quotes the exact same joke.) The links at the bottom of the page are from another episode that didn't ignite the same controversy, but used a different joke. Hopefully, this will put the issue to rest. There was some controversy when sara silverman made a races remark on jimmy kimmel live show when she was talking to guillermo a parking lot attendat for jimmy kimmel at the MTV music awards. Guillermo told silverman quote " you looke very pretty" and she responded to him "how would you know your a Mexican".

Links: Politically Incorrect Transcript A second PI transcript Another entertainment article that proves the joke IMDB news-last item --Uberchouette 15:58, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

In a Fresh Air interview November 9, 2005 she says that she said it on Conan and was asked to repeat it on Politicaly Incorrect among other places. She said she has been asked to repeat it so many times while explaining the controversy that she has dropped it from her act. --Gbleem 22:06, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

link to transcript —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.132.127.199 (talk • contribs)

Gender Questioned

Comedian not comedienne. i mean, c'mon. this is an english article and we ought to be using gender-neutral language whenever reasonably possible

In formal writing (ie encyclopedic articles) it is usually suggested to avoid gender specific terms. --Fallout boy 10:24, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

No it isn't. In politically correct writing, maybe. 80.254.147.52 16:38, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

actually, no, in formal writing. tomasz. 10:11, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I see this mentioned often on Wikipedia, but I don't know where it's coming from. Is that like a style rule in Britain or Canada? I don't quite understand why even referencing gender in the name of a profession is offensive. I don't even find "male nurse" offensive even though the term is clearly pointing out that it's "weird" for a man to be a nurse. Anyway I've noticed in many Wikipedia articles the word "actress" is almost verboten, but there are awards for "Best Actress" and rarely have I heard complaints about that. Many actresses will certainly complain about all kinds of gender-issues. Also why does this "unisexing" always end up being just dumping the feminine form? Maybe both men and women should be called actress, comedienne, etc. Just raving, sorry. (I'm male so maybe I don't get it)--T. Anthony 10:56, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Usually the male form the first term created and used, and then somewhere along a female version commes along.--Fallout boy 03:44, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Regardless of what word is used to refer to her profession, the fact remains that many, many people desperately want to have sex with this woman.

Seriously. Is there a formal, encyclopedia-acceptable way to say she's a smoking hot babe? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.94.217.54 (talk) 02:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Use of "perfect"

The word "perfect" is used several times in this article, and I'm not sure it's the most NPOV word to use. I figured I'd let her fans change it or defend it before I changed it though. 68.97.36.194 07:37, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Sarah Silverman Video Clip

Folks,

I cannot post the video clip of Sarah Silverman below because my family owns evtv1.com and there is a :15 commercial in front of the clip. I have spoken with several long-time editors and they suggested I post the appropriate video clips on the article talk pages for the editors to see if they wish to post them in external links.

Eureka Lot has sought fit to revert many of my past edits and I actually understand and have stopped adding video clips completely. It is a bit of a conflict for me to add, but you who work on this article can jointly decide. I will say that a lot of people clicked on the Sarah Silverman video clip of roasting Hugh Hefner when it was up (about 250 people in a week)

All of these clips are 100% legal from a copyright status. You have to decide if the :15 commercial is too obtrusive or if the clips are worth the "pain" of the commercial. I leave it up to you. -Jaffer

Here is the link of Sarah Silverman roasting Hugh Hefner...we also have the clip Jesus is Magic, but that has NOT been cleared for syndication, so I never tried to include the clip when I was posting. -Jaffer

http://www.evtv1.com/index.asp-itemnum-957

Joe Franklin

I believe there needs to be a source cited regarding the statement made here that Joe Franklin is considering suing Silverman over her joke in The Aristocrats movie. It's clear (having just watched the movie) that he seemed to take it in good humor because of the nature of the film. Can someone provide a link or other verification that such a lawsuit is actually being considered? If so, it also needs to be added to the Joe Franklin article since the identical paragraph appears there. 23skidoo 06:34, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I stand corrected. The problem was the citation for the New Yorker article was placed before the statement, therefore it didn't draw attention to itself. I moved it down and now it works. I'll make a similar change to the Franklin article. 23skidoo 06:38, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Personal Life-Reference to Breaking Up Kimmel's marriage?

She and Kimmel started up while he was still married. Why be coy about it?

i support that, i used to work in hollywood at a very popular restaurant, that jimmy kimmel and silverman used to frequent quite often, i recall a certain day when Mr. Kimmel's daughter had some choice words for Ms. Silverman, Which, due to the lack of noise at the time became public knowledge. The child definetly seemed coached, but she definetly seemed willing.

It was something along the lines of "why don;t you get your own man, he has a family a wife and he does'nt need you."

they left in quite a hurry, as the whole restaurant turned and realized exactly what had happened, it is indeed a truth, however as far as it being public domain to talk about, thats questionable, in the same note, this is an encyclopedia, and when writing a biographical piece, it is inate to the subject matter to not only paint a picture of this person's good qualitites and accomplishments, but the bad ones as well.

i think adding a refrence to the "controversial" beggining of this realationship is instrumental in painting character value and the quality of the person in question, therefore, i see it as a requirment, this is not the "only good news" encyclopedia....

we may as well strike Bill clinton's fillandering from all records,and any man or woman in the public eye who has done something "morally objectible" in my eye's if the both of them just came out and said, "yeah, i left my wife for her, or YEs, i took him from an unhappy situation" it would not be so controversial. it's the fact that they are both elusive and in turn the subject gains some what of a stigma.

When1eight=2zeros

Please read Wikipedia's policies on verifiability and original research. Thanks, —bbatsell ¿? 20:28, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Birthday

Was Sarah born on December 1/1970 or December 2/1970? Hotwine8 04:11, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Jonathan Silverman

So is she honestly not related to him?? They look exactly alike! SkaTroma 11:10, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Apparently not.... maybe like 400 years ago they had a common ancestor, who knows... Mad Jack 06:52, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Article makes no sense

Under career it says "Within three years"... within three years of what, being born? 82.69.28.55 15:29, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

• Agreed, I just came here to see if anybody was discussing it. I will go back through the history to see if any relevant line was removed. It almost reads like there should be a sentence before it. --Bridgecross 14:17, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Indeed in a very old version, the 'personal life' section was above the 'career' section, and that first line was a segue. There was a separate 'Early Life' section that made it all make sense. Somebody thought it was clumsy, removed the early life section and moved it all down. People should read before they edit. Will rewrite. --Bridgecross 14:33, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Removed these entries from the Personal Life section

Removed due to WP:LIVING

Sarah Silverman is a comedian who has joked about herself being raped (at least two well-circulated jokes about this - by a doctor, by a famous comedian ), about herself being extremely racist, about herself being slutty etc etc. We can't treat things she says from her standup routines as related to actual facts for the personal life section! It's inherently an unreliable source for that section. Not that these statements had any referenced sourcing anyway. Bwithh 17:19, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

i agree, as with my other comments, Silverman in person, is different from the "sarah" we see portrayed, i have had the luck to actually engage in a conversation with the woman, and she is nothing but down to earth and very humble. There is a very very very clear line between her on stage charisma and her real life mentality.we have to take into account this woman is coming off this way because she see's the amazing amount of comedy in a completly "no-qualms" woman. She has balls! and we as a public need to be able to discern her comedic partialities, and abstain from trying to paste them to her, because hse is able to tell us in such a serious manor.

a women looking you dead in the face very serious saying, "oh, i hate black people, and my boyfriend's penis is so small, i don't even care about getting him mad at me, and by the way i pooped my pants."

thats hard to lauh at at first, because of her delivery, but that is part of her character and her appeal/genius....i refrence it to mitch hedberg's some what, heroined-drawl, or steven wrights "im about to shot myself in the face with a 44. magnum, depressive moan"lewis black's crazy fingers, adam sandlers baby sound's....the list goes on.

just my opinion

When1eight=2zeros

Silverman with Jesus Magnets

Frankly, the only real reason why this picture was on the article in the first place was because its the only free image available. Now that we have a better free image it no longer has any relevance here. I don't see how Silverman pimping out some atheist website's merchandise is relevant to describing her controversies. She's made one or two comments about Christ, but from what I've seen her humor is far from focused on religion if anything at all.--CyberGhostface 02:50, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

And if you want another free picture of Sarah, I can easily get another one from flickr of her at a comedy show or something.--CyberGhostface 02:51, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

... "One or two comments about Christ"? Are you joking? Jesus is Magic, anyone? The image should be retained for the following reasons: (1) it is a good-quality image illustrating the subject matter of the article; (2) it is a free-use image, so the only reason not to include it is because it is inappropriate for this article, not because it is legally questionable; (3) although Jesus Dress-Up Magnets specifically are not Sarah's joke, they do, in fact, illustrate her general style of humor, which is provocative and does frequently reference social issues like religion; (4) having more images on this article makes it more aesthetically pleasing and helps break up large chunks of text, which makes it more accessible and appealing to readers. I welcome you to get more high-quality free-use images to add to this article (or at least consider adding), and if we get enough clearly better ones, we can indeed remove the "Magnets" one for space reasons (because having too many images is as bad as having not enough); but until then, I reallly don't see the harm it's doing. Having multiple different images of the article subject matter is a good thing, not a bad thing. The only reason to ever remove such an image is if it's inappropriate/irrelevant, useless/redundant, or fair-use, none of which seem to be the case here. -Silence 14:32, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Agree with Silence, adding pics breaks up a very text-heavy article. Could crop the picture to remove the Jesus magnets perhaps. WLU 15:03, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't see the need. The Magnets don't decrease the quality or informational value of the image; they increase it. -Silence 15:08, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

'Jesus is Magic' had very little to do with Jesus. She made a comment about Jesus two times, and one of those times was making more fun of the blacks than she was of Jesus. I'll try to find more free images of her.--CyberGhostface 17:31, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

The fact that she chose to name it "Jesus is Magic" despite a limited amount of Jesus-related content shows that she wanted to especially emphasize a a joke about Jesus; that, and the fact that she chose to be photographed with the magnets, is more than enough to show relevance. High-quality free-use images of major celebrities are hard to come by, and throwing an especially good one away on such a nitpick is just silly. -Silence 19:02, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

So if I were to find a high quality free image of her performing would that be alright?--CyberGhostface 19:09, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely it would be alright! That would be a great image to add to the "Career" section, for sure. Though certainly such an image and the Jesus-magnet image would not need to be mutually exclusive. -Silence 19:25, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

We all know you guys only like her because she blasphemes, and that's the only reason she's popular or successful. Gee. . .I wonder how that could be? I mean, it's not as though there's some relgio-ethnic group that runs the media and foists popular culture on us that actually goes directly against what most Americans believe. . . —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.163.0.41 (talk) 17:19, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Source?

Is there a source for "that she smokes marijuana four days out of the week"?(Trampton 06:45, 20 February 2007 (UTC)).

there's a small piece on it in high times [1] --Threatis 03:55, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Your actually taking "High Times" as a credible source, come on now.Skiracer712 (talk) 17:26, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Recent additions re: her show material

User:169.139.188.6 added homosexuality, lesbianism, rascism, queefs and cough syrup abuse as part of what her show deals with. I removed rascism since it was a duplicate (and misspelled), and I am wondering if we really need a huge list like this about what her show deals with... Whereizben 16:34, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Usually anything more than two examples turns into a kind of within-article listcruft, I'm always inclined to take it out. WLU 19:12, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I will do this, please let me know anyone if you disagree. Thanks! Whereizben 16:24, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I was the one who added the additional items to the list Cough syrup etc to the list of over a dozen topics. I thought the list was so extemely long that it just need to be taken a step further. I agree that the list probably was a great example of Listcruft and the article looks more professional with the deletions.

"Sarah Silverman's profile on Wikipedia: User:Alienlifeformz"

I was reading the article and came upon this. What does it have to do with the article? If it really is Sarah Silverman's Wikipedia profile, there is no mention of it anywhere. --Kimon^talk 22:06, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I've just undone the last edit that added that in until we can confirm it here. I'll be honest, I doubt that Sarah has the spare time to do minor cleanup and editing (though I'd certainly commend her if she did). Like you, I could find no confirmation or even a reason to suspect that this account belongs to her, though. —bbatsell ¿? ✍ 22:11, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I am not Sarah Silverman, just a fan of hers. Others have inquired about this too. I had her photo (along with many others') on my userpage, and under it I had written "Me Julie," in reference to the other comedian I had right next to her, Ali G. Apparently people did not understand the Ali lingo, and thought that the word "me" (ignoring "Julie") meant that I am Silverman herself. Sorry for the misunderstanding. I've removed her photo from my userpage. --Alienlifeformz 19:52, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Initial Photo

Does anyone else think that her skin in the photo above her bio has a bit of a greenish hue to it (compare to the standup picture further down)? I don't mind fixing it if some of you agree. Do we have to get anyone's permission to alter hue/gamma/etc. on "fair use" images? ZZYZX 08:25, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

She's a waitress?

I'm not a fan of hers, so is this a reference to one of her jokes? Or is she really also a waitress? Vorenus 00:41, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Error in Jesus is Magic section

"On November 11, 2005, Silverman's concert movie, Sarah Silverman: Jesus Is Magic was released in two thousand theatres."

Two thousand is just way too many to make sense here. Does anyone know the real figure?

Jpvinall 03:34, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I just lopped off that part of the sentence, as the real numbers (7 initial theaters, 57 total) were already in the paragraph. Tarc 03:06, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Paris Hilton Entry

This entry contains some pretty biased words. i assume the writer meant to say 'uncalled-for'; either way, the joke stands for itself, you don't need to go throwing adjectives around. Also, unless Paris says she was offended, you can't write that she was. And you describe the venue so publicly is repetitive:

Sarah Silverman also heavily mocked and offended Paris Hilton publicly at the 2007 MTV Movie Awards, with her typical and uncalled lack of poise: "In a couple of days, Paris Hilton is going to jail. [...] As a matter of fact, I heard that to make her feel more comfortable in prison, the guards are going to paint the bars to look like penises. I think it's wrong, too. I just worry that she's going to break her teeth on those things." Would it be ok to link the YouTube Video of that? I really do not know! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwkjeefUEes Can a admin please tell me?

I linked to the MTV videos, they have the correct copyright for sure. Colfer2 (talk) 16:04, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Silverman A Feminist Artist?

Should Silverman really be categorized as a "Feminist Artist"? She may be popular within some feminist and lesbian circles but I don't think she's anymore of a feminist than the typical female stand up comedian. In fact, she may be less of a "feminist" than most. She frequently makes light of issues like rape.

ReplicantRoy 01:44, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Andy Milonakis Show?

I think she was on the Andy Milonakis Show once, but it's not mentioned in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.183.97.121 (talk) 18:56, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Controversies

Is the section on controversial jokes really necessary? Everything Silverman has ever done has been about as "controversial" as the selected quotations. It just seems entirely... well... pointless. I'm going to delete it the day after next if nobody objects. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.21.203 (talk) 21:53, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it's a classic "controversy because she isn't super liberal and politically correct section." Such is Wikipedia. --Haizum μολὼν λαβέ 10:36, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I object to the removal of the section, because you've only made 5 edits to Wikipedia previously, I think removal of mass pieces of text should be left to users who have made previous contributions to this article (e.g not me!) and have worked on it for sometime p.s the whole "you've only made 5 edits thing" was not meant to be an insult or anything, no hard feelings. Ryan4314 12:25, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

That's a very silly objection. The point is a valid one. I'm editing the section. --J.Dayton 18:08, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't think my objection is silly, and it's rude for you to say that, I implied no offence and I do not think 71.232.21.203 took any. I have no objection to you editing this article, although I notice you also have not made any previous edits to this article.

I was merely trying to protect the interests of those who created this article, by registering an oppose vote against the hasty deletion of their content, before they had time to register their own vote in support or objection. In case you haven't noticed but this article is currently under protection, in times such as these we must be vigilant about the removal of content, especially from unregistered users and ensure that it is a community decision. Ryan4314 18:33, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I didn't mean to offend you. It simply is what it is: a silly objection. --J.Dayton 02:37, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Says you. Ryan4314 12:57, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually to the best of my knowledge, most of her political positions fall into the liberal side of things. Just because she isn't politically correct does not mean she is not liberal. 128.227.209.96 14:52, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

You're right. She's very liberal; but Sarah speaks in politically incorrect. Everything she says is "controversial." --J.Dayton 18:08, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Woah hang on, thought this discussion was about the removal of a "controversial jokes" section? Ryan4314 15:09, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Douche

I thought I'd report that the main page says "Sarah Kate Silverman is a douche. (born December 1, 1970)". I'm not going to change it because I grossly agree and it owuld be against my morals to change it.. but someone else might like to. 211.30.60.106 05:12, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks douche Angrymansr 15:48, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Silverman a LGBT rights activists ?

Should Silverman really be categorized as a "LGBT rights activists from the United States"? I thought she was a comedian... CubanOne (talk) 04:47, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

It's documented that she is pro-gay marriage. This of course leads to rumours of her being gay herself, but there is no direct evidence to support this. I don't know if any of that qualifies her as a LGBT activist. --24.2.60.26 (talk) 21:37, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

That's exactly my point, if being pro-gay marriage makes one a LGBT activist, then nearly half the population can also be categorized as activists. I really believe that category should be removed from her article.CubanOne (talk) 04:06, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

it has been. tomasz. 09:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Sarah Silverman's other condition

On The Sarah Silverman Program Season 1 DVD, during the "Not Without My Daughter" commentary, Sarah states that she has a "couple conditions that make me [Silverman] faint". She says she has really low blood pressure that she regulates with medication. During filming for the episode, she had run out of pills a few days earlier and neglected to take them afterwards, which resulted in her fainting for roughly 10-11 minutes or so.

Since the DVD has no subtitles, I can't simply spell it out here, but it sounds like "vasal nagel" or something similar. Does anyone know what she's referring to? Action22579 (talk) 04:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

"Vasal nagel" didn't turn up any google searches for me. Maybe you can run it by an online medical dictionary.--CyberGhostface (talk) 04:50, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasovagal Orbis 3 (talk) 01:05, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think the specific name of the drug is particulalrly relevant in this case. Why not just say she takes medication for a low blood pressure condition?--Beaker342 (talk) 04:52, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

She's f*cking Matt Damon

Isn't she?

no, that's a joke, like it says in the article. She is a comedian, after all. tomasz. 15:34, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Mocking Bigotry etc.

The intro seems to be claiming Sarah Silverman as a champion of the very subculture she seems to be ridiculing with such amusing aplomb. The references cited point to liberal (I hate that term but it's the only commonly-used term) writers staking claim to her, but she's never identified herself in that way (link to prove me wrong). Without any input from her, Occam's Razor would seem to indicate that she's laughing at liberals instead of with them, as all things being equal, which they seem to be, that is the simplest explanation. Or, perhaps, if she's been silent on the subject, simply making a straight statement about the nature of her act without making any particular claims about what her intent is, would be more responsbible. I would also think another evidence that she is not mocking the holders of the attitudes but the pious, hypocritical denunciators of those attitudes, is the fact that the latter is funny, fresh, and would propel a career, and the former would have been funny in about 1967. But that's just my subjective interpretation (like the opening statement). 70.91.235.10 (talk) 14:28, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

In the first cited source there's this:

DRE:[laughs] With the kind of jokes you make did you ever get the wrong kind of fans?

SS:Yeah, I have an old boyfriend who would call it mouth full of blood laughs. Laughing at the wrong thing like, “Yeah I hate chinks too.” [laughs]

which is pretty directly saying that the wrong way to interpret the jokes is that they are unironic racist jokes. Personally I've never heard anyone argue that she's mocking critics of racism if that's what you're saying. Right now we have one source with her saying that there is a wrong way to interpret her jokes (which is unironically), and we have two credible sources citing it as an example of satire, if you can find a source to support your view, please provide one. I don't really understand a lot of your arguments though: being a critic of anti-racism in the independent comedy scene probably would not propel a career, unironic racist comedy is not fresh, so I don't think Occam's Razor really applies, especially since this kind of satire is pretty prevalent right now. I feel that this is like arguing that Stephen Colbert is actually satirizing critics of "the right", rather than "the right" itself. Is that a correct comparison? --TM 02:21, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Find a reference and it could go in the article. Colfer2 (talk) 07:51, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

hahaha... you're really applying occam's razor to satire? by your "logic" there is actually no such thing as satire at all. --86.135.176.189 (talk) 22:44, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

She is an anti-gentile. No doubt about it. Some one call me anti semite please. PLACE THE ANTI SEMITE CARD! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.202.99.131 (talk) 22:33, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to play the idiot card instead: she's dating a catholic. Therefore you are an idiot. --86.135.176.189 (talk) 03:43, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Is she actually Jewish?

Her mother's name is "Beth Ann O'Hara." I'm curious if she's only Jewish on her father's side. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.100.82.38 (talk) 15:51, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

No, that's why it says "parents". Yeh, we know Judaism is matrilineal. No, that wouldn't have gone unnoticed in the acres and acres of press identifying her as Jewish. tomasz. 16:36, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

sourcing?

• http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7680076.stm — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 19:51, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Born December 1st or the 2nd?

A few years ago Wikipedia said she was born on December 2nd and now I see it says the 1st. Is that her real birthdate? I for the longest time called her "Sarah Spears" because I thought the had Britney's birthdate, but if she really was born on the 1st that name doesn't make sense anymore. -Kedem —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.169.242.72 (talk) 07:55, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Potentially racist "Subjects"

Given the list of "subjects" (shown below) in this article, I believe the inclusion of "Judaism" to be in poor taste, at the very least, and, potentially, racist, at the very worst.

For that matter, why are the middle three listed at all? They are part of her "shtick", not of her, personally. And, as long as we're on the subject, why wasn't "comedy" listed? Or "satire"?

The "subjects" needs to be edited, appropriately, and not simply be a list of "tags", as if this were a "blog".

You believe the inclusion of Judaism to be in poor taste? Her whole 'shtick,' as you say, is around Judaism, she shares an affinity with the Jewish people, and she, using Jewish standards, is defined as an ethnic Jew. What is wrong then with stating obvious facts? Even if she went to great lengths to hide her Judaism, it would still be appropriate to identify her as a Jew as it would to identify other people's ethnic groups. Perhaps because she makes fun of virtually every group but her fellow Jews, except perhaps for Jews that buy German products(lolz), in her 'shtick' makes you a little nervous and so you don't want people to know that somebody from that group is doing it? Don't know but a valid question from my point of view. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.55.174.192 (talk) 19:21, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Needs editing and TED flap added

Came here to look into exactly what happened back in Fed when she appeared at the TED (conference), which isn't listed (it's not listed in the main article about TED either). It took awhile to realize it was a wasted effort because of the disorganization of the page. In dire need of a chronological clean up. RoyBatty42 (talk) 00:30, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Is she actually Irish?

Her mother is also referred to Beth Ann Halpin (see article) and since both Halpin and O'Hara are Irish names, is Ms Silverman in fact Irish American? Millbanks (talk) 08:43, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Nope, she's about as Jewish as they come. --Mr. Pibb —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.237.160.217 (talk) 03:20, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Ethnically-speaking, she is definitely an Ashkenazi Jew. She may very well have some Irish blood, but I'm somewhat similar in that I have Polish last name, but nearly no Polish blood. Last names definitely aren't always an indicator, and she clearly identifies predominately as Jewish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.168.192.162 (talk) 03:57, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Which ones have the tree necks, and does Rachel Griffiths belong to the same sect? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.13.57.167 (talk) 01:45, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Domestic partner?

Was Alex Sulkin actually her domestic partner? It seems like they dated for eight months, no mention of living arrangements or anything. 66.108.6.53 (talk) 03:28, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Removed text

I removed the following text from "Personal life" section:

She has made reference to smoking marijuana in her act, and can be seen vaporizing marijuana in the movie Super High Me with Doug Benson.

In this section, this text looks like an allusion that she smokes dope. Therefore I deleted it per WP:BIO: what she does in her acts has no indication to her personal life. If she does smoke, please provide a direct reference, otherwise it is a piece of defaming WP:OR. Bar-abban (talk) 14:30, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

her memoir describes her pot smoking, and it was consciously released on april 20 (4/20). I think its safe to say she smokes pot, or wants everyone to think she smokes pot, which is the same thing, unless we have a transcript and video, all notarized, and witnessed by her personal attorney and a physician, that she smoked a joint of cannabis that was tested as positive for THC, and then had a blood test or urine test where she tested positive for the same.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 17:42, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Anyway, smoking pot is totally not interesting, encyclopedic or nything. Or we should mention she is known for using the bathroom, aswell. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Honorsteem (talk • contribs) 20:43, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Big S

She may well have been credited a few times as "Big S", but I could find only two instances, both from many years ago. This tidbit about her being credited as "Big S" was added over six years ago[2] and doesn't appear to have been questioned since, but to me it is clear that it is so rare that it hardly merits mention in the article, let alone in the second sentence of the lead sentence. 74.178.230.234 (talk) 18:24, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

"Religion (or lack thereof)"

The citations regarding her religious stance I've read indicate she considers herself "ethnically Jewish", meaning she doesn't practice the religion. Being "ethnically Jewish" does not make one an atheist, as she's been classified a few times on here. There's no reason to pigeonhole anyone into a particular demographic based on something you might infer from a statement they made, especially when that demographic classification is irrelevant, or nearly so, to the reason(s) for their celebrity. Wikipedia has enough problems with people making inferences they shouldn't. Othersider (talk) 06:25, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Since then, she's said "I can't imagine there's a god" on Bill Maher's show, Real Time. That doesn't really imply agnosticism - so I wonder why she's categorized as one? Atheism sounds accurate, as it conveys a clear lack of belief, which is atheist in the broader sense. She hasn't really said anything inferring agnosticism that I'm aware of... 98.168.192.162 (talk) 23:06, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

In a new interview with CNN she said "I'm agnostic, I don't know the answers". The article should be updated. http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/02/18/sarah.silverman.ted/index.html?hpt=C2 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.55.27.4 (talk) 19:02, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I always thought the last person who claimed that judaism was "an ethnicity" (i.e. a race) instead of cra religion was Adolf Hitler? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.153.254.251 (talk) 19:47, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

No, a lot of Jewish society feels the same way, if you're born to a Jewish mother, you're ethnically Jewish, no matter what your religious beliefs (or lack of). And it kind of makes sense too - for a lot of history, from the time of the Hebrews on, the more conservative branches of Judaism tried to keep Jewish society and the rest of society separate, for fear of losing their customs and culture if they were to "assimilate" fully into society, and part of this was encouraging Jews to marry other Jews. In fact, I think some of the more conservative branches don't even allow converts to the religion unless they're from a Jewish family. Alongside that, mixed religion marriages were just as controversial to society as a whole 100+ years ago as mixed race marriages were 60+ years ago, like a young Jewish guy who got beaten to death in the early 20th century for daring to date a Catholic girl. So with these pressures both from within Jewish society and from society as a whole, the Jewish population's probably kept a fair bit of Hebrew blood in them. Conversely, if someone who's ethnically very, oh, let's say Swedish, with no Jewish ancestry at all converts to the Jewish religion (the less conservative branches of Judaism allow that), they'll be considered religiously Jewish but ethnically not Jewish. I hope all that made sense! I also hope I got all my facts right, as I'm writing this purely from memory, but my main point is that many Jewish people also feel that "Jewish" is truly an ethnicity, so it's not antisemitic to think that, and the history of the Jewish people gives them a fairly good argument that they are a genuine ethnicity. Xmoogle (talk) 10:09, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

SarahSilvermanOnline

This was the first external link, but its a fans unofficial site: [3]. I dont think we usually put such sites as external links. if anyone disagrees, talk, and if someone can show its a notable fansite, i have no bias against adding it back.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 17:39, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

SSO is definitely a fan site, and SSO did not try to post itself as an external link. Despite the clear disclaimer on the SSO homepage, some readers continue to think it's Sarah's official site. Sarah posts on the internet in a variety of locations (including a Facebook page), none of which she maintains consistently, and none of which are maintained by professionals. She does consistently post to her official Twitter feed, so that is correctly included as an external link. GatorPB (talk) 13:50, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Early Life

Sarah is from Bedford, NH, not Manchester. Jaco66 (talk) 02:32, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Do you have a source that confirms that? DP76764 (Talk) 02:54, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

No, Manchester is right, according to Sarah's memoir. (Just added as source.)GatorPB (talk) 02:56, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

"Her comedic style/dark humor?"

I belive that that her humor style should be added to the article, ie: cringe humor, dark humor, bule comedy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.112.139.209 (talk) 21:32, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

I have talked with a few people on the NY comedy circuit who claim she doesn't (or at least didn't back then) even write her jokes. I don't think we need a section for her style without having an actual style noted in several sources. 75.134.26.34 (talk) 09:45, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Quotes

Having a quotes section is not useful structure for this article. She has had many quotations that have gotten repeated and reported on at various times. Some are stated elsewhere in the article. But none have stuck with her long enough to be identified with her, nor has any become a term that has entered general language. If you want to add a noteworthy quote, place it in the section that mentions the element the quote comes from (i.e., "cookie party," from The Sarah Silverman Program).GatorPB (talk) 14:35, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

"Controversies"

We read:

Silverman caused a brief controversy [...]

Silverman also caused a minor controversy [...]

Each of these starting a paragraph that's about as long as any in the article.

Do brief or minor controversies count for as much as achievements? Incidentally, she's not a priest but a comedian; unless they're particularly anodyne, comedians sometimes sail close to the edge, do they not? I'd tend to say: Although her career has already lasted over X years, Silverman has only triggered Y minor controversies... Tama1988 (talk) 07:02, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps tangential to the above; the article states she dealt with "controversial" topics in her act. It doesn't seem that way. In fact, the majority of her act consists of shit and piss. Literally, and she's been credited as "the undisputed queen of shit and piss", a title she's all too happy to acknowledge, the article (that now conveniently escapes memory) went on to state. Should this be mentioned? 82.181.201.82 (talk) 13:14, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

"BLACK NRA" needs some judicious editing. The last sentence (gun pointing at neck) looks more like a promotion of Treacher than a relevant detail. Also, what's being satired (Trayvon Martin case) should be stated.GatorPB (talk) 07:41, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

horrible picture

Was that picture the winner of the worst sarah silverman picture ever contest? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.91.29.44 (talk) 21:24, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Kyle Dunnigan and Professor Blastoff

Hey, I noticed someone added that Silverman's relationship with Kyle Dunnigan has ended and sourced it to the podcast Professor Blastoff on which Kyle Dunnigan is a co-host. I listened to the episode and although it seemed like he was serious I also think the possibility it was a joke shouldn't be discounted considering the source. This is the same show in which gay woman Tig Notaro jokes about "her man" and how she and Kyle are "banging", it's pretty much a running joke that the hosts make things up about their relationships. Does anyone know of a more reliable source than a comedy podcast? Not that sources on celebrities love lives are ever all that reliable, but I think another source would be preferable. --87.82.207.195 (talk) 13:24, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

TED Conference and Twitter Fight with Chris Anderson and Steve Case (former AOL CEO) Need to be added

I agree that the censorship by Chris Anderson of TED in February's conference needs to be added. There was a now-famous Twitter exchange between Chris Anderson, Steve Case, and Sarah. She discussed the incident briefly on Real Time with Bill Maher.

See the following for references:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/15/sarah-silverman-in-twitte_n_462769.html http://conferences.ted.com/TED2010/program/speakers.php http://www.monstersandcritics.com/smallscreen/news/article_1554366.php/Sarah-Silverman-recounts-TED-debacle-on-Real-Time-with-Bill-Maher

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Sarah Silverman/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Looks like a fairly complete treatment, and even provides references for most statements. Yksin 00:25, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 00:25, 24 February 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 15:45, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Middle name

Is there a definitive source for her middle name? While many sources do state it is "Kate", I've also seen it listed as "Bennett". All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 21:22, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Personal life

Is it really necessary for this article to list every man she has ever dated? I understand mentioning Jimmy Kimmel, they both talked about their relationship on the air and made jokes about it, and generally made a big thing over it. But I don't see how that applies to the next guy and the next guy and the guy after that. I realize that with celebrities, these things get reported, but it just seems kind of intrusive in an encyclopedia article. I have not removed the information, just raising the issue. Neutron (talk) 18:11, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

"Sorry it's a boy" and "Ten Tips"

A single man-blog and a Daily Mail source are not sufficient for a controversy section in a BLP. If you can find better sources, please do. Be aware also of edit warring before re-adding them, and please adhere to Bold, Revert, Discuss, thanks. Chaheel Riens (talk) 20:13, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

I agree, blogs are not reliable sources, per WP:BLOG. And the Daily Mail is widely considered an unreliable source. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:15, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Agreed, a blog is not (with rare exceptions that do not apply here) a reliable source for much of anything. An article in the Daily Mail is certainly not sufficient to show that something was "widely criticized". (Incidentally, requesting a list of unreliable sources is backwards. Most possible sources are not reliable (an email chain letter you got, something your sister said she heard, a voice that came to you in a dream, a notge passed to you in study hall, etc.). Those that are reliable will fit the criteria outlined at WP:IRS.) - SummerPhD (talk) 03:23, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Correct father's name?

This very likely was an error on the part of the media outlet, but for WP:BLP due diligence I'll note here that Zap2It's coverage of Silverman's mother's death says her father's name was John O'Hara: link 68.146.52.234 (talk) 14:45, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

John is Sarah's step-father. Steve Lux, Jr. (talk) 18:19, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Sarah Silverman. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080102084323/http://www.maximonline.com:80/slideshows/index.aspx?imgCollectId=94&slideId=1955 to http://www.maximonline.com/slideshows/index.aspx?imgCollectId=94&slideId=1955

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

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:34, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Agnostic vs. atheist

Yes, various sources of fairly dubious reliability say Silverman is an atheist. That said, one clearly reliable source (CNN) has Silverman saying, without equivocation, "Yes, I'm agnostic."[4] Lacking anything reliable to the contrary, I can't see much argument.

To clarify, atheism is not believing in gods. Agnosticism is not personally knowing or believing nothing is known about Criticizing religion indicates that someone dislikes at least some aspects of organized belief systems. Atheists, agnostics the devoutly religious and everyone in between can criticize religion. - SummerPhD^v2.0 03:28, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Calls for Military Coup against US Government

Please discuss here before removing this section. This is well sourced and was veritably tweeted by the person in question.Joe6Pack (talk) 17:03, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

We might consider removing this "This was in the wake of the violent [58]protests at the University of California in Berkeley over political activist and speaker Milo Yiannopoulos being scheduled to speak on campus.[59]" as it could be considered original research. Though factually correct in terms of time frames, it is not clear from the tweets that this is related to Berkely. Joe6Pack (talk) 17:25, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

I agree. It's a completely unrelated event. I removed that part of the section and added her response two days after her initial tweet. --Kbabej (talk) 21:35, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

We have one tweet and one source discussing it (though I'm sure there are piles of unreliable and/or right-wing sites pumping it). If that is our standard for inclusion, the Donald Trump article will be several hundred pages long... - SummerPhD^v2.0 22:40, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

There are two sources and a tweet as it stands. Fox News and Mediaite. There are pages of others if you google it, however. A few include The Washington Times, The Independent, and Entertainment Tonight. The list goes on. --Kbabej (talk) 23:29, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Removing BLP violation

I have removed BLP violations and they should not be reinstated without reliable sources. Sources such as interviews (primary sources) or sources that simply print out tweets are not reliable sources for BLPs. --I am One of Many (talk) 00:54, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Smoker

Please add this FACT to the article: Sarah Silverman smokes cigarettes. How do I know this? Because she has been photographed doing so. Does the Daily Mail make a habit of publishing fake/doctored photos? Proof, please. Provide one instance where they have done so.

Not defamatory because the proof is there and also because smoking tobacco is legal. Relevant because the article discusses her health problems, and yes smoking contributes to lots of health problems including suppressing the immune system, look it up.

And then there is the issue of some editors suppressing facts they'd rather not see, but that's a whole other discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiForAll (talk • contribs) 06:04, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

As explained on one of your IP talk pages and another article talk page:

1) There is no indication the issue is relevant.

2) The source is not reliable.

3) The source does [[WP:SYN|not say what you want it to say.

You are editing Wikipedia to spread the word about the dangers of smoking. You need to listen to what has been explained to you. - SummerPhD^v2.0 14:51, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

I agree with the above. I'll add that we also wouldn't add what type of chocolate she eats. Chocolate can ruin your teeth and make you fat. Obesity can contribute to health problems. That the English Wikipedia does not consider the Daily Mail a reliable source has been widely reported, but irrelevant in a sense. Come back with multiple mainstream sources linking her smoking to her health problems, then we can consider it. That's what you'd need, as editors we can't make that link. Doug Weller talk 15:01, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

I have multiple photos from the National Enquirer showing George Burns smoking cigars. Smoking can affect your sense of balance (look it up). I'll bet that's what caused him to fall in the shower, eventually leading to his tragic death at such a young age.

Incidentally, this file should definitely have a trigger warning. - SummerPhD^v2.0 15:10, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Okay so still waiting on some shred of proof that the Daily Mail publishes fake pics. In the absence of that, I'd say she smokes. Looks like some folks are a bit confused or maybe in denial about smoking, it's on a whole other level from eating chocolate; even if a few smokers do beat the odds longevity-wise their health will tend to be poor. It affects all aspects of health negatively. To say it's irrelevant, you might as well say her health problems don't matter either then don't mention them in the article. Also impressed with the amount of time some people spend ranting at me on my talk page, laughable while they are doing that I'll be looking after my health and doing things to improve myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiForAll (talk • contribs) 20:53, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

1) You cannot add anything to an article about a living person based on the Daily Mail. If you disagree, please take the issue to Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard.

2) The unreliable source does not say any of what you claim. Your claims are synthesis and are not acceptable on Wikipedia, especially in an article about a living person. If you disagree, please take this issue to the Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard also.

3) You seem to be having trouble hearing. You can improve yourself by reading the policies (linked above) that you are violating. - SummerPhD^v2.0 03:55, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Comment I'll point out something you missed since you are so hung up on the pictures in the Daily Mail, take a very careful look at the pictures. The cigarette in question was never even lit! Now maybe you can see why we require reliable sources of which the Daily Mail is clearly not. --I am One of Many (talk) 07:12, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

References

Regarding Michael Sheen.

Last night, I saw a re-run of an episode of the Conan TV show that featured Sarah Silverman. She spoke of Sheen as her "boyfriend" and "lover" and of their relationship as "on again, off again". The "on again, off again" comment is in the second clip: http://teamcoco.com/celebs/sarah-silverman?page=2 Thank you for your time, Wordreader (talk) 05:15, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Raped by a doctor

According to the New York Times (and other sources), “I was raped by a doctor, which is so bittersweet for a Jewish girl,” is not only her signature joke, but also "a breakthrough for this new generation of female comedians." http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/16/arts/television/female-comedians-are-confidently-breaking-taste-taboos.html

Is there any reason why it's not in the article? --Nbauman (talk) 16:28, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

WP:WEIGHT applies. Yeah, she's said this. She's said lots of things. Biographical material consists of basic facts (parents, where she was born, etc. and material about her that is discussed. There's also the question of whether she intends this to be a factual statement or if it has been altered in some way to be part of her act. For instance: There probably was an early band that Bryan Adams was a part of, but it likely wasn't in the "Summer of 69", when he was 9. Did James Blunt fall in love in a club in "1973"? Unlikely, he was born in 1974.

Similarly, Silverman has said that if she and her then boyfriend (a Christian) were to ever have a child, she would tell the child that she "is one of God's chosen people and Daddy thinks that Jesus is magic." It's a funny bit, but not likely.

Maybe she was raped. Maybe not. Maybe it was a doctor. Maybe not. We accept without question that it being "bittersweet" is fictional, so why aren't we questioning the rest? If independent reliable sources discuss the incident, we can source it and include it. Otherwise, we cannot exclude the possibility that the event is partially or entirely fictional. - SummerPhD^v2.0 20:28, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

SummerPhD^v2.0 - I think the important point that Nbauman was making is not so much that Silverman made a specific joke, but rather this part of the post: " ... also "a breakthrough for this new generation of female comedians." http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/16/arts/television/female-comedians-are-confidently-breaking-taste-taboos.html

Is there any reason why it's not in the article? --Nbauman (talk) 16:28, 22 August 2016 (UTC) "

That someone writing for The New York Times would attribute this recognition to Silverman would certainly be noteworthy. Thank you for your time, Wordreader (talk) 17:26, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Nationalism / Patriotism

Is Sarah Silverman a qualified authority on differentiating these two concepts? It seems to me that she has only her opinion on the two. As I mentioned in my edit Wikipedia itself says Patriotism and Nationalism have similar concepts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.196.218.110 (talk) 15:33, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Also she contradicts herself because she is quoted as saying "She later said that while she “can get behind the flag,”". If she can get behind the flag than what was the problem with her boyfriend flying the flag in the first place. Is that not patriotism?

Silverman is the undisputed authority of what the words mean to her. You might feel that nationalism and patriotism are the same thing. She does not. The fact that they are two different words, used in different contexts is a hint that many make a distinction.

My version of the text:

"Silverman expressed fears she felt years ago when she discovered her then-current boyfriend regularly flew an American flag, saying that nationalism -- which she differentiated from patriotism -- is innately terrifying for Jewish people."

Yours:

"Silverman expressed fears she felt years ago when she discovered her then-current boyfriend regularly flew an American flag, saying that it is innately terrifying for Jewish people, and in her view it represented nationalism and not patriotism."[5]

According to the source, Silverman did not say flying the flag is innately terrifying, as the your version says. Rather, she said that nationalism is innately terrifying for Jews: "...nationalism is innately terrifying for Jews." You seem to want to conflate nationalism and patriotism: "Clarify that it was her opinion, since Wikipedia itself says nationalism and patriotism share the same core concepts." Unfortunately, that clarification of her opinion distorts what the source -- Silverman -- says her opinion is. She says nationalism ("flags, marching, blind allegiance — these things tend to ring a bell for us"), is terrifying, as an "old bed buddy of racism and xenophobia". "The flag", however she "can get behind".

If this section is included at all (which is highly questionable), it needs to say what Silverman's opinion is, not some version that kinda-sorta reflects what you want her to have said.

As for whether or not this should be included, its addition here seems to be the result of looking for content. As the host of a weekly show, she presents a new topic each week. Why is this one included but not all of the others? - SummerPhD^v2.0 15:56, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Your way "saying that nationalism -- which she differentiated from patriotism" is loaded language. She contradicts herself by saying she can get behind the flag yet was offended by someone flying the flag. Recommend deleting anything I put in as it clearly does not meet your agenda. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.196.218.110 (talk) 16:12, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Also, "Silverman is the undisputed authority of what the words mean to her". So now we are allowed to determine what words mean to ourselves even if its incorrect? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.196.218.110 (talk) 16:16, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

People we quote are allowed to make seemingly self-contradictory statements. We are not permitted to misquote them, or to attempt to interpret those statements based on our own impressions and/or biases. General Ization ^Talk 16:26, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

If John Doe said, "Up is down" and we report it at all, we would say, "Doe said that up is down." We would not say, "Doe wrongly said that up is down."

Silverman referred to the blind allegiance of nationalism ("an extreme form of patriotism, especially marked by a feeling of superiority over other countries"). She did not say that flying the flag terrified her. She said nationalism is terrifying to her: "...nationalism is innately terrifying for Jews."

If you would like to spell out how horrible you feel she is and that you feel differentiation between something and an extreme form of it is a "contradiction", Wikipedia is not the place for it.

My "agenda" here is to improve the encyclopedia. IMO, sticking to what the sources actually say is important. The independent reliable source that you added says what Silverman said. It does not say: "but...but...but...flying the flag every day because: 'Merica is the patriotic duty of every 'Merican, so Silverman should get out". - SummerPhD^v2.0 16:55, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Off-topic chat

Wow, so you claim to be unbiased yet you just used 'Merica' which is an internet meme made to mock Southerners and "country folk" who you obviously feel are beneath you. At no time did I mock any group of people like you just did. Says volumes about you and that obviously are not an unbiased editor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.196.218.110 (talk) 17:14, 3 January 2018 (UTC) This article talk page is for discussing improvements to the article, not for general discussion. Please discuss content, not editors. Your guess as to where I got a term and what I meant by it are your guess. Like interpretations of Silverman's comments, we often know what words someone used and interpret them through the lenses of our own pasts. - SummerPhDv2.0 17:18, 3 January 2018 (UTC) Its obvious what your intentions are, it is no guess. Your bias is obvious. Wikipedia will only suffer as a reputable reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.196.218.110 (talk) 17:32, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Silverman introduces Bernie Sanders at an August 2015 campaign rally in Los Angeles

Please tell me, what is the name of the song in the end of the speech?87.249.198.59 (talk) 11:47, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

YouTube videos

Doug Weller Can you please explain why you restored the YouTube videos which are cited as WP:RS here? Isn't it being used as both WP:PROMO for the videos and as WP:PRIMARY (the video being a source for itself). You said in the edit summary:

It all depends, this is her official channel so far as I can tell.

I'm not sure what that means. If she owns the channel and writes about herself that's WP:SELFPUBLISH and WP:PRIMARY, isn't it?

@Binksternet: I believe we discussed that YouTube in not WP:RS. Care to comment? --David Tornheim (talk) 18:09, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Looks to me as if these are just links to videos rather than citations to sources. If the wish is to host external links then make it clear that's what is being done. Don't put the links into a table column marked "References". Binksternet (talk) 18:53, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

YouTube can be used as a reference in certain instances. If a TV station hosts a documentary on YouTube, that might be a reliable source. We also can use primary sources depending upon the context. Here they seem to be used as a source to show that the list is accurate. Do you want to discuss this at RSN because I'd be interested in other views. Doug Weller talk 19:14, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes. Let's discuss at WP:RS/N. I would like to get consensus from wider audience as to what to do about use of YouTube videos. I do agree that documentaries are okay as refs, as long as they are not WP:COPYVIO. But when it comes to the music stuff, all the videos I have seen are just the music videos themselves, and they are being very aggressively added back by multiple IP editors, which suggests to me these edits are attempts to keep those videos in the articles so that the owners of the video get profits off of views. Proving such COI might be difficult right now, but the behavior strongly suggests it to me.

Either though I raised the questions, it's fine with me if either of you make the post at WP:RS/N. Please tag me if you do, or give me notice here or at my talk page. --David Tornheim (talk) 14:44, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

FYI. I posted at WP:RS/N here: Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#YouTube_official_music_video_as_a_reference_for_that_video. --David Tornheim (talk) 23:37, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Marriage

In 2003 she married David Silverman 2A00:23EE:1198:454B:4D7B:625C:CDFE:D363 (talk) 00:03, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Do you have a reliable source for that? She was dating Jimmy Kimmel at the time. Cullen328 (talk) 00:07, 28 November 2022 (UTC)