Talk:White power

I have removed the redirect page to white supremacy, as power is not the same as supremacy. This is completely ignorant and rather offensive. I therefore suggest that this page is removed until someone writes an article about the subject in question. Liamoliver (talk) 22:57, 17 March 2008 (UTC) wat —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.190.226.22 (talk) 09:56, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As I found a page on White Nationalism, I thought it best that White Power should redirect there. There is seemingly an edit conflict with a user about this. Liamoliver (talk) 11:42, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

see previous discussion here [1] it was agreed to merge white power to white supremacy Thisglad (talk) 09:36, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

These two titles are not the same. Why doesn't Black power redirect to Black supremacy? – Batreeq ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 05:45, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I think I've found the most accurate target. Jjjjjjdddddd (talk) 10:11, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Comment

Discussion is necessary over whether to keep this as a redirect and, if so, where to redirect. I note that the most common use of this term is as a slogan and we have a paragraph at white nationalism#United States that explains its origins. It is currently a redirect to white pride which is, as an article, well-developed with decent sourcing, but I find, actually, more sources discussing the "white power" slogan. Other options include writing an entirely new article, writing a new section in a current article, or simply keeping the status quo. Note the preliminary discussion on this matter which has already taken place at Talk:White_pride#White power. Broader input would be welcome. jps (talk) 13:49, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's my opinion from experience that both "white pride" and "white power" are not in and of themselves legitimate movements, but are employed by white separatists, white nationalists and their ilk as a "fig-leaf" which provides them with a certain appearance of legitimacy, and may have the effect of attracting to their movement people who would not otherwise think of themselves as white separatists or nationalists. In this way, it differs from "black pride", which was a separate movement from "black power", albeit one related in some ways by the conditions of the time. "Black pride" however, was legitimate in its own goals, and was not conceived as a means of providing cover for the "black power" movement, as is the case with "white pride" and "white power" in relation wot white supremacy and white nationalism, etc.
For these reasons, I think that one article is sufficient, and whether it's at "white pride" or "white power" is immaterial, since they serve the same purpose and are not truly separate in any way. Whichever one is not an article title should remain as a redirect to the one that is: thus the current situation should be maintained, and any additional material brought up through research can be added to the current article at White pride. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:29, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
redirect to white supremacy Edaham (talk) 18:57, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think the way the article is written, specifically at the beginning, could easily be seen as a bias compared to the other articles related to a race's pride (ie. Black pride, Asian pride, Hispanic pride, etc.) and should be considered rewritten. CaptainGummyBearz (talk) 01:17, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]