Talk:Ice Cube

Del

In the early life section, when it mentions that Del Tha Funky Homosapien is Cube's cousin, it says that Del made music for Gorillaz. While this is true, is this really necessary? - User:Danielcool123 -- 23:51, 2 January 2019 (GMT)

Long history of anti-Semitism accusations

Should the 1.1 section really be it's own subsection? looks like it should be a normal paragraph along with the other stuff. And is it actually true that "Cube has long faced accusations of anti-semitism"? 90.255.176.123 (talk) 00:29, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

There is MASSIVE media attention right now to his use of anti-Semitic imagery on Twitter. There is no reason why the section on anti-Semitism should be reduced to two sentences given the plethora of articles on his troublesome behavior by the international press. Josemolero (talk) 08:13, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Clearly, there is plenty of information ranging back to the 1990s that show he "has long faced accusations of anti-semitism"? Did you read the subsection? There's too much information and plenty of coverage for it just to be a paragraph. Pennsylvania2 (talk) 19:23, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

This article is being vandalized and some admins should perhaps be called to oversee what is happening. There is massive international press on Ice Cube's anti-Semitism and the section on it - more than 'current events' - is continuously deleted. This needs dispute resolution and failing that arbitration because this will be a chronic editing war. Josemolero (talk) 04:53, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

To prevent an editing war, I have requested assistance to review this article. Josemolero (talk) 05:15, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

As my latest edit summary explains, the content is covered in the present edit, which merely omits the great details, details that exceed coverage of anything else in the article [diff]. Further, I have already explained in prior edit summaries that one may add such details in footnotes, and I myself have even done some of that for one. As another of my edit summaries explains, however much one thinks that this should be a central issue on Ice Cube's encyclopedic significance, it is not so far. Give it a few months, and maybe—maybe, not certainty—it will be, at which point it could merit its own subsection. But even then, justifying this would require also dedicated subsections on things "Sociopolitical views" and "Endorsements", too, not only "Accusations of anti-Semitism". That is why a dedicated section for only antisemitism is undue weight. The Wikipedia article is not the place to alert the public that Ice Cube, most importantly, is apparently anti-Semitic. — Occurring (talk) 11:05, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Once again, the accusations of anti-Semitism and support for Farrakhan go back multiple decades, as other editors have pointed out. This is not a mere 'recent event.' In any case, perhaps a compromise can be reached because this is way too polarized right now and consensus is thus not possible. Multiple editors apparently agree with me on this. Josemolero (talk) 11:17, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

You've alleged here, "This article is being vandalized"—apparently by me. But before I cleaned up the article, it was massively redundant, gratuitously detailed, and utterly disorganized, a burdensome mess to read (WP:TLDR). (See the before version.) Similar was the newly inserted section "Accusations of anti-Semitism"—offering gratuitous, unfolding details like an Ice Cube blog or a news report. Perhaps persons on the lookout for antisemitism would appreciate the visual warning flag effected by a dedicated subsection suggesting that Ice Cube, beyond all other interests, is antisemitic. But readers seeking a neutral review of the topic, Ice Cube, will be struck by the stark bias to highlight alleged antisemitism beyond all else. Although my edit covers the allegations that you introduced, your complaint is basically that the topic isn't highlighted to grab immediate attention, that the coverage isn't exceptionally detailed, and that we don't follow every rabbit hole to find only antisemitism.

In the first case you raised, lyrics from his 1991 song "No Vaseline", Cube had actually retorted N.W.A's repeatedly smearing Cube as a traitor for leaving the group over money complaints, while N.W.A portrayed themselves as true to each other and to their own black identity. In "No Vaseline", Cube alleges that N.W.A are the ones who had betrayed fellow blacks—themselves and him—via no less than a Jewish man, N.W.A's manager Jerry Heller who allegedly exploited them all financially. However silly I myself think such color identity and allegiance is, that is quite different from your depiction that Cube just came out the blue calling for the murder of the man merely since he was a Jew. Actually, as a member of N.W.A, Cube routinely called for the murder of blacks, too. In fact, N.W.A in the song "Alwayz into Somethin'" had depicted shooting the "bitch O'Shea", Cube's legal name. Meanwhile, both with N.W.A and while solo, Cube used the word nigga often as not even a generic term for men, but actually as a synonym for black men or perhaps even, at times, for just blacks. And that is probably why the allegations of antisemitism lacked acute force against Cube: he racially stereotyped blacks, too, and that was part of his own sociopolitical angle, employing commonplace stereotypes about virtually every group in the public eye. But, far from contextualizing that, your edit zeros in and pulls out only antisemitism as if only Jews cannot be criticized by Cube in his typical fashion.

To reinforce your case that Cube has been merely antisemitic, period, since at least the 1990s, you suggest that his support for Farrakhan shows antisemitism: "Since 1997, Cube has been supportive of anti-Semitic Minister Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam.[37][38][39]". But note #37 instead discusses how Cube's feud with rapper Common was resolved swiftly, amicably, and fruitfully: "The tension ended in coordination with Minister Louis Farrakhan, who created a gathering for Cube, Common, and others at the Nation Of Islam headquarters in Chicago in 1997" ["Ice Cube says beef with common was a 'dark moment' in his career", BET.com, 3 Feb 2020]. Since the source suggests nothing at all about Cube supporting Farrakhan via antisemitism, that is tendentious editing (WP:TE). I don't know what compromise you seek. I've covered all the allegations in an encyclopedic fashion in line with the topical coverage that the article as a whole offers. In fact, I even better sourced it and elaborated it by citing Billboard magazine. As I said, if you want to add extensive details, you may reasonably do it in footnotes. And in the coming months, maybe Ice Cube will become recognized as a raging antisemite—hating Jews generally—much as Harvey Weinstein became recognized a serial molester beyond all else. But right now, the outrage is that Cube endorsed Farrakhan and also endorsed conspiracy theories, especially the one that a couple of Jewish banking patriarchs along with three Christian bankers or monopolists and an occultist leader teamed up to play socioeconomic monopoly on the backs of colored men. And that's documented in the article now. The article isn't to be a public service announcement that the public is widely, rightfully outraged because Cube hates Jews. — Occurring (talk) 12:35, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Ice Cube's controversial history of anti-Semitism has been detailed by many publications - here is just one as an example: [[1]] - throughout the 1990s and since and has been elaborated by numerous published authors. In addition to his anti-Semitic lyrics, he has associated himself with Farrakhan for decades. It's clear you wish to minimize the significance of all of this history, including his recent use of blatantly anti-Semitic imagery. You apparently seem to think it's fine for him to associate himself with the Black Hebrew Israelites through the use of their imagery (implying the Jews are not real Jews) and to nitpick over every issue and attempt to make each and every individual example a matter for trial without taking into account the totality of the behavior for decades, and how it would be deemed utterly unacceptable and worthy of a section if done by anyone else. You have clearly attempted repeatedly to diminish the anti-Semitic behavior of Ice Cube. Apparently, you feel, contrary to what many published authors and some editors here believe, that he should get a free pass in the form of very minor footnotes that effectively diminishes all of this. Basically, you are arguing that the moral or ethical dimension of this continued conduct is irrelevant or mostly irrelevant and more important are other biographical or musical minutiae. This is a social and ethical dimension that is not amenable to mere logic, though it is obviously a calculated effort to hold Ice Cube to a different standard than others, and it is in my view not a standard that would be supported by Wikipedia's top editors. If I am wrong along with other editors who agree with me, I'd like to be shown so by them. Josemolero (talk) 13:22, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

I think that your comments urge a sociopolitical, activist agenda to punish Ice Cube as an antisemite. You indicate no specific content missing from the article. Highly personal speculations and allegations about my mindset and values, your contentions in sum are that I refuse to give the accusations of antisemitism center stage so that Ice Cube can be publicly censured for longstanding antisemitism. But the concept of proven antisemitism that you suggest is proven support of Farrakhan, as if antisemitism is Farrakhan's sole role. You say, "Ice Cube's controversial history of anti-Semitism has been detailed by many publications - here is just one as an example". You thus cite a Jewish activist group's entire report of roughly a dozen pages about Farrakhan, a report that mentions Ice Cube, as far as I can find, one time—page 13—but mentions him so unclearly there that I'm unsure what it's even alleging beyond some kind of agreement with a book that an alleged antisemite wrote. If you know what it's saying and it's relevant, you may add it—in context and in due weight via the Wikipedia article's layout and depth of analysis. Otherwise, as to Ice Cube's allegedly extensive, "controversial history of anti-Semitism" being, you assert, "elaborated by numerous published authors", you cite none. And as it is, I took the very content that you added and gave it an encyclopedic treatment, legitimizing it far more than the apparently sensationalist, paranoid fixation that I found.

Near closing, rather, you now approximate the correct stance: "Basically, you are arguing that the moral or ethical dimension of this continued conduct is irrelevant or mostly irrelevant and more important are other biographical or musical minutiae". I don't see that you've documented "continued conduct" of antisemitism, though, except continual liking of Farrakhan, which you and Jewish activists stereotype as antisemitism. Maybe I should add to the article that Jewish activists continually condemn him for supporting Farrakhan. Anyhow, the article is about Cube's encyclopedic significance in outline—not in minutiae. Perhaps the article could be rewritten for minutiae, but that would be on every subtopic. Meanwhile, your treatment didn't offer minutiae, but made strident, naked accusations and insinuations out of context. If Cube's public significance becomes primarily as an antisemite, I won't stop anyone from creating a subsection "Accusations of anti-Semitism" as the article's only subsection outside of music and film. In fact, I'll probably make it its own section, then. Otherwise, for now, minutiae would go in footnotes. But, please, stick to facts, rather than use tendentious editing to rouse the public against Ice Cube because he made made an album smearing nearly every racial group 30 years ago, has liked Farrakhan for 25 years, and a week ago endorsed the theory that two Jewish bankers, Lord Rothschild and Paul Warburg, teamed with three nonJews to take over the global economy. To assert a widespread social impact by Ice Cube's actions, cite it. In my view, Cube's main threat, 30 years old by now—and, to my relief, 25 years past his rap relevance—is his racism against simply whites and his paranoid mythology about black victimization. But none of that is mentioned at all in the article, since I cannot cite that, and this isn't the place to stitch mere opinions for a moral cause. Yet it's appropriate to add that Jewish activists have long opposed him. Otherwise, the article already explains his June 2020 actions and the outrage over alleged antisemitism that they caused. — Occurring (talk) 14:19, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Ice Cube has 5.3 million followers on Twitter and is effectively a social media influencer. Thus, to limit his cultural impact to music that was produced decades ago is to misunderstand his influence and his responsibility as both an artist and social activist. To suggest that the massive social and media reaction to his use of offensive symbols via social media should be mostly ignored is to effectively engage in censorship to mold his image in a way that would be more akin to public relations. Once again, this is not a standard that Wikipedia should represent. The tendentious editing is rather coming from the person repeatedly and gratuitously removing well-sourced material produced by multiple editors that is socially and culturally relevant. The censorship seems to be coming from one person. Josemolero (talk) 03:19, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

I would add that the removal of the section on anti-Semitism has encouraged some clutter. Now editors are forced to fill well-sourced material into parts that reduce the organizational flow, in my view. This is due to the rigid censorship by one editor. The point is, the censorship is ineffective, because one way or another the information will be added. If we stop the censorship, we can make a section where the article reads more clearly. Lesson: don't censor. Josemolero (talk) 04:22, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

I also encourage the talented editors to continue to fight the censorship. Keep up the good work. Josemolero (talk) 04:31, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Who is the "person repeatedly and gratuitously removing well-sourced material produced by multiple editors that is socially and culturally relevant"? And what is the material? I think you have not pointed to a piece of material I have omitted from the article. In fact, I added more and the most authoritative sources alleging antisemitism. Your stated concerns suggest mainly an activist agenda to stigmatize Ice Cube as a rabid, blind antisemite—hating Jews generally—so that you can combat some vague social ills that you attribute to antisemitism. Please, see Wikipedia guidelines concerning activism, WP:ACTIVIST. — Occurring (talk) 11:07, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

What you have contributed is to making a somewhat disjointed article whereby another editor has been forced to elaborate on Ice Cube's questionable and controversial conduct in a section that prevents a smooth timeline. In any case, the other editor has fixed the problem created by your attempt to censor to an extent. As I said, you cannot censor in an open-source platform as you attempt to do. Your removal of material has already been quickly altered by more than one editor in less than a week. That ought to shed some light on who is not upholding Wikipedia's standards. In any case, there are other sections here you can contribute to. I suggest you continue your diligent work with the minutiae of Ice Cube's music unrelated to his decades-long controversies regarding his apparent political extremism. You will simply get overruled by the consensus when you step out of bounds, as has been shown in the editing history of the main article. Josemolero (talk) 11:31, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Your endorsed edits don't realistically depict Cube's "political extremism", but instead merely focus on only antisemitism, trying to interpret the Nation of Islam as only and solely antisemitic. Cube's actual political extremism is far more extensive and elaborate, and I'm the only one actually making headway on depicting both that and the antisemitic allegations in a respectable, reliable, encyclopedic fashion, not in the manner of nearsighted, paranoid blogging, activist jabbering about merely antisemitism alone. – Occurring (talk) 12:50, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Just for the record, I assert that your accusations about my edits are downright delusional. Even the article's paragraph that you praise is nearly all my writing, with just a few touches of tendentious editing by the other editor to foist the NOI as solely a hate group and Cube's sociopolitical views as solely hatred of the Jewish diaspora since Cube attacked one Jewish man on one song, "No Vaseline", while, as the editor fails to mention, Cube simultaneously attacked and slurred four black men. — Occurring (talk) 14:55, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

I now apprehend what you think my "censorship": my thwarting antisemitic suspicions and allegations from segregating to a newly created subsection "Accusations of anti-Semitism", grabbing instant visual attention while intuiting everything possible as antisemism, within the section "Personal life & side ventures". What's thwarting that is, for just a start, that there are no subsections at all outside of the sections on music career and on film career. Adding subsections in the section "Personal life & side ventures" would call for sorting the entire section into subsections, like "Early life", "Religious views", "Sociopolitical views", "Family life", "Business ventures", and "Antisemitic allegations", and then balancing them via due weight. Contrary to your recentism and populist vigilance to any possibilities of antisemitism, Ice Cube's encyclopedic significance is not mainly antisemitism. Give it a few months, and if Ice Cube starts an antisemitic blog, gets indicted for a mass shooting of synagogue, and so on, then you'll get your way. Until then, in the scope of an encyclopedia article, not in a news article or a blog post, Ice Cube's other activities, influences, and viewpoints still outweigh his lyrical attack on one Jewish man in a 1991 song, allegedly telling his entourage to assault a rabbi for wearing a yarmulke in 2015, and, this very month, endorsing a popular conspiracy theory about six individuals, only two of whom are Jewish, and another conspiracy theory about the Israeli state, not about all persons of Jewish ancestry, a religious state that was mandated by one of those two Jewish bankers. However much those socioeconomic and sociopolitical views and facts outrage Jews and the Twitter crowd outraged by virtually everything, this is neither conclusively hatred of Jewish people generally nor Ice Cube's primary significance. Apparently, this helps explain your focus on stigmatizing Farrakhan and connecting Ice Cube to him, because you cannot find Ice Cube ever vilifying Jewish people generically. In any case, Wikipedia prioritizes historical overview, not today's popular preoccupation. And meanwhile, far from removing content and sources about antisemitism, I added the most authoritative content and sourcing of it. Merely, there is not enough actual antisemitism that anyone can substantiate to warrant the treatment here that you urge so that you can counteract his allegedly estimable social influence today, which itself you cannot substantiate. If he is that influential via Twitter, then just document the numerous persons being thus converted to antisemitism and then the article will speak for itself about the peril, no tendentious editing needed. – Occurring (talk) 17:00, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

I clarify that at this general time, even if within the section "Personal life & side ventures", multiple subsections were newly created—like "Early life", "Religious views", "Sociopolitical views", "Family life", "Business ventures", and "Antisemitic allegations"—I would likely object and cite WP:ONUS to call for justifying this. And that is because, until one or two editors' new efforts to prioritize and elaborate alleged antisemitism beyond all else in his "Personal life & side ventures", the entire section itself was cursory, a skim. The section has now grown in length by gaining more backstory, context, and Ice Cube's own statements in my effort to balance the significant minority viewpoint—matching mainly Jewish writers activist—that Ice Cube has been blindly, chronically, vociferously antisemitic, singularly attacking Jewish people generally, for some 30 years. That sheer falsehood is being foisted supposedly for a noble cause of counteracting Ice Cube's allegedly great but pernicious social influence via his June 2020 Twitter posts. Wikipedia is not the place for activism, let alone activism that molds opinions via false propaganda. And if some editors persist to rehash or ramify the same antisemitic allegations, then increase the factual accuracy—e.g., by putting in footnotes what the conspiracy theories actually allege—not by merely stitching personal affiliations, broad generalizations, and stigmatizing adjectives. — Occurring (talk) 03:30, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

As you acknowledge, you are struggling against multiple editors, and whereas you are the sole person continually deleting material to censor criticism of Cube. You are thus the minority view here. I'd edit some more but there's no point in simply having my edits undone by someone who openly generalizes about Jews on this Talk page. See below. Also, you are continually resorting to strawmen arguments to deflect away from the widespread condemnation of Cube's recent and past behavior. If you have elaborated more on the anti-Semitic accusations, it is largely because you have been compelled to do so by the comments on this page. Initially, you were simply removing material willy-nilly and defending actions that no serious publications or writers defend. Josemolero (talk) 06:21, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

I object to the blatant generalizations about Jews and accusations of "activism" for merely voicing concerns about Ice Cube's widely condemned conduct. In particular, this comment of yours seems sketchy:

However much those socioeconomic and sociopolitical views and facts outrage Jews and the Twitter crowd outraged by virtually everything, this is neither conclusively hatred of Jewish people generally nor Ice Cube's primary significance. Apparently, this helps explain your focus on stigmatizing Farrakhan and connecting Ice Cube to him, because you cannot find Ice Cube ever vilifying Jewish people generically.

And this:

I don't see that you've documented 'continued conduct' of antisemitism, though, except continual liking of Farrakhan, which you and Jewish activists stereotype as antisemitism. Maybe I should add to the article that Jewish activists continually condemn him for supporting Farrakhan.

These generalizations about Jews ought to raise questions regarding your ability to be objective and neutral. It seems the blatant bias is coming from the person accusing others of it. If you object to the accusations against Ice Cube from Jewish individuals, that's fine and perfectly legitimate. But to cast aspersions on Jews as a whole in this Talk page is uncalled for and should be remedied. Josemolero (talk) 04:12, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

I've been loathe to join this conversation but it's gotten to the point of fucking ridiculous imo. Having read both arguments on this page I have to concur with Occurring, so I think you're a little off with regards to them vs everyone else. You can paint it as "censorship" but it comes across more like a fundamentalist jew pushing their antisemitic agenda trying to right great wrongs at Wikipedia. Many people support Farrakhan, does that make them all a bunch of raging anti semites? I recommend attempting to argue/edit from a neutral perspective as your views on this appear to be clouded in possible personal beliefs which are not conducive to reaching a NPOV on the subject. Robvanvee 07:34, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

A compromise was seemingly reached whereby the anti-Semitic accusations were more fairly covered rather than omitted. Honestly, your claim that I sound like a "fundamentalist jew" (sic) simply for giving my take on providing more balanced coverage is unnecessary and simply reinforces the notion of toxicity within the platform. Again, a compromise was apparently reached here. Also, I question the assumption that "many people support Farrakhan" - but that's neither here nor there. The very purpose of a Talk page is to sort out these differences. Josemolero (talk) 06:33, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

The "compromise" was your dropping your prior shenanigans and, as I now see, starting milder ruses. All of your criticisms are about my edits. Your initially advocated content on accusations of antisemitism was a newly created, dedicated subsection, too detailed, tendentious, and misleading—stitching personal associations, broad generalizations, and stigmatizing adjectives—while citing merely Jewish newspapers and perhaps one Fox News article. A Jewish newspaper was cited to state that Ice Cube was sued in 2015 for allegedly ordering his entourage to assault a rabbi, who thought himself targeted for Jewish headwear. This, same Jewish newspaper article also quotes Ice Cube's 1991 song "No Vaseline" out of context to falsely make him appear to call for killing a man merely because he was Jewish.

Sparking this dispute, I summarized the content to heed the tone and depth of this encyclopedia article—not a news article or a blog post—add more authoritative sources for the same accusations of antisemitism, and integrate this into the preexisting content. You cried "vandalism", although the only content I plainly deleted, briefly, was the statement of the rabbi's lawsuit. Why? The rabbi is anonymous, and the Jewish newspaper sources only the American gossip tabloid TMZ. This might violate WP:BLP. But once I myself found the Daily Beast's senior editor Marlow Stern restating the 2015 lawsuit, I myself, citing this source, restored the mention to the Wikipedia article and soon quoted Stern's allegation of a "long, disturbing history of anti-Semitism". (Stern's only support, like the Jewish newspaper, is quoting the 1991 song "No Vaseline" out of context and citing the anonymous rabbi's 2015 lawsuit.)

Meanwhile, newly crying "censorship", no longer "vandalism", you apparently still demanded a subsection devoted to accusations of antisemitism. There has been no compromise toward your paranoid complaining and torturous deceptions here on the talkpage. You witnessed the editing process, whereby I tenaciously kept accurately reflecting the basic facts within as well as the sum balance of reliable published sources, nearly all of which I alone added, about the antisemitic accusations. Please, learn from and duplicate that, rather than repeat your talkpage shenanigans that only wasted editors' time. Anyhow, soon, I will either delete the rabbi's claim again or clarify that the rabbi is anonymous, that the source is a gossip tabloid, and that the lawsuit is mysterious, there seemingly no other published report of it [Grisar PJ, "We need to talk about Ice Cube's anti-Semitism allegations", Forward.com, 11 Jun 2020]. Further, I may characterize as mainly Jewish the view that Ice Cube is "a raging antisemite" [Grisar, etc.]. — Occurring (talk) 13:15, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 August 2020

Change "they had a half-sister murdered when Cube was 12" to "they had a half-sister who was murdered when Cube was 12". 92.237.96.195 (talk) 10:59, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

 Done Hope that looks better. Thanks. Robvanvee 11:05, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 November 2020

Ice Cube is regarded to be one of the most influential MC's of all time Iamabelyonas (talk) 21:32, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Could be mentioned if a major publication has described him as such. – Thjarkur (talk) 22:00, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Doom 3 Voice Acting

I can't find anything anywhere that confirms this - do we have a reference for this?