Jump to content

Talk:Azealia Banks

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Robofish (talk | contribs) at 19:20, 13 March 2021 (→‎Controversy section - too much detail?: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Racist

10th of May 2016 Azealia Banks verbally abuses Zain Malik form One Direction. She firstly accuses him of copying her music video to which Zain denies, however it doesn't end there she spews racist comments aimed at his background of Pakistani heritage. Calling him and his mother names to the effect of "sand monkey" "immigrant" etc. When an English radio station takes Zain's side she goes off and lashes at the English government claiming they should offer free dental healthcare to its citizens as they all have terrible teeth Her slurs don't end there she claims to be the only number 1 female artist left in America. Rihanna and Gaga are over as she says! Lets see shall we.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.47.96.216 (talk) 11:11, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]


I'd like to suggest that in the description of her latest controversy*, the phrase "racist tirade" be put in quotation marks, since it is the exact phrase used by the headline of the Daily Mail article currently being used as a source.

  • "In December 2016, Banks was criticized for posting a video on Instagram, where she showed the aftermath of three years worth of sacrificing chickens for witchcraft. Banks responded to the criticism by launching a racist tirade on social media.[90]" 73.164.8.201 (talk) 21:52, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Twitter suspension

As with every previous Twitter spat, detailed exchanges are not encyclopaedic (see WP:NOTNEWS). The controversy should mention that she was suspended from Twitter due to the Zayn Malik issue. Some detail can be added to that, as for instance the cancellation of her appearance at a London festival. On a more general note, social media spats/conflicts and musings tend to generate a lot of tabloid fodder. It currently is the bugbear of online reporting with sites such as tmz.com that gets picked up by some of cheap dailies. As the previous instances concerning Ms. Banks have shown she is very apt at this type of publicity drive. And I'm sure she will wear the Twitter suspension as a badge of honour. But all that needs to be put into perspective and cannot be the overriding feature of this article. For an example of a high-profile singer and public persona see for instance Madonna (entertainer) Karst (talk) 07:14, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Has Twitter given any reasons for the suspension? The "Zayn Malik issue" also led to her insulting a teenage actress's femininity online; I can't help but think the Skai Jackson thing was as much part of the suspension as well (it certainly got as much news play here in the US in relation to the suspension as the Malik issue, which of course also got her kicked out of the festival she was supposed to be in)—I understand not going into exacting detail, but certainly it could merit a passing mention in that paragraph? Daniel Case (talk) 07:16, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Twitter is unlikely to give any reason as there are legal issues around disclosure. The Skai Jackson page on wikipedia does not make reference to the incident. And I would be hesitant to include it as she is a minor. If there are reliable sources that mention it then one sentence on it would be appropriate, yes. However, I do not think we would want to overstate it. Karst (talk) 13:26, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Not a problem, then. (Although I am really wondering if we should have a separate Azealia Banks on social media article, or at least consider it, the way things are going). Daniel Case (talk) 03:02, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well, this might be the end of it, for all we know. And there would be the danger of it becoming running commentary on social media issues on Azealia. Karst (talk) 09:17, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Azealia Banks. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:44, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Situation of career today

FLOP, VERY FLOP — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonardekalvyn (talkcontribs) 00:14, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

On the homepage, when searching for her the subcaption reads "American Flop rapper and singer". I assume this is vandalism unless this has some different meaning that I'm not aware of - is there some way to fix this?

Thanks! 68.119.153.181 (talk) 00:51, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding vandalism

Why is it that every time I link this page, it says "American Flop rapper and singer" beneath her name in grey? How do I fix it? --Aleccat 13:27, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 20 February 2017

ADD "LUNICE" AS A "ASSOCIATED ACT". 2602:306:C518:BC0:A537:78A4:99E0:8861 (talk) 01:14, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 20 February 2017

Add Lunice as an associated act Benstevens (talk) 01:16, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done — Train2104 (t • c) 03:10, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sexual assault/rape

Starting a section to discuss if and how to add the recent news about Banks' sexual assault/rape. (Example sources: [1] [2]) EvergreenFir (talk) 22:38, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Controversies addition: Animal sacrifices

Added information regarding her animal sacrifices. It's definitely something relevant for the controversies section, and was in fact admitted to by Banks herself. Jparenti (talk) 12:23, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Failed Verification in Controversies, not really failed?

Hey I wanted to ask about that claimed failed verification. There is a reference like this:

"I would really love to see someone bomb the shit out of this place Lmfao. Give y'all white asses something to fucking cry about. Ugly blonde pigs you swedes are."[1][failed verification]

But when I check the article there is actually a screenshot of her saying the things that were claimed. Why is this marked as a failed verification, is that an error?

Joel Busch (talk) 15:07, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

airline incident doesn't make sense, not supported

Banks made a wordplay of the Irish airline Aer Lingus, calling it "Air Cunnilingus", and had to leave the plane due to an altercation with an air stewardess in January 2019, after calling her "fucking ugly" on Instagram

This sentence is very confusing and much of it is not supported by the citation. It reads like she was kicked off a plane for her instagram posts, theres no mention of this in the article, nor of "air cunniliguns". Its also unclear if the two mentions of "January 2019" are separate incidents.

--Thesowismine (talk) 05:27, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Someone please update the end of the "Personal Life" section

The "news" is that Azealia Banks has been publicly struggling with severe mental illness and expressing political anger for several years. And now this page is locked on "Azealia Banks announced that she intends to end her own life" as if this is still her plan, 3 months on. Pretty needlessly morbid at this point in time. I suppose everyone who is interested in Azealia Banks is feeling pretty morbid these days.203.211.98.50 (talk) 00:45, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 18 January 2021

Under "Controversies," in paragraph beginning "In October 18," regarding feud with Lana Del Rey, change the sentence, "Banks clapped back by calling her a 'cokehead Oxycodone turnaround', and . . . " to "Banks responded by calling her . . . " I suggest this because "clapped back" feels like editorializing, biased language, and really not befitting an encyclopedia, anyway . . . "Clapped back" is Buzzfeed article language.

The source linked at the end of that sentence says that particular quote of Banks came from an Instagram post, anyway, not Twitter like the paragraph here on Wikipedia suggests (source: " . . . a topic she also raised in a separate rant on her Instagram Stories, describing Del Rey's performances as consisting of moves like a "cokehead Oxycodone turnaround") . . . and the quote in the source doesn't immediately link it to this specific back-and-forth, etc . . . that whole part of the sentence including that insult seems messy, and in my opinion, maybe it isn't necessary to include that particular insult at all (there are plenty elsewhere in the paragraph if people really want them). In any case, the "clapped back" change to "responded" is my primary suggestion . . . Bhakti84 (talk) 09:28, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Partly done: "Banks clapped back by calling her..." --> "Banks responded by calling Del Rey...". Jack Frost (talk) 09:44, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy section - too much detail?

Having just come across this article, I'm concerned by the length of the 'controversy' section, and tagged it with {{Overly detailed}}. Clearly, this is a biography of a controversial figure. But do we really need to include every controversial or offensive thing she's posted on social media, or list every person she's had a 'feud' with? The level of detail here seems completely excessive for an encyclopaedic biography. While I appreciate that it is sourced, so I'm not disputing the accuracy of the content, I have to ask 'do Wikipedia readers really need this'? This, for instance:

Banks has had feuds with people including Pabllo Vittar, Grimes, Elon Musk,[114] Remy Ma,[115] Cardi B, Kim Kardashian, Kanye West, Lorde, Lana Del Rey, Marina Diamandis, Charli XCX, Lady Gaga, T.I., Iggy Azalea, Action Bronson, Lil' Kim, Skai Jackson, Rita Ora, Kendrick Lamar, Pharrell Williams, Erykah Badu, Kreayshawn, Rihanna, ASAP Rocky, Baauer, Nicki Minaj, Sia, Dominique Young Unique, Jim Jones, Beyoncé, Angel Haze, Lily Allen, RZA, SZA, Rico Nasty, Lupe Fiasco, Doja Cat, Eminem, RuPaul, Perez Hilton, Nick Cannon, Diplo, Shea Couleé, Funkmaster Flex, The Stone Roses, K. Michelle, Shystie, Amanda Brunker, Troy Carter, Cupcakke, Mariah Lynn, DC Young Fly,[116] Disclosure, Lizzo, Kim Petras, Slayyyter, Adrian Grenier, Busta Rhymes, Dave Chappelle, Anthony Fantano and Wendy Williams, among others.

What's the point of that list? Wouldn't it be more effectively replaced by just something like 'Banks has had feuds with a large number of other musicians and public figures'? Robofish (talk) 19:20, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ "Amerikansk rapper rasende på Sverige: – Ville elsket å se noen bombe dritten ut av dette stedet". www.vg.no.