Talk:Oprah Winfrey

_{== ''''''{{Skip to talk}}'''''' {{Talk header|search=death}} ==
^{Superscript text}}

_{Subscript text}

Meditation talks with Deepak Chopra

A rather unknown facet of her is the yoga meditations she has been publishing this year 2013 alongside Deepak Chopra. I personally find she did a great job, but of course this is an encyclopaedia.. The wiki article could briefly mention this new facet of her life: https://chopracentermeditation.com/purchase https://chopracentermeditation.com/home

Edit request on 15 May 2013

Please fix the spelling of Oprah's name underneath her picture on the right column of the article. It currently reads "ORPah" instead of OPRah.

Thanks!

WHIMPEYD (talk) 00:41, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

 Not done: Check the reference attached to both instances of the word "Orpah" in the article - according to Oprah herself, her birth certificate reads "Orpah". The article is correct as written - she was born Orpah Winfrey. --ElHef (Meep?) 00:46, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Indeed, since I was just about to reply, and have this on my clipboard, from the reference, here it is in case it is hard to find:

“ Oprah Winfrey: I was born, as I said, in rural Mississippi in 1954. I was born at home. There were not a lot of educated people around and my name had been chosen from the Bible. My Aunt Ida had chosen the name, but nobody really knew how to spell it, so it went down as "Orpah" on my birth certificate, but people didn't know how to pronounce it, so they put the "P" before the "R" in every place else other than the birth certificate. On the birth certificate it is Orpah, but then it got translated to Oprah, so here we are. But that's great because Oprah spells Harpo backwards. I don't know what Orpah spells. ” — www.achievement.org, Oprah Winfrey Interview

Hope it helps. Begoon ^talk 00:55, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Pseudoscience

Oprah Winfrey promotes every pseudoscience. The articles should deal with it more thoroughly. To her estimated total audience of 100 million, many of whom uncritically accept every word the world's wealthiest celebrity says, she promotes the paranormal, psychic powers, new age spiritualism, conspiracy theories, quack celebrity diets, past life regression, angels, ghosts, alternative therapies like acupuncture and homeopathy, anti-vaccination, detoxification, vitamin megadosing, and virtually everything that will distract a human being from making useful progress and informed decisions in life.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.222.204.33 (talk • contribs) 14:19, July 9, 2013 (UTC)

While I share your opinion that much of this is bunk, to discuss it in this article we would need a reliable source discussing it as such in the context of it being on Winfrey's show. - SummerPhD (talk) 20:57, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

See User:Ret.Prof to discuss it in this article. 70.27.27.162 (talk) 22:21, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Alleged racism incident in Switzerland

It could be included that Oprah was in Zurich, Switzerland, when an assistant at an upscale handbag shop told her the purse she was looking at (worth over $35,000) was “too expensive” for her. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.60.168.87 (talk) 14:43, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

It's a bit much that this is being assumed to have been racism. I was bum-rushed out of a jewelry shop in Switzerland... Told I was wasting their time. I hadn't spoken to anyone in the shop, but they were hovering over me constantly, as If I were going to pull out a high-powered laser and cut through the 5cm thick plexiglas showcase. I'm white. Of course, I am also American, which is reason enough for them to be suspicious... Apparently. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.215.115.31 (talk) 17:55, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

The democrats are playing the race card again. Here is the source where the saleswoman explained herself: Original source: http://www.schweizer-illustrierte.ch/stars/schweiz/oprah-winfrey-rassismus-vorwurf-zuerich-handtaschen-verkaeuferin-interview and translated by Google: http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=de&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.schweizer-illustrierte.ch%2Fstars%2Fschweiz%2Foprah-winfrey-rassismus-vorwurf-zuerich-handtaschen-verkaeuferin-interview I am so sick of democrats playing the race card.

The Swiss newspaper interview with the Swiss saleswoman has not appeared anywhere in the U.S. media nor even been noticed that it has taken place. In her own interview with the U.S. media Mrs. Winfrey has accused the Swiss saleswoman of racism and has put words in the mouth of the saleswoman which are denied by the saleswoman herself in her own interview. If Mrs. Winfrey can't prove her accusations, she is a liar and is slandering the saleswoman. As a matter of fact, the Winfrey TV show is largely unknown in most of Europe; it is not broadcasted anywhere as the TV show is heavily americocentric and thus not of interest to European viewers. Also, the Swiss saleswoman is an Italian citizen and as such more familiar with speaking Italian, German and French than English. She was addressed in American English by Mrs. Winfrey. Mrs. Winfrey should, like all touritst, try to learn to communicate in the language of the country she visits and make herself familiar with the local customs and manners. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.247.112.124 (talk) 15:09, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

The BBC reported the sales associate as having said (lifting directly from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-23633768 here, bold is mine):

Speaking to US TV show Entertainment Tonight, she said: "I go into a store and I say to the woman, 'Excuse me, may I see the bag right above your head?' and she says to me, 'No. It's too expensive.'"

When Oprah insisted, the shop assistant allegedly replied: "No, no you don't want to see that one, you want to see this one because that one will cost too much. You will not be able to afford that."

Blatant racism to me, and I am not a Democrat. 85.53.130.166 (talk) 17:56, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

As stated before it would be helpful to learn a foreign language - if not to communicate perfectly, to learn about empathy in relation to a possible missunderstanding. The bag was behind glass and it probably made sense to look at the same model in a different material. For the going on I have big problems to believe the rather ridiculous, mentioned here "You will not be able to afford that" (that was added at the end of the interview phrase and seems to be an interpretation). No one will say this in a shop like this with customers from all around the world spending really big amounts and certainly not all of them dressed-up like her. (Oprah stated herself; “I washed my hair and I put on my Donna Karan skirt because I know the people in those stores can be very snooty pooty, so I thought let me dress so I don’t get turned away, and it happened anyway, so I guess I didn’t get dressed up enough,” she said.) No, sorry, it certainly isn't about dressing up, I'm astonished about such a - to my opinion - naive statement. As also mentioned here, giving statements such as about "the people in those stores" leaves an aftertaste for all service professionals.--Caumasee (talk) 11:43, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Controversy and POV issues

This article has a very American slant and a very positive slant toward Oprah. She is represented as having "emerged as an influential spiritual leader" and quite a lot of space is given over to this.

She has also created controversy and I think her visit to India should not be left out of the conversation, since it was seen as quite offensive there. From the BBC article, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-18967127:

Winfrey, 58, drew particular criticism for remarking on the Indian tradition of eating with one's hands. "I heard some Indian people eat with their hands still?" she is seen asking a Mumbai family she joins for dinner.

The middle class Indian family handled Oprah's comments quite gracefully at the dinner table, but it was widely condemned in India as implying that their lack of cutlery made them backward.

Later, she went into a modest family's 10' by 10' single room home and asked the children, “Don’t you feel it’s too cramped?”. She went on to ask questions that made the head of the household cry, making it clear throughout that she was quite surprised about the poverty they lived in. Oprah, in http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/oprah-winfrey-defends-criticism-indian-viewers/story?id=16846172: "When I stepped in the door I was thinking, 'OK, where is the house? Where's the rest of the house?' And then I realized I was already in it," Winfrey says in the episode.

This article does not objectively represent its subject. 85.53.130.166 (talk) 18:39, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

There is virtually no criticism of Ms. Winfrey, when she isn't quite as popular as it may seem. Her "mad cow" and other incidents should be included. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.69.9.224 (talk) 22:17, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

ridiculous

One of the most ridiculous inclusions in the article is "She is also, according to some assessments, the most influential woman in the world." Dead wrong! In the U.S. she maybe is, and nowhere else in the world for sure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.82.249.76 (talk) 20:57, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

"most influential"

FORBES magazine states that German Chancellor Angela Merkel is the world's most influential woman. FORBES is a trustworthy source for Wikipedia, gossip press is not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.131.78.216 (talk) 10:56, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm assuming you are referring to the mention in the lead. This is merely a summary of the later section Oprah_Winfrey#Rankings, which is well sourced. Maybe a tweak to the wording there? - SummerPhD (talk) 14:14, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Forbes says merkel is the most POWERFUL woman in the world. Oprah is the most INFLUENTIAL. Power means nothing unless you can turn it into influence, and oprah proved that she could by electing the first black president.65.92.198.135 (talk) 05:20, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Different sources will have different opinions about who is the most "powerful", "influential", etc. They are opinions, not facts. As such we report what reliable sources say as opinions of the sources: "According to an article in the New York Times, Jane Smith is the most powerful person on the planet.<ref>Doe, John. April 1, 2075, New York Times.<ref>" NOT: "Jane Smith is the most powerful person on the planet.<ref>Doe, John. April 1, 2075, New York Times.<ref>". - SummerPhD (talk) 17:19, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Most influential possibly within the U.S. The world includes the area outside of the U.S., too. English is not only read and spoken in the U.S. but in England, Wales, Scotland, Australia and Canada, for example. She is not influential outside of the U.S., especially not in countries where they have their own language. This article is clearly tailored by Americans for American readers only which is no NPOV. Much of it reads like a PR campaign anyway.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.157.54.175 (talk • contribs) 08:13, October 29, 2013 (UTC)

Do you have suggestions as to what might be done to improve the article? - SummerPhD (talk) 13:29, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

saying she's only influential in the U.S. is a huge understatement. Here in Canada she's extremely influential too, not to mention we have sources even documenting her influence in the Arab world. But that's not the point. Even if she were only influential in her house, she could still be the most influential in the world, if everyone else is only influences their bedroom. The article does not even say she influenced the world (though clearly she has through her impact on American culture and politics) it says she's the most influential woman in the world, meaning no other living woman has had more impact. No one is influential in every country...just influencing one country is enough to make you the most influential woman in the world, particularly if that country is/was as influential as America. And calling someone influential is not praising them. Hitler and Bin Laden were both hugely influential when you examine their impact on history, but that influence is considered evil. Oprah's biggest critics are the first to acknowledge her influence but argue that her new age spiritual influence is sending millions to hell or her role in electing Obama has destroyed the world. So calling someone influential, especially when so well sourced, is not POV, it's extremely neutral. Catsoccer (talk) 14:20, 30 October 2013 (UTC)