Talk:Oprah Winfrey/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents 1 Only black billionare? 2 Info 3 Nobel Peace prize ceremony 4 Name dispute 5 Criticism 6 From Oprah 7 My two cents 8 Comedy target section 9 More information for history 10 Picture 11 Roger Ebert 12 Recent revisions of this article 13 Oprah 14 Merge with Legends Weekend 15 Criticism section 16 Page protection 17 Rapist 18 Some believe 19 Rags to riches 20 World's only black billionaire by 2004? 21 Who should have been honored at the Legends Ball 22 Link to wrong Bob Greene? 23 huge pictures

Only black billionare?

Is that really true? I mean, aren't there any rich kings in in Afican countries or something? Would "African-American" be more correct?

Forbes international rich list has listed Oprah as the world's ONLY black billionaire in 2004, 2005, and 2006. They even had a special section for kings, queens, and dictators, and there were no black billionaires there either. Mabutu might have been a billionaire when he was alive, but now he is long gone.

Info

Some useful biographical info from here 1 may help flesh out the early career bit, looks like she was a reporter in '73, talk show host by early 80's —Hobart 13:15, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Nobel Peace prize ceremony

The article should mension that she hosted the nobel peace prize concert in 2004 with Tom Cruise. It's a piece of information that says alot about her personality.

WHAT?

Name dispute

no duh, everyone knows her name is orpah!!! In a - believe it or not - children's book I read that Oprah was supposed to be called Orpah (after the Biblical sister-in-law of Ruth), but there was a mistake in registring the birth and nobody bothered to change it back. Does anyone has sources to corrobate this claim, and where in the article should it go? JFW | T@lk 12:54, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I think that's a widely-spread urban myth. These interviews from the horse's mouth, so to speak, seem to back up the OP:

Funny, I heard her name was Harpo Marx's name backwards. I'm not sure of the credibility behind this, however. eagleboy978

http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/page/win0int-1

http://multirace.org/firstday/stamp81.

I actually read the same thing (Orpah) in a biography that I found in my high school library a few years ago. I would say that it's pretty credible.

I read that Oprah was supposed to be named Orpah, but her step mom didn't spell her name right on her birth certificate in a biography called Oprah the television star by steve otafinsk. Also I heard that she made Harpo Studios and she named it by spelling her name back wards from Oprah to Harpo.

Philip 18:01, 16 April 2006 (UTC) marked the sentence in the article with the DUBIOUS tag until this is resolved. And once this is resolved, the article Orpah should be updated to be consistent, since right now they disagree.

Oprah herself has said on her show that her name was meant to be Orpah.

On the June 2, 2006 repeat airing of her show (Never-Seen Oprah Outtakes), Oprah detailed the story of her first name. She explained that she was actually supposed to be named Orpah, from the Bible, on the recommendation of her aunt, but the midwife that delivered her transposed the r and p on the birth certificate. Oprah described the mistake as a good one. However, she recommended that no one name their child Oprah because it was very difficult growing up with it. Oprah has mentioned several times on her show and in various interviews that the first name of her production company, Harpo, is simply Oprah spelled backwards.

I see a lot of references to this: [1] Rklawton 21:15, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I have sourced both options, the non-mdwife one is ostensibly an interview with Oprah herself, so the June 2 show is somewhat disturbing because she is contradicting herself from 15 years before. -- Avi 15:21, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Criticism

I believe the article should include criticisms of Oprah Winfrey ..Currently the article seems be a glowing praise...Obviously the other side of the argument has to be included... Compare this format to other articles on say Bill O Reilly or the New York Times where one full page is devoted for critics views. The criticism uses the world "allegedly"...So it is NPOV. Thanks

If you can provide more than one critic's comments, from a more reliable source than The 700 Club, fine. Also, the quotes you added are a bit lengthy; a summary with a choice quote or two would probably be better. —tregoweth 18:21, Dec 26, 2004 (UTC)

Obviously the ex editor of the ladies home journal is a credible source...Please refer the book itself if you need. I am adding one quote instead of two. Thanks

Once I found that the author was a former Ladies' Home Journal editor, I added it to the article. Previously, there was no indication of who she was, so I had no idea if she should be taken seriously. —tregoweth 19:07, Dec 26, 2004 (UTC)

Can anyone confirm the edit made by 60.228.236.195 on 2 December 2005 regarding steroid use? I can find no such article online. 72.131.44.247 07:00, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

From Oprah

I've cut the following line out of Oprah. It might be relevant here, if someone can verify it. --Millsdavid 23:47, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Oprah Winfrey owns a Summer House in Lavalette, New Jersey. Lavalette is home to other celebrities like Joe Pesci and Nicholas Tuttoro.

My two cents

I dont think the article is at all overly praising of Oprah. I rather like the artical. I feel the syntax and flow might need some work, but I dont feel an overtly liberal bias is present in its presentation. Though, it is important to inculde critisim. But, the criticism seems overly harsh. Oprah never presented herself as anything more then a talk show, so it makes sence she has opinions and the shows follow her interests. And it just so happens her opions resonate with so many Americans, of various back grounds and points of view. The real critisim seems to be at her sucess and popularity. If there is a particular interest that is not represented... that may be because she knows her audience, and knows what they would wish to view. After all... she has contracted to extend her overall tenure to 25 years. And no, I dont watch Operah, but do beleive she is a modern American role modal, not only for women but for many who can take something she says and be inspirid about it. Drachenfyre 03:45, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Comedy target section

Why is this noteworthy? Comedians (especially skit shows like SNL, Chapelle, and madTV) go after damned near everyone, but you don't see an "[x person] has been the subject of humour skits on madTV" paragraph in every notable human being's Wikipedia article. I'm removing the paragraph. Shem^(talk) 05:43, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Hmmm... When I think of Oprah, I do remember special targeting by comedians--but mostly regarding her weight. It seems like the comics have moved on lately, though. So I suppose she's only remarkable as a "celebrity-topical" target, sort of the way tabloids ignore celebs unless there's something "juicy" to gossip about--like drug problems or weight gain--and especially if it is a recurring problem for the celeb. Another argument is that Oprah's influence and power make her a more obvious target. Ckamaeleon 23:36, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

More information for history

I recall watching a news segment about Winfrey's past, and she wore glasses that she didn't like, so she broke them just so her parents could buy her new ones. Just an example, but there is a lot more information that could be said about where she came from. And believe me, it's an interesting thing to know, since she has now become one of the most powerful women in the world. Gary King 00:43, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

Picture

This picture is awful - it looks like she's on crack or hasn't slept in days - either way we really need another picture even if it's outdated. freestylefrappe 23:50, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

• one where she isn't on crack likely doesn't exist
• Well the one good thing about the current photo it is copyright friendly because it is a screen capture. I don't think you can take stuff from Oprah.com due to their Terms and Conditions. It only allows for private usage of their material. The only way I can think of getting another copyright friendly image is by getting a scan of her magazine's covers or take another screen capture of her television show. --J. Nguyen 01:29, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

• • It's not clear to me why that wouldn't also be infringement. --Westendgirl 08:30, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Roger Ebert

How I gave Oprah her start Would someone better versed in Oprah's biography be able to work this into the article?

Recent revisions of this article

I just reworked the first two paragraphs of the section on Oprah's early life. I only reworded; I did not change any of the facts. It could probably still use a little bit of work. eagleboy978

Responding to the attention tag, I have extensively re-written this article. Enjoy! Caroline Sanford 06:29, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes it could use more work. I just changed "Oprah was impregnated" to "Oprah became pregnant". What was it? An alien abduction? antony

Oprah

This is a poorly written article, to be sure. However, there is an inaccuracy I wish to expose, too: The term "multi-tasking" has been around long before the 1990's and most certainly could not have been "coined" by Winfrey. This term has been used to describe the Unix and MULTICS operating systems since the early 1970's.

I wonder if celebrity pages belong in an encyclopedia at all. Articles such as this are dated, popish, and vanity serving to the subject.

If it's so poorly written, why don't you rewrite it? And I don't see the problem in having celebrity pages, this is a unique encyclopedia with topics on anything and everything.

Merge with Legends Weekend

Since Legends Weekend appears to have been a mere publicity non-event, since this publicity non-event seems such a minor branch of a subject (Winfrey) that it doesn't deserve its own article, since that article is worsened by its longwindedness and gushing tone, since the request for a greater reason for its importance has gone unanswered since September, and in view of what's written in Wikipedia: Deletion policy, I propose summarizing its substantive content (if any) in much fewer words, and merging this with Oprah Winfrey. -- Hoary 03:38, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Although you can't necessarily tell from the article, what's notable about the event was the gathering of all these notable African American women from different generations in one place. I agree that it can summed up in a few sentence in the main Oprah Winfrey article. Crunch 03:53, 29 January 2006 (UTC)babababab

Criticism section

someone added this: "2004: Harpo Inc. and Oprah were also criticised for organizing an expensive, highly insensitive search involving ex. US marines and amphibious vehicles for the body of Mr. Fernando B. in the Muslim area of Arugam Bay, Sri Lanka. Requests to assist locals were ignored, natives not consulted, self help groups shunned and their work underminded. A successful show about the Tsunami, Mr. Nate & Mr. Fernando at Arugam Bay raised compassion and huge sums in donations. Just one Million was channeled to the actual area, but through locally controversial Charities. Residents in the affected area still fail to see any actual benefits. "

I couldn't quite follow what this is about - perhaps it is valid and just needs to be written more clearly? Rmhermen 14:55, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Page protection

This page is an big target for vandals and must get vandalized about one every couple of hours or so. Should this page be protected somehow or is the problem not big enough to warrant protection?--Hypergeometric2F1[a,b,c,x] 21:09, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Rapist

Was her rapist ever punished for the crime ? Jay 11:58, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Some believe

This needs to be verified with instances or removed.

It has also been noted that the occasions on which various guest celebrities on her show "reach out" and perform charitable acts (such as performing for sick children) seem to nearly always coincide with a release of a project in which they have a prominent role (such as starring in a movie or releasing a music album). Some have said that this trivializes and degrades the various causes they help by turning them into vessels for marketing and have even suggested that it verges on exploitation, especially when children are involved.

What's the "Some believe" crap? Some believe the Earth is flat, but that doesn't mean they get space in Oprah's article, either. Rklawton 21:17, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Rags to riches

This article does not reflect the road between being a reporter to her current status of a producer, personality and owner. I think it is a very important part of her story.

World's only black billionaire by 2004?

"Perhaps the world's only black-women billionaire?"

Reason being, what about Michael Lee-Chin of Jamaica who lives in Canada. He's one of Canada's richest men and only but one of the successful Caribbean businessmen that have thrived in Canada. [2] CaribDigita 21:31, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Michael Lee-Chin is Blasian not black. While he has some black ancestry genetecists now know that Chinese is the genetic opposite of black so black ancestry is in effect cancelled out by Chinese ancestry. Indeed on the genetic levels, Caucasians are nothing more than Africans half way into becoming North East Asians. Thus a person who is half Chinese and part black is no more black on the genetic level than a white person.

Also Micheal Lee-Chin is a MAN. The article claims that she is the world's only black WOMEN billionare...there is a difference

For the past three years Forbes has listed her as the ONLY black billionaire MALE or FEMALE.

"Chinese is the genetic opposite of black, so black ancestry is in effect cancelled out by Chinese ancestry"? What kind of nonsense is that? The fact of the matter is, actually, it is generally thought that Caucasians are furthest removed from Africoids, with Mongoloids being intermediate along the evolutionary spectrum.

300px}right

Further, there is ample evidence that Africoid peoples were the original inhabitants of not only Southeast Asia, but China, as well. The anonymous, seemingly afrophobic poster would do well to investigate the differences between sinodont and sundadont Asians -- just Google, say, "sundadont Chinese." Here are some of the first entries that popped up.[3],[4][5] While there is no way of knowing to what extent there was intermarriage between the black Chinese and the "yellow" Chinese, to be sure there was some. And there definitely has been intermarriage between the "modern" sundadont Chinese and sinodont Chinese, north and south. "Booya!" my Chinese brutha. LMBAO. deeceevoice 16:03, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Didn't know who the hell Michael Lee-Chin was, so I googled him. Sho' looks like a brutha 2 me. At least as black as "Tigah, Tigah, Tigah, Tigah Woods, y'all." deeceevoice 16:15, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Remember to remain civil, deeceevoice. "Booya" and "LMBAO" are not acceptable means of communication here. Justforasecond 21:15, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

(:p) deeceevoice 21:44, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

All the genetic research points to Chinese being the genetic opposite of black and Caucasians being intermediate genetically between blacks and North East Asians. Caucasians are essentially just Africans who branched off before becoming Chinese, so a Chinese/black mix is no more African than most Europeans are.

As for the original people of South East Asia, they are NEGRITO not NEGROID. Although their skin is black, they are genetically very distinct from sub-saharan Africans and are in fact closer genetically to Caucasoids than to Negroids.

But South East Asians (who have Negrito blood) are very different from the Chinese and other North East Asians. The North East Asians are at the opposite end of the genetic spectrum from Africans and are the most different from Africans gentically.

The following genetic linkage tree shows that Africans and Chinese are genetic opposites. They are furthest apart on the tree [[6]]

Who should have been honored at the Legends Ball

Even though Many legends honred at Oprahs Ball didnt make it like Aretha, Rosa, and more these woman were not even on the ballot of being a legend EARTHA KITT, ETTA JAMES, RUTH BROWN, and many more there is alot of people OPRAH forgot about.

She can't invite everyone on the planet, give her a break.

I watched the Legends Ball and was moved. But, as my sister pointed out, "I wish she hadn't concentrated so heavily on women in entertainment." deeceevoice 15:50, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Link to wrong Bob Greene?

I'm fairly sure the link in the article is to the wrong Bob Greene. Bob Greene, the "award-winning columnist for the Chicago Tribune newspaper for 24 years," is not Bob Greene, BFA, MFA, fitness expert, probably best-known as Oprah's personal trainer and author of several best-selling books on diet and fitness, including two that he co-authored with Oprah. Perhaps this Bob Greene deserves his own Wikipedia article, and then the link can be changed to point to that article. 72.75.31.210 20:35, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

huge pictures

I noticed someone made the pictures really big, I dont know if it was an accident or meant to be. If someone sees that again, please fix it.