Talk:Sarah Silverman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] See comments
	This article is supported by the Arts and Entertainment work group.

Contents 1 Older discussion 2 Gender Questioned 3 Use of "perfect" 4 Sarah Silverman Video Clip 5 Joe Franklin 6 Personal Life-Reference to Breaking Up Kimmel's marriage? 7 Birthday 8 Jonathan Silverman 9 Article makes no sense 10 Removed these entries from the Personal Life section 11 Silverman with Jesus Magnets 12 Source? 13 Recent additions re: her show material 14 "Sarah Silverman's profile on Wikipedia: User:Alienlifeformz" 15 Initial Photo

[edit] Older discussion

There seems to be a controversy about whether or not Silverman made the jury duty joke on Conan. Not only did I view the episode in question in July 2001, but I point those in doubt to the following sites which quote the joke (including a transcript from [Politically Incorrect] where Silverman and several other guests quotes the exact same joke.) The links at the bottom of the page are from another episode that didn't ignite the same controversy, but used a different joke. Hopefully, this will put the issue to rest.

Links: Politically Incorrect Transcript A second PI transcript Another entertainment article that proves the joke IMDB news-last item --Uberchouette 15:58, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

In a Fresh Air interview November 9, 2005 she says that she said it on Conan and was asked to repeat it on Politicaly Incorrect among other places. She said she has been asked to repeat it so many times while explaining the controversy that she has dropped it from her act. --Gbleem 22:06, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

link to transcript —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.132.127.199 (talk • contribs).

[edit] Gender Questioned

Comedian not comedienne. i mean, c'mon. this is an english article and we ought to be using gender-neutral language whenever reasonably possible

In formal writing (ie encyclopedic articles) it is usually suggested to avoid gender specific terms. --Fallout boy 10:24, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

I see this mentioned often on Wikipedia, but I don't know where it's coming from. Is that like a style rule in Britain or Canada? I don't quite understand why even referencing gender in the name of a profession is offensive. I don't even find "male nurse" offensive even though the term is clearly pointing out that it's "weird" for a man to be a nurse. Anyway I've noticed in many Wikipedia articles the word "actress" is almost verboten, but there are awards for "Best Actress" and rarely have I heard complaints about that. Many actresses will certainly complain about all kinds of gender-issues. Also why does this "unisexing" always end up being just dumping the feminine form? Maybe both men and women should be called actress, comedienne, etc. Just raving, sorry. (I'm male so maybe I don't get it)--T. Anthony 10:56, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Usually the male form the first term created and used, and then somewhere along a female version commes along.--Fallout boy 03:44, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Regardless of what word is used to refer to her profession, the fact remains that many, many people desperately want to have sex with this woman.

[edit] Use of "perfect"

The word "perfect" is used several times in this article, and I'm not sure it's the most NPOV word to use. I figured I'd let her fans change it or defend it before I changed it though. 68.97.36.194 07:37, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sarah Silverman Video Clip

Folks,

I cannot post the video clip of Sarah Silverman below because my family owns evtv1.com and there is a :15 commercial in front of the clip. I have spoken with several long-time editors and they suggested I post the appropriate video clips on the article talk pages for the editors to see if they wish to post them in external links.

Eureka Lot has sought fit to revert many of my past edits and I actually understand and have stopped adding video clips completely. It is a bit of a conflict for me to add, but you who work on this article can jointly decide. I will say that a lot of people clicked on the Sarah Silverman video clip of roasting Hugh Hefner when it was up (about 250 people in a week)

All of these clips are 100% legal from a copyright status. You have to decide if the :15 commercial is too obtrusive or if the clips are worth the "pain" of the commercial. I leave it up to you. -Jaffer

Here is the link of Sarah Silverman roasting Hugh Hefner...we also have the clip Jesus is Magic, but that has NOT been cleared for syndication, so I never tried to include the clip when I was posting. -Jaffer

http://www.evtv1.com/index.asp-itemnum-957

[edit] Joe Franklin

I believe there needs to be a source cited regarding the statement made here that Joe Franklin is considering suing Silverman over her joke in The Aristocrats movie. It's clear (having just watched the movie) that he seemed to take it in good humor because of the nature of the film. Can someone provide a link or other verification that such a lawsuit is actually being considered? If so, it also needs to be added to the Joe Franklin article since the identical paragraph appears there. 23skidoo 06:34, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I stand corrected. The problem was the citation for the New Yorker article was placed before the statement, therefore it didn't draw attention to itself. I moved it down and now it works. I'll make a similar change to the Franklin article. 23skidoo 06:38, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Personal Life-Reference to Breaking Up Kimmel's marriage?

She and Kimmel started up while he was still married. Why be coy about it?

i support that, i used to work in hollywood at a very popular restaurant, that jimmy kimmel and silverman used to frequent quite often, i recall a certain day when Mr. Kimmel's daughter had some choice words for Ms. Silverman, Which, due to the lack of noise at the time became public knowledge. The child definetly seemed coached, but she definetly seemed willing.

It was something along the lines of "why don;t you get your own man, he has a family a wife and he does'nt need you."

they left in quite a hurry, as the whole restaurant turned and realized exactly what had happened, it is indeed a truth, however as far as it being public domain to talk about, thats questionable, in the same note, this is an encyclopedia, and when writing a biographical piece, it is inate to the subject matter to not only paint a picture of this person's good qualitites and accomplishments, but the bad ones as well.

i think adding a refrence to the "controversial" beggining of this realationship is instrumental in painting character value and the quality of the person in question, therefore, i see it as a requirment, this is not the "only good news" encyclopedia....

we may as well strike Bill clinton's fillandering from all records,and any man or woman in the public eye who has done something "morally objectible" in my eye's if the both of them just came out and said, "yeah, i left my wife for her, or YEs, i took him from an unhappy situation" it would not be so controversial. it's the fact that they are both elusive and in turn the subject gains some what of a stigma.

When1eight=2zeros

Please read Wikipedia's policies on verifiability and original research. Thanks, —bbatsell ¿? 20:28, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Birthday

Was Sarah born on December 1/1970 or December 2/1970? Hotwine8 04:11, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jonathan Silverman

So is she honestly not related to him?? They look exactly alike! SkaTroma 11:10, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Apparently not.... maybe like 400 years ago they had a common ancestor, who knows... Mad Jack 06:52, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article makes no sense

Under career it says "Within three years"... within three years of what, being born? 82.69.28.55 15:29, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

• Agreed, I just came here to see if anybody was discussing it. I will go back through the history to see if any relevant line was removed. It almost reads like there should be a sentence before it. --Bridgecross 14:17, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Indeed in a very old version, the 'personal life' section was above the 'career' section, and that first line was a segue. There was a separate 'Early Life' section that made it all make sense. Somebody thought it was clumsy, removed the early life section and moved it all down. People should read before they edit. Will rewrite. --Bridgecross 14:33, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removed these entries from the Personal Life section

Removed due to WP:LIVING

Sarah Silverman is a comedian who has joked about herself being raped (at least two well-circulated jokes about this - by a doctor, by a famous comedian ), about herself being extremely racist, about herself being slutty etc etc. We can't treat things she says from her standup routines as related to actual facts for the personal life section! It's inherently an unreliable source for that section. Not that these statements had any referenced sourcing anyway. Bwithh 17:19, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

i agree, as with my other comments, Silverman in person, is different from the "sarah" we see portrayed, i have had the luck to actually engage in a conversation with the woman, and she is nothing but down to earth and very humble. There is a very very very clear line between her on stage charisma and her real life mentality.we have to take into account this woman is coming off this way because she see's the amazing amount of comedy in a completly "no-qualms" woman. She has balls! and we as a public need to be able to discern her comedic partialities, and abstain from trying to paste them to her, because hse is able to tell us in such a serious manor.

a women looking you dead in the face very serious saying, "oh, i hate black people, and my boyfriend's penis is so small, i don't even care about getting him mad at me, and by the way i pooped my pants."

thats hard to lauh at at first, because of her delivery, but that is part of her character and her appeal/genius....i refrence it to mitch hedberg's some what, heroined-drawl, or steven wrights "im about to shot myself in the face with a 44. magnum, depressive moan"lewis black's crazy fingers, adam sandlers baby sound's....the list goes on.

just my opinion

When1eight=2zeros

[edit] Silverman with Jesus Magnets

Frankly, the only real reason why this picture was on the article in the first place was because its the only free image available. Now that we have a better free image it no longer has any relevance here. I don't see how Silverman pimping out some atheist website's merchandise is relevant to describing her controversies. She's made one or two comments about Christ, but from what I've seen her humor is far from focused on religion if anything at all.--CyberGhostface 02:50, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

And if you want another free picture of Sarah, I can easily get another one from flickr of her at a comedy show or something.--CyberGhostface 02:51, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

... "One or two comments about Christ"? Are you joking? Jesus is Magic, anyone? The image should be retained for the following reasons: (1) it is a good-quality image illustrating the subject matter of the article; (2) it is a free-use image, so the only reason not to include it is because it is inappropriate for this article, not because it is legally questionable; (3) although Jesus Dress-Up Magnets specifically are not Sarah's joke, they do, in fact, illustrate her general style of humor, which is provocative and does frequently reference social issues like religion; (4) having more images on this article makes it more aesthetically pleasing and helps break up large chunks of text, which makes it more accessible and appealing to readers. I welcome you to get more high-quality free-use images to add to this article (or at least consider adding), and if we get enough clearly better ones, we can indeed remove the "Magnets" one for space reasons (because having too many images is as bad as having not enough); but until then, I reallly don't see the harm it's doing. Having multiple different images of the article subject matter is a good thing, not a bad thing. The only reason to ever remove such an image is if it's inappropriate/irrelevant, useless/redundant, or fair-use, none of which seem to be the case here. -Silence 14:32, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Agree with Silence, adding pics breaks up a very text-heavy article. Could crop the picture to remove the Jesus magnets perhaps. WLU 15:03, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't see the need. The Magnets don't decrease the quality or informational value of the image; they increase it. -Silence 15:08, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

'Jesus is Magic' had very little to do with Jesus. She made a comment about Jesus two times, and one of those times was making more fun of the blacks than she was of Jesus. I'll try to find more free images of her.--CyberGhostface 17:31, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

The fact that she chose to name it "Jesus is Magic" despite a limited amount of Jesus-related content shows that she wanted to especially emphasize a a joke about Jesus; that, and the fact that she chose to be photographed with the magnets, is more than enough to show relevance. High-quality free-use images of major celebrities are hard to come by, and throwing an especially good one away on such a nitpick is just silly. -Silence 19:02, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

So if I were to find a high quality free image of her performing would that be alright?--CyberGhostface 19:09, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely it would be alright! That would be a great image to add to the "Career" section, for sure. Though certainly such an image and the Jesus-magnet image would not need to be mutually exclusive. -Silence 19:25, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Source?

Is there a source for "that she smokes marijuana four days out of the week"?(Trampton 06:45, 20 February 2007 (UTC)).

there's a small piece on it in high times [1] --Threatis 03:55, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Recent additions re: her show material

User:169.139.188.6 added homosexuality, lesbianism, rascism, queefs and cough syrup abuse as part of what her show deals with. I removed rascism since it was a duplicate (and misspelled), and I am wondering if we really need a huge list like this about what her show deals with... Whereizben 16:34, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Usually anything more than two examples turns into a kind of within-article listcruft, I'm always inclined to take it out. WLU 19:12, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I will do this, please let me know anyone if you disagree. Thanks! Whereizben 16:24, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I was the one who added the additional items to the list Cough syrup etc to the list of over a dozen topics. I thought the list was so extemely long that it just need to be taken a step further. I agree that the list probably was a great example of Listcruft and the article looks more professional with the deletions.

[edit] "Sarah Silverman's profile on Wikipedia: User:Alienlifeformz"

I was reading the article and came upon this. What does it have to do with the article? If it really is Sarah Silverman's Wikipedia profile, there is no mention of it anywhere. --Kimon^talk 22:06, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I've just undone the last edit that added that in until we can confirm it here. I'll be honest, I doubt that Sarah has the spare time to do minor cleanup and editing (though I'd certainly commend her if she did). Like you, I could find no confirmation or even a reason to suspect that this account belongs to her, though. —bbatsell ¿? ✍ 22:11, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Initial Photo

Does anyone else think that her skin in the photo above her bio has a bit of a greenish hue to it (compare to the standup picture further down)? I don't mind fixing it if some of you agree. Do we have to get anyone's permission to alter hue/gamma/etc. on "fair use" images? ZZYZX 08:25, 12 March 2007 (UTC)