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. |
Archive 1 |
The 'conservative hit-job' part about David Brock is unsubstantiated. The reference linked to someone's homepage with text and details of the original allegations. No where was the 'hit-job' confession mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.147.58.6 ( talk) 13:27, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Current entry states, "In 1991, public opinion polls showed that 47% of those polled believed Thomas, while 24% believed Hill. Doubts about her testimony were furthered by the widely publicized and later recanted claims of David Brock." However, one public opinion poll shifted in favor of Hill after the publication of Brock's book. [1]. Better to say, "Brock sought to further doubts about her testimony..." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Weffiewonj ( talk • contribs) 18:47, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Added "followed him to this new job", which is true.
[[User:Rex071404| Rex071404 ]] 06:57, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
-- Amynewyork4248 13:37, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
68.45.226.99 06:02, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
The front page has some error/vandalism. Please attend to it Gautam Discuss 06:31, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
None of Wallamoose's edits are cited, and should be challenged. RafaelRGarcia ( talk) 04:55, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps something should be added to cover the witnesses who testified that Hill had previously seemed to imagine that men were taking interest in her, and all the speculation during the hearings about whether it was "fantasy" or "transference," and how even those who said she was not telling the truth believed that she believed what she was saying. These seem to be important points in an article about the woman and the controversy.
68.45.226.99 06:48, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
^7 Hull, Smith, Scott. All the Women Are White, All the Blacks Are Men, but Some of Us Are Brave: Black Women's Studies, pxvi
Add "Publisher: The Feminist Press at CUNY (February 1, 2003)"
From listing at Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/But-Some-Us-Are-Brave/dp/0912670959
00:20, 9 June 2009 (UTC) Perseus109 - 6/8/2009 —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Perseus109 (
talk •
contribs)
The linked main article on Black Feminism's opening line directly associates sexism with racism, but Clarence Thomas is African-American. As regards the subject matter of the article, unless a scholastic argument can be made which removes Clarence Thomas' African-American heritage from the issue and/or cause of his alleged sexism, then its inclusion in the article itself is inappropriate. Unfortunately, it is impossible to do so without sacrificing the scholastic value of the article, for by doing so it will become an argumentative, possibly propagandist piece of literature. It may well be that Anita Hill's experience inspired "Black Feminism," as the article states, but to retain educational value the implicit suggestion that race and sexism are linked, even when an accused offender is African-American cannot be permitted to remain in this article. By simply pointing out that Clarence Thomas is African-American, a tabla rasa student will then be able to recognise the apparent contradiction, and then may or may not pursue further study to develop their own informed opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.13.59.205 ( talk) 03:29, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Under the Later Career section it is asserted at the end of the section that:
"In 2012, she may be nominated to serve as Supreme Court Justice."
There is no reference offered for this assertion. Is there any truth to this at all and, if so, shouldn't there be a cite for the evidence? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Vansloot (
talk •
contribs)
05:03, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
HBO movie Confirmation is about Hill-Thomas tiff. 64.53.191.77 ( talk) 17:57, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Why is the story about Ms. Hill allegedly putting a public hair in one of her students notebooks not in this entry? -- 24.177.0.156 ( talk) 19:21, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
I have seen coverage on MSNBC News and also FOX News that suggests that Anita Hill's accusations against Thomas were "politically motivated character assassination" and that if Thomas had not been a conservative, he would never have been subjected to her accusations.
Does anyone have any source material that either proves or disproves that assertion?
65.101.228.154 ( talk) 00:00, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
I was led to believe all these years by the media Ms. Hill was a Repubican and she was spurned by them and left the party. Thank you for clearing up that misconception. She never was a Republican. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.177.0.156 ( talk) 19:24, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
Suggested sister link to add to this article's External links sect:
{{commonscat|Anita Hill}}
Readers and editors may find additional suitable images there, for example perhaps one of these could be considered (instead of current infobox profile image which lacks WP:OTRS confirmation of permission) see:
I'll leave that decision up to other editors,
— Cirt ( talk) 02:24, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Anita Hill. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:09, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Anita Hill. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:18, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Anita Hill. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:32, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
No offense to anyone intended, but is there any published information on her personal life? Has she ever had any long-term relationships? Has she ever been married? Does she have any children? Do she have any hobbies? What does she like to do when she is not working? 66.162.249.170 ( talk) 02:03, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Those two footnotes are not my doing but I can't get rid of them. 66.162.249.170 ( talk) 02:06, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
I removed the mention of EZ Million being called a "one-armed man," partly since I can't locate the original source, and because according to the one reference I did find ( http://www.oklahomaconstitution.com/ns.php?nid=184&commentary=1) this seems to have been in relation to his activism around a Constitutional Convention in the 1980s and has nothing to do with Anita Hill. If there's an Elmer Zinn Million article, that might go there. 11 Arlington ( talk) 22:25, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
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. |
Archive 1 |
The 'conservative hit-job' part about David Brock is unsubstantiated. The reference linked to someone's homepage with text and details of the original allegations. No where was the 'hit-job' confession mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.147.58.6 ( talk) 13:27, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Current entry states, "In 1991, public opinion polls showed that 47% of those polled believed Thomas, while 24% believed Hill. Doubts about her testimony were furthered by the widely publicized and later recanted claims of David Brock." However, one public opinion poll shifted in favor of Hill after the publication of Brock's book. [1]. Better to say, "Brock sought to further doubts about her testimony..." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Weffiewonj ( talk • contribs) 18:47, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Added "followed him to this new job", which is true.
[[User:Rex071404| Rex071404 ]] 06:57, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
-- Amynewyork4248 13:37, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
68.45.226.99 06:02, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
The front page has some error/vandalism. Please attend to it Gautam Discuss 06:31, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
None of Wallamoose's edits are cited, and should be challenged. RafaelRGarcia ( talk) 04:55, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps something should be added to cover the witnesses who testified that Hill had previously seemed to imagine that men were taking interest in her, and all the speculation during the hearings about whether it was "fantasy" or "transference," and how even those who said she was not telling the truth believed that she believed what she was saying. These seem to be important points in an article about the woman and the controversy.
68.45.226.99 06:48, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
^7 Hull, Smith, Scott. All the Women Are White, All the Blacks Are Men, but Some of Us Are Brave: Black Women's Studies, pxvi
Add "Publisher: The Feminist Press at CUNY (February 1, 2003)"
From listing at Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/But-Some-Us-Are-Brave/dp/0912670959
00:20, 9 June 2009 (UTC) Perseus109 - 6/8/2009 —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Perseus109 (
talk •
contribs)
The linked main article on Black Feminism's opening line directly associates sexism with racism, but Clarence Thomas is African-American. As regards the subject matter of the article, unless a scholastic argument can be made which removes Clarence Thomas' African-American heritage from the issue and/or cause of his alleged sexism, then its inclusion in the article itself is inappropriate. Unfortunately, it is impossible to do so without sacrificing the scholastic value of the article, for by doing so it will become an argumentative, possibly propagandist piece of literature. It may well be that Anita Hill's experience inspired "Black Feminism," as the article states, but to retain educational value the implicit suggestion that race and sexism are linked, even when an accused offender is African-American cannot be permitted to remain in this article. By simply pointing out that Clarence Thomas is African-American, a tabla rasa student will then be able to recognise the apparent contradiction, and then may or may not pursue further study to develop their own informed opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.13.59.205 ( talk) 03:29, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Under the Later Career section it is asserted at the end of the section that:
"In 2012, she may be nominated to serve as Supreme Court Justice."
There is no reference offered for this assertion. Is there any truth to this at all and, if so, shouldn't there be a cite for the evidence? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Vansloot (
talk •
contribs)
05:03, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
HBO movie Confirmation is about Hill-Thomas tiff. 64.53.191.77 ( talk) 17:57, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Why is the story about Ms. Hill allegedly putting a public hair in one of her students notebooks not in this entry? -- 24.177.0.156 ( talk) 19:21, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
I have seen coverage on MSNBC News and also FOX News that suggests that Anita Hill's accusations against Thomas were "politically motivated character assassination" and that if Thomas had not been a conservative, he would never have been subjected to her accusations.
Does anyone have any source material that either proves or disproves that assertion?
65.101.228.154 ( talk) 00:00, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
I was led to believe all these years by the media Ms. Hill was a Repubican and she was spurned by them and left the party. Thank you for clearing up that misconception. She never was a Republican. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.177.0.156 ( talk) 19:24, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
Suggested sister link to add to this article's External links sect:
{{commonscat|Anita Hill}}
Readers and editors may find additional suitable images there, for example perhaps one of these could be considered (instead of current infobox profile image which lacks WP:OTRS confirmation of permission) see:
I'll leave that decision up to other editors,
— Cirt ( talk) 02:24, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Anita Hill. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:09, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Anita Hill. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:18, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Anita Hill. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:32, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
No offense to anyone intended, but is there any published information on her personal life? Has she ever had any long-term relationships? Has she ever been married? Does she have any children? Do she have any hobbies? What does she like to do when she is not working? 66.162.249.170 ( talk) 02:03, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Those two footnotes are not my doing but I can't get rid of them. 66.162.249.170 ( talk) 02:06, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
I removed the mention of EZ Million being called a "one-armed man," partly since I can't locate the original source, and because according to the one reference I did find ( http://www.oklahomaconstitution.com/ns.php?nid=184&commentary=1) this seems to have been in relation to his activism around a Constitutional Convention in the 1980s and has nothing to do with Anita Hill. If there's an Elmer Zinn Million article, that might go there. 11 Arlington ( talk) 22:25, 6 December 2017 (UTC)