Talk:White power

I have removed the redirect page to white supremacy, as power is not the same as supremacy. This is completely ignorant and rather offensive. I therefore suggest that this page is removed until someone writes an article about the subject in question. Liamoliver (talk) 22:57, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

As I found a page on White Nationalism, I thought it best that White Power should redirect there. There is seemingly an edit conflict with a user about this. Liamoliver (talk) 11:42, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

• see previous discussion here it was agreed to merge white power to white supremacy Thisglad (talk) 09:36, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

• These two titles are not the same. Why doesn't Black power redirect to Black supremacy? – Batreeq ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 05:45, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Ok, I think I've found the most accurate target. Jjjjjjdddddd (talk) 10:11, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Discussion is necessary over whether to keep this as a redirect and, if so, where to redirect. I note that the most common use of this term is as a slogan and we have a paragraph at white nationalism#United States that explains its origins. It is currently a redirect to white pride which is, as an article, well-developed with decent sourcing, but I find, actually, more sources discussing the "white power" slogan. Other options include writing an entirely new article, writing a new section in a current article, or simply keeping the status quo. Note the preliminary discussion on this matter which has already taken place at Talk:White_pride#White power. Broader input would be welcome. jps (talk) 13:49, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

• It's my opinion from experience that both "white pride" and "white power" are not in and of themselves legitimate movements, but are employed by white separatists, white nationalists and their ilk as a "fig-leaf" which provides them with a certain appearance of legitimacy, and may have the effect of attracting to their movement people who would not otherwise think of themselves as white separatists or nationalists. In this way, it differs from "black pride", which was a separate movement from "black power", albeit one related in some ways by the conditions of the time. "Black pride" however, was legitimate in its own goals, and was not conceived as a means of providing cover for the "black power" movement, as is the case with "white pride" and "white power" in relation wot white supremacy and white nationalism, etc.
  For these reasons, I think that one article is sufficient, and whether it's at "white pride" or "white power" is immaterial, since they serve the same purpose and are not truly separate in any way. Whichever one is not an article title should remain as a redirect to the one that is: thus the current situation should be maintained, and any additional material brought up through research can be added to the current article at White pride. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:29, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
• redirect to white supremacy Edaham (talk) 18:57, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

• I think the way the article is written, specifically at the beginning, could easily be seen as a bias compared to the other articles related to a race's pride (ie. Black pride, Asian pride, Hispanic pride, etc.) and should be considered rewritten. CaptainGummyBearz (talk) 01:17, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

It seems that this article is not fully fleshed out. It is a relatively short article while I think the slogan is relatively weighty. All of the content is relevant, but it does not seem as important as other information that could be added to the article. There could definitely be additional information on the recent use of the term and how it affiliates itself with a current political party and social movements.

Writing101emily (talk) 17:45, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

Everything in this article has to be reliably sourced. PARAKANYAA (talk) 18:27, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

The article currently paints "white power" as a racist thing, which could make sense. However, when compared to the articles counterparts (such as Black power) you can see that the two articles encourage "Black power", and discourage "white power". Me personally, I find this a bit racist and kind of ridiculous. I believe one of the two articles should change tone to match the other. Jelloistired (talk) 23:08, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

@Jelloistired This is how the sources cover white power. If the sources on black power cover it as an empowerment thing, while the sources on white power cover it as a racist thing, then we reflect that. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:10, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

But do you not see an issue here? This is blatant racism. The sources seem to be what I would call BS. If a source seems to make one race superior to the other, than it should be disregarded. Jelloistired (talk) 23:13, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

@PARAKANYAA I would also like you to take note on the fact that included the introduction, there isn't a single source. 0 citations. Jelloistired (talk) 23:16, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

@Jelloistired Yes, we do not include citations in the lead, per WP:LEADCITE. All material in the lead is included in the body, where it is cited.

Take it up with the people who write the sources. Wikipedia reflects what are in reliable sources, and the general consensus among scholars is that white power is racist. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:17, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

@Jelloistired Your recent addition was unsourced and the material in the body, where the sources go, does not reflect it. Do you have reliable sources that say white power is not racist? PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:23, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

Oh for crying out loud. @Jelloistired your recent contributions border on vandalism. Please cease immediately. I am not here to debate "reverse racism" here per WP:NOTFORUM only to manage page content. Simonm223 (talk) 14:37, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

@Simonm223 All of my edits are made in good faith. I have no ill intentions when editting an article. I would appreciate if for the love of God someone would actually try to help me learn how to be a better wikipedian. But instead, most people expect me to know right away. Jelloistired (talk) 14:47, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Then here's your tip of the day: Whether you think sources are biased is irrelevant to our use of them if they are considered reliable sources. As reliable sources call this a white supremacist slogan, whatabouting regarding black power is entirely irrelevant. All of this falls under WP:NOTFORUM which says we should focus explicitly on the management of article content as described via reliable sources. Simonm223 (talk) 14:53, 9 March 2026 (UTC)