This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Actors and Filmmakers This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers (assessed as Low-importance). Comedy Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. California: San Francisco Bay Area Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by San Francisco Bay Area task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Hi all, I have finished expanding this article. There is a limited amount of information available on the subject, and could use some additional expanding (e.g., birth date, specific place of birth). Have any comments or anything else to say? Post it here! --TheKMan 04:21, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• It seems in the past someone has been removing content on these pages referring to the comedian Mooney, and continues to replace it with text referring to the software developer/blogger Mooney. To whoever it is, before you try it again with the newly expanded article, could you please post your reasoning here? To others, feel free to discuss this. --TheKMan 04:21, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• To who ever keeps reverting these pages, please talk to us, and please stop erasing the talk boards. I would also like to mention, your "proof" that you were first to this article does not mean you have a true claim to it. It should also be noted that the "proof" was deleted previously for a reason.[1] --TheKMan 17:04, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• I know the blogger Paul Mooney, the guy who created the FAN SHRINE for that other Paul Mooney knows nothing about him. Paul Mooney the blogger has over 5,000 subscribers reading his blog every day, he belongs here. The other Paul Mooney has PR people, an Agent and so on, if you think he is so wonderful why don't you start a FAN SITE and see how many members you can gather from the whole wide world.

• You are welcome to create a disambiguation page, regarding software developer/blogger Paul Mooney. You are not welcome to erase an entire article and replace it with vanity text, and a skewed POV. I am not interested in creating fan shrines or fan sites. I am only interested in using Wikipedia as it was meant to be used: posting objective information. Just a note: Paul Mooney comedian has been seen in television and film by millions of people. His works have been seen by millions more. He helped make Richard Pryor the comedian he was. Frankly, I have seen more notable people than Mooney-blogger be quickied. Please add comments to the bottom of this discussion page, and do not erase the comments of others. --TheKMan 19:45, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Be quickied???????? Richard Pryor didn't credit Mooney as much as Kman does, reading this shrine Kman has posted you would think he was a big star in Hollywood....thats a joke. Many people are now saying that Wikipedia is worthless and now I can see why. There are links to comerical websites in this "article", maybe Kman is making money here, but there is no way for us to know.

• Heh, I wish I was being paid. Anyway, this is hardly a shrine. It is all objective information. If you do not feel this article is worth being on Wikipedia, you are welcome to post it in Articles for Deletion. — TheKMan^talk 22:35, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• I am Paul Mooney, it’s my name and no one can take it from me. My blog has thousands of readers and is aggraded and syndicated all over the world. My name first appeared here on 3/05 after a blog index on Ask.com required the reference. It was deleted for the same reason KMan deleted it yesterday, because of something they saw on TV. The story of this other Paul Mooney has never been told, we don’t know if it's his real name or not....all we have is an association with two Black comedians after they signed thirty million dollar contracts!

Mooney comes from the Irish O’Maonaigh, no Irish man ever owned a slave, we were slaves of the British for 800 years.

Type Paul Mooney in any search engine and your going to find me and another blogger in Ireland.

• • Perhaps we should have an article on the other Irish blogger Paul Mooney instead, then. B.Wind 18:55, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It’s outrageous that a prominent blogger, a pioneer who has earned Press credentials for all the major Technology conferences and Events can be removed at the whim of a college student who knows life only by what he sees on TV.

• Again, you are welcome to create a disambiguated page, you are welcome to create articles with accurate information and NPOV, and you are welcome to post the current Mooney article in Articles for Deletion. I am not stopping you. — TheKMan^talk 02:14, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• • Mr. Mooney, if you want to create that article go right ahead, but I took your advice and searched "Paul Mooney" on Google and it came up with only one link for you, which was for your website. All of the other links were regarding this Paul Mooney. If you could please stop being unreasonable and just make your own article rather than accuse others of stealing your name everyone would appreciate it.

• • It is clear that the blogger Paul Mooney would rather fight the fight than help the people who want to create and keep an actual encyclopedic article on him. This requires objective information directly about him, third party references (and not blogs themselves), and no extraneous information about attempts to delete the article or Muhammad Ali's mother (unless she has a direct relationship to the blogger Paul Mooney). On the other hand, the current article on the writer/comedian Paul Mooney is an adequate one, and will become better as the red links turn blue. It is referenced, it easily demonstrates notability (which the blogger Paul Mooney article does not), and it gives details of his activities for which he is notable, and -- most importatantly -- it is written with a neutral point of view. If the blogger's article is to stand more than a snowball's chance in hell of surviving a couple days more, it needs to be expanded more than the one remaining sentence (yes, I removed the extraneous stuff from there). Good luck. B.Wind 18:55, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• • I don't understand the problem. All that needs to be done is create another page called Paul Mooney (blogger) and then change the name of this one to Paul Mooney (comedian). Just like any other article on wikipedia like an article for someone named "John Smith". I would do this right now if I knew how.--DavidFuzznut 18:11, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like 67.84.245.60 (talk · contribs) took your advice, albeit not too well: he or she added the blank entry Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Mooney to today's AfD page. He or she also added, for some reason, the blank entry Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Think Tank -- maybe this makes sense to the editors here. --Calton | Talk 06:48, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Step 2 of Resolving disputes has been implemented, in the form of Requests for comment. This talk page has been posted under Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Media, art and literature. I'm hoping that this will be constructive, and that the comments of others from the Wikipedia community will help resolve the dispute at hand. The main issue is the subject on the Paul Mooney article. Another person by this name continues to replace the article with alternative content. Please refer to the edit histories of both the article page and this talk page. Seeking any and all comments. — TheKMan^talk 08:11, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Came here from RfC. If the angry people above calmed down for a moment they would realise that we can have articles for BOTH Paul Mooneys. Then we can consider one or both separately for deletion if there are questions of appropriateness. What we do not need to do is fight over this article name. I'm happy to come back here in a day and do that work myself, if there are no objections before then. AndyJones 12:57, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is Wikipedia offering FREE WebHosting now? This comedian didn't have a website till TheKman put one up here, maybe there is money being exchanged. A quick look at the History shows that crid and TheKman are the vandals having removed Paul Mooney the blogger's entry many times as if it was a mission from God.

• It does appear the theKman has abused his position of trust on Wikipedia by authoring a lengthy

exaggerated article without any fact-checks on one Paul Mooney as a means to exclude the blogger Paul Mooney.

• Hello all. I feel that I must apologize to the other Paul Mooney if he took my comments personally, for that was never my intention. It was not my intention to comment on the contributor, but only to comment on the content as per Wikipedia policy against personal attacks. It turns out the subject of the content, and the contributor, were one in the same. Anyway, I went ahead and posted a Paul Mooney (disambiguation) page, and a Paul Mooney (blogger) page with the contents directly from this article's history[2]. The new article has an “importance” tag, and requires attention to bring it up to standards. — TheKMan^talk 23:55, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Nothing for me to do, then, I think. AndyJones 01:08, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Groovy! Thanks yet again Crid 01:58, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• RfC response Take it easy, people. Both sides violated the three revert rule yesterday. This looks like a very simple situation to resolve: Start a new page for both people, move the current article to Paul Mooney (comedian), and make Paul Mooney a disambiguation page. Best wishes. Durova 02:17, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• I just thought I should mention that the 3R rule doesn't apply in cases of vandalism. The anonymous user involved was temp. blocked for 24 hours after three warnings. Also, to all other users, before you comment, please view the Paul Mooney (blogger) article, which contains the content of what the previously mentioned user was posting. — TheKMan^talk 02:26, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

^The problem isn’t your comments Kman, it’s your credibility. You took the action of deleting my Wikipedia entry and replaced it by cutting and pasting tidbits from publicists and PR hacks paid to promote a persona. If you bother to do any real research you will discover that these Paul Mooney’s are cousins.

What you have done is unacceptable; you’re perpetuating a falsehood. Why don’t you consult Jimmy Wales, he may know me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.166.146.88 (talk • contribs) 02:30 14 Dec 2005

You know, between your raging vanity and paranoia, your unfounded personal attacks and goofy tangents, and your limited (36 unique) Google hits for "'Paul Mooney' blogger dotnetjunkies", you're not not really making much of a case here for your own credibility, nor for your supposed notability or encyclopedic value. Maybe your time would be better spent at Talk:Paul Mooney (blogger) to help clean up the article and prove it's worth keeping. --Calton | Talk 02:43, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Your research is flawed;

• Kman the clown should have constructed a disambiguation page for the comedian rather then delete Paul Mooney the bloggers page, what is the point of having rules if editors ignore them?

The Paul Mooney page still has commercial links and is essential a FAN SHRINE, where is the "encyclopedic value"?

• Please refrain from making personal attacks. Thank you. — TheKMan^talk 17:14, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• This entire episode has been a personal attack on Paul Mooney, Kman never should have deleted his page. Using the word "Other" is an insult Kman.

• It does appear that the lunatics are running the asylum thanks to theKman, Crid and Carlton, how can we believe anything on Wikipedia?

• Responding to the RfC. After reading both articles and doing a little research on the two Mooneys, I think the status quo makes the most sense - Paul Mooney goes to the article about the comedian, who has a solid IMDB entry with acting and writing credits, with a dab link at the top to the blogger's page or to a dab page. Also, the article on the blogger needs a lot of work. If I had come upon Paul Mooney (blogger) directly without seeing this discussion, I almost certainly would have tagged it ((nonsense)) or ((nn-bio)). And finally, everyone please sign your posts on talk pages. | Klaw ¡digame! 16:49, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• This morning I removed a SPEEDY tag from Paul Mooney (blogger). I will do the same if there are more, although I'm not sitting at my computer to defend that page full time. That page really only has a few days to turn it into an encyclopedic article. I would encourage the person who has been fighting for that article on this page to spend some time there. AndyJones 17:19, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Just in case someone misinterpreted my comments, I wasn't calling for the blogger article to be speedied. I was just commenting on its current status. The presence of the RfC should give it a temporary reprieve from speedy deletion. | Klaw ¡digame! 18:08, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• 21st December has arrived and I have therefore listed Paul Mooney (blogger) at AfD, here. I haven't voted myself. I encourage everyone interested in this discussion to make their views known, there. AndyJones 21:39, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• The AfD has now closed. The discussion is here. There were no comments in support of Paul Mooney (blogger) (unless you count my efforts to protect it from speedy deletion), and it has been deleted. I think this RfC is now effectively closed. Any insertion of Paul Mooney (blogger) info on this page will be the recreation of previously deleted material, and can therefore be treated as vandalism, and reverted on sight. I suggest that it might be useful to report anything of that kind to Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress if and when it happens, rather than simply reverting, to avoid any further edit warring. AndyJones 09:43, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Replacing one Paul Mooney with another was the act of vandalism. Google Paul Mooney, look who is #1 (unsigned by LN. First edit with this username)
  • On the contrary, replacing with the more notable Paul Mooney (with a TV/movie credit trail spanning more than a dozen years) and disambiguishing Paul Mooneys saved a Paul Mooney article. The lack of cooperation vis-à-vis making the Paul Mooney (blogger) page encyclopedic doomed it in AfD. B.Wind 13:47, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Can you find a web presence for the comedian Paul Mooney other then the cut and past page that passes your encyclopedic test, while it's accuracy is in doubt? —Preceding unsigned comment added by LN (talk • contribs) 14:31, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Here is a video on the New York Times website with Paul Mooney speaking about Richard Pryor [3] (click on "the lives they lived" videos on the top left). Or try your luck with a direct link: [4] (may not always work due to Javascript junk). — TheKMan^talk 17:52, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• What is missing is any reference to Paul Mooney by Richard Pryor, you have assembled many dead links and too much misinformation on a subject you have admitted knowing nothing about. This entire exorcize has been an act of vandalism, we have witnessed why Wikipedia is now said to be worthless.

(unsigned by LN)

OK, LN - you want a definitive web link for Paul Mooney? Try [5] [6][7][8] -- and that's only after about five seconds of Dogpile.com searching (it would have been far less, but I'm on dialup). It's time to move on, LN. If you tried as hard to establish, expand, and verify the Paul Mooney (blogger) article, your hero's page would still be up and we'd have two encyclopedic "Paul Mooney" articles that would be quite useful. You're welcome to try again if you truly wish it: just click the red link in this paragraph and start rewriting it. B.Wind 00:47, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the line about not knowing where mama came up with the "nickname" mooney seems a bit ridiculous, given that PAUL MUNI was the top hollywood star right around mama's time. it's like having a kid named frank and your uncle starts calling him "sinatra". would anyone ever say "i wonder where he came up with that?"

for that matter, there should be a redirect (hat top or w/e they're called). lotta people looking for paul muni are going to attempt "mooney" or "moony" first.

there's one in the other direction on muni's page. there should be one here. 67.150.84.204 (talk) 00:55, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

II added info about his being pulled from the stage at the Apollo. I had originall entitled the section "Banned from the Apollo" however I don't believe he was banned from the Apollo, which is owned by the public, just the TV show Showtime at the Apollo which is owned by Time Warner. Quadzilla99 10:25, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• I corrected something for the above info, as Mooney didn't appear on Stern on 12-28-2006 (as Stern was on Christmas vacation then). He actually appeared on 10-30-2006 (per MarksFriggin.com). Fanarchy 17:18, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Negrodamus.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:40, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I restored the n-word part after User:DorilMagefont vandalized it. Fclass (talk) 14:45, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I saw Mooney last night in Dallas and the N-Word is back in full force, used liberally throughout the entire show. And yeah, everybody laughed. 2012-02-11

By the way, tracee ross does not constitute a crowd of people walking out. paul mooney is hilarious, and he tells it like it is. wikipedia articles should be written from a factual, unbiased point of view; this article is everything but that. no wonder people don't want to use wikipedia as a dependable source! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cobaahema (talk • contribs) 17:33, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, if you're going to write about a new subject you need to create a new section as I have done for you here. Secondly, nowhere in the article does it say "a crowd of people walked out". Examples are cited when certain people have walked out. Please read WP:Policies and guidelines. MrBlondNYC (talk) 07:34, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have no citations, I saw Paul Mooney at Caroline's on Broadway in August 2008, and I saw a number of people, all white (as am I) walk out. I can not speak to the reasons they left, but they definitley left. Bananatruck (talk) 01:13, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

how could he influence him he came before him — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.72.167.49 (talk) 01:07, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@Halp44: I disagree with these types of sections being added. There are no reliable, third-party sources being cited regarding Paul Mooney being a misogynist, disrespector of women, etc. The source being referenced is your interpretation and opinion of a Paul Mooney comedic performance. If you feel that such a section is warranted, please provide reliable, third party sources covering this subject matter or feel free to use this talk page to try to build consensus. Charger2 (talk) 16:39, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would second this suggestion. The information isn't properly sourced. His standup is a work of performance art. Art is not a reliable source to support factual information unrelated to the art piece about the subject. SocializedBombast (talk) 17:54, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I checked the sources for the Boston bombing comedy routine, but there is only one and it is a tweet and the article is behind a paywall. Should this really be on wikipedia? Mooney however did defend himself though, but walkouts are common it seems on his routines but at least provide a legitimate source. Dilingerhas (talk) 17:27, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. This information isn't very relevant and should be properly sourced at the very least or removed. SocializedBombast (talk) 18:00, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Paul Mooney (comedian). 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.eurweb.com/story/eur22573.cfm

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: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:00, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone smarter than me please remove the italics from the article title? No reason for them. —Sesel (talk) 04:26, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, but I tried unsuccessfully to use Template:DISPLAYTITLE, and also failed in trying to move the page. Would an editor smarter than the both of us care to weigh in? –Matthew - (talk) 04:26, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Fixed - I wouldn't claim to be "smarter", but I have perhaps read more template documentation! -- John of Reading (talk) 07:23, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The information provided under the 'Personal Life' header appears to just be a continuation of the 'Contriversies’ section. Personal Life should include things like hobbies, interests, personal relationships, etc etc. I suggest deleting the person life header. As to the content I don't think that's properly cited either. It's double hearsay from a source with no established credibility. But that should be for another discussion. SocializedBombast (talk) 17:59, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence would be more accurate if it just said "Chappelle left the show." Not only is "due to stress" inaccurate reasoning as to why he left, but it's entirely irrelevant to this article about Mr. Mooney. 161.97.197.190 (talk) 18:24, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]