Wikipedia deletes Bakhtawar/Aseefa Bhutto-Zardari's articles

[Poetlister]

The largest online encyclopedia platform, Wikipedia, to which millions of people turn towards for information deleted the profiles of Bakhtawar Bhutto-Zardari and younger sister Aseefa Bhutto-Zardari because “the subject of the article does not have any notability by its own.”

A discussion page for the proposed deletion of Bakhtawar’s Wikipedia page explains why the page was deleted. Firstly, it states that there was mass copy paste from Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) official Wikipedia page, and it contained more information about former prime minister Benazir Bhutto. Bakhtawar’s Wikipedia page violated three policies of Wikimedia; copy paste, neutrality and primary source. Most of the information on the page wasn’t gathered on her merits but on the merits of the Bhutto family, said the page.

The Tribune (Pakistan)

[Zoloft]

Yeah. Let's offend Pakistan. Way to go, Wikipedia.

[Poetlister]

Wikipedia can afford to lose Turkey, because not many people there speak English. Getting the site blocked in Pakistan could have a perceptible impact on the editing figures.

[JCM]

This kind of is one of those damned if you do, damned if you don't situations. If you waive notability requirements, hell, half the real people here might get bios and we would be at one billion unmanagable articles in English and counting within a year. If you don't several prominent popular personalities don't get included, and their lack is perceived as a shortfall in coverage. Ideally, at least to me, these individuals might be profitably covered in wikidata and, maybe, in an article possibly including a lengthy interview in wikinews. If the search engines could be influenced to bring up the appearance of those related sites in search results, that might make some of these problems disappear. I'd like to see that, but unfortunately I doubt we will.

On what might be a dubiously related point, does anyone know whether something like a substantial wikinews interview or feature story would qualify as one of the required evidences of notability? I remember some years ago seeing a fair number of topics in the broad religion field which I thought should be covered but which I couldn't find references for, and this would be one way to deal with that.

[Renée Bagslint]

Wikipedia can afford to lose Turkey, because not many people there speak English. Getting the site blocked in Pakistan could have a perceptible impact on the editing figures.

How many donors are there in either of those countries? Being censored in a country with a reputation for undemocratic conduct only boosts the WMF's reputation with the bien-pensant West Coast philanthropists.

[Poetlister]

On what might be a dubiously related point, does anyone know whether something like a substantial wikinews interview or feature story would qualify as one of the required evidences of notability? I remember some years ago seeing a fair number of topics in the broad religion field which I thought should be covered but which I couldn't find references for, and this would be one way to deal with that.

Given that a Wikipedia article is (rightly of course) not regarded as a reliable source for establishing facts i another article, it would be preposterous to treat Wikinews as reliable. Of course, preposterous things do occur in wikiland.

[JCM]

On what might be a dubiously related point, does anyone know whether something like a substantial wikinews interview or feature story would qualify as one of the required evidences of notability? I remember some years ago seeing a fair number of topics in the broad religion field which I thought should be covered but which I couldn't find references for, and this would be one way to deal with that.

Given that a Wikipedia article is (rightly of course) not regarded as a reliable source for establishing facts i another article, it would be preposterous to treat Wikinews as reliable. Of course, preposterous things do occur in wikiland.

I was actually thinking more in terms of notability than reliability, but I do think that there have been some interviews conducted at wikinews which, if reviewed by the interviewee for accuracy, might qualify as reliable.

[Poetlister]

On what might be a dubiously related point, does anyone know whether something like a substantial wikinews interview or feature story would qualify as one of the required evidences of notability? I remember some years ago seeing a fair number of topics in the broad religion field which I thought should be covered but which I couldn't find references for, and this would be one way to deal with that.

Given that a Wikipedia article is (rightly of course) not regarded as a reliable source for establishing facts i another article, it would be preposterous to treat Wikinews as reliable. Of course, preposterous things do occur in wikiland.

I was actually thinking more in terms of notability than reliability, but I do think that there have been some interviews conducted at wikinews which, if reviewed by the interviewee for accuracy, might qualify as reliable.

I meant that it was not a reliable source for notability any more than mentions on say Facebook or Youtube would be.

[JCM]

On what might be a dubiously related point, does anyone know whether something like a substantial wikinews interview or feature story would qualify as one of the required evidences of notability? I remember some years ago seeing a fair number of topics in the broad religion field which I thought should be covered but which I couldn't find references for, and this would be one way to deal with that.

Given that a Wikipedia article is (rightly of course) not regarded as a reliable source for establishing facts i another article, it would be preposterous to treat Wikinews as reliable. Of course, preposterous things do occur in wikiland.

I was actually thinking more in terms of notability than reliability, but I do think that there have been some interviews conducted at wikinews which, if reviewed by the interviewee for accuracy, might qualify as reliable.

I meant that it was not a reliable source for notability any more than mentions on say Facebook or Youtube would be.

Understood and my apologies. Having said that, I would kind of hope that in some cases we might be able to maybe, in time, get things set up to the point that maybe we might be able to see an interview on wikinews of, for instance, an archaeologist of the results of his recent dig and get it maybe to function as a popular version of some of the academic journals. I have gotten the impression there aren't many such or they aren't widely printed, and they would be useful to have.