Talk:Worood Zuhair

This article was nominated for deletion on 26 March 2021. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography

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

Germany Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany 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.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women 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.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women

Women scientists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women scientists, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in science 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.Women scientistsWikipedia:WikiProject Women scientistsTemplate:WikiProject Women scientistsWomen scientists
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women writers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers 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.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Human rights

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights 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.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Removals

@Do.Lew.83: Hi. The removals done by the other user and myself weren't vandalism - they were done in order to bring the article into compliance with WP:BLP, which requires that claims about living people be cited to reliable sources. I'm about to go and see what I can add back, with edits for tone. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:33, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

On further looking into the (reliable) sources, I'm doubting that she's notable. I would say that she might rate a mention in longer articles (refugees in Germany, atheism in Iraq or something) but I don't know if the reliable sources rise to the level of justifying her notability as a person, as opposed to putting a face on an issue. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:51, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Roscelese: Today this article was targeted by anti-feminist organization, the arwiki got many vandalism and got rolled back and protected by an administrator. All of the details you removed was mentioned in her speeches and interviews which is in the Sources section, I also conformed every detail in the article with Zuhair before posting it (Can show proofs), also you can see the picture details in commins for a source. Also about the notability she is well known in Iraq and definitely notable, And just few moments ago the wikidata page got vandalize too, Luckily the arwiki is protected as I mentioned --Do.Lew.83 (talk) 21:56, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So, beyond the verifiability issue (there is, if I recall, a specific procedure for confirming that you've contacted an article subject off-wiki - I cannot remember what it's called, but do you know what I'm talking about? Have you followed it? If not, I'll try to remember/find out what it is) there's also the question of WP:RS more broadly. If you had to personally contact Zuhair to get all of this information because it doesn't appear in reliable sources, this is an indication that it isn't appropriate for Wikipedia. Our articles need to reflect what reliable sources have reported about the person. With regard to notability, if she is notable in Iraq, can you add any sources that show this?

I'm sorry to hear that the page has been the target of vandalism and I will do my best to remove it if it continues to appear, but removing unencyclopedic material, including unsourced claims about living people, unencyclopedic language, and promotional-sounding fluff, is not vandalism. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:30, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As I mentioned, all of the the details is sourced by reliable source see the sources section in the article in the interview with Deutsche Welle Which is definitely a reliable source she was talking in person in a video so thats says it all and can't be or called "unreliable source". And about me contacting the individual, that is not by any mean "an indication that it isn't appropriate for Wikipedia" Everyone can contact anyone who is "famous" or well known, for an example you can write to the White house and get a reply by the president etc. Contacting Zuhair by email was to get a free licensed picture of her to use and also to confirm that this article have valid informations. the article might have an unprofessional english writing which is due that English is not my mother language so if you see things that were unprofessional writing please fix it but do not remove it all saying its unsourced, you can add the sources if you see it needs it instead of removing an entire sections. --Do.Lew.83 (talk) 22:59, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure you understand what I'm saying. To use your example, if I wrote to the White House and the president told me in a letter that he really enjoys Swiss cheese, that wouldn't be appropriate for Wikipedia just because someone could verify that he had said it. WP:RS is our reliable sources policy and explains how we decide what information is admissible as part of Wikipedia. Further, if some of the unsourced paragraphs in this article are actually supported by citations, you need to appropriately use citations in the article. I'm going to restore the improvements I made to the writing and sourcing, and I suggest that you do not revert them again. If you wish to restore material to the biography of a living person, you must make sure that it is cited.

I also asked you for proof of this claim that she's notable in Iraq. As I said, the German sources seem to use her more as a human face on particular issues, such as atheist refugees, rather than as a notable person per se. If you have sources about her notability in Iraq, please produce them. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 03:18, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you misunderstood what I said, please read again when I said: "Contacting Zuhair by email was to get a free licensed picture of her to use and also to confirm that this article have valid informations" I did not asked for information or details, I asked for a picture to provide and a conformation that all of this is valid, never asked, never provided. All of the details in the article was heavily based from her interview with the DW channel. Your edits was not an "improvements" was vandalism, you just can't remove things you don't like, how many times should I repeat saying that? talking about things that "unsourced" I've look at your contributions and saw lots of "unsourced" edits, I believe you should go add some sources to them before removing things on wiki. About the notability you can just search by yourself and see, although most of the things will be in Arabic which I assume you won't understand unlike me. Want "improve" the article? add things to it, don't remove things were sourced in sources section in the article. I undo your edits to the last good version. Have a nice day. --Do.Lew.83 (talk) 04:26, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:JUSTGOOGLEIT is not an appropriate response to someone asking you for sources. If the sourcing about her in Arabic, unlike the sourcing in German, demonstrates her notability, please produce some of the sources you're referring to. I'm trying to work with you and help you here, but if you're going to insist on your ownership of the article to the point not only of adding unsourced information about a living person, but also removing sourced information added by other people, I'm going to have to seek disciplinary measures. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 14:49, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I never removed a "sourced information added by others" the page history is there and everyone can see the history edit and what changed. I only added back what you and others removed even when its sourced and was base on the interview mentioned in the source section, I'll add back what was removed and add the sources to them. And btw its not "My ownership" or what ever, its free wikipedia everyone can edit it and add some, but to the point I see vandalism by removing entire sourced sections no I'll not let this get throw, and will never let you adding this "Throughout 2019 she publicly posted many photos that showed her naked body, a view I wouldn't wish for my worst enemies." back to the article. As I said I'll bring back the text that got removed with the sources "at the end of each text" so you don't have a reason or something, I'm done with this edit warring, it's stupid and childish actually. I'm only here doing this cause this article and the Arabic one and even the wikidata about her is targeted by an anti-feminist and pro islamic organization who's trying to get rid of everything against them so I had to do something while I'm very busy battling the coronavirus in me. I'll get better and greater and will make this article great again soon. --Do.Lew.83 (talk) 23:43, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I missed that my edit had accidentally restored vandalism, and I removed it myself when I spotted it. I'm sorry to hear that you're having a hard time, and please be assured that I don't support vandalism in this article any more than you do, but making sure that unsourced claims about living people are removed from Wikipedia is not vandalism and is an important policy that benefits Zuhair far more than it benefits her attackers. Incidentally, I inquired, on your behalf, about the procedure for confirming that you have contacted a subject, and you would go through WP:OTRS. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 04:28, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]