Talk:Zaynab Khadr

Notability
With regard to BWH76's flagging this as non-notable:

Zaynab Khadr's claim to notability does not ride entirely on the shoulders of her brothers. Granted, she is not the household name in Canada that Abdurahman Khadr or Omar Khadr are, but I think that her being the subject of numerous television interviews along with the Osama bin Laden connection makes this subject pass the litmus test of notability.

To be specific about it, I believe that taken together the CBC article, the CityNews article, and the Canberra Times article constitute evidence that the subject "has been the subject of published secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject."

I realize the argument is not so much whether all this information should be deleted, but instead about whether it should be here or in the Khadr family article. Independent of the issue of notability which I mentioned above which I think serves as a compelling enough reason for a separate article, I think there is already more than enough to discuss in the Khadr family article. --Saforrest (talk) 20:38, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Notability Clarification
You make a few good points - I should have been clear that I do not think that this article should be deleted, but merged as you suggest. I'd like to hear your thoughts on this, but here is where I stand on the issue:

The main reason is that I believe the article should be merged is that it fails the [| Not News], specifically "Someone or something that has been in the news for a brief period is not necessarily a suitable subject for an article in their own right."  Ms. Khadr's notability is derived purely through her family.

Additionally, this article seems to fit directly into the into the General Non-Valid Criteria - "That a person has a relationship with a well-known person is not a reason for a standalone article."

Yes, she has been interviewed by various sources as is documented in this article, but the reason that she has garnered any media attention (and the focus of each interview) is solely due to the actions by and the accusations of her family as opposed to anything that she may have done herself. In other words, she is not independently notable, but she should be included in another article.

As such, some of the information about Ms. Khadr may be omitted in any merge as per this policy.  BWH76 (talk) 23:35, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The RCMP has made it clear on a number of occasions that Zaynab Khadr is considered to be as "guilty" as the rest of the family - her name comes up in any discussion of the family - meaning this article should exist, since people will be turning to us to find out who she is. And the small amount of information that could be fairly included in an article on the family, without breaking WP:UNDUE, would really not be enough. Sherurcij (Speaker for the Dead) 02:17, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * According to an affidavit written by Sergeant Konrad Shourie, a senior RCMP counter-terrorism official:
 * {| class="wikitable"


 * "I believe that Zaynab Khadr has willingly participated and contributed both directly and indirectly towards enhancing the ability of al Qaeda to facilitate its criminal activities."
 * }
 * Should we trust Shourie's judgment here? Judgment call.  But, without regard to how credible we find his claim, he is an important player, and his views matter, this affidavit matters.
 * Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 05:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 05:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I am frankly perplexed by suggestions that Ms Khadr: "...has been in the news for a brief period." -- The following references span about two years -- which doesn't match my definition of a "brief period".
 * Michelle Shephard, in the Toronto Star, has been following the Khadr's, including interviews with Zaynab, but the Toronto Star has changed its policy and made most of its older article paid. Geo Swan (talk) 05:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Michelle Shephard, in the Toronto Star, has been following the Khadr's, including interviews with Zaynab, but the Toronto Star has changed its policy and made most of its older article paid. Geo Swan (talk) 05:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Michelle Shephard, in the Toronto Star, has been following the Khadr's, including interviews with Zaynab, but the Toronto Star has changed its policy and made most of its older article paid. Geo Swan (talk) 05:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Michelle Shephard, in the Toronto Star, has been following the Khadr's, including interviews with Zaynab, but the Toronto Star has changed its policy and made most of its older article paid. Geo Swan (talk) 05:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Michelle Shephard, in the Toronto Star, has been following the Khadr's, including interviews with Zaynab, but the Toronto Star has changed its policy and made most of its older article paid. Geo Swan (talk) 05:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Michelle Shephard, in the Toronto Star, has been following the Khadr's, including interviews with Zaynab, but the Toronto Star has changed its policy and made most of its older article paid. Geo Swan (talk) 05:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Michelle Shephard, in the Toronto Star, has been following the Khadr's, including interviews with Zaynab, but the Toronto Star has changed its policy and made most of its older article paid. Geo Swan (talk) 05:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Michelle Shephard, in the Toronto Star, has been following the Khadr's, including interviews with Zaynab, but the Toronto Star has changed its policy and made most of its older article paid. Geo Swan (talk) 05:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Michelle Shephard, in the Toronto Star, has been following the Khadr's, including interviews with Zaynab, but the Toronto Star has changed its policy and made most of its older article paid. Geo Swan (talk) 05:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Michelle Shephard, in the Toronto Star, has been following the Khadr's, including interviews with Zaynab, but the Toronto Star has changed its policy and made most of its older article paid. Geo Swan (talk) 05:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Michelle Shephard, in the Toronto Star, has been following the Khadr's, including interviews with Zaynab, but the Toronto Star has changed its policy and made most of its older article paid. Geo Swan (talk) 05:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Michelle Shephard, in the Toronto Star, has been following the Khadr's, including interviews with Zaynab, but the Toronto Star has changed its policy and made most of its older article paid. Geo Swan (talk) 05:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Michelle Shephard, in the Toronto Star, has been following the Khadr's, including interviews with Zaynab, but the Toronto Star has changed its policy and made most of its older article paid. Geo Swan (talk) 05:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Michelle Shephard, in the Toronto Star, has been following the Khadr's, including interviews with Zaynab, but the Toronto Star has changed its policy and made most of its older article paid. Geo Swan (talk) 05:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Michelle Shephard, in the Toronto Star, has been following the Khadr's, including interviews with Zaynab, but the Toronto Star has changed its policy and made most of its older article paid. Geo Swan (talk) 05:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Michelle Shephard, in the Toronto Star, has been following the Khadr's, including interviews with Zaynab, but the Toronto Star has changed its policy and made most of its older article paid. Geo Swan (talk) 05:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Michelle Shephard, in the Toronto Star, has been following the Khadr's, including interviews with Zaynab, but the Toronto Star has changed its policy and made most of its older article paid. Geo Swan (talk) 05:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Michelle Shephard, in the Toronto Star, has been following the Khadr's, including interviews with Zaynab, but the Toronto Star has changed its policy and made most of its older article paid. Geo Swan (talk) 05:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Merge suggestion
The value of the wikipedia doesn't merely lie in the raw text. The information in a paper document has to be organized, to be really useful. The organization of the information is even more important with hyperlinked documents. Crucial information lies in the links, not in the text.

Merging perfectly valid, referenced articles, for some kind of misplaced aesthetic reason, guts the utility of the extremely powerful "what links here" button.

With paper documents authors and editors really had no choice but to impose their idea of the natural order readers access information about the topics they have written about.

With hyperlinked digital documents authors no longer have to impose their idea of the natural order on readers. Readers should be able to pick their own path. When articles are small and focussed on single topics, jumping from one article to a link within it to another article is more useful. The reader has a better idea what the link will contain. The links shown when you click on the what links here button will be more meaningful.

Yes there are instance when merging articles makes sense -- but far fewer than mergists contend. Geo Swan (talk) 05:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

HCI/Sudan/Truck
This article (admittedly quite biased) alleges that the Sudanese Zawahiri-follower involved with the Embassy Bombing and living with the Khadr family at the time he purchased a truck used in the bombing...was actually either a "suitor" or married to Zaynab at the time. Sherurcij (Speaker for the Dead) 22:29, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

removed copyright violation
Removed copyright violation from the Toronto Star. Sherurcij (speaker for the dead) 01:23, 2 April 2009 (UTC)