Talk:Zeituni Onyango/Archive 2

The American Prospect
I agree that there is a problem with Soapboxing Banjiboi it is evident in your contribution to the article. The American Prospect for instance is a political advocacy journal not a news journal. I also doubt that Zeituni faces danger from the Kikuyu faction in the government. Barack Obama's election is seen as providing hope for improvement in national relations which could benefit Kenya generally. There is more likely to be danger from common criminals. RichardBond (talk) 03:35, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually i see you as soapboxing by inserting content that seems a bit irrelevant. This article is about Onyango - she felt threatened and cited violence so that is discussed. That Kikuyu people also supported Obama seems irrelevant. Most news reports see overwhelming support from all Kenyans as a hopeful sign. If we had a source that Kikuyu tribe members opposed him that might be relevant. Also save the editorializing about the American Prospect article - we state here that they are the source so anyone can read into that what they wish and they can look to that article or click on the reference link to investigate further if they wish. It's not Onyango's fault that they have written about her. -- Banj e  b oi   22:18, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

It is questionable how threatened she actually felt. If someone is here on a legal temporary status it is possible attempt to make it permanent by claiming persecution to gain asylum regardless of actual threat. Zeituni Onyango had requested asylum by a judge reviewing her case and been turned down. As you say the support for Obama in Kenya comes Kikuyu as well as Luo but you have said above that only opposition is relevant. If she goes back fringe Kikuyu might try to kidnap her or common criminals. The Kikuyu who are in the Kenyan are far more likely to try and utilise her in conjunction with Luo to gain American economic support. On the other hand if she is able to use her family political connection to stay she will undermine any appearance of impartiality. RichardBond (talk) 23:14, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * On Wikipedia though we go by verifiability not truth. You may know that her claim of violence is questionable but sources only say that she cited violence so that is what the article states. We also don't know why her case was rejected - it could have been mishandled in some way or she didn't qualify under the provisions she applied for at that time. We don't know so all we state is that is was denied.
 * As for the Obama connection to Onyango and Kenya there are many but they aren't all appropriate here. She attended his Senate inauguration years ago but as of yet that doesn't seem like its noteworthy enough to include. Her family was mobbed - in a good way - in Kenya but that to has been left out. The tribal information is relevant to the violence and ethnic tensions between the Kikuyu and Luo. Thousands have been killed and many more displaced due to the violence that she cites as her reason to seek asylum. If she sought asylum citing the overall support of President Obama in Kenya then I would want to include that information instead. It's not that only opposition is relevant, it's that whatever is relevant should be placed within context and we let the readers decide what to think. Onyango cited violence and sources support there is a decades-long history of it.
 * Whether or not she stays or Kenya gets extra US support is speculation. If and when events happen we also have to look to sources to state why they happened. We follow their lead. -- Banj e  b oi   00:07, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Pronunciation
The lede currently ascribes the pronunciation "zay-TUHN" for "Zeituni". This seems to suggest that the last letter is silent, but Obama's nickname for her, "Aunti Zeituni" suggests that "Zeituni" rhymes with "Aunti" - i.e. that the pronunciation is "zay-TUHN-ey" or similar. Anyone with access to American/Kenyan TV care to comment? the skomorokh 09:46, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Notable biography
This is a well written and sourced article but its fails our notability requirementsfor biographical articles I think. Basically we have an encyclopedia article on an illegal Kenyan immigrant who is a Computer programmer and public health advocate. She is a half aunt of Obama. So what? The only notable information is her investigation during Obama's presidency for illegal immigration but this is certainly not grounds for an encyclopedia article on her biography. Count Blofeld  16:38, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * It seems you are confusing notability with importance. Notability is determined by significant coverage in reliable sources, which this topic has in spades. the skomorokh  18:17, 10 November 2008 (UTC)


 * She's is one of the world's more high-profile political asylum cases because she is the relative of arguably one of the most powerful men in the world. This runs concurrently with US efforts to reform immigration and she has been pegged as a poster-child of sorts on multiple sides of these complex issues. -- Banj e  b oi   22:21, 10 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Since her notability is derived from Barack Obama, perhaps this material is better covered in Barack_Obama_presidential_campaign,_2008 and Family of Barack Obama? Just a thought. --Regents Park (bail out your boat) 17:44, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * The notability is derived from the coverage of the topic. Apart from that "how" would it be better covered? What tools you lack here that you would have there? Are you unable to edit the text of the article here or how possibly could it be "better" in any way? Hobartimus (talk) 23:22, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * What I mean is that the stuff that relates to the campaign can go in Barack_Obama_presidential_campaign,_2008, while the stuff that relates to her aunt-ness can go in Family of Barack Obama. Apart from those two things, there is not much that is notable. BTW, this is just a thought and I'm not married to it (the latter is a metaphor that sort of implies that I don't have a strong conviction, either way, on this issue).--Regents Park (bail out your boat) 02:01, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * It was already proposed in the Afd, however at this point many things changed. The campaign is over the campaign article is no longer relevant here and the family article is a poor excuse for an "article". It has 75 sources for what 30 something family members, like 2-3 on average per family member? This article after some older mass deletions and blanking done by a disruptive editor still has 49 sources and much higher quality. The family members "article" barely qualifies as a decent "list" based on it's content it probably should be renamed list of to reflect the reality of lack of no content there. Hobartimus (talk) 13:21, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I think the family article will grow exponentially and this is one of many family members to get a more full article written. See Category:Siblings of Presidents of the United States. Category:Relatives of Presidents of the United States is likely to be created soon. -- Banj e  b oi   16:27, 12 November 2008 (UTC)