Talk:Bella Hadid/Archive 1

Archive 1

Nationality

Per WP:BLP, sources must be cited when adding information to biographies. Concerning Hadid's citizenship - we know for certain that she is an American citizen. No references have been cited showing that Hadid has indeed claimed Dutch citizenship. Furthermore, Palestine is a geographic area, not a nationality. There are no "citizens of Palestine." Until sources can be provided confirming that she is indeed holds Dutch or Palestinian citizenship, I am reverting the changes to the opening sentence. 47.55.183.206 (talk) 00:05, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Note this exact discussion also happened over at Talk:Gigi Hadid. 47.55.183.206 (talk)

'Palestinian' is a nationality. Candy bling1 (talk) 16:11, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 May 2018

Add this factual sentence under "Early life": Her father is Muslim. 109.66.130.32 (talk) 01:01, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

References

 Not done Mohamed Hadid has an article where personal details about him belong. This article is not about him. Geraldo Perez (talk) 01:09, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Arabic name

I've removed this countless times but it somehow keeps reappearing so I guess a discussion is necessary. Why are editors insistent on including Hadid's name written in the Arabic language? I understand if Hadid was a born-and-raised Palestinian model, but she is not. She is American. Hadid's only connection to the Arab world is being half-Palestinian. Unless she has done work and advocacy for the Arab community or generated her notability due to her Arab ancestry (neither of which is true), I don't understand why this would be here. To me, it comes across as just nationalism. Kim Kardashian's name is not written in Armenian for the same reasons. Gigi Hadid's name also features no Arabic, so I don't know why Bella's would. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 22:48, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Bellahadid.jpg.hadid.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:06, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Pseudo science - Cronic Lyme Disease

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:PSCI&redirect=no

The page includes several references to a disputed health issue, including saying she was “diagnosed” with it. It is clearly stated in the Wikipedia article about the health issue that it’s disputed. In this article however, it is explained as a “disease” that she is “diagnosed” with. This does not go along with a NPOW. Kyrkovaktmästarn' (talk) 07:21, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Height, etc

I think vital stats should remain out unless an aspect of notability. If there are related discussions on the topic, I can't recall them offhand. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 21:39, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

I've asked at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Biography#Any_broad_consensus,_etc_on_inclusion_of_vital_stats?. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 21:51, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Plastic Surgery

Bella Hadid has had plastic surgery on her nose, in spite of the fact that she has constantly refused to come out with the truth on this subject or to further comment. (This can be seen in her portrayal of herself on The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills when her mother, Yolanda Hadid, was a cast member.) VivaLaVives (talk) 16:03, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Fyre

Should fyre festival be mentioned? It is in Emily Ratajkowski and even has a whole section in Kendall Jenner. Awbfiend (talk) 19:06, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

The two articles you mention seem to give it undue weight, with too much tangential detail. What sources are you proposing? --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 20:01, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Philanthropy section

I've removed:

In 2016, Hadid donated a pair of denim jeans to Johny Dar's Jeans for Refugees project, which were to be hand painted and auctioned off in order to raise money for the International Rescue Committee. In 2018, she joined to make 500 meals scheduled to be delivered to the Bowery Mission shelter on behalf of System of Service, Hashtag Lunch Bag, and Nike for Thanksgiving in New York.

In April 2020, Hadid announced she made a donation to the Food Bank and Feeding America to support COVID-19 relief. In May 2020, she announced she will be supporting and donating to charities such as Preemptive Love, UNRWA USA and Middle East Children's Alliance (Meca) to help support refugees, displaced families, families in the front lines of conflict and children across Palestine, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and other affected regions.

Hadid has shown support for Black Lives Matter movement. When Black Lives Matter protests resurged in May 2020, Hadid took to Instagram to share that she would be donating to the NAACP Legal Defense Fund and also shared her support of those protesting, donating, and demanding justice for the too many black lives taken by the hands of police in America. In June, Hadid auctioned off her Miu Miu boots as part of the inaugural Way We Wore auction, a collaboration with the pre-loved fashion site, Hardly Ever Worn It organised by British Vogue that benefit NHS Charities Together and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). In July, Hadid auctioned limited edition fashion item that she has created at home during lockdown and 100% of proceeds will go towards supporting the black community, with initiatives such as Your Rights Camp, Feeding America and more. Hadid donated some of her clothes to a pop-up event that went to benefit Black Lives Matter causes, including Abundant Beginnings Collective and Brooklyn Supported Agriculture which was called "Sidewalk Sale for Social Justice" in Brooklyn in September.

In August 2020, following the explosion in Beirut, Lebanon, she announced that she will be donating to 13 local and international charities.

References

There may be something encyclopedic in all this, but the high-quality, independent sources are required. --Hipal (talk) 18:00, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Bistymings Can you provide reliable third party sources that indicate the noteworthiness of In 2016, Hadid donated a pair of denim jeans..." please? Some1 (talk) 18:34, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Hipal I've added more sources to the section. You better help to provide more sources rather than keep reverting it. (Bistymings (talk) 09:42, 23 November 2020 (UTC))

Some1 I've added another reliable source thanks (Bistymings (talk) 09:42, 23 November 2020 (UTC))

Please revert and get consensus first. Here's the new proposal:

In 2016, Hadid donated a pair of denim jeans to Johny Dar's Jeans for Refugees project, which were to be hand painted and auctioned off in order to raise money for the International Rescue Committee. In 2018, she joined to make 500 meals scheduled to be delivered to the Bowery Mission shelter on behalf of System of Service, Hashtag Lunch Bag, and Nike for Thanksgiving in New York City.

In April and May 2020, Hadid announced she made a donation to the Food Bank and Feeding America to support COVID-19 relief. In May 2020, she announced she will be supporting and donating to charities such as Preemptive Love, UNRWA USA and Middle East Children's Alliance (Meca) to help support refugees, displaced families, families in the front lines of conflict and children across Palestine, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and other affected regions.

Hadid has shown support for Black Lives Matter movement. When Black Lives Matter protests resurged in May 2020, Hadid took to Instagram to share that she would be donating to the NAACP Legal Defense Fund and also shared her support of those protesting, donating, and demanding justice for the too many black lives taken by the hands of police in America. In June, Hadid auctioned off her Miu Miu boots as part of the inaugural Way We Wore auction, a collaboration with the pre-loved fashion site, Hardly Ever Worn It organised by British Vogue that benefit NHS Charities Together and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). In July, Hadid auctioned limited edition fashion item that she has created at home during lockdown and 100% of proceeds will go towards supporting the black community, with initiatives such as Your Rights Camp, Feeding America and more. Hadid donated some of her clothes to a pop-up event that went to benefit Black Lives Matter causes, including Abundant Beginnings Collective and Brooklyn Supported Agriculture which was called "Sidewalk Sale for Social Justice" in Brooklyn in September.

In August 2020, following the explosion in Beirut, Lebanon, she announced that she will be donating to 13 local and international charities.

References

Starting at the beginning, the new source verifies the information but is just a promotional piece, a press release slightly modified. --Hipal (talk) 17:18, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Hipal Could you please stop reverting what I have put? What kind of sources do you want? You want me to put her instagram account as source or what? (Bistymings (talk) 08:30, 1 December 2020 (UTC))

Sources that are clearly reliable and independent, while not simply regurgitating celebrity trivia or promotion. --Hipal (talk) 17:26, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Small charities of BELLA HADID do not qualify as Philanthropy, the section lacks argumentative base uses unreliable sources and Post-Truth

In recent months, some users who belong to FANDOMS or Bella Hadid's fan club have tried with effort to make a section dedicated to philanthropy, using as a reference and referring to minor charities whose donation consists of clothes and jeans, boots " MIU MIU ”, or supposed shipments of food in small quantities or announcements about which this public figure named Bella Hadid makes on her social networks regarding which household or charity she donates small amounts of food. This type of charity does not qualify as “Philanthropy” and Bella Hadid never donated large amounts of money to renowned institutions or foundations such as UNICEF, WFP (world food program) nor has she ever created a foundation to raise money on a large scale, like Sean Penn has done with CORE (Community Organized Relief Effort) or like Bill Gates and his (Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation), or The Oprah Winfrey Leadership Academy Foundation that raises US $ 172 million a year. if Bella Hadid donated a lot more than a one million dollars, we would agree considered her as humanitarian figure and does philanthropy on the same level as Bill Gates, George Soros, Elon Musk, Oprah Winfrey, Leonardo Dicaprio, Angelina Jolie, Sean Penn, Selena Gomez, Shakira , or activist of the LGBT movement like Harvey Milk and Laverne Cox. But I repeat that Bella Hadid's small charities do not qualify as philanthropy, donating your clothes, your”MIU MIU boots” , some Jeans or “Nike shoes” or donating small amounts of food to shelters is only minor charity and does not turn it into philanthropy and many celebrities do it anonymously without advertising it on social media as Bella Hadid and no one considers it philanthropy. What I perceive with this section is an effort by users who are fans of Bella Hadid to want to clean up her public image and try to position her as a “good person” based on small charities exaggerated by her fans and by Bella Hadid and her modeling agency IMG. This is a very serious fault in Wikipedia, because it denotes a lack of objectivity, Wikipedia is not a place to clean or whitewash anyone's image, I also see that it is used as an argument to justify the supposed philanthropy section in which Bella Hadid supports the movement Black Lives Matters BLM, which is absurd and lacking in argumentative weight, supporting the BLM movement, does not make you a Humanitarian figure or is worthy of being considered philanthropy, many celebrities support that movement and it is not written about in their Wikipedia articles. Some users also used bad reference sources for this type of section: HARPERS BAZAAR, PEOPLE MAGAZINE, N LIFE STYLE, VOGUE, COSMO, they are fashion and gossip magazines, they are not reliable sources like THE ECONOMIST O TIME, or THE NEW YORK TIMES, CNN that are world and current politic economic actuality magazines and are suitable sources for such things as philanthropy. For these reasons, in addition to the fact that in the "philanthropy" section there is a Wikipedia ad that says that the sources used by users or fans are not reliable sources and that it looks more like an ADVERTISEMENT without trustworthy links and lacking a neutral point of view, that is why the so-called “Philanthropy” section has been removed. I invite fanatic users to write about topics with real argumentative weight and not post-truth like the supposed philanthropy of Bella Hadid, that´s the reason a cause this article still C-CLASS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tammaravon89 (talk • contribs) 05:28, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 May 2021

Change “American model” to “Palestinian-American model” 202.187.155.211 (talk) 07:44, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done per MOS:ETHNICITY. Shellwood (talk) 09:49, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 May 2021

Her Support for Sheikh Jarrah in 2021 Israelistate (talk) 09:17, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:48, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Lead section

I've been trying to expand Hadid's lead section to include more information about her career (like adding the amount of appearances she's had on international Vogue magazine covers, and her Vogue September cover record). I've even added citations to support the information. But every time I try to add it in, it always gets deleted.

If there is a noticeable stub in the article saying that the lead section is too short and suggesting that it be expanded (which this article has), then why are expanding efforts getting deleted? Shouldn't there be more information added to that section?

Suggestions are more than welcome.

Sweethavxn (talk) 18:13, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for starting a discussion on this.

Per WP:LEDE, The lead serves as an introduction to the article and a summary of its most important contents. Because the article is in such very bad shape overall, it isn't clear what belongs in the lede. Tallies of the number of times she's been on the cover of magazines don't appear very important, but better references could indicate otherwise. Looking over the first dozen references, I'm not seeing much to work from and a great deal that should be pruned back. Is there even one high-quality reference about her with depth?

Until the article is far better, it's going to be difficult to figure what might belong in the lede. --Hipal (talk) 00:38, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 August 2021

Can you add protection template?

Best regards :) 201.239.205.195 (talk) 01:47, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made

@Grayson Indica: what sources? I only want to add pp as this article is semiprotected. All protected pages need protection template. Do you know it?. This: {{pp-vandalism}}

This page already semi protected we don't understand what changes you want to be made please explain in nutshell

@Grayson Indica: the template {{pp-vandalism}} is normally added to the top of the article when its protected. But nevermind bye bye. Anyway this isn't protected indefinitely. For next time, try to be a little smarter

Template protection

Can anyone add {{pp}} template to the top of the article, please?

Greetings. 201.239.205.195 (talk) 04:35, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Added the template. SunDawntalk 07:34, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 January 2019 and 13 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Zelharake.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 17:56, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 March 2022

In the Relationships section, please change the following:

Wikitext to change

Hadid is currently in a relationship with [[art director]] Marc Kalman.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Bella Hadid Seemingly Confirms New Relationship with Mystery Man on Instagram|url=https://people.com/style/bella-hadid-seemingly-confirms-relationship-with-marc-kalman/|access-date=2021-07-10|website=PEOPLE.com|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|last=Burgos|first=Jenzia|date=2021-07-08|title=Bella Hadid Just Went Instagram Official With Her New Boyfriend—& He's Friends With Travis Scott|url=https://stylecaster.com/bella-hadid-boyfriend/|access-date=2021-07-10|website=StyleCaster|language=en-US}}</ref> They have been dating since July 2020.<ref>{{Cite web|date=2021-07-09|title=Inside Bella Hadid's New Romance With Marc Kalman|url=https://www.eonline.com/news/1287761/inside-bella-hadid-s-new-romance-with-marc-kalman|access-date=2021-07-10|website=E! Online}}</ref> Hadid made their relationship public on July 8, 2021, during her time at [[Paris Fashion Week]] and the [[Cannes Film Festival]].<ref>{{Cite web|title=Bella Hadid Seemingly Confirms That She Has A New Boyfriend|url=https://www.wmagazine.com/culture/bella-hadid-marc-kalman-instagram|access-date=2021-07-10|website=W Magazine|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|last=Bailey|first=Alyssa|date=2021-07-09|title=All About Marc Kalman, Bella Hadid's Boyfriend She Posted on Instagram|url=https://www.elle.com/culture/celebrities/a36971648/who-is-marc-kalman-bella-hadid-boyfriend/|access-date=2021-07-10|website=ELLE|language=en-US}}</ref>

to the following:

Wikitext to use

On July 8, 2021, Hadid made public her relationship with [[art director]] Marc Kalman.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Bella Hadid Seemingly Confirms New Relationship with Mystery Man on Instagram|url=https://people.com/style/bella-hadid-seemingly-confirms-relationship-with-marc-kalman/|access-date=2021-07-10|website=PEOPLE.com|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|last=Burgos|first=Jenzia|date=2021-07-08|title=Bella Hadid Just Went Instagram Official With Her New Boyfriend—& He's Friends With Travis Scott|url=https://stylecaster.com/bella-hadid-boyfriend/|access-date=2021-07-10|website=StyleCaster|language=en-US}}</ref> during her time at [[Paris Fashion Week]] and the [[Cannes Film Festival]].<ref>{{Cite web|title=Bella Hadid Seemingly Confirms That She Has A New Boyfriend|url=https://www.wmagazine.com/culture/bella-hadid-marc-kalman-instagram|access-date=2021-07-10|website=W Magazine|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|last=Bailey|first=Alyssa|date=2021-07-09|title=All About Marc Kalman, Bella Hadid's Boyfriend She Posted on Instagram|url=https://www.elle.com/culture/celebrities/a36971648/who-is-marc-kalman-bella-hadid-boyfriend/|access-date=2021-07-10|website=ELLE|language=en-US}}</ref> They began dating in July 2020.<ref>{{Cite web|date=2021-07-09|title=Inside Bella Hadid's New Romance With Marc Kalman|url=https://www.eonline.com/news/1287761/inside-bella-hadid-s-new-romance-with-marc-kalman|access-date=2021-07-10|website=E! Online}}</ref>

Reason: Avoids the use of "Currently" which may become outdated. See MOS:DATED. I believe this is an uncontroversial change because it mostly just reorganizes the already-existing words, phrases, and references already in the section. 69.174.144.79 (talk) 19:25, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

 Already done Appears to have already been done by another editor, but not based on this edit request. Seems ok but feel free to make another edit request if you feel your wikitext would work better. Thanks and happy editing! --Ferien (talk) 15:33, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 July 2022

Change "the Weeknd" to "The Weeknd" in the 1st paragraph of Personal Life -> Relationships. Lipemsc (talk) 15:57, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: Please see MOS:NICKNAMETHE. Padgriffin ^{Griffin's Nest} 09:35, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 October 2022 (2)

Bella Hadid is a supermodel Stetzner.29 (talk) 22:09, 13 October 2022 (UTC) Bella Hadid is a supermodel

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:20, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Bella Hadid in Cannes 2021.webp

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:36, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

The phrase ‘diagnosed with chronic lime disease’ and the link to the Wikipedia page describing this as health fraud are inconsistent

See above 2A00:801:764:4548:ACEE:2EE8:C1F2:70C (talk) 05:37, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

My name is bella hadid

Bella hadid 78.131.17.40 (talk) 14:24, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Middle name

Hello! I think if i do remember well, talking about Bella Hadid real middle name isnt Khairiah but Khair. She told herself on her instagram's biography and i search a little bit, Daily Sabbah is a turkish pro government magazine and i think isnt a good source... i found this website explain that yes she name after her grandmother name who was called Khairiah but Bella Hadid middle name is Khair like Gigi Hadid's daughter is Khai... here, other website like Grazia, Glamour or Elle... I think we should change the name because it isnt true. What y'all think?

(i previously posted on teahouse) Datsofelija (talk) 12:40, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Y Agreed - although I haven't edited the article, Daily Sabah is generally considered as an unreliable source, so unless other opinions from editors come up, you should change the information. NotAGenious (talk) 12:52, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@NotAGenious Hello, can i change? Its been like 10 days without any answer since yours... Thanks Datsofelija (talk) 08:39, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

 Go ahead Sounds good to me. Let me know if you need any help. NotAGenious (talk) 08:46, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

I agree.Bella's middle name is Khair Maria1718182 (talk) 16:19, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Please edit or remove the "Controversies" section of the article.

I'm not sure who wrote it or approved this section - why is the article locked for editing when people are also able to publish sections that are poorly written and poorly edited? For example: "Both Hadid sisters along with Dua Lipa were featured in the controversial cover of the New York Times magazine as supporters of Hamas" - this sentence insinuates that Hadid is a supporter of Hamas and does not clarify that it was not the cover of the NYT, it was an advertisement in the magazine. There is also no evidence given to the claim that she has been accused of Antisemitism. 72.39.94.248 (talk) 17:54, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Removed per WP:BLP, WP:CRITS, WP:NOTSCANDAL. There may be some salvageable content or references in it. --Hipal (talk) 19:14, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

I agree with the first comment regarding the quality, and would suggest a thematic split:

-a section regarding antisemitism and Israel; most references that were removed can be salvaged, and I would suggest rephrasing some statements like the one criticised to reflect a NPOV; additionally, some of the current issues should be added. The structure should probably be chronological, and some of the more vague comments should be removed or sourced. The accusations of antisemitism should probably be provided with one or two additional sources.

-another section on the general political issues, either in a separate section or included somewhere else.

Is there something I missed? FortunateSons (talk) 18:02, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Hadid has been accused of anti-semitism and the sources explain it very well if you have time to actually read them.

"Poorly written" it wad featured in the New York Times magazine one of the most famous magazines in the world.Also Gigi Hadid has been known to spread misinformation which she later apologized for .Their father is an anti-semitic person comparing Nazis with Israel and there are sources that explain it.So before you make your statement go and read those sources.

Also it wasn't a cover.It was a whole article about them Maria1718182 (talk) 16:17, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

I mostly agree, but the edits are all covered by the rules on the Israel-Hamas Conflict and therefore need to be made by an extended-confirmed user. FortunateSons (talk) 18:11, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Any changes along the previous lines is most likely going to be immediately removed per WP:BLP. I suggest working with something resembling an edit request beforehand, clearly identifying the references and the proposed changes to the article. --Hipal (talk) 20:41, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Would you be willing to sign of on content, and then work on phrasing with me? I am happy to do both at the same time, but this was a bit of an issue last time. FortunateSons (talk) 20:45, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

It seems a waste of time at very best. --Hipal (talk) 17:25, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Hadid's middle name

Hadid's middle name is Khair not Khairiah. The source which is used is a pro goverment turkish source (as described here on wikipedia) and even on Bella's instagram it's written that her middle name is Khair. https://www.instagram.com/bellahadid/?hl=en Many sources have said that her middle name is Khair, so unless someone has heard the interview and has a video about it because it may have been written incorrectly. This misinformation should change and I don't know why it was allowed in the 1st place. If enough people aprove of this I'll change it myself. Maria1718182 (talk) 20:45, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

It would help to have a list of clearly reliable sources that we could work from to resolve this. --Hipal (talk) 18:57, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

I found a source from Vogue. https://www.vogue.com/article/bella-hadid-cover-april-2022. In this article Bella opened about her mental health. I thought to use her instagram but I dont' think that's reliable enough.I changed it on the wiki page, and feel free to review my edit. If you don't agree then change it to how it was. Thank you. Maria1718182 (talk) 17:55, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. That Vogue ref looks fairly good. We have conflicting references then. Did you just search for something that verifies Khair, or did you look deeper at all? We should look deeper. --Hipal (talk) 18:01, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

I just searched Hadid's middle name online.Her instagram confirms my claim.Since we haven't heard the interview online then we can't say anything about the name "Khairiah".Most sources claim that Bella's middle name is Khair

https://en.vogue.me/fashion/5-facts-bella-hadid/

https://www.vogue.com.au/fashion/news/gigi-hadid-reveals-the-name-of-her-daughter-with-zayn-malik/news-story/0b668a610a54f6a6af45d6c1d6905abf Maria1718182 (talk) 16:11, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Digging deeper, I agree with the changes, especially given Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 321#RfC: Daily Sabah, which was pointed out in the previous discussion that I overlooked.

Added with comment by @Trillfendi: [1], originally added as a ref by @Pktlaurence: [2]

I don't know why Datsofelija didn't make the change again after the previous discussion. --Hipal (talk) 18:42, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 February 2024

Change American model to Dutch and Palestinian-born American model 2A02:1811:3533:8D00:B964:FE08:53CB:997C (talk) 16:48, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

No reason given for changes. Please check relevant policies and guidelines, and indicate supporting references. --Hipal (talk) 19:36, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Regarding the Religion and politics section.

@Hipal and Tobby72: There is a bit of a disagreement over including info about Gaza, Israel and the song Harbu Darbu. From my perspective, the song is notable enough to be mentioned as it has its own article, its lyrics mention Hadid, and we have reliable sourcing for both: The Independent, The Times. There is also the sentence about the humanitarian situation and the war, which also is reliably supported by sources for both August and October of last year: USA Today/AP, AP, Reuters, Al Jazerra, Vulture, The Guardian. Since there is only three of us involved, is there any way to word or format it that the three of us will all be satisfied with? --Super Goku V (talk) 03:04, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for starting a discussion.

I think the entire section needs to be reworked. It looks very fan/anti-fan pov.

This looks like a case of name-dropping a celeb/model (Hadid) in the context of the Israel-Hamas War. Hence my concern that it's WP:UNDUE and WP:NOTNEWS. WP:RECENTISM too.

Which sources demonstrate this has any importance in Hadid's life from a historical perspective? Not The Independent. I don't have access to The Times. Not USA Today, AP, Reuters, Al Jazerra, nor Vulture. We might be able to do something with the context provided in the piece from The Guardian.

You didn't identify the same references as what were used in the article. Does that indicate you'd rather use the ones you mention? Rolling Stone, Times of Israel, and Business Insider are all publishers that I'd be wary of using for triple-contentious-topics content. --Hipal (talk) 03:42, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

If you think the entire section is a problem, then maybe it needs to be axed and rewritten. As far as I know, this is my first edits to this article. Regarding the next two paragraphs, NOTNEWS shouldn't apply because being mentioned in a song that is wishing that you would die is well outside of a routine situation. (As for the Who's who part of NOTNEWS, it is limited to a sentence in this article, so proportion is fine, which should cover the issue with UNDUE if I am understanding you properly.) I will say that you have a point regarding RECENTISM and that from a historical perspective nothing has changed in her life as far I as I am aware. Regarding the last, I did not write the original sentences nor the sources used. I am suggesting sources that are generally reliable to back up the claims and potentially have some of them be used in the article. (Just out of curiosity, do you believe that Mia Khalifa and Dua Lipa should be edited to remove their mentions of the song?) --Super Goku V (talk) 06:48, 17 February 2024 (UTC) (Amended on 12:24, 18 February 2024 (UTC))

Hadid has been a supporter of Palestine for many years and has been criticizing Israel's actions in Gaza for months, so this is not an isolated and insignificant event in her life. If Israel's number one song with 18 million views on Youtube is calling for her death, then it is definitely worth mentioning in her biographical article. I agree with Super Goku V's suggestion. The article could also be expanded to include her long-term support for Palestine. -- Tobby72 (talk) 08:07, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

As I said, "name-dropping". The band used the names to get attention, the press eats it up, but in the end it has no impact on Hadid's own life beyond influencing the amount and tone of the impulsive reactions (social media, soft news, etc) about her.

Hadid has been a supporter of Palestine for many years That's supported by The Guardian, and should be the focus of anything we include. The rest are just reactions to her and attempts to benefit from Hadid's high level of recognition and interest. --Hipal (talk) 17:57, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

The Jerusalem Post, October 30, 2023, Bella Hadid 'I receive hundreds of death threats' as Hamas war rages: "Hadid, who identifies as Palestinian and has been vocal about her support for the "Movement for the Liberation of Palestine," has frequently condemned Israel and actively participated in demonstrations against the country. ... She said that, "Every day, I receive hundreds of death threats, my phone number has been leaked, and my family feels unsafe." ... Hadid also extended her condolences to the Israeli families affected by the October 7 attack, saying that she grieved for the Israeli families grappling with the pain and consequences of the event. ... Continuing to criticize Israel, Hadid echoed the messages of the Palestine Liberation Movement, noting that it is crucial to understand the hardships faced by Palestinians, who often find themselves labeled as nothing but terrorists opposing peace." -- Tobby72 (talk) 11:45, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

I don't think it should be used given the author is "Walla!" --Hipal (talk) 01:12, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Yep. If I understand SYNDICATED and other discussions correctly, the article isn't considered to be a Jerusalem Post article, but a Walla! article instead.

@Tobby72: That means that it doesn't necessarily have the same reliability as The Jerusalem Post does. --Super Goku V (talk) 08:32, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

The Daily Beast, 28 October 2023, Bella Hadid Speaks Out on Israel-Hamas War After ‘Daily’ Death Threats: "On Instagram, the outspoken supermodel posted a written statement mourning the loss of Israeli and Palestinian lives over the past three weeks. In the same post, she shared that she’s been doxxed and has been sent “hundreds of death threats daily.” ... In the past, Bella has received backlash from Israel’s official accounts for attending a pro-Palestine rally.

The Business Standard, 26 October 2023, Gigi Hadid, Bella Hadid receive death threats for supporting Palestine : "Reports suggest that as a safety measure, the Hadids have had to change their phone numbers. Close sources to the family have also mentioned that their father Mohamed is contemplating involving the FBI to identify the individuals responsible for the death threats."

Hindustan Times, 27 October 2023, Bella Hadid breaks silence, posts long note in support of Palestine: ‘I've been sent hundreds of death threats daily': "Bella also mentioned how she, too, has been impacted by the crisis. “I've been sent hundreds of death threats daily, my phone number has been leaked, and my family has felt to be in danger. But I can not be silenced any longer. Fear is not an option."

Samaa TV, 18 October 2023, Hadid sisters receive death threats for their support of Palestine: "According to sources, the Hadid family has been compelled to take security measures, including changing their phone numbers, in response to the alarming number of death threats they have received."

Rolling Stone, 26 October 2023, Bella Hadid Says She’s Received ‘Hundreds of Death Threats’ Amid Israel-Hamas War: "Hadid, whose father Mohamed Hadid is a Palestinian immigrant and practicing Muslim, shared a post on her Instagram Thursday, where she also revealed that she’s been doxxed and has been sent “hundreds of death threats daily.” Hadid said she is currently in mourning with both the “mothers who have lost children” in Gaza, and also the “Israeli families that have been dealing with the pain and aftermath” of the Oct. 7 attack.

Dazed, 18 October 2023, Gigi and Bella Hadid face death threats for supporting Palestine: "In fact, Israel’s social media tactics – including twisting statements made by Gigi Hadid – has now been credited with influencing reported death threats against the entire Hadid family. ... According to TMZ, Gigi Hadid has received a wave of death threats (alongside Bella, Anwar, and their parents) since speaking out against the Israeli government’s violence in Gaza. These have reportedly come via email, social media, and their personal phones, with their numbers leaked online over the last week. The content apparently includes graphic descriptions of their executions."

The Express Tribune, 17 October 2023, Gigi Hadid, Bella Hadid receive death threats for supporting Palestine: reports: Reports claim that the Hadids have been forced to change their phone numbers to protect themselves. Sources close to the family have also revealed that Mohamed is considering involving the FBI to trace the perpetrators behind the death threats. -- Tobby72 (talk) 10:28, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Could you strike out, or otherwise identify, all potential sources above that do not meet Wikipedia's highest standards for sources, as required for BLPs? --Hipal (talk) 17:36, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Which of the listed sources would be acceptable to you, which would not be acceptable and why? -- Tobby72 (talk) 12:34, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Death threats and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict

This information was reverted, with the following edit summary: " edit-warring against BLP". I don't agree with that. She is of Palestinian descent and her views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and related death threats are in no way a violation of BLP policy. If you disagree, please take it to Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard.

Hadid has supported the Palestinians and criticized Israel's policy towards Palestine for many years. In October 2023, she expressed concern about the humanitarian situation in Gaza during the Israeli offensive in the Gaza Strip. She also condemned the Hamas-led attack on Israel. Hadid stated that she and her family have received death threats for their pro-Palestinian stance, saying: "I've been sent hundreds of death threats daily, my phone number has been leaked, and my family has felt to be in danger. But I can not be silenced any longer. Fear is not an option." In November 2023, Israeli music duo Ness & Stilla released the single "Harbu Darbu", calling for her death.

-- Tobby72 (talk) 20:46, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

References

If you disagree... That's not how BLP works, nor is it a sound approach for any disputed content in any contentious topic, let alone under three. Please stop edit-warring, and either try again to gain consensus or move on to something else. --Hipal (talk) 22:40, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

I agree. Hadid's Palestinian activism is quite well-documented. I don't see why this shouldn't be included, although I maybe would rewrite this paragraph a bit differently. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 23:01, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't see how her well documented activism falls under WP:UNDUE. The previous discussion failed to reach a consensus so citing that as a reason to remove not only my latest edit but the entire section seems unjustified. - Ïvana (talk) 04:21, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

As I mentioned earlier, "Hadid has been a supporter of Palestine for many years That's supported by The Guardian, and should be the focus of anything we include. The rest are just reactions to her and attempts to benefit from Hadid's high level of recognition and interest." [3].

Those discussions ended when it appeared that editors didn't understand the basics of what references are appropriate for a BLP.

As I mentioned on Gigi's talk page, "It all comes down to what references we have available and relevant policies. For references: WP:RS, WP:IS, and WP:BLPRS. As to the POV issues: WP:NOT (especially NOTNEWS), WP:RECENTISM, WP:POV."

The Guardian piece doesn't give us much to work with, and doesn't rise above NOTNEWS and RECENTISM. Is there something better? --Hipal (talk) 16:44, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Those discussions ended when it appeared that editors didn't understand the basics of what references are appropriate for a BLP.

@Hipal, that's doesn't look like a fair assessment to me. The last discussion ended with Tobby72's question to you. Tobyby72 restarting the discussion again because the prior one stalled out due to the unanswered question doesn't seem problematic to me.

As for references, I see three or four useable ones in the list provided by Tobby72. Why not use those and how doesn't The Guardian apply? --Super Goku V (talk) 09:19, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. BLP (and the associated contentious topic) places high standards on editors. If editors cannot identify BLP-quality references, then it's unlikely we can make progress.

I see three or four useable Great! Identify the ones you think we can use, then let's see what we can do with them. --Hipal (talk) 18:20, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

I am serious about my assessment. They wanted to know what sources you would accept and those that you would not. I thought you didn't see it because of the time difference, but that seems to have been incorrect.

The Guardian, The Independent, and The Times all seem to count easily. HuffPost and The Express Tribune would need some discussion to be potentially included. --Super Goku V (talk) 08:45, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

And I'm serious about my assessment.

Regarding the Guardian, I already wrote, without response, "The Guardian piece doesn't give us much to work with, and doesn't rise above NOTNEWS and RECENTISM. Is there something better?"

Re The Independent. It's a "Lifestyle" article, so we need to take care with giving it too much weight. It's churnalism, reporting on Bella's social media posts. The author provides almost no context beyond the penultimate paragraph. What do you think is usable from this reference?

Re: The Times. Archived copy found at https://archive.ph/lHphO . There's absolutely no context other than she's targeted in the song. --Hipal (talk) 16:53, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Personally, I think The Guardian with HuffPost can cover most of the proposed sentence "Hadid has supported the Palestinians and criticized Israel's policy towards Palestine for many years" between the following sentences: Hadid and her sister, Gigi, who is also a supermodel, are vocal supporters of Palestinian rights whose social media posts reach tens of millions of followers & Bella Hadid and her sister, model Gigi Hadid, have embraced their heritage and advocated for the Palestinian cause. The "for many years" portion might need a better source, but that is the only problem I see. NOTNEWS and RECENTISM don't seem to apply and would like clarification as to how those apply.

The Independent covers the proposed "She also condemned the Hamas-led attack on Israel" just fine. Bella Hadid posted a written statement to her Instagram condemning the Hamas attacks and advocating for the innocent lives of Palestinians amid Israel airstrikes in Gaz & “Seeing the aftermath from the airstrikes in Gaza, I mourn with all the mothers who have lost children and the children who cry alone, all the lost fathers, brothers, sisters, uncles, aunties, friends that will never again walk this earth.” I don't see a problem with using this source for VERIFY.

The Independent could also cover the "for many years" part discussed above. In the past, Hadid has taken public stances, standing with the Free Palestine movement. In May 2021, she received public backlash for attending a Pro-Palestine march in New York City along with her sister Gigi and Dua Lipa, who was dating her brother Anwar at the time. She was the target of an ad placed by the World Values Network in the New York Times condemning her support of Palestine, saying: “Hamas calls for a second Holocaust. Condemn them now.” If you think that is too much weight to give, then we can try to find another source. If you have a suggestion for a source, I would welcome it.

There's absolutely no context other than she's targeted in the song. So that would cover the proposed sentence, "In November 2023, Israeli music duo Ness & Stilla released the single "Harbu Darbu", calling for her death."

This would leave just two of the proposed sentences as needing new sources to be included in the article. --Super Goku V (talk) 20:45, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

NOTNEWS and RECENTISM don't seem to apply Why not? You're aware that this article is under three different contentious topics, so we shouldn't be ignoring or looking for exceptions to policy. BLP sets very high standards for the quality of sources and adherence to content policy. BLP also places the burden on those seeking to include content. --Hipal (talk) 17:16, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Why not? Hipal, you are the one claiming that NOTNEWS and RECENTISM apply. Why do I need to explain why a policy that you are citing doesn't apply? Just pointing at policy is frustrating as it doesn't make your point clear other than that you are claiming that X applies. (It also doesn't help that this was also brough up in the prior discussion.)

If it helps, I will go over NOTNEWS and hope that you will explain how RECENTISM and BLP apply to prohibit the suggested paragraph or its sentences.

NOTNEWS criteria 1 involves original reporting, but none of the sources are claimed to be primary sources, so it doesn't apply. News reports is criteria 2, but this isn't routine coverage of a celebrity with this involving the person's activism and harassment towards her. Who's who is criteria 3 and cannot apply as this is the primary article about a person. Criteria 4 is Celebrity gossip and diary which notes that not all events in a notable person's life are notable. Between the death threats and a song calling for her death, I find it easy to say that this qualifies as both notable and something "which our readers are reasonably likely to have an interest."

You're aware that this article is under three different contentious topics, so we shouldn't be ignoring or looking for exceptions to policy. Discussing how policy applies in this situation is not ignoring it. I have no idea what exceptions you are implying, but as far as I understand a policy either applies or it doesn't. As for the rest, there is a majority here that wants to include the content, the only issue is making it work with you as best as possible. --Super Goku V (talk) 09:28, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for addressing NOTNEWS.

I'd consider that ROUTINE does fit this: Reporting on social media posts where there are minimal outcomes fits NOTNEWS's "Wikipedia considers the enduring notability of persons and events. While news coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, most newsworthy events do not qualify for inclusion and Wikipedia is not written in news style."

However, it fits the WP:NOTDIARY better. We have entertainment reporting covering social media posts.

Celebrities are harassed. It's an unfortunate part of life in the limelight. People are harassed for taking political positions. That's unfortunate as well. Neither have weight in an encyclopedia article when the references are poor and there are minimal outcomes.

Regarding our previous discussion, I responded to you with something that applies here as well: As I said, "name-dropping". The band used the names to get attention, the press eats it up, but in the end it has no impact on Hadid's own life beyond influencing the amount and tone of the impulsive reactions (social media, soft news, etc) about her. --Hipal (talk) 17:08, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

@Hipal: Having given this consideration, here is my overall conclusion: The song is considered notable enough, along with this article. The Times both verifies the sentence and is considered to be generally reliable. The proposed paragraph is for a single sentence, which is the bare minimum it could be and does not seem to be excessive. There are no issues with the mention of the sentence in other articles: Mia Khalifa and Dua Lipa; just this article is a problem. Those sentences use the following sources, Business Insider, Newsweek, and The Times of Israel, with other potential sources being The Independent (2024 article) and The Jerusalem Post. From what I see, there is coverage with quality sources regarding the song to permit the proposed sentence regarding the song. --Super Goku V (talk) 06:53, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

I agree with your conclusion. If Hipal is still unconvinced, I would suggest Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard and/or Wikipedia:Requests for comment. --Tobby72 (talk) 16:41, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

I'm unclear if my policy concerns are even being considered. That's no way to create the necessary consensus that a BLP requires. --Hipal (talk) 23:18, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Hipal, my understanding was that your reply on the 3rd was about the "Harbu Darbu" proposed line. Were you referring to just that line or to multiple sentences? --Super Goku V (talk) 01:52, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

I believe I was clear with my comment of 16:44, 24 April 2024. --Hipal (talk) 16:35, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Okay then. Then what policy concerns did I not address? I explained how the song meets the notability requirements, which should cover NOTDIARY. The sentence involving the song doesn't fall under ROUTINE as it fails ROUTINE's definition. You complained about the source reporting on social media posts, so I gave you multiple other options for a source. It is clear that she was targeted in the song and we have sources that cover it.

As far as I can tell, here is where we are at with anything struck-out as needing more work:

Hadid has supported the Palestinians and criticized Israel's policy towards Palestine for many years. In October 2023, she expressed concern about the humanitarian situation in Gaza during the Israeli offensive in the Gaza Strip. She also condemned the Hamas-led attack on Israel. Hadid stated that she and her family have received death threats for their pro-Palestinian stance, saying: "I've been sent hundreds of death threats daily, my phone number has been leaked, and my family has felt to be in danger. But I can not be silenced any longer. Fear is not an option." In November 2023, Israeli music duo Ness & Stilla released the single "Harbu Darbu", calling for her death.

That leaves two sentences still needing worked on as discussed at the beginning of the month. --Super Goku V (talk) 18:45, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

I explained how the song meets... But that doesn't mean it is encyclopedic or due in this article about Hadid. --Hipal (talk) 16:29, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

If I got this right, your saying that a song which directly references Hadid and which has a standalone article with over two dozen sources might not be encyclopedic? Did I get that correct? --Super Goku V (talk) 06:16, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

No. I specifically wrote "in this article."

You argued that NOTDIARY and ROUTINE don't apply. I don't believe your arguments address the policy or my concerns. --Hipal (talk) 17:20, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Accidently omitted that I was referring to this article, but gotcha. --Super Goku V (talk) 22:44, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

I agree, an inclusion is definitely valid. I think both the politics and their reception should be included, and believe that an RfC or noticeboard are probably the most productive avenue here. Is someone opposed to that suggestion? FortunateSons (talk) 18:03, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

@FortunateSons: I am supportive of an RfC to help clear things up. --Super Goku V (talk) 18:33, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Great, I will write one up soon. I don’t think the parallel one at Gigi’s article will be over soon, but I don’t think there is an issue with parallel RfCs in this case? FortunateSons (talk) 18:50, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Huh, didn't know about that RfC. For now, it might be best to hold off and let that one run its course. While there is no technical issues, there could still be complains to doing so. --Super Goku V (talk) 06:29, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, makes sense. I think I will hold off for now. FortunateSons (talk) 06:34, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

@FortunateSons The RfC on the other article has concluded if there is still reason to proceed with an RfC here. --Super Goku V (talk) 02:59, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. That depends, are there still any objections to content that someone believes should be added? FortunateSons (talk) 08:06, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

That is a good question. Going back over the original proposal by Tobby72 with sentences stricken that are in the article in some form:

Hadid has supported the Palestinians and criticized Israel's policy towards Palestine for many years. In October 2023, she expressed concern about the humanitarian situation in Gaza during the Israeli offensive in the Gaza Strip. She also condemned the Hamas-led attack on Israel. Hadid stated that she and her family have received death threats for their pro-Palestinian stance, saying: "I've been sent hundreds of death threats daily, my phone number has been leaked, and my family has felt to be in danger. But I can not be silenced any longer. Fear is not an option." In November 2023, Israeli music duo Ness & Stilla released the single "Harbu Darbu", calling for her death.

I know that from the above that there is objections to this by Hipal, so the main thing to me would be some form of In October 2023, she expressed concern about the humanitarian situation in Gaza during the Israeli offensive in the Gaza Strip. It was sourced by Tobby72 with The Express Tribune, so we would need a new source or a discussion to use the The Express Tribune article. There are some recent sources that might work, BBC and Time, but I would prefer it to be clearer. I will see if I can do more digging on this. --Super Goku V (talk) 21:41, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I think a bit more information on the criticism/reactions she received is required, and the content added by @Starship.paint as well as reactions to past conduct. I think we can cut down the death threat quote, and let’s run activism + death threats + reactions/crit/adidas through the RfC? What do you think? FortunateSons (talk) 08:16, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

@FortunateSons: - as you probably know the material I added has already been removed, I find it quite important that the government of a country has directed targeted Hadid, and likely that view on Hadid (being antisemitic) has led to the death threats. starship.paint (RUN) 11:37, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Agreed, we should include both the accusations of antisemitism and the death threats though as far as I know, RS generally don’t directly relate these two.

If you scroll up this page (and the one on her sister), you will find longer discussions on the topics. @Hipal has repeatedly reverted such inclusions, so I think an RfC would be the least wasteful way to include this, instead of taking up more editor time? FortunateSons (talk) 11:43, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

I should note that the original threads have been archived here per the 2 thread/30 day rule. As for the Adidas situation, maybe we just need to find a source that references what the tweet said? (Worth an attempt.) --Super Goku V (talk) 18:43, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Nevermind, that was already tried. --Super Goku V (talk) 18:53, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

That sounds like a plan to me. --Super Goku V (talk) 18:43, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Any chance of including her support for Palestinians? There seems to be a consensus for inclusion. Burrobert (talk) 07:12, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

I think both her support and the reactions are RS-covered and DUE, but believe that an RfC would be quicker than continuing this discussion. :) FortunateSons (talk) 07:15, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

The BBC article adds little. The coverage of her support isn't very good, but I'll point out once again[4][5] that the Guardian article should be used. Coverage of the reactions doesn't appear to be encyclopedic despite months of discussion. --Hipal (talk) 20:35, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Let’s wait for the other RfC to end, and then do this via RfC here. FortunateSons (talk) 20:41, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

An extremely poor RfC isn't likely to help, other than educate editors on how to make useful RfCs.

We already have related content, and better sources, for Bella. It seems like our time is better spent on this article. --Hipal (talk) 02:37, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Notwithstanding your comments about the RfC, being able to include all content the majority of participants in this discussions would consider due would indeed be productive. However, reading over this and the last discussion, I believe that a binding consensus for inclusion (for example: activism, reactions (positive, negative, threats), about one paragraph per section) would be a productive way to save editor time from a third discussion, allowing us to focus on how to include content instead of which content to include. FortunateSons (talk) 09:08, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Afaict there is no RfC being conducted here. If there is an RfC going on somewhere else then it would generally be irrelevant to what is decided here. But why would we need an RfC here when there seems to be a consensus to include a mention of Bella's support for Palestine in her bio? Burrobert (talk) 14:13, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

I think we can definitely include her support and the reactions to it. If you want, you can make a suggestion on sourcing and text? FortunateSons (talk) 15:00, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Let's start with something uncontroversial:

• Hadid is a long-time supporter of Palestine and the Free Palestine movement.
• Bella and her sister Gigi donated $1 million to Palestinian aid agencies during the Israel-Hamas war.

Thank you.

The Independent does not verify that statement, though it gives an example that we already include in this article.

The PerthNow article makes an overgeneralization, saying "Hadid and her younger sister Bella ... have always been vocal in showing their support for the Palestinian cause."

The Guardian ref says, "Hadid and her sister, Gigi, who is also a supermodel, are vocal supporters of Palestinian rights whose social media posts reach tens of millions of followers."

Maybe drop The Independent, and add The Guardian?

Maybe add https://apnews.com/article/bella-hadid-dior-israel-hamas-war-fact-check-aabe93d8f40f0a5a226bd51af36b3343 ? --Hipal (talk) 16:12, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

The news.com.au article was meant to support the first statement since it includes the clause "[Gigi], who has been a longtime advocate for the ‘Free Palestine’ movement alongside her sister Bella Hadid ...". Anyway, there seems to be enough sources to substantiate these two fairly uncontroversial statements. Burrobert (talk) 16:53, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

So we use the News.com.au ref instead of the PerthNow ref? I'm going ahead and adding something along this line. --Hipal (talk) 17:49, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

References

Adidas advertising campaign

Basically, it looks like Adidas removed Hadid from their advertising campaign to cover for their ineptness. This seems squarely a case of WP:NOTNEWS. WP:CT/BLP and WP:CT/A-I apply. --Hipal (talk) 17:30, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

• ... except we have an Israeli embassy commenting, accusing Hadid of antisemitism, and Hadid herself commenting, criticizing the campaign and disavowing antisemitism. This is a part of her life that shows her having to thread the needle due to her political views. starship.paint (RUN) 11:40, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

I don't understand. Israeli embassy posts on social media are NOTNEWS.

This is a part of her life that shows her having to thread the needle due to her political views. Says what BLP-quality source? --Hipal (talk) 16:40, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

What parts of NOTNEWS, CT/BLP, and CT/A-I are you citing? NOTNEWS has four different criteria which don't seem to be an issue, plus we are not using the direct tweet, but an article. CT/BLP and CT/A-I don't apply in the way that you are using them to my perspective. --Super Goku V (talk) 18:57, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

I said that CT/BLP and CT/A-I apply. Do you disagree?

NOTNEWS: "not all verifiable events are suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia". All of #2 and #4.

I think it important to repeat once again, "This looks like a case of name-dropping a celeb/model (Hadid) in the context of the Israel-Hamas War. Hence my concern that it's WP:UNDUE and WP:NOTNEWS. WP:RECENTISM too." --Hipal (talk) 20:32, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

• @Hipal: - it seems that you are applying NOTNEWS and UNDUE in a subjective manner. "Israeli embassy posts on social media" are not necessarily NOTNEWS and UNDUE. The incident has had a tangible impact on Hadid. She was pulled from an advertising campaign by an employer, who apologized to her. She was directly criticized by a country's government, and she herself also apologized for the incident. There are plenty of BLP-quality sources covering this internationally. (1) New York Times, (2) Agence France-Presse, (3) NBC, (4) Financial Times, (5) Time, (6) Sky News UK, (7) BBC, (8) CBS, (9) Bloomberg, (10) Daily Telegraph, (11) Hollywood Reporter, (12) Guardian, (13) Washington Post, (14) USA Today (15) Haaretz. starship.paint (RUN) 13:34, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Pick out a couple of refs that you think are the best of what's available, and we can look at them in detail as a start, and compare them to the poorer ones to determine what might be something other than NOTNEWS. (It appears some are inaccessible to me, but let's see what you'd prefer to start with.)

Yes, social media posts generally are NOTNEWS, as are public relations campaigns.

She was directly criticized by a country's government As part of a wartime public relations campaign (some would say "propaganda campaign".)

Hadid gets pulled from an ad campaign, but we have absolutely no details on what the terms were before, nor what was changed. For all we know, this has absolutely no impact on her beyond the public relations mess.

she herself also apologized for the incident "Apologized"? Can you identify the ref that says that? --Hipal (talk) 16:23, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

My view is that this should be pretty straightforward. No need for editors to pick favorite sources for consideration, no need for unspecified decision procedures based on interpretations of NOTNEWS etc. It doesn't strike me as significantly different from adding content about a band's new album or an actor's part in a movie. It is career related. The Adidas campaign presumably qualifies for a mention as part of her career and the reaction to the campaign just alters the due weight evaluation. Sean.hoyland (talk) 07:53, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

You think it significant. Let's wait a year and then look for any evidence, if no one is going to try now. --Hipal (talk) 17:38, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

I didn't say I think it's significant. No one should care whether I think it's significant. Significance is a function of coverage in RS, not my opinion. It's part of her career history and it's covered by plenty of reliable sources. There is nothing complicated about it. It's just a little bit of information relevant to this encyclopedia article. Sean.hoyland (talk) 10:24, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Fair enough. I'll start a new subsection below for a next step. --Hipal (talk) 16:39, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Hipal, attempting to apply these policies as you are doing here varies widely from what is the normal/standard application on en.wiki. The content is clearly due, as are many other engagements of BLPs with the I/P area. FortunateSons (talk) 14:07, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Being dismissive of policies gets us nowhere at best, and can be seen as disruptive. --Hipal (talk) 17:38, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Then it’s a good thing that the three experienced editors (+ me) who disagree with your assessment are not dismissing policy, but instead applying it properly. FortunateSons (talk) 18:45, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

That's irrelevant, as anyone working in a BLP article should know. Sanctions apply. --Hipal (talk) 21:45, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Sanctions apply to the actual policy, not what you imagine it to be. I would strongly encourage you to listen to what your fellow editors are telling you. FortunateSons (talk) 21:52, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Please stop disrupting this talk page. --Hipal (talk) 16:36, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Please stop casting aspersions. FortunateSons (talk) 16:55, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Proposals

Let's get some proposed content together, with references. I'll dig through the article history. --Hipal (talk) 16:41, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

• Proposal 1 - [6]:

She also signed a contract with Adidas to promote the relaunch of a shoe that Adidas had originally created in 1972 for the Summer Olympics in Munich. The advertisement campaign became controversial due to the Munich massacre terrorist attacks, which were perpetrated by the Black September Organization during the games, and Hadid's contemporary pro-Palestinian views. Adidas later apologized after criticism from the Israeli government and said it would make changes to the advertising campaign. After Adidas dropped the ad campaign, Hadid issued a statement saying that she was "shocked, ... upset, and ... disappointed in the lack of sensitivity that went into [Adidas' advertisement] campaign". She also claimed not to have known about the Munich massacre and she that would not have signed on to the campaign had she known.

References

I'd say that grossly violates the policies already mentioned, and appears to have some SYN/V problems.

• Proposal 2 - [7]: In 2024 she expressed regret about wearing retro sportswear by Adidas that was supposed to be reminiscent of the 1972 Summer Olympics without taking into consideration that at the same time those games are associated with the Munich massacre where Palestinian terrorists killed Israeli athletes.

It seems UNDUE with what it presents while at the same time lacking basic context (and any references, of course). --Hipal (talk) 16:57, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

• Proposal 3 -

What’s wrong with this version? (Reverted here)

After German company Adidas used Hadid to promote a shoe campaign related to the 1972 Munich Olympics (where the Munich massacre of 11 Israelis and 1 German took place), the Israeli embassy to Germany protested, accusing Hadid of having "spread antisemitism in the past and incited violence against Israelis and Jews". Hadid responded that she was "disappointed in the lack of sensitivity" of the advertising campaign, while simultaneously disavowing "hate in any form, including antisemitism", and calling for "a world free of antisemitism".

Short, due, neutral. It’s my opinion that it’s a perfectly valid summary of events, cited to two very high quality sources. You claimed „rv - per NOT, POV, BLP“ and „and RECENTISM - political posturing is definitely a NOTNEWS situation“ as reasons for reverts, which do not align with my readings of policy FortunateSons (talk) 17:03, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

References

Thanks for that one. You beat me to it.

Besides what's been already mentioned, it's grossly UNDUE and appears to have some SYN/V problems. --Hipal (talk) 17:24, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

It’s two sentences based on AFP and BBC, with multiple other high quality sources available. How is it a SYN/V violation? FortunateSons (talk) 17:28, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

The SYN/V was to the first. Apologies.

SOAP, QUOTE vios with this last one.

For all we know, this has absolutely no impact on her beyond the public relations mess. --Hipal (talk) 17:45, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Ah, that makes more sense, thanks. Why do you consider this a soap violation? FortunateSons (talk) 17:53, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

The quotes (and, to a lesser extent, the content from the three public relations campaigns), especially the one coming from social media from a party engaged in what's been characterized as war propaganda.

Including "antisemitism" at all, is worse. --Hipal (talk) 18:53, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

We are correctly attributing the quotes, and based on the nature of the quotes and their coverage, they are due. While I’m not inherently opposed to paraphrasing the content, I see no reason to do so here, particularly if you’re concerned about exzessive length and considering it’s unlikely to fix what you’re objecting to. FortunateSons (talk) 18:58, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

based on the nature of the quotes and their coverage, they are due Howso? --Hipal (talk) 20:16, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Coverage is self-explanatory, I think - high-quality RS.

Nature of the quotes: considering it is about political statements relating to the impact on the career of a politically active person known for her career, making a significant accusation and having at least an indirect impact on her career, it would likely be significant even if it wasn’t made by a government body, which it was. Regarding her response, Wikipedia:Mandy Rice-Davies does not apply, and ‘allowing’ her to respond is a good choice, for encyclopedic completeness, the spirit of BLP, and human decency. As such, and based on both content and coverage, it’s due. I think it would be beneficial to let others weigh in at this point, so I’ll give them the opportunity.FortunateSons (talk) 20:25, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Coverage is self-explanatory... I see that as ignoring NOT, BLP, and POV. --Hipal (talk) 20:48, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Are you saying that there is a lack of high-quality RS covering the incident? Because if that’s what stopping you, I’m happy to look for more. FortunateSons (talk) 21:04, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Better references would change the situation, yes. I've been looking. Right now there seems to be a lot of churnalism, but no one is going beyond the public relations campaigns, other than to give a bit of background on Hadid and the 72 Olympics. Hadid gets pulled from an ad campaign, but we have absolutely no details on what the terms were before, nor what was changed. For all we know, this has absolutely no impact on her beyond the public relations mess. --Hipal (talk) 21:56, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

You've already been given no fewer than 15 high quality references. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 22:25, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

There is also Spiegel, FAZ, ZDF,Zeit, TAZ, Welt and SZ (non-exhaustive list), which are most of the large mainstream German publications (left, centre and right). FortunateSons (talk) 22:41, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm afraid they are definitely not all high quality. For example, that FAZ ref is garbage. Let's not throw mud at the wall.

Do any have analysis or provide historical context? --Hipal (talk) 23:33, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Well, an argument can be made about Welt/TAZ due to their political leanings and correlated quality issues, everything else is clearly RS.

Do you feel like the content cited by Spiegel/FAZ/ZDF are insufficient for this? FortunateSons (talk) 23:42, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

If your edit summary is any indication, you are referring to FAZ? It’s a (generally pretty centrist) German newspaper of record, what is the justification for calling it “garbage”? FortunateSons (talk) 23:54, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

The FAZ ref regurgitates, without checking, the rumor from US Weekly that Hadid was suing Adidas. It's untrue. I don't see a correction. That's why it's garbage. That's why I repeatedly refer to churnalism in this situation. --Hipal (talk) 01:39, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Considering they appropriately qualify it as a rumour: “now reportedly wants to take legal action against the sporting goods manufacturer from Herzogenaurach” (Google translate, just so I don’t bias the translation), I don’t think that a retraction is required without clear evidence against. Is there a source that confirms this as untrue? Because two weeks is not nearly enough to confirm it based on time passing alone, particularly with professional/corporate lawsuits. FortunateSons (talk) 08:05, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

• Proposal 4 - Here's a minimal proposal as an alternative:

In 2024, Hadid was removed from an Adidas advertising campaign, in part due to her Palestinian heritage.

References

This focuses on Hadid, without coatracking/soapboxing. --Hipal (talk) 20:48, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Leaves out too many details, both about the controversy and her reaction to it. There is no need to supress her reaction. Her reaction is neither coatracking nor soapboxing. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 21:36, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for joining the discussion.

Her reaction is soapboxing. Something from it may be DUE rather than NOTNEWS if there is actual analysis of her reaction, or maybe some historical context. I am unable to find such references so far.

Which controversies? Adidas' controversies are not hers, nor are those from wartime propaganda efforts. If there's no analysis or historical context, it's unclear what should be added, if anything. --Hipal (talk) 22:02, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Here are some notable facts

1. She was hired for an advertisement campaign
2. She was fired from said campaign due to her political positions
3. She reacted to her firing

All that is WP:DUE and beyond WP:NOTNEWS. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 22:22, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Bottom line: Whatever you want to write, it must include all these three key points. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 23:10, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

I believe that is all WP:OR. Can you supply any references for her being hired or fired? We might want to throw something about her political positions. Can you provide a source for that part? --Hipal (talk) 23:30, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

I think your accusation of WP:OR is slanderous. Everything in the paragraph is supported by the existing references. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 23:50, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

That's not how BLP works, nor verification in general. You've been asked to prove that BLP information is verifiable. If you can't, you need to withdraw your statement. Until you do one or the other, there's no reason to take the "three notable facts" any further. --Hipal (talk) 01:44, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Seems to me that you are not reading what I'm writing. All the information is in the references that are in the article. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 04:52, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

The WP:ONUS is on you. There's no reason to take this further. Claiming she was fired is simply not true according to all the references that I've looked through, and is a V, OR, BLP, and POV violation. --Hipal (talk) 03:00, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

There are clearly some important facts here. (1) Bella Hadid ... involvement in an Adidas ad campaign NBC. (2a) “Guess who the face of their campaign is?” the official X account for Israel posted. “Bella Hadid, a half-Palestinian model who has a history of spreading antisemitism and calling for violence against Israelis and Jews.” “For Adidas to pick a vocal anti-Israel model to recall this dark Olympics is either a massive oversight or intentionally inflammatory,” the American Jewish Committee wrote on X. “Neither is acceptable.” Guardian. (2b) Adidas has pulled images of the model Bella Hadid from adverts ... The German-based sportswear company said it was “revising” its campaign after criticism from Israel over Hadid’s involvement. ... Adidas said in a statement that the campaign for the SL72 shoe “unites a broad range of partners”. It said: “We are conscious that connections have been made to tragic historical events – though these are completely unintentional Guardian. (3) Hadid, whose father is Palestinian, said she would “never knowingly engage with any art or work that is linked to a horrific tragedy of any kind.” Hadid said she was unaware of the association until after the campaign was live. “I am shocked, I am upset, and I am disappointed in the lack of sensitivity that went into this campaign. Had I been made aware, from the bottom of my heart, I would never have participated,” Hadid wrote. “I do not believe in hate in any form, including anti-semitism.” Time. starship.paint (RUN) 13:06, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Good points. Thank you.

(1) is covered by this proposal. Does it need to be more specific or expanded?

(2a) I don't think social media posts should be used to determine content nor weight. As far as adding that she was the main model in the campaign, that's worth adding if independently verified. I don't recall seeing any detailed analysis of the entire campaign. Is she the sole model, one of many, were there ads in the campaign without her, ...?

(2b) I'm not clear what you are suggesting, that we add that the ads with her image were pulled? Do we know if all ads with her from the campaign were pulled? Do we know if all the ads from the campaign were removed?

(3) To avoid NOT, POV, and QUOTE problems, I'm against quoting from any of the public relations campaigns. Given that this article is about Hadid, her perspective is definitely more DUE than that of the other parties. As I've already said, a summary of her response may be DUE, especially if there's a reference that provides a summary, analysis, or broader context. --Hipal (talk) 17:20, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

• @Hipal: - right, perhaps I should have explained why I posted (1), (2a), (2b), (3) above, it is because earlier above, you were rejecting some 'facts' as WP:OR. Now, whether the previous 'facts' are OR is now irrelevant, because I have posted direct quotes above, there can't be any OR for what I just posted. Now, I am gaining a better understanding of your opposition. Your opinion is that social media posts and public relations campaigns inherently should not be included. I disagree, because we should rely on the sources. If many reliable sources have reported on the social media posts or public relations campaigns, I think that that satisfies WP:WEIGHT for including. Now, as for your questions above, I think they are irrelevant, because we need only report what the reliable sources say and no further. starship.paint (RUN) 11:59, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for getting us beyond basic V and OR problems, especially BURDEN. Much appreciated.

I've already mentioned WP:ONUS, a part of WP:V. It states, While information must be verifiable for inclusion in an article, not all verifiable information must be included

I hope you'll reconsider your comments, as V and OR are not all of the content policies and guidelines we are required to follow.

I asked, Does it need to be more specific or expanded? If that question cannot be answered, or is considered irrelevant, then we cannot address wider policies beyond V and OR, especially NOT and POV. Verification does

I'm asking what specifically should be be adding or changing, and why. --Hipal (talk) 15:28, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

• I can't see anything wrong with Proposal 3, and clearly whoever who added it is the best editor to have edited Wikipedia ever. starship.paint (RUN) 12:55, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the laugh. --Hipal (talk) 16:53, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

You're welcome. starship.paint (RUN) 11:59, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

RfC-Options

In line with discussion on my talk page, I would consider an RfC to be the quickest way to end this discussion in a productive manner.

I would personally just use the four proposals above, with no inclusion as a fifth option, unless someone wants to suggest an alternative before we do? FortunateSons (talk) 17:06, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, an RfC that samples as much of the Wiki-population as possible. Sean.hoyland (talk) 17:08, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't see a good RfC coming from what we have so far. Not while we have proposals and objections with V/OR problems. Not when policies appear to be ignored or not understood.

I think we're making some good progress with the proposal discussions. I'd hate to see that progress squelched. --Hipal (talk) 17:28, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

As long as there is active and productive discussion working towards a phrasing everyone is happy with, I don’t mind waiting with (and maybe entirely avoiding) the RfC. FortunateSons (talk) 17:36, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Proposal 5

I've added this to the article:

In 2024, Adidas pulled a controversial advertising campaign starring Hadid, in part due to her Palestinian heritage. The campaign promoted the rerelease of a sneaker that debuted concurrently with the Munich 1972 Olympics where Palestinian terrorists killed Israeli athletes in the Munich massacre. Hadid apologized for participating in the ad campaign, noting that she was unaware of the connection between the shoe and '72 Olympics. Adidas apologized to Hadid.

References

I think it addresses at least some of the NOTNEWS concerns. Definitely addresses the COAT, SOAP, QUOTE concerns. Still seems UNDUE and, to a lesser extent, RECENTISM. --Hipal (talk) 16:48, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

• It's better than nothing. What do others think? starship.paint (RUN) 12:06, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

  Not perfect, but the wording can be adjust slightly. For one thing, Adidas can't pull a controversial advertisement campaign prior to launching the campaign, so the topic needs to be first introduced that she signed on to an advertisement campaign that Adidas pulled.
  Keep in mind that this is a biographical article, so the focus must be the subject of the biography. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 13:05, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

  Agreed with it being better than nothing and definitely a valid option if it ends up at an RfC. There are some factual concerns (for example, based on the coverage, the activism is likely comparably or more significant than the heritage, even if both are statistically correlated, yet only one is mentioned), and it’s just generally lacks details that would be due, particularly considering the depth and intensity of coverage (we could likely make a standalone article if we get another source in a few weeks/months, satisfying ‚sustained‘, and could definitely have a standalone article on her engagement with Israel alone). Thank you for creating a new proposal, I appreciate it! FortunateSons (talk) 20:22, 9 August 2024 (UTC)