This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:
We should find a better photo at some point. This one is blurred and leaves her face half in the dark. Jontel ( talk) 16:08, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
WP:CSECTION makes it clear we should avoid a controversies section, as we did with for example Change UK. Are we to remove this section? KarstenO ( talk) 17:47, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
For biographies of living persons, Wikipedia ask that they are balanced and avoid guilt by association WP:BLPBALANCE. This might be an issue for the sentence referencing the killing of Israeli athletes at Munich.
For convenience, the sentence reads ‘’ The newspaper (i.e. The Jewish Chronicle) noted that in 2018, on Sky News, Shaheen had defended Corbyn's attendance at a ceremony in 2014, in which a photo appeared to show him standing opposite the graves of Atef Bseiso and Salah Khalaf, two senior Palestine Liberation Organization officers who had been accused of links to a terrorist attack at the 1972 Munich Olympic Games, which had killed 11 Israelis.’’
The context is that Corbyn was attending a conference about Palestine in Tunis with multi-party British parliamentarians and visited the cemetery with other conference delegates for a ceremony commemorating those killed in the Israeli bombing of the PLO headquarters in Tunis nine years earlier, a bombing condemned by the United Nations Security Council and the governments of the United States, Tunisia and Egypt.
Shaheen, who was a newly selected Labour parliamentary candidate, was interviewed on television in 2018 and, when asked about the recent Daily Mail article referenced above, expressed the Labour party position which was that Corbyn, who was party leader at the time of the interview and under multiple attacks from the media, condemned the Munich attack and had laid a wreath at the memorial of those killed in the bombing, not at the nearby graves of the two assassinated PLO officers.
Without going into the details of everything further, which is covered in other articles, I suggest that Shaheen expressing the official party position and defending the party leader in a TV news interview is what politicians generally do and is not noteworthy, so we should drop the sentence from her article. Keeping it, especially without any of the context enabling an understanding of the disputed events, seems to me to engender guilt by association and is unbalanced with respect to her biography. Jontel ( talk) 17:11, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
Done Removed
Jontel (
talk)
14:51, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
As requested by the user who removed my previous contributions, I'm sharing my thoughts in the Talk page: In recognition of the fact the disagreeing contributor doesn't want views on antisemitism and Corbyn to be dwelled on at length during an election (although many would see such details as highly relevant), I've halved the amount of words on that, although what I cut was well-sourced, largely self-published by Shaheen or by mainstream media such as The Katie Halper Show, which she appeared on. However, to reduce further would risk leaving a misleading impression and suppressing clearly relevant information. The references aren't just 'internal social media' but largely mainstream sources or ones connected to Shaheen: Shaheen herself or media such as the Owen Jones Show, Michael Walker of Novara Media, and the New Statesman. The length of my first edit was intended to address what I see as a glaring imbalance on relevant issues, such as the lack of mention of views on Corbyn, by including Shaheen's own words on that topic. For example, would you remove mention in Paul Mason's article of his criticism of Corbyn due to them not being 'noteworthy or relevant'? In Shaheen's words, in the tweet cited, she joined Labour because of Corbyn and 'he opened up space for those of us who want systemic change, who want equality, compassion &those who haven’t & won’t forget the Iraq war.' As the rest of the article, such as the section on her book about inequality, shows, 'systemic change' and 'equality', to take two, are important to Shaheen and her career. If the reasons to support his suspension are important enough to her that they override that previous praise for him, surely it is highly relevant to what the rest of the article describes about the subject? Without this information, I think the article doesn't meet the B-class criteria of not containing 'any obvious omissions or inaccuracies': /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Content_assessment
Furthermore, the article prior to my edits has a strong focus on Shaheen's deselection and contextualises it with reference to allegations of, to quote verbatim, 'a cull of left-wingers within the Labour Party under Keir Starmer' - relevant, naturally, regardless of the fact that 'Shaheen is not a Labour Party member and has never been a Party official or publicly elected representative'. As Corbyn was on the left of Labour and has been suspended under Starmer, in my view leaving out information about support for Starmer over his suspension creates a one-dimensional picture. If another politician on the left of Labour 'culled' under Starmer had voiced support for Shaheen's suspension in a mainstream news publication such as The New Statesman, would it be judged neither 'noteworthy or relevant' and forbidden from being mentioned in their article? Under the same predicates established by these parts of the article I've mentioned, which has been contributed to extensively by the disagreeing contributor over a long period of time, these issues can't fail to be both noteworthy and relevant.
On the comment about an election, the information provided is necessary to minimise the risk of a one-dimensional portrait with or without an election, and, on the contrary, it could be seen as dubious that the information hadn't been included, and was then excised indiscriminately, in a time frame up to an election period. A politician seeking to become a publicly elected official should have their views open to scrutiny, again, before or after an election, without what many would view as key information being withheld. Polarlows ( talk) 18:30, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
As the article contains passing mention to Shaheen's deselection being linked to tweets mentioning Israel and one reference from the Jewish Chronicle of Shaheen saying she was prevented from speaking out on Palestine, I think it would be relevant to expand on Shaheen's positions on the conflict. I received a notification saying the "Arab-Israeli" conflict has been designated contentious and so I'm unable to make an edit about it, as only accounts that made 500 edits can. My previous entry about it was deleted. I would appreciate it if any editor, recognising that this is an issue very relevant to a British politician in the current political context, can help. I accept that different points can be added about the topic, but my request is for the information I added to be restored. It also doesn't need to have its own heading, but can be part of the 'Political positions' section, for example. Here it is with some of the references, others can be found in my first edit:
"Shaheen called publicly and explicitly for a ceasefire in the afternoon on the 18th of December 2023. [1] Starmer had called for a ‘sustainable ceasefire’ earlier that day after Rishi Sunak [2] and David Cameron called for a ceasefire on the 16th of December. [3] Shaheen received criticism from pro-Palestine activists prior to calling for a ceasefire explicitly." [4] Polarlows ( talk) 19:14, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
Of course, as implied, I support a ceasefire and always would
{{
cite web}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Check date values in: |access-date=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Check date values in: |access-date=
(
help)
"I appreciate the pressure you are under. But please also appreciate that many of your voters are not going to endorse someone because they aspire to do good one day. On the most consequential issue of our day, you remain silent."
{{
cite web}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)