Talk:Nabilla Benattia

Why this article does exist ?

Hi, First of all, please excuse my aproximative english, I'm not a native english speaker and I just discovered this article through a forum and I was really surprised that a such article does exist. I start this conversation because I don't understand a couple of things regarding this article.

My first question is: Why this girl (for you) deserve a wikipedia article?

My answer on "Why she doesn't deserve a wikipedia article" : well, it's a French girl who appeared on French television, and she is well known for saying a stupid sentence and it became famous because of that, a meme that only deserve its place on a board like a FRENCH "know your meme" and certainly not on an intellectual website such as Wikipedia. Do you really think she deserve an article on english wikipedia just because the french article on wikipedia was deleted? I don't think so. No need to remind you why this article was deleted, it's a part of a FRENCH reality TV show, the article was merged with the article of that TV show. Nabila is not an intellectual reference. Do you really think every stupid person who once appeared on TV saying a stupid sentence deserve a wikipedia article? Do you think it makes more sense to write an article about a person who doesn't speak a single word of english here on english wikipedia? Do you really think it's serious? Wikipedia is serious business, there is no place for them here. French Wikipedia have they reasons, and the english wikipedia community should follow them, because this article doesn't make any sense here.

90.59.88.251 (talk) 10:10, 30 September 2013 (UTC) Maxime

Another opinion against this article: There is lot of people known thanks to a little role in French TV. Also think Nabilla don't deserve an article. Nabilla's French Wikipedia article has been banned this year on April after being reviewed by Wikipedia's French community. Serious newspapers have relayed the information such as Le Point and Le Parisien. You better link to the TV show from channel NRJ 12 that created these "stars": http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Les_Anges_de_la_t%C3%A9l%C3%A9r%C3%A9alit%C3%A9

I agree it would be best if this article was only on the French Wikipedia. In the mean time, I absolutely don't understand why somebody who doesn't speak english should not be on the English Wikipedia. Can you tell me how many celebrities on the French Wikipedia don't speak "a single word of French". That's irrelevant. You will need better arguments to delete this article. You are also using agressive terms on the Talk Page and it won't help you making a point. Puda (talk) 09:14, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Job announcement ?

I feel, when I read this article that is has a very clear commercial purpose, not only an information purpose. For instance, when I read that NRJ 12 is currently looking for an agent for Nabilla. Is this the purpose of Wikipedia ? ANother example is the statement of the 1.8 million people audience of the Grand journal when she was invited. This is clearly a promotional figure to me, and doesn't bring any additionnal information. Moreover, most of her sentences are not even translated into english, which is at least surprising in an english article.

I prefer not to modify the article directly, as I'm new here, but I hope this discussion can go on.

Which Wikipedia article?

Not that I'm suggesting it be added, but I believe it was the French Wikipedia article fr:Nabilla Benattia that was deleted, despite no outside source seeming to mention which language it was in. This one comes close by mentioning the president of Wikimedia France, but it's only by vague association. Chris857 (talk) 19:21, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that's correct. I've trawled the deletion logs of both English and French Wikipedias and only the French version shows a deleted article. The discussion is here: fr:Discussion:Nabilla_Benattia/Suppression. FunkyCanute (talk) 19:47, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Discussion of deleted Wikipedia article

I removed this from the lead section:

A French Wikipedia article about Benattia was deleted after a debate resulted in the decision that she lacked encyclopedic interest,<ref>{{cite web|title=Discussion:Nabilla Benattia/Suppression|url=https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussion:Nabilla_Benattia/Suppression|publisher=Wikipédia|accessdate=1 May 2013}}</ref> causing a media controversy.<ref name="Tel130501">{{cite news | url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/10030060/Wikipedia-you-dont-get-to-decide-whos-interesting.html | title=Wikipedia: you don't get to decide who's interesting | date=1 May 2013 | accessdate=1 May 2013 | last=Brand | first=Katy | newspaper=Daily Telegraph}}</ref> The page has now been redirected to that of [[:fr:Les Anges de la téléréalité]].<ref>{{cite news|last=Falla|first=Sophie|title=Nabilla Benattia n'est pas assez célèbre pour figurer sur Wikipédia!|url=http://www.rtl.be/people/primetime/lesangesdelatelerealite/754129/nabilla-benattia-n-est-pas-assez-celebre-pour-figurer-sur-wikipedia-|accessdate=1 May 2013|newspaper=RTL.be|date=30 April 2013}}</ref>

There are a number of problems here. First, WP:LEAD says that the lead section is supposed to be a summary (in most cases, citations are unnecessary because of that), while the above text isn't reflected in the main article. Second, the lead section, as a summary, should cover only major points - and this controversy isn't major. Third, it is absolutely a violation of WP:RS to use a Wikipedia page as a source (that is, to "cite" it), regardless of language version. Fifth, this is the English language Wikipedia; if there are not citations available in English, to support text, then that text should be omitted. (There are many biographies in other languages of people who are notable based on sources in that language, but who are not notable at all to those who speak English, and therefore should never have a bio in the English Wikipedia.

To be more constructive, I think the following, somewhere in the body of the article, would be fine (I've not fixed the first cite to be complete, however):

In May 2012, an article about her in the French language version of Wikipedia was deleted after editors of that version decided that she lacked encyclopedic interest.<ref>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/10027919/Gallic-Kim-Kardashian-banned-from-Wikipedia.html</ref><ref name="Tel130501">{{cite news | url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/10030060/Wikipedia-you-dont-get-to-decide-whos-interesting.html | title=Wikipedia: you don't get to decide who's interesting | date=1 May 2013 | accessdate=1 May 2013 | last=Brand | first=Katy | newspaper=Daily Telegraph}}</ref>

That's consistent with WP:UNDUE - as far as the English-language speaking community is concerned (that's the audience for this Wikipedia), this is not a major controversy (if it were, there would be a lot, lot more sources available), and so it should get minimal coverage in the Wikipedia article. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 19:06, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, John. You've made a number of sweeping remarks.

1. WP:LEAD does indeed say what you assert. However, this is a newly-written stub and still needs a degree of copyedit and a whole lot more expansion to get it anywhere near good article status. Making arbitrary deletions when an article is displaying the {{under construction}} banner is not very helpful.
2. The controversy is major (with regards to the subject; clearly not in comparison with D-Day landings, say), sufficiently so that several sources covered it internationally.
3. WP:RS states that a Wikipedia article should not be used as a source. A deletion discussion page, however, is not the same. There are good reasons for articles not to be sources: they should themselves be based on third party sources. A deletion page is not based on other sources so can serve as one itself.
4. You skipped the fourth.
5. The requirement to have English-language citations is absolutely bogus.

Thanks for taking time to detail your point of view. FunkyCanute (talk) 08:49, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Okay, second try:

1. I've moved the text that we both agree doesn't belong in WP:LEAD, putting it into the body of the report. I'm planning on editing it further, but this way we can separate any issue regarding its location from everything else.
2. A "major" controversy would be, in my opinion, one that was covered by dozens of different newspapers and magazines, not one or two. But, more to the point, I misread the wording - "media controversy" is fine by me.
3. To be continued at another time, if I don't get distracted.
4. A sign of old age, unfortunately, or of getting a bit too worked up to be able to focus fully.
5. I stand corrected, as I found out. Apologies. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 01:33, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Meaning of her catchphrase?

I thought I understood the basic meaning of each of the four words individually, but I don't particularly understand what the overall meaning is supposed to be when they're placed together in that order, and a lot of people would probably be even more confused than me, so it would be best to include a translation... AnonMoos (talk) 06:44, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

I did my best to translate that wonderful uttering... Actually, the success of her catchphrase resided not in the intrisec quality of Nabilla's thoughts, but in the tone of voice she used, and in its numerous parodies on the internet and in various french medias. Jean-Jacques Georges (talk) 07:39, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Blanking

Several edits ago, a large portion of the page was blanked. I am currently trying to fix the blanking, however I don't believe the lead section is well-written enough, if some of the information belongs in the lead/in the article at all. kikichugirl (talk) 17:29, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

This article is advertising by her agent, this woman does not have any fame nor activity in French media now

As Maxime said, she created a small buzz only in TV circles, a lot of persons who dont watch TV or TV reality never knew of her.

The buzz lasted all the summer, then it's gone. Nowadays, she doesnt have any media apparence or activity.

Wikipedia shouldnt keep this page, which is, as its written, hidden advertising to help her in international carreer.

The french Wiki direction choose itself to delete her page because of the total lack of interest. Please consider it there too.

Anysound, french user. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.67.14.5 (talk) 17:18, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

There is no "french wiki direction", actually. Users actually chose to delete the article because she was a reality tv candidate. This was before she starred in her own prime-time tv show. "She doesnt have any media apparence or activity" : please ! She was on the cover of a least three french tabloids last week, and the second season of her show will be broadcast this year. Make no mistake, I find this woman's celebrity deplorable, or at least I think she is famous for all the wrong reasons... Yet, it was a mistake to delete her french article so soon, and it should be recreated there, not deleted here. Jean-Jacques Georges (talk) 20:28, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. Nabilla was only famous because of her catchphrase first. She then became extremely notorious in the past 3/4 months and she deserves an article within the French Wikipedia. For an unknown reason (I have been part of many Deletion review), people decided to delete her page. Mostly because she has been hated in France I think. Since she has received a wide coverage in 2013, she also deserves an article here. Puda (talk) 08:43, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Well, I don't know about Nabilla being a "deserving" girl here ;-). But this is hardly the point: beyond her famous catchphrase (was it in March 2013?), she later received a lot of coverage, with some real secondary sources analysing the "reasons why" beneath her rather unexpected notability.

As for the rationale behind last year's deletion, The French Wikipedia has consistently insisted that notability was not supposed to be purely temporary, for which only time could tell (nothing to do with "hate", then). As things stand now, I expect that, one year and many sources later, her page will be very shortly undeleted (a new AfD is currently underway). --Azurfrog (talk) 11:58, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

The French page has been restored and kept, with a strong majority of users (75/16) judging that her notability had proved durable enough. Jean-Jacques Georges (talk) 16:42, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Nationality

Her nationality is unclear. It is not mentioned in the text, only by the categories. And they contradict each other (Swiss people of Italian descent|French female models, no category about double nationality). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.128.125.99 (talk) 21:41, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Zaire

In 2009, Zaire wasn't called Zaire anymore for more than years. Can any credit be given to a source still using the word at this point? GL (talk) 19:06, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Article inappropriate

This woman is famous in France for ridiculous and discusting interventions on french TV. She brings nothing intellectual, artistic or anything for society except having money outrageously while we are in crises. In France she is considered insain and vulgar. She issue from a rich familly and have indecence to claim her father financed her remodeled by plastic surgery body. It's discusting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fredericknetwork (talk • contribs) 05:41, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

You can still ask for deletion but it has been decided to keep the article the last time. Your comment is only based on your assumption. This is unproductive. Also, use proper english to make a point. I understand you are against this page on Wikipedia but you need better arguments. If you really want this page to be deleted, ask for its deletion. Puda (talk) 09:03, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Nabilla Benattia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131212091922/http://www.vsd.fr/contenu-editorial/l-actualite/les-indiscrets/2208-nabilla-mais-si-elle-a-fait-de-la-prison to http://www.vsd.fr/contenu-editorial/l-actualite/les-indiscrets/2208-nabilla-mais-si-elle-a-fait-de-la-prison

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:36, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Nabilla Benattia - Falsehood & Defamation

Hello, I come to you in order to modify some comments transcribed on the Wikipedia page of Nabilla BENATTIA.

Indeed, some words are false, see defamatory and harm him.

Firstly, with regard to the paragraph on "His first years", this refers to a conviction in 2009. I would like to point out that these facts date back more than ten years and that Nabilla BENATTIA was a minor at the time of the facts . Both abroad and in France, minors are protected by law. A page such as Wikipedia cannot report such a statement and at the very least if it persists, Madame BENATTIA will be perfectly capable of initiating any useful action.

Then, as regards the paragraph relating to his "imprisonment and indictment", it contains numerous exaggerations which may prove to be fallacious.

It is for this reason that I would be grateful if you would do whatever is necessary to allow me to make changes in this direction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kvarin83 (talk • contribs) 14:49, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Why is this article Protected?

It makes absolutely no sense that this article is protected in the English wikipedia but not the French wikipedia. As this is an article of a person who is more notable in French-speaking countries than English-speaking ones. Can someone please care to explain why this is? 76.65.45.114 (talk) 04:46, 25 November 2023 (UTC)