Talk:Zarah Sultana

Rees-Mogg

In December 2020, UNICEF announced that it would provide £25,000 to the charity School Food Matters so that vulnerable children and families in Southwark could be supplied with thousands of breakfast boxes over the Christmas school holidays. In parliament Sultana said that it was the first time UNICEF had been required to "feed working-class kids in the UK. But while children go hungry, a wealthy few enjoy obscene riches". She mentioned that Jacob Rees-Mogg is "reportedly in line to receive an £800,000 dividend payout this year". Rees-Mogg criticised UNICEF's action and called it "a political stunt of the lowest order". Sultana then sent Rees-Mogg a copy of Charles Dickens' A Christmas Carol, writing inside "Jacob, it seems this wasn’t on Eton’s reading list. Merry Christmas, Zarah".[19][20][21] This was put in, just wondering as its her parliamentary career section, if a tweet about UNICEF (no matter how funny)is really relevant enough. I'll leave it for now but I plan to remove it, unless someone disagrees and we can discuss why. I'll leave this here for now, please reply. Blackwater-Bradfield1900 (talk) 13:01, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

A tweet could be completely relevant—what matters are the sources. In this case it's Guernsey Press, Coventry Live and Distinct Today. The first two are just local papers and the last looks like it's of dubious reliability. I'm also a bit unclear about why this story is about Sultana and not about Rees-Mogg. So yes, I'd support removal. — Bilorv (talk) 13:17, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

I don't see that twitter has anything to do with this story. Everything occurred in meatspace. Regarding sourcing, I have added a few more sources. Delete whichever you think are weakest. Yes the story is about Rees-Mogg. I'll add it to his page. But it is also about Sultana. Burrobert (talk) 14:13, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Ok, my concern was only that it seems a bit pointless to include, because are we going to go through every ironic tweet she has sent? I just really do not see how it is so significant that it should be included, considering the large chunk of the page that is written about it. However, as the concern is not shared by anyone else I will not remove it, I will have a look at the poor sources that were mentioned and remove them. Thanks--Blackwater-Bradfield1900 (talk) 14:01, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Ethnicity

Please stop reverting Zarah’s origin information. The most reliable source is her own website where she says her grandfather is from Kashmir. This makes her Kashmiri not Pakistani. Kashmir is a disputed region according to United Nations and the area her ancestors are from is currently administered by Pakistan and is not officially a part of Pakistan. Zarah identifies as Kashmiri according to her own website so please respect that. 2A00:23C6:5B0C:B901:C89C:5E12:476E:2099 (talk) 21:22, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Actually Wikipedia favours WP:INDEPENDENT sources over primary sources, which describes her as Pakistani-origin. — Czello 07:29, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Zarah’s family is from Kashmir so her ethnicity is Kashmiri not Pakistani. Kashmir is a unresolved disputed territory according to the United Nations and other international organisations. It has never been a part of Pakistan. Article 257 of the Pakistan constitution makes it clear that Kashmir is not incorporated into Pakistan. 2A00:23C6:5B0C:B901:CD89:A909:4D44:CB97 (talk) 23:19, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

As already stated above, reliable sources describe her as having Pakistani origins. The source in question describes her as having both Pakistani and Kashmiri origins - these are not mutually exclusive, and her family origins could go deeper into Pakistan. — Czello 08:20, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Until we have more accurate information on this it’s best to include both Kashmiri and Pakistani as that’s what that source says. It’s not right to erase her Kashmiri ethnicity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a00:23c6:5b0c:b901:480f:9d79:34e2:b265 (talk) 03:54, 23 July 2022 (UTC)