Talk:Pakistan Supreme Court acquits Asia Bibi from blasphemy charges after eight years of confinement

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Photos (to Nannadeem)[edit]

Is [1] or [2] also her? I think yes but if she was in prison for many years then why did she go to Spain or home. (flickr2commons) Gryllida (talk) 20:49, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Seems yes. says she met her husband on 2013.04.06 same as the date on the photo. Gryllida (talk) 20:51, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Gryllida. I also add that some times people obtain pics from their sources, irrespective its timing and place it on different sites with permission for its fair use. Nannadeem (talk) 05:44, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
At Commons the licence needs to be really free. At Wikinews we use the photos from Commons or images are uploaded locally if the licence requires non-commercial use (something Commons people delete on sight). Gryllida (talk) 06:07, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think issue has resolved, as I see the image(s) in WP Commons. Nannadeem (talk) 12:22, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Aiming for active voice and to add 'Pakistan'?

"Supreme Court of Pakistan acquits Asia Bibi after eight years in prison"?

Gryllida (talk) 10:35, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As you wish. Nannadeem (talk) 18:19, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The word "blasphemy" ought not be capitalized. Additionally, there seems to be an assumption the audience knows about the Asia Bibi case. Not only the headline, but the opening paragraph need to be restructured. Cheers, --SVTCobra 00:49, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, the first paragraph only says "blasphemy charges" the rest of the article does not further clarify this. Do you think more information needs to be added to the first paragraph or to the end only? Gryllida (talk) 00:52, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the article needs to decide what is the news? Is it the acquittal or the protests/threats? If it is both, it should be in the headline. For example, "Blasphemy acquittal triggers protests and death threats in Pakistan" ... this is just what I get from reading what we have in our Wikinews article. I have not read the sources. The four sentences in the opening paragraph are extremely disjointed. For example, I don't think the detail of four children belongs in the top. Those are my thoughts for what they are worth. Cheers, --SVTCobra 01:12, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not the best example, but this article's lede tried to highlight two things which competed for focus: Water Disputes: Violence hits Karnataka, Tamil Nadu; Supreme Court revises Kaveri water share decision. Judgement + protests.
•–• 05:29, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks SVTCobra. :) I wasn't really reading into this deeply but now I added background to the end and adjusted the layout. I think the freshness expires at midnight from Saturday to Sunday (UTC) because it happened on Wednesday.
Nannadeem, maybe you can improve the story a bit further based on this. Gryllida (talk) 11:16, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Left the focus on the acquittal, I hope it is sufficiently recent. At the moment I don't really know anything of the protests so I would not be able to write about them Gryllida (talk) 11:21, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The story I submitted mainly pertains to acquittal by apex court and who is acquitted. Simultaneously it also covers reaction erupted after verdict. With regard to Freshness reporting of acquital in the WP:ITN on Ist Nov-2018 is cited. However, I have tried my best to focus the story in the lede and its subsequent paragraphs.
Gryllida is requested to study the lede and last para of the page and do whatever he deems good. Thanks Nannadeem (talk) 17:28, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]


I read several of the sources. From what I see, Bibi spent the eight years on death row, not necessarily in solitary confinement. The closest I saw to what this WN article claims is "most of". --SVTCobra 20:12, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"The illiterate, Christian mother has been behind bars in a prison in central Pakistan´s Multan ever since, spending years in a cramped windowless cell during periods of solitary confinement." (
"She always maintained her innocence, but has spent most of the past eight years in solitary confinement." (BBC)
"Bibi, who is the first woman to be sentenced to death for blasphemy in Pakistan, has remained in solitary confinement for the past eight years." (The Guardian)
Not sure how to implement this into the article.. Gryllida (talk) 20:26, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Really? How about changing "solitary" to "death row"? Or even qualifying it in accordance with the sources? If they could write it, I am sure Wikinewsies can too. I understand how a person who is angered by Bibi's plight might want to highlight her suffering, however, it is extremely important to remain factual. For this reason, I never wrote articles about things that got my blood boiling. --SVTCobra 21:09, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I was being serious - not caused by compassion or wish to leave it in, but actually by the how to put it in. What is confusing me here is that none of the sources quantify it. Now changed to 'death row' presuming the grammar is now correct (I broke the web browser and lost the addon which opens the sources in a new tab in reading mode, so that makes it hard to look it up), and moved the note about solitary down.
The first paragraph is massive. Split it.
I find it really concerning that the article does not say the reason for acquittal. Gryllida (talk) 00:00, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"According to various reports..."?
•–• 21:58, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Review of revision 4443673 [Passed][edit]

'solitary' in the headline?[edit]

--Gryllida (talk) 04:47, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Gryllida: I noticed that word in the headline, during my final sanity check before publishing, and, realizing that the article body doesn't mention it, checked the sources. One of them did say she'd been in solitary confinement for the whole eight years. It's not desirable to have something in the headline that isn't mentioned in the article, but it would be much worse to have something unverified in the headline. Under crazy time pressure, I only verified it. On later reflection, yeah, maybe next time a situation like that comes up I'll be more likely to remove the additional detail from the headline.

For the current article, we could resolve the discrepancy by adding this detail to the article, if it's done within the next half day or so. --Pi zero (talk) 13:27, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at acagastya's fix, and consulting the sources more thoroughly, I see that while one source does say she spent eight years in solitary confinement, two other sources though mentioning solitary are less absolute about it. --Pi zero (talk) 17:19, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Renamed, after all. --Pi zero (talk) 17:33, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
At this talk page at the top there is one more link which expands on the terms of the confinement.
Thanks for the rename, Pi zero. Gryllida (talk) 20:22, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]