Talk:Paris Katherine Jackson

redirect

1. REDIRECT Michael Jackson#1995–99: HIStory, second marriage, and fatherhood, NOT to Personal relationships of Michael Jackson, for consistencies sake.99.23.83.211 (talk) 00:36, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

This should have her own page

She is notable, and has made recent headlines with a suicide attempt. At least put this in the Michael Jackson page somewhere. Tinton5 (talk) 01:03, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

No she isn't and shouldn't. Creating a separate article for her - currently a 14-year-old child famous only for her father and troubled personal life - would be a massive invasion of privacy and violation of BLP. Robofish (talk) 15:00, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

I can't actually find anything about her on the redirected page though. Perhaps it should go to the Jackson family, or some other place in the Jackson related wiki-sphere that addresses her?--Bellerophon5685 (talk) 23:32, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Well, now I see there is a mention of her birth. Well, unless she does something to establish notability (I hear she is interested in acting and/or singing) she is non-notable. Wikipedians (and everyone else) should leave the poor girl alone.--Bellerophon5685 (talk) 23:45, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

I like that idea but Paris-Michael Katherine Jackson has existed for some time and that's where the redirect should point. Jim.henderson (talk) 16:33, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

This should redirect to Paris-Michael Katherine Jackson.

This should redirect to the Paris-Michael Katherine Jackson article, not to a section of the Michael Jackson article that barely mentions her in passing. Red Act (talk) 21:26, 2 September 2013 (UTC) Red Act (talk) 21:26, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Done --Redrose64 (talk) 21:58, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

So, why does the redirect page have a higher degree of protection than the target? Jim.henderson (talk) 15:57, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

I would say that it's a legacy of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paris Katherine Jackson. You could contact the protecting admin (see page logs) and ask if it can be reviewed. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:59, 4 September 2013 (UTC)