Not that it's necessarily wrong for it to not be listed there, though. The article on GWB is about him and what he did as president - it isn't meant to be a complete history of the United States between 2001 and 2009.
replyI agree -- which is also why the absence of Benghazi on Obama's wiki page is not, in my view, a sign of bias.
replyHow is that remotely similar? There was not a scandal implicating George Bush regarding the Kolkhata attack.
replyWhat scandal implicated Obama in the Benghazi attack? Be precise.
replyI have trouble believing anyone with the remotest knowledge of US politics is unaware of the scandal, but https://www.britannica.com/event/2012-Benghazi-attacks . 'Reactions and investigation' has the information you apparently missed all these years.
replyhttps://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052970204712904578090... - "What we now know—and still don't—about President Obama's 9/11." is pretty good too.