Talk:1984 Sydney bank robbery

Title
I'm thinking that this article's title should be changed to "Hakki Bahadir Atahan" or something along the lines of "1984 Sydney bank robbery." Calling it Sydney's 1984 Dog Day Afternoon just doesn't sound encyclopedic... Paris1127 (talk) 04:47, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Requested Move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Moved. Alpha_Quadrant   (talk)  05:17, 7 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Sydney& → 1984 Sydney bank robbery – Article title uses quotation marks (which are advised against in WP:TITLEFORMAT). In addition, a search of news archives shows no comparison between Hakki Atahan (the robber) and the film Dog Day Afternoon on file. People who have not seen the film who want to look into this crime would search for a bank robbery in Sydney in 1984, not a "Dog Day Afternoon." "Dog Day Afternoon" may be considered unencyclopedic under WP:NPOVTITLE, as it can be considered a colloquialism and there is no longer any proof that the phrase was ever associated with the bank robbery (neither The Age nor the North Shore Times sources provided even mention the film). Other possible titles may include 1984 Sydney bank robbery spree or Hakki Bahadir Atahan. Paris1127 (talk) 03:04, 2 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Support per Paris1127. – ukexpat (talk) 01:27, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Support. After googling, I conclude that the current title is a Wikipedia "invented here" name. If another such incident occurs, it can be proclaimed Sydney's Groundhog Day. Kauffner (talk) 05:28, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Support. YEPPOON 13:58, 4 February 2012
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Numbers
The numbers don't add up. The article says: "During negotiations, Atahan fired at least two shots from a pistol and released all the bank's customers. Some time later, Atatan released four female bank staff whilst keeping five male staff as hostages."

The article from The Age indicates that there were 10 staff taken hostage, not nine.

The lede of this article also says he was "taking 11 people hostage". If this includes the customers, there must have been only one or two customers; if this means those left after the customers were release, it's at odds with both the figures later in this article and also in The Age.

The Age article also says it was "his 19th bank robbery in less than a year" and "In the past year he had held up 16 metropolitan banks", which I interpret to mean he had held up 19 banks in the last 12 months, of which 16 were in the metro area, or perhaps that he had robbed 16 banks on the past 12 months, then the other three that morning, and this was his 19th. This seems to get translated in the article as: "...had carried out no less than 16 bank robberies during 1983 and 19 during 1984." ...which is unlikely since this was in January 1984 which would have made him exceptionally busy!

What are the correct figures? —sroc &#x1F4AC; 16:08, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Sydney hostage crisis
Sydney hostage crisis presently redirects to 2014 Sydney hostage crisis which includes a hatnote referring to this article. A proposal has been made to change Sydney hostage crisis into a disambiguation page instead. Please see the discussion at . —sroc &#x1F4AC; 11:56, 16 January 2015 (UTC)