Talk:2017 Marseille stabbing

Witness statements
I removed this sentence:
 * Witnesses claim the man shouted "Allahu Akbar" before stabbing the two women.

In this case, news reports are WP:PRIMARY source, and we also know that witness statements could be unreliable. Please let me know if there are any concerns. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:23, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The text clearly attributes the claim to witnesses. Are you saying that the news report is not reliable for what witnesses said? 216.8.156.254 (talk) 13:27, 3 October 2017 (UTC)


 * We can certainly quote WP:RS on this.E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:45, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Why would we want to? BBC says that some unnamed French media say that unnamed Fr investigators say that witness(es) say that they heard this said? Mysteriously, we know most of what is on the CCTV, but this doesn't appear to have been mentioned as being there. I'm sure that if any solid link to a religious motive is discovered, Fr police will say so, we don't need this chinese whispers. Pincrete (talk) 09:26, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Does the CCTV have sound? The point of the quote is to answer the question "why would anyone suspect terrorism". We mention the ISIS claim, which is much less reliable than the French press report on what a witness heard. 216.8.156.254 (talk) 19:16, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * That ISIS have made the claim is reliably reported by everyone, that doesn't of course make their claim true, but we know ISIS made it. A minority of Fr media are saying unnamed investigators reported that an unknown no. of witnesses heard this. There is a history of claims of having heard such a slogan, turning out to be false, sometimes invented. If we did include it, we could not say "witnesses heard", we would have to say "some french media reported that witnesses had heard". Is it worth it? The nature of the attack along with the identity of the killer would make terrorism one of the obvious possible explanations. Police seem pretty clear at present that "possible" means just that, one of their lines of enquiry. Pincrete (talk) 20:47, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * This should end this silly debate: • "the prosecutor of the Republic, François Molins [...] The prosecutor, who confirmed that the attacker had shouted "Allahu akbar" twice" • "Police sources said the suspect had shouted “Allahu Akbar” (God is greatest) in Arabic as he attacked the women" • "Mr Molins confirmed that the attacker had shouted "Allahu Akbar" (God is greatest) while launching the deadly attack with "a 20cm blade". Cheers to all, XavierItzm (talk) 01:34, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Canvassing
The blood of the victims is not yet dry, and already there is canvassing for deletion going on on talk pages ; if you want to talk about it, talk about it here.E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:44, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I see you are using the "blood of the victims" to gain leverage on a Wikipedia page. What a disrespectful and inconsiderate comment Gregory. Are you at least going to ping or send a message to that editor you accused of canvassing?TheGracefulSlick (talk) 17:04, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The article is being considered for deletion on French Wikipedia. I was uncertain myself whether to write it, but since it exists, have improved it (we should not restrict ourselves to English-language sources for a foreign event). I think there's a case for deletion under WP:NOTNEWS but won't nominate it myself. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:04, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
 * And the French accuse Americans of always being in a rush. If might, for example,  be useful to know whether perp was acquainted with his victims before rushing to AfD.  And whatever else the indictment or the press will reveal if we wait a few months instead of trying to determine notability before the police have released any significant information.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:43, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
 * can you link that discussion here or at my talk page? It's going to be useful when this news cycle goes away in another day or two.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 21:03, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm frankly not impressed by the calibre of the discussion, but it's here, linked at the top of the French article. I'm not sure how long their deletion discussions run, but the nomination rationale is a NOTNEWS one. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:07, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Categories
I removed the terrorism-related categories for now (diff), as the prosecutors have not yet confirmed it was a terrorist act. Please let me know if there are any concerns. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:29, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Offensive Terminology
There are repeated uses of the term "illegal alien" in this article - someone should replace it with "undocumented". Right? The most effectual Bob Cat (talk) 23:35, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
 * "undocumented" is not much used in Europe - 'illegal immigrant' or "irregular" are more common, I agree 'alien' is unclear and borderline offensive, I have modified slightly. Pincrete (talk) 19:45, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Renaming to "2017 Marseille stabbing"
I suggest renaming the article as stated. Any other ideas or thougts about it? --Angerdan (talk) 21:26, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
 * As there have been no other notable stabbings in Marseille, disambiguation by year is unnecessary. WWGB (talk) 01:49, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
 * The view from the category perspective shows the usefulness of uniform names for several articles to separate them by year: Category:Stabbing attacks in Europe --Angerdan (talk) 08:07, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Also if there will be another event with same background, a date mark is needed to separate them from each other. It is more helpful to rename it than not. --Angerdan (talk) 11:56, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Agreed. If there is another Marseille stabbing, then we will need to disambiguate each article with a year identifier at that time. WWGB (talk) 12:08, 24 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Obviously yes, see Category:Islamic terrorist incidents in 2017 - the year and location are beneficial. A simple restore to 2017 Marseille stabbing is possible (and perhaps preferable), but it is not how the attack is known on fr.wp. Or if not then October 2017 Marseille stabbing. If someone really wants to argue that there were no other stabbings in Marseille in history (February 2019), or even in 2017, suggest the onus is on them to prove no one has ever been stabbed in that city before or after. In ictu oculi (talk) 20:19, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 10 May 2019

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Moved &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 22:08, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Marseille stabbing → 2017 Marseille stabbing – restore the year, per 2019 Marseille stabbings. "Marseille attack: Man injures four in frenzied stabbing spree - police shoot knifeman dead" In ictu oculi (talk) 21:43, 10 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Oppose. That 2019 incident, like many other stabbings in the history of Marseiile, does not have a Wikipedia article so readers will not be confused. WWGB (talk) 04:30, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
 * why would readers not be confused if they live in the real world and have access to a reality outside Wikipedia such as newspapers? Of course they will be confused. Please explain from policy why the existence or not of other Wikipedia articles influence WP:CRITERIA? Where does this idea come from? And secondly, if your understanding is correct, which it is not, then please explain why we have and use WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:07, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia requires the fewest characters necessary to disambiguate a title (WP:CONCISE). While there may have been hundreds, or even thousands, of stabbings in Marseille throughout the ages, only one such incident has a Wikipedia article. Therefore, the addition of a year to the title is unnecessary. Your concerns are completely addressed by the current existence of the redirect page 2017 Marseille stabbing. WWGB (talk) 11:27, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
 * As well as being concise, the title needs to (AFA possible), identify a subject - not simply differentiate it from all other articles. The year addition helps a little to do that. Pincrete (talk) 16:16, 11 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Support per nomination and per frequent Wikipedia form in these types of incidents, not merely WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS — see entries with year indicators in Category:Stabbing attacks in Europe, Category:Stabbing attacks in 2017 or Category:Islamic terrorist incidents in 2017. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 05:49, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Support It’s normal and useful to include the year. Pawnkingthree (talk) 07:45, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Support It has become normal and is useful IMO to include the year on these minor terrorism-related events. Including the year doesn't really clearly, totally identify the subject (which would almost certainly not be sufficiently notable to even have an article, were it not terrorism-related), but it does narrow the range of possibilities about what the subject might be. Pincrete (talk) 16:16, 11 May 2019 (UTC)


 * 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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.