Talk:2017 New York City truck attack/Archive 2

Requested move 3 November 2017

 * 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. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Not moved, and closing early per WP:SNOW. There's no way the the proposed title will be accepted, and concern about WP:BLPCRIME seems misplaced. This is a high-profile article about a current event, and there is no need to have it tagged about a proposal doomed to fail. No such user (talk) 10:02, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

2017 Lower Manhattan attack → 2017 Lower Manhattan fatal truck rammings – The present name is a violation of WP:BLPCRIME as Sayfullo Saipov has not yet been convicted of any crime. As such, regardless of how many news outlets or politicians declare this to be an attack, given that attacking people with vehicles is a crime we have a responsibility to our BLP policy not to call this an attack until this is ascertained in a court of law. The FBI having pressed charges is noteworthy but until those charges result in convictions, it is a violation of BLPCRIME to speak as if the trial is already concluded and call him an attacker, no matter how overwhelming the evidence is, since Saipov is still alive. There is no problem with reporting on notable sources who say this is an attack, of course. It just shouldn't be done as a narrator. ScratchMarshall (talk) 02:19, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Naming an article has no bearing on what a jury decides. They will be presented with evidence from the prosecution and defence, and make a decision accordingly. Or perhaps you think the prosecutor will just wave the Wikipedia article and tell the jury it's been determined? Multiple reliable independent sources refer to the incident as an attack, therefore so do we. WWGB (talk) 02:26, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose. First, the move review hasn't even been closed yet. There are a lot of merit based reasons to oppose as well, with WP:COMMONNAME being the most compelling, but the TL;DR version of these reasons is that it's unwieldy. epicgenius (talk) 03:13, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose Multiple reliable independent sources clearly refer to the incident as an attack and we retain it also as per WP:COMMONNAME.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 06:27, 3 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Oppose There was an attack in Lower Manhattan. You can't dispute that. Hence the title.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 08:05, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. gidonb (talk) 08:49, 3 November 2017 (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.

Move discussion
The issue is being discussed in  Move Review Here anyone wishing to comment can comment there and above this discussion was closed as Snow .Hence see no point in reopening that discussion which was closed as WP:SNOW here hence reverted it.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 14:34, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

A "little aggressive"
described him as a "little aggressive" Don't you think this should be improved? Is this word choice even correct? Why is there an article at all? Or did the source mean "a little aggressive"? It would change he meaning completely.--Adûnâi (talk) 19:48, 3 November 2017 (UTC)


 * "A little aggressive" means the same as a "little aggressive" or "a little" aggressive. We can only choose to "quote" the words the news does. Pretty useless information, anyway. Virtually every person we know is a little aggressive, especially sometimes. That he "isolated himself from the outside world" might better illustrate his oddness, but it comes from an anonymous source (same footnote). InedibleHulk (talk) 17:35, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Cycling in New York City
What's about adding a link to Cycling in New York City and Vision Zero (New York City)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.193.104.227 (talk) 11:35, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
 * No direct relevance to the attack, would be WP:OVERLINKING. WWGB (talk) 01:22, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

the Complaint
Does the complaint say how he made the plan? Does Uber keep track of his routes, was he familiar with the area before he "made a test drive near the route" - was it near the route or on the route? Seraphim System ( talk ) 03:28, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Please do your research elsewhere - the Talk page is for improvements to the article, based on sourced material. Thanks. Tvoz / talk 22:38, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Right, I had read the complaint prior to posting as it is not my custom to use talk pages for research and I didn't see it - I saw some things about "forced displacement of Shia communities", recruitment of foreign fighters, that ISIS has circulated videos on the Internet, that a twitter account unrelated to the suspect tweeted "Lone Wolfs Rise Up" (possibly from Syria), that ISIS had previously published an article about running people over with cars, that he "verbally" waived his Miranda rights to make all manner of statements ... I read it through quickly, the purpose of my asking here is to inquire whether the "test drive near the route" language actually has a source (this is in the article right now, so I don't consider it "research".) Seraphim System  ( talk ) 23:01, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

The New Changes
The page was edited from 'a person drove a pickup truck' to 'Sayfullo Saipov drove a Home Rental pickup truck'. I am ok with the 'home rental pickup truck' bit, but should we be including the name of the attacker completely up front? Or should it be like 'the man was later identified as 29 year old Sayfullo Saipov'. AllyGebies (talk) 00:55, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Until (or if) Saipov is convicted we can't even say that it is definitely Saipov who drove the truck. Someone has fixed that and I fixed another instance. Galobtter (talk) 02:37, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Suggesting title to be changed to '2017 Manhattan attack' or '2017 New York City terrorist attack'
Per WP:NOTABILITY, media and sources refer to incident as 'New York attack' or 'Manhattan attack'.JBergsma1 (talk) 21:09, 31 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Yeah I agree, we need a familiar title that is being used as the WP:COMMONNAME. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 21:06, 31 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Yes I ment WP:COMMONNAME. My bad.JBergsma1 (talk) 21:09, 31 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Why not name it "2017 New York City Truck Attack"? 173.54.215.179 (talk) 21:16, 31 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Support move to "2017 New York City truck attack" (note caps).  West Side Highway is simply too parochial.  I do see the need to disambigulate from the  "2017 Times Square car crash", however, unlike Times Square, no one outside the metor region has a clue what the West Side Highway is.  Plus this a truck attack, and that was a car crash.E.M.Gregory (talk) 21:39, 31 October 2017 (UTC)


 * I think the new name isn't fitting, as the "west side highway" is only familiar with new yorkers. 173.54.215.179 (talk) 21:38, 31 October 2017 (UTC)


 * I agree that 'West Side Highway' is too parochial. However, 'New York' may not be specific enough. I hate to add another suggestion into the mix, but what about using the phrase 'Lower Manhattan'?Avilan01 (talk) 21:46, 31 October 2017 (UTC)


 * How about '2017 Lower Manhattan Truck Attack'? 173.54.215.179 (talk) 21:50, 31 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Yeah I think that works well. It's specific without being overly so. The unfortunate reality is that there have been many terrorist attacks in New York and there will probably be more. If we were to distinguish each one by just the year, things could get confusing in the future. Avilan01 (talk) 22:34, 31 October 2017 (UTC)


 * I agree, but think it should be fine for now. If future attacks make a distinction necessary, then we can also add "Halloween" to the name to distinguish this one. Jade Phoenix Pence (talk) 22:56, 31 October 2017 (UTC)Jade Phoenix Pence


 * Assuming (knock on wood) there aren't any more attacks this year in Manhattan, the title could use Manhattan. However, Lower Manhattan works too, and in my opinion, better, due to its specificity. Or call it the 2017 Halloween (truck) attack. I'm also kind of surprised the West Side Highway isn't that well known... I guess all those Law & Order reruns have biased me... Paris1127 (talk) 23:20, 31 October 2017 (UTC)


 * The 2017 Times Square car crash was also an attack in Manhattan this year, so we need to rename this article to October 2017 New York City attack. Jim Michael (talk) 01:26, 1 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Bold move - I've moved the article to 2017 Lower Manhattan attack as both of the proposed titles are ambiguous and confusing, as either could accurately refer to the 2017 Times Square car crash. A title with "West Side Highway" is also undesirable, as that was only the site of a portion of the incident. Referring to it as Lower Manhattan is more precise, and accurate to locals and outsiders. It's important not to depend too much on news headlines for direction on this naming, as we are writing an encyclopedia where this article has to stand among all the other topics in the historical record. A news operation writing headlines for an event today does not take naming for posterity into account, like we do. So an event in May (Times Square car attack) may not, and usually does not, play into their headline writing process. (I lived in Manhattan for many years, biked through that area many times and have edited scores of news stories about NYC and Manhattan for more than a decade, so I'm quite familiar with this area and topic.)  -- Fuzheado &#124; Talk 14:28, 1 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Oppose "Halloween" Two in the afternoon ain't e'en'. We can blame restless spirits from a shady underworld, but we can't pin this one on traditional spooky ghosts and may as well not even suggest it. Unless Trump suspects them, of course. InedibleHulk (talk) 17:38, 1 November 2017 (UTC)


 * OK, I've given this some more thought and I'm fine with going with "Lower Manhattan" but still think we need to include "truck" - it is too vague without it -the title should be clear which attack we're talking about, because one of our concerns should be readers coming here and searching for this article and "truck" is central to it. So I'd go with 2017 Lower Manhattan truck attack. Tvoz / talk 19:13, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I came here to read about the attack in Wikipedia and finally found it. I would have never guessed it was "Lower Manhattan". Reading the news, I do not see it referred to as "Lower Manhattan". Therefore, I suggest something other than Lower Manhattan. Even 2017 New York terrorist attack (2) would be better. Vanguard10 (talk) 02:41, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Agree - that is why WP:COMMONNAME exists. 2017 New York Terror Attack  or 2017 New York Truck Attack seem to be the most common names. Galobtter (talk) 02:45, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * 2017 New York City Truck Attack' is a good name and very similar to that suggested by Galobtter. Vanguard10 (talk) 02:34, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Nobody's calling it the "2017" anything. Wikipedia has a bad habit lately of attaching a year to everything, despite the common usage or whether the title needs disambiguation. Let's stop that, eventually, shall we? InedibleHulk (talk) 15:51, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you Thank you Thank you for the great suggestion. Wikipedia has a weird style and adding 2017 is part of it. Let's re-think things! Vanguard10 (talk) 03:51, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
 * We need to be precise in our titles. In 1993 a truck bombing went off in the World Trade Center so something like New York City Truck Attack wouldn't be helpful. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:03, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Aye, when it's needed, it's needed. When we can distinguish through commonly-used words, though, that's clear and concise. "Manhattan truck ramming" is perfect, I say, but I'll wait till a proper RfC to make it my "final answer". InedibleHulk (talk) 17:00, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
 * "Manhattan truck ramming" would be unfaithful to the norms we've established, however. We've typically had the year in the title because, sadly, these are occurring fairly often and it's needed to distinguish one event from another. "Manhattan" is ambiguous, as Times Square is also in Manhattan, and there was an vehicular attack earlier this year. "Ramming" is not a word we use in the article title much, as we have preferred "attack." Ramming is typically used for hitting something of similar mass - ramming a building, obstacle, etc. When a vehicle mows down people who are less than 1/20th the mass of the truck, that's not exactly "ramming." So we tend to use the pattern - YEAR - DETAIL/LOCATION - ACTION. 2016 Nice attack, 2017 Las Vegas shooting, et al. -- Fuzheado &#124; Talk 09:51, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't want to be unfaithful to our norm. That's why I suggest killing her and finding a new one. Times Square is in Manhattan but, absent a Muslim, this is rarely called a "ramming" and didn't involve a truck. Titling it "Times Square car crash" and this "Manhattan truck ramming/attack/crash" is clear enough to set them apart without shoehorning in a year nobody uses. One person weighs less than a truck, but a crowd of them and a school bus sure doesn't. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:18, 5 November 2017 (UTC)


 * I think 2017 New York City truck attack is probably going to be the best title. That's how people are most often calling it. "Lower Manhattan" doesn't match the way most people around the world will WP:RECOGNIZE it. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 10:30, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Your suggestion is good. Lower is an odd phrase outside of Manhattan Vanguard10 (talk) 04:31, 7 November 2017 (UTC)


 * I think that's too vague and confusing, as the May 2017 Times Square attack is also "New York City." That means you'd have 2017 New York City car attack vs 2017 New York city truck attack with just the car and truck being the distinguishing characteristic, which seems too close to be useful. -- Fuzheado &#124; Talk 10:43, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
 *  Comment - I still support the name "2017 New York City truck attack" for those in the world who are not familiar with Manhattan. I also support "October 2017 New York City attack", or other similar title.  I am closing this discussion, because I started a "requested move" discussion below. --Jax 0677 (talk) 18:34, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 9 November 2017

 * 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. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Moved.Strong consensus. Winged Blades Godric 17:19, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

2017 Lower Manhattan attack → 2017 New York City truck attack – The previous move request discussion was closed prematurely, because someone inappropriately moved the title during the move discussion. I strongly believe that "New York City" should be somewhere in the title, as some people around the world might not be so familiar with the name Manhattan. I suggest this, "2017 New York City terrorist attack" or "October 2017 New York City attack". --Jax 0677 (talk) 18:38, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Strong Support RSes rarely describe it as lower manhatten attack - more often as new york truck attack or terrorist attack. 2017 new york city terrorist attack or truck attack are both good. Lower manhatten attack utterly fails WP:COMMONNAME. Galobtter (talk) 18:52, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Strong Support As above Guyb123321 (talk) 21:40, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Bike Path Attack would be better. Truck attack and lower manattan attack are too generic.  The unique aspect (and probably first of this type of attack) is that it was on a bike path. Americasroof (talk) 05:37, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Support I think using NYC over Lower Manhattan is a more common name in news reports, and I suspect that most people will refer it to it as "that (truck) attack in NYC" in five/ten/x years from now too.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 08:29, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Support - Per WP:PRECISE and WP:CONCISE policies. HastyBriar321 (talk) 22:51, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Support dropping “Lower”. Mild preference for Manhattan over NYC, that’s what I’m seeing more in sources. Oppose “truck” in favour of “pickup truck” or “vehicle”. It’s not a real truck. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:19, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Sources are constantly calling it a truck... HastyBriar321 (talk) 06:33, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Examples? --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:58, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * This, for starters. HastyBriar321 (talk) 07:14, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Just googling new york truck attack reveals numerous ones - . Mostly truck attack or sometimes terror attack. Galobtter (talk) 07:22, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Also, I don't understand what constitutes as a "truck" for you... HastyBriar321 (talk) 08:48, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I looked more. It’s mixed, but enough sources title with truck, no small/pickup, so I no longer think it’s an issue. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:10, 13 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment I thought West Side Highway Attack was fine. If Sayfullo Saipov redirects here, that is probably what most people looking for this article will search for. Seraphim System  ( talk ) 23:30, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * As far as I can see only one website uses west side high attack . Searching for it reveals that most other sources use a variation of New York Truck Attack . Galobtter (talk) 06:08, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * The linked sources are all putting "pickup" in front of the first use of "truck". --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:24, 13 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Support per WP:COMMONNAME. Most sources around the world are referring to it as the NYC attack, not Manhattan, and truck is the way they're often distinguishing it from other attacks. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 09:21, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Support. Almost no reliable sources are calling it by the name "Lower Manhattan attack", which is basically a neologism invented by Wikipedia editors who moved the article there. —Lowellian (reply) 17:26, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Putting aside for the moment that any title for this article is, by definition, a neologism, I don't see how you can say that no reliable sources are referring to the event as a lower Manhattan attack. A simple google search on "Lower Manhattan Attack" (specific phrase) pulls up plenty of reliable sources using exactly that phrase, often in the title of the article. I've nothing against moving the page but it seems to me that many of the oppose !votes are either not bothering to look or are ignoring evidence that is contrary to their belief. --regentspark (comment) 19:27, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I wasn't criticizing it for being a neologism in itself; I was criticizing it for being a neologism propagated from Wikipedia. I didn't say there were no such sources; I said there were few. There are increasingly many sources now using that phrase because of the influence of Wikipedia. But I remember when the article was initially moved -- at that time, almost all sources were calling it variations of "New York City attack", "New York City car attack", "Manhattan attack", "Manhattan car attack", etc., with almost none using the term "Lower Manhattan attack", hence one of the points of controversy at the time the article was moved, as a unilateral action without established consensus, that resulted in the move review. Googling will get you to websites that have since have started using the term "Lower Manhattan attack" because of Wikipedia's prominence on the Internet, basically parroting what Wikipedia calls it because Wikipedia is considered by much of the public as a reliable authority for information, which is problematic, as Wikipedia is at this point basically setting usage instead of following the usage of reliable sources. —Lowellian (reply) 00:50, 14 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Support without "2017" Nothing else on Wikipedia search comes up for "New York City truck attack". It's clear enough to not use a date not commonly used elsewhere. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:33, 14 November 2017 (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.