Talk:2017 Rinkeby riots

Donald Trump quote
Discuss why the remarks made by Donald Trump about what happened on Friday, according to Trump, why these remarks pertain to this story. If you can not argue for why these comments are pertinent to the story, that information should be left out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.227.247.237 (talk) 13:30, 3 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Please discuss further why the remarks made by Donald Trump days prior to the outbreak of these riots have anything to do with these riots. Do not include information in articles that do not pertain to the topic of the articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.227.247.237 (talk) 14:29, 4 March 2017 (UTC)


 * To clarify, I refer to the remarks made by Donald Trump where he insinuated some significant disastrous event had taken place in Sweden the day prior to his speech. The riots that broke out several days after these unsubstantiated remarks were passed, were due to a drug bust that happened just hours before the riots started developing. Please explain the relevance of what Trump said about Sweden on Saturday, about a non-existent event that supposedly happened prior his speech, what relevance this has on this article about events that unfurled several days after that speech for reasons entirely disconnected from Donald Trump. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.227.247.237 (talk) 18:19, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The Trump thing belongs on the page because the coverage of the temporal relationship between Trump's remarks and the riot was the focus of so much international attention.E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:51, 5 March 2017 (UTC)


 * That doesn't quite follow: just because the media reported on these things as connected to each other, that doesn't necessarily mean one had to do with the other. We wouldn't allow this kind of post hoc ergo propter hoc and time-correlation based reasoning on any other article if there wasn't a really good reason to do so, only because some media outlets have gotten things confused and mixed up: this is a question of relevance and to just say "sources said so" isn't quite going to cut it, as far as I've understood. I believe this information should be left out, since it is irrelevant to the actual story, or if kept, that it is clarified that the statements that Donald Trump made were misleading and also had nothing to do with the riots. Relevance and clarity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.227.247.237 (talk) 14:38, 5 March 2017 (UTC)


 * It's clear that the Trump--Rinkeby connection has been widely discussed in the media (https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=trump+rinkeby&*). To suggest it should be removed is highly disingenious. HampsteadLord (talk) 20:54, 5 March 2017 (UTC)


 * I don't dispute that it has been made in the media. I'm disputing the relevance to the actual story. Just because some media outlets make a connection, that doesn't mean it's actually there. There is not a thing disingenuous about that, and I would prefer it if you kept such inept accusations away from here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.227.247.237 (talk) 23:29, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Links
Rinkeby suburb - has became the "No Go Zone" because of migrants.


 * 1) lastnightinsweden ???

1) the official police report "Rinkeby clashes" - (swe.).

https://polisen.se/Aktuellt/Nyheter/Gemensam-2017/Februari/Oroligheter-i-Rinkeby/

Clashes in Rinkeby Police patrol was attacked in connection with the riots in the Rinkeby. – We are increasing staffing, and will remain so as long as it is needed to create security and order, " says Ulf Johansson, regionpolischef in Stockholm.     2) pictures and movie on site

http://www.dn.se/sthlm/polis-skot-for-att-traffa-i-rinkeby/

http://www.expressen.se/nyheter/stockholm/har-kastar-ganget-sten-mot-polisen-i-rinkeby/

3) the story of beaten photographer

http://www.dn.se/sthlm/dn-fotograf-misshandlad-i-rinkeby/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.135.239.6 (talk) 20:03, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Recent edit
I removed the section breaks (the article is too short to have meaningful sections just yet) and reduced the amount of See also links: diff. Please let me know if there are any concerns. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:39, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

edit
I added that police didn't just fire warning shots, but that they "shot for effect", intending to hit at least one target, but missed. Also that several fires were started and at least 7 cars burned (7-8). The references are added twice though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:32E5:CD60:12BF:48FF:FED7:D8F7 (talk) 21:30, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Merger possible?
@K.e.Coffman: If the article violates WP:NOT, is merger possible? If so, which target destination? --George Ho (talk) 08:34, 16 March 2017 (UTC); Re-pinging K.e.coffman due to IE11's AutoCorrect thing. 08:35, 16 March 2017 (UTC)