Talk:List of terrorist incidents in 2022

2022 Abu Dhabi attack
I am here because I was told to. I added the 2022 Abu Dhabi attack, backing this up with citations. A few days later, I had my edits reverted by @TompaDompa, based on the grounds of WP:ONUS. The edit summary was:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_2022&oldid=1066691869 rv. See] WP:ONUS, I see one reference that says "US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan condemned the terrorist attack", that doesn't meet the inclusion crtieria. The others don't call this a terrorist incident.

I reverted that edit, with the following summary:

Undid revision 1066691869 by FDW777 (talk) (also recognized by the Governments of Saudi Arabia, Israel, Egypt, and much more. Multiple newspapers described it as "terrorist" in their headlines. Talk page consensus must be taken before reverting again.

I then added a reference to a reliable source (ThePrint.in) describing the incident as a terrorist attack. My edit summary was:

→‎List: Adding another source that describes it as terrorist

@FDW777 manually reverted my edits, with the summary:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_2022&oldid=1066695106 rv. I suggest reading] WP:ONUS, "The onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content". It's up to you to achieve consensus on the talk page, not the people removing your disputed addition.

I then received a warning for edit warring. I believe this is the standard Twinkle warning template for edit warring, if I am not mistaken. I'm afraid I may have gotten overboard with the reverting.

The warning told me to go to the talk page. So I am here.

My arguments for inclusion are:

1. There are multiple references describing the events as a terrorist attack, in their headlines, as I claimed. For instance:


 * In phone call with UAE crown prince, Pakistani PM condemns Abu Dhabi terror attack (dailypakistan.com.pk)
 * UAE requests UNSC meeting on Houthi terrorist attacks that killed two Indians – ThePrint
 * Egypt condemns Houthi terrorist attack on UAE after 3 killed in oil tanker explosions - Foreign Affairs - Egypt - Ahram Online
 * President Sisi denounces Houthis’ terrorist attack on Abu Dhabi airport - EgyptToday

2. If we go by Britannica's definition of terrorism (the calculated use of violence to create a general climate of fear in a population and thereby to bring about a particular political objective) this makes sense. The attack was planned and intentional. The Houthis threatened to carry out more attacks if the UAE did not withdraw from Yemen - this is a climate of fear. The political objective is to

3. If we go by this site's definition, the short description is that it is "the use of violence to further a political or ideological cause." This is pretty easy to see here. The longer description is that "terrorism, in its broadest sense, is the use of intentional violence to achieve political aims. The term is used in this regard primarily to refer to violence during peacetime or in the context of war against non-combatants (mostly civilians and neutral military personnel). Again, this is an attack on a civilian facility that killed three civilians. These people were not firing at a military base, they fired at an airport where civilians go and an oil facility where civilians work. They did this in pursuit of the aim to scare the Emiratis into submission, so they would leave Yemen. Salah Abdeslam said the November 2015 Paris attacks were retaliations in revenge for French airstrikes in Syria. This is not very different.

4. Merriam Webster describes it as "the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion." I have explained why this is so before.

5. The basic meaning of all these definitions is that "Terrorism is the intentional use of violence against civilians and Non-combatants with the intent to scare people, all as part of a political and/or ideological goal." This is a simple example.

6. ONUS is not really well applied here (although done in good faith). Multiple sources say it is a terrorist attack:


 * Saudi coalition strikes Houthis after drone attack on UAE - The Jerusalem Post (jpost.com)
 * Attacks in Abu Dhabi and Turkey give oil market the jitters | Upstream Online
 * Pakistan, UAE FMs discuss Abu Dhabi terror attack (tribune.com.pk)
 * US Defense Secy Austin condemns terrorist attack in Abu Dhabi, says 'we remain committed to UAE's security' (aninews.in)
 * Israel condemns terrorist attacks on Abu Dhabi; sends condolences to India – ThePrint

7. The US was not the only country to call it a terrorist act.


 * Bennett offers UAE 'security and intelligence support' after attack by Houthis | The Times of Israel
 * Abu Dhabi: Saudi led-coalition launches airstrikes on Yemeni capital shortly after deadly Houthi drone strike in Abu Dhabi - CNN
 * https://www.gov.il/en/departments/news/spoke_abu_dhabi180121
 * Houthi terror attack on Abu Dhabi: What we know so far - News | Khaleej Times
 * Muslim World League condemns terrorist attack on Abu Dhabi (arabnews.com)
 * Pakistan, UAE FMs discuss Abu Dhabi terror attack (tribune.com.pk)

I am pinging @Jim Michael and 2001:464F:B10E:0:19B1:E305:386A:302E, who have both edited this page constructively, and @Prism55, who made the article. Also pinging @RPSkokie who made the 2022 Abu Dhabi attack article.

I would also like to apologize for edit warring, which I should not have done. Sincerely, Dunutubble (talk) 18:29, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Pinging @Love of Corey, who also edited this article constructively. Dunutubble (talk) 18:31, 19 January 2022 (UTC)


 * It fits the inclusion criteria; it should be there, backed by a few of these refs which call this attack terrorist. Jim Michael (talk) 18:45, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for bringing this to the talk page.
 * 1. Per WP:HEADLINES, a headline cannot be used for anything.
 * 2-5. We're not interested in Britannica's or any similar definition of anything. The inclusion criteria for this article, and similar ones, were decided by an Rfc. The inclusion criteria appear in the article.
 * 6-7. It is correctly applied. Your addition was reverted, therefore it's up to you to gain consensus for inclusion. You tried to reverse this by demanding other editors gain consensus for removal, the policy is clear that's not how it works. Your edit can only be judged on the references you provided at the time you made it, not on references you failed to provide. FDW777 (talk) 19:19, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
 * 1. I wasn't saying that headlines alone prove something.
 * 2-5. By RFC, I assume you meant this one. In this case it proves my point. It has a stand alone article, 2022 Abu Dhabi attack, and a majority of Reliable sources describe it as so, including The Jerusalem Post and ThePrint. Entire governments classified it as a terror incident, including the USA, Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar (the last being the Emirates' mortal ally)
 * 6-7. While my edits were disruptive, which I can't really justify, it doesn't mean the statement is wrong. The article for the attack has been updated to mention it as a terrorist attack in its lede section. Dunutubble (talk) 16:47, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * are the current references sufficient for inclusion? FDW777 (talk) 21:09, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * @FDW777 - Not Tompadompa but the United Nations Security Council just designated it to be a terrorist attack. This is a clear-cut reason to reinstate this entry.  Dunutubble (talk) 21:49, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm neutral, leaning towards inclusion. Love of Corey (talk) 21:08, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I think the attack should be included in the list. The attack has a stand-alone article and it's described by enough reliable sources as a terrorist attack. So it meets the inclusion criteria. Lukasvdb99 (talk) 12:25, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I think the attack should be included in the list. The attack has a stand-alone article and it's described by enough reliable sources as a terrorist attack. So it meets the inclusion criteria. Lukasvdb99 (talk) 12:25, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

2022 Buffalo shooting
A new terrorist attack occurred in the us after a white supremist, was racially motivated to kill 10 people, here's the source: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/may/14/buffalo-shooting-supermarket-new-york — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snake101201 (talk • contribs) 01:03, 15 May 2022 (UTC)


 * I would support adding that, in the same vein that List of terrorist incidents in 2019 has the Christchurch mosque shootings and List of terrorist incidents in 2015 has the Charleston church shooting. Dunutubble (talk) (Contributions) 13:42, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Absent a conviction for terrorist crimes, this is fundamentally a non-starter as it would be a WP:BLP violation. We can't say in WP:WikiVoice that a living person who has not been convicted of terrorist crimes is guilty of terrorist crimes, nor can we say that they are a terrorist, nor can we say that their actions constitute terrorism. Thus, we can't include this in a list of terrorist incidents absent a conviction for terrorist crimes. What we can do is say that "such-and-such called it terrorism" with proper WP:INTEXT attribution, but that would of course not be done here but at the article 2022 Buffalo shooting. TompaDompa (talk) 16:30, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Disagree with this reasoning. The top of the article outlines "To be included, entries must be notable (have a stand-alone article) and described by a consensus of reliable sources as 'terrorism'." No conviction for terrorism is necessary to be included on the list, and if it were to be a condition of inclusion then any terrorist attack where the perpetrator(s) is/are killed during the act would not be included on the list, as they are never convicted of terrorism. (This would mean the Colleyville synagogue hostage crisis should be removed under your reasoning.)
 * I support adding the Buffalo shooting as the shooting has its own stand-alone article and the perpetrator was motivated by racial hatred, plus he has been charged with domestic terrorism (and indicted on said charges). Vired (talk) 15:53, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * WP:BLP is not optional, nor can it be overridden by WP:Local consensus. Bringing up instances where the perpetrator was killed is rather nonsensical—the issue here is that there is a living person who has not (yet) been convicted of terrorist crimes and that calling that person a terrorist or their actions terrorism would be a violation of our policy on material about living people. I suggest you familiarize yourself with this policy: WP:Biographies of living persons. TompaDompa (talk) 17:03, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * WP:BLP doesn't say we have to strictly wait until someone is convicted of terrorism to be referred to as a terrorist. However, if you'd like to wait for him to be found guilty of terrorism, then sure, I'm fine with that. But in that case I recommend you remove all references of the attack as terrorism from Wikipedia, including from the article of the attack itself, as well as from the article Terrorism in the United States.
 * What's more, how do we go about Dylann Roof? He falls under WP:BLP and yet is referred to as a terrorist in numerous places on Wikipedia despite never having been charged with terrorism. Vired (talk) 20:29, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I removed it from Terrorism in the United States. If you find additional gross WP:BLP violations of this kind, by all means remove them. TompaDompa (talk) 21:09, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 * So given that the Buffalo shooter has now pleaded guilty to all state charges, including terrorism, should we now add the Buffalo shooting to this list? Vired (talk) 01:25, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Raising this discussion again as it still seems not everyone agrees that the Buffalo attack was a terrorist attack. I believe that the arguments in favour of being included on this list are the fact that the shooter has pleaded guilty to state charges of terrorism; and the shooter is referred to as a terrorist, or the attack is referred to as a terrorist attack, by the following sources:


 * Foreign Policy: "The horrific terrorist attack on Saturday in Buffalo, New York, that killed 10 people and injured three more ..."


 * Southern Poverty Law Center: "Hatewatch reviewed the alleged Buffalo terrorist’s propaganda document ..."


 * Middlebury Institute of International Studies: "The Buffalo Terrorist Attack: Situating Lone Actor Violence into the Militant Accelerationism Landscape"


 * Combating Terrorism Center at West Point: "This article examines the Buffalo terrorist atrocity ..."


 * Ofcom: "On 14 May 2022, an 18-year-old far-right extremist allegedly undertook a violent terrorist attack on a supermarket in a predominantly Black neighbourhood in Buffalo, New York."

Given the guilty plea and the above sources, I believe the Buffalo attack should be included in this list and am seeking wider consensus from those who have made constructive edits to this page. Vired (talk) 04:09, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Somalia attacks this year
I’m wondering as to why certain attacks that have happened this year in Somalia are missing from this list. We have February 2022 Beledweyne bombing, but there have been four attacks in total in Somalia this year.

The other three attacks are March 2022 Somalia attacks, April 2022 Mogadishu bombing and 2022 Mogadishu hotel attack (the hotel attack happened more recently so the article is fairly small at the moment).

My question is whether these attacks meet the criteria to be included. I’m certain at least the March and April ones do, but I wanted to pass it on the talk page before adding anything because there may be a valid reason as to why these haven’t been added. Fats40boy11 (talk) 05:57, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
 * All those four should be included, providing they're backed by RS describing the attacks as terrorism. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 17:43, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Shah Cheragh attack
On 26 October 2022, at least 15 people were killed in Shiraz, Iran. The problem is with who conducted the attack. Although the Islamic state has claimed responsibility for the attack, others have disputed this such as the ISW.

Therefore, should we wait for a while to see if more information comes out or does this incident deserve to be included on the basis of the information (and speculation) we have right now? Fats40boy11 (talk) 18:27, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Islamic State claimed responsibility, so it should be added. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 20:12, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Strabane bombing
Can somebody add the attack on the police in Northern Ireland last week the new ira clamirc responsibility 178.167.224.151 (talk) 18:29, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
 * ❌ because it doesn't have an article & isn't notable enough for one. It should instead be added to Timeline of Real Irish Republican Army actions. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 20:12, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

2022 Jerusalem bombings
The incidents were described as terrorist attacks by the US Department of Defense, the US Embassy in Israel, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, the European Union’s diplomatic arm, Tor Wennesland, as well as Israeli authorities and publications (The Jerusalem Post, Haaretz..).

Is this enough, or would it be ideal to wait for more information on the perpetrators? Mooonswimmer 00:53, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
 * WP:There is no deadline. Waiting until more is known seems like a good idea, for now. We run into WP:BLPCRIME issues if someone is charged with terrorist crimes. I'd also like to note that not all of those listed above use the word "terrorism"—Karine Jean-Pierre, for instance, says acts of terror. "Terror" and "terrorism" are not interchangeable terms. TompaDompa (talk) 01:13, 29 November 2022 (UTC)