Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2018 Amsterdam stabbing attack


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Sam Sailor 11:16, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

2018 Amsterdam stabbing attack

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Another page from the German Refugee Crimes walled garden. This one branches out a bit and is a Dutch refugee crime page instead. Same issues with WP:SUSTAINED and WP:EVENTCRIT and WP:NOTNEWS as the other articles in this grouping. Simonm223 (talk) 15:05, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Plus attacker had "a terrorist motive".E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:32, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
 * So What A motive does not provide notability to a minor assault. Simonm223 (talk) 13:35, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Press coverage is more intense &s sustained for a terrorist attack. As is true here.E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:49, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Thsmi002 (talk) 17:24, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Thsmi002 (talk) 17:24, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. Thsmi002 (talk) 17:24, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
 * 2018 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep It isn't a "refugee crime" as you are downplaying it, it was the first terrorist attack in the Netherlands since 2001 (according to Dutch intelligence agency's) and therefore a significant event. You should be ashamed of yourself for trying to get articles like this deleted by lying that it is about an ordinary crime. Terrorist attacks are no ordinary crimes. It did get a lot of media attention in the Netherlands but of course it doens't get media coverage all the time since the criminal trial takes a long time. It gets media coverage every time there are new details. Histogenea22 (talk) 17:49, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I would suggest you should review WP:BATTLEGROUND and redact the bits of your statement just now that violate WP:NPA. Simonm223 (talk) 17:52, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Now, notwithstanding that rough start, I'd posit that there's nothing about WP:EVENTCRIT that makes a crime purportedly motivated by terrorism any more or less notable than any other crime. In this case it was an attack on two people. Regardless of the motive of the attacker, two guys getting stabbed may be shocking, but absent any sort of significant sustained coverage of the event that demonstrates lasting encyclopedic significance, it's just another shocking crime. In this case, it's literally, at worst, an attempted murder as neither victim was killed. Nor was the suspected attacker. This is not notable per WP:NOTNEWS and invoking the spectre of terrorism does not make it moreso. Simonm223 (talk) 19:07, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
 * The attacker left a will and did not expect to survive the stabbing spree. Unfortunately there are frequent attempts by extremists and and their apologists to downplay the significance of failed attacks, while the former celebrate large-scale attacks with a multitude of victims. Since the assailant survived, a trial is certain to take place. AadaamS (talk) 06:23, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I would caution you that WP:BLP applies to all pages on Wikipedia including talk pages and AfD discussions. Referring to a suspect of a crime as "the assailant" prior to the trial could be considered a WP:BLP violation. Simonm223 (talk) 15:34, 8 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:SIGCOV that was international. Stabbing of two randomly selected tourists in the Central Train Station of Amsterdam by an assailant with a police-confirmed terrorist motive.E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:58, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:01, 7 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. Wide international coverage in August/September 2018 close to the event. Continuing coverage in October -e.g. - . Icewhiz (talk) 14:09, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep for now per WP:RAPID: terrorist attacks are not "routine incidents" in Europe and it's unlikely they ever will be considered so. Terrorist attacks and subsequent trials generate long-term media attention once they are concluded. A trial is certain to take place as the attacker survived being shot by police, despite the expectation of the assailant who wrote a will prior to going on the murdering spree. Per WP:COMPETENCE, terrorist incidents in EU countries are summarized and reported in annual reports by Europol. AadaamS (talk) 06:23, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Murdering spree?!? Hard to call it that when nobody died in the incident. Simonm223 (talk) 15:39, 8 November 2018 (UTC)


 * What does WP:COMPETENCE have to do with whether an assault that may have been motivated by religion constitutes a "terrorist incident"? Or do I need to break out statistics on frequency of knife attacks in Europe to demonstrate that sometimes people get stabbed and it's generally not notable? Simonm223 (talk) 15:38, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
 * For whatever reason, it would seem that alleged attacks, that were allegedly ideologically motivated, against strangers (and all the more so - foreign tourists) garner much more coverage in RSes than other attacks. It also seems, for whatever reason, that police attempt to foil such alleged attacks as they allegedly did here - allegedly shooting the alleged assailant within 9 seconds of the start of the alleged stabbing (see BBC which for some reason does not deem alleged to be a necessary qualifier in this case). Our personal value judgement on the editorial choices made by RSes who have chooen to cover this incident (while not covering various other incidents) is irrelevant for notability - what is relevant is coverage. Icewhiz (talk) 16:07, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Except that WP:NOTNEWS limits the extent to which coverage matters, as does WP:EVENTCRIT which expressly excludes shocking crimes unless they're shown to have broader impacts. The only broad impact here is getting racists excited. Simonm223 (talk) 16:41, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Not a routine event. Coverage (international coverage, continuing coverage) clearly pegs WP:EVENTCRIT(2) - Events are also very likely to be notable if they have widespread (national or international) impact and were very widely covered in diverse sources, especially if also re-analyzed afterwards (as described below).. Icewhiz (talk) 16:50, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I think we have a fundamental disagreement over what constitutes widespread impact. I mean, has the Netherlands banned knives? Has there been any other policy change? Any shift in international relations? No? Ok, no widespread impact. Simonm223 (talk) 19:21, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Assessing impact is a matter of OR and POV (though in this case this did result in a US travel advisory). EVENTCRIT(2) does not require such an assessment, and generally the existence of continued coverage implies a lasting effect.Icewhiz (talk) 19:26, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
 * All terrorist attacks in Europe that have either succeeded or been foiled at major transportation hubs have standalone articles due to WP:SIGCOV because they are well-known places with uncounted international travellers passing through. They generate a lot of analysis and publications in WP:RS.
 * If the victims release a letter via the US Embassy thanking police and hospital staff for saving their lives, it is logical that they were in a life-threatening situation. Many people have been killed in terrorist knife-attacks in Europe over the last few years. It does indeed happen that lethal violence is trivialized by extremists and their apologists simply because more victims survice injuries that would have been life-threatening two decades ago. This is of course thanks to the improving skills of medical expertise, not due to any imagined harmlessness of hypothetical attackers. AadaamS (talk) 19:43, 8 November 2018 (UTC) That's funny. Because that's not at all what the actual words of the actual policy say. "All terrorist attacks have..." is WP:OSE covered. Also I still challenge that you can call a stabbing for which the trial has not concluded in which nobody was killed a terrorist attack on the basis of a prosecutor's report of a suspect's possible motive. Simonm223 (talk) 20:25, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Strong keep, wide international and continuing coverage.--Greywin (talk) 21:35, 13 November 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.