This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
2020 Vienna attack article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1Auto-archiving period: 2 days
![]() |
![]() | A news item involving 2020 Vienna attack was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 2 November 2020. | ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 2 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
My addition of Category:2020 murders in Europe was reverted, with the edit summary "there has been no judicial finding of murder". Do we really need to wait for a court case (which, if there was only one gunman, will never occur) before describing these awful events as murder? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:02, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
"please cite the specific part that prevents us from describing killings by a dead terrorist as murders". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:56, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
Having failed to substantiate his claim that wp:crime prevents us from applying the category to this article, Slatersteven is now edit-warring to remove it; most recently with the nonsensical edit summary "Still not cite thre was only one killer"
; and previously with the edit summary "read
wp:brd and
wp:UNOUS "
(note that
WP:BRD says "BRD is not an excuse to revert any change more than once.").
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
14:43, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
Value-laden labels—such as calling an organization a cult, an individual a racist or sexist, terrorist, or freedom fighter, or a sexual practice a perversion—may express contentious opinion and are best avoided unless widely used by reliable sources to describe the subject, in which case use in-text attribution.In other words, we should never call anyone a terrorist in WP:WikiVoice – but writing "X said Y is a terrorist" is fine. TompaDompa ( talk) 15:12, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
''[[racist]]'' or ''[[sexist]]'',
. Perhaps you didn't mean to include that in your quote, in which case you should apply more care, but include it - and refer to it - you did. None of the terrorism-related categories on this article are quotes of other people. If you believe that we can't refer to something as a murder without a legal authority declaring it thus (further: yet can do so for terrorism), please cite a policy that says as much.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
20:58, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
All material in Wikipedia must be attributable to a reliable, published source.Are you trying to suggest that news media are WP:RELIABLE sources for making decisions about what does and does not constitute a particular type of crime in specific cases? TompaDompa ( talk) 21:19, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
I tend to agree with not categorizing this under "murder". Part of it is because there is no murder conviction yet; another part of it is the important distinction between "murder" and "(terrorist) attack" we make on Wikipedia. Murder requires an intent to harm specific people, but this attack appears to be indiscriminate. I came here after seeing Pigsonthewing indirectly refer to this discussion off-wiki. Deryck C. 21:57, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
This matter is now moot. The sole attacker is dead, so there is no "reputation" to protect from a statement of murder. I still maintain, however, that "murder" should not have been asserted while it was likely that an alleged attacker was still alive. But that did not play out. WWGB ( talk) 03:37, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
andThe policy in question here is WP:OR:
All material in Wikipedia must be attributable to a reliable, published source.Are you trying to suggest that news media are WP:RELIABLE sources for making decisions about what does and does not constitute a particular type of crime in specific cases?
respectively. TompaDompa ( talk) 18:03, 4 November 2020 (UTC)"Terrorism" is attributed to the Austrian authorities in the sources and the article
"Then feel free to remove all fifteen occurrences; and thus test whether your assertion has consensus.. Still waiting for you to do that... Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy`; Andy's edits 10:32, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Are you trying to suggest that news media are WP:RELIABLE sources for making decisions about what does and does not constitute a particular type of crime in specific cases?I asked about "mass murder" because Category:Mass murder in 2020 is used here. I was thinking it should be removed. I had misread which category was being discussed, but the point still stands. TompaDompa ( talk) 12:27, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
We do not blindly repeat sources making dubious claims.in response to another editor making the blanket statement
we do not second guess RS(about something CNN had reported) in the section #20,000 videos on this very page. WP:GREL itself gives the following examples for when generally reliable sources are not reliable:
the material is contradicted by more authoritative sources, it is outside the source's accepted areas of expertise (a well-established news organization is normally reliable for politics but not for philosophy), a specific subcategory of the source is less reliable (such as opinion pieces in a newspaper), the source is making an exceptional claim, or a higher standard of sourcing is required ( WP:MEDRS, WP:BLP) for the statement in question. Here, we have something outside of their area of expertise. Or are you trying to suggest that making decisions about what does and does not constitute a particular type of crime in specific cases is in fact within the area of expertise of news organizations? TompaDompa ( talk) 23:06, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Once again: both the BBC and The Times are reliable sources. Both describe these shootings as murders. Beyond that, you still seek to apply an irrelevant test, of your own invention. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:36, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Are the recent incidents described here relevant enough to the topic to be included in the article? I realize the source is a bit partisan, but just wanted to bring it up. Thanks Inter&anthro ( talk) 16:44, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
This addition is unsourced. It needs an RS source. It is not sufficient that the editor is of the view that it is not contentious - it is not supported by an RS, and of course it is contentious (the shooting started there, the shooter may not have known it was closed, etc). -- 2604:2000:E010:1100:6CFD:553E:241D:821D ( talk) 08:11, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
Is it confirmed that Czechia authorities reported to Austrian authorities that the perpetrator had tried to buy ammunition in Czechia, and that the Austrians did not act on this information? Abductive ( reasoning) 05:41, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
2020 Vienna attack article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1Auto-archiving period: 2 days
![]() |
![]() | A news item involving 2020 Vienna attack was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 2 November 2020. | ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 2 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
My addition of Category:2020 murders in Europe was reverted, with the edit summary "there has been no judicial finding of murder". Do we really need to wait for a court case (which, if there was only one gunman, will never occur) before describing these awful events as murder? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:02, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
"please cite the specific part that prevents us from describing killings by a dead terrorist as murders". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:56, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
Having failed to substantiate his claim that wp:crime prevents us from applying the category to this article, Slatersteven is now edit-warring to remove it; most recently with the nonsensical edit summary "Still not cite thre was only one killer"
; and previously with the edit summary "read
wp:brd and
wp:UNOUS "
(note that
WP:BRD says "BRD is not an excuse to revert any change more than once.").
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
14:43, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
Value-laden labels—such as calling an organization a cult, an individual a racist or sexist, terrorist, or freedom fighter, or a sexual practice a perversion—may express contentious opinion and are best avoided unless widely used by reliable sources to describe the subject, in which case use in-text attribution.In other words, we should never call anyone a terrorist in WP:WikiVoice – but writing "X said Y is a terrorist" is fine. TompaDompa ( talk) 15:12, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
''[[racist]]'' or ''[[sexist]]'',
. Perhaps you didn't mean to include that in your quote, in which case you should apply more care, but include it - and refer to it - you did. None of the terrorism-related categories on this article are quotes of other people. If you believe that we can't refer to something as a murder without a legal authority declaring it thus (further: yet can do so for terrorism), please cite a policy that says as much.
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);
Talk to Andy;
Andy's edits
20:58, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
All material in Wikipedia must be attributable to a reliable, published source.Are you trying to suggest that news media are WP:RELIABLE sources for making decisions about what does and does not constitute a particular type of crime in specific cases? TompaDompa ( talk) 21:19, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
I tend to agree with not categorizing this under "murder". Part of it is because there is no murder conviction yet; another part of it is the important distinction between "murder" and "(terrorist) attack" we make on Wikipedia. Murder requires an intent to harm specific people, but this attack appears to be indiscriminate. I came here after seeing Pigsonthewing indirectly refer to this discussion off-wiki. Deryck C. 21:57, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
This matter is now moot. The sole attacker is dead, so there is no "reputation" to protect from a statement of murder. I still maintain, however, that "murder" should not have been asserted while it was likely that an alleged attacker was still alive. But that did not play out. WWGB ( talk) 03:37, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
andThe policy in question here is WP:OR:
All material in Wikipedia must be attributable to a reliable, published source.Are you trying to suggest that news media are WP:RELIABLE sources for making decisions about what does and does not constitute a particular type of crime in specific cases?
respectively. TompaDompa ( talk) 18:03, 4 November 2020 (UTC)"Terrorism" is attributed to the Austrian authorities in the sources and the article
"Then feel free to remove all fifteen occurrences; and thus test whether your assertion has consensus.. Still waiting for you to do that... Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy`; Andy's edits 10:32, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Are you trying to suggest that news media are WP:RELIABLE sources for making decisions about what does and does not constitute a particular type of crime in specific cases?I asked about "mass murder" because Category:Mass murder in 2020 is used here. I was thinking it should be removed. I had misread which category was being discussed, but the point still stands. TompaDompa ( talk) 12:27, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
We do not blindly repeat sources making dubious claims.in response to another editor making the blanket statement
we do not second guess RS(about something CNN had reported) in the section #20,000 videos on this very page. WP:GREL itself gives the following examples for when generally reliable sources are not reliable:
the material is contradicted by more authoritative sources, it is outside the source's accepted areas of expertise (a well-established news organization is normally reliable for politics but not for philosophy), a specific subcategory of the source is less reliable (such as opinion pieces in a newspaper), the source is making an exceptional claim, or a higher standard of sourcing is required ( WP:MEDRS, WP:BLP) for the statement in question. Here, we have something outside of their area of expertise. Or are you trying to suggest that making decisions about what does and does not constitute a particular type of crime in specific cases is in fact within the area of expertise of news organizations? TompaDompa ( talk) 23:06, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Once again: both the BBC and The Times are reliable sources. Both describe these shootings as murders. Beyond that, you still seek to apply an irrelevant test, of your own invention. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:36, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Are the recent incidents described here relevant enough to the topic to be included in the article? I realize the source is a bit partisan, but just wanted to bring it up. Thanks Inter&anthro ( talk) 16:44, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
This addition is unsourced. It needs an RS source. It is not sufficient that the editor is of the view that it is not contentious - it is not supported by an RS, and of course it is contentious (the shooting started there, the shooter may not have known it was closed, etc). -- 2604:2000:E010:1100:6CFD:553E:241D:821D ( talk) 08:11, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
Is it confirmed that Czechia authorities reported to Austrian authorities that the perpetrator had tried to buy ammunition in Czechia, and that the Austrians did not act on this information? Abductive ( reasoning) 05:41, 9 November 2020 (UTC)