![]() | The terms " extremist", " terrorist" and " freedom fighter" should be avoided or used with care. Editors discussing the use of these terms are advised to familiarize themselves with the guideline, and discuss objections at the relevant talkpage, not here. If you feel this article represents an exception, then that discussion properly belongs here. |
![]() | This article was nominated for
deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Purpose of the article is? Regardless, for it to not be nominated for deletion it will need beefier more scholarly sources.
PЄTЄRS J V ►
TALK
19:16, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
This is pure, blatant POV fork.
Collect (
talk)
19:22, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
A solution could be add some kinds of terror that have been set in terror literature, I was searching for that and I'd found really strange that Wikipedia didn't talk about it... I'll see what would do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Urbanista77 ( talk • contribs) 20:44, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
I am adding this source here for possible future use. It is interesting as it discusses the difference between " terror" and " terrorism" and in fact states that terror is a key element of counter-terrorism. (Whether the US did this or the Chinese is irrelevant.)
-- Petri Krohn ( talk) 06:10, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: page moved and undisambiguated name redirect to fear. Andrewa ( talk) 15:57, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
– This is a very ASTONISHing title. If there's a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC at all, it's Terror (emotion), which redirects to Fear. In fact, the page was linked from {{ Emotion}} until I just now removed it. Participants in the two AfDs for this article have expressed similar concerns. For now, I think the best thing to do would be to say there's no primary topic. I wouldn't oppose the base title redirecting to Fear, and I'm not dead-set on Terror (politics) for this article if there are other viable alternatives. -- BDD ( talk) 19:29, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
Noting the two AfD nominations both resulting in the article being kept (the older one closed no consensus but look at the closing comments There is consensus that the article should not remain the dictionary definition and semi-fork of Terrorism that is is now. But there is no consensus what it should become (a redirect or a dab page, to where, with or without merging). These solutions can all be implemented without deleting the page. Nobody can reasonably want this article to become a red link, so deleting the article would not help solve the disagreement about what it should become. This needs to be resolved editorially on the talk page, perhaps via an RfC. That is really a consensus to keep in my view, as none of those ways forward involve deletion.)...
I think we should note how remarkably good this article now is, for a short article on a very controversial subject. It is NPOV and well referenced, and has every chance of growing. Andrewa ( talk) 17:59, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
![]() | The terms " extremist", " terrorist" and " freedom fighter" should be avoided or used with care. Editors discussing the use of these terms are advised to familiarize themselves with the guideline, and discuss objections at the relevant talkpage, not here. If you feel this article represents an exception, then that discussion properly belongs here. |
![]() | This article was nominated for
deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Purpose of the article is? Regardless, for it to not be nominated for deletion it will need beefier more scholarly sources.
PЄTЄRS J V ►
TALK
19:16, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
This is pure, blatant POV fork.
Collect (
talk)
19:22, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
A solution could be add some kinds of terror that have been set in terror literature, I was searching for that and I'd found really strange that Wikipedia didn't talk about it... I'll see what would do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Urbanista77 ( talk • contribs) 20:44, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
I am adding this source here for possible future use. It is interesting as it discusses the difference between " terror" and " terrorism" and in fact states that terror is a key element of counter-terrorism. (Whether the US did this or the Chinese is irrelevant.)
-- Petri Krohn ( talk) 06:10, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: page moved and undisambiguated name redirect to fear. Andrewa ( talk) 15:57, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
– This is a very ASTONISHing title. If there's a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC at all, it's Terror (emotion), which redirects to Fear. In fact, the page was linked from {{ Emotion}} until I just now removed it. Participants in the two AfDs for this article have expressed similar concerns. For now, I think the best thing to do would be to say there's no primary topic. I wouldn't oppose the base title redirecting to Fear, and I'm not dead-set on Terror (politics) for this article if there are other viable alternatives. -- BDD ( talk) 19:29, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
Noting the two AfD nominations both resulting in the article being kept (the older one closed no consensus but look at the closing comments There is consensus that the article should not remain the dictionary definition and semi-fork of Terrorism that is is now. But there is no consensus what it should become (a redirect or a dab page, to where, with or without merging). These solutions can all be implemented without deleting the page. Nobody can reasonably want this article to become a red link, so deleting the article would not help solve the disagreement about what it should become. This needs to be resolved editorially on the talk page, perhaps via an RfC. That is really a consensus to keep in my view, as none of those ways forward involve deletion.)...
I think we should note how remarkably good this article now is, for a short article on a very controversial subject. It is NPOV and well referenced, and has every chance of growing. Andrewa ( talk) 17:59, 26 February 2015 (UTC)