Jump to content

Talk:1996 Docklands bombing

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
There is a clear guideline on Wikipedia about the use of the word Terrorism. Please read it before editing.

Name of article

[edit]

Does anyone else think it should be at 1996 Docklands bombing? "South Quay bombing" is used but quite rarely, certainly not as much as Docklands bombing. Obviously the alternate name would stay in the llead. Thoughts? One Night In Hackney303 23:56, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, it might well be the most accurate title but I've never heard it referred to as the "South Quay bombing". GiollaUidir 22:37, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

The image Image:SouthKey bombing - 9.2.96.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --05:03, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Date?

[edit]

Wikipedia states that the bombing occurred on February 9, but BBC says February 10. Which is correct??? 79.78.53.60 (talk) 20:59, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The BBC news report is referring to the bombing of the previous day, 9 February. 2 lines of K303 13:58, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I thought the article in question, is an "On This Day" e.g. when it happened, and they specifically find the first article they published about the event, then they do an "in context" section. The article says last night because thats the first one published by BBC. Further evidence exists when you click the "BBC News Player" it states in the side box: The IRA admits planting the bomb that exploded in the Docklands area of London last night. (First broadcast 11 February 1996)

see here: BBC News Player

Some sources say 9 and some say 10... Patyo1994 (talk) 21:59, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, nevermind, the BBC seemed to haved changed their minds: other BBC article Patyo1994 (talk) 22:12, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 03:47, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 03:47, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 03:47, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 03:48, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why No Terrorism Label?

[edit]

Could some kind soul explain to the uninitiated why there is no label of terrorist applied to those responsible for this attack, where as in the 9/11 attack article that label is applied? Is it because only the USA's enemies may be so labelled? I cannot see what justification there can be that the IRA cannot be labled a terrorist organisation when Al Qaeda can be, surely they are both non-governmental organisations who pursue their political agendas through violence against civilians and civilian infrastructure. Is this an inherrent weakness of Wikipedia? Surely all such organisations should either be labelled as terrorists or not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.63.247.68 (talk) 12:48, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Given that there has been no response to the above comment in over a year, I intent to edit the article to reflect it as a terrorist act. Anyone who disagrees please speak now and explain your reasoning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.76.231.247 (talk) 04:46, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]