Talk:Domestic terrorism

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): AkaDeezy918.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 20:12, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Users trying to maintain the integrity of the article

This isn't acceptable. We need to lock this page with the example image of the domestic terrorist woman. TheStranjer (talk) 02:49, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

This is incredibly petty behavior. This website is about conveying accurate information in the best possible way. That's it. It isn't your political soapbox, nor is it anyone else's. FairlyDecent (talk) 02:57, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

I've requested semi-protection for this article due to the bad behavior of numerous brand-new accounts. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:02, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

I believe that is for the best. I know I'm one of those new accounts, but I'm not trying to start a fight here. I merely believe that right now, with all the drama going on, it would be best to be patient and objective before we start labelling people as domestic terrorists.FairlyDecent (talk) 03:10, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Let's try and avoid unnecessary pejoratives; I've relabeled this section. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 03:11, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

I really do not understand what the problem is with showing a recent example of a domestic terrorist. That woman stormed the Capitol, and every major law enforcement official and governmental organ recognizes what happened on January 6th, 2021 as a domestic terrorist incident.45.24.224.237 (talk) 03:13, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Because there hasn't been any completed investigations about the incident. the image doesn't have a proper source.

It's called Wednesday. TheStranjer (talk) 03:18, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

You are basically asking me not to believe my own eyes and listen to the government45.24.224.237 (talk) 03:18, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Too late boys, article locked in old version. quit messing with articles to fellate your ego. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:100E:B142:68AC:B53F:7C77:2F61:B730 (talk) 03:21, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. Maybe after some time has passed and everyone's cooled down, we can get another example image.FairlyDecent (talk) 03:23, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

My reasoning is the same as NorthBySouth's, alongside the fact that is just isn't a good photo. Looking at that photo, on its own, does not conjure up an image of domestic terrorism. I believe that the photo of the aftermath of the Oklahoma City Bombing is much more apt in that regard. It's far more well known, it's far more illustrative, and it's a depiction of the act itself, not the perpetrator.FairlyDecent (talk) 03:20, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

• One of the problems with including the storming of the Capitol in this article is that there are other, better, descriptions of what it was, such as "insurrection" and "attempted coup". It really doesn't fit in extremely well with the usual definitions of "domestic terrorism", although I agree that it's certainly closely related -- enough that it should be mentioned in the article in some way. There's also the problem that "domestic terrorism" has not been the description of choice of the media, at least in the broadcasts I've seen and the articles I've read, which are mostly calling it an insurrection and occasionally a coup attempt.
  It's the function of talk page discussions such as this one to determine if it should be included here, and to what extent. That's going to require a good deal more calmness than has been exhibited up to now, but I've seen more intractable disputes solved. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:02, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

  It's a tough call: some officials including Biden suggested it was, but I agree that it's not a typical example of domestic terrorism. Maybe it's also WP:TOOSOON: if some participants eventually get convicted under a domestic terrorism charge, perhaps it would be more relevant... —PaleoNeonate – 05:13, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

I would argue it being a tough call is exactly why a different photo should be used. The photo should be something that is commonly accepted to be an example of domestic terrorism, like the Oklahoma bombing or the Gunpowder Plot. In fact I think the latter would make for a wonderful example photo when the time comes. The incident is both well known, and old enough to not garner any real controversy. FairlyDecent (talk) 06:41, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Yes, in terms of the photo, the Oklahoma bombing is a much better example of hone-grown terrorism. I was thinking more of the general question of whether the storming of the Capitol should be in this article, and to what extent. Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:19, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Even better would be a non-American picture, maybe?

Few points and reminders, this article is not specific to the United States and is a global outlook on domestic terrorism. Terrorism in the united states covers numerous incidents in the US, many not listed here. Second, using the Capitol as the picture is focusing too much on current events and trying to be the news. Third, while editors are here, this article could use some TLC to get the various country sections in some consistent style, along with proper links to the country specific articles. Slywriter (talk) 13:55, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Certainly the article is not US-specific, but it is in the nature of the world that events in the US many time gets more attention than events elsewhere, and the lede image should be one that is immediately recognizable to a large portion of the English-speaking population. I think the remain of the Murrah building fills those requirements. That being said, I was thinking about the Charlie Hebdo incident in France, but I really can't think of an image connected to that which would be as iconic. Still, if such a non-US image fills the bill, I would have no objection to it, per se. Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:48, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Probably should have clarified that I didnt have a specific event in mind and yeah I see the issue of some more notable events may not have a great image. Just wanted to make sure everyonez especially newer editors involved realize the article is about more than US and should not overly focus on the most recent event which will undoubtedly wide and extensive coverage throughout wikipedia.

besides Oklahoma, Weather Underground is another that should be considered if looking for a US event that has extensive public domain photos (via FBI) Slywriter (talk) 03:40, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Clearly this is an example of ageism and misogyny. Editors are seeking to enforce their preconceived gender and age norms upon a woman who participated in an event reliable sources have deemed an act of domestic terrorism. These are the standards of Wikipedia. Claims that it is too soon are just attempts to sidestep the issue of equality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.50.52.10 (talk) 15:07, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Please enumerate the reliable sources that called it -- in their own voices, not quoting Biden -- "domestic terrorism". (And please stop slinging insults at other editors, that's not what talk pages are for, and it's certainly not conducive to civil discussion.) Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:43, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Let's see an example article reporting about some arrests. It uses "riots", "attack" and "insurection" but makes no mention of terrorism. —PaleoNeonate – 17:51, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Adding: when looking at the main 2021 storming of the United States Capitol article, there are mentions of specific people calling it domestic terrorism or calling insurgents terrorists, although what we should be looking for are sources calling it as such without attribution. If enough such sources exist, then perhaps it's a good and WP:DUE example here... As for the woman, was she convicted under terrorist charges? If not, it'd be a WP:BLP violation for Wikipedia to do the connection itself via WP:SYNTHesis. —PaleoNeonate – 18:03, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

I find it rather ironic that you complain how "Editors are seeking to enforce their preconceived gender and age norms upon a woman" when you've just done exactly the same thing by assuming the person in the photo is a woman. KingSupernova (talk) 18:31, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

This is an actual joke, right? 192.223.236.250 (talk) 21:01, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

I have no dog in this fight, I'll just note that it appears the person in the photo was not even at the event on January 6th; it was an unrelated photo taken in Kansas. (https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/capitol-meemaw) This is a great example of why social media posts are not considered reliable sources. KingSupernova (talk) 18:28, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

References

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Unabomber-sketch.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:25, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

White supramcist terrorism

This article lacks significant discussion of the current (11/2032) singlemost domestic terrorism threat in the USA: heabily-armed, angry white men who are ready to commit or actually commit violence against their fellow citizens whom they have othered because of perceived but non-existent injustice or threat againstl the “white race.” 2600:387:6:80F:0:0:0:56 (talk) 18:16, 20 November 2021 (UTC)