Talk:Parsons Green train bombing

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Parsons Green train bombing article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 30 days

Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Parsons Green train bombing. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Parsons Green train bombing at the Reference desk.

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

This article was nominated for deletion on 15 September 2017. The result of the discussion was keep.

While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard.

Crime and Criminal Biography: Terrorism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Terrorism task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Explosives Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Explosives, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Explosives on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ExplosivesWikipedia:WikiProject ExplosivesTemplate:WikiProject ExplosivesExplosives articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Islam: Islam and Controversy Low‑importance

	Islam portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Islam and Controversy task force.

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

London Transport Low‑importance

	London transport portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London Transport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Transport in London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.London TransportWikipedia:WikiProject London TransportTemplate:WikiProject London TransportLondon Transport articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Trains: in UK Low‑importance

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject UK Railways (assessed as Low-importance).

United Kingdom Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on September 15, 2021.

Requested move 17 May 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Parsons Green train bombing. No such user (talk) 10:36, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Parsons Green bombing → Parsons Green train bombing – It would be better named "Parsons Green train bombing". Calling it just Parsons Green sounds more like a street attack, or in the area of Parsons Green. Putting the "train" in there makes the title exactly clear that it is a train bombing. It also places it with other articles like 2004 Madrid train bombings, 1961 Vitry-Le-François train bombing or Cannon Street train bombing, which all have that "train" in it and is a good standard. Gateshead001 (talk) 14:10, 17 May 2018 (UTC)--Relisting. Dekimasuよ! 05:04, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support there's no benefit in misleading article titles, this bombing was not at Parsons Green, nor even the train station, but in a tunnel between two stations. In ictu oculi (talk) 16:28, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- In fact the bomb was in the train while the doors were open at the station (video) -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 21:37, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment You know there's a problem when no one has even created the redirect. The problem as I see it is that not many in the UK would call that thing a train, even though it was overground and technically is a train, it's an underground train, or tube (which would still make the title a bit awkward). The examples you provide are all train attacks, not tube attacks (see instead Category:Terrorist incidents on underground rapid transit systems). Though various descriptions are used here and there, 'Parsons Green bomb' seems to be the most widely used description in reliable sources. 'Parsons Green tube bomb' also appears more commonly than 'train bomb'. I'm not flat-out opposing, I'm just not convinced. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 16:34, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I have to admit you've got a good point there. I do still believe it should be renamed from the current name (it's too misleading), but perhaps 'Parsons Green tube bombing' might be better suited than 'train bombing'. Will that fit with an international audience though? It's people in this country who know it as 'tube', other English-speakers probably wouldn't know since tube is a unique name to London's metro system. --Gateshead001 (talk) 22:24, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'll leave that for an international audience to confirm, but I think you're right that 'tube' is a bit too local. It's also a bit too close to 'pipe', IMO. On the other hand it's worth some serious consideration. This leaves two obvious alternatives: 'Parsons Green underground bombing' - this is complicated by the fact it was overground, and that it was really a London Underground thing. It's also not very common, so '(2017) London Underground bombing' is a bit too vague, and also not a common description of the event. Honestly, I've not liked the title of this page since it was started, but satisfactory alternatives continue to elude me. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 05:09, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    - Yeah I definitely agree with your last sentence. At this stage 'Parsons Green train bombing' would probably still fit best. --Gateshead001 (talk) 17:02, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. "Tube" will be unfamiliar to general readers; conversely, "train" will be well-understood even if your average Londoner wouldn't call it that. (It's still a train). That said, I don't see a need to move the article. The current title is natural and unambiguous. Similar articles for attacks against subway infrastructure don't specify further. I'd leave it where it is. Mackensen (talk) 11:50, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I think the current name is clear enough, and doesn't get us into a debate over what exactly the "tube" is.--Cúchullain ^t/c 16:33, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Reopened and relisted per request. Dekimasuよ! 05:04, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Exclusionists can go too far in removing allegedly unnecessary explaining-type words. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 08:42, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support its still a train even if you call it the tube it runs on tracks that's a train even if it's underground עם ישראל חי (talk) 15:16, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- A very good statement. Even if it's "tube" or whatever, at the end of the day it's still a "train". It's the generic name for that type of carriage. --Gateshead001 (talk) 18:14, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support - although technically there is no other Parsons Green bombing to disambiguate against, it does nonetheless seem a valid move to me, per WP:CONSISTENCY with the other train bombings mentioned and also helps readers to WP:RECOGNIZE the subject. — Amakuru (talk) 21:00, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Evidence

The article fails to mention the evidence, which is especially noteworthy considering his pleading not guilty. So far, the only evidence mentioned in the article seems to pertain to the fact he had lied about his age. Was he seen at the scene of the crime? Were his fingerprints identified? Did he order particular chemicals? --2003:EF:1709:2942:CDF7:39C7:66CD:40A5 (talk) 02:52, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The perp along with two other Islamists attacked a prison officer

I feel like that could be mentioned in the article see: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-56984568. Phil of rel (talk) 21:07, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]