Talk:January 2016 Paris police station attack

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

keep, 17 February 2016, see discussion.
no consensus, 20 January 2016, see discussion.

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
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).

Death Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death 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.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

France: Paris Low‑importance

	France portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France 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.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Paris task force.

Category refugee crisis

This category is appropriate because perp was living in asylum center in Germany in autumn 2015 under false name under pretense of being a recent refugee from Syria. E.M.Gregory (talk) 03:01, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This category is not appropriate. It's pretty clearly an example of trying to shoehorn a specific narrative into what happened. Kyle renner (talk) 23:38, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree because according to the article the European migration crisis began in 2015 and he arrived in 2011 from an unaffected country. AusLondonder (talk) 16:07, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Use of the refugee crises by economic migrants from countries not undergoing political/economic crisis, by individuals who are not refugees, and by individuals who assume identities in order to claim asylum is a significant part of the refugee crisis.E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:07, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with AusLondonder: the suspect arrived long before the European migrant crisis began, and we don’t know when he applied for asylum. The “relation” of the crime to the crisis is not a “defining characteristic that reliable sources commonly and consistently define the subject as having” (as required by WP:CATDEF). Nykterinos (talk) 18:51, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

But the suspect definitely used the migrant crisis for cover - he lived in a refugee residence. It is sourced that he applied for asylum within the migrant crisis - otherwise he couldn't live in a refugee accomodation in Germany. Also the German sources are entitled "Flüchtlinge und Terror", so the connection is made by the sources. There is no editorializing here, as everything what is written in the article is also in the source - I hope you read it before editing.--Gerry1214 (talk) 20:00, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

He could have applied for asylum before the migrant crisis began, too; by the way, E.M. Gregory has just written that an article fits in the category if "The migrant involved did ... enter Europe during the migrant crisis defined as beginning in 2015", which this migrant didn't. Once again, all this shows that this category is completely WP:SUBJECTIVECAT, besides not being the defining characteristic of the crime (is the alleged fact that the crime is related to the migrant crisis a “defining characteristic that reliable sources commonly and consistently define the subject as having”?). As for the sentences I deleted and you restored without discussion, they are a textbook example of OR and SYNTH: the sentence "it demonstrated a link between the migrant influx and terrorism" is your OR, and you even added a quotation from September 2015 (WP:SYNTH), as if this case refuted it (really? did this migrant take any "arduous, protracted, and perilous routes"?). Nykterinos (talk) 20:25, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I saw E.M.Gregory's statement on the CfD discussion and added my own. The category can be clearly defined. But this has to be discussed there before acting here. I restored the sentences after discussing, and rightfully so, because they are sourced as I wrote before. Again: The link between the crime and the migrant crisis is made by the sources, and by the way obvious, as the persons who live in German refugee residences since August 2015 - as the attacker did according to source in the article - have clearly arrived within the migrant crisis. We should not try to deny the obvious. This leads us nowhere.--Gerry1214 (talk) 20:56, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The category can't be clearly defined, because categories have no definition: they have to be clearly named, and this is not. ("related to" is deprecated, like "associated with": see WP:OCASSOC). As you know, it can take more than a year for an asylum application to be processed, so the suspect could have applied for asylum before 2015. Nykterinos (talk) 21:51, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stop deleting sourced material! Maybe you don't like it, but it is all in the sources.--Gerry1214 (talk) 21:27, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I cite it for you here: "Der Islamist, der einen Anschlag auf Berlin geplant haben soll, ist als Flüchtling nach Deutschland eingereist. Er ist laut Verfassungsschutz nicht der erste, der diese Tarnung nutzt. Zurzeit laufen 19 ähnliche Ermittlungsverfahren." "Erst am Mittwoch hatte Verfassungsschutzpräsident Hans-Georg Maaßen in Berlin bestätigt, dass die Terrormiliz IS die Flüchtlingswelle nutzt, um Attentäter nach Europa zu schleusen." "Nach einem Bericht der „Tagesschau“ soll der am Donnerstag in Attendorn festgenommene Hauptverdächtige mehrere Identitäten benutzt haben. Auch der mutmaßliche islamistische Terrorist, der Anfang Januar bei einem Angriff auf eine Polizeiwache in Paris erschossen wurde, war mit mehren Alias-Identitäten registriert worden. Der Mann, der zuletzt in einem Flüchtlingsheim in Recklinghausen gelebt hatte, war mit insgesamt sieben Identitäten unterwegs gewesen." [1] --Gerry1214 (talk) 21:30, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's exactly what I wrote: "Another case of a terrorism-linked asylum seeker abusing multiple identities like the Recklinghausen suspect was found on 4 February". That source is about the Algerian asylum seeker, and the only similarity with the Tunisian one, according to the source, is that they both abused multiple identities ("Auch der mutmaßliche islamistische Terrorist, der Anfang Januar bei einem Angriff auf eine Polizeiwache in Paris erschossen wurde, war mit mehren Alias-Identitäten registriert worden".) Maaßen's concern applies to the Algerian, who arrived recently, not to the Tunisian: you are misrepresenting what the source says. And can you quote the sentences of the two other sources you cited which say something similar to "Though the attack was unsuccessful, it demonstrated a link between the migrant influx and terrorism, and that asylum seekers with criminal or terrorist intentions can enter Europe without problems and move freely within it"? Nykterinos (talk) 21:51, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sure: "Der Fall Belgacem rückt ein gravierendes Phänomen in den Fokus der bereits angeheizten Flüchtlingsdebatte. Offensichtlich können angebliche Asylbewerber mit kriminellen oder sogar terroristischen Absichten ohne grosse Probleme in Europa einreisen und sich hier frei bewegen." [2] The FAZ source is clearly about both and 19 other cases, as they are similar. It is entitled "Terrorverdächtige in Flüchtlingsheimen" (="terror suspects in refugee homes" -> more than one refugee residence, including the one of Belgacem and clearly linking all the cases). Again: Don't deny the obvious because you want to do so.--Gerry1214 (talk) 22:05, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that's the new source you added now for the second part of the sentence ("asylum seekers with criminal or terrorist intentions can enter Europe without problems and move freely within it"). What about "it demonstrated a link between the migrant influx and terrorism"? I hope you realize that this sentence doesn't make sense, because Belgacem did not arrive through the migrant influx, and Maaßen's concern, that terrorist can arrive in Europe through the migrant influx ("die Terrormiliz IS die Flüchtlingswelle nutzt, um Attentäter nach Europa zu schleusen"), doesn't apply to him, who had already been in Europe for years and just happened to become radicalized. Nykterinos (talk) 22:20, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Maaßen's statement has to relate to the Belgacem case (and other cases), as he stated on Wednesday and the Algerian was detained on Thursday. And both were part of the migrant influx, the other sources also make that link ("Flüchtlinge und Terror", Tagesspiegel source, also the Welt source).--Gerry1214 (talk) 22:32, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Use of the noun "attack" to describe this event

This discussion has been moved to WP:VPM#Use of the word "attack" in various article titles in order to have all 20-30 discussions in one place. Please go there to participate. Thanks! ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 05:02, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Use of the noun "attack" to describe this event

Alfred Nemours (talk) 02:18, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.