Category talk:Terrorism

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Terrorism category.

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

	This category 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
	This category is supported by the Terrorism task force.

Death

This category 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

Human rights

This category is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights 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.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights

This category was nominated for deletion on 6 April 2009. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

Untitled

See also Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Terrorists for related discussions organized by year. Here are some searches of Wikipedia:Categories for discussion for terrorism and terrorist [1] and [2]. They pull up many discussions of various terrorism and terrorist categories.

Comments

Y'know, maybe we ought to rename this "Category: Freedom Fighting / Terrorism" to please the NPOV junkies... ;-) Rickyrab 03:07, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Yes, let us discuss the matter here before adding POV/disputed tags.Phase1 22:31, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More Information

I think this list is really incomplete, you should add a lot of names of people and organisations to the list. EX: Yasser Arafat (yes, he was a terrorist), EZLN, FARC, PLO, etc. If this is really an objective source of information, these names should be added

You are right, but the nature of "anyone can edit" is that terrorists with a large Wikipedia fan base will not be listed. And if you try, the pro-terrorist types will just delete the whole category. They already deleted List of terrorists, so they certainly have the power. Mirror Vax 03:06, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, how exactly is EZLN a terrorist group? Oh me, oh my, a non-State force is using guns...And don't even think about citing the EIR...The article on EZLN is riddled with innacuracies...For one thing, the first person they cite as being a victim of the EZLN is someone FROM the EZLN who was killed by the Mexican government...The rest of their claims of Zapatista terrorism cannot be proved that the army commited them...One, they are not associated with the National Liberation Forces, (Subcommandante Marcos said of them "If you were in power, we would have to fight you, too.") and the allegation that they are involved in narco-terrorism is completely false. The Zapatista communities decided by consensus to get rid of alchohol and drugs.

The only reports of people allegedly kidnapped or killed by the EZLN were also listed by the National Human Rights Commission (a Mexican institution that has given support and legal protection to Zapatista and Sixth Declaration adherents, most recently in San Salvador Atenco ) as having been the victims of state-supported violence. All other reports, most coming from before the 1991 uprising, are so obscure and undocumented that they are laughable, as are the connections made between autonomous communities and drug-trafficking. Since a unilateral truce has been enforced by the Zapatistas, even under government harassment and outright violence, since 12 January of 1991, how is there any support for listing the EZLN as a terrorist group? Not even the CIA qualifies them as such.

Please would someone add George Bush too. As he is responsible for killing many innocent people at the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan. helohe (talk) 23:50, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sigh* WTF are you talking about??? 2600:1014:B124:4DBD:DC12:3B5E:2975:ABF2 (talk) 07:34, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish Defense League

Should the Jewish Defense League be included in the category? They have been classified by the FBI as a terrorist organization and have a long history of perpetrating or supporting terrorist acts.Homey 20:06, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Sub-Category Suggestions

I was thinking of adding a Category:Organizations accused of terrorism and a Category:Terrorist organizations. Also a Category:Anti-terrorism organizations is needed. --Ben Houston 23:22, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would think that either "State Terrorism" should be expanded to include State acts of warfare and aggression that are not listed by the U.S. State Department yet can easily be subsumed under "Acts of Terrorism" -- as, for instance, the recent bombing of Lebanese infrastructure and public systems by Israel, the East Timor atrocities perpetrated by Indonesia during the '90's, or the United States' support for the Nicaraguan Contras during the 1980's -- or a new category be created for it, something along the lines of "State Sponsored Terrorism".

There are many regions of the world where State actors can be considered sponsors of Terrorism. Several African and East Asian states come to mind immediately, not to mention the long history of State-sponsored terrorist acts for which Israel and the United States have gained a wide reputation.--Stone 15:55, 16 Aug 2006 (Taiwan Time)

And just what is terrorism? --maxrspct ping me 14:23, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the link to the previous cfd discussion?

I noticed in the history log that at one point around March 2006 this category appears to have survived a cfd debate. However, I can't find the archived discussion in the cfd logs for that week. Usually, if a category survives a cfd delete nomination, a template is added to the talk page saying "This category survived a deletion nomination and the result was keep", or something similar, with a link to the discussion.

If someone could post a link to the previous cfd debat for this category for reference, that would be most helpful. I can't seem to find it. Dugwiki 20:11, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Words to avoid

Wikipedia:Words to avoid#Terrorism--Error 19:52, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RFC: Definition

"This category deals with topics relating to events, organizations, or people that have at some point in time been referred to as terrorism, terrorists, etc., including state terrorism."

So... if I publicly call Jimmy Wales a terrorist, I can list him in this category? Wow. We're just begging for a libel case, eh? - TheMightyQuill (talk) 17:19, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want to delete this category, but I'd like to change the criteria for inclusion. If I get no response, I will be bold, do so, and start removing categories which don't fit. - TheMightyQuill (talk) 01:55, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Definition:

Working with the definition at Category:Terrorists, I want to propose the following definition for this category and all sub-categories:

This category is for individuals, incidents, and organizations.

There exist many different definitions of terrorism, but all of the following elements should be present for articles in this category and its sub-categories:

Use of unlawful violence or the threat of unlawful violence.
Targeting civilians.
Non-state actor. , thus excluding state terrorism.
Absence of a state of war (specifically conventional warfare), thus excluding war crimes.
Designed to coerce, frighten, or "send a message" to the public or a government, thus excluding organized crime performed for personal gain.
Finally, this category should only be placed on articles which already have verifiable text that the individual has been identified as a terrorist. If there are no reliable sources which call the individual a terrorist, then this category is not appropriate.

All articles listed in this categories are related to the verifiable use or attempted use of terrorist tactics, by the all above criteria. Self-identification as a "terrorist" is not required; see terrorism for a list of alternative terms, with both positive and negative connotations. WP:TERRORIST still applies to article content.

Thoughts? TheMightyQuill (talk) 13:52, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That category was proposed explicitly for individuals, where it is perhaps acceptable. It was not proposed for organizations and incidents.Haberstr (talk) 21:10, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]