Talk:List of mass stabbing incidents (2020–present)

Merge proposal

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.

---

I propose that 2024 Bondi Junction stabbings be merged to List of mass stabbing incidents (2020–present). Wikipedia is not a newspaper, and subjects are required to demonstrate lasting notability before an article is created. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:42, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

In my opinion, this attack has quite lasting notability because it was the deadliest massacre in Sydney in the last 13 years and the deadliest physical attack in Sydney since 1991. Mapgenius (talk) 23:55, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

The significance, international impact, and importance of public knowledge about the stabbing are reason enough for an independent page. The death toll alone, as well as being among the deadliest attacks in Australia in the last 20 years. This is not a usual event. It demotes the significance of this attack by reducing it to a single mass-stabbing page. Kak101 (talk) 00:20, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

I realise that this even is a slow news Tuesday in some other parts of the world, but for Australia it is an outlier event, especially given the large number of victims. I think that it should be covered on it's own just based on the extremely widespread and even international coverage, and since there is no WP:DEADLINE, we can reconsider if there is sufficient lasting notability at some point down the road. Melmann 00:35, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

You mean the list where most of them already have articles? This is a pretty clear cut case of notability. It's not just passing news. You had the Pope and King give remarks. Why? I Ask (talk) 00:52, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

contextually significant, fine as is. Augmented Seventh (talk) 01:04, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

• Support per nominator, this incident does not seem to have any sort of actual lasting importance, not to mention it doesn't meet the notability guidelines enough for it to warrant its own article. 92.9.144.133 (talk) 01:03, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

  Not sure where the notability argument comes from when it’s literally on nationwide news for the past two days. Plus an additional 100+ news articles online? Historically, one of the worst stabbing incident in Australia. Definitely notable… Ryan Watern (talk) 01:33, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

  And any sort of mass incident always has a long lasting importance. At least in my opinion. Including when this is the most deadliest physical attack in Sydney Australia, in the past 13 years. Ryan Watern (talk) 01:34, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

• Strongly oppose This is one of the worst massacres in Sydney since the Strathfield massacre in 1991, which also killed around 6 people (and didn't get much international coverage) -- So, if you want to merge this article, then we can might as well delete the Strathfield article and merge it there as well. Furthermore, the Bondi Junction incident has garnered international media attention, with president Biden, the Pope and the Royals making comments on it, in addition to being a top story in CNN, Fox News and BBC. This tragedy is a huge deal in Australia, not just Sydney. Yucalyptus (talk) 01:20, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

• Strongly oppose and speedy close This is definitely a historic incident that happened, one of the worse physical attacks in the past 13 years within Sydney Australia. There’s hundreds of news articles, it has international coverage, several presidential leaders talked about, etc. so the fact that there’s even notability questions is kind of ridiculous. Ryan Watern (talk) 01:42, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose as a clear case of WP:RAPID. Literally only 1 day has passed since the event. Not even the initial news coverage has passed, and we're talking about lasting notability that can't really be proven until at least a few weeks later? Come on. S5A-0043^Talk 01:46, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Seems to me that some are just merge and AFD happy. See it on so many articles now. Not even a day will go past and they’ll either be an AFD or merge discussion. Ryan Watern (talk) 01:57, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Or even a proposed move, which almost always happens on articles like this. Incredibly it hasn't happened, because @Onetwothreeip: did a completely correct WP:BOLD move to get rid of "Westfield" in the title and someone else has had a preliminary discussion on the talk page before tagging the article. I don't want to knock the nominator here, I can see why they thought to propose this. But it is a little premature and thought should be given as to the need for immediacy for an issue like this, in circumstances where the high-traffic article is being rapidly edited. Local Variable (talk) 03:28, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose. Signs indicate this will likely have long term notability/coverage/etc. A lot of these don't, but this one seems fairly unusual in some respects. Impossible to fully predict, obviously, but there are signs that predict these things decently and for me it hits that marker where I would be quite surprised if there wasn't continuing coverage. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:45, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
• Strongly oppose: This is a huge story in Australia and most certainly is a historic incident. It is one of the worst massacres in the last 25 years in death toll alone. Stabbing or really any violence on this scale is almost unheard of in Australia unlike in other places in the world like the US, therefore is of significance. 106.71.58.30 (talk) 02:56, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose. You do not need a crystal ball to know that this attack will have lasting notability in Australian history. WWGB (talk) 03:00, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose and speedy close This misunderstands NOTNEWS - this is not mere routine news coverage. This is a major incident being covered worldwide, including the NYT and The Guardian. It can be readily inferred it will have enduring notability, and we are not in a position now to state it will not have enduring notability. GNG is clearly satisfied by overwhelming coverage in reliable sources. I seriously recommend the nominator consider withdrawal so we don't have a maintenance tag slapped on a high traffic article. Local Variable (talk) 03:05, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose and speedy close. Every major international news outlet has covered this, the royal family has even responded. Needs to be closed asap. MarkiPoli (talk) 05:07, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose This is an extremely notable event and highly unusual in Australia. Events of such significance almost always have a lasting impact on the whole country. There has been widespread international news reports, messages of condolence from world leaders. One of the victims was the daughter of a prominent entrepreneur. Dfadden (talk) 05:32, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

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.

Criteria for inclusion.

DeFacto has stated that 2024 Wakeley church stabbing is not a mass stabbing incident. This is in spite of the fact that it fits the inclusion criteria: "It includes incidents in which there were at least three casualties (killed or injured)." Should we change the criteria or include the Wakely incident? Pabsoluterince (talk) 15:21, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

@Pabsoluterince, one person stabbed and others injured restraining the attacker isn't a mass stabbing. If you can find a selection of reliable Australian sources describing it as a "mass stabbing" though, that could persuade us perhaps. -- DeFacto (talk). 15:56, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

There's a few that do ([1][2][3]). I agree we should just follow reliable sources and on the whole it's not described as a mass stabbing (just a mass stabbing) by most sources. But given that, we should remove the inclusion criteria in the lead. Pabsoluterince (talk) 01:51, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

I added the Wakeley Church stabbing, because of the inclusion criteria. Perhaps that criteria should be changed to "It includes incidents in which there were at least three deaths" or "It includes incidents in which there were at least three casualties (killed or injured). It does not include targetted attacks on one person where bystanders were attacked restraining them" Jesse Flynn (pseudonym) (talk) 06:33, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

I agree that one person being kind of stabbed and others being injured in the melee does not constitute a mass stabbing incident. In my opinion, it would be more appropriate to add Mar Mari Emmanuel to List of people who survived assassination attempts. 5225_C (talk • contributions) 03:45, 23 April 2024 (UTC)