Jump to content

Talk:2018 Toronto van attack

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 126.161.165.35 (talk) at 16:09, 24 April 2018 (/* Confirmation of use of non-Anglicised significant alternative name). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Relevant for the update

https://twitter.com/MalcolmNance/status/988505465553383424?s=19

Former NYC police commissioner reporting it as a terrorist attack. This would be useful to put on the page, if anyone can go in and edit it. Media here in Canada are doing a real disservice by releasing zero information. As we often do, I guess we'll get it from CNN or somewhere else before our own media tells us anything. Adtrace (talk) 20:51, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Both. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:07, April 24, 2018 (UTC)
  • The Canadian media are not doing anybody a disservice by maintaining a high standard of not releasing information until they've confirmed it with police — they're actually doing us a solid by trying to be careful and accurate and not whipping up a panic. CBS went with what the police chief in New York told them, not the police in Toronto, so their information was automatically of less value than the CBC's. Bearcat (talk) 00:58, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Concur with Bearcat regarding foreign police quotes. Update tomorrow may include something from Canadian PM on Canadian media.[1]

References

  1. ^ http://anccanada.org/1141/

Location map

Can use this instead of the generic photo if you want:

Attack location is located in Toronto
Attack location
Attack location
Attack location (Toronto)
Attack location is located in Canada
Attack location
Attack location
Attack location (Canada)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by LaserLegs (talk • contribs) 21:01, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Is there a better map that doesn't show political subdivisions that haven't been used in Toronto since last century sometime? North York still exists as one of four community council within the city, but the border don't match those shown, and some of the political units shown have not existed in any form this century - and in some cases have become so forgotten, that the actual boundaries for the area have become almost mythical in local neighbourhoods that span the old borders. Here's a link to the current boundaries that have been used since the 1990s - though presumably they will change in late 2018 or early 2019 with the new wards. I've been wondering this for some other Toronto pages as well, for which the old 20th century political units aren't relevant. Nfitz (talk) 01:32, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
On a related note, if anyone knows how to add the co-ordinates, that would be great. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 09:13, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reactions

What encyclopaedic information do these quotes convey beyond the final sentence of the preceding section "In the aftermath of the incident, messages of support and condolences came under the hashtag "#TorontoStrong"."? The flags are certainly not necessary and I'm struggling to think of a reason not to just remove the entire section. Thryduulf (talk) 23:21, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It contributes absolutely nothing, but this crap is on the page of just about every such incident. Bueller 007 (talk) 23:25, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Agree for the 150th time in six years. Shrink and summarize. Or wait till someone else does. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:42, April 23, 2018 (UTC)
I've summarised the reactions into something encyclopaedic, but I wouldn't be surprised if people readd the quotes or start a spinoff article for them. I keep getting edit conflicts while trying to resolve the four conflicts I had when summarised so I've given up as I should have bene in bed an hour ago! Thryduulf (talk) 00:20, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've also added a comment to editors noting that quotes should not be added without first discussing it on the talk page. I don't have much hope of people listening, but we can but try. Thryduulf (talk) 00:22, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thryduulf Thanks for your efforts. I believe national reactions have some value, but the wall of flags and carbon copy condolences offer nothing. --LaserLegs (talk) 00:33, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
They offer nothing here, but to a spinoff reaction article, they're invaluable. I generally support places where people who genuinely care about quotes and flags can go to argue safely amongst themselves about what's most relatively meaningful. But before we can have a "Reactions to...", we need to know what we're calling the main thing. I think we can all agree the old title won't work forever. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:10, April 24, 2018 (UTC)

As a rule, the reactions should only include those people directly involved eg Prime Minister, city leader, etc with what happened otherwise what happens is that every country in the world and all major organisations can be included. BernardZ (talk)

Anyone can create a hashtag and promote it to have notable people using it. Leave the reactions to notable people and organizations. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 01:32, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think what we have at the momemnt is close to ideal - a prose summary of what the reactions were, a note that the directly relevent people have commented (city, provincial and national leaders) and that there have been international reactions. The quoted portion of the mayor's statement is the only non-proforma bit and that actually adds something to the article. This is followed by summaries of relevant physical reactions in prose form without excessive detail. If anybody major says or does something out of the ordinary, as determined by reliable secondary sources then we can consider adding that, but it should be in prose format. Thryduulf (talk) 08:24, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why a list of reaction of various politicians - particularly foreign - has any value at all, which could simply be summed up with "the obvious was stated". Only Mayor Tory's comments had any relevance - and he was the only one on the seen. I'd have though comments from Ward 23 councillor John Filion would have been more relevant generic statements. Nfitz (talk) 08:53, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Better title

Any suggestions? InedibleHulk (talk) 01:11, April 24, 2018 (UTC)

I think we need to wait for further information to see whether it was "terrorism", "attack" etc. Lots of exemplars at Category:Terrorist incidents involving vehicular attacks. WWGB (talk) 01:28, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'd also suggest we hold off until we have a clearer sense of what the motivation was. In addition to the unconfirmed speculation that it had something to do with the Armenian genocide, which I've already poleaxed from the article, there's also an unconfirmed (and possibly faked) Facebook post making the social media rounds which suggests more of an Elliot Rodger incel/MRA Isla Vista thing. And simple "attempted suicide-by-cop" still isn't actually off the menu yet, either. We just don't know what's true and what isn't, so it's hard to pick the right word for it yet. Bearcat (talk) 01:36, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It seems clear this was an attack, not merely an "incident". Beyond that, we don't know.Adoring nanny (talk) 01:51, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't like "2018 Toronto Van Attack" (where we suddenly jumped). Too many capitals and doesn't need a year to separate it from anything else. But yeah, this was an attack (regardless of motive). InedibleHulk (talk) 02:17, April 24, 2018 (UTC)
Now it has the right number of capitals, but still a pointless year. Progress! Tried unilaterally moving it to Toronto van attack, but someone already yoinked the redirect; still like it. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:18, April 24, 2018 (UTC)

Why is it a pointless year? There's never been a van attack before in Toronto? Lots of mass shootings and attacks have the year pre-fixed.. We'll just have to change it again when there are more vehicle attacks in future. Meanwhile, there's no harm in using 2018 now. Regardless, this article should be titled either "Toronto_van_attack", or "2018_Toronto_van_attack", and the others should forward there, not vice versa. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.91.136.100 (talk) 05:11, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Vans don't attack people. Nfitz (talk) 05:33, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There've been Toronto van attacks. Just none here at Wikipedia to distinguish this one from. Maybe there'll be one in another year, but that worry also applies to everything there's only been one of yet. The harm in calling anything after the year is that we look for a common name, and no reliable sources call these things after their year. Why make up a highly unusual name when we don't have to? InedibleHulk (talk) 06:04, April 24, 2018 (UTC)

The correct and appropriate term for this should be recognized as "Toronto Vehicular Rampage Incident". Condolences 126.161.142.36 (talk) 10:10, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, because that is too long, complicated and has too many capital letters. Jim Michael (talk) 10:13, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Toronto attack"

It seems that this was more of a "Rampage" or "Tragedy" of Vehicular manslaughter by an Armenian-Canadian in Toronto. Perhaps "2018 Toronto Rampage" (not to be CONFUSED with Montreal Rampage)

I'm far from onboard with 2018 Toronto attack. Doesn't mention a van. I think the van played a defining role here, and am surprised no other shooting, stabbing, beating or whatever has taken that redirect. Does Toronto attack work? InedibleHulk (talk) 04:54, April 24, 2018 (UTC)
I've shrunk it to Toronto attack. Barring a portmanteau, that's about as concise as it gets, yet I still think people will know the one we mean. If nobody likes it, though, I won't miss it. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:58, April 24, 2018 (UTC)
That might be a bit TOO concise. See also Toronto Attack. It should go back I think User:InedibleHulk as that's rather unfair to the hockey team! Nfitz (talk) 05:03, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Holy shit, yeah. How did they not scoop it already? "Toronto van attack" is much better now. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:14, April 24, 2018 (UTC)
"Toronto attack" is not appropriate. ---Another Believer (Talk) 05:23, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Guys... Toronto van attack. Not "TORONTO ATTACK". 23.91.136.100 (talk) 05:05, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There may have been several so-called attacks. Calling it just "Toronto Attack" as User:InedibleHulk did is just so inappropriate. There are possibly tens of so-called Toronto attacks. What makes this incident as "THEEEE attack of all attacks" Toronto has suffered from just baffles me. Mentioning the year as in "2018 Toronto Attack" may be more acceptable though not ideal either. "Toronto attack" has just to go. werldwayd (talk) 05:00, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The way I see it, if there was a more appropriate article that could use it for a redirect, it would've been done already. The year is unnecessary no matter what we choose; I'd rather define it by what happened, rather than when. Where's always good, and three word titles are nice. "Toronto van attack" is the best choice, I think, but that was already taken for a redirect here. Had to act quick without discussion, because when I brought up "Florida school shooting" as amazingly simple, somebody stole it for a redirect. If it's bad by most everyone else, though, I agree it was a poor choice. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:12, April 24, 2018 (UTC)
Is no-one concerned by the similarity of Toronto attack to Toronto Attack, an ice hockey team? WWGB (talk) 05:22, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Kind of, for now. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:25, April 24, 2018 (UTC)
There's nothing stopping it getting moved over a redirect. An admin can do it. Until now, when people say "the Toronto Attack" they think of the hockey team (anyone who knows of them at least). If it weren't for the hockey team I'd agree with you. But because there is, there is already a notable Toronto Attack. And as such, now there needs to be a disambiguation statement. And I don't think that's right! User:Bearcat do you have any thoughts? Nfitz (talk) 05:27, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You already agree with me, as of my "holy shit moment" 22 minutes ago. Just to be clear. Needs a "van" in the middle now more than ever. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:36, April 24, 2018 (UTC)
Aaaaand I moved it back to Toronto van attack. No opinion on the year. Could we please agree on a final title before anyone else moves it again? ansh666 05:58, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Article should be moved back to 2018 Toronto van attack. It is most appropriate as an encyclopedia title. "Toronto attack" is generic and does not accurately represent the subject. EelamStyleZ (talk) 05:50, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, there are BILLIONAIRES of attacks (not limited to Toronto) so it may be a bit too GENERIC. You would have to be on DRUGS to call it that, I mean, even an Israeli girl once claimed her dog was attacked by her ex-boyfriend in the little electric car he bought for her but she didn`t like, A REVA, but that was a complicated attack because they were estranged. Just soo many examples, anyway, I see it`s been changed back to "Toronto Van Attack". Let`s see what they name the memorial tomorrow, could be a better choice of name.

Looking at other similar articles in the navigation template at the foot of the article, should this article be at 2018 Toronto attack? Compare 2016 Nice attack, 2017 Stockholm attack, 2016 Berlin attack, etc. Van/truck, or whatever was used, does not form part of the article name. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 09:16, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree - 2018 Toronto attack is better. We don't usually include the type of vehicle in the title. Jim Michael (talk) 10:15, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
As has already been discussed above, the problem is that the title Toronto Attack is in preexisting use as the name of a hockey team — so just titling this "2018 Toronto attack", without specifying "van", would carry an unacceptably high prospect of getting misinterpreted as that hockey team's 2018 game season. As important as consistency is in principle, so that titles aren't just all over the place for random reasons, it's not the one naming consideration that overrides all others as the Prime Directive — if there are special considerations that problematize or interdict the title preferred by the "consistency with other comparable topics" rule, then those special considerations take precedence. Bearcat (talk) 13:27, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Do we have any articles about a sports team's season that is in that format? Would readers be likely search 2018 Toronto attack when looking for the details of a sports team's fixtures? Jim Michael (talk) 14:27, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Bearcat about using 'van' as a qualifier. 2018 Toronto van attack seems the best option. And to Jim Michael, usually for team seasons, it will usually say 'season' at the end, such as 2017–18 Toronto Maple Leafs season, but sometimes for leagues we just have 2017–18 Serie A with no 'season' qualifier. So it is possible, though admittedly unlikely, to search for this intending to find the sports team's season, however. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 15:19, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Questions of dual-nationality and Hebrew/Armenian ethnicity

Not a particularly appropriate line of inquiry. ansh666 04:27, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Reporters were asking about the ethnicity or origins of the suspect and how that may have borne influence on the actions of the suspect. In a complex-society such as Canada all immigrants and 1st/2nd/3rd/4th generation settled immigrants have adapted their traditions and customs, with obvious implications in the Pharmaceutical and Mental-Health industries. It has been asserted that the suspect bears a name drawn from the Armenian language, but no foreign-national records nor immigration records have been cited. Speculation has been raised with regards to whether the suspect is a Dual-National. These questions are being asked, and if determined, these facts should be included in the article shouldn`t they?

  • Firstly, just because he has an Armenian name doesn't mean he was born outside of Canada — so "foreign national" or "immigration" records don't necessarily exist to be cited. Secondly, Hebrew/Armenian? What's that, exactly?Bearcat (talk) 01:39, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, even if the suspect is Canadiite by birth, if the suspect had visited the middle-east (Armenia?), for whatever reson like visiting grandfolks or cultural program or suchlike, they usually say something like "the suspect may have been radicalised while visiting the middle-east". Or recruited or whatever. Secondly, about refugees FLEEING persecution in their old countries, (or even German immigrants in Armerica during WWII changed their names to flee discrimination against Germans), it is quite common that people Anglicise names. Why would it be different for Armenia?

Either way, if the perpetrator had crossed borders, there SHOULD be a stamp in the passport, and that is important. If the perpetrator is a dual-national or has multiple passports, then you wouldnt find certain stamps in either/or. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.161.149.59 (talk) 01:53, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If all they are is questions, ignore them. Wait for answers. That's what people come to article space expecting to find. Wondering here on Talk is fine (presuming we don't libel anyone), but try to share your sources, just for further context. Which reporters are wondering exactly what, and so on. Sector-wide implications aren't always so obvious to those who aren't already in the know, and I (for one) don't know what you mean. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:56, April 24, 2018 (UTC)
I've removed "of Armenian heritage", since its relevance hasn't been proven and it's not included in any sources I checked anyways. This kind of xenophobic speculation is counterproductive at best. ansh666 02:05, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
126, Armenia is a Christian country, and it's not in the Middle East. So I really don't know what you think you're talking about, but there's no place for it in Wikipedia. Bearcat (talk) 02:07, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken, but if the perpetrator was of Irish or Colombian ethnicity a few decades ago, investigators would have examined any links to the IRA or FARC. Passport stamps are ryelevant.

Which, transposed to Armenia, gets you...what potential link of concern, exactly? Bearcat (talk) 02:21, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The psycho-social implications of the terrorism of the (Armenian) holocaust, or sumthing? Oh yeah, about speculation, persons of Irish or Colombian extract are not offended by mention of the FACT that investigators have pursued such lines of inquiry, moreso than such lines of inquiry themselves. Same should hold with regards to Hebrew or Armenian ethnicities. And about whether Armenia is in a Muslim-region or the Middle-East or not.... anyone can take a bus from Brussels to Turkey and Turkey to Armenia, just like many of those so-called "jihadi-wives" did. AND, there would be a stamp in the passport. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.161.149.59 (talk) 02:37, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But we have no mention of any such investigation. There is no FACT in any Armenian connection, just idle speculation. ansh666 02:47, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's that damn rock music and weed, I tell ya! Now that that's settled, I'm afraid we're all well into the WP:NOTFORUM zone. Policy suggests we should leave, or at least talk about improving the article somehow. And by "somehow", I mean in clear and specific proposal. Not just "you know...somehow." InedibleHulk (talk) 02:54, April 24, 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, it's clearly time to be done with this obvious troll. Bearcat (talk) 03:03, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe in trolls, just people who can't hear and people who'd rather not. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:23, April 24, 2018 (UTC)

Get ready for it guys, it appears that Alek Minassian, the "suspect" who ran over & killed over 10 people and injuring many others. Arrived from Lebanon 6 months ago, devout Muslim, his facebook says from "Aleppo Syria" BernardZ (talk)

Get ready for what User:BernardZ? Do you have a reliable source for this, which conflicts with all the published accounts? Does it have any relevance? Looking for sources, the only stuff I'm seeing of a similar nature seems to be coming from white nationalist and neo-nazi sources, that I'd not consider reliable. Nfitz (talk) 08:27, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Normal terms

"Author" of the attack? "Breaching" a red light? Maybe more conventional terms are appropriate. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 12:18, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On "Author", indeed most other articles within the infobox use terms like "Suspect", "Perpetrator", and "Attacker". I've yet to find any page with Author used. -- Zanimum (talk) 12:21, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm noticing that the change was made by an anon. Changed to Perpetrator, but others are welcome to choose other terms. -- Zanimum (talk) 12:25, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Flag" usage?

Is there any benefit to displaying the flag of the "movement" he is said to have identified with? -- Zanimum (talk) 12:19, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have no particular opinion on that but I restored it after someone simultaneously removed it along with a whole lot of sourced text. 92.13.129.174 (talk) 12:37, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps if it is a flag of Canada or Armenia, or perhaps if the "he said she said" of non-Canadian newspapers gets a credible source. New York Post (dubiously) indicated a CBN source, but it`s not coming up on a google or duckduckgo search. No benefit as of yet.

Means nothing to 99% of readers so contributes nothing to the article. WWGB (talk) 13:35, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I see no benefit to including this. Natureium (talk) 13:36, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I concur, a link to the Incel article is appropriate but the flag is off-topic. These types of symbols are generally not included even if they are arguably relevant. –dlthewave ☎ 13:43, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of the group, the shoddy New York Post article, and the British tabliod (Sun) article shall be taken down. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.161.175.13 (talk) 13:44, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Incel

This is the first time I am seeing this word -- took me a bit to find out it is shorthand (apparently) for "involuntary celibate." I would like to suggest that if this is an actual (in-use) term, and if it is going to be used on this page (or any page), as it is alongside the supposed symbol for this condition (actually, here it is described as a "movement" -- which I think is not accurate), then there should be a link, an explanation, and at least one verified/legitimate reference to this term. Jdevola (talk) 13:41, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you are discussing the use of the flag, please see above. If you intend to marry the flag and group, wait for clarified references, non-tabloid. The reference to the term is established, but not to the incident. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.161.175.13 (talk) 14:02, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmation from CBC that account was genuine

CBC News has official confirmation from Facebook that the "Incel Rebellion" post was genuine and was publicly posted to Minassian's account before Facebook deactivated it, as is their standard procedure. Currently in Tweet form (https://twitter.com/CBCAlerts/status/988786051924791296), will likely filter through into news stories throughout the day. RA0808 talkcontribs 14:51, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It was the FB account confirmed genuine, not the FB post, which may have passed as if it were made jokingly. This needs clarifying in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.161.175.13 (talk) 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Confirmation of use of ANGLICISED given name (Christian name, Surname)

Shouldn`t we use his real name? It does not translate to English or French the same depending on Translator, but the Armenian is correct; "Ալեք Մինասյանն է" 126.161.175.13 (talk) 14:57, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah, another unreasonable denial of the suspects identity may be construed as having basis in the Toronto Human Rights Code as it protects against identifing people who may be targetted, for hate-crimes or something like holocaust-denial, but the guy was clearly arrested and identified already, so that arguement would apply equally to disclosure of whether he identified as LBGT celibate etc. etc. and it is STRONGLY recommended that the fact the guy is an Armenian-Canadian be PROMINENTLY noted in this article, lest further disservice be done by denying it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.161.175.13 (talk) 15:06, 24 April 2018‎ (UTC)[reply]

  • What bearing does what country his ancestors come from have on this? RA0808 talkcontribs 15:32, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • There's nothing that makes people of Armenian background inherently more likely to do something like this than people of any other ethnic heritage. The fact that he's ethnically Armenian is entirely irrelevant to this, outside of the fact that it shuts down the "must have been a Muslim, because only a Muslim would ever" narrative that was in force yesterday before his identity was confirmed. Bearcat (talk) 15:38, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

so sorry if you misunderstand, what is the policy on using an individuals real name, and is it appropriate to follow policy? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.161.175.13 (talk) 15:41, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So it would be correct to include a "significant alternative name", or is that only for the French Canadian wikipedia?

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2018_Toronto_van_attack&oldid=838046613"