Talk:Lone wolf (terrorism)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

RFC for inclusion[edit]

There is consensus that the specific phrase "lone wolf" does not have to occur in the sources. There is, however, no clear consensus on a general definition of what counts as a lone wolf; this probably entails that each new incident has to be considered separately, as Irondome suggested. (non-admin closure) Dionysodorus (talk) 21:19, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
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.

Does an event need to have newssources/other sources explicitly mention "lone wolf" or does the fact that the event had a perpetrator act alone in support of a group, movement or ideology (or as the lead defines lone wolf). Sir Joseph (talk) 03:56, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

  • Comment Obviously (to my thinking) the exact phrase "lone wolf" does not have to be the deciding factor here. Similar terms can suffice. Suggest we take the approach of subjecting new incidents to consensual discussion, and treat them as unique events and weigh wording used by Reliable sources reporting such incidents. Irondome (talk) 04:05, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment I think any terror event that is properly sourced that the perpetrator acted alone but in support of a group, movement or ideology can be listed here. The news doesn't need to explicitly say lone wolf for the person to be a lone wolf. A person acting alone in support... is by definition a lone wolf. Sir Joseph (talk) 04:07, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
  • This is a malformed question, and this RfC is therefore invalid. The question isn't whether sources describe "a perpetrator" as a "lone wolf"; as I wrote above in #Original research, once again, the question is whether sources describe the person as a terrorist. Only terrorists may be included in this article, not perpetrators. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 04:18, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment I agree with Irondome and Sir Joseph, but I also think other issues need to be considered first before a classification is made, i.e. mental health. Parsley Man (talk) 08:51, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
  • 'Comment following Malik, I think the context obliges editors to consider sources that specifically contextualize acts done by terrorists acting on their own. Whether then, the person is described literally as a lone wolf or by some cognate term or pariphrase such as a perpetrator acting according to his own darks is a secondary issue, as Irondome, I believe, implies.Nishidani (talk) 19:42, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment "Lone wolf" = any terrorist acting alone. We obviously done need the exact word "lone wolf". And as Sir Joseph - pointed out earlier on the talk page users on both sides of the argument are agreeing that terrorists are to be added even though they don't use the words "lone wolf". CaseeArt Talk 06:48, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
  • I agree with Irondome above. Each case is different. As for Caseeart's comments, most terrorists work under the help or instruction of others, regardless of whether they perpetrate the act itself alone. Best, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 13:10, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
  • , just to clarify, in that case it wouldn't be a lone wolf. A lone wolf doesn't get help from any organization. Sir Joseph (talk) 13:38, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment I agree with CaseeArt "Lone wolf" = any terrorist acting alone. If you only use sources that use the term "Lone Wolf" It may exclude significant events where that term was never used in covering the event. Elmmapleoakpine (talk) 20:54, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment Pretty pointless question if it is not 100% established that these are RSd as terrorists. Clearly they are not lone wolves by our definition if there is any significant doubt about that. Pincrete (talk) 21:39, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Possible compromise[edit]

Due to the arguments being made by both sides of this discussion, I think I might have a potential solution to this: the creation of a suspected terrorists category or something of that nature. We can use it if certain attacks look like acts of terrorism but have not been confirmed by officials as such. Comments? Parsley Man (talk) 20:54, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Not a compromise but a BLP nightmare and likely violation in most cases.--TMCk (talk) 21:21, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
I agree with --TMCk (talk). The term Lone Wolf is common enough in English Language media coverage that the vast majority of readers will understand it in the context of a person acting alone. Elmmapleoakpine (talk) 20:57, 7 June 2016 (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.

Ali Muhammad Brown Disputed[edit]

  • From April 27-June 25, 2014 Ali Muhammad Brown killed 3 men in Seattle and one in New Jersey. He had been convicted in bank fraud scheme which the FBI believed but was unable successfully link to fundraising for terrorists in Africa. His motive for seemingly random crimes was only known after after he told authorities he followed his Muslim faith as his mission was "vengeance for lives are lost every day...[in] Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan" [1] Bachcell (talk) 14:13, 20 February 2017 (UTC)


I can't see where the source says Brown is a lone wolf terrorist. Could you please quote that portion of the article for me? — MShabazz Talk/Stalk 19:38, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
You can't seriously argue that Ali Muhammad Brown was not a lone wolf, he is charged with terrorism. Bachcell (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:54, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
From April 27-June 25, 2014 Ali Muhammad Brown killed 3 men in Seattle and one in New Jersey in 3 separate attacks and previously convicted in a bank fraud scheme which was investigated for being support of terrorists in Africa. Brown seemingly random crimes were only characterized as a lone wolf and indicted on terrorism charges after he was captured and confessed to authorities he was following his Muslim faith as "vengeance for lives are lost every day...[in] Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan". [1][2][3][4][5][6]


Instead of belly-aching and typing the same things over and over, why don't you cite a reliable source that describes Brown as a lone wolf terrorist? Not a self-published book. Not a newspaper editorial. A reliable source. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 04:05, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Are you seriously trying to improve the article or just censor information about one of the most dangerous lone wolf terrorists who was all but ignored by CNN and New York Times until he finally was charged with terrorism? The fact is when multiple media is calling him a Lone Wolf, then he's a lone wolf. John Mueller is a terrorism expert with the Cato Institute published by a major University. Frank Cilluffo is the director of the Homeland Security Policy Institute at George Washington University. Fox News is the best source of news on terrorism as the mainstream media has proven unreliable when it comes to identifying lone wolves. Just because the Washington Post has not used the term but Fox News has experts that do call him a lone wolf does not mean he is not a lone wolf. Where does it say the standard can't include government experts, university professor experts and Fox News investigations? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bachcell (talkcontribs) 04:10, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Please stop the insults and try reading our policies and guidelines. The only sources you have cited that called Brown a lone wolf are a newspaper editorial and a self-published book. They're not reliable for a biography of a living person. If you disagree, please visit either WP:RS/N or WP:BLP/N and make your case there. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 05:38, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Why are right wing extremist not listed here?[edit]

You state that this is a list of examples where the perpetrator acts alone in support of a group, movement or ideology. That is the description, yet there is no mention of Right Wing Extremism which is clearly terrorism and in support of a group movement and ideology. There is no mention of the mosque bombings or the case of the Labour MP Jo Cox who was murdered in the UK by the extreme rightwing terrorist Thomas Mair. Please update your page with all the facts so that we might see a real pattern of behavior emerging. One that may lead to the conclusion that male extreme violence is what needs to be addressed by our communities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:22, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

How can we better understand the Lone Wolf?[edit]

The mental health of these Lone Wolf terrorists is the biggest identifier in being able to stop future attacks. What is the common denominator for these solo attacks of terrorism? Could be foreshadow terrorists in the makings and give psychological help to those showing side effects of terrorism? Are these types of terrorists more likely a younger demographic? There are many questions that need to be answered, that could help deter any citizen from these thoughts of action.

Although this type of Terrorism is "rare", there are many identified cases listed below. What can we say is common from all these people charged with terrorism? Were they truly alone? Terrorism is influenced from some sort of outlet. If people did these acts of violence randomly then it would be called a form of psychological breakdown, not terrorism. Samo56 (talk) 05:20, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lone wolf (terrorism). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:20, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Breaking 'list of' to its own page[edit]

As-is, the list seems incredibly unwieldy and should ideally be consolidated as prose or moved to its own page. Thoughts/support/oppose? Shaded0 (talk) 03:20, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

  • Oppose The list largely consists of original research. If it is "unwieldy", it should be limited to what can be supported by reliable sources as "lone wolf" terrorist attacks, and those believed to be such by Wikipedia editors but not supported by reliable sources should be removed. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 04:07, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose per above as well as failure to establish WP:LISTN in general. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 12:23, 2 July 2017 (UTC)