Untitled[edit]

Requested move 29 April 2018[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 01:16, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]



Jihadi JohnMohammed Emwazi – Jihadi John was just a title given to him by the media. Now that his real identity is well known and he is dead, identifying him with his correct name is preferable than to continue calling him with a "nickname" dubbed on him by media at the time werldwayd (talk) 20:48, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Updated link[edit]

Hi, can someone add the updated source link for number 11. This one does not load the PDF. I found a working link. http://clarionproject.org/wp-content/uploads/Issue-13-the-rafidah.pdf Thanks Nusent 16:29, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Clarion Project isn't an ideal source. You're right that the link to the Dabiq article on Archive.org seems to have stopped working. There have been complaints in the past about linking to Islamic extremist material on Wikipedia, eg the Daily Mail got itself worked up here. The Dabiq link was a load of blather about what a warm and wonderful person Emwazi was, and it was nothing special. There is a screenshot of it here and the article should look for a secondary source rather than quoting it directly.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 05:23, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The Dabiq obit was previously discussed 2 years ago. The archive.org link works for me. The site is unreliable sometimes, or clear browser cache. It says "The obituary shows him unmasked and ..", not merely using it as a source but referring to the source. WP:PRIMARY allows for it, in addition to CNN etc as supporting secondary. The only concern then is extremist material - I don't know what Wikipedia guidelines are (WP:FRINGE is the closest but doesn't seem applicable) or if an obit would be extremist. Regardless, if it's causing an issue it's not worth disputing to retain an ISIS obit which future historians will probably find more interesting the talk page discussions. -- GreenC 05:25, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm getting blank pages when I try to view the Dabiq link on Archive.org. As for showing him unmasked, there is a screenshot lower down the page in the CNN article which can be enlarged by clicking it. I didn't see anything in the text of the Wikipedia article that required the full WP:PRIMARY article in Dabiq.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 05:44, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It really does work. Clear cache, try a different browser, different computer. Or the item page: https://archive.org/details/Dabiq13 (the main landing page). If all that doesn't work, quite possible your ISP is blocking, or somewhere upstream, if there are laws against extremist material. PRIMARY doesn't require and doesn't disallow :) -- GreenC 14:59, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And now we're getting somewhere. The link https://archive.org/details/Dabiq13 shows up as Geo-restricted Items for which access is geographically restricted so it won't work in some countries. Most of the geo-restricted items seem to involve Islamist extremist material, although The Eternal Jew (1940 film) is also in there. So it looks like the CNN article is now the preferred option.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 18:11, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Military career" infobox[edit]

Military career is not the correct term considering he did not represent an authorised armed force of a recognised Sovereign State, I suggest renaming sub heading to "Militant activities". — Preceding unsigned comment added by L.S.Farquhar (talkcontribs) 14:56, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article uses embedded Infobox military person. Agree that he did not represent a sovereign state, as Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant and Al-Nusra Front are both best described as armed Islamist organizations rather than a recognized national army. Also, according to the Fourth Geneva Convention, killing unarmed civilians would not be part of a military career. The use of Infobox military person should be reconsidered. It seems to be designed for use with people who represented the armed forces of a recognized sovereign state, which isn't the case here.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 17:25, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Kuwaiti-British"?[edit]

Only the citizens of Kuwait can be called Kuwaiti, which is about 40% of the population. His parents were Iraqi, and they were denied Kuwaiti citizenship. I suggest it should be "British of Iraqi descent, born in Kuwait".Malaiya (talk)