This article 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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ohio, which collaborates on Ohio-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to current discussions.OhioWikipedia:WikiProject OhioTemplate:WikiProject OhioOhio articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Terrorism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles on terrorism, individual terrorists, incidents and related subjects 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.TerrorismWikipedia:WikiProject TerrorismTemplate:WikiProject TerrorismTerrorism articles
User:Surtsicna. I'm sure you're right about that search. But the thing is, - date, place - is now the standard way of naming terrorist attacks on Wikipedia. I think the "dated" the style is useful. Take a look at 2017 New York City attack#See also. However, if you feel strongly, feel free to start a discussion here. It's not a firm rule. Just the way it's being done most commonly on Wikipedia. And, certainly, if other editors prefer it without the date I will defer.E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:48, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
E.M.Gregory, I am aware that the date-place format is becoming widespread due to terrorist attacks recurring at some locations several times. Applying that to situations such as this one, however, is not only against the accepted guidelines, but also purely misleading. The title 2016 Ohio State University attack implies that similar events took place in the previous years or in 2017. It prompts users to waste time looking up such events, only to realize that there weren't any. Worse yet, it might then imply that future attacks at Ohio State University are expected, which is distasteful and even morbid. I have requested a similar move at Talk:Manchester Arena bombing#Requested move 3 October 2017, where you can find a more detailed explanation. If need be, I will request the move and more or less copy the rationale, as it applies to this case too. Surtsicna (talk) 15:38, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: No consensus. It is clear that these moves should be treated and discussed individually, rather than as a group, particularly when one of them has already seen consensus for the current name at a recent RM. — Amakuru (talk) 12:37, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for all of those. This is a simply unnecessary move a these incidents were always the only such attack in their area. The resulting moves would provide no benefits whatsoever. Dunutubble (talk) 02:54, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, one could easily argue that having some sort of indication in the title of WHAT YEAR these incidents occurred might be helpful — it's not like there's "NO benefits whatsoever". Paintspot Infez (talk) 22:57, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
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.