Talk:2016 Minneapolis shooting

This article was nominated for deletion on May 3, 2017. The result of the discussion was keep.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2016 Minneapolis shooting article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Minnesota Low‑importance

	Minnesota portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Minnesota, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Minnesota 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.MinnesotaWikipedia:WikiProject MinnesotaTemplate:WikiProject MinnesotaMinnesota articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Crime and Criminal Biography Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Title[edit]

Hi, Kamalthebest. May you please change the title back to "2016 Minneapolis shooting"? The current title looks biased and... less accurate. The suspect was sentenced to prison for shooting Somali men during the encounter. I wonder whether you have done the WP:RM process previously. --George Ho (talk) 08:25, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I concur. "Anti-Muslim shooting" is a highly irregular title. Even in flagrantly faith or race based killings, we do not use titles like "anti-Christian shooting." We do have 2016 Normandy church attack where a church was attacked, 2015 Abha mosque bombing (a mosque was bombed), but even with something like the Charleston church shooting, Lynching of Laura and L. D. Nelson or the Toulouse and Montauban shootings, we don't use terms like anti-Christian, anti-Jewish , or anti-black in the title. User:Kamalthebest, Please revert your title change and, if you like, start a discussion about the best name for the title here to achieve a consensus decision.E.M.Gregory (talk) 08:51, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think a good starting point is to see how it was described elsewhere; the article cites do seem to support something like this title, but, as you say, it's outside Wiki's norms. Anmccaff (talk) 16:07, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, George Ho and E.M.Gregory. I just wanted to clarify that I was perfectly fine with the original title of "2016 Minneapolis shooting" but changed it per Anmccaff's request on the AfD page that the title needed to be more specific. I hope everyone is okay with the article as it is now. Kamalthebest (talk) 20:14, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Yeah... I would like the title to remain "2016 Minneapolis shooting" for now. If it's not the best title, best to treat it as a stopgap until a consensus at RM agrees to change it into another title. BTW, I like your expansions on the article. --George Ho (talk) 20:17, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Title was the best I could come up with at the time, and danged if I can think of a better one now. Sometimes as you source/expand an article, you find that the local press is using a good keyword, identifying the shooting with some sort of geographic marker, or something. I wouldn't be surprised if something occurs to you as you're working on it.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:26, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

E.M.Gregory has this been classified as a hate crime? Would "2016 Minneapolis hate crime" be an improvement? I would also suggest "2016 Minneapolis Muslim hate crime" but I'm worried that alternative would mistakenly confuse readers into believing a Muslim committed the act.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 01:15, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No. This is not unusual, prosecutors are generally reluctant to charge with hate crime because it is a hard motive to prove, so charging with murder, assault (as here: charged with 9 felony counts) is routine. So, "hate crime" is out. The neighborhood was Dinkytown,, and papers use that in the headline, so Dinkytown could be added to the title.E.M.Gregory (talk) 09:30, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Adding "Muslim" or anti-Muslim to the title, however, is problematic. We do name institutions by religious and ethnic category (Category:Attacks on places of worship) But even in cases where an attack on a member of a religious group is widely characterized as "hate crimes" (Category:Victims of religiously motivated violence in the United States, Category:Antisemitic attacks and incidents in the United States, Category:Lynching deaths in Tennessee) I do not see "black," "Jewish," "Mexican", "Italian," etc. in the titles. Not even with marquee hate crimes: March 14, 1891 lynchings, Leo Frank, Zoot Suit Riots, Emmett Till, Scottsboro Boys.E.M.Gregory (talk) 09:30, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There are some articles such as the 1984 anti-Sikh riots, 1945 Anti-Jewish riots in Tripolitania, and 2014 anti-Muslim riots in Sri Lanka who carry a similar format regarding the targets of the attacks. That being said, these are riots, not shootings. So, I agree. Personally fine with the title as it is or maybe it could be changed to 2016 Dinkytown, Minneapolis shooting.

Well... either as is or "2016 Dinkytown, Minneapolis shooting". However, unsure about the latter because there aren't any other notable shootings in Minneapolis last year. Well, doing an RM would be a safe bet if you like to propose that title. --George Ho (talk) 02:45, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@George Ho: Honestly, I'd prefer it stay as is. Kamalthebest (talk) 07:42, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Same thoughts. George Ho (talk) 11:57, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]