This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Mohamed Lahouaiej-Bouhlel article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article was nominated for deletion on 15 July 2016. The result of the discussion was merge (but keep for now). |
This
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
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.
Is this subject notable enough to have his own article? I feel like it is not relevant outside the 2016 Nice attack and should be redirected to that instead. GSMR ( talk) 14:36, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
My view is that considering the high death toll of the Nice attack and its corresponding significance, this justifies having a page solely for the attacker. I think this is the general rule that has been followed. For example, Ibrahim El Bakraoui, Khalid El Bakraoui, Najim Laachraoui and Mohamed Abrini and Osama Krayem all have their own individual Wikipedia pages despite being only involved in a single attack (Brussels)
Amedy Coulibaly also has his own page even though he was notable for his involvement in a singular event.
These are clear precedents for an individual page. The proposed deletion should be removed/rejected Dave8899 ( talk) 15:00, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
article clearly fulfills CRM#2 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dave8899 ( talk • contribs) 16:47, 15 July 2016 (UTC) it will get longer and more detailed in due course the proposal for deletion tag was already removed by another editor as i explained above, there is plenty of precedence for a separate article Dave8899 ( talk) 16:43, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The alleged killer was described as drug-taking wife beater who never went to Mosque by one of his relatives.....“Bouhlel was not religious - he did not go to the mosque, he did not pray, he did not observe Ramadan. “He drank alcohol, ate pork and took drugs. This is all forbidden under Islam http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/who-mohamed-lahouaiej-bouhlel-what-8425647
Clayjiclay (
talk)
20:54, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
" According to a cousin of Bouhlel's wife, Bouhlel was not a religious person and did not attend a mosque.[8] Bouhlel's cousin said that he "wasn't a Muslim", and his neighbor said he drank alcohol and never attended mosque."
Funny how these claims that the terrorists aren't Muslims are always made after the attacks, followed by no true Scotsman rationales supporting the non-Muslim claims. Funny also how the perp comes from Tunisia, a country where 99% of the population is Muslim. What are the odds that out of the 11 million Muslims in Tunisia, a man named Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel, who committed a terrorist attack in Nice while shouting "Allahu Akbar", is not a Muslim, according to his cousin? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baron d'Holbach II ( talk • contribs) 08:37, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Funny how people keep insisting because his name sounds foreign and was born abroad he must be a Muslim. His name and birthplace say nothing about what he believes in or stands for. Now if he was a guy who prayed all day and knew the Quran by heart and then went and did this, maybe you’d have a point. Sure, the nutters who blow up people don’t represent or in any way help Muslims, but as you say it’s hard to argue that they aren’t Muslims because of the No true Scotsman fallacy. This is an entirely different case though. We have no evidence whatsoever that this man identified as a Muslim, and his behaviour (not going to mosque, drinking and eating pork, etc.) directly contradicts any notion that he would be. At some point, this stops being about No true Scotsman and is just about people wanting to label him as a Muslim because it’s convenient. 2.227.51.21 ( talk) 12:11, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Just a small comment, do you think the title “Death” is the most appropriate one for the section about the massacre? I mean yeah sure, he did die there, but that hardly seems like the most significant aspect of it. 2.227.51.21 ( talk) 12:11, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
While this article has a correct interwiki link to its analogous entry in the Arabic Wikipedia as well as another proper link to the entry in the Farsi Wikipedia, the third [as of this writing] interwiki link to the German Wikipedia is incorrect. The German link is only a redirect, as is another redirect which is not interwiki-linked, this one in the French Wikipedia. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 17:50, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Article: "no group has claimed responsibility for the attack"
News:
Update article please
( 70.53.99.193 ( talk) 04:58, 17 July 2016 (UTC))
Apparently sources like BBC are now hyphenating his name. [1] If so, the page needs moving. 220 of Borg 07:54, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
I now see that this page was at that name, and Mohamed Lahouaiej-Bouhlel redirects here already. 220 of Borg 08:01, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
Umm...am I the only one who thinks it's just a tad WP:POV to point out a single report that he may have been in a sexual relationship with a 73 year old man? Seems pretty clearly there to imply "hey guys look! this guy was a sexual deviant!" It comes off an awful lot like an LGBT slam as well as a slam on older people, and older LGBT people in particular. If there is general consensus in favor then it can be readded, but since this 73 year old is assumedly a living person, then WP:BLP comes into play, and so I've moved the passage here for discussion. TimothyJosephWood 15:00, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
Sky News report that he was in a sexual relationship with a 73 year old man. [1] He used dating sites to pick up men and women. [2]
"The India Times described Lahouaiej-Bouhlel as 'mentally unstable', with a tumultuous personal life, which included drug use, frequent use of dating websites, and consumption of violent online content. Law enforcement examination of his phone revealed what Sky News described as a 'string' of relationships with both men and women, including a 73 year old male characterized by French media as his 'principle lover.'"
I have messaged Mathsci, and now pinging to invite to join discussion. I'm not entirely sure about my original argument (same as theirs) regarding BLP. More discussion is probably good. TimothyJosephWood 19:25, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
As an FYI, I posted about possible BLP violation regarding the associated person on WP:BLPN, just to cover all our bases. No response as of yet. TimothyJosephWood 18:16, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
How do we know for sure this was the attacker? Can we trust mainstream media sources? Eck ( talk) 06:17, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Mohamed Lahouaiej-Bouhlel. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.huffingtonpost.fr/2016/07/18/mohamed-lahouaiej-bouhlel-terroriste-nice-attaque-terrorisme_n_110522When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:38, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
Is there not a higher quality picture of him that's in the public domain? The only picture of him throughout the whole article is the one in the infobox, so I think it'd be better to use an image that isn't so obscured. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RajanD100 ( talk • contribs) 22:32, 29 October 2020 (UTC)