Misplaced Pages

Talk:2014 shootings at Parliament Hill, Ottawa: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 19:34, 22 October 2014 editMartin451 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers28,269 edits Speculation: re← Previous edit Latest revision as of 14:24, 12 November 2024 edit undoTom.Reding (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Template editors3,916,038 editsm top: blpo=yes + blp=no/null → blp=other; cleanupTag: AWB 
(870 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header|search=yes}}
{{blpo}}
{{ITN talk|23 October|2014}}
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
{{Calm}}
{{WikiProject Canada|class=Start|importance=}}
{{Canadian English}}
{{WikiProject Ottawa|class=Start|importance=}}
{{WikiProject Crime|class=Start|importance=}} {{WikiProject banner shell|blp=other|class=B|listas=Parliament Hill, Ottawa, shootings at, 2014|1=
{{WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography|terrorism=yes|terrorism-imp=high|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Death|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Islam|importance=high}}
{{WikiProject Military history|class=B|b1=yes|b2=yes|b3=yes|b4=yes|b5=yes|Canadian=yes}}
{{WikiProject Ottawa|importance=high}}
{{WikiProject Canada|importance=mid}}
}} }}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
{{calmtalk}}
| algo=old(30d)
| archive=Talk:2014 shootings at Parliament Hill, Ottawa/Archive %(counter)d
| counter=4
| maxarchivesize=100K
| archiveheader={{Automatic archive navigator}}
| minthreadsleft=5
| minthreadstoarchive=1
}}
{{On this day|date1=2024-10-22|oldid1=1252722071}}

==Apparent contradiction==
{{quote|In the wake of the incident, the Canadian government introduced a bill to expand the powers and courtroom anonymity of the ] (CSIS), Canada's spy agency. The bill was slated to be introduced the day of the shootings, which postponed it.}}

OK if the word "introduced" means into parliament, this may be technically consistent. But the text should be written in a clearer way, if, indeed, this has any place in the article.

All&nbsp;the&nbsp;best: '']&nbsp;]'',&nbsp;<small>18:33,&nbsp;11&nbsp;November&nbsp;2014&nbsp;(UTC).</small><br />
:Example:
:{{quote|The Canadian government had already prepared a bill to expand the powers and courtroom anonymity of the ] (CSIS), Canada's spy agency, which was due to be introduced the day of the shootings, and was postponed by the event.}}
:All&nbsp;the&nbsp;best: '']&nbsp;]'',&nbsp;<small>18:35,&nbsp;11&nbsp;November&nbsp;2014&nbsp;(UTC).</small><br />

== Unencycplopaedic slang ==

The statement that "the downtown core of Ottawa was placed on lockdown" is unencyclopaedic slang, and poor English. "Central Ottawa was subject to unprecedented security measures" would be a more accurate statement.] (]) 07:24, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
::what is wrong with lockdown? A similar thing happened after the Boston Marathon bombing and the same term was used. All buildings closed etc. ] (]) 07:49, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

:"Lockdown" is, in fact, the term used by the , , , , , , , , etc. In fact, the usage of "lockdown" to describe what happened is pretty much universal. ]] 14:41, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

:: "Central Ottawa was subject to unprecedented security measures" is so vague as to be meaningless. Were there more police officers on patrol? Tanks in the street? Mounties going door-to-door? "Lockdown" is a common and easily understood word. ] (]) 03:51, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

== Requested move 9 February 2018 ==

<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;"><!-- Template:RM top -->
:''The following is a closed discussion of a ]. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a ]. 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. ]<small>]</small> 00:17, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
----


] → {{no redirect|2014 Ottawa shooting}} – ], ]. It is more common to identify the incident as happening in Ottawa () than Parliament Hill (); as noted in the ], the murder of the Canadian soldier didn't even happen on Parliament Hill (see map), making the fact that this inaccuracy in the title has persisted for over three years rather embarrassing.


]
==May need a rename==
The last RM failed because it proposed "attacks" rather than the favoured "shooting". Before that, ] "2014 Ottawa shooting" would imply 365 days of shootings, when in fact, as another user noted, "'2014 Ottawa shootings' no more means there was a year of shootings than '22 October 2014 Ottawa shootings' means there was 24 hours of shootings." There may have been other guns fired in 2014 in Ottawa, but it doesn't matter; this is ] and indisputably the ] for "2014 Ottawa shooting". ] (]) 04:17, 9 February 2018 (UTC)<small>--'''''Relisting.''''' —<span style="font-size: 104%; letter-spacing:1.5pt;"><span class="monospaced" style="font-family: monospace, monospace;">usernamekiran]</span></span> 22:38, 16 February 2018 (UTC)</small>
W/ three seperate incidents reported, the current title may not be sufficient. But wait to see how this gets covered in sources. Might be simpler as "2014 Ottawa shooting attack" (pending on who's behind this). --] (]) 16:09, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
:Makes sense, no one at the article ] has ever to my knowledge ever suggested that they thought that the attack lasted for the calendar year based on the title.--] (]) 16:48, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
:The article has been moved by ] to "2014 shootings at Parliament Hill, Ottawa". I have issues with this. First, it uses ], which is against ]. Second, listing multiple shooting locations (forcing the use of a comma) is also unnecessary; we can limit it to one general location. I would suggest a new name that uses one general location (e.g. Ottawa) and places it before "shootings" (e.g. "2014 Ottawa shootings"). Please discuss potential new names here so we can come to ]. --'''] ]''' 17:28, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
::I would use "2014 Ottawa shootings attacks" as there where multiple incidents. ] (]) 17:35, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
:::'''Strongly oppose''' "2014 Ottawa shootings". There have been plenty of other shootings in Ottawa in 2014, I'm sure. "at" is not an article at all. It is a preposition, and is perfectly acceptable in the context of the guidelines. It isn't about "listing multiple locations". It is about clarifying the location. These shootings were at "Parliament Hill" in "Ottawa", as opposed to other Parliament Hills elsewhere. The format "Parliament Hill, Ottawa" is a standard convention for neighbourhoods in cities. ] — ] 17:36, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
::::"Plenty of other shootings in Ottawa in 2014" - do any have Misplaced Pages articles? And how about '''October 2014 Ottawa shootings'''? ] <sup>] &#124; ]</sup> 18:09, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
::::::If we're going this route, I favour "22 October 2014 Ottawa shootings". They did not cover the whole of October. Let's be ]. ] — ] 18:12, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
:::::::See title format of other articles: ]; ]; ]; ]; ]; ]; etc. I think this is plenty of justification for '''2014 Ottawa shootings''', on top of point from ]. Any other shootings thus far are relatively trivial to this anyway. --'''] ]''' 18:17, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
:::::::::I don't agree with the titles of those articles either. Just because they exist as such doesn't mean that they should, as per ]. Let's try and actual follow the title criteria this time, shall we? ] — ] 18:22, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
::::::::::I believe these article titles are in keeping with ] conventions, just because you don't agree with them, it doesn't mean they don't follow the conventions. --'''] ]''' 18:51, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
:::::No need for a rename in this fluid situation - and we need to be specific the shootings were at Parliament Hill ] (]) 18:46, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
::::'''Comment''' As it stand now this article is "2014 Shootings at Parliament Hill, Ottawa" I think this current title is apt and succinct. - A Canadian Toker (]) 18:20, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
::::::I agree. I prefer to '''keep''' the present title as both apt and succinct. ] — ] 18:28, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
:::::::'''Merge''' the article with ] and then '''rename''' the article to include the word ''downtown''. The first shooting was not on parliament hill, it was at the War memorial. -- ] (]) 18:47, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
::::::::The memorial near Parliament. "Parliament Hill attack" or Parliament Hill shooting". "Downtown" is wrong, as the Rideau Centre thing did not actually happen. This is the longstand article. That fork has already been merged here. ] — ] 18:50, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
:::::::::Thank you for pointing out the update re: Rideau Centre. So, '''2014 Parliament Hill shooting(s)''' would be an appropriate name? --'''] ]''' 18:54, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
::::::::::No, it would not. There are other "Parliament Hills". "Ottawa" must be specified. ] — ] 18:56, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
:::::::::::Note ] currently directs to the one in Ottawa, as it is the most common usage. The ] only points to two others which are less prominent. --'''] ]''' 19:03, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
:::::::::::::'''Comment''' I agree that having Ottawa in the title is also important. Also, having downtown is unnecessary IMO. - A Canadian Toker (]) 18:58, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
{{outdent}}It's probably too soon to even be having this discussion. In a few days we will be able see what the sources are calling this incident, and can rename this page to match. If we move it now it will probably just be moved again in a day or two. Best practice would be to redirect all likely names here for the time being. ] (]) 19:31, 22 October 2014 (UTC)


*'''Oppose'''. Title has been stable for years and I'm pretty sure this title was rejected early on when there was a lot of interest in the page. The significance is that the shootings happened at Parliament Hill, not just the city of Ottawa. The proposed title is inprecise amd covers all the shootings that happened in the City that year - and we deturmined there were a few of those. Clearly a less precise title does not help the reader understand or find the topic. Further - the War Memorial IS on Parliament Hill (which cover a wider area than the Parliament Buildings). ] (]) 23:12, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
== Soldier's Death ==
**] and ] says "titles should be precise enough to unambiguously define the topical scope of the article, but '''no more precise than that'''." Say "2014 Ottawa shooting" and no one is going to think of any other shooting than this one. Google the phrase and see what turns up. It is ] and the ] beyond the shadow of a doubt. ] (]) 23:35, 9 February 2018 (UTC)


There have been conflicting reports on if the soldier that was shot has died, please hold off editing the soldier's condition, other than the fact that a soldier has been shot. Misplaced Pages is not news. ] (]) 17:21, 22 October 2014 (UTC) *'''Support'''. Only one of the shootings was at Parliament Hill. I tried to debate this when the event happened, but it fell on deaf ears. -- ] - ] 23:51, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
:Confirmed far and wide, including in the Police Press Conf. Also confirmed one suspect dead. ] (]) 18:20, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
::As said it has now been confirmed. Reservist from Hamilton, may he RIP - A Canadian Toker (]) 18:22, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
:: Please then link the correct source, your current one still has it as unconfirmed.] (]) 18:26, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
:::The soldier's death has been confirmed, unfortunately. ] (]) 18:32, 22 October 2014 (UTC)


*'''Oppose''' for the reasons given by Legacypac. Proposed title is ambiguous. The key fact about this event is that it was an attack at Parliament for some sort of political reason, and it in fact ended right in the Parliament buildings. The location is the most important point and should be reflected in the title. The same pattern is seen with ] - it's not just that there was a shooting in Quebec; the fact that it occurred in a mosque is key to the significance of the article. ] (]) 13:16, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
== Identification of weapons used ==
*'''Support''' more nature title. I suspect very few people get to this page from the search bar by typing in the name directly (this far too unwieldy), and the shorter name remains sufficiently precise without confusing any other events. We don't try to put any spin into the motives/target of the attack beyond the general location (eg the 2016 Nice attack above). The mosque article is consistent when the attack it at a single building/structure, ala ], it's not specifically calling out the mosque as a critical element, only that that is the most precise location. --] (]) 13:24, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
:: It's not spin when the title indicates why the event is notable. Why is this event more notable than any other shooting in Ottawa in 2014? Because of its location and the fact that at one point, the shooter was actually in the Parliament buildings. For whatever his motives, it was an attack on parliament - that's what makes it notable, and putting that in the title is not spin. Nor does the title of the Quebec City mosque shooting article provide a precise location - Google indicates that there are five mosques and one Islamic centre in Quebec City, and the article title doesn't tell which one. The reason for including "mosque" in the title of that article is the same as for referring to Parliament in this article title - the fact of the attack was on a mosque was part of what made it notable. ] (]) 11:38, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
::Sure but the ] occured on public streets over a significant portion of the city's waterfront areas. It was an attack on the city of Nice and it's population, so that is the right title. This was an attack on Canada's Parliament, not the city of Ottawa generally. ] (]) 13:32, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
:::The fatal shooting was at the National War Memorial, which is not part of Parliament Hill. It may be close to Parliament Hill, but it is never confused for it. -- ] - ] 13:39, 10 February 2018 (UTC)


::::The War Memorial is across the street from the Parliament Buildings, part of the Parlimemtry precinct, and clearly within the area commonly known as the Hill. The reason Ottawa is in the title is there is more than one Parliament Hill in the world, so we agreed to add Ottawa to DAB it. This was also the most prominate shooting in Ontario that year, but a move to ] would not be a good idea either. Frankly, I can't understand the motivation to make the page harder to find by choosing an imprecise title. The current title unambiguously refers to a particular series of events.
In media I have heard varied reports ranging from double-barreled shotgun to rifle to long-gun (long-gun is a class of firearms according to Canadian law, not all long rifles are long guns...) I have added the citation needed tag to the statement re. the double barreled shotgun. We need RS to say whether in fact there was a double barreled shotgun, rifle or combination of the two (RS still unsure as to # of shooters). - A Canadian Toker (]) 19:02, 22 October 2014 (UTC)


::::The Canadian Encyclopedia calls it "Parliament Hill Attack" Macleans called it Parliament Hill shootings http://www.macleans.ca/bearing-witness-parliament-hill-shootings-oral-history/. ] (]) 14:14, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
== Speculation ==


:::::Clearly, you're not familiar with Ottawa. No one here refers to the War Memorial as being part of Parliament Hill (the "Parliamentary Precinct" is a very different definition). Parliament Hill is an actual hill on which the War Memorial is not on. Personally, as a local, I've found the article title to be border-line offensive in its ignorance. -- ] - ] 15:13, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
WP is NOT a media outlet. we don't speculate/sensationlise. unless there is a connection asserted with this being isis there is no reason to speculate it follows a day of isis shit (and if it is then there will be more see also's)] (]) 19:05, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
:'''Lean oppose'''. If anything, including Parliament Hill in the title serves as an immediate aid in identifying the significance of this event vis a vis every other and often borderline routine article we have on shootings. And it does so while remaining concise. Really, the best objection presented is the fact that the War Memorial isn't technically on Parliament Hill itself. But given it is literally across the street, that is really just quibbling. ]] 14:48, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
:I have restored the mention of the previous incident involving an ISIL sympathizer. This does not allege the two incidents are connected, but objectively mentioned that it happened previously (as other media outlets sourced in the article mention). --'''] ]''' 19:13, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
:: It is not "literally" across the street. It is a few blocks east of Parliament Hill. I know I'm being pedantic, but I think it's important not to underestimate that the two places are distinct locations, and are not confused for one another. -- ] - ] 15:49, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
::While there may be no definitive link as of yet many RS are reporting on the fact that Canada increased its terror alert following the earlier ISIL inspired terror attack. This is notable for this incident. (P.S. does the earlier incident have a wikipage?) - A Canadian Toker (]) 19:15, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
:::] with your local knowledge can you compare this statutory definition of the Hill with the location of the War Memorial? with the map showing it immediately across the street from the Parliament building grounds, just like the Prime Minster's Office is also immediately across the street. In land use designation we always count the zoning line as going to the middle of any fronting streets, but even if 100% of Wellington St is outside the Hill, the National War Memorial grounds are 20 m from the Parliamentry grounds, which is close enough for me in naming an event.
:::Likely not nor should it have one; it was a "minor" incident for all purposes and, ignoring today's shooting, would likely fail NEVENT. Now, if it turns out that ends up being related to this, I would fully support a short section on this article to discuss that event in this context, but not before. However, mentioning the event as we have now is just fine since the press is pointing this out in spades. --] (]) 19:27, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
:::For a local, the idea of what is on the Hill is one thing, but sitting beyond the Rockies our perception of what is "Parliament Hill" is broader. By way of analogy, someone in Ontario may correctly (in their mind) say I live in Vancouver even though there are a few separate cities between me and the ], but someone sitting downtown Vancouver considers anything south of False Creek as hinterland. While traveling outside Canada I usually say I live in Vancouver because most people have an idea of it's existence from the Olympics etc, even though I would never say that to someone who lives in the Vancouver area. ] (]) 21:37, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
::::There was plenty of international coverage of the car crash prior to this shooting incident. ] etc., but this seems to have brought the crash to the forefront of the press. I would say this article is the wrong place for the car crash, unless they are directly related, e.g. same terrorist cell. I think the car crash needs a separate article if in cannot be included in a generic ] article. ] 19:34, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
:::: I disagree. If a major event happened in ] I would be just as insistent the article title not include Vancouver. They are separate places. I will admit that the War Memorial is technically across the street, I guess, but I still maintain that it's not part of Parliament Hill so it shouldn't be in the article title. Is just mentioning Ottawa in the title too ambiguous? -- ] - ] 23:16, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
:::::Yes, I think it would be ambiguous. Why would a shooting in Ottawa in 2014 be notable to the international audience reading Misplaced Pages? As soon as you include "Parliament" in the title, anyone reading it immediately knows from the title alone why it's notable. ] (]) 01:56, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
::::::Ottawa is best known as the capital of Canada. I maintain there is nothing ambiguous about the proposed title and that it satisfies every naming convention, including ], ], ], ], and yes, ], which specifically states that "titles should be precise enough to unambiguously define the topical scope of the article, but '''no more precise than that'''." ] (]) 02:09, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
:::::::Ottawa is the capital, yes, but it's also a large city. Just saying a shooting in Ottawa does not identify that it was an attack on parliament. The topic of an article is more than just time and place; the target of an attack is a key aspect of the topic of an article about that attack. ] (]) 13:23, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
:::Unless the East Block is itself separate from Parliament Hill, then yes, it is literally across the street. ]] 21:42, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
:::::Ottawa has almost a million people in it with various shooting events. It's too imprecise alone. I agree with the user that said the current title instantly tells anyone why the topic is notable, while the proposed title leaves the reader wondering why there is an article. ] (]) 21:03, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
----
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a ]. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a ]. No further edits should be made to this section.''</div><!-- Template:RM bottom -->

Latest revision as of 14:24, 12 November 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2014 shootings at Parliament Hill, Ottawa 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
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 30 days 
In the newsA news item involving 2014 shootings at Parliament Hill, Ottawa was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the In the news section on 23 October 2014.
Misplaced Pages
Misplaced Pages
Peace dove with olive branch in its beakPlease stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.
This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard.
This article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconCrime and Criminal Biography: Terrorism Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis 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 Misplaced Pages. 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
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Terrorism task force (assessed as High-importance).
WikiProject iconDeath Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconIslam High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconMilitary history: Canadian / North America
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
B checklist
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
  1. Referencing and citation: criterion met
  2. Coverage and accuracy: criterion met
  3. Structure: criterion met
  4. Grammar and style: criterion met
  5. Supporting materials: criterion met
Associated task forces:
Taskforce icon
Canadian military history task force
Taskforce icon
North American military history task force
WikiProject iconOttawa High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Ottawa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ottawa on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OttawaWikipedia:WikiProject OttawaTemplate:WikiProject OttawaOttawa
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconCanada Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on October 22, 2024.

Apparent contradiction

In the wake of the incident, the Canadian government introduced a bill to expand the powers and courtroom anonymity of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), Canada's spy agency. The bill was slated to be introduced the day of the shootings, which postponed it.

OK if the word "introduced" means into parliament, this may be technically consistent. But the text should be written in a clearer way, if, indeed, this has any place in the article.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough18:33, 11 November 2014 (UTC).

Example:

The Canadian government had already prepared a bill to expand the powers and courtroom anonymity of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), Canada's spy agency, which was due to be introduced the day of the shootings, and was postponed by the event.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough18:35, 11 November 2014 (UTC).

Unencycplopaedic slang

The statement that "the downtown core of Ottawa was placed on lockdown" is unencyclopaedic slang, and poor English. "Central Ottawa was subject to unprecedented security measures" would be a more accurate statement.Royalcourtier (talk) 07:24, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

what is wrong with lockdown? A similar thing happened after the Boston Marathon bombing and the same term was used. All buildings closed etc. Legacypac (talk) 07:49, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
"Lockdown" is, in fact, the term used by the CBC, National Post, Global Television, The Globe and Mail, Ottawa Citizen, CTV, BBC, Yahoo!/Agence France-Presse, etc. In fact, the usage of "lockdown" to describe what happened is pretty much universal. Resolute 14:41, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
"Central Ottawa was subject to unprecedented security measures" is so vague as to be meaningless. Were there more police officers on patrol? Tanks in the street? Mounties going door-to-door? "Lockdown" is a common and easily understood word. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 03:51, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 9 February 2018

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! 00:17, 22 February 2018 (UTC)



2014 shootings at Parliament Hill, Ottawa2014 Ottawa shootingWP:CONCISE, WP:COMMONNAME. It is more common to identify the incident as happening in Ottawa (963 Google Books souces) than Parliament Hill (734 Google Books sources); as noted in the last RM in 2014, the murder of the Canadian soldier didn't even happen on Parliament Hill (see map), making the fact that this inaccuracy in the title has persisted for over three years rather embarrassing.

Sites of shooting

The last RM failed because it proposed "attacks" rather than the favoured "shooting". Before that, it was nonsensically claimed "2014 Ottawa shooting" would imply 365 days of shootings, when in fact, as another user noted, "'2014 Ottawa shootings' no more means there was a year of shootings than '22 October 2014 Ottawa shootings' means there was 24 hours of shootings." There may have been other guns fired in 2014 in Ottawa, but it doesn't matter; this is recognizable and indisputably the primary topic for "2014 Ottawa shooting". Ribbet32 (talk) 04:17, 9 February 2018 (UTC)--Relisting. —usernamekiran(talk) 22:38, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Makes sense, no one at the article 2016 Nice attack has ever to my knowledge ever suggested that they thought that the attack lasted for the calendar year based on the title.--72.0.200.133 (talk) 16:48, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Title has been stable for years and I'm pretty sure this title was rejected early on when there was a lot of interest in the page. The significance is that the shootings happened at Parliament Hill, not just the city of Ottawa. The proposed title is inprecise amd covers all the shootings that happened in the City that year - and we deturmined there were a few of those. Clearly a less precise title does not help the reader understand or find the topic. Further - the War Memorial IS on Parliament Hill (which cover a wider area than the Parliament Buildings). Legacypac (talk) 23:12, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose for the reasons given by Legacypac. Proposed title is ambiguous. The key fact about this event is that it was an attack at Parliament for some sort of political reason, and it in fact ended right in the Parliament buildings. The location is the most important point and should be reflected in the title. The same pattern is seen with Quebec City mosque shooting - it's not just that there was a shooting in Quebec; the fact that it occurred in a mosque is key to the significance of the article. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 13:16, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Support more nature title. I suspect very few people get to this page from the search bar by typing in the name directly (this far too unwieldy), and the shorter name remains sufficiently precise without confusing any other events. We don't try to put any spin into the motives/target of the attack beyond the general location (eg the 2016 Nice attack above). The mosque article is consistent when the attack it at a single building/structure, ala 2017 Westminster attack, it's not specifically calling out the mosque as a critical element, only that that is the most precise location. --Masem (t) 13:24, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
It's not spin when the title indicates why the event is notable. Why is this event more notable than any other shooting in Ottawa in 2014? Because of its location and the fact that at one point, the shooter was actually in the Parliament buildings. For whatever his motives, it was an attack on parliament - that's what makes it notable, and putting that in the title is not spin. Nor does the title of the Quebec City mosque shooting article provide a precise location - Google indicates that there are five mosques and one Islamic centre in Quebec City, and the article title doesn't tell which one. The reason for including "mosque" in the title of that article is the same as for referring to Parliament in this article title - the fact of the attack was on a mosque was part of what made it notable. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 11:38, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
Sure but the 2016 Nice attack occured on public streets over a significant portion of the city's waterfront areas. It was an attack on the city of Nice and it's population, so that is the right title. This was an attack on Canada's Parliament, not the city of Ottawa generally. Legacypac (talk) 13:32, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
The fatal shooting was at the National War Memorial, which is not part of Parliament Hill. It may be close to Parliament Hill, but it is never confused for it. -- Earl Andrew - talk 13:39, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
The War Memorial is across the street from the Parliament Buildings, part of the Parlimemtry precinct, and clearly within the area commonly known as the Hill. The reason Ottawa is in the title is there is more than one Parliament Hill in the world, so we agreed to add Ottawa to DAB it. This was also the most prominate shooting in Ontario that year, but a move to 2014 shooting in Ontario would not be a good idea either. Frankly, I can't understand the motivation to make the page harder to find by choosing an imprecise title. The current title unambiguously refers to a particular series of events.
The Canadian Encyclopedia calls it "Parliament Hill Attack" Macleans called it Parliament Hill shootings http://www.macleans.ca/bearing-witness-parliament-hill-shootings-oral-history/. Legacypac (talk) 14:14, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
Clearly, you're not familiar with Ottawa. No one here refers to the War Memorial as being part of Parliament Hill (the "Parliamentary Precinct" is a very different definition). Parliament Hill is an actual hill on which the War Memorial is not on. Personally, as a local, I've found the article title to be border-line offensive in its ignorance. -- Earl Andrew - talk 15:13, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
Lean oppose. If anything, including Parliament Hill in the title serves as an immediate aid in identifying the significance of this event vis a vis every other and often borderline routine article we have on shootings. And it does so while remaining concise. Really, the best objection presented is the fact that the War Memorial isn't technically on Parliament Hill itself. But given it is literally across the street, that is really just quibbling. Resolute 14:48, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
It is not "literally" across the street. It is a few blocks east of Parliament Hill. I know I'm being pedantic, but I think it's important not to underestimate that the two places are distinct locations, and are not confused for one another. -- Earl Andrew - talk 15:49, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
User:Earl Andrew with your local knowledge can you compare this statutory definition of the Hill with the location of the War Memorial? with the map showing it immediately across the street from the Parliament building grounds, just like the Prime Minster's Office is also immediately across the street. In land use designation we always count the zoning line as going to the middle of any fronting streets, but even if 100% of Wellington St is outside the Hill, the National War Memorial grounds are 20 m from the Parliamentry grounds, which is close enough for me in naming an event.
For a local, the idea of what is on the Hill is one thing, but sitting beyond the Rockies our perception of what is "Parliament Hill" is broader. By way of analogy, someone in Ontario may correctly (in their mind) say I live in Vancouver even though there are a few separate cities between me and the City of Vancouver, but someone sitting downtown Vancouver considers anything south of False Creek as hinterland. While traveling outside Canada I usually say I live in Vancouver because most people have an idea of it's existence from the Olympics etc, even though I would never say that to someone who lives in the Vancouver area. Legacypac (talk) 21:37, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
I disagree. If a major event happened in Surrey I would be just as insistent the article title not include Vancouver. They are separate places. I will admit that the War Memorial is technically across the street, I guess, but I still maintain that it's not part of Parliament Hill so it shouldn't be in the article title. Is just mentioning Ottawa in the title too ambiguous? -- Earl Andrew - talk 23:16, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
Yes, I think it would be ambiguous. Why would a shooting in Ottawa in 2014 be notable to the international audience reading Misplaced Pages? As soon as you include "Parliament" in the title, anyone reading it immediately knows from the title alone why it's notable. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 01:56, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Ottawa is best known as the capital of Canada. I maintain there is nothing ambiguous about the proposed title and that it satisfies every naming convention, including WP:CONCISE, WP:COMMONNAME, WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, WP:RECOGNIZABLE, and yes, WP:PRECISE, which specifically states that "titles should be precise enough to unambiguously define the topical scope of the article, but no more precise than that." Ribbet32 (talk) 02:09, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Ottawa is the capital, yes, but it's also a large city. Just saying a shooting in Ottawa does not identify that it was an attack on parliament. The topic of an article is more than just time and place; the target of an attack is a key aspect of the topic of an article about that attack. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 13:23, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Unless the East Block is itself separate from Parliament Hill, then yes, it is literally across the street. Resolute 21:42, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
Ottawa has almost a million people in it with various shooting events. It's too imprecise alone. I agree with the user that said the current title instantly tells anyone why the topic is notable, while the proposed title leaves the reader wondering why there is an article. Legacypac (talk) 21:03, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

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.
Categories:
Talk:2014 shootings at Parliament Hill, Ottawa: Difference between revisions Add topic