Talk:Usman Khan (terrorist)

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) 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.

This article was nominated for deletion on 30 November 2019. The result of the discussion was keep.

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography

Crime and Criminal Biography: Terrorism 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Terrorism task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

England Low‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England 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.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Islam: Islam and Controversy / Salaf / Sunni Islam Low‑importance

	Islam portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related 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.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Islam and Controversy task force.
	This article is supported by the Salaf task force.
	This article is supported by the Sunni Islam task force.

Law Enforcement

	Law portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

London Mid‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Nationality

Did this man have Pakistani citizenship? If not, he can't be described as 'Pakistani-British'. If he did, then a source is needed. I added a fact tag in the article. 5.81.164.70 (talk) 13:32, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Someone has now removed the assertion, but didn't discuss it, or otherwise mention it here. Never mind. 5.81.164.70 (talk) 16:27, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why can't he be described that way? I think your argument is flawed. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 01:27, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, User:SelfieCity, you have to cite a reliable source for that assertion. In the US, it was normal to describe a person as a hyphenated American in the past. Current journalistic practice, especially in Europe, is to not mention ethnic heritage if a person is born in their country of residence. I found a Guardian (newspaper) source stating that his family has property in Pakistan, but that does not tell us his ethnicity. That's why we don't call him 'Pakistani-British' on Wikipedia.--Quisqualis (talk) 06:48, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The source in the article mentions "Pakistani parents."^[1] source #4 in the article, at the moment--Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 12:12, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pakistani nationality law entitled him to Pakistani citizenship. Jim Michael (talk) 16:19, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Does that mean he had Pakistani citizenship or at least could be considered part-Pakistani? --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 20:39, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Being entitled to citizenship (if indeed that applies to him) is not the same as having citizenship. I haven't seen any sources saying he is also a citizen of Pakistan. As for ethnicity, that is something that is generally self-reported. Again I haven't seen any sources reporting on his ethnic self-identification. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 21:22, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Townsend, Mark; Iqbal, Nosheen (30 November 2019). "'We don't understand how Usman Khan ended up like this'". The Guardian.

Confusion over events

I'm somewhat confused by the order of events described in this article. If he was in jail from 2012 to 2018 for a plot to blow up the London Stock Exchange, then how did he travel to Kashmir in 2013? This is Paul (talk) 17:54, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@This is Paul: I see that part of the article. The records of his going to Kashmir were 2013, not that he went there that year. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 12:23, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article says that he went to FATA, not Kashmir. Jim Michael (talk) 12:55, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

~~The sources don't appear to indicate the date of his travel to FATA.~~ Self-evidently, he did not go there at any time between his arrest in December 2010 and his death in November 2019; so he must have gone before. Nonetheless, please note his travel appears to be noteworthy enough that sources, including a special independent terrorist rapporteur of the British Parliament, deemed it sufficiently important to include it on his annual report to Parliament. In other words: Parliament does not appear to have been informed of, for example, your travel, nor mine, but Parliament was informed of Usman Khan's travel to FATA. The terror rapporteur says he has legal access to security and intelligence sources to which few are privy. XavierItzm (talk) 14:59, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Did he go to Kashmir as well? Jim Michael (talk) 16:40, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No WP:RS that I have seen says that he ever went to Kashmir. Multiple WP:RS going back to 2011 say straight up that he owned land in Kashmir, though some only say that the Kashmir land is owned by his family. These all could be true; when his home was first raided by counter-terrorist forces in 2008, perhaps the land was owned by more senior relatives; then perhaps it fell into his personal possession; and now the land might pass on by tribal rules on to surviving family. XavierItzm (talk) 18:14, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, since the Report to Parliament says "Following their arrest in December 2010, all nine members of the network pleaded guilty" after it says "three men from Stoke (Usman Khan, Nazam Hussain, Mohammed Shahjahan) who travelled to the FATA and planned to fund, construct and take part in a terrorist training camp in Kashmir", it is incorrect to say that no date is given for the travel; the text is giving us a date for the travel, and the date is prior to the December 2010 arrest. XavierItzm (talk) 10:01, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(militant)

Really? He was a terrorist, plain and simple. Use of the term militant is not appropriate in this instance. Yevad (talk) 19:32, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't he both? However, I'm fine with just using "terrorist," since it has a higher degree of precision. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 20:31, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I dunno, militant kind of implies that there is justification for the actions, and murdering two people who have no influence over the perceived cause certainly isn't justified. I don't know if that makes sense, or if my perception of the term "militant" is correct though.Yevad (talk) 21:29, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is hard for me to believe that "terrorist" is not THE correct definition. Unless "murderer" is used instead. Have we grown so mamby-pamby that we feel the need to soften the description in order not to offend overly touchy sensibilities? D.G.Smith, Michigan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:301:7777:21A0:300B:D489:546B:8321 (talk) 03:38, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

True. I'm not sure "militant" is mamby-pamby, as you say, but on the whole I can see your point. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 12:18, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 3 December 2019

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: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 02:34, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Usman Khan (terrorist) → Usman Khan – WP:TWODABS ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:54, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Sorry, I edit-conflicted while moving to "(terrorist)", and didn't intend to interfere with any existing process. FWIW I've no view on the primary topic. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 22:04, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose . It wouldn't make sense to move it to the disambiguation page. Wouldn't this: [[1]] apply more directly? David O. Johnson (talk) 23:16, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose because Usman Khan now has four entries, there was decentralised disambiguation through hatnotes at Usman Shinwari, so I imported those to the main disambiguation page. I would also say wait until the post-attack saturation coverage has cooled down before making a case for primary topic, because, while English sources will probably focus on the terrorist, there is an element of recentism that we need to avoid. The other Usman Khans have had whole careers, this guy has just recently stabbed some people, so we should probably hold off for the time being. However, if the attack does have long-term implications on sentencing in the United Kingdom, he may well end up being the primary topic, but only time will tell. SITH (talk) 11:26, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Usman Khan is rightly a dab page. WWGB (talk) 11:36, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per WP:RECENTISM. Soon nobody will remember his name. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:21, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide a reliable source for your opinion? --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 23:16, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What an absolutely ridiculous comment. How does one source an opinion? Can you provide a source that he will be remembered after the current spate of news articles have died down? Of course you can't. -- Necrothesp (talk) 23:31, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How can you be so sure that his name will disappear? --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 02:37, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just like no-one remembers the name of the perpetrator of the 2017 Westminster attack unless they go and look it up. WWGB (talk) 02:51, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't answer my question. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 12:34, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There has been a lot more media coverage about Khan than there was about Masood, which is why I don't think Khan will be as quickly forgotten. There's a lot of controversy in regard to Khan having been released early & been invited to the event at Fishmongers' Hall less than a year later - nothing like that was the case with Masood. Jim Michael (talk) 12:15, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose as per above. Octoberwoodland (talk) 21:41, 9 December 2019 (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.

[1] Townsend, Mark; Iqbal, Nosheen (30 November 2019). "'We don't understand how Usman Khan ended up like this'". The Guardian.

[1]