Talk:Islamic terrorism in Europe

I recently converted (and updated with new data) the chart on this page for launched and foiled attacks as it was broken (it's also on Islamic terrorism and had been for quite a while I think). It was recently converted to a table in this edit. What do people think? Seeing the comparative trends, or are the numbers more important? gilgongo (talk) 17:49, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

I'm the one who converted it to a table. I think it makes more sense for this set of data. The trends are fairly easy to see without the visual aid (and from a perspective of MOS:ACCESSIBILITY it might even be better), and we don't get the issues inherent with trying to present trends in three different (if interlinked) data sets in a single graph: the number of foiled attacks, the number of launched attacks, and the combined number of attacks. A stacked bar chart might work okay-ish, but a stacked line chart really isn't a good fit for this type of data (it creates weird area effects, among other issues). TompaDompa (talk) 20:56, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

I see. I think the chart had existed on the page (in the old format) for a long time, so yours is a new perspective. Makes sense though I suppose (and given the very small numbers involved). Interesting point about the accessibility aspect too - I'm not sure how the new chart template works with that. gilgongo (talk) 23:50, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

Summarize Timeline Top Qs Fact Check

Not sure why this list was removed but I can only guess as to why.

Making this list but shall leave it to someone else to edit, as each time I add to the list, it gets removed, so I won't waste my time. So here as follows:

• Arras school stabbing
• Crocus City Hall attack
• 2024 Mannheim stabbing
• 2024 Solingen stabbing
• 2021 Nantes stabbing - https://www.france24.com/en/france/20210528-man-attacks-french-police-officer-with-knife-sparking-manhunt-in-western-france
• Annecy knife attack 2022 - https://www.francetvinfo.fr/faits-divers/terrorisme/annecy-un-homme-mis-en-examen-pour-violences-volontaires-sur-personne-depositaire-de-l-autorite-publique-en-relation-avec-une-entreprise-terroriste_5508240.html
• 2023 Paris knife attack - https://www.lemonde.fr/societe/article/2023/12/02/attaque-a-paris-une-personne-tuee-et-une-autre-blessee-l-assaillant-interpelle_6203579_3224.html
• Liverpool Women's Hospital bombing
• Surovikino penal colony hostage crisis
• 2024 Dagestan attacks

ThePaganUK (talk) 17:50, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Add as well:

• 2022 Oslo shooting
• Zürich stabbing attack

131.164.141.70 (talk) 12:09, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

The Oslo shooting appears to have been confirmed as 'Islamist' by Oslo police. The Zürich incident appears to be an antisemetic hate crime, but with almost no official endorsement of it being either Islamist nor terrorism.Pincrete (talk) 06:36, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

2025 to add:

• Villach attack, Austria, 15 February 2025: https://web.archive.org/web/20250216121829/https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cjw4jj0p5jdo
• Munich attack, Germany, 14 February 2025: https://www.politico.eu/article/munich-attack-islamic-extremism-germany-election/
• Mulhouse attack, France, 22 February 2025: https://edition.cnn.com/2025/02/22/europe/mulhouse-attack-intl-latam/index.html

ThePaganUK (talk) 15:10, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

Have just made an edit adding these attacks, mentioning it here as I'm sure they'll be removed again.ThePaganUK (talk) 19:09, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

ThePaganUK, mentioning it here as I'm sure they'll be removed again, well they'll only get removed if they fail the inclusion criteria, which briefly are, that a senior police office speaking officially, or senior 'justice' or other relevant political figure state EXPLICITLY that they have concluded that the act WAS Islamic/Islamist/Jihadist terrorism. Or that Europol report the event as such. We additionally expect that sources HERE should support the text here (that is readers should not have to trawl through the main article to verify anything important said here).

These criteria were put in place as previously the article was such a mass of speculative nonsense, that it was valueless. You might want to read this joke piece I started about a single piece of nonsense which editors were determinedly edit-warring back in and out of this article for over a year, (and that joke piece barely scratches the surface of how much nonsense there was in the article at that time, the Taliban were apparently in open warfare throughout Europe in what we were all calling the European Intafada - that particular nonsense sourced to a misreading of an article in German, which in turn referred to a piece in a Russian news outlet, again repeatedly edit-warred back into the article and a Cypriot blog).

It's probably worth mentioning some of the things that fail these criteria. Police or media speculating as to whether the act was terrorist and/or Islamist. It is fairly obvious that police saying on day one that they are investigating an event as to whether it is in a particular category is not the same as them subsequently concluding that it was. Occasionally European police have made an early claim that an event might be and we hear nothing more until it appears in Europol, but so what? We aim to be a reliable source of information not a newspaper. Unnamed witnesses saying that they heard someone shout an Islamic slogan are similarly inadmissable, because such claims have repeatedly been shown to be unreliable or even actively fabricated. Ditto claims about contacts/internet searches etc,. It is the police/investigators' responsibility to establish whether these indicate anything, not ours or the media's. We can record such claims but not treat them as proof of anything.

SO, I take great exception to your imputation that there are individuals who monitor this page that have some weird politically-motivated reason for not adding attacks on here. The only individuals who monitor this page that I'm aware of are ones that care about the reliabilty and accuracy of the info recorded here.

Regarding your first addition, the 2022 Oslo shooting. It is very possible that that event could meet the inclusion criteria, but at the moment it fails both of the requirements. The source used does not support the text "Police declared the incident as an "act of Islamist terrorism" (the source has lots of speculation as to his possible contact with known Islamists, but not that simple factual claim). Nor AFAI can see does the linked article (it claims police began investigating it as such, as they also began investigating as to whether the man's mental health was the determining factor and bags of further speculation as to his possible motives and affiliations, but few if any conclusions) I know next to nothing about the Oslo incident and it is very possible that later sources exist that would make it warrant inclusion, or that I missed a relevant source on that page, but at the moment, AFAI can see, it simply isn't verified. I haven't looked at most of the other events for some time.

In the past I have spent 100s of hours 'cleaning up' behind other editors happy to use poor sources or who fail to scrutinise the sources critically and simultaneously impugn the motives of those who do (as you have also done), I know of several editors here who have carefully and patiently sifted through text and sources, painstakingly cleaning up after others. It gets very boring when one is insulted for doing other people's hard work for them. Pincrete (talk) 07:23, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Addendum: The second part of the 2022 Oslo shooting entry claims "As of 2026, it is the only terrorist incident linked to the Islamic State to occur in Norway".

Firstly AFAI can see, neither the source used nor thwe linked article claims that this shooting is the first of anything.

Seconfdly the 'ISIS link' claim is so weak and vague as to be pointless,, the source used says: "Several media outlets have reported that Matapour (the accused) has connections to Arfan Bhatti, who is a leading figure in the Profetens Ummah movement. They are known for recruiting several Norwegians to fight for IS in Syria" Which media outlets? How reliable? What was the nature of the connection? This 'connection' be substantial or could mean nothing whatsoever.

Finally, and most absurdly, how can a 2022 source be used to justify "As of 2026 …" Pincrete (talk) 11:30, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

I'll also mention, as I have before, that part of the reason that this article is not updated very frequently is that the editor 1Kwords was indeffed back in December 2021 because of longterm POV issues (they were also blocked for 2 years on Swedish-language Wikipedia for misrepresenting sources in October 2021). Suffice it to say that their edits to this article ensured that other editors kept a close eye on it and likewise edited it fairly heavily. TompaDompa (talk) 18:49, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

Winterthur is falsely noted as Austrian. Holunderstaub (talk) 14:04, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

Fixed although it is unclear at present whether this is Islamist (a local paper saying that an unnamed witness thought they had heard an Islamic 'slogan', doesn't normally qualify). Pincrete (talk) 14:40, 21 July 2026 (UTC)