Talk:2016 Hamburg stabbing attack

Categories/see also

I agree to remove the terror/ISIL cats for now, let's see what happens. Personally, I ask myself on which facts the statement of the police is based - no good clue, but they know what it is not... --Gerry1214 (talk) 19:44, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

I would in addition remove the link to "immigration and crime in Germany" here. Up to know it is totally unclear who the perpetrator is and whether he is an immigrant or not. Only several political actors try to draw this conclusion. LucLeTruc (talk) 13:26, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

I disagree. Police are not searching for anybody, but for a "man of southern origin", which would be an immigrant, and this is perfectly sourced. So there is clearly a relation here given by the sources. And several other political actors try to conceal certain conclusions.--Gerry1214 (talk) 17:54, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Police are looking for a man of "southern appearance" (you realize the difference?) who does not neccesarily have to be an immigrant. So, as long as there is no suspect and as long as this suspect is not proven to be an immigrant all of this is either speculation (for which wikipedia is not the right place) or political propaganda (for which it is neither) LucLeTruc (talk) 18:19, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

We should follow the version given by the police, and not only as the vast majority of people look like what they are, we should leave the see also and categories. Above that, the issue is related in the social and political discourse. I also would re-add the "ISIL related events" category because of that (see my addition). Wikipedia is certainly not a place for concealment for obvious reasons, but for open information. The relation is obvious here, and it is given by the sources.--Gerry1214 (talk) 19:11, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia is for open information but also for true and well sourced information. I agree with mentioning the ISIL terror stuff, but before relating this to the general "migration and crime" debate, it has to be proven that an immigrant commited the crime. I agree that this is "likely" given the suspect description but he could also be a tourist, a terrorist who just came to Germany for the crime or a German born in Germany. So lets keep out these political debates and lets stick to the given facts as reported by the police. LucLeTruc (talk) 19:24, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

I have to add that the connection to immigration was also drawn by Die Welt. And given the description by the police, he could also be a Marsian who just looked like a human being, or the witnesses were right-wing propagandists who told a weird story and there was no crime at all or someone else murdered him... So we should leave the most likely and best sourced categorisation/see also which is the current one.--Gerry1214 (talk) 19:40, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not the place for "the most likely categorization". It is the place for the "correct categorization" which, unfortunately, neither we nor the police currently know. So we should leave it out until we know. LucLeTruc (talk) 20:01, 8 December 2016 (UTC)