Talk:List of Islamist terrorist attacks

Attacks against military targets

In a quick glance at this list, I notice that the Battle of El Adde is listed as a terrorist attack. My impression is that an attack on a military target is generally not considered a terrorist attack. A terrorist attack is generally defined as an attack on non-combatants with a political or ideological motivation. Are there a lot of other entries in the list like that one? —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 19:20, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

The source for that entry does quote an official referring the the attackers as "terrorists", but I'm not sure that's enough to include it here. - ZLEA ^TǀC 19:34, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

I think it's pretty clear that some people are fond of calling their political opponents "terrorists". Wikipedia should not use the term so loosely. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 20:06, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

At this point, I have removed about twenty topics from the list. There are more that I think should be removed. I believe attacks against police officers should be treated similarly, and so should attacks against government institutions and politicians. "Terrorism" is when the targets of the violence are non-combatants. Rebellions are not terrorism. Killing political leaders is not terrorism. Civilian casualties are not terrorism unless the civilians are intended targets. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 01:25, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

I believe attacks against police officers should be treated similarly, and so should attacks against government institutions and politicians.. I think that might be going a bit too far. It's not our place to draw the line as to who is considered a non-combatant, or whether such a distinction alone determines whether an attack is considered terrorism. As stated in the terrorism article, there is no universally accepted definition of terrorism, so for us to choose one of many definitions as the basis for this list is irresponsible. Instead, we should go by what reliable sources say. - ZLEA ^TǀC 08:52, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Police officers are people whose job is fundamentally to use force (including deadly force) to achieve and enforce governmental authority. Police forces clearly are armed forces who are combatants in conflicts about such governmental authority. They are not spectators. It is certainly possible to find people who will use "terrorism" labelling simply as a smear against anyone who challenges their authority. We need to have some criteria over what to consider "terrorism" for purposes of this list, and the definition given in the opening sentence of the Terrorism article seems basically adequate for that. Looking at some articles in the last few hours, I notice several articles that have been placed in terrorism categories when the targets of the violence were not the general public and the only sources that I find that refer to them as terrorism are quotes from police or other government officials or politicians with an obvious direct interest in the opposing side in a conflict. I note that a relevant RfC is linked above: Talk:List of terrorist incidents/Archive 2#RfC: List criteria, which seems reasonable. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 16:19, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Police officers are people whose job is fundamentally to use force (including deadly force) to achieve and enforce governmental authority. Police forces clearly are armed forces who are combatants in conflicts about such governmental authority. They are not spectators. Again, it is not our job to determine whether police forces should be considered non-combatants, or if it can only be considered terrorism is the target was non-combatants. It is certainly possible to find people who will use "terrorism" labelling simply as a smear against anyone who challenges their authority. If that's the only way RS link an event to potential terrorism, then we cannot say that the sources themselves refer to said event as such. We need to have some criteria over what to consider "terrorism" for purposes of this list, and the definition given in the opening sentence of the Terrorism article seems basically adequate for that. The terrorism article's definition is not adequate as it acknowledges that "there are various different definitions of terrorism, with no universal agreement about it." WP:RS exists for a reason, and if we disregard what RS say based on the oversimplified definition of terrorism in one of our articles, we would be violating WP:OR. If sources are suspected to have a direct interest in labeling the opposing side of a conflict as "terrorists", then we should take them to WP:RSN to discuss their reliability in the context of said conflict, if not their overall reliability. I believe the consensus you linked perfectly aligns with my point. - ZLEA ^TǀC 18:21, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Suggestions

I will suggest adding the 1999 Russian apartment bombings, 2002 Moscow Theatre, 2004 Beslan, 2004 Moscow Metro, 2004 Russian aircraft bombings, 2011 Domodedovo, October and December 2013 Volgograd bombings Andhrandir (talk) 14:50, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

According to like half of the internet the 1999 Russian apartment bombings were done by the FSB to make muslims, specifically Chechens, look bad. Polygnotus (talk) 13:52, 26 March 2026 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 August 2026

Missing is 7th Oct 2024 Israel masacre. 1200+ killed ~2026-42510-80 (talk) 16:20, 1 August 2026 (UTC)

Missing is 7th Oct 2023 Israel masacre. 1200+ killed ~2026-42510-80 (talk) 16:22, 1 August 2026 (UTC)

see above:

• In this RfC there was no consensus to add Hamas’s attack on Israel on 7 October 2023, otherwise known as Operation Al-Aqsa Flood, to the list

Fordhamblues (talk) 19:48, 1 August 2026 (UTC)