Talk:Glostrup Terrorists Case

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 Low-importance).

Denmark Low‑importance

	Denmark portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Denmark, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Denmark 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.DenmarkWikipedia:WikiProject DenmarkTemplate:WikiProject DenmarkDenmark
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

suggest new scope of article

The case described in the article is not to my understanding important enough to warrent its own article, it is not the only case of terrorism in Denmark at the moment. I suggest that the article is

moved/renamed to Terrorism in Denmark or Terrorism and counter-terrorism in Denmark, so it keeps within the style of similar articles.
exspanded to include the currrent case from Odense.
exspanded to include the case against Said Mansour.
exspanded to include the legislation regarding terrorism.
exspanded to include the counter-terroism of the government agencies.

example given: Terrorism in Australia or Terrorism and counter-terrorism in Kazakhstan

Does anyone have any thoughts on this? Mads Angelbo ^{Talk / Contribs} 01:37, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at "Terrorism in Australia", you can see that it's a main article for an entire category and that it serves as a general reference, as well as putting things in perspective of each other. The Glostrup case was Denmark's first terrrorism case, which is important, and it has a nice sized entry. Why burden it with additional facts about additional terror cases? As you rightly point out, there are several other issues regarding terrorism in Denmark. I would support starting off an article about it, writing about issues as they develop, and once/if they get to be big enough, they can branch off to their own article. Additionally, there is information missing in this article, so it might grow in the future. I personally prefer the way it's done in "Terrorism in Australia" - whatever there's little information about is written in the main category, whatever there's more information has branched off. Misheu 04:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It will be a good idea to keep the article and to make a new article with the scope of terrorism in Denmark. Sorry to say, but to my knowledge it is not the first case of terrorism in denmark, however it is the first case of "prevented" terrorism and the first case of islamic suspects. if you understand danish please see [list of incidents of terror in DK from danish wiki] -Angelbo ^{Talk / Contribs} 17:40, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Glostrup Terrorists Case. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070206010546/http://www.diis.dk/sw30537.asp to http://www.diis.dk/sw30537.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:04, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]