Talk:Mohamed Atta

Florida Couple

Surprised not to find this here, relevant to Atta's entry:

A news report about a Saudi family that disappeared from their home in Sarasota, Fla., just two weeks before the 9/11 attacks has brought an angry response from the co-chair of a congressional Sept. 11 committee. [Senator] Graham called Sarasota case "eerily similar" to the FBI's failure to tell the intelligence committee about a former Saudi civil servant, Omar al-Bayoumi, who supported two hijackers while they were living in San Diego..independent journalist Anthony Summers..said on msnbc tv that a hushed-up inquiry found that "three of the (9/11) pilot hijackers had all been in touch with the Saudis in that house." Abdulazzi al-Hiijjii, his wife Anoud and their two children resided in a home owned by Anoud's father, Esam Ghazzawi, in the gated Sarasota subdivision called Prestancia, according to the report...According to the report, the FBI connected the couple to more than a dozen terrorists through telephone records and through their car license tags and driver's licenses as they passed through the subdivision's security gate. Among the terrorists who visited the home or called the couple was 9/11 leader Mohamed Atta, the report said. Graham said he had no reason to doubt the news report, which said the couple and their two children abruptly abandoned their luxury home, leaving behind a full refrigerator, clothes, furnishings and a new car in the driveway. The news report was based on information from an unnamed counterterrorism official, a neighbor, subdivision administrators, the subdivision security guard and the subdivision lawyer, who said the FBI tried to get him to lure the homeowner back to the United States. According to the report, the Sarasota couple returned to Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, with Anoud's father after abandoning their home.

See (above are slightly rearranged and much condensed snippets from) this source [1] and similar reports like [2]

Shared Names

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/16/us/after-attacks-missed-cues-saudi-may-have-been-suspected-error-officials-say.html

Mr. Atta is one of three hijackers who has the same name as a person who had received training with the U.S. military

Able Danger

The section on Able Danger to be rewrite to better reflect the Able Danger project, read Able Danger on wiki for a more representative picture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.245.216.205 (talk) 20:45, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

image gallery

At the end of the article there was an image gallery without much sense. Maybe you'd like to use these images in context. --141.30.72.76 (talk) 15:24, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

• 
  flight record at Huffman
• 2000 Visa
  2000 Visa
• 
  Egyptian passport

There isn't much "context" to the images as they are just documents, preserved for historical value, more than illustrating a specific fact about his life. Sherurcij ^{(Speaker for the Dead)} 15:29, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Images are useful. AdjustShift (talk) 02:51, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Bot report : Found duplicate references !

In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)

• "hooper" :
  • {{cite news |url=http://observer.guardian.co.uk/waronterrorism/story/0,,556630,00.html |title=The shy, caring, deadly fanatic |date=September 23, 2001 |author=Hooper, John |publisher=The Guardian}}
  • {{cite news |url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/sep/23/september11.education |title=The Shy, Caring, Deadly Fanatic |publisher=The Guardian |date=September 23, 2001 |author=Hooper, John}}

DumZiBoT (talk) 04:25, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Fair use images

This article has numerous fair use images. The Wikipedia:Non-free_content policy applies here. A key criteria is "Significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic." Minimal usage of fair use images is one factor to consider.

• So, we have two images of Mohammed Atta's drivers' license, one in the infobox that is cropped to just show his picture. The second is in further below article text. I think the infobox photo is justified, since it was widely circulated by the FBI [3], and demonstrates his "cold" appearance as noted by many. The picture of his entire drivers license on the other hand, it doesn't add much at all to the readers' understanding of the topic.

• We also have Atta's college photograph, which again is questionable, since it mainly illustrates or decorates that section of the article.

• The Huffman Aviation record fits well with the text, illustrating all the hours of training Atta had. It goes beyond what the text says and I think significantly increases readers' understanding.

• We also have two security camera photos, both which I think are definitely justified to show Atta's whereabouts and activities on 9/10 and 9/11.

• Atta's visa is public domain, since it's a work of the U.S. government, so no problem with including it.

--Aude (talk) 17:48, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Also, there is Atta's martydom video. I think a screenshot from the video would significantly add to readers' understanding. --Aude (talk) 17:58, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

The simplest solution for the driver's license problem is to include the driver's license, but change our "main" image to another Public Domain image of him if such can be found; thus eliminating the "duplicate" nature. `Sherurcij ^{(speaker for the dead)} 18:28, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

How does the drivers license add significantly to the readers' understanding of the topic? --Aude (talk) 18:35, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

I've erased "Image:AttasFLDriversLic.jpg" from the bio. AdjustShift (talk) 14:59, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Dubious

Sometime in the last eight months a bunch of {{dubious}} templates have been added to this article. These templates are less intrusive than some other editorial templates. But they do direct interested readers to the "Dubious" section of the article. But the concerned wikipedian didn't add one.

The template, when expanded, currently adds two links (1) one to Wikipedia:Disputed statement, which explains how the template is supposed to be used; and (2) another to the section of the article entitled Dubious.

The instructions tell concerned wikipedians, when they encountered passages that concerned them, to first see if they could fix the passages on their own. If they couldn't, they were then advised to add a "Disputed" section to the talk page, describing their concern. Only after describing their concern were they supposed to add {{dubious}} tags.

AGF -- the first tags were added eight months ago. Maybe the guideline has been changed in the last eight months, and didn't spell out as clearly the concerned wikipedians responsibilities? But the use of this tag clearly doesn't comply with the guideline, and I am going to suggest that any that aren't explained in a reasonable period of time should be removed.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 10:53, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

I am mostly on a wikibreak now, but at some point plan to spend more time on the Mohamed Atta article and get it to featured article standards. It's indeed taking a long while for me to get back to working on the article, and not sure when I'll have the time to do so. The article is fairly close, though there are some unsourced passages and there are sections where the sources (and statements) need checking and replacement with more reliable sources. Those sources marked as "dubious" are such sources that are questionable. What I could do for now is replace the tags with hidden inline comments that are only visible when in edit mode.

As for leaving a note on the talk page, that's just a guideline. Where it's been mostly just me working on an article, as has been the case with the Mohamed Atta article, I sometimes don't bother with notes on the talk page. But, more than willing to respond if someone does ask on the talk page. --Aude (talk) 00:45, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Okina

As I understand it the okina is a purely Hawaiian character. Yet it is in one rendering of Atta's name. ??? Rich Farmbrough, 03:53, 8 August 2009 (UTC).

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 July 16#Mohamed Elamir awad al-Sayed Atta Karadogan

Editors may be interested in contributing to this discussion. Bridgeplayer (talk) 01:22, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Mohamed Atta's identity

A number of reports suggest the possibility that the person purporting to act under the name of Mohamed Atta in the United States was not the same person as the Mohamed el-Amir Atta who was born in Egypt and studied in Hamburg, Germany. Contrary to anonymous intelligence or law-enforcement sources, these reports were published in mainstream media and provide the full names of their sources;

1. Two men who locals recognized to have been Marwan al-Shehhi and Mohamed Atta stayed at a popular resort hotel in Mabalacat, the Philippines, sometime between 1998 and 2000, drank whiskey with Philippine bargirls, dined at a restaurant that specializes in Middle Eastern cuisine and visited at least one of the local flight schools. Philippine and U.S. investigators have been checking out the reported movements of Marwan Al-Shehhi and Mohamed Atta but would not confirm the accused hijackers' presence in the Philippines. Local hotel workers, including Gina Marcelo, a former waitress, Victoria Brocoy, a chambermaid and Ferdinand Abad, a security guard at the Woodland Park Resort Hotel, were however willing to talk to media about these guests. Another person, interviewed by the New York Times, who remembered Mohamed Atta, was Trudis Dago, manager of the Jerusalem Restaurant in Angeles City. [New York Times, October 5, 2001]

2. Spruce Whited, head of security at the [Portland public] library, said he first saw a man he is convinced was Atta in April 2000. He said the man came to the library several times, using the computers. "I only recognized him because he'd been here a few times," he said. Kathy Barry, a reference librarian, also reported seeing Atta, whose photograph has been distributed widely through the media since the Sept. 11 attacks. [Portland Press Herald Report, October 5, 2001, ]

3. An in-depth interview by eminent journalist Brian Ross with Johnelle Bryant broadcast on ABC News on June 6, 2002, where she tells him about her encounter with Mohamed Atta in April or May 2000 in her office at the Department of Agriculture in Florida. and

4. Mohamed Atta, the suspected terrorist who crashed hijacked American Airlines Flight 11 into the World Trade Center, went twice to a small airport in South Florida and asked detailed questions about how to start and fly a crop-duster plane. In Belle Glade, local crop-dusters recounted Sunday what Atta asked about, and speculated on how one of their planes could be used for a terrorist mission. "[Atta] wanted to know how to fly it, how to crank it, how much it would haul, said James Lester, 50, who maintains and loads a 502 Air Tractor crop-duster with as much as 500 gallons of insecticide and fertilizer. Lester said the 33-year-old Atta visited the small airstrip here with several groups of men as recently as last month. "The FBI showed me [Atta's] photo, said Lester, who remembered at least two encounters with Atta -- once in March when he drove up in a green van with two other people, and again in August when he flew into the airport in a single-engine Cessna. "The reason why I recognized him was because he was always walking behind me, being real persistent in asking those questions." [The Miami Herald, October 29, 2001,

These reports provide facts that are incompatible with the official account on Mohamed Atta on three grounds: (a) Mohamed Atta is seen in the Philippines acting as a playboy, contrary to his description as a pious Muslim (b) Mohamed Atta is seen by several independent witnesses in the United States prior to his official entry date into the U.S. (c) Mohamed Atta is described as someone intent to make himself conspicuous as well as suspicious within the U.S.

Whatever the deep significance of these facts, they constitute part and parcel of the public account on Mohamed Atta and must appear on any objective account regarding this person. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emetvetzedek (talk • contribs) 13:05, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

References

Challenged without citations

is there a reason why User:JohnCengiz77‎ feels that these statements need to be in the article without citations? All they need are citations, but he seems willing to reintroduce challenged material without citations and is close to being blocked for it. Please read WP:Verifiability and become accustomed to how things actually work on wikipedia.--Jojhutton (talk) 14:17, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Martyrdom Video Authenticity

I'm surprised there is no mention here or elsewhere regarding the authenticity of the "martyrdom" video. Specifically, the portion of the video allegedly linking the hijackers to Osama Bin Laden addressing some sort of rally in Afghanistan. Prior to the announcement of this footage, the same rally is featured via an alternate camera angle in the docudrama "The Road to Guantánamo" released earlier during the same year. This footage also contains the same 1/8/2000 date in the datestamp. Coincidentally, the footage in the film supposedly has the detainee inserted via CG so they can try and convince him that he was present at the rally. The datestamp during the rally (in the martydom video) is inconsistent with the edits (including a scene dubbed in which later reverts to the dubbed over scene picking back up where it left off with the new date stamp - camcorders didn't work like this) but I can't find any 'official' sources which state this. Anybody who watches the video can see the inconsistent date stamp for themselves although that would fall under the umbrella of original research I guess. Either way, I think "The Road to Guantánamo" deserves mention since it is the same rally on the same day (according to the date stamp) from the same country that released the martyrdom video and in the same year in a partially fictitious docudrama film (at the 74 minute mark). Ryal-oh (talk) 22:02, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Was Mohamed Atta

Was Mohamed Atta living with his family in Birmingham, Alabama in 2001? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.211.255.221 (talk) 00:25, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

pure terror

Atta was the first face of terror that I came across ever since I was a child. I am seeing his face probably after 10 years today and the mere sight of him has brought back those drastic images of terror back to me. I read his message of 'expanding terror', i wonder how can a person feel gratification of absolutely any kind after having killed another human being. just how !!!!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.119.100.122 (talk) 05:54, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Mastermind

Atta was a coward, not mastermind. The first sentence should be rephrased. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.114.202.71 (talk) 19:26, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

That's the term used in reliable sources, not some sort of comment on how good or bad a person he is. In any event one could actually be both a mastermind and a coward--the two are not incompatible. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:13, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Mohamed Atta's father

• "Atta's father praises London bombs." (Archive) CNN. Wednesday July 20, 2005.

WhisperToMe (talk) 17:10, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Section titles

Is there a reason for using "Notes" as the section-title for the citations? I would have expected that to be called "References".

Along the same lines, is there a reason for using "References" as the section-title for the fullsize-books? I would have expected that to be called "Further Reading".

See WP:FNNR and WP:CITEVAR, which explicitly say this: "Editors may use any section title that they choose. ...unless there is consensus to change, defer to the style used by the first major contributor." Current section-titles seem different from what I would expect, but they are not wrong. And I'm not a stickler about "house style" everywhere. If nobody speaks up, then I'll mark this down as no-need-to-change-it.

Worth asking, though: anybody else think changing the section-titles, from notes-to-references, and from references-to-furtherReading, is worthwhile as an exercise in consistency? 74.192.84.101 (talk) 04:16, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

See also

Any objections to adding a See Also, to the article? There are some navboxen (for Al-Qaeda and War On Terror), but no actual See Also.

1. September 11 attacks (( there is already a navbox for the 9/11 hijackers... but not for the overall event ))
2. Aircraft hijacking
3. Suicide attack

These are just preliminary suggestions, I'd be happy to see better alternatives/additions. Thanks. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 04:16, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Atta and the CIA

Speculation exists that Atta was handled by the CIA and was used in Kosovo in an attempt to destabilize Milosovich. Claims of his devout Islamic faith have largely been fabricated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.82.92.150 (talk) 22:22, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 external links on Mohamed Atta. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090204193802/http://www.nytimes.com:80/2002/09/10/national/10PLOT.html?ex=1221624000&en=30bc6f683535b59f&ei=5070 to http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/10/national/10PLOT.html?ex=1221624000&en=30bc6f683535b59f&ei=5070
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081202180005/http://www.nytimes.com:80/2002/09/10/national/10PLOT.html?ei=5070&en=81b2bc66ebffd6b4&ex=1139374800 to http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/10/national/10PLOT.html?ei=5070&en=81b2bc66ebffd6b4&ex=1139374800
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140417114220/http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/10/national/10PLOT.html?pagewanted=all to http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/10/national/10PLOT.html?pagewanted=all

N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

• 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.

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.sptimes.com/2002/09/01/911/Florida__terror_s_lau.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070927193334/http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nationworld/bal-te.hijackers27jan27,0,3333483.story to http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nationworld/bal-te.hijackers27jan27,0,3333483.story
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110604182608/http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/custom/attack/bal-te.terror28jan28,0,6896536.story to http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/custom/attack/bal-te.terror28jan28,0,6896536.story

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:06, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Passport Cynicism

' When Atta returned, he claimed that his passport was lost and got a new one, which is a common tactic to erase evidence of travel to places such as Afghanistan. '

This encyclopedic article ought to state facts not cynicism. Beingsshepherd (talk) 16:02, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Mohamed Atta. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nationworld/bal-te.hijackers27jan27%2C0%2C3333483.story
• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5T7H27edX?url=http://www.archives.gov/legislative/research/9-11/staff-report-sept2005.pdf to http://www.archives.gov/legislative/research/9-11/staff-report-sept2005.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/custom/attack/bal-te.terror28jan28%2C0%2C6896536.story
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-uslugg274705186apr17%2C0%2C6096142.story?coll=ny-nationalnews-print

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) 13:47, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

EVIL

He is an evil man who deserves nothing but punishment. >:( — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:34D4:F390:F1E1:FD3A:AE27:EC7C (talk) 23:41, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Mohamed Atta. 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/20110607150225/http://www.911myths.com/index.php/File:Hijackers_Timeline_OCR.pdf to http://www.911myths.com/index.php/File:Hijackers_Timeline_OCR.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080228003140/http://old.911digitalarchive.org/crr/documents/1017.pdf to http://old.911digitalarchive.org/crr/documents/1017.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090207000314/http://www.coralsprings.com/frontpage2/attacoralsprings.htm to http://www.coralsprings.com/frontpage2/attacoralsprings.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051228121415/http://newsmine.org/archive/9-11/flight-schools/hijackers-traced-to-huffman-aviation.txt to http://newsmine.org/archive/9-11/flight-schools/hijackers-traced-to-huffman-aviation.txt
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080917063644/http://www.adl.org/rumors/atta_rumors.asp to http://www.adl.org/rumors/atta%5Frumors.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120216064401/http://www.dodig.mil/fo/foia/ERR/r_H05L97905217-PWH.pdf to http://www.dodig.mil/fo/foia/ERR/r_H05L97905217-PWH.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110929172646/http://www.militaryinfo.com/news_story.cfm?textnewsid=2149 to http://www.militaryinfo.com/news_story.cfm?textnewsid=2149

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) 13:05, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Mohamed Attas daughter marries Osama bin Ladens son

See here: http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/osama-bin-ladens-sohn-soll-tochter-von-mohammed-atta-geheiratet-haben-a-1221752.html and also https://www.cbsnews.com/news/osama-bin-laden-son-married-911-hijacker-daughter-reporter-says-today-2018-08-04/ Why is it not mentioned in the article that Mohamed Atta has a daughter? --2003:74:CF49:1D3D:B0BA:73D:BDC4:BDBE (talk) 20:12, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Umm..

So if Waleed al-Shehri and Wail al-Shehri was on flight 11, then why was Marwan al-Shehhi was on Flight 175? Bacrens (talk) 23:03, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Are you implying all three were brothers? Waleed and Wail were, but Marwan had no relation to either of them (and even his surname was different: al-Shehhi rather than al-Shehri.) --Ismail (talk) 07:02, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Article was renamed from "Mohamed Atta" to "Muhammad 'Atta"

I notice the article has been renamed, under the theory that the new name "Muhammad 'Atta" is more common than "Mohamed Atta". Certainly my reading on the subject has essentially always found it transliterated as Mohamed Atta. I have literally never seen a news or historical article use the other name. I don't even know what the apostrophe before Atta represents in Arabic. Any comments on this? Tarl N. (discuss) 03:35, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

The article rename has been undone, and under WP:BRD have reverted the massive changes to the article until discussion takes place here. Tarl N. (discuss) 05:33, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Ringleader vs. Planner and commander

I just reverted an edit changing the description of Atta from "Ringleader" to "Planner and operational commander". I find the change profoundly offensive - he was a mass murderer, and whitewashing descriptions of him is not appropriate. Any disagreements should be discussed here. Tarl N. (discuss) 02:40, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Copied from editor's talk page, so discussion can take place here:

Isn't a ringleader the same thing as a commander? I can't see how this whitewashes him, especially considering everything else that describes what he did in the article which would make any attempt to "whitewash" him futile without severe vandalization of the article. He is also described as a "commander" in the main Al-Qaeda article (September 11 attacks section, second paragraph, second line). In any case, the main point was to add "planner" to the section. I apologize if you found this edit offensive, and I will not revert your reversion, I will however ask if I can add back the "Planner", as he was heavily involved in the planning of the attack. Enginemen (talk) 13:44, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

No. Look the words up. Ringleader and commander are quite different words. One carries the explicit statement of criminal behaviour, the other carries the explicit statement of military command structure. Conflating criminal and military actions (which is characteristic of previous edits by you) is exactly what is so offensive. As for planner, that's implicit in ringleader - leading a criminal gang means planning their actions. The infobox is supposed to be concise, and the term "ringleader" is perfectly adequate, no need to go into great detail there when the rest of the article already has that information.Tarl N. (discuss) 00:55, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 19 August 2024

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.

---

Mohamed Atta → Mohammed Atta – WP:COMMONTERM spelling per:

• JSTOR: "Mohammed Atta" 478 results - "Mohamed Atta" 291 results
• Taylor & Francis: "Mohammed Atta" 161 results - "Mohamed Atta" 109 results
• Brill Publishers: "Mohammed Atta" 50 results - "Mohamed Atta" 22 results

And the list goes on. I would argue against "Mohamed Atta", "Muhammad Atta", "Mohammad Atta" etc. as alternatives since they have far lesser results than "Mohammed Atta", which is clearly the common spelling in WP:RS. Also, "Mohammed" for Atta is consistent with related al-Qaeda members such as Mohammed Atef, Mohammed Hamdi al-Ahdal, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed etc. Hoping for a quick move. Беарофчечьня (talk) 20:49, 19 August 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 13:31, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

See his driver's license, an image of which is in the article. He anglicized his name with a single M. Tarl N. (discuss) 01:09, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

See his other driver's license, in which Atta anglicized his name with double Ms as "Mohammed Atta". As is mentioned in the Aliases heading, he used several variants of his name such as Mohammad El Amir", "Muhammad Atta", "Mohammed Atta", "Mohamed Atta', "Mohamed El Sayed", "Mohamed Elsayed", "Muhammad al-Amir" etc. What matters here is WP:COMMONTERM and that is clearly "Mohammed Atta" as per WP:RS. Беарофчечьня (talk) 01:33, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Is that license real? It's in an article about a forged image, and it expires on 9-11-2001. That looks suspiciously like a faked image. Tarl N. (discuss) 05:45, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

And more importantly, I just checked the 9/11 commission report. It refers to him as Mohamed Atta. Tarl N. (discuss) 06:49, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, the 9/11 commission report does mention him as "Mohamed Atta", though Britannica uses "Mohammed Atta", Voice of America uses "Mohammed Atta", The Guradian uses "Mohammed Atta", Taylor & Francis, Brill, JSTOR have more results for "Mohammed Atta" than "Mohamed Atta" as highlighted above. Also, the public hearings of 9/11 commission report mention him as "Mohammed Atta". (Can be seen here). Nevertheless, "Mohammed Atta" still more common than "Mohamed Atta" as per the sources cited above. Беарофчечьня (talk) 14:51, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

As another data point, see Ngrams for "Mohammed Atta,Mohamed Atta,Muhammad Atta,Mohammad Atta" shows that Mohamed and Mohammed have always been quite close with Mohammed being somewhat more common until ~2014 when Mohamed passed it and has remained more common by a small amount.

I found in appendix A from the "Monograph on 9/11 and Terrorist Travel" from the "Staff Monographs" from the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, it includes two additional images of documents with the Mohamed spelling (direct PDF link): "Mohamed Atta’s U.S. visa issued in Berlin, Germany on May 18, 2000, 10 days after he acquired a new passport" and "Mohamed Atta’s revised immigration arrival record (I-94) created on May 2, 2001 at the Miami INS district office" (which appears to have been handwritten by Atta).

Theories on why 9/11 hijackers visited Las Vegas seems to have a copy of a motel receipt where he also wrote his name as "Mohamed".

I'll say we (meaning editors of Wikipedia) not in the business of debunking things really, but the "other" driver's license (with the Mohammend spelling) but as Tarl N. said it feels sketchy to me: I can't find it (happy to be proved wrong) in any official sources, just weird reuses and the older stories about it being used in ads. In particular, the expiration date being 9/11/01 and the issue date of 09/10/99 but I see no evidence in either our article on Atta or searching through the Commission report that Atta was ever in the United states in 1999, let alone that he tried to get a DL in that year. Furthermore, our article mentions that in 2000, On 16 April, Atta was given a citation for not having a valid driver's license, and he began steps to acquire one. (Also why would he bother to get the license that's in the 9/11 report issued on 5/2/01 if he already had a valid FL license? (This is an unanswerable question I know.)

I am not an expert in how such names are transliterated into English but given there are multiple valid choices, one particular region's (in this case British ngrams shows that British sources favored Mohammend more significantly than the American sources until about the 2014 switch over) preferred style should not overrule a version that is also (perhaps more so now) common and seems preferred by the subject. Skynxnex (talk) 21:36, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

I take my claim back for the other license; I found a post saying that it's a mockup. As you stated, "Mohammed Atta" was more common than "Mohamed Atta" for more than a decade until 2014, which, in my assessment, was probably due to the Wikipedia article being titled "Mohamed Atta". Беарофчечьня (talk) 18:14, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

I find most relevant the form that will be used in any legal documents relating to his crimes. That's Mohamed, since all interaction with the US and state governments took place using the single "M" form. Tarl N. (discuss) 22:38, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

I also find relevant the form used in legal governmental documents, which includes "Mohammed Atta" in U.S. Senate Intelligence, Office of Justice Programs, the State Department etc. Legal documents use different variants and we would have to go with the most common one which is clearly "Mohammed Atta" with two Ms. Беарофчечьня (talk) 18:14, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

It's not clearly the most common currently since ngrams provides a time-based view which shows their corpus has the one M variant being more common beginning in 2014. And when usages are at all close, we don't blindly go with WP:HITS. Skynxnex (talk) 18:45, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography/Serial Killer task force, WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, WikiProject Egypt, WikiProject Terrorism, WikiProject United States, and WikiProject Biography have been notified of this discussion. Aprilajune (talk) 02:20, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Comment: As I mentioned before, Atta varied his name in documents such as "Mehan Atta", "Mohammed Atta", "Mohamed Atta", "Muhammad Atta", "Mohammad El Amir", "Mohamed El Sayed", "Mohamed Elsayed", "Muhammad al-Amir", "Awag Al Sayyid Atta", and "Awad Al Sayad" etc. per the Sun Sentinel, which is a RS. Even if we assume that he only used the spelling "Mohamed", we would have to abide by WP:COMMONNAME, that states: "Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's official name as an article title; it generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable, English-language sources)" Беарофчечьня (talk) 18:14, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

I guess one of the questions I have is "why now?" There is certainly no statute of limitations on fixing mistakes (if it's a mistake), but why the urgency? The redirect Mohammed Atta->Mohamed Atta has existed unedited since 2006. Almost two decades later, it's suddenly become important to change the Wikipedia Article? What changed to justify "Hoping for a quick move."? Tarl N. (discuss) 20:51, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose I looked at three American official documents that Беарофчечьня said used "Mohammed Atta"in his/her post of 18:14, 21 August 2024 (UTC). Two used both spellings, and one uses the double "m" spelling (but only once). The only conclusion I can draw from this is that they used both spellings indiscriminately. There seems no reason for Wikipedia to change.-- Toddy1 (talk) 19:55, 26 August 2024 (UTC) (oppose "vote" added on 27 August)
• Oppose per my comments above about more recent usage and document analysis. Thought I had formally !voted earlier but apparently not. I'd also argue for potentially an early close of not moved. Skynxnex (talk) 15:00, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose I guess I'll add my pro-forma vote. I suspect this largely goes nowhere, this seems to have largely been an effort to be disruptive. The OP has vanished, as expected, after an SPI investigation started. Tarl N. (discuss) 22:54, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Date format

If someone wants to change the date format for this article, I think they should get consensus first. It is specially unhelpful to have part of the article in a changed format, but most of it in the already-in-use format.

I know that in 2005 the article was in American date format. The change from American date format to rest-of-world date format was done in this edit dated 21:52, 12 September 2023 (UTC) by 78.157.120.208 who wrote Date format has never been discussed. In Arabic, mdy is not used. He lived most of his life in an Arabic-speaking country. bin Ladens article is aslo written with the dmy format. Added template for American English.-- Toddy1 (talk) 18:16, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

The date format was changed without consensus by an IP editor about a year ago (making a simple click of an undo button impossible). This happens to be the longest, most in-depth article about the hijackers and I quickly found that fixing it back (pending any possible discussion about the format) was exhausting, so I stopped midway through without thinking about it. In any case it's tedious and boring enough, and my request to have a bot do it was denied (even though it would be useful in many other cases of flip-flopping date formats without discussion). For what it's worth, I've found the IP editor who insisted on the change was not even completely thorough, leaving some dates unchanged (on other hijackers' articles and likely this one too). I've already fixed several of the hijackers' articles back, but I'm bored and frustrated now, so I think I'm done. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 18:49, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

To elaborate on my reason for stopping after only changing five months' worth of dates (I use Quick Find in my browser and work through it January to December): One, as said, it was tedious and boring; two, I had hoped, again because this was implemented without consensus (also in conflict with the insistence on American English otherwise, a stipulation the IP even went so far as to add explicitly), I could pick up with it later or someone else would finish the job once it became apparent what I was doing. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 19:03, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Someone reverting your edit will not stop you picking up where you left off once you have got consensus.

But why do you think that an article on an Egyptian that uses rest-of-world date format ought to be changed to American date format? The IP editor gave a sensible reason for the change from American date format to rest-of-world date format. And he/she is correct in saying that the article on Osama Bin Laden uses rest-of-world date format.

The only reason you have mentioned is that the IP editor should have got consensus in September 2023. That would have been convincing a year ago, but no longer seems relevant.-- Toddy1 (talk) 19:06, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

That consensus is clearly not forthcoming so I'm not going to try for it, but perhaps it's worth pointing out this Egyptian is WP:NOTABLE solely for an event that happened in the United States, an event so major that its name is forever enshrined in history for the entire world in American format regardless of whether it's referred to by its long or short names. That's about the only reason I would put forward, and even then I don't expect it to be considered a strong argument. If the IP had not already been reverted elsewhere for similar changes to the other hijackers' articles, I would have let things ride here and not made any fuss about it. It's not what I personally think should be done, and I definitely believe it was done in good faith, but it simply seemed to me that it slipped through the cracks and by the time anyone noticed it, it had to be undone by hand. I don't personally care all that much, honestly; if we want it this way, that's fine. I simply was under the impression we didn't, but no one had said anything — even as a frequent reader and contributor to this topic area it took even me this long to notice. At the same time, I'm not acting in a vacuum; there is at least a tenuous rule of thumb that the date format should match the variety of English used in an article. I'm not the only one laboring under this impression, which led me to think it was a fairly uncontroversial change where my only error was stopping before I was done without explaining what I was doing right off. The IP's reasoning is one thing, but even a sound reason can be rejected by consensus, or for that matter a lack thereof. I never said anything about bin Laden's article; for the record, it would make sense for him since he was relevant for far more than merely being a belligerent against America. If Wikipedia had existed in the 90s, he would have already had his own article. (I've also never heard of a date format being insisted upon one way that didn't jive with the ENGVAR code inserted at the top of the page; I don't even have a strong opinion that American English is what we should use here, it's simply what we've been using here and the date format is, at best, uncommon in that flavor of English.) Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 19:25, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Let us see what other people think.-- Toddy1 (talk) 19:37, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Maybe compromise on ISO dates like 2001-Sep-11? (that's intended as humor). I'll agree with Zeke here. It doesn't matter where Atta spent his life, he's known entirely for a crime committed on American soil, which makes this an American article. Which in turn suggests MDY dates. Legal, media and historical documents in the US will tend to follow that pattern, so most of the references cited will more likely have that date pattern. Tarl N. (discuss) 05:46, 9 September 2024 (UTC)