This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic.
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard.
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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death 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.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania 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.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pittsburgh, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pittsburgh and its metropolitan area 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.PittsburghWikipedia:WikiProject PittsburghTemplate:WikiProject PittsburghPittsburgh articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
A news item involving Attempted assassination of Donald Trump in Pennsylvania was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 14 July 2024.
Wikipedia
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:
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.
The result of the move request was: moved. This move request has been lingering in the backlog for a while so I will go ahead and close the discussion. When the discussion first started, there were several editors who wanted to wait to see the outcome of the of the requested move of the other assassination attempt and to wait and see if the other attempt would even be categorized as such. Now that time has passed, and the other article was moved, editors here primarily supported to complete the move here. The main point that the opposition brought up is that this article is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and the title should remain without the further disambiguation. They also noted that the requested title does not include the year and there were other proposed names that added it to the title. The supporters largely countered by stating that the new title is supported by WP:PRECISE and WP:TWODABS and, now that the other article was moved, is WP:CONSISTENT with each other. Whether calling the other incident an assassination attempt falls out of favor in the future or is forgotten is to be seen, and if so, this move can be revisited. For now, in this current discussion, there is a clear consensus to move the article to Attempted assassination of Donald Trump in Pennsylvania. (non-admin closure) cyberdog958Talk04:16, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. SS Director just said he never had a line of sight. Does that mean it was attempted( especially since he never shot? It’s hard to say. But it must be some sort of Wikipedia page, REGARDLESS. Possible “Threats to Donald Trumps life”? IEditPolitics (talk) 21:35, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Obviously we have to differentiate between the two assassination attempts. They're both absolutely deserving of their own independent article.
Mild Support: I see the recentism argument but when people search for the current title they're more likely to be searching for the second attempt which is being called an attempt pretty widely. Jtrrs0 (talk) 12:51, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: the location of the events seems irrelevant and does not help the reader clearly find this article vs. the other one, unless they already know detailed information about where each event took place. The dates each event took place are much more sensible for disambiguation. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 13:37, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support there was recently another attempted assassination on Donald Trump which happened at a golf club just a couple of days ago, but waiting for confirmation on wether if it was targeted at Donald Trump or not, so will wait until any reliable sources confirm it. Overall, I support the name change. PEPSI697 (💬 • 📝) 07:49, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
YES, CHANGE IT. It makes ZERO sense for it to just be called “Assassination attempt of Donald Trump” or whatever the article is called, when there have been TWO OF THEM. And only a month apart. I don’t get why there’s a debate on this. Eg224 (talk) 16:06, 26 September 2024 (UTC) Eg224 (talk) 16:08, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per proposal. For the sake of readers, it's imperative to different both assassination attempts. Nevertheless, we need to wait until this second attempt is widely comfirmed. The FBI claim is not sufficient enough.
Wait I haven't even seen that a shot was fired. Most likely it was an attempt. But this is an encyclopedia, not a Breaking News site. Patience. O3000, Ret. (talk) 00:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Dates are better than states, people won't really know the locations as much as the time, they will know one came after the other, however. MarkiPoli (talk) 06:14, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Too early - while the incident in Florida is being described as an assassination attempt, it is still to early to determine whether or not this will no longer be the primary topic or not. There is a strong possibility that the Pennsylvania incident will be what most people associate with when they hear "Trump assassination attempt." Bneu2013 (talk) 02:00, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: As per WP:Precise and WP:NOYEAR, I strongly agree that the name change must include the month and year of the events occurrence, to disambiguate between the two. I would recommend the name change to something more along the lines of July 2024 Attempted Assassination of Donald Trump, rather than the proposed. It is easier to tell the chronological order of the events in the title, and it is also easier to get quick context from the event in the title, being the most precise. Using the state, or even state and town name, could leave people confused by clicking on the wrong article when they wanted to view the first one instead of the second one. Furthermore, multiple news sources have stated that the FBI has deemed the September 2024 incident as an attempted assassination, as per AP News (being one of the most reliable news sources). Best, Zeke (talk) 02:26, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adding 'in Pennsylvania' does no harm and addresses the fact that today's event is being widely referred to as an 'assassination attempt'. Readers coming here on a search for information about it should be presented with a clear and disambiguated article title, and not be expected to read hat notes to know they're not at the article they were expecting. Marcus Markup (talk) 02:36, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcus Markup: how do you feel about the disambiguation being the date (July 2024 vs September 2024) rather than location (in Pennsylvania vs in Florida)? Whether they should be disambiguated is one question, how they should be is another. I suggested date separation above, and would like to know if there are any issues with that suggestion. Unnamed anon (talk) 02:48, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That would be fine. However the title gets disambiguated, that would be great. At the moment, though, I am supporting this proposal. It is not how I would phrase it, but it's better than what it is now by a mile, and I am not going to let the search for perfection get in the way of the good. Marcus Markup (talk) 03:07, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion, it should be one or the other of date or location, not both. I'm not opposed to location either, despite suggesting date, I just personally think date would be more helpful in knowing which came first. Unnamed anon (talk) 02:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's how I feel about it as well. Date typically is the better way to disambiguate something like this than location, as the person looking for the article would more than likely be reading in chronological order rather than by what happened where Best, Zeke (talk) 02:54, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per comments from Personisinsterest. This event will go down in history as THE attempted assassination of Donald Trump, I would describe today's event as a security incident. The best course of action in my opinion would be to keep the current title (or perhaps add a date) and then have a hatnote directed at today's incident. GMH Melbourne (talk) 03:34, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think what makes this event more significant is the fact that Donald Trump was actually wounded. I'd speculate also that in 50 years time, when people refer to the assassination attempt of Donald Trump they would be referring to the time he was shot in the ear instead of a security incident on a golf course. GMH Melbourne (talk) 03:57, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support There are now two attempts and both are notable for standalone articles. This is based on the FBI stating they were investigating the incident as an attempted assassination. Any incident deemed by the FBI an assassination attempt of a former president warrants a standalone article as such events are extremely notable. 24.21.161.89 (talk) 05:08, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I still stand by my previous !vote that this is too early. However, considering that the suspect in the Florida incident does not appear to have fired or attempted to fire at Trump, is there a chance that incident should be described as an "assassination plot" and not an "assassination attempt?" Other articles use this terminology. Bneu2013 (talk) 05:10, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well let's see here. He was observed pointing a high power rifle into the golf club and the rifle had a long distance scope and lots of 7.62 ammo (7.62 is a large caliber round, by comparison the M16 rifle is 2.37) and Trump was playing golf at the time. He was armed with a military style assault rifle and not a hunting rifle, so it's clear he was probably not hunting geese or ducks, but Trump. I see no other explanation. Secret Service wisely fired on him and he fled and left the weapon behind. I am fairly confident this was an assassination attempt whether or not he succeeded in wounding or killing Trump or getting off a shot. In this attempt, secret service did their job. The FBI has announced it was an assassination attempt and the facts seem to bear this out. Waiting until there are more complete sources stating this certainly won't hurt but at this point I think we can logically conclude this was an attempted assassination. 24.21.161.89 (talk) 05:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Putting any type of politics aside, it is very clear that this was an attempted assassination attempt on someone, presumably Trump, but only time will tell with any investigation conclusion. But yes, you would not hunt geese in a bush with an AK-47 (think of AR or AK as a gun of military power) (AK's are the Russian AR's), you would hunt geese from a forest that isn't super dense, or field with a hunting rifle, an AK-47 would destroy the goose. However, when armed with an AK-47 and sitting in a bush, you are most likely hunting wild Trump in their natural habitat, especially when one is 400 yards away from you. Best, Zeke (talk) 05:33, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, recentism aside, this is still the primary topic as it was the only assassination attempt in which shots were actually fired at Trump. Also, if we need to disambiguate both, we should use the months (July 2024 and September 2024) rather than the states they took place in – the only reason we use the states to disambiguate Ford's two assassination attempts is because they took place in the same month. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 07:24, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Most sources now say the suspect did not fire a shot. Most likely this was an assassination attempt. But wouldn't it be nice if an encyclopedia waited to know what was actually going on as opposed to trying to beat some imaginary competition? O3000, Ret. (talk) 20:34, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait. The overwhelming term being used to describe the September 15 incident is "attempted assassination attempt" (see for instance CNN, AP, Washington Post, NYT, NPR, CBS, NBC). This would imply that disambiguation of some form is necessary, and the question is whether there's a clear primary topic between the two events. It's difficult to make that call in the immediate aftermath. There's some decent logic for presuming this will remain the primary topic, but right now it's really impossible to say (and hard to say where Trump International Golf Club shooting will wind up, for that matter; there's an RM open on that page too). Dylnuge(Talk • Edits)01:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Whoops! I just meant "assassination attempt", though my brain apparently merged that in with "attempted assassination". "Apparent" definitely appears in many sources too (though not all my linked ones; WaPo uses "potential" and NYT and NBC both don't use an adjective at all). Dylnuge(Talk • Edits)12:37, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose Is that really the best we can come up with? Attempted assassination of Donald Trump in Pennsylvania? I would much rather support the July 2024 Attempted assassination of Donald Trump than that. Although at the exact same time, this is the most infamous assassination attempt on Donald Trump. The recent attempt has no causalities and is very much on par with the 2016 Las Vegas incident. Every other assassination attempt article has a title similar to this page. It would be ridiculous to rename this page due to an extremely recent event. It's just embarrassing seeing that 90% of the support for the name change is failing to understand that the recent incident is nothing unusual. Trump has survived 6 assassination attempts. Look at how many attempts other presidents have survived and see how only the ones which caused casualties get this treatment. This attempt is on par with those attempts in that regard, while the recent attempt is not. Therefore, this change is not only unnecessary, but poorly runs off the tongue. MountainJew6150 (talk) 02:41, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Trump has survived 6 assassination attempts... you say, while defending having this article title phrased as if there were but one. I admit: I am completely perplexed by your logic. Marcus Markup (talk) 02:49, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The only shots fired were by Secret Service. We don't have articles on the "attempted assassination of Barack Obama" when Taylor Taranto was arrested near his home with bomb-making equipment. Guy (help! - typo?) 17:36, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - RSS are using "apparent assassination attempt", simply assuming the incident in Florida is an assassination attempt without RSS verification is pure OR. I also agree with JzG's above comment.--estar8806 (talk) ★19:38, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation is only required for the other article. This article is evidently still the primary topic for "Attempted assassination of Donald Trump", so it doesn't have to move anywhere. The other article can be (and already is) linked from a hatnote. CFA💬23:59, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Per WP:TWODABS, “if an ambiguous term has no primary topic, then that term needs to lead to a disambiguation page.” So here. Each assassination attempt is equally significant, and it’s equally likely that someone searching this term will be looking for the Florida incident as compared with the Pennsylvania incident. Anythingyouwant (talk) 02:15, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support Not wild about the proposed new name, but there have now been two confirmed assassination attempts. We need to differentiate them. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:38, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ad Orientem: what new name would you propose? Some users, including me, have suggested differentiating them by date (July and September), but I'm wondering if you have an idea that might be better. Unnamed anon (talk) 04:36, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There was an attempt in 2016 too. It is not still considered important, and the golf course incident won't be either. In ten years, when someone hears the term "Attempted assassination of Donald Trump", they will think of the time someone actually shot him. QuicoleJR (talk) 11:09, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ridiculous to keep debating: Change it already. It doesn't matter how you refer to it as long as it makes it clear. Then once it is changed, everyone can have another debate about whether to change it to something else - if you really must. It is detrimental that this is not being referred to in an unambiguous way. Everyone thinks about both incidents in the same category of things.Quadrow (talk) 18:47, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Now that the incident that occurred in Florida has been charged as an assassination attempt moving this article and replacing it with a disambiguation page makes the most sense. Kcmastrpc (talk) 11:32, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For some more on-wiki evidence as to why this is the primary topic, Attempted assassination of Donald Trump in Florida has had 180 000 page views in the past 30 days. Attempted assassination of Donald Trump had 1.5 millionpage views on July 14th alone (over 4.5 million now). Anecdotally, I'm Canadian, and the one time I heard about the Florida attempt off-wiki was during a 5-minute CBC News segment on the day it happened. Never heard about it again (in contrast to the July attempt, which took up the entire evening news block and was talked about well into the end of the month). I really don't see how anyone could argue that the Florida attempt (comparable to the 2016 incident) is as significant as the July attempt. But I digress. CFA💬01:47, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Because of enough similarities disambiguation is preferable. Twice a lone gunman was able to get up close to Trump on a public place with swift actions requiring from the Secret Service. Sidney.Cortez (talk) 03:15, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are we seriously going to argue that the attempt where Trump was actually shot (and where someone died) is not the primary topic in terms of long-term significance...? CFA💬21:16, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, a lot of the support !votes are weak. By many of the same arguments, we should give equal weight to the 2016 incident (which probably next to no one remembers). Although there is no way to determine whether or not this will always be the case, I think it has been demonstrated that the Pennsylvania incident is the primary topic. Just the pageviews on the day of the incidents (1.5 million vs 82k) demonstrate how these were fundamentally different. Bneu2013 (talk) 05:34, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per WP:PRECISE. The generic title fails to identify where and in what context the assassination attempt occurred. The FBI has charged the culprit behind the golf course attempt as an assassination attempt so it makes sense to differentiate the two articles. No need to wait any longer the move request should be speedily made. Please close this rename discussion it's been here for 15 fays, more than enough time to see what happens. 24.21.161.89 (talk) 23:18, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support for the clear factual reason that Trump experienced two assassination attempts, one in Pennsylvania, and one soon after in Florida. Thus, they need differentiation. Why are we even debating this any longer? TheKingLives (talk) 22:13, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support because the existing title is too generic, and as there have now been two assassination attempts within a two-month period of one another on the same person, though they occurred in two different states, I think it's time we change the title of this article to reflect that this one is about the assassination attempt in Pennsylvania. Unknown0124 (talk) 17:59, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Corey Comperatore, the man who was killed by Mr. Crooks in the assassination attempt, should be split into his own article just like Thomas Delahanty, a victim of the Ronald Reagan shooting who would otherwise not have his own article (even if he was not murdered). DementiaGaming (talk) 20:27, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The only way we're going to find out if it fails BLP1E is to create the article and see if the community decides to keep it. There was a deletion discussion regarding Thomas Delahanty based on BLP1E, and while it wasn't much of a discussion, the result was keep. Kcmastrpc (talk) 20:37, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 October 2024
Given that time has passed since my initial request some months ago, I'd like to bring up this subject again. Speaking strictly on facts, this event can be considered a mass shooting according to several definitions (which are utilised across Wikipedia), including the definitions set by the Gun Violence Archive, Vox, and the Stanford University MSA Data Project. More importantly, since the shooting, several reliable sources have, one way or another, referred to this event a mass shooting, or referred to Crooks as a mass shooter. See the contents of the following:
This is not every article, but I think this is more than enough to allow categories such as Category:Mass shootings in the United States. These articles could be inserted into the article for referencing if people agree with this proposal. Previous discussions of this concept were met with opposition due to lack of reliable sources calling this event a mass shooting, so I compiled this small list of a variety of global, national and local news sources which do so. It is worth noting that this event is already classified as a mass shooting on the article List of mass shootings in the United States in 2024. Additionally, within this article, under Motive, it is already stated that this shooting fits some definitions of a mass shooting.
In other discussions of this nature, it has been argued that Crooks was likely only targeting Trump, so categorising the event as a 'mass shooting' is inappropriate, but this would be original research (WP:OR) as Crooks' entire motives and intentions have not been confirmed. Macxcxz (talk) 02:34, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 31 October 2024
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Change:
A previous attempt at violence toward Trump during one of his rallies happened in 2016, when a man attempted to grab a security officer's gun at a rally outside of Las Vegas.[27]
To:
A previous attempt at violence toward Trump during one of his rallies happened in 2016, when a man attempted to grab a police officer's gun at a rally outside of Las Vegas.[27]
Source is the in the linked (27) news article. The "security" officer was in fact a Las Vegas Metropolitan Police officer, on duty providing assistance to the Secret Service. 72.5.34.1 (talk) 09:53, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The lead paragraph currently states that Trump was "shot", based on a RfC. However, that RfC predates the FBI report - currently cited in the article via a NYT article - that states that Trump was either grazed by a bullet or by a fragment thereof i.e. it is unclear whether he was actually shot. While a number of sources use that phrasing, most predate that report. Cortador (talk) 10:49, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think this depends on your definition of "shot". A bullet was fired at him and hit him - to some extent - so I think 'shot' is appropriate. Macxcxz (talk) 11:32, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This has already been debated ad nauseam. The FBI confirmed that Trump was shot by a bullet, either whole or in part. Any discussion beyond that is useless semantics. "Shot" is completely appropriate:
"to wound or kill (a person or animal) with a bullet, arrow, etc., that is shot from a weapon"
A bullet fragment is part of a bullet. Just so it's extra clear for you, being grazed by a bullet is a more specific subset of being shot by a bullet i.e. if you were grazed by a bullet, then by definition you were shot by a bullet. MightyLebowski (talk) 01:15, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
