Jump to content

Talk:Nuseirat rescue and massacre

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Merge but label it correctly

[edit]

While this allegedly was inteded to be a rescue operation (debatable considering israeli action over the past year). This was in fact a massacre, it is the only applicable term that accurately describes what occurred on the ground according to virtually all reputable reporting. Not labeling it as a massacre is simply disingenuous and dangerous. The level of civilian casualties exceeded 100 civilians. The dictionary desribes the term as "an indiscriminate and brutal slaughter of people" That is an accurate description of the events on the ground. It is important, not just from a morality perspective but also from a historical perspective. Let's make these decisions just based off of actual events instead of projecting biases. Andy chacha (talk) 13:50, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

if merged, it is basically Wikipedia saying that it views Palestinians as subhumans who the mass killing of hundreds isn’t even worthy of being called a massacre or acknowledged, and that the lives of 4 Israelis have priority over 250 Palestinians. The merge should have been the other way around, but Wikipedia doesn’t consider bombing 100 Palestinians civilians as they pray at dawn to be a “massacre” so it’s really hopeless with this kind of admin and moderators The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 14:43, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
that is as unfortunate as it is shameful. I guess the hasbara field in occupied palestine is operating at full capacity for this to occur. My impression had been that Wikipedia had been combating that however I guess I am mistaken. I guess if this isn't going to be a place of factual reference, then my continued support of this website is a waste of time and resources. Thank you for the heads up, I appreciate it. Andy chacha (talk) 16:49, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Andy chacha@The Great Mule of Eupatoria. Please join the discussion below. Also, even if you don't perfectly agree with the proposed title, please do indicate if you think its better than the current title.VR (Please ping on reply) 19:27, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Which two different articles were merged?
הראש (talk) 10:48, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Abu Obaida's claim of retaliation

[edit]

In response to a question left on my talk page:

  1. It's always preferable to use a reference that has a specific number over a reference that doesn't
  2. MOS:CLAIM is not a prohibition on the use of the word "claim". In my opinion, since the claim is unsubstantiated, the word "claim" is proper. However, I am open to a discussion on whether a different word would be more appropriate.

--The Mountain of Eden (talk) 03:01, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As I've noted in my edit summary, both sides are entitled to their claims, per NPOV. Evidence doesn't really come into it, because both parties in this conflict are guilty of producing grossly unevidenced and spurious statements. Iskandar323 (talk) 05:27, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How is this addition not a duplication of the paragraph that is already in the article two paragraphs below? It talks about the exact same people doing the exact same thing (Abu Obaida making a claim and Peter Lerner dismissing the claim). --The Mountain of Eden (talk) 07:24, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My mistake. Got muddled. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:32, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Death Count Claims Question

[edit]

Hello. Curious. What is the argument for the use of this sentence: "The Israeli military acknowledged fewer than 100 Palestinian deaths." The sentence plainly suggests that the number of dead is not disputed, and that Israel only "acknowledges" a fraction of them. Seems to me, this is just a case of contrary claims, routinely handled at WP with equal weight. Under what editing policy are editors permitted to decide which claims are more valid than others? Thx. Johnadams11 (talk) 02:11, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For interest, I don't read acknowledged the same way as you perhaps because of the context, the "according to the Gaza Health Ministry and Palestinian health officials" attribution that precedes it. But maybe the word estimated from the BBC source is better from the statement "Israel estimated there were fewer than 100 casualties". Sean.hoyland (talk) 07:19, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Sean.hoyland Exactly. Thanks. "Estimated" is an enormous improvement. Johnadams11 (talk) 16:16, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 January 2025

[edit]

Change opening paragraph language to be more neutral. Change: "On 8 June 2024, during an operation to rescue hostages held in the Nuseirat refugee camp, the Israeli military killed at least 276 people and injured over 698, according to the Gaza Health Ministry and Palestinian health officials.[b][12] The operation's objective was to recover hostages taken during the 7 October Hamas-led attack on Israel. The Israeli military acknowledged fewer than 100 Palestinian deaths.[13][14][15]"

To: "On 8 June 2024, the Israeli military successfully carried out a mission to rescue four Israeli hostages kidnapped by Gazan militants and held at the Nuseirat refugee camp. The Gaza Health Ministry and Palestinian health officials claim at least 276 Gazans were killed during the operation, though the IDF claims Palestinian deaths were fewer than 100." Gmotola (talk) 07:23, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit extended-protected}} template. 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 09:39, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Abo Yemen You may know that an editor cannot start an RFC in a topic covered by WP:ECR until they are extended-confirmed. Johnadams11 (talk) 18:08, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
They cant? The page is unprotected tho 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 18:24, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Abo Yemen Enforcement of ECR is often manual. This is a lesson I had to learn the hard way. See here, under technical limitations. Also, here, under "Resolution Path for ECR Topics." Johnadams11 (talk) 19:07, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yeah mb. I don't think that the first sentences of the lede are going to change anytime soon tho because the new wording sounds like it's on the side of praising the IDF "the Israeli military successfully carried out a mission to rescue four Israeli hostages kidnapped by Gazan militants" 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 07:17, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Claim they were beaten

[edit]

This needs to be removed as this was a lie. One of the hostages even said that her words were twisted and was not beaten. Even the sources listed retracted those statements later 2600:1008:B0C5:F2AE:1C17:241E:8DEE:1E41 (talk) 03:13, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nuseirat_rescue_and_massacre&oldid=1272208926"