Talk:2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 November 2023

It appears that the numbers of victims of this attack are incorrect in terms of total number of deaths as attributed to death certificates/formally confirmed casualties based on Haaretz reporting of 900. It try also under represents the volume of Israeli soldiers/police combatant casualties based on Haaretz reports. Moreover it reportedly shows the numbers of Hamas militant combatants deaths at around 1400 when this is not fully and definitively verified with full referent to the individuals. There is the implication in this article that the 1400 militant combatant deaths DO NOT count in the Gazan death toll whilst the Israeli soldier/police combatant deaths DO count in the Israeli death toll. 2A00:23C7:5FDE:5201:2DAF:8D78:DA78:D615 (talk) 22:00, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Seawolf35 (talk - email) 14:44, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Widness

https://news.walla.co.il/item/3621425 2.55.181.130 (talk) 17:46, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

The police collected:
https://mobile.mako.co.il/news-military/6361323ddea5a810/Article-649c6c3579fab81027.htm?sCh=31750a2610f26110&pId=173113802 2.55.181.130 (talk) 18:41, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 1 November 2023

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: page not moved. The oppose arguments have brought up the point that this is a changing event by the day and lots of sources refer to a lot of different dates. (non-admin closure) Seawolf35 (talk - email) 16:26, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

2023 Hamas attack on Israel → October 7 Hamas attack on Israel – See WP:COMMONAME Update:

Parham wiki (talk) 17:37, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

  • I agree, October 7 is emerging as the more common name. Marokwitz (talk) 19:55, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Strong Oppose - obviously October 7 is going to be the common name as of now because it's still the same year. estar8806 (talk) ★ 20:33, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
@Estar8806: See WP:CRISTAL Parham wiki (talk) 23:56, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
Could be CRYSTAL, could be WP:COMMONSENSE. In any case, the proposed title fails 4/5 of the WP:CRITERIA. The proposed name is less recognizable (readers are certainly going to know the year, but will they know the exact date?). It's less precise (October 7 could be in any given year). It's less concise (barely, and not that it really matters). And, it's less consistent. I simply think it's too soon to deem this a WP:NOYEAR situation. estar8806 (talk) ★ 03:51, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Strong oppose , I strongly oppose this proposal because this conflict taken place throughout multiple days, not a single day, so no reason to rename it October 7.
Ku423winz1 (talk) 16:53, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
@Ku423winz1: In infobox:
Date
7 October 2023 Parham wiki (talk) 17:21, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Move to something as the current title isn't specific enough. Maybe 2023 Hamas surprise attack on Israel, the phrase "surprise attack" being frequently used in sources. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 17:54, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
    It's a descriptive name because there isn't a commonname. Selfstudier (talk) 18:16, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Support. Current title is way too vague. natemup (talk) 18:49, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Support. A shift has defintely occurred in sources to naming it the October 7 attack or attack on October 7. Yeoutie (talk) 17:05, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Oppose move. You can bet your britches that this is the Primary topic if you're comparing all of the 2023 attacks of Hamas on Israel. Name is sufficiently accurate. PhotogenicScientist (talk) 22:53, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
So what is WP:COMMONAME? Parham wiki (talk) 07:35, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
The original name (operation al aqsa flood) shouldn’t have been changed, the military operation had a name so it’s best to use that The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 08:15, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Support per Yeoutie Undescribed (talk) 19:16, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Oppose Current descriptive name is fine, there is no commonname available. Sources mention dates for lots of events, not just this one. That sources sometimes mention a specific date is merely because it is recent. Selfstudier (talk) 19:29, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
    @Selfstudier: So what about the September 11 attacks? Also see WP:CRYSTAL Parham wiki (talk) 20:33, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
    What about them? I am not making any predictions. Selfstudier (talk) 23:16, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Support October 7 has become a common name like the January 6 United States Capitol attack. JJARichardson (talk) 19:02, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
    Evidence? As has been pointed out, it took place on multiple days. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:16, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose: Nah. Too early to determine a common name here, and the proposal isn't truly a common name suggestion, but just an alternative descriptive title with a supposed common name element. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:18, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
'Weak support I do support October 7 in the name per WP:COMMONNAME, but should be October 7 attack on Israel or October 7 attacksJoaquinazo (talk) 21:21, 8 November 2023 (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.

"Israeli police raided a mosque"

there are 1000s of mosques - shouldn't more detail be provided given that al-Aqsa is quite a well known mosque eg "raided the al-Aqsa mosque" with a link to the al-sqsa site 82.11.163.59 (talk) 18:40, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Problem with Template

When the Template of the 2023 Israel–Hamas war casualties is added, a error appear in the page that show the aftermath of the current war until 11 November. The current article covers the events on 7 October.Mr.User200 (talk) 02:32, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Just discovered the issue, someone have created a Template named Template:2023 Israel–Hamas war casualties with two paragraphs of the overall caualties of the war until now, today 11 November and placed the Template on many articles.Mr.User200 (talk) 02:42, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Documents found on the bodies of Hamas militants

The following text appears in this article:

Documents later found on killed Hamas militants revealed extensive study of communities and army bases near the Gaza-Israel border, and the intent to inflict as many civilian casualties and capture as many hostages as possible.[1][1][2]

My understanding is that these documents remain unverified by any credible third party source (and, while this is not particularly reliable, I have seen the idea that Hamas militants carried immaculately printed stapled together documents on listing explicit instructions to commit war crimes widely mocked. That is, of course, though, not at all encyclopedic, or in any way reliable). The story seems first to have been broken by NBC news, as seen here, https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1712945098164518999. There is a lot of criticism in the replies to the story, questioning the reliability (and the NBC story itself makes no claim to independent verification). Again, though, twitter replies are not reliable sources. So I'm providing that context as a starting point, not making claims to be able to make an objective assessment here.

I have not made any edits because I am not sure the best way to handle this. It seems to me, that, if this is included in this article at all, it deserves proper contextualisation which it currently lacks. Also, perhaps it would be more appropriate to include it in the "media coverage" section of the article rather than the "background" at this stage (or punted to the "media coverage of" article itself). I remain unsure on all counts: whether it belongs in this article, if so where, and how best to proper contextualise it. And for that reason, I have made no edits, and leave this comment on the talk page so that perhaps a more experienced wikipedia editor can use their best judgement and take the appropriate action. --Tomatoswoop (talk) 18:39, 9 November 2023 (UTC) Tomatoswoop (talk) 18:39, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

The claims should certainly be couched. It seems little secondary analysis has been done on this. And this amid a conflict swamped in misinformation where forged documents is a tactic. Iskandar323 (talk) 05:12, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
@Tomatoswoop: agreed and attributed.VR talk 05:10, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ a b Schecter, Anna (14 October 2023). "'Top secret' Hamas documents show that terrorists intentionally targeted elementary schools and a youth center". NBC News. Archived from the original on 14 October 2023. Retrieved 14 October 2023.
  2. ^ "Documents found on fighters reveal Hamas capabilities, bloody plans". Washington Post.

Killings of Israeli civilians by the IDF

Article doesn't seem to mention the killings of Israeli citizens by the IDF during the battle. I can't edit it myself as I do not fit the edit count required yet. [1] Bill3602 (talk) 22:39, 9 November 2023 (UTC) If this source is not notable enough I sincerely apologise.--Bill3602 (talk) 22:40, 9 November 2023 (UTC)--Bill3602 (talk) 22:40, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

The volume of reporting on this has been low. This Middle East Monitor piece looks at it a bit, and there was a confirmed friendly fire incident on the Lebanon on 9 October. There's not much more. Iskandar323 (talk) 05:17, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
This is the source of the claims, and its written by Max Blumenthal, who is a distinguished journalist. But we'd need more sources to pick up on this for it to be WP:DUE.VR talk 05:13, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Yes, the information is starting to percolate through. This is the thin end of the wedge. More mainstream sources and WP:RSP will presumably get there in the end, but on a delay. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:13, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
With all due respect, Max Blumenthal is not a distinguished journalist. He is a blogger and a propagandist. He is known as an advocate for authoritarian regimes like the Chinese, Russian, Syrian, and Venezuelan governments. Cullen328 (talk) 08:20, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
I think we're all in agreement that the source is not usable on its own - it's been deprecated. At the same time, Blumenthal is just repeating information already out there. Iskandar323 (talk) 10:43, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Indeed, Blumenthal is unreliable. Andre🚐 08:25, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

No Palestinian Civilian Death Toll

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/pressure-israel-over-civilians-steps-up-ceasefire-calls-rebuffed-2023-11-06/ 70.54.133.161 (talk) 18:59, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

There is no data on Palestinian civilian casualties as the Gaza Ministry of Health doesn't provide this breakdown. Alaexis¿question? 19:23, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
This seems to come up repeatedly. This article is about the initial Hamas attack/raid, not the entire war. Palestinian casualties for the most part came after that, and are mentioned in the main article about the war Averell (talk) 11:07, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 November 2023

Why dont you comment on the Israel rampage of northern and southern Gaza. The genocide of an entire population? One sided cuck journalistic entry. 2A10:D582:1E94:0:43CA:16F4:A188:88C9 (talk) 13:33, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 14:29, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Hamas hit people at gaza

https://www.zman.co.il/live/437639/ You need to add at war article 2.55.173.42 (talk) 20:58, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Partly unsubstantiated orders and missing civilian response

While there were civilian executions, Hamas' orders to mutilate and rape seem unsubstantiated. The sentence "the subjects said they were ordered to kill, behead, cut off limbs and rape" references an article by the potentially biased paper Times of Israel on the interrogation of captured Hamas members.

According to the paper, the order to "cut off [limbs]" was recalled by a subject wearing a stained white shirt. However, according to the publicly available video that subject (identifying himself as Ahmad) does not explicitly mention such things. Instead he states that his mission was "kidnapping" (1:50 mark). The commander added "killing young men" (1:30 mark). Mutilation seems only mentioned in a long sentence by his interrogator (2:00 mark). In the video no captive mentions having received orders to mutilate or rape. Therefore the orders of "behead", "cutting limbs" and rape seem at present unsubstantiated and should be removed. This is not a detail, as it appears to be currently exploited to justify disproportionate response.

Furthermore, in the same video interrogation, captured Hamas subjects also recalled instances of some civilians returning fire and launching grenades from inside buildings (6:30 mark) in Kibbutz Be'eri. That should also be indicated in this page as it might have further increased the number of civilian casualties. ED3202 (talk) 15:07, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

It is not a conflict it's a war

Israel declared War on October 7th Swords of Iron. It is not mentioned. Also, I noticed that in other languages it is described as a "conflict". Let's use the exact terminology of those topic as it might be incorrect understanding. Yanna1512 (talk) 06:50, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Nope. Israel declared war on 8 October, and war is a form of conflict. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:55, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
Incorrect. The prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared the war on October 7th. A war is not a conflict. You wouldn't call American- Afghanistan conflict, right? Same here. Please use the correct terminology. The Hebrew version I accurate, but the English isn't! Yanna1512 (talk) 14:37, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
War in Afghanistan (2001–2021) — “The War in Afghanistan was an armed conflict from 2001 to 2021”, literally the first sentence. I don’t think you know what a war is. P.S. funny you mention the Hebrew version being “accurate”, when, in fact, they perm block people who changed “Israel occupation army” to “Israel Defense Forces”. Hebrew Wiki and English Wiki have different criteria for how things are named and called. On English Wiki (and almost every other Wiki), a “war” is a type of “conflict”. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 14:45, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
You seem very unprofessional to me. Yanna1512 (talk) 14:47, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
Here is the chain of events/terms: 2023 Hamas attack on Israel & 2023 Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip are part of the 2023 Israel–Hamas war which is part of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict which is part of the Arab–Israeli conflict. Conflicts describe the overall event and war describes the individual “wars”. A war is an armed conflict. That should help clear up the terminology difference. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 14:53, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
Thank you! Yanna1512 (talk) 15:08, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
@WeatherWriter: What you reference is Arabic wiki, not Hebrew. Most Arabic countries do not recognize Israel as a country so it is indeed neutral according to Arabic language sources. English sources do not matter on other wikis. What happened to you staying out of the topic for a while as you said? Noah, AATalk 15:38, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Hebrew version vs English version

The Hebrew version mentions that the Hamas terror attacked was Crime against Humanity and War crimes. The English version doesn't mention that. Yanna1512 (talk) 06:45, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

The fourth paragraph: "Widespread civilian deaths have led to both Israel and Hamas being accused of war crimes. The United Nations reported that around 1.5 million Palestinians, over 70% of Gaza's population, as well as over 200,000 Israelis have been internally displaced. There are acute shortages of drinking water, food and fuel in Gaza. The Gazan health system is failing; more than half of all hospitals are out of service due to shortages of fuel and power, and medical surgeries like C-sections and amputations are being performed without anesthetic due to shortages of medical supplies. The war has led to widespread global protests that have focused on a variety of issues including demands for a ceasefire, and the release of hostages. Pro-Palestinian anti-war protests in particular have been described as the largest since those against the Iraq War. A non-binding resolution passed overwhelmingly in the United Nations General Assembly called for a cessation of hostilities." Talks about was crimes. We should mention what war crime Hamas being accused of. The body camera and videos revealed torture, violence, burning and 240 were kidnapped of Kids, women, elderly and men. Over 200 of the bodies were burned and mutilated that day, and the process of identifying them is still underway. Yanna1512 (talk) 15:43, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Revert and incorrect Israeli death tolls

Shadowwarrior8, there is no original research [2], everything I edited is properly cited/referenced.
1. Civilian fatalities, none of the sources you cited say "around 800 Israeli civilians", on the contrary, one of the sources you cited is specific in saying 845 civilians;
2. The IDF itself [3] (source was provided) lists 276 soldiers by name to have died on October 7th, the subject of the article 2023 Hamas attack on Israel is solely the events of October 7th, not the clashes or conflict that followed October 7th. The sentence in the Times of Israel article you are referring to "The most recent death toll from the military had 318 service members killed during the attack itself (37 more have been killed since the IDF launched its ground offensive in Gaza)" is incorrect in its calculatations. At the time of publishing of that article, 355 servicemen and 59 police were identified killed in the whole conflict [4] (source has since been updated with 6 more IDF deaths), including 37 deaths in Gaza yes. However, the 318 deaths the article mentioned also includes nine deaths on the border with Lebanon, one dead in the West Bank, and more than two dozen others who died in the days after October 7th, during the recapture of the kibutzes. So, back to the official site of the IDF which currently lists by name 361 soldiers killed in the whole conflict, including 276 soldiers who died on October 7th exclusively;
3. Further, the Times of Israel article is also incorrect in saying 59 police died on October 7th exclusively. No, 59 have been confirmed to have died in the whole conflict [5], including two who died in the West Bank [6][7]. You can check the names of the two.
I hope this clarifies things and I would ask that you revert your revert of my edit. If you require additional discussions I am at your disposal. Best regards. EkoGraf (talk) 18:31, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

EkoGraf
1. None of the sources I cited stated that 845 civilians died. On the contrary, "The Times of Israel" report states: "That would leave the civilian death toll at around 800, by current estimates"
2. Well that's not what the article itself says. Also, the Israeli military site doesnt state the number of dead soldiers. To claim that your source restricted the number of its soldiers killed in the attack to 276 would be original research. On the contrary, "The Times of Israel" source states: "The most recent death toll from the military had 318 service members killed during the attack itself"
So unless you can provide another source that specifies the number of dead soldiers that contradicts the report in "The Times of Israel", that shouldnt be removed.
3. "The Times of Israel" article appears to have been mistaken regarding the 59 police deaths during the Hamas attack on October 7th, since that number looks like the total number of dead Israeli police members. So i have changed that to 57. Shadowwarrior8 (talk) 15:23, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Shadowwarrior8
1. Quote from the very source you are citing [8] - "Police said they have identified 845 civilian deaths." It doesn't say anywhere "That would leave the civilian death toll at around 800, by current estimates". Please check again.
2. Again, this article [9] is incorrect in its statement that 318 died on October 7th, just like they were incorrect in saying 59 police died (which you confirmed yourself). Like I said, at the time of the report, 355 soldiers were confirmed dead in the whole conflict, including 37 in Gaza, while the remaining 318 included 9 dead on the border with Lebanon, 1 in the West Bank and those killed both on October 7th and in the days after October 7th. See the Time's own reported overall death toll [10] that they update daily (currently at 361). It clearly states the figure includes all deaths. As for this source [11], the Israeli military itself, again, there is no Original Research. You just need to check the date filter to show you the deaths from October 7th only and it will show you 276. To make it easier for readers to confirm and make it more verifiable we can add a note to the reference by pointing out people need to check the date filter.
3. Thank you. EkoGraf (talk) 19:17, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
EkoGraf
1. Ok, the wording was changed in a later version of the article. I have corrected the number.
2. I also checked the date filter, and the Israeli military released a list of 276 dead Israeli soldiers. However, this doesnt necessarily contradict the article of "The Times of Israel". The Israeli military source probably has not published the details of the rest of the dead soldiers. That source is not a death toll count since it doesnt give a clear estimate of the number of dead Israeli soldiers.
You maybe right that the "The Times of Israel" source is incorrect in its assertion that 318 Israeli soldiers died on October 7th; but you would need another source to refute its claim. The Israeli military source is only a list, it doesnt provide a death toll count. Shadowwarrior8 (talk) 19:45, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Shadowwarrior8
1. Thank you.
2. I already provided you with a source that refutes the claim of 318. The Times of Israel itself. In the article you cite they said (incorrectly) 355 died on October 7th and in the Gaza Strip. However, in their article regarding the overall conflict toll which they update daily they stated 355 was for the whole conflict (including Lebanon border, West Bank, and the days after October 7th), plus they list all of the names. The Israeli military on its site [12] currently lists the updated number of 361 soldiers killed overall in the conflict (including 276 on October 7th). The updated Times of Israel [13] currently states 361 soldiers have been killed overall in the conflict. The military and the Times confirm eachother in this regard (double verification). So regarding your comment that the military probably has not published the details of the rest of the dead soldiers...no...they have in fact published the full up-to-date list which completely overlaps with the Times of Israel's list/count. EkoGraf (talk) 20:53, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
EkoGraf
Umm.. no. "The Times of Israel" article states: "The most recent death toll from the military had 318 service members killed during the attack itself (37 more have been killed since the IDF launched its ground offensive in Gaza)"
So the article never suggested that 355 Israeli soldiers were killed during the Hamas offensive itself. It clearly states that 318 Israeli military members were killed during the Hamas offensive, and that another 37 Israeli soldiers were killed later.
Look, the estimate in that article maybe wrong but you havent brought up another source that clearly restricts the number to 276. If you can insert a reference which clearly states that the total death-toll of Israeli soldiers during the Hamas offensive was 276, you can go ahead and change the 318 number yourself. Shadowwarrior8 (talk) 05:48, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
Shadowwarrior8, you seem to have misunderstood me. I never said the incorrect Times of Israel article states that 355 were killed during the Hamas offensive. I said they incorrectly stated 318 died during the 7th October attack. With the 37 (correctly stated) deaths from the Gaza offensive, that is a total of 355 dead incorrectly stated to have died during the 7th October and the Gaza offensive. The other Times of Israel link I provided you where they have a running tally of the overall Israel death toll clearly stated (at that time) 355 were killed in the whole conflict, including 37 in the Gaza offensive. And by the whole conflict, they clearly pointed out that also includes deaths from the days after October 7th, the Lebanese border and the West Bank. Please read the correct Times of Israel article carefully [14].
That is one source, and, again, I already provided you with a second source as well. The Israeli military's own site lists 276 soldiers died on October 7th (which you yourself acknowledged), which is the subject of this article. Any deaths that took place after October 7th are not the subject of this article.
To be clear once more, the IDF currently lists 363 deaths occurred during the whole conflict and the daily-updated and correct Times of Israel article lists 363 deaths occurred during the whole conflict. In addition, the daily-updated and correct Times of Israel article which says the toll is for the whole conflict clearly contradicts the other Times of Israel article which said the toll is only for October 7th and Gaza offensive. To summarize, you have two sources contradicting that Times of Israel article, the official Israeli military and the Times of Israel itself. EkoGraf (talk) 15:57, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
EkoGraf
An article of "The New York Times" states: "At least 278 soldiers were killed in the battles inside Israel, according to the Israeli military’s website"
I have changed the number from 318 to 278. Shadowwarrior8 (talk) 05:27, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
Shadowwarrior8, thank you! Yes that would be correct. I read last night that a soldier that was missing since October 7th had been confirmed killed that day after her body was identified recently. In addition, today, the IDF confirmed a soldier who had been kidnapped that day was subsequently killed. With the addition of these two new confirmed deaths that would make 278. :) EkoGraf (talk) 17:34, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Images

Main satellite image doesn't describe this terrorist attack. There is a need for a collage of multiple images with the horrors of the attack. There must be images of a damaged houses outside + inside, including remaining of blood inside house, burnt bodies, and mutilated corpses.

  • That is not the point of the infobox - there are other places in the article where those would be appropriate. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 18:14, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

Hamas orders don't match those in sources

While there were civilian executions, Hamas' orders to mutilate and rape seem unsubstantiated. The sentence "the subjects said they were ordered to kill, behead, cut off limbs and rape" references an article by the potentially biased paper Times of Israel on the interrogation of captured Hamas members. According to the paper, the order to "cut off [limbs]" was allegedly recalled by a subject wearing a white shirt. However, according to the publicly available video that subject (identifying himself as Ahmad) does not explicitly mention such things. Instead he states that his mission was "kidnapping" (1:50 mark). The commander added "killing young men" (1:30 mark). Mutilation seems only mentioned in a long sentence by his interrogator (2:00 mark). In the video no captive mentions having received orders to mutilate or rape. Therefore the orders of "behead", "cutting limbs" and rape seem at present unsubstantiated and should be removed. This is not a detail, as it appears to be currently exploited to justify disproportionate response.

In the same video interrogation, captured Hamas subjects also recalled instances of some civilians returning fire and launching grenades from inside buildings (6:30 mark) in Kibbutz Be'eri. That should also be indicated in this page as it might have further increased the number of civilian casualties aside from executions. ED3202 (talk) 15:07, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Nonexistent article linked without much reason

Under the "Torture and mutilation" section, a "See Also" is provided for "Hamas beheading incidents", an article which does not seem to exist or ever have existed. The section makes one passing mention at an unconfirmed interrogation claiming beheading and nothing else, making it a questionable addition even if the article did exist. With all of this, I can't see much reason as to why said section is on the page. Seems almost biased towards trying to confirm what is currently very unconfirmed. DstressATL (talk) 14:48, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

What do you mean is currently uncomfirmed? Shedis caph (talk) 16:28, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
It's not currently confirmed anywhere that beheadings were / are widespread in the operation, outside of a few government claims not yet backed up with hard evidence. The (nonexistent) article title does not say "alleged" or "purported". Untill we can prove that beheadings are a tactic HAMAS used often in the attack, the addition seems very irrelevant. DstressATL (talk) 18:15, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
I keep on seeing references of 40 beheaded babies that was initially reported by i24. Why is this still mentioned in this wiki page if it was unverified? Haaretz has it on their dead database that only 1 baby (a 10month old) was killed during the Oct 7 attack. How is it possible to have 40 beheaded babies but only 1 baby reported as dead?
Sources: https://www.reuters.com/world/nato-ministers-shown-horrific-video-hamas-attack-2023-10-12/
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/internet/unverified-allegations-beheaded-babies-israel-hamas-war-inflame-social-rcna119902 https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-10-19/ty-article-magazine/israels-dead-the-names-of-those-killed-in-hamas-massacres-and-the-israel-hamas-war/0000018b-325c-d450-a3af-7b5cf0210000 Shadmeister82 (talk) 20:59, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

Mentioning terrorist organization

Describing Hamas as a terrorist organization is a must. Just like other terrorist attacks (Boston, Manchester, 911) where the attacks were referred as terrorist attacks on this platform. 2601:589:4901:B50:6F47:4ACA:F6F3:4478 (talk) 03:31, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for good article

I am not a contributor to this article, and so am not in position to nominate. But I think editors here have done an excellent job on a highly contentious topic and I hope you will consider a nomination for a good article.

Wikipedia:Good article nominations/Instructions ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 03:03, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

ditto to the Professor KaiFlai 2600:1700:B280:F3D0:2E:CF90:F1A6:C75F (talk) 05:25, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Claims of Iranian involvement are becoming UNDUE

I know the WSJ claims that Iran was behind the attack, and WSJ is normally a reliable source, but on this topic they are pushing what is becoming a WP:FRINGE theory. Other major RS have not accused Iran of being behind the attack. Iran being behind the attack has been denied by Iran[15], US[16] and even Israel[17]. I think at this point the claim should be scrapped entirely from the article. VR talk 06:55, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned references in 2023 Hamas attack on Israel

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of 2023 Hamas attack on Israel's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "auto5":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. Feel free to remove this comment after fixing the refs. AnomieBOT⚡ 08:03, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

This was a terrorist attack by a terrorist organization.

Describing Hamas as a terrorist organization is a must. Just like other terrorist attacks (Boston, Manchester, 911) where the attacks were referred as terrorist attacks on this platform. 2601:589:4901:B50:6F47:4ACA:F6F3:4478 (talk) 03:31, 17 November 2023 ( DDJJ72 (talk) 05:05, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Yes. I second this. 70.235.135.231 (talk) 13:01, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Page Name

Why was the name changed to a clearly biased name? None of the previous wars/operation is called "X attack on Y". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ras al Ghoul (talk • contribs) 17:50, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

Should probably be something closer along the lines of "invasion" yeah LegalSmeagolian (talk) 18:14, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
The page name should be October 7th 2023 Hamas Terror Attack on Israel 70.235.135.231 (talk) 12:59, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

why is this article not mention anything about this being a terrorist attack? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.26.167.207 (talk) 13:30, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Use of term "militant" vs terrorist

Hamas cannot be described as militants im their actions on October 7, 2023. Their massacre of Israeli cibilians is a terrorost attack and they should be described as terrorists.

Hamas status as terrorists was already established from 2002 to 2004 during the second intifada with their suicide bombins campaign against civilians in busses, cafes, and similar civilian settings. 68.193.48.39 (talk) 17:48, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

In addition, most countries/new organizations call them terrorists, the BBC is an exception and should not be taken over the majority.
9/11 was a terrorist attack also taken by an islamic organization taking political action against the damage they viewed by a western power and is currently designated a terrorist organization on Wikipedia.
Finally the definition of terrorist is: a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims which is literally a perfectly fitting description of the attack. SonsyEpicMap (talk) 20:49, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
United Nations has not designated Hamas or Taliban regime as terrorists unlike ISIS/Al-Qaeda so that's why their case is different.
Also, majority of world governments especially of Global South does not consider them terrorists. Sam6897 (talk) 13:38, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
What they did was pure terrorism, they recorded it on GoPros and are proud of their terror. ‘Militants’ needs to be replaced with terrorist. 70.235.135.231 (talk) 12:58, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
there is currently zero un-disputed footage of Al-Qassam fighters killing israeli civilians!!!!
Most of footage released by israeli government is suspious and for propoganda purpose. Israeli government official account has yet published 60 dis-info news on twitter. this tells alot about authenticity of the footages released by israel. Sam6897 (talk) 15:32, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Torture

No mention is made of the torture, rape, burning of children alive, baking a baby in an oven. This wasn't a classic war. This was a savage attack against civilians in their beds. And no mention is made of the many Israelis who were left without limbs for the rest of their lives. No mention is made of how the terrorists live streamed and posted videos of people bleeding out to death. 2600:4041:5ADD:5A00:DC6A:5DC7:84DE:2FF5 (talk) 16:29, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

Please provide reliable sources and we'll it to the article. I think that there were some claims made in the beginning that were not confirmed, so we need to be careful. Alaexis¿question? 21:04, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
@Alaexis the article makes mention of zaka testimony in regard to torture and rape, so why isn't zaka witness testimony reliable source for beheaded babies and baked in oven? MoshiachNow (talk) 06:47, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
zaka is not an neutral organization, they are just peddling pro-israeli government narrative. Sam6897 (talk) 15:33, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Torture and mutilation

I keep on seeing references of 40 beheaded babies that was initially reported by i24. Why is this still mentioned in this wiki page if it was unverified? Haaretz has it on their dead database that only 1 baby (a 10month old) was killed during the Oct 7 attack. How is it possible to have 40 beheaded babies but only 1 baby reported as dead?

Sources: https://www.reuters.com/world/nato-ministers-shown-horrific-video-hamas-attack-2023-10-12/ https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-10-19/ty-article-magazine/israels-dead-the-names-of-those-killed-in-hamas-massacres-and-the-israel-hamas-war/0000018b-325c-d450-a3af-7b5cf0210000 Shadmeister82 (talk) 20:55, 16 November 2023 (UTC)

I agree Sam6897 (talk) 15:34, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

casualties

"At least 400 casualties were reported in Ashkelon, while 280 others were reported in Beer Sheva, 60 of which were in a serious condition" -- this is incorrect. the number of 400 is the number of wounded patients treated in Ashkelon, not a number reflecting casualties in Ashkelon. The other numbers don't appear in the referenced articles, also probably reflecting people treated in hospitals in beersheba. the attackers did not reach ashkelon and beersheba, which are major cities. i have already pointed out this error in the past.--Exjerusalemite (talk) 17:46, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Blatantly biased sources

Using an Israeli news source which second-hand quotes vague "Israeli authorities" for the estimate of civilian casualties is wildly irresponsible. At the very least, it's an editor's duty to define that this fact is according to Israeli authorities, as it does on the casualties section for the Palestinian fighters. 2A02:8086:D03:F880:8107:CEE5:60B8:8BA4 (talk) 19:01, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

Reverting Information with reference!

@Alaexis, You reverted my edition and commented by "this article is about the October 7 incursion; the casualties in Gaza should be in 2023 Israel–Hamas war". If this is right, did the Casualties stated in the article happen at that particular day? Of course No. In fact these casualties is the sum of casualties over many days, so the Casualties of the consequences should be mentioned as well, or you should state the actual numbers of casualties of both sides at that particular day. Dr-Taher (talk) 14:06, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

As far as I can see, the casualty numbers refer to the initial incursion into Israel. If they don't, please let us know and it will be fixed. The scope of this article is the 7 October operation into Israel by Hamas. The casualties during the invasion of the Gaza strip should go to 2023 Hamas attack on Israel and 2023 Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip. Alaexis¿question? 20:17, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

Casualties and article name

It claims that 1,200 Israelis were killed, the numbers have been updated again and it is now back to 1,400. https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/11/07/middleeast/palestinian-israeli-deaths-gaza-dg/index.html Also this article barely mentions that this was a terror attack and hamas was motivated by genocidal antisemitism/racism. It isn’t just political. 2601:46:C800:3FBF:6131:9EDD:90A0:FB03 (talk) 02:01, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

An article 12 days old doesn't prove "updated again". Zerotalk 05:26, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Haaretz, which is publishing all the names of those killed (1177 so far), said "Approximately 1,200 Israelis, civilians and soldiers were killed" just a few hours ago. Zerotalk 05:29, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Casualties of civilians Palestinian

The facts and figures regarding the total casualties of civilians in Gaza are not mentioned and just an old number mentioned also casualties regarding infants and children must mentioned accordingly. 203.215.178.158 (talk) 16:01, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Arab world survey

The arab world for research and development survey described "Palestinians living in the West Bank overwhelmingly answered that they supported the attack to either an extreme or “somewhat” extent (83.1%.)" was done by a consultancy agency working for the Palestinian government (so Hamas). A mention of this/disclaimer would be great as the source is heavily biased. The question asked in the survey (original document: https://www.mivzaklive.co.il/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Public-Opinion-Poll-Gaza-War-2023-Tables-of-Results.pdf) is in table 27: How much do you support the military operation carried out by the Palestinian resistance led by Hamas on October 7th? ExNihiloScientia (talk) 16:04, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Agreeing with what has been said, it is necessary to specify that this institute is linked to Hamas. In the interest of neutrality and transparency, I also propose to transcribe word for word the question that was asked in this opinion survey and to remove the references to "attacks on Israel", which come from Israeli media and were not explicitly stated in the original question. Adding that primary source https://www.mivzaklive.co.il/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Public-Opinion-Poll-Gaza-War-2023-Tables-of-Results.pdf would also be beneficial to the reader, in my opinion.
@Homerethegreat coucou ;) I also notify you as you are the author of this paragraph, any thoughts? Wikihydro (talk) 19:06, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
[for clarity] *a consulting agency that has worked for Hamas regularly. I could not confirm whether this study specifically was directly for Hamas. This does not change what has been said about bias, though, as the agency is clearly pro-Hamas ExNihiloScientia (talk) 19:20, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Vivian Silver

"Among those believed to have been abducted was Vivian Silver," her Wikipedia page says she was killed. ? MoshiachNow (talk) 06:37, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

You are right. Sadly, she was confirmed dead a couple of days ago.
Can an EC editor update the article? ShamsiSideUp (talk) 23:25, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
I updated the article. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 19:42, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Why isn't this article called "Operation Al-Aqsa Flood"?

Operation Barbarossa
Operation Enduring Freedom
Operation Overlord
Operation Market Garden
etc

Why not call this by the name of the folks who planned it? vap (talk) 22:30, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

I don't have an opinion either way on this specific article, but we follow COMMONNAME policy on Wikipedia, which doesn't necessarily defer to whoever begins or executes the offensive. For example, the Attack on Pearl Harbor is not Operation AI, the Battle of the Bulge is not the Ardennes Offensive, and the Dunkirk evacuation is used rather than Operation Dynamo. -- Veggies (talk) 00:11, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
@Vapblack: The article used to be named "Operation Al-Aqsa Flood", but a long requested move discussion back in October, which involved 71 people with 178 comments decided to rename it. The closing user stated, "See below significant opposition to any rename; however, arguments in favor of some rename were very strong. The title that received overwhelming support is the one chosen and will serve as the highest and best title." So, that is why it is not named "Operation Al-Aqsa Flood". The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 00:22, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
will an article be renamed to whatever a majority agrees on? vap (talk) 00:54, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
If a new discussion occurred, whatever the consensus is (not necessarily majority is) is what the title could be renamed to. You can see WP:VOTE to learn more about it. Hope this helps Vapblack. Cheers! The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 00:59, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

casualties

"At least 400 casualties were reported in Ashkelon, while 280 others were reported in Beer Sheva, 60 of which were in a serious condition" -- this is incorrect. the number of 400 is the number of wounded patients treated in Ashkelon, not a number reflecting casualties in Ashkelon. The other numbers don't appear in the referenced articles, also probably reflecting people treated in hospitals in beersheba. the attackers did not reach ashkelon and beersheba, which are major cities. i have already pointed out this error in the past--Exjerusalemite (talk) 19:00, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Casualties include wounded individuals. Alaexis¿question? 20:20, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
On the second thought, it can probably be confusing, so I've changed the text.  Done. Alaexis¿question? 20:23, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Al-Aqsa Flood?

Al-Aqsa Flood seems to be the name Hamas uses for this entire war, not just the October 7 attack. Here is an address by the spokesman of the Hamas armed wing from a few hours ago, in which he talks about "Day 45 of the Battle of Al-Aqsa Flood." Also, footage released by the Hamas armed wing of the fighting, even that in recent days, has "Battle of Al-Aqsa Flood" on it. Moazfargal (talk) 22:00, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 November 2023

Hello, as discussed on the talk page here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2023_Hamas_attack_on_Israel#Arab_world_survey

I propose to add: "The question that was asked is: To what extent do you support the military operation carried out by the Palestinian resistance led by Hamas on October 7th?[1]"

right there: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Hamas_attack_on_Israel#Palestinian_public_opinion

kind regards

Wikihydro (talk) 10:58, 21 November 2023 (UTC) Wikihydro (talk) 10:58, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

  1. ^ https://www.mivzaklive.co.il/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Public-Opinion-Poll-Gaza-War-2023-Tables-of-Results.pdf

Background section

I would propose two small additions.

„In September 2005, the end of Israeli military occupation of the Gaza Strip was declared by the Israeli government and Israel dismantled all Israeli settlements in the Gaza Strip. The majory of the international community still sees Isreal as the occupying power in the Gaza Strip. Since 2006, the Gaza Strip has been described as an "open-air prison", due to the ongoing blockade by Israel and Egypt“

I think those changes add more information to the picture. The involvement of Egypt in the Blockade is clearly stated in the first sentence of the respective article, I also think that it's fair to include not only differing opinions on the aim of Hamas, but also on the Israeli Governments view on the question of occupation in Gaza. SiMon (talk) 15:59, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Videos

This article should include more videos of the massacres, including testimonies of survivals and Captive Hamas Terrorists. Captive Hamas Terrorists Hamas Terrorists videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MzZ0at_G74k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFVAOPSgwYo

This article must not be called a 'terrorist attack' as this is biased and taking sides. It was a military offensive and its main target was military bases and checkpoints, 15 of which were captured in this offensive
Its main target was civilians. The large majority of those killed, as well as those kidnapped, were civilians. The attackers knew that they had no chance of seizing & holding territory. X2023X (talk) 18:10, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
The attackers also posted video of their attacks on civilians boasting with those attacks. proving that this was part of the main objective, and part of the broader objective - destruction of the state of Israel, and jewish presence in Israel. מאכן ארדענונג (talk) 18:17, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 November 2023 (2)

This is about missing information on the IDF strength, which Israel called for 300,000 reservists.Saying that, please change isreal strength “unknown” to 300,000 [1] 94.129.234.107 (talk) 03:10, 23 November 2023 (UTC)


  1. ^ https://m.economictimes.com/news/international/us/what-is-israels-military-strength-heres-everything-you-need-to-know/amp_articleshow/104615713.cms

Lion's Den

Did Lion's Den actually DO anything on October 7th? Or just announce support? Have they done much since? Nablus has been quiet, but i might be just not paying enough attention. Possibly there shouldn't be in this infobox, or possibly they are missing from other pages like List of engagements during the 2023 Israel–Hamas war and Template:2023 Israel–Hamas war infobox? Irtapil (talk) 02:15, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 November 2023

Change militants to terrorists. 2600:8800:3293:D000:FC33:8B1E:FA01:D6F4 (talk) 00:04, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: the proposed change would need a valid reason and consensus. M.Bitton (talk) 00:31, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
militant is better Irtapil (talk) 03:18, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Casualty Total

Request to include neutral sources regarding civilian casualities total on Oct. 7. See post by NYT reporter Seth Abramson for links:

https://open.substack.com/pub/sethabramson/p/proof-exclusive-a-look-inside-the?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=gc2sd 2603:7080:ED41:2500:38D2:9478:9F7E:2A81 (talk) 15:46, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Invasion of Gaza

The lead says that one of Hamas' motives was to provoke Israel into invading Gaza. The article should say why Hamas wanted that to happen. X2023X (talk) 00:42, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Is it even clear that was the goal? Irtapil (talk) 03:19, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
could you provide a source on this? 2600:1700:3354:D810:CB8:B520:67F2:8C44 (talk) 04:17, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 November 2023

Hamas is a terror organization and is now addressed as HAMAS ISIS because their brutal assault on children women and elderly. Hamas raped women and kids in this mass murder attack on innocent civilians. Hamas posted their assaults, rapes, and behaedings of babies and civilians onto social media. 2A00:A041:3AC6:6900:D59A:66:8579:5347 (talk) 11:19, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Parham wiki (talk) 11:36, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Not an Israeli victory

The military action infobox calls the result an Israeli victory. That's like calling the Pearl Harbor attack an American victory because Japanese units returned to their aircraft carriers instead of occupying Hawaii. The attack was a raid. It achieved what Hamas intended and probably more. October 7 is not a day of victory in Israel but a national tragedy. If Hamas loses the war despite winning the battle, that's for another article. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 20:56, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Agreed. I haven't checked the sources, but I don't think any describe this attack as an Israeli victory; Hamas didn't intend to permanently hold on to these areas and probably achieved what they wanted. Moazfargal (talk) 23:21, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
I keep wondering if it "went wrong"? If they took hostages with fewer civilian deaths it might have "worked" better towards their long term goals, rather than giving the IDF an excuse to completely obliterate Gaza. But, on the other hand, it seems like "start a war" might have been their short term goal, and that definitely "worked". And some things the PFLP did with other allies seem to have the goal of civilian casualties, like the Lod Airport massacre, I can't get my head around what that achieved? Irtapil (talk) 03:18, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
@Iskandar323: Raised a similar issue in another page (hope you don't mind the tag?), I'm not sure what the solution is, but I agree the framing is currently not ideal. Irtapil (talk) 02:19, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
I have to disagree. Who said that this attack was planned as a ride? We know that some of the militant groups occupied the places in Israel, and it took a significant effort and a few days by IDF to remove/defeat them. Speaking on the Pearl Harbor attack analogy, that would be a situation when Japanese ground forces did occupy some parts of Hawaii, and have been defeated by US forces out there. Hence, yes, it was a victory by Israel. My very best wishes (talk) 17:41, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
Please read and internalize WP:OR. You repeat the same error across pages, claiming your own view to be fact but lacking any sources to back it up. For what sources say, Jon B Alterman in Time (see his gscholar page: Hamas’ stunning military success on October 7 will prove to be a pyrrhic victory.; Natan Sachs in The Atlantic: Hamas executed a stunning military surprise, breaching the Israeli border in multiple ways and attacking more than 20 Israeli population centers, as well as military bases. Militants kidnapped dozens of Israelis—apparently including children and the elderly—and captured military personnel. Israeli social media and news outlets filled with calls for help from families in southern Israeli towns occupied by Hamas, sheltering in their homes as armed terrorists went door-to-door. The failure of Israel’s intelligence and preparedness is second only to that in 1973.

But this Hamas victory might prove Pyrrhic. nableezy - 17:51, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

The "Pyrrhic victory" is a variety of defeat. As our page correctly says, "A Pyrrhic victory is a victory that inflicts such a devastating toll on the victor that it is tantamount to defeat.". Yes, various sources (not me) are saying different things about it. Most say that the attack was a security defeat for Israel. But it has been successfully repelled by Israel forces. This is the result of the operation to be shown on infobox (I have no problem with the current version). My very best wishes (talk) 18:17, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
No, it is a short lived victory that causes greater devastation to ones own side, and they are saying will prove to be to say that this victory, present tense, will lead to devastating losses on their side, future tense. That is saying they won the battle but will lose the war. nableezy - 18:47, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
How was it a victory for either side? It's like the 2022 al-Shabaab invasion of Ethiopia, but with mass kidnappings and a much higher death toll for the invaded country. Life is much worse for Israelis & Palestinians as a result of the invasion, which Hamas knew would be the case. X2023X (talk) 23:03, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Hamas Militant

Hamas militant needs to be changed to Hamas Terrorists 2A02:2F0A:7902:1600:EE12:1DAB:38B3:974C (talk) 07:15, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Per MOS:TERRORIST, labels such as "terrorist" are best avoided. —M3ATH (Moazfargal · Talk) 08:22, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Gazan victims

I think a section on Gazan victims is needed. Much has been written on Israeli victims but even the numbers of Gazans killed and taken prisoner seem to be unknown 81.101.0.145 (talk) 13:53, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Only if they were killed during the initial Hamas attack on Israel, which is the subject of this page (everything after that is covered on other pages). Indeed, there were reports of Gazan civilians who crossed to the Israel territory during the attack to plunder. Anything about them would be relevant. My very best wishes (talk) 17:33, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Epidemic of alt names

We don't need four alt names in the lead. What is the most common name in Israel? Is it "Black Saturday", "Simchat Torah Massacre" or "7 October attacks". Black Saturday is hard to assess because there are dozens of events by this name, but "Simchat Torah Massacre" throws up only 62 hits in an English language news search, meaning that presumably, if it is prevalent in Israel, it is prevalent in Hebrew, not English. Per WP:OTHERNAMES: If there are three or more alternative names – including alternative spellings, longer or shorter forms, historic names, and significant names in other languages – or there is something notable about the names themselves, a separate name section is recommended. As it stands, we need to either to trim these alt names down or hive them off into a section. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:59, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

@Iskandar323, write in a separate section or in a note (such as the September 11 attacks and the Tet Offensive). Parham wiki (talk) 10:16, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 20 November 2023

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. (closed by non-admin page mover) -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 20:21, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

2023 Hamas attack on Israel → 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel – This current title of this page is a potential misnomer and needs an adjustment both for WP:PRECISION and WP:ACCURACY. The attack involved, at the current count, five groups, led by Hamas; the current title could be interpreted as pertaining solely to Hamas. This RM is, first and foremost, a matter of WP:COMMONSENSE, since the infobox on the page clearly lists five involved groups. From an WP:NCE perspective, it is more accurately descriptive, and it follows a road already travelled by pages such as US-led intervention in Iraq (2014–2021). In terms of sourcing, this more precise language is used by numerous WP:RSP, including the NYT, NPR, ABC, VOA, Al Jazeera and Washington Post, as well as the Times of Israel and HRW. Since this is a descriptively titled page, and "Hamas-led attack" is clearly supported, and more precise (where "Hamas attack" lends only ambiguity), it is the better option and would eliminate the current grey area with more precise, unambiguous terminology straight from the WP:RSP. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:46, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Support: Your arguments were convincing. Parham wiki (talk) 11:34, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
Support - For the sake of accuracy and precision. Looks to be used in enough sources that those two can be prioritized, even if later in the discussion it's proven to be less common. estar8806 (talk) ★ 18:43, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
Support as it accurately broadens the scope of the participants. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 19:20, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
Support, as what you say makes good sense, but it will be an interesting case of our title being better than what most of the "reliable sources" say. And what are the implications for "2023 Israel–Hamas war"? Moonraker (talk) 19:51, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
For that one, I think it is best kept at Israel-Hamas, at least for now, as that's what sources seem to overwhelmingly use. In our case here, Hamas-led attack does feature in RS. Moazfargal (talk) 22:05, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
Support - Hamas-led attack is more accurate, and is used by a number of sources as demonstrated above. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moazfargal (talk • contribs) 22:03, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
Support - As per above BlackOrchidd (talk) 06:47, 21 November 2023 (UTC) Struck per WP:ARBECR and WP:PIA. — mw (talk) (contribs) 17:44, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
This should be renamed 'Operation Al Aqsa Flood' in line with the sites naming policies. It was a military attack which primarily targeted military bases as we now know, calling it otherwise violates the rules of wikipedia https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2023/10/7/from-hubris-to-humiliation-the-10-hours-that-shocked-israel Odin818 (talk) 09:30, 21 November 2023 (UTC) Struck per WP:ARBECR and WP:PIA. — mw (talk) (contribs) 17:44, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
As I mention below, Al-Aqsa Flood seems to be the name Hamas uses for this entire war, not just the October 7 attack. Here is an address by the spokesman of the Hamas armed wing from a yesterday, in which he talks about "Day 45 of the Battle of Al-Aqsa Flood." Also, footage released by the Hamas armed wing of the fighting, even that in recent days, has "Battle of Al-Aqsa Flood" on it. Moazfargal (talk) 09:32, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
And why would wikipedia want to call it what Hamas is calling it rather than what the wider range of free press is calling it? מאכן ארדענונג (talk) 18:20, 22 November 2023 (UTC) Struck per WP:ARBECR and WP:PIA. — mw (talk) (contribs) 17:44, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
I never said that. Moazfargal (talk) 18:22, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
Support - This is indeed more accurate. פעמי-עליון (talk) 14:36, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
Support - this is more accurate. Tomclarke (talk) Tomclarke (talk) 07:32, 22 November 2023 (UTC) Struck per WP:ARBECR and WP:PIA. — mw (talk) (contribs) 17:44, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Oppose per WP:COMMON NAME. Google search retrieves 9 million hits for "Hamas attack on Israel" versus ~6 thousand hits for "Hamas-led attack on Israel". Yes, several groups took part in this attack, but the common name of the event is "Hamas attack". The comparison with "US-led intervention in Iraq" is irrelevant. Yes, it was a US-led [coalition of countries] intervention in Iraq. That was something very different. My very best wishes (talk) 17:22, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
    The comparison with "US-led intervention in Iraq" is irrelevant. Yes, it was a US-led [coalition of countries] intervention in Iraq. That was something very different.
    How is it different? Both are coalitions led by a member.
    Also, WP:COMMON NAME says the following: Ambiguous or inaccurate names for the article subject, as determined in reliable sources, are often avoided even though they may be more frequently used by reliable sources. Moazfargal (talk) 21:00, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
I am happy we agree that "Hamas attack" is the most common name. The difference is that "US-led coalition [of countries]" is a common name, but "Hamas-led" is not. My very best wishes (talk) 20:02, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
Even if "Hamas attack" is more common, "Hamas-led attack" is not uncommon, and you're ignoring the part of COMMONNAME that say that accuracy takes precedence over commonality. —M3ATH (Moazfargal · Talk) 20:05, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
Number of hits listed with a Google search is not reliable. Those numbers are essentially meaningless. Results from Ngrams, Google Scholar, and Google Books are reliable, but not Google search hits. For example, I just googled the following: "russian teachers" prescriptivism
It said 457 results, but I scrolled to the bottom and counted every result; there were only 116. Anyway, the point is, this isn't a valid argument for commonness. Dylanvt (talk) 00:51, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Would “Hamas-led raid on Israel” be a better title in your opinion? The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 11:31, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
No, because it was not planned as a raid. The Hamas forces tried to keep the taken territory/villages, and it took an effort by IDF to free them. My very best wishes (talk) 19:52, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
That's just nonsense. Pockets of fighters just ended up holed up with hostages in various areas when they got pinned down by helicopter fire. Iskandar323 (talk) 20:49, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Rename to October 7 attack . The current name 2023 Hamas attack on Israel is a commonly used name, but the article should be renamed to October 7 attack which has solidified as the most commonly used of the attack. Marokwitz (talk) 06:11, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
    If that's the case then it should be possible to evidence the solidification of the usage of that name. Iskandar323 (talk) 11:39, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
This was an invasion which included many attacks/massacres. Hamas-led invasion of Israel would be a better title. X2023X (talk) 13:03, 26 November 2023 (UTC) Struck per WP:ARBECR and WP:PIA. — mw (talk) (contribs) 17:44, 27 November 2023 (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.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 November 2023

after each mention of "Hamas", add "a terrorist organization" 2605:AD80:80:2008:7931:681C:6110:84A5 (talk) 10:24, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: Per MOS:TERRORIST, using terms like "terrorist organization" requires it to be widely used in reliable sources, which doesn't seem to be the case, to the best of my knowledge. Using these terms also requires in-text attribution and citations, which becomes incredibly tedious to write and read if we do it for each appearance for the word. Liu1126 (talk) 10:33, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Result of 7/10 victory/defeat/pyrrhic victory/undetermined.

I saw that it was written that Hamas is victorious. But sources point to a pyrrhic victory or simply state that it is yet undetermined. For now changed it to a pyrrhic victory per source.

I personally think we should wait since result of conflict remains undetermined. Homerethegreat (talk) 08:28, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

  • Remove 'Result' - Remove the "Result" portion of the infobox—at least for now. There's no clear consensus over whether this was a victory, a pyrrhic victory, or a defeat. Israel was certainly surprised and many civilians were killed/captured, but Hamas was not able to hold onto any territory within Israel after 48 hours. What was Hamas' goal in the attack: just to kill/capture people, even at the cost of all their attackers, or to try to conquer territory in the long-term? I think that question determines what the "result" is. -- Veggies (talk) 17:54, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Scroll up — Very long discussion is in progress for this exact thing. With permission from Homerethegreat, this discussion should be closed since there is a super long discussion about this with a lot more editors above. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 17:59, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
We should have an RFC, full discussion is unreadable on phones for example Drsmoo (talk) 18:08, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
yes perhaps it would be best. Homerethegreat (talk) 18:44, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Oh wow, didn't see that. Homerethegreat (talk) 18:44, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Missing Hamas referred as terroristic organisation

Its a shame you keep naming Hamas nice nanes. Its a terrorist group that did horrible things. Very strange Wikipedia is working with lefts to active antisemitism. All de World find them Terrorists. This is really an outrage. Wikipedia is a left terroristic tool. Lets work in closing Wikipedia. 2A02:A469:5F5D:1:489A:6819:1E65:7432 (talk) 00:51, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

no, not all world "find them terrorists".
they are not designated by Saudia Arabia, Japan, Russia, Norway, Switzerland, China, Brazil, South Africa, Turkey etc.
Also, many countries like New-Zealand have only declared military wing of Hamas (Al-Qassam brigades) as terrorist not the political wing. Sam6897 (talk) 01:24, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel

Talk:2023 Hamas-led TERRORIST attack on Israel, HAMAS IS CONSIDERED A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION IN 72 COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD, INCLUDING ALL OF THE DEMOCRATIC COUNTRIES MeLuckyLucky (talk) 04:28, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2023_Hamas-led_attack_on_Israel/Archive_3&oldid=1189725961"