Talk:Israel–Hamas war

Title

If this topic is notable enough to warrant its own article, it will almost certainly need a less ambiguous title.

More likely, this can be added to an article about various Hamas attacks on Israel in 2023, or over a longer period. DenverCoder9 (talk) 07:04, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

@DenverCoder19 Well, sadly it can be changed to "2023 Israel Palestine war" soon 2A01:C22:C931:E700:78CF:B4BA:DE3D:CB0C (talk) 07:19, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

I typed 2023 hamas attack and the first thing that came up was clashes in May. Maybe we could add October. Borgenland (talk) 07:23, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

there is now an operation name for this event https://www.kan.org.il/content/kan-news/defense/558406/?app=true SignedInteger (talk) 07:35, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

should this become the new article name (once translated) SignedInteger (talk) 07:36, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/10/07/world/israel-gaza-attack

Both sides have referred to this as a war, and sources are reporting on it as such. Perhaps appropriate to title it as 2023 Israel-Gaza War or something similar. KiharaNoukan (talk) 07:53, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

2021 Israel-Palestine crisis is an indicator, maybe best to wait a bit and see just how serious this becomes. Selfstudier (talk) 09:55, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

I think it's best for us to wait for a bit. If there is no sign of deescalation, then it's a go. BlueHelvetical (talk) 14:48, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

“Gaza-Israel Conflict” or “Gaza-Israel War, 2023” are appropriate titles. “Palestine-Israel Conflict/War” is both inaccurate and inappropriate.

Just like the geographic region known as “North America” contains 3 countries, Canada, USA, and Mexico. There is no country, “North America” nor is there a nationality, “North American.”

By the same token, the geographic area known as “Palestine” contains 3 countries, Gaza, Israel, and Jordan. There is no country, “Palestine” nor is there a nationality, “Palestinian.”

If Mexico were to attack or invade the USA, it would not be appropriate to refer to it as the “North America-USA Conflict.”

https://theworldhistoryofwar.quora.com/https-www-quora-com-If-the-Palestinian-people-didnt-exist-before-Israels-existence-then-where-did-they-come-from-answe?ch=17&oid=16745248&share=f887561d&srid=a9am&target_type=post MetroNYCJerry (talk) 16:19, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

what about 5th Arab-Israeli War 166.194.158.48 (talk) 19:13, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

If Israel attacks back, we can name it 2023 Palestine−Israel War. Andrew012p (talk) 15:19, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

And Israel has attack back while Gaza is under fire right now from Israel forces Efuture2 (talk) 16:09, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

That should not occur. While the groups are from terrorist organizations within Palestine, the Palestinian military nor government has declares actual war upon Israel. IEditPolitics (talk) 21:13, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Support. Since Benjamin Netanyahu declared war, surely the conflict is, definitively, a war? I would also like to express my deepest appreciation for everyone’s commitment to Wikipedia’s truthfulness and neutrality on this particularly divisive topic (and everything else). MrBoy632 (talk) 21:38, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Point of information – Titles of articles are generally goverened by WP:COMMONNAME which states, "the term or name most typically used in reliable sources is generally preferred." Please focus on what WP:RS are using to refer to this conflict. - Fuzheado | Talk 16:29, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

I would second the comment citing to WP:COMMONNAME and WP:RS. It is easy to get caught up in various points of a conflict and forget to adhere to the guidelines set by Wikipedia. Given the statement by the Isreali Prime Minister, it would be justified in being called "2023 Israel Palestine war" and also because of the media coverage by reliable sources. It may be advisable to wait a few days to see how this progresses as there is no rush to finalize a title for the article right now. Jurisdicta (talk) 18:17, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

We should probably focus on getting the content right and picking the name later, something will coalesce. But people here seem to be generally on the right track and we shouldn't mind moving it and changing the name if a different one emerges. Keep in mind that no change is permanent. DenverCoder9 (talk) 22:40, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

The conflict is occuring a bit after Yom Kippur, so shouldn't it be called ẗhe "Second Yom Kippur War" or "Yom Kippur War II"? 23.93.17.238 (talk) 22:50, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

I have not seen a reputable source use that term. Mostly it is being characterized as a war. Invanity (talk) 22:52, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

The infobox refers to it as the "Third Intifada", perhaps we should use that? SufficientChipmunk3 (talk) 00:15, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

What is the official name of the operation

New account so I can't edit this but we know the Israelis are calling their "response" Iron Swords. Maybe for now call it the name that Palestinian militant groups are referring to as opposed to "Hamas attack on Israel".

You know, for the neutrality that wikipedia is so famous for! Bingusbungus12345 (talk) 08:03, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

there already is a discussion to merge the two articles so this is pointless SignedInteger (talk) 08:04, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

not really, actually. I still don't see a neutral article title. Bingusbungus12345 (talk) 09:28, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Start an RM for a different title if the current one is seen as not neutral, seems OK atm. Selfstudier (talk) 09:53, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Hamas calls it Operation Al-Aqsa Flood. AmericanBaath (talk) 00:23, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Israeli Commander Nimrod Aloni has been captured ?

Found this on twitter: https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/1710602173262840257?s=20

Can anyone confirm with RS? Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 11:15, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Nothing to confirm. People are just spreading rumors because they think that this person looks like the IDF commander. ie it's social media self-research. Ignore it. Harizotoh9 (talk) 12:14, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

This is fake. HiyoriX (talk) 12:27, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Add "non-combatants" to the Military conflict infobox

Operation Al-Aqsa Flood
Part of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict and Gaza-Israel conflict
Date 7 October 2023 – present Location Israel Gaza Strip Status Ongoing
Belligerents and Non-belligerents
Hamas Islamic Jihad	Civilian non-combatants	Israel
Commanders and leaders
Mohammed Al-Daif Ziyad al-Nakhalah		Benjamin Netanyahu Yoav Galant
Units involved
Al-Qassam Brigades Al-Quds Brigades PFLP Lions' Den	Magen David Adom Red Crescent	Israel Defense Forces
Casualties and losses
Unknown	At least 2 (in Gaza). and 7 (in Israel) civilians killed. At least 5 (in Gaza) and 3 (in Israel) civilians injured. Multiple civilians captured (in Israel)	At least 10 killed Unknown number of prisoners Armored vehicles destroyed and captured: 1 Merkava destroyed 1 Merkava captured 1 Namer APC captured Over 35 soldiers, police officers and civilians captured

Hi all, Like many, I am deeply frustrated with never ending conflicts. I believe that a major error in the reporting of such conflicts including by Wikipedians, is that it is always being presented as a two-sided conflict, when actually it is always a three-sided conflict where the third side is always forgotten about or only given as a foot note because they lack adequate representation in the conflict.

I am of course talking about the civilians.

These are unwilling participants who are being killed by being caught up in the middle of the conflict, despite not necessarily taking a side. This is particularly true of young children, who do not have a mental capability to understand, to even be able to take a side. The only ones supporting them are the medics are working tirelessly to save them. By not including them on equal footing, it is also suggesting that civilian victims are not as important as military casualties. In fact, I think that they are more important.

Even if you do not agree that non-belligerents deserve a front-seat in the conversation (and shame on you), to attribute them to a particular side is impossible given the level of reporting. All we know is what side of the border that they happened to be on when it happened.

For all we know, they could be a person of Israeli citizenship who does not politically align with the state of Israel (They could be a Palestinian living in Israel, for example). It could be a Palestinian living in Gaza who does not align with the values of Hamas. It could be someone of another state or religious affiliation or none at all.

It is disingenuous to equate a Palestinian or Gazan as someone who supports Hamas (and it might not be safe to elicit a true answer) and it is disingenuous to equate an Israeli or Jewish person as someone who supports the Israeli Government. So to include them in the info box under a particular state's figures could be offensive if it is wrong. It would be especially offensive to claim a Palestinian as an "Israeli" victim.

To the right is an example of how I believe the infobox should look like.

As it becomes known (if at all) that a civilian was supportive of a particular side, then by all means, they should be moved under the banner of which their align to. Note that it would be hard to be a "Citizen of Hamas" because Hamas is not a country and is itself a militant organisation so how is it even technically possible to be a non-combatant of Hamas. That is without a whole other can of worms of lumping Palestine with Hamas.

If it is absolutely decided that Civilians do not deserve a place of equal footing in the info box, my backup argument is that they should be included above the militants in the info box or of its own infobox above the military one, as they are the most important by virtue of being innocent and not actively making themselves part of the hostilities. Kleinerziegler (talk) 11:20, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

I think we can confirm the reports of kidnapping by now, I agree non-combatants should be added Daniel (strangestuff) (talk) 11:23, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Oppose. It isn't the convention for such things. I think it is best to raise this up to editors who are part of the Military History task force. Borgenland (talk) 11:37, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Don't you think that Israel-Palestine conflict is in a bit of a unique situation compared to other conflicts where it isn't 100% clear cut that subjects of Israeli-controlled territory don't necessarily align with the national identity of Israel? Perhaps on that basis, this is the correct venue to have a discussion and make an exception.

If not, could you please point a link to the correct venue to have such a discussion? Kleinerziegler (talk) 12:07, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

I'm opposed to the addition of non-combatants unless this becomes wiki-wide policy. Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 12:21, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Not a good idea, imagine doing Ukraine. Selfstudier (talk) 12:24, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

This is primary a military conflict, with its own conventions and it would make every conflict more convoluted than it is already. Imagine having Henri Dunant listed as a field commander in the Battle of Solferino.

Anyways, move your forum here to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history

Borgenland (talk) 12:27, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Battle of Solferino was as far as I can tell, a purely military conflict without civilian non-combatant targets. Henri Dunant was not involved in any combat.

For Ukraine, I am very much in favour, as well as Northern Ireland, or any other conflict of civilian non-combatant targeting, especially where their national allegiance can be easily determined (for example, indiscriminate attacks in disputed territory). Kleinerziegler (talk) 12:42, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

But he did involve himself. Which would make him a unit Borgenland (talk) 12:44, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

According to the wiki page about it, the battle was already over, he was inspired by the aftermath to make Geneva conventions which relate just as much to how combatants can attack each other (or not) as it does to civilians. If he was out there on the battlefield telling sides not to kill each other in the heat of battle, or he was out supporting civilians not of any side (and the civilians without a side were actually present in that battle), yeah, I would support his inclusion. But really beside the point isn't it. Kleinerziegler (talk) 12:59, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Agree with others, if this was added here this rationale could really be used in most conflicts. I'm also not sure the point? We have a casualties section which typically delineates between civilians and fighters. If they were fighting together as some sort of militia group with its own wikipedia article then this might change, but as it stands I see no point as having civilians as a "third side" in really any conflict. Yeoutie (talk) 17:02, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Non-combatants are not belligerents- casualties for civilians are covered at the bottom of the infobox. Civilian agencies operating during the war aren't relevant for the infobox - presidentofyes, the super aussa man 12:40, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

If you look closely, the infobox example was modified to say "Belligerents and Non-belligerents" Kleinerziegler (talk) 12:43, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Do also note that your proposal would add an unnecessary gap in the leaders and units, especially if no obvious relief agency is available. It would also lead to more mistakes with users having difficulties with columns particularly in conflicts were there are more than two defined sets of combatants involved. Borgenland (talk) 12:48, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

In my example, I have deliberately omitted "Commanders and leaders" because so far no one has stepped up to stand up for purely the civilian casualties.

I might argue that MDA is supporting both Civilians and IDF, while RC is supporting both Civilians and Hamas, and could be listed twice in that regards, as they don't discriminate based on combatant status.

It would seem that there is precedent for a 4-way war: Syrian civil war. Kleinerziegler (talk) 13:12, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

but your example did not list the Syrian Red Crescent or the White Helmets in whatever you consider to be non-belligerents. Borgenland (talk) 13:20, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

• Abo_Yemen (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) DO NOT edit others' discussion! You vandalised my example. You will be reported if you do this again! Kleinerziegler (talk) 12:53, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

There is already a third casualties parameter in the conflict infobox template for covering civilian casualties. There is nothing unique about this conflict or any other. The same style guide applies . Iskandar323 (talk) 13:04, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Support: Israel/Palestine is a special case. Even if you want to divide everyone into Jewish people and Arab people, there are many Arabs in Israel, and many pockets of formerly (or currently, depending on your perspective) Palestinian territory that can be collateral damage of Hamas' own rockets. You cannot cleanly divide many innocent bystanders into supporters of one country or another. DenverCoder9 (talk) 22:49, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Oppose: almost every conflict involves civilian casualties and the "parties" in an infobox typically represent the belligerents (and allies of said belligerents). Civilians are not fighting this war per se nor are they a belligerent. Per above and per this reasoning, adding in a "civilian party" would be superfluous and inaccurate. Dan the Animator 00:22, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

References

Infobox

Surely ‘operation al-Aqsa flood’ would be a better title to the infobox than ‘Palestinian attack on Israel’, as it’s more specific? 81.106.115.150 (talk) 11:32, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Yes but this article also mentions Israel's operation too. Abo Yemen✉ 11:44, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 7 October 2023

October 2023 Gaza−Israel conflict → 2023 Palestine−Israel War – with the government of Israel declaring a state of emergency and war and most of the important palestinian groups involved in it, it only makes sense for it to be called a war rather than a conflict Abo Yemen✉ 11:55, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

• Too early, we don't know where this will lead yet. FunkMonk (talk) 11:56, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Perhaps wait a bit for sources to come in that it is an all-out war, otherwise Wikipedia could be pre-emptive enough to make it be widely reported as an all-out war, and from there become an all-out war. Kleinerziegler (talk) 11:58, 7 October 2023 (UTC) Struck per WP:ARBECR --Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 16:48, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  Good idea, no need to escalate the situation ourselves. ChaotıċEnby(talk) 12:29, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

• Wait a bit. Note per NYT, "Lt. Col. Richard Hecht, a military spokesman. He told reporters that the military was not yet calling the events on Saturday a "war," even though Israel’s defense minister, Yoav Gallant, had already done so in an official statement." Selfstudier (talk) 12:00, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Comment Shall we move this to Hamas invasion of Israel on the lines of Russian invasion of Ukraine. Please note that Russia attacked Ukraine first and now both are in a war attacking and defending against each other. Same is the case here. Hamas invaded and now both are in a state of war. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 12:23, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  This would violate WP:IMPARTIAL and WP:BALANCE. Ghost finders (talk) 14:48, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  Hamas is not a country. Selfstudier (talk) 12:26, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  @Selfstudier See 2022 al-Shabaab invasion of Ethiopia Parham wiki (talk) 12:35, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose for now despite the "we're at war" comment, the media is still referring to it as a conflict, so it's still the WP:COMMONNAME. There isn't anything to gain by rushing to rename something that isn't widely used yet. It's also controversial to name it after Palestine when it's specifically Hamas that the issue is with. Waiting is the best option in my opinion.
  JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 17:01, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• This scenario always happens, and the answer is always to wait. Dege31 (talk) Dege31 (talk) 17:16, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Support 2023 Gaza-Israel war - both sides have acknowledged this to go beyond just a simple operation and rather a war. RamHez (talk) 17:19, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  Agreed that this should not be called a war with Palestine as this currently has nothing to do with most of Palestine (i.e. the West Bank). So 'Gaza' is correct, although IMO not really a war unless it lasts for a week or so Fig (talk) 22:08, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  Um... [Six-Day War]] 75.104.88.113 (talk) 23:26, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

• Partially support. i think the article should be name “Operation Al-Aqsa Flood” or at least an article about the operation should be created. Stephan rostie (talk) 18:08, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Is the State of Palestine even involved? They gave an ambivalent statement on the matter as far as I can tell, and titling the article as such if they are not in the war would be serious disinformation Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 18:41, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• oppose - conflict still the most commonly used term by external sources Xyphoid (talk) 20:46, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  Hamas would not doubt be claiming that it is in response to some previous invasion by Israel and by this logic it would be never ending invasions and counter-invasions of each other. Kleinerziegler (talk) 12:33, 7 October 2023 (UTC) Struck per WP:ARBECR --Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 16:48, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  Since 1948, ongoing. Selfstudier (talk) 12:36, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  @Selfstudier Russo-Ukrainian War and Russian invasion of Ukraine both article exists. Whats going on since 1948 is a conflict. But this is a major escalation (won't call it war as advised above). There are articles on conflicts going on since 1948. There is a difference in both. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 12:39, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  If one renames Israel-Palestine conflict (the whole thing) as Israel-Palestine war, then this is just a part of that. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS but not relevant to here. Selfstudier (talk) 12:44, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

• I'd support this, it seems to accurately describe this situation rn - presidentofyes, the super aussa man 12:44, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  Perhaps but are sources calling it a war? Selfstudier (talk) 12:47, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  The words Invasion and war are different. They dont have same exact meaning. Since sources are calling/not calling it a war that's why I suggested Invasion. Because this is what it is. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 12:50, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  Which sources are calling it (naming it) an invasion? Selfstudier (talk) 12:52, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  @Selfstudier I never said sources calling it. I said that's what (invasion) it is. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 13:00, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  @Selfstudier Anyways, sources say that Hamas has invaded/incursed/attacked Israel.

  • At least 40 killed in Hamas surprise attack on Israel
  • Hamas kills 40 in unprecedented, wide-ranging incursion into Israel. Netanyahu says ‘we are at war’
  • Hamas launches large attack on Israel as war breaks out in Gaza

  There are many more. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 13:06, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  I would agree with the term invasion if it would be an official proposal. Governor Sheng (talk) 13:16, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

• I suggest we procedurally close this for now as WP:SK #6. S5A-0043^Talk 12:53, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Way too early to tell how the situation will evolve, and whether "war" is the right terminology to use. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:06, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Wait - This does seem likely to turn into a war, but in that case the proper title would be 2023 Gaza War in line with precedent from 2014 and 2008, or if the conflict widens beyond the Gaza area, then we will have to see what RS call it. PrimaPrime (talk) 13:08, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Comment — 2023 Gaza war exists. An article for the attack should not be voided. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 13:11, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  Will be deleted shortly. Selfstudier (talk) 13:52, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  It has been redirected to this article. - Fuzheado | Talk 14:46, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

• Support. Israel declared a state of war because of the Islamist intrusion. --Governor Sheng (talk) 13:15, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Support 2023 Gaza War Israel said it is a war and title would be in line with the previous two Gaza wars. EkoGraf (talk) 13:38, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose The PLO or Fatah aren't involved as far as I know, it would be very disingenuous to call this a "Palestine-Israel War". ChaotıċEnby(talk) 13:39, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Support, Hezbollah has now started in the clashes so it's not localized to Gaza. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 14:09, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose Too early. PLO or Fatah are not supporting as yet so calling it Palestine−Israel war is not right at this point.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 14:33, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose. If anything, it would be a Hamas-Israel war, since the PLO and the Palestinian authorities in the West Bank don't appear to be joining in. The extent of Hezbollah's involvement appears to be a generic statement of support for Hamas (just like Iran), but they don't appear to be involved in the attacks at this time, so the proposed move is to the wrong page. I would support 2023 Gaza War, however, for these reasons and for those given by EkoGraf. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 14:36, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose. Not an improvement. That said, 2023 Gaza-Israel War may be warranted soon. If not already. gidonb (talk) 14:43, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose "Palestine", because the West Bank hasn't been involved. Gaza's got its own political system for a long time. Artoria2e5 🌉 15:09, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Comment I think "Israel" would need to be in the title (e.g, "Gaza–Israel"), as much of the fighting has occurred on Israeli territory. --Jprg1966 ^(talk) 15:26, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  That makes sense for me. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 15:34, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

• Strong Support. There has been an official declaration of war by Israel. This is a full-on war not a simple conflict. PadFoot2008 (talk) 15:32, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose: conflict remains the most commonly used term in external sources. It is a part of the Gaza–Israel conflict which has been ongoing for a long time, see for example Military operations of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. It might get to the stage of the Gaza War (2008–2009) or the 2014 Gaza War, but we must not rush. Onceinawhile (talk) 15:43, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Point of information - There are two contentious issues here, probably the result of a rush of editors new to editing current events articles. This requested move is about a specific title, and not about the general observation of whether this is a war or not. The question being asked is whether "2023 Palestine−Israel war" is the right title. Secondly, titles of articles are generally goverened by WP:COMMONNAME which states, "the term or name most typically used in reliable sources is generally preferred." There is a lot of WP:OR or personal reflection on a war-related title here rather than citing sources. Until mainstream news sources start using a "war" label consistently, you may find staying with the current name more prudent. Looking at this list may be instructive: List of modern conflicts in the Middle East. This is all to say that breaking out a new discussion section just around the "war" label may be useful, because expressing all those opinions into the mix of this RM just makes it more confusing for all. - Fuzheado | Talk 15:45, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  Gaza is enclaved and supported by Palestine Pooqn (talk) 15:50, 7 October 2023 (UTC)  Note: WP:A/I/PIA restriction applies. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:45, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  Gaza is internationally recognized as an exclave of Palestine, but has been controlled by a separate entity (Hamas) since 2007. Hamas caused the attack, not the PLO, and conflating both here would be disingenuous. ChaotıċEnby(talk) 16:45, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose Palestine Israel War. Strongly support Gaza Israel War. Gaza is only a part of Palestine and does not include West Bank. However this is still a war as Israel has entered a state of war. Ecrusized (talk) 15:50, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Support calling this a war since it is one, but I'm not sure about that specific title. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 15:53, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Partial Support: I believe it would be more appropriate to change the article's name to 2023 Israel Hamas war since the war is not happening in the West Bank. EloquentEditor (talk) 15:56, 7 October 2023 (UTC)  Note: WP:A/I/PIA restriction applies. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:41, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  But Hamas isn't the only Palestinian group participating in this. FunkMonk (talk) 16:02, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

• Partial Support for 2023 Gaza War. A Palestine War would imply that it has the support of the entire PA including whatever passes for its entire military structure. Borgenland (talk) 16:02, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose for now. We don't know how long this conflict will last, or how much it will escalate. No need to hurry. —Trilletrollet [ Talk | Contribs ] 16:53, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose: Far too early to make a call on what to call this.--Eldomtom2 (talk) 16:56, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose as this is way too early. I would like to note that it doesn't really matter what Netanyahu calls it, it only matters what reliable sources refer to it as, and at this point they are not using the term war other than when quoting the prime minister. Agree that the "gaza-israel" part should be changed however. Yeoutie (talk) 16:58, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose: Call it what it is: Hamas attacking Israel and Israel defending itself. SteelersDiclonious (talk) 17:11, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose — As others have already said, it is too early to call it a "war", in terms of usage of that word in reliable sources and also the scale of the conflict. Yue🌙 17:23, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Strong support - Israel has declared a state of war. What is happening is more unprecedented than the 2006 Lebanon War (yes, "war"!) I'm perplexed why people insist on calling it the clunky title it has now. -- Veggies (talk) 18:05, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose - Thus far the war does not involve Palestine at large. Gaza is only one of the Palestinian regions and Hamas is only one of its organizations. (That said, I would prefer a less clunky title than the current name.) AbbotOfLeibowitz (talk) 18:11, 7 October 2023 (UTC)  Note: WP:A/I/PIA restriction applies. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:38, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  Except Hamas isn't the only org involved in this war Abo Yemen✉ 18:32, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose - It's too early to call it a war, and too early to tell where the conflict is going to go. - RockinJack18 18:48, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  Yeah agreed. Barring official declarations of war by both sides, naming something a war is best done in retrospect a few weeks or months down the line. Hard to call where this conflict/invasion will go. Unfortunately my gut does think this is going the direct of war, but we don't know that yet, and the sources aren't really supporting it yet. Jjazz76 (talk) 21:49, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

• Support 2023 Israeli-Palestinian war. "War" because Israel itself has called it as such. "Israeli-Palestinian" because this already involves Gaza, and Palestinian militants in the West Bank have been regularly clashing with Israeli troops.VR _talk 19:48, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Strong support It's obvious by now its a full blown war.Weatherextremes (talk) 20:53, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose for now, but it'd be good to have this discussion again at a later time. Most reliable sources still call it a conflict, and until that changes (and therefore so does the WP:COMMONNAME) I'm reluctant to support a page move at this time. Wikipedia has a lot of power when it comes to article titles, so it's important to be sure of these things. Deauthorized. ^(talk) 21:25, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose. "Palestine" is both POV in this context and also inaccurate, as it reflects a war between Israel and the Palestinian Authority that currently is not underway, and/or a war between Israel and the land comprising the former Palestine Mandate, which it now controls, which is nonsensical. Coretheapple (talk) 21:43, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose. Comments made which state that we do not know where this will lead and the main news are referring to this under this nomenclature. Chefs-kiss (talk) 22:13, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Support This case is not like the previous Palestinian-Israeli conflicts. It has a much larger dimension, with a high number of deaths on both sides in only one day. Israel has declared a state of war; and, in addition, it is taking place beyond the Gaza Strip and the surrounding area. Salvabl (talk) 22:25, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Strong oppose - too early to tell if this is a COMMONNAME or if this is even a war. Paul Vaurie (talk) 22:27, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Too soon - pretty obvious we may well get there, but there's no reason to jump the gun. Retswerb (talk) 22:43, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Comment Is it a considered a war yet? Cwater1 (talk) 22:43, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

• Support It's definitely becoming more large-scale with the expansion of Hamas controlled area in Israel because of the Hamas offensive and the large Israeli strikes in Gaza, so it's more of a war than just clashes at this point. RowanJ LP2 (talk) 23:01, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

• Support alternative as 2023 Gaza-Israel War. It is almost certainly a war at this point, but fighting is still localized around Gaza and doesn't exactly warrant being referred to as "Palestine-Israel"/"Israel-Palestine", at least until we start seeing action around the West Bank. BanditTheManedWolf (talk) 23:19, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Support alternative: Move to Third Intifada. AmericanBaath (talk) 00:10, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

• Support per all sides declaring as such. Ultimograph5 (talk)
• Support as Netanyahu has declared that Israel in state of war and Hamas invasion of Israel is a good idea. As some part of West Bank is under Israeli Occupation while Gaza Strip is unitedly under Hamas Control. Lionel Messi Lover (talk)

Oppose any move for now but support 2023 Gaza-Israel War should RS start calling it a war. (ps: strongly oppose any title that includes "Palestine" since Fatah (e.g. half of Palestine) is not a belligerent in this conflict) Dan the Animator 00:27, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose War against whom exactly? Where is the declaration of war and who made it? Why are some so anxious to call this an official "war"? The ink isn't even dry on the story. Perhaps an encyclopedia should follow and not lead? O3000, Ret. (talk) 00:30, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Map of alleged territory seized by Hamas

I have stumbled upon this tweet which purportedly displays the towns under temporary Hamas occupation. Should this image be included in the article? https://twitter.com/ragipsoylu/status/1710584095632163250 Ecrusized (talk) 12:06, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

A proper map should be made if we are to show the occupied towns LuckTheWolf (talk) 12:09, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

We could use this: Template:Israeli-Palestinian conflict detailed map

Just add more cities to it in southern Israel, with control and ongoing engagements and all that - presidentofyes, the super aussa man 12:38, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Hundreds of Israel casualties from Hamas rockets?

The introduction suggests this but the cited sources do not substantiate this. Is there any evidence from credible sources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by El-Baba (talk • contribs) 13:50, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Probably not from the rockets alone but also the incursions. Borgenland (talk) 15:03, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Add Norwegian response

I can't edit the article due to its status, so I'll just put it here. The Norwegian Prime Minister, Støre, has said on Twitter [1]https://twitter.com/jonasgahrstore/status/1710621092673429700 that "Norway strongly condemns the attacks on Israeli civilians and ask that the violence stops immediately. This is a very serious situation developing. Israel has the right to defend itself against military attacks. It is important the violence does not escalate." 109.247.106.208 (talk) 12:45, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

There's an official translation in English I didn't see: [2]https://twitter.com/jonasgahrstore/status/1710620794198323432 109.247.106.208 (talk) 12:47, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Just added it! ChaotıċEnby(talk) 13:08, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Merge?

@Slgrandson: Edward-Woodrow • talk 13:04, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Response weight

As always with such pages, a wall of response material is rapidly being added without a logical stopping point - if 200 countries responded, would the page simply list all 200 responses? A simple starting point for rationalizing this would be to ditch pure twitter/X content. Foreign ministry tweets are a primary source; without secondary sources supporting the mention of such primary statement, they have no weight and are undue. I would suggest initially removing responses that do not have secondary sources supporting them, and potentially later tightening this to multiple secondary sources. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:11, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

The detailed wording usually adds no knowledge. A sentence such as "The attacks were condemned by countryone[ref], countrytwo[ref], ... and supported by countrya[ref], ... would seem sufficient, with more detail when anything substantial rather than routine is said. Best wishes, Pol098 (talk) 13:49, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Based on experience, it is better to condense such statements after things quiet down, because some editors are quite touchy especially if it deals with their home countries. Please do note also that a lot of countries, including mine, have lots of migrant workers in Israel so I might add ours the moment it comes out. Borgenland (talk) 14:23, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

We know that the West will support Israel by default and the rest of the world will call for restraint, with a few outliers supporting the Palestinians, so listing every single country in the western block with their identical statements is pointless. FunkMonk (talk) 15:30, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Reactions are added, until they become too numerous. In that case, only reactions covered in secondary sources may be kept. If that becomes too voluminous as well, a split is in order. Simple procedure. Dege31 (talk) 17:18, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Im going to condense and split off. nableezy - 17:21, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

and done. nableezy - 17:33, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

That's a major change; there should be a consensus first.–St.nerol (talk) 17:46, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

There is precedent, same thing was done with 2021 Israel–Palestine crisis, split off to International reactions to the 2021 Israel–Palestine crisis. Logical, I think. Selfstudier (talk) 22:26, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Add Romanian response

https://twitter.com/KlausIohannis/status/1710570418753474952: Romania strongly condemns this morning rocket attacks against Israel. We stand in full solidarity with Israel in these terrible moments. Our thoughts are with the families of victims and with those who are under fire. Cristi767 (talk) 13:19, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Duplicate

ElijahPepe keeps recreating a duplicate at 2023 Gaza war. Admins, notice this, please. Triggerhippie4 (talk) 13:40, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

This article is now up for the deletion process, so arguments against its existence should be taken there and no further redirects should occur until it is closed. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 13:42, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Should be redirected here, not deleted. It's a valid search term. FunkMonk (talk) 13:46, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Link: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2023 Gaza war. Triggerhippie4 (talk) 13:53, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Israel has now officially declared war. Name should remain. 24.20.147.65 (talk) 13:55, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

I have speedy closed that deletion request so that 2023 Gaza war redirects to this article. - Fuzheado | Talk 14:40, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

• Here's a stub which also seems to be unneeded: Stand-off in Be'eri and Ofakim FunkMonk (talk) 19:13, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Open air prison by HRW

@KiharaNoukan: Your removal of sourced content is not only counterproductive to the state of the article but also in violation of 1RR. There is no reason not to include this important piece of information that belongs in the background section. Makeandtoss (talk) 13:47, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

You deleted sourced content factually stating that the Blockade of the Gaza Strip is conducted by both Israel and Egypt to insert WP:UNDUE POV calling the blockade an "open air prison." KiharaNoukan (talk) 13:55, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

The HRW source I used (UN, Amnesty International, among others have made the same characterization) has called Gaza an open-air prison due to the Israeli blockade while mentioning Egyptian restrictions at Rafah border and not an Egyptian blockade; making my edit completely due and yours completely unsourced. Makeandtoss (talk) 14:04, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

@Makeandtoss Here is a very recent Reuter's article stating: "Israel, which along with Egypt maintains a tight blockade of the Gaza Strip" However, for the sake of each others' sanity and time, do you want to discuss this on the admin noticeboard page you opened up before giving me a chance to respond, or do you want to discuss this here? KiharaNoukan (talk) 14:23, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Both these things are common in sources so both should go in, properly sourced. Both are potentially POV, one because there is no comparison between the Israeli and Egyptian control and the other because it is in general, although not only, rights groups using the phrase open air prison. Selfstudier (talk) 14:42, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

While I would disagree with that characterization, given the extensively more thorough article on the blockade mentioning a dual nation blockade on line 1 of the lead indicating it to be a clearly WP:DUE short descriptor of the blockade, I don't see a problem with inserting both, with like you said, proper sourcing. "The Gaza Strip has been subject to an Israeli and Egyptian blockade since 2007, described by HRW as an 'open air prison.'" or something along those lines would work for me for consensus. KiharaNoukan (talk) 15:19, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Works with me, for now. Makeandtoss (talk) 15:37, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

What’s with the Nepalis?

Is it a transliteration of a Hebrew word or are these actual nepalis? TomGoLeen (talk) 14:08, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Actual Nepalis - presidentofyes, the super aussa man 14:09, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

There were Nepalese nationals who got caught up. But I do recognize the the demonym needs to be clarified. Borgenland (talk) 14:09, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

The article should say why Hamas kidnapped Nepalis. Jim 2 Michael (talk) 18:52, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Forgot to mention it but I added a link in the infobox to Nepali people to clarify it. (Don't change the link even if I know it's a redirect, specifically to avoid further confusion like this) ChaotıċEnby(talk) 20:08, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Simchat Torah and Shabbat

One should remember that not only is Yom Kippur a much more important holiday than Simchat Torah (one with military implications- Yom Kippur is a fast day), Shabbat is not a holiday in the same sense as either- it happens once a week. I would remove the mention of Shabbat and perhaps clarify the difference between Simchat Torah and Yom Kippur. Tangle10 (talk) 14:11, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

It also occurred on Shabbat which is rest day. But aside from that, could you also clarify Succot? There are also mentions of that holiday. Borgenland (talk) 14:25, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Sukkot ended right before this happened, and is a feast holiday. Tangle10 (talk) 15:05, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Support

Support should be added in the infobox. The Pentagon, the highest US military body, announced its support and readiness to provide what Israel needs. Iran expresses its full support for the Palestinians. Dl.thinker (talk) 14:27, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

I removed it from the infobox earlier. At this point the support is solely diplomatic. Wouldn't "support" as a belligerent only make sense if the DOD was actually supplying materiel? --Jprg1966 ^(talk) 14:32, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Israel's military is funded by the US by default, so that would be pointless. FunkMonk (talk) 14:55, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Imagine having to pitch in the rest of Europe arming the IDF and every Eastern bloc country supplying Kalashnikovs to Hamas. Borgenland (talk) 15:02, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Civilian/Combatant casualties/injuries?

Is there an accurate representation for how many combatants have been injured/killed? I think it would be a far more accurate representation for those who are curious as to how the war is going, which we now cant quite get a good sight on.

[Reply by zoryz_]

This information is almost certainly not available yet. This is still a highly fluid conflict. Perhaps the sides will make announcements with the numbers of combatants and civilians at some point, but we must wait. --Jprg1966 ^(talk) 14:38, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

From what I understand, reports from the Palestinian side didn't specify how many victims were civilians or terrorists. ChaotıċEnby(talk) 14:39, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Map

Hi Stowgull, not sure if you intentionally added it back but IMO the map is pretty pointless: we have limited knowledge of the territorial gains and the actual border is ridiculously low quality with no details on checkpoints, roads, etc. – Isochrone (T) 14:55, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

I've removed the map. The map itself isn't well-sourced (the Commons page doesn't really have a good list of sources), and we should avoid placing unverifiable information in the infobox of an article. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 15:07, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

If anything, a new, verifiable map should really be made from the UN OCHA map or using the relevant OCHA GIS data. – Isochrone (T) 15:11, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Also see #Map of alleged territory seized by Hamas where I suggested using the existing Israel-Palestine map template for a map - presidentofyes, the super aussa man 18:05, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

@Isochrone That was unintentional. Was just trying to correct the capitalization. Stowgull (talk) 15:10, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Flag

I don't know why the flags were removed from the Reaction section, it just makes it more difficult to identify countries. BlackShadowG (talk) 14:59, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Magnolia677 (talk · contribs) appears to have removed them. Their edit summaries cited WP:OL and WP:DECOR. --Jprg1966 ^(talk) 15:04, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

My understanding is that it's somewhat standard to not have flags there, but I'm having trouble finding that in MOS:FLAG. My guess is that it's to do with MOS:NOICONS. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 15:04, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Then we’re gonna need a way better solution than the current format because right now this is very unhelpful and confusing in my opinion. S5A-0043^Talk 15:06, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

MOS:NOICONS only banned the use of flags in prose, this section is in list format. BlackShadowG (talk) 15:08, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

The icons serve no navigational function, and country names are not linked. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:12, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

they do Abo Yemen✉ 16:06, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

They do serve a navigational function, they're visual identifiers. Much faster to spot a flag than to comb through words. Killuminator (talk) 16:14, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

@Killuminator exactly Abo Yemen✉ 16:18, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

One could convert this into an actual tabular list rather than the current WP:PROSELINE that we've got. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 15:16, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Most of the reaction section is undue, with the listed reactions being largely based on primary sources, i.e. twitter posts, with no secondary sources establishing weight. Iskandar323 (talk) 16:23, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

@Iskandar323: This is a reasonable point. Is this a practice that is typically followed on other pages with global "reactions" sections? Is there no presupposition of notability if, let's say, the UN makes a statement? Just curious. --Jprg1966 ^(talk) 16:44, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Beyond sourcing, when there are hundreds are reactions, some sort of prioritisation is necessary. A statement by the UN secretary general would be meaningful - a statement just put out by the press office might not be, unless covered in secondary sources for some reason. Serious interview-sources statements by country leaders are also pretty worthy of mention, but this doesn't particularly apply to tweets, which more often than not are just generic words scripted by aides. The next level down are foreign minister statements, which again can be worthy of mention with the same provisos (tweets are again the lowest common denominator), and below that are all the generic foreign ministry statements, which are often little more valuable than your average press release material. Iskandar323 (talk) 16:56, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Makes sense. I will do some vetting of the tweets to see if they've been picked up in RS (or if there are better sources instead). --Jprg1966 ^(talk) 17:00, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

@Iskandar323: How's this: We start to hide (<!-- -->) countries where there are no secondary RS. We can delete them later if no sources emerge later. Figure it's easier than removing and then re-adding later. --Jprg1966 ^(talk) 17:06, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

instead of hiding how about just marking them with a [Better source needed] Abo Yemen✉ 17:08, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Duh, that's a better intermediate step. Yes, let's do that. --Jprg1966 ^(talk) 17:11, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

the flags section has been split to List of international reactions to the October 2023 Gaza−Israel conflict Abo Yemen✉ 17:35, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Taliban

An Russian Telegram Channel wrote, that the Taliban supports Hamas. Link: https://t.me/c/1650319399/1/1993585 لهثسن (talk) 15:01, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, but this appears to be a private Telegram channel. (I can't even see the message without joining the channel.) If you can find a news article from a mainstream source mentioning this information, I'd be happy to add it. --Jprg1966 ^(talk) 15:06, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Flag map of the conflict

based on https://liveuamap.com/ i made a flag map of the war. 47.204.53.161 (talk) 15:09, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

See #Map above. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 15:11, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Info box: add Iran to the "diplomatic support" for the palestinian groups

should we add a "diplomatic support" to the infobox for the palestinian side? because Iran is the only country that out right support the palestinian groups, and it shows america on the Israeli side. just my thoughts

Proposed infobox

October 2023 Gaza−Israel conflict Part of the Gaza–Israel conflict File:Israeli casulties Oct 2023.webp File:Tank captured by palestinians.png Clockwise from top: Israeli casualties during Operation Al-Aqsa Flood, Palestinians celebrating the capture of an Israeli tank, Palestinian attacks on Israeli base, Rocket impact on a car in Rishon LeZion Date 7 October 2023 – present Location Israel and Gaza Strip, Palestine Status Ongoing Belligerents Palestine Hamas PIJ PFLP DFLP File:Lion's Den Emblem.png Lions' Den Diplomatic support: Iran Israel Diplomatic support: United States Commanders and leaders Mohammed Al-Daif Abu Obaida Isaac Herzog Benjamin Netanyahu Yoav Galant Herzi Halevi Kobi Shabtai Units involved Al-Qassam Brigades Al-Quds Brigades Abu Ali Mustafa Brigades National Resistance Brigades Israel Defense Forces Israel Police Strength 1,000 Casualties and losses 198 Palestinians killed, 1,610 injured 100+ Israelis killed, 908 injured, 53 captured 17 Nepalis captured by Hamas, 7 Nepalis injured References

Durranistan (talk) 15:12, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

It's not part of convention for such infobox. Attempts to do so have been reverted. Borgenland (talk) 15:14, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

• @Abo Yemen: I've noticed that you removed part of a diplomatic support section from the infobox on the basis that never in wikipedia have i seen a "diplomatic support" section. You seem to only have done this on the Palestinian side in the infobox; your edit left intact a "diplomatic support" note involving the United States on the Israeli side of the infobox. Why delete the one on the basis that you've never seen it before while leaving the other one? — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 15:13, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  Diplomatic support does not go in an infobox. ChaotıċEnby(talk) 15:20, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  Is there a reason for this? I believe I've seen it in infoboxes before. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 15:29, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  Infobox is for active military support only (eg Belarus in the Russian invasion of Ukraine) ChaotıċEnby(talk) 15:58, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  Let me rephrase. Is there some discussion that came to community consensus on that conclusion? I'm not aware of any, though I'd be happy to take a look at links if you'd be willing to provide them. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 17:35, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  "Diplomatic support" is mentioned in the infobox for Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. It used to be on Soviet–Afghan War as well. AmericanBaath (talk) 00:16, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

  Some parts removed at the same time that other editors put the opposite side on. Borgenland (talk) 15:51, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  i removed both of them but someone else added it back and i didn't really focus on it. Let's add back the standard "Supported by:" Abo Yemen✉ 15:59, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Diplomatic Support in favor of Hamas

Could someone Add "Diplomatic Support" in the Palestinian section of the Template:Infobox military conflict. The countries/Organisations who Support Palestine are Hezbollah and Iran. Source (in German): https://www.n-tv.de/politik/Hamas-Attacke-erhaelt-Beifall-von-Israels-Feinden-article24447286.html لهثسن (talk) 15:15, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

See above. – Isochrone (T) 15:17, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Add Finlands response

Finnish foreign minister Elina Valtonen tweeted support for Israel, a tweet which was retweeted by the finnish government twitter page. https://x.com/elinavaltonen/status/1710561468419039583?s=20 Someone with edit perms please add this response, thank you Jukuboi (talk) 15:52, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

 Done --Jprg1966 ^(talk) 16:26, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

PFLP

Should "socialist PFLP" be this prominent in the article? Why socialist and not secular? There is no explanation of secular PFLP's new cooperation with Hamas. Sometimes organization ideologies and networks change after decades. If all there is is a tweet and PFLP website I hoping someone else will remove it or make it less prominent for the time being. Ben Azura (talk) 16:02, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

I removed "socialist" because we don't make any special ideological note for the other Palestinian groups. --Jprg1966 ^(talk) 16:37, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Add response from Portuguese President and Prime Minister

Both the Portuguese president and the Prime Minister condemned the attacks branding them as "Unacceptable". The Portuguese prime minister said: "The attacks from today against Israel are unacceptable and deserve our strong condemnation. We are sorry for the victims of these attacks, we leave a word of solidarity to their families."

Taken from the following articles in Portuguese:

https://e-global.pt/noticias/lusofonia/portugal/portugal-primeiro-ministro-condena-ataques-em-israel/

https://www.publico.pt/2023/10/07/politica/noticia/israel-marcelo-costa-condenam-ataques-inaceitaveis-nao-ha-portugueses-afectados-2065916 PedroSheridan (talk) 16:04, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

 Done --Jprg1966 ^(talk) 16:35, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Title should be updated to include War

As Israel declared a state of war in the morning of October 7, shouldn't the title be updated to reflect the change of status from operation to war Efuture2 (talk) 16:08, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

A new RM can be proposed once the current RM, which includes some discussion about this, is dealt with. Selfstudier (talk) 16:10, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

see #Requested move 7 October 2023 Abo Yemen✉ 16:50, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

 Not done - Please see discussion above for the existing requested move. - Fuzheado | Talk 20:27, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Over-linking of titles

In the list of presidents and prime ministers who offered support for Israel, do we need to link each leader's title? It creates a MOS:SEAOFBLUE and isn't really necessary. Magnolia677 (talk) 16:42, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

If you BOLDly removed the links to the titles, I would not revert you. --Jprg1966 ^(talk) 16:49, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Map

Perhaps it would be convenient if there was a map that showed what countries' positions were. Dl.thinker (talk) 16:46, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

A map would be very helpful here, especially if it indicated where the fighting has been. 98.170.164.88 (talk) 19:39, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

I agree. Andrew012p (talk) 19:42, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

"Expressed restraint" is not proper English

You can say "called for restraint" or "urged the parties to show restraint", but not "expressed restraint".

Saudi Arabia as a palestine supporter?

I think the part of Saudi Arabia should be in the neutral section instead of the "Palestine support" one,since they speech was more to a peaceful solution to the war Lucasmota0975 (talk) 17:14, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

It was a bit of a mixture, I'd say keep it where it is but as its position potentially evolves, it could be changed - presidentofyes, the super aussa man 18:06, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

I think it is appropriate the way it is now Stephan rostie (talk) 18:11, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

@Lucasmota0975 I agree it should be changed to neutral. 124.123.164.140 (talk) 18:43, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

New attacks against Tel Aviv

Hamas has fired 150 rockets towards Tel Aviv

source: https://www.vg.no/nyheter/utenriks/i/on2pog/nye-rakettangrep-mot-israel in Norwegian 158.248.72.36 (talk) 17:47, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

CNN, in English NotAGenious (talk) 18:10, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

original telegram? NotAGenious (talk) 18:13, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Israeli retaliation

At least 200 people have been killed and 1,610 wounded in the Palestinian enclave of Gaza during Israel’s retaliation after a surprise attack by Palestinian forces into Israel, the health ministry says [3] better add this to the Intro page for more context and a balance. Mujiwins (talk) 18:11, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

 Done -- Jprg1966 ^(talk) 18:51, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Armenian reacation

Can someone ddd the Armenian reacation? Source:

https://newsarmenia.am/news/in_the_world/mid-armenii-shokirovany-nasiliem-mezhdu-palestintsami-i-izrailem-i-targetirovaniem-grazhdanskogo-nas/ لهثسن (talk) 18:14, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

 Doing... NotAGenious (talk) 18:15, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

N I withdraw - I'd like to see an official, reliable statement by the ministry. NotAGenious (talk) 18:23, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Updated casualties tolls

Reported casualties so far:

- Israel: 250 dead, 1,104 injured

- Gaza: 232 dead, 1,697 injured

source: BNOnews

https://twitter.com/bnonews/status/1710725503655596082

Stephan rostie (talk) 19:00, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

 Not done I believe BNO's Israeli numbers are off here. The number at one time was 150+ Israeli dead and 1,104 injured. Those have each now been updated to 200+ and 1,452. --Jprg1966 ^(talk) 19:08, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Support and opposition in the lead

Should countries support/opposition be mentioned in the lead? I was under the operating assumption that generally these sorts of things should be mentioned in the leads of conflicts. But I'm not sure if that'd make this page too verbose.

@Jprg1966: reverted the addition, unknowingly, I reverted his. So I just wanted to reach some sort of consensus with him + other editors on the page. :)

Thanks! KlayCax (talk) 19:21, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Right, my main concern was that the language reflect the balance of actual opinions voiced so far. So I tried to do that with my last edit. --Jprg1966 ^(talk) 19:26, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Looks good. @Jprg1966:. I don't have a strong preference for inclusion/deletion. Not sure if there's a general "rule of thumb" in conflict-type situations or whether it's up to the judgement of editors in each article. KlayCax (talk) 19:28, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

I summarized it[4]. I don't think nitty gritty details are for the lead (like it doesn't matter that PA's support for the uprising happened at an "emergency meeting").VR _talk 19:55, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Title

I think the title should be changed to 2023 israeli gaza war first of all not to be confused with the 2023 may conflict and because this is way more than a "conflict" Fnfp (talk) 19:52, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

 Not done - Please see the discussion above for the existing requested move. - Fuzheado | Talk 20:27, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Talk:October_2023_Gaza−Israel_conflict#Requested_move_7_October_2023 Cwater1 (talk) 22:41, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Page move needed on a technicality

The current separator between "Gaza" and "Israel" in the name is a minus sign −, instead of an en dash –. Per MOS:DASH, an en dash is the correct character here. Would also need to be applied to the international reactions page. --Jprg1966 ^(talk) 19:52, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

 Done, can you update the redirects and text? Andre🚐 20:05, 7 October 2023 (UTC)My apologies, I accidentally moved the talk page without moving the article itself. Someone else has to do it, it's protected. Andre🚐 20:07, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

We'll need an admin for this :( ChaotıċEnby(talk) 20:10, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Yep. I was able to move the reactions page, though. --Jprg1966 ^(talk) 20:15, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

I moved it back to keep it consistent and get rid of the red link until the article gets moved. - RockinJack18 20:21, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

PFLP?

The lead mentions that the PFLP is involved with the attacks. Which reference verifies this? Cullen328 (talk) 21:27, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

The infobox appears to link to a statement on PFLP's website. --Jprg1966 ^(talk) 21:46, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

That statement is a primary source and is non-specific bluster. Are they actually a part of today's attacks? Cullen328 (talk) 22:19, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Someone kidnapped has been identified

Shani Louk, a German citizen, who was seen unconscious in that pickup truck video was identified and reported to be missing by her relatives, as she was attending an outdoor party in Urim, Israel. source. 2A02:908:4E3:9520:DD40:507C:B7CE:F490 (talk) 21:58, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

I think this is relevant

https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1710757415388414307#m

A German citizen was murdered. 69.249.102.223 (talk) 22:32, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Tweets are generally considered unreliable for sourcing requirements. XeCyranium (talk) 00:22, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

party near Re’im

Palestinian terrorists arrived to the nature party complex in the Re’im forest, fired at the participants and threw grenades https://twitter.com/kann_news/status/1710551424436748742 https://www.jta.org/2023/10/07/israel/it-was-utter-chaos-families-and-survivors-describe-the-horrors-of-hamas-invasion https://www.ynet.co.il/news/article/ryhehzybp#autoplay https://www.mako.co.il/news-military/2023_q3/Article-f88c2856ee80b81026.htm https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/gunmen-homes-captives-abducted-gaza-leave-israelis-shock-2023-10-07/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by שמי (2023) (talk • contribs) 22:53, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

peoeple dead https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/report-bodies-being-removed-identified-from-site-of-large-party-near-reim/

"Survivors of Massacre at Israeli Outdoor Rave Describe 'Battlefield'" https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-10-07/ty-article/.premium/survivors-of-massacre-at-israeli-outdoor-rave-describe-battlefield/0000018b-0a85-dae9-adcb-abbfa4990000

a lot of them are missing. https://www.ynet.co.il/news/article/hjyzajclt

I added a sentence about bodies being recovered from the party. --Jprg1966 ^(talk) 23:59, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

death toll 300 now

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/israeli-death-toll-in-hamas-onslaught-rises-to-at-least-300/ 2001:569:57B2:4D00:C9A0:AE48:F495:2536 (talk) 22:47, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

There is no evidence of "widespread sexual assault"

The female Israeli citizen's body that was displayed was not undressed, she was wearing shorts and a bra. A look through this female Israeli's social media account shows that she has posts of herself in that very same outfit and other similar loose, revealing outfits. There is no proof that the Palestinian fighters undressed her or sexually assaulted her. Revise this segment. 41.47.21.14 (talk) 00:14, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

It'd be helpful if you specified the text you wanted changed and provided a reliable source that supports your proposed change. XeCyranium (talk) 00:20, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

"Widespread sexual violence and massacres of Israeli civilians have been reported." The citations do not mention any reports of "widespread sexual violence." One article mentions the woman discussed above, the other cites statements by American politicians speculating that sexual violence would occur. 2604:3D09:D07D:A830:98D4:DBCA:3D4F:805B (talk) 00:26, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Celebrating protests

In Berlin the attacks where celebrated, things like that could be mentioned in the article https://web.archive.org/web/20231007231849/https://www.tagesspiegel.de/berlin/terror-unterstutzer-feierten-angriff-aus-israel-polizei-lost-propalastinensischen-aufmarsch-in-berlin-neukolln-auf-10588360.html FSbiran (talk) 00:28, 8 October 2023 (UTC)