Jump to content

Talk:Jabalia refugee camp airstrikes (2023–2024): Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Mads Gilbert?: new section
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit New topic
Line 41: Line 41:
The October 31 attack on the Jabaliya refugee camp should be a separate article, as that attack is significant both militarily (Israel says it killed key Hamas leader) and the sheer number of casualties.'''[[User:Vice regent|VR]]''' <sub>[[User talk:Vice regent|talk]]</sub> 23:06, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
The October 31 attack on the Jabaliya refugee camp should be a separate article, as that attack is significant both militarily (Israel says it killed key Hamas leader) and the sheer number of casualties.'''[[User:Vice regent|VR]]''' <sub>[[User talk:Vice regent|talk]]</sub> 23:06, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
:[[October 31, 2023 attack on Jabalia|Created]].'''[[User:Vice regent|VR]]''' <sub>[[User talk:Vice regent|talk]]</sub> 00:11, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
:[[October 31, 2023 attack on Jabalia|Created]].'''[[User:Vice regent|VR]]''' <sub>[[User talk:Vice regent|talk]]</sub> 00:11, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

== Mads Gilbert? ==

I think Wikipedia will lose credibility if it think Mads Gilbert's opinion of the the 31 October bombing is an impartial or important piece of information. There's a one in a trillion chance he would ever NOT label an Israeli attack as a massacre.

Whether he is 100% right or not, he is known for his extremist views, such as saying the September 11 attacks were justifiable (later "retracted"). He has been a prominent anti-Israel activist and Hamas ally for well over a decade. [[Special:Contributions/1.129.108.0|1.129.108.0]] ([[User talk:1.129.108.0|talk]]) 02:28, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 02:28, 1 November 2023

Please edit this article for neutrality.

The article opens by describing the attack as "terrorist". Especially in the present context, that term is far from neutral. Please edit for neutrality. W.edelberg (talk) 18:12, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's a style guideline for that. Language and sourcing has gotten much better. – SJ + 15:05, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It may be worth adding a controversy heading to address neutrality concerns. This would allow for addressing the Amnesty International consideration of the attacks as a war crime, while also addressing the terrorism language from the Israelis. Just a thought. JW907AK (talk) 18:35, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

The only claims presented in this article are from Hamas or Hamas-controlled organs of state. Hardly neutral and independent, and the fact that this does not include independent or the Israeli perspective present serious NPOV concerns. Added POV tag. Longhornsg (talk) 19:49, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I just added an Israeli claim and several accounts from survivors speaking to France24. It's hard to input exact tolls and sources when only Palestinian officials and media report on the airstrike and it's casualties. There are several videos from independent media [1][2], showing civilian casualties and injuries, along with the destruction of the market, but none give an exact toll or numbers. Jebiguess (talk) 21:55, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Which claims are you referring to? The page as a whole appears to have diverse sourcing. Iskandar323 (talk) 03:50, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Multiple reliable sources are present, to which you are free to add any "balancing" perspective. I see no use of the POV tag for now. Makeandtoss (talk) 10:26, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Plural airstrikes

There were airstrikes on both the 9th and the 12th; the title should probably be plural. I changed the section descriptions to include the dates. (It's more clear there should be two sections now that the toll from the second strike is known to have been higher.) – SJ + 15:06, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

fake news

"On October 19th, the camp was hit by a third airstrike, killing 18 refugees." The source provided claims "18 Palestinians killed in Israeli air strikes on Gaza's Jabalia refugee camp". It doesn't say " 18 refugees". It can be 18 rocket launchers who were firing form the camp. If you make up things, so why not say "18 terrorists"? 192.114.1.66 (talk) 16:01, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Israel defines any Palestinian they kill as a “terrorist” including surrendering unarmed civilians so you may be right The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 17:39, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is not NPOV. Not sure how it is relevant. Use the information from the sources. Antisymmetricnoise (talk) 23:43, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

October 31

The October 31 attack on the Jabaliya refugee camp should be a separate article, as that attack is significant both militarily (Israel says it killed key Hamas leader) and the sheer number of casualties.VR talk 23:06, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Created.VR talk 00:11, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mads Gilbert?

I think Wikipedia will lose credibility if it think Mads Gilbert's opinion of the the 31 October bombing is an impartial or important piece of information. There's a one in a trillion chance he would ever NOT label an Israeli attack as a massacre.

Whether he is 100% right or not, he is known for his extremist views, such as saying the September 11 attacks were justifiable (later "retracted"). He has been a prominent anti-Israel activist and Hamas ally for well over a decade. 1.129.108.0 (talk) 02:28, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]