Talk:2024 Iranian strikes in Israel

Name change

I think the name Iranian attack on Israel is better. This is an attack like never before. In addition, this is an attack with different types of weapons (assuming we will find out later that there was also a cyber dimension and the like). Galamore (talk) 21:09, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Support but this should probably be a move discussion Lukt64 (talk) 21:09, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

No. Because someone just forwarded the article without waiting for further opinions.Galamore (talk) 21:11, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Oppose There have been previous strikes on Israel by Iran, so for now let's leave it with the current name. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 21:15, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

This is not true. Iran didn't strike Israel from its own terrority before.

(Source) SpringKay (talk) 08:24, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Support as in not calling it anything like Iran-Israel war. Calling it that when all of this could be over a week from now makes no sense to me. Poklane (talk) 21:15, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Oppose The "assuming" is pure WP:CRYSTAL and doesn't have its place here. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 21:18, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

WP:CRYSTAL isn't relevant. This is not speculation, rumors or any kind of violations stated in the guideline. SpringKay (talk) 08:37, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Hmm. What was this "attack" a response to?

Don't bomb embassies. 2607:FEA8:A4E5:6A00:C057:A3A3:66EE:A4B (talk) 21:20, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

• Comment The appropriate title was 2024 Iranian strikes on Israel, the page has been repeatedly moved without discussion. AusLondonder (talk) 21:23, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Oppose This was a retaliation to the Israeli bombing of the Iranian embassy in Damascus, so the appropriate term would be "strikes." "Attack" also seems a biased term towards this situation and would be inappropriate per WP:NPOV. Christophervincent01 (talk) 05:19, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Support

As it is an historic event and the first time ever Iran attacked Israel from its own terroity. SpringKay (talk) 08:25, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Oppose for reasons already stated. Alexanderkowal (talk) 08:42, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Oppose the intent of Iran sending missile's into Israel was not to disstory anything, it is for a show of force, and to deter Israel from future boming of Iran's embassys.

We also did not call the Israel air strike on Iran's embassy a attack, we called that a boming, and that was done with intention of as some would say to neutralize the embassy and the people inside

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_bombing_of_the_Iranian_embassy_in_Damascus Ricemaker313 (talk) 11:49, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Oppose : Hello, I created this page yesterday using the terms '2024 Iranian drone attack on Israel'. If I used the term "attack", it's because I'm not completely fluent in English, and in French, the term is broader. However, it wasn't a POV, as within the same framework, I didn't attribute the strikes to Iran and used the conditional for this attribution until other contributors deemed it appropriate to update, which I, of course, followed. Regarding the date 2024, which seems to be the issue, I preferred to specify the timeframe for the page to be more precise, and mainly because I was unaware if such confrontations between these two countries had occurred before. Since it appears from this discussion that it's the case, as the messages above state, it's clearer to keep the term '2024' for now. As for the question of 'bombings', 'strikes', etc., I don't have a clear position.AgisdeSparte (talk) 12:03, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

I must state that the name we kept for many of the pages where I worked used the yearly date, even if they were the first, for example : 2023 Turkish drone shootdown or 2023 Tours bombing AgisdeSparte (talk) 12:07, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Add belligerents

Since the US and the UK are shooting down drones they should be added 2A02:3100:5E50:FE00:E00D:4ED6:3FF8:30AE (talk) 21:11, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Do you have a source for that? Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 21:51, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

from a quick search: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/14/us-and-uk-forces-help-shoot-down-iranian-drones-over-jordan-syria-and-iraq Notnotmysql (talk) 00:18, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Unbalanced Background section

The Background section focuses in an extremely WP:UNDUE way on the October 7 attacks and on Hamas, describing them in gruesome detail, while making little mention of the more direct background (the Israeli missile strike) that led to the confrontation. One or two sentences discussing the context (October 7 attacks and Israel-Hamas war) should be fine, but having several paragraphs give it a weight that isn't in the reliable sources and are not needed as immediate background, while the recent escalation of tensions between Iran and Israel could be more elaborated upon. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 21:12, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Yep I've tried to remove some of it but every time I get an edit conflict. AusLondonder (talk) 21:19, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

I suggest the "Background" section should only discuss in-depth the missile strike and any other events directly connected by WP:RS consensus to the current strikes. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 21:21, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Appears to be fixed already, thanks a lot! Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 21:34, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing, and aiming to keep it simple and succinct so that this does not become a battleground Dreameditsbrooklyn (talk) 21:37, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

By "gruesome detail" do you mean "lies"? Before it was edited, it read like an Israeli PR release. 2607:FEA8:A4E5:6A00:C057:A3A3:66EE:A4B (talk) 22:23, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Change to sentence case

As it is, the article is not in sentence case as strikes is not a proper noun. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 21:18, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

It is due to the article being moved 3 times in 10 seconds, stopping the old name without capital S being used. Lukt64 (talk) 21:20, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Support speedy move per MOS:MILTERMS and WP:MILNAME. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 21:22, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Support speedy move: completely uncontroversial BappleBusiness^[talk] 21:58, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

"ICBM missiles"

The claim in the article that there are ICBMs heading towards Israel doesn't seem substantiated by the source. Not all missiles are ICBMs. There are less than 1000km between Iran and Israel and ICBMs have a range of over 5000km. 109.101.157.168 (talk) 21:21, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Agree. I removed it. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 21:24, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 13 April 2024

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. Speedy move to smaller case strike. reopening this discussion for 'in' vs 'on'. – robertsky (talk) 01:47, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

---

2024 Iranian Strikes in Israel → 2024 Iranian strikes in Israel – No need to capitalize the word strikes. RodRabelo7 (talk) 21:26, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Also, shouldn't it be "on", not "in"? Triggerhippie4 (talk) 21:28, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Not a native English speaker here, but there are the pages 2024 Iranian missile strikes in Iraq and Syria and 2024 Iranian missile strikes in Pakistan. RodRabelo7 (talk) 21:31, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Note: I think in is preferred in those cases because the strikes targeted non-state actors in those countries and not, say, the regular armies of the countries. As a native U.S. English speaker, strikes on seems to imply the latter, but this could be semantics. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 22:09, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Support speedy move although the page already exists as a redirect to this article. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 21:28, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

This is left up to technical requests. Lukt64 (talk) 21:30, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

• Comment This page has been listed at WP:RM/T requesting that the undiscussed moves are reverted. AusLondonder (talk) 21:32, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Military history, WikiProject Palestine, WikiProject Military history/Post-Cold War task force, WikiProject International relations, WikiProject Syria, WikiProject Israel, WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration, WikiProject Yemen, WikiProject Iran, and WikiProject Islam have been notified of this discussion. RodRabelo7 (talk) 21:31, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Support speedy move to sentence case, we can get consensus for "in" vs "on" later. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 21:32, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Support speedy move to revert back to the proper, correct version with the lower case. Triggerhippie4 (talk) 21:39, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

1. Speedy move to correct sentence case (lowercase S), and 2. the correct preposition "on" (instead of "in" - which would only be correct if they were launched from Israel, which is not the case. Widefox; talk 21:54, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

What would be the correct title for the other two pages mentioned above? Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 21:55, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Support speedy move: completely uncontroversial BappleBusiness^[talk] 21:58, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Comment: Page has since been moved to 2024 Iranian strikes against Israel, which has also updated the requested move template above, giving it a misleading appearance. Please note that comments prior to 22:00 UTC were not necessarily opposed to the current name. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 22:13, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

@SaintPaulOfTarsus, there are two different pages that uses the preposition "in" instead of "against"... See Category:Drone strikes conducted by Iran. Should we move those two pages? RodRabelo7 (talk) 23:01, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Rod Rabelo: My intention was to simply point out that when you started the discussion, the article title was 2024 Iranian Strikes in Israel. It is now 2024 Iranian strikes against Israel, but the requested move template now reads It has been proposed in this section that 2024 Iranian strikes against Israel be renamed and moved to 2024 Iranian strikes in Israel, which was not the discussion when the comments above were made. Regards SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 23:04, 13 April 2024 (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.

Please continue the discussion on reaching consensus for which preposition to be used in the article title at Talk:2024 Iranian strikes in Israel#Requested move 14 April 2024. – robertsky (talk) 01:59, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Add commanders and leaders in lists

add names of Iranian president etc GeopoliticalSphygmomanometry (talk) 21:30, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

The Supreme Leader is the de facto leader of Iran, is there any evidence that the President is in charge of the operation? Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 21:33, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Should it not be 'have yet to reach Israel' instead of 'are yet to reach Israel' ?

73.72.101.57 (talk) 21:33, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Forgot to log in when I made this, fuck. BurnerAcountOneThousandAndOne (talk) 21:34, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Done. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 21:35, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Well, thanks anyway BurnerAcountOneThousandAndOne (talk) 21:38, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

You can get it oversighted. RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 04:15, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

They have reached Israel. Air raids sirens in Tel Aviv right now PalauanLibertarian^🗣️ 22:07, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Pictures

i do not know how to add pictures to Wikipedia i have some footage that can be added as Pictures of the drones in Israël Basedenverist on tiktok (talk) 22:22, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:UploadWizard PalauanLibertarian^🗣️ 22:35, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Strength

add Iron Dome on Israëls strength side cuz that's what their using to counter them Basedenverist on tiktok (talk) 22:23, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

 Done SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 22:29, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Merge with Israeli bombing of the embassy?

That’s it MoMoChohan (talk) 22:34, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

No, these are two separate events. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 23:26, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Part of the Iran–Israel proxy conflict, Iran–Israel conflict during the Syrian civil war, Israel–Hamas war, and Israel–Hezbollah conflict (2023–present)

The "part of" parameter in military infoboxes tends to get a little out of hand, but these strikes are currently classified as "part of" four larger conflicts, those being the Iran–Israel proxy conflict, the Iran–Israel conflict during the Syrian civil war, the Israel–Hamas war, and the Israel–Hezbollah conflict (2023–present).

I do not believe these strikes could reasonably be considered part of a proxy conflict as one party in the conflict is directly striking the other party. I also find that these events have a tangential connection to Syria and little bearing on the internal civil war going on there. The latter two I find reasonable.

Please discuss. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 22:36, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't think that the Syrian civil war has anything to do with this, but the other conflicts do. It is known that Hamas and Hezbollah are proxies of Iran as per Iran–Israel proxy conflict. Iyzn127 (talk) 11:52, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Added a picture no permission

I have added a picture of a Iranian suicide drone in Israel shot down can't upload in wiki page cuz no permission Basedenverist on tiktok (talk) 22:44, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

You cannot just upload random images you find. You need the copyright permission PalauanLibertarian^🗣️ 22:47, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

What is the picture file Lukt64 (talk) 22:47, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Iranian_drone_shot_down.jpg PalauanLibertarian^🗣️ 22:52, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Unfortunately, that's how copyright works. You can ask the person who took the picture to release it under a matching license (as CC BY-SA, not just "to use on Wikipedia" because of licensing shenanigans), or find/upload another picture whose creator released under a permissive license. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 23:13, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Navy

Is the navy also supposed to be added because I'm pretty sure their also going to get involved to shoot down the drones Basedenverist on tiktok (talk) 22:56, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Unless a source says they have, they will not be added. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 22:58, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

CNN has said the United States air defence is getting involved in this So in strength a USA air defence maybe? Basedenverist on tiktok (talk) 23:01, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Please provide URL links to your sources SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 23:06, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Add France and the US to the list of belligerents

France and the US are involved in the conflict as per WSJ reports: here and here Screen111 (talk) 22:59, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

The US one was linked twice. Is France also involved? Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 23:15, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Apologies, here it is https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/israel-iran-strikes-live-coverage/card/france-deploys-navy-to-defend-israel-fwknZbgcf2sGhKZdTlye Screen111 (talk) 23:16, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Oh shit. Well, guess we go in the list of supporters now... Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 23:19, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Iran attacks U.S. bases in Iraq

OSINT sources say U.S. Forces at Erbil International Airport and Al-Asad Airbase in Western Iraq are under attack. Let's wait for better sources for confirmation Anime King (talk) 23:06, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Please link when making "OSINT says" statements :) RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 05:19, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Should Jordan be listed as a supporter in the belligerents?

Jordan is listed here because Jordan stated they will shoot down any Iranian missiles that go through their airspace, but is that not just how closing your airspace works? Several other countries closed their airspace and I don't know that this meaningfully counts as Jordan offering Israel support. I get listing the US because the US is actually defending Israel, but it seems like Jordan is just enforcing the closure of Jordanian airspace?  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 23:13, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, closing your airspace is just a routine thing and isn't actual involvement. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 23:16, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

The reference I added[1] states that Jordan has opened its air space to Israel to allow shooting down the oncoming drones. --Z 23:18, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Airspace closure pertains to civilian aviation. Military hardware flying through your airspace to get to someone else is another matter. Too, Jordan and Israel have a peace treaty which covers this sort of thing. kencf0618 (talk) 03:28, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Jordan is reported to have actively shot down drones that invaded their airspace. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/jordans-air-defence-ready-shoot-down-any-iranian-aircraft-that-violate-its-2024-04-13/ 2600:1006:B155:A779:CC0A:B2DB:F28E:CD6D (talk) 11:45, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

The first attacks have hit

Should we add this or wait for a source? PalauanLibertarian^🗣️ 23:19, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Your file doesn't work, but yes wait for a source. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 23:23, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Do these?

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1AZ0X0BTSMEFbdyLmbPj5mR6CTv_y6Ez9/view?usp=sharing,

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1n7kGLp-b_hiTK9T-2tTOq_GLmZZXvUe5/view?usp=sharing,

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1oGFVZZd2zbKJODcYaZSHwQaTjnvh4nzP/view?usp=sharing PalauanLibertarian^🗣️ 23:28, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, but for now wait for a reliable source to report. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 23:30, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

"Blasts heard above Israel after Iran launches drone attack – live". The Guardian. April 14, 2024. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 23:49, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

I'm not downloading from whatever website this is, I expect better sources will catch up in a few minutes. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 23:24, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

We should wait as that is considered just a WP:primary source. --Z 23:50, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

There's the Guardian source form a few minutes ago. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 23:51, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Units involved

USAF and RAF in the units involved section? DontForgetJeff (talk) 23:24, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Name of operation

I believe the name of the operation is “Operation True Promise” not operation truthful promise (a desperate name for an operation in the Middle East in 2006) can this be changed? Bobfroglog12321 (talk) 23:25, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Some also say Faithful Promise. Maybe add a note with the other names PalauanLibertarian^🗣️ 23:32, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

US, UK: Support or full belligerents?

As I've seen edits moving back and forth over this: should the US and UK be added as full belligerents in the infobox, or only as providing support? Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 23:26, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Full surely, as they have air units actively intercepting UAVs. That is a full involvement with lives potentially at risk. DontForgetJeff (talk) 23:27, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

@Chaotic Enby According to Sky News, USAF and RAF manned jets shot down many Iranian drones over Iraq. "Support" is used for mere military equipment supply rather than personnel. Llew Mawr (talk) 23:36, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

They are not the targets of the attacks, so not sure if they would be full belligerents. --Z 23:53, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

While they are not the main belligerent (Israel), they are actively shooting down drones which makes them co-belligerents. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 23:53, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

I have no problem listing them provided we have sourcing to support that they've had an active role. AusLondonder (talk) 23:55, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Non-Houthi involvement not supported by ref

This sentence has been added a few times to the article: "Hezbollah and Iranian-backed groups in Iraq, Syria and Yemen also launched rockets towards Israel." [2]

However, looking at the context, it is clear that it's in reference to the broader Hamas-Israel war (not this particular drone strike).

Thanks, David O. Johnson (talk) 23:27, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

 Done Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 23:29, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Almost all media calls it Operation True Promise

It is Operation True Promise, not Operation Truthful Promise (more generally referring to a 2006 even in the Middle East). Please change it to Operation True Promise to clear this up as this is how it is being described by the IRGC which is their official title for these events. Bobfroglog12321 (talk) 23:43, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

"No casualties have been reported"

Last line in the April 14th paragraph makes that claim but there are reports that a 10 year old Bedouin boy was injured https://twitter.com/i24NEWS_EN/status/1779286755855757674 2A01:73C0:501:DAC:0:0:C22:56C3 (talk) 23:44, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

It's already in the article. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 23:48, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Upload image?

Should we get some non-free images on the page, especially the images of the ground explosions, such as in the Nevatim Airbase or should we wait for free images to get upload? PalauanLibertarian^🗣️ 23:48, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Be for real, who is gonna copyright strike wikipedia? Lukt64 (talk) 23:58, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

There's a reason why we can't use any copyrighted image and {{fair use}} has strict conditions of use. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 00:01, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

We simply cannot use any non-free image unless it fully complies with WP:NFCI, which is stringent by design. Cullen328 (talk) 05:37, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Iron dome

Why is Iron dome specifically listed, Arrow 3, David Sling, Iron Dome but specifically a2a missiles have been used to shoot down the majority of the drones. It is very out of place in the infobox, in my opinion and should be removed. 80.217.100.31 (talk) 00:29, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Well someone requested it be added not too long ago but I will change it. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 00:31, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Reactions from Poland and coverage in TVN24, Polsat News, TVP Info

1. Why is reaction from the Council of Ministers (Poland), Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Poland), Prime Minister of Poland, President of Poland and other government institutions of Poland? 2. About What is describing the coverage of the current news from Palestine by TVN24, Polsat News and TVP Info? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.29.183.212 (talk) 00:58, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Not every statement from every country from every institution needs to be covered. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 01:05, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Disagree with @Flemmish Nietzsche.

This is an act of war made by Iran. International response is a common practice in these types of articles.

+ UN is involved and the general secretary of the UN has made a statement regarding the attack. SpringKay (talk) 08:32, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

? except for the israeli embassy attack, every statement from every country from every institution WAS covered. 138.255.255.14 (talk) 10:31, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Artesh involvement?

The infobox claims that the Artesh (Iran's conventional army) took part in the attacks alongside the IRGC, do we have any sources for this? Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 01:17, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

There was one but it was heavily biased in its wording. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 01:23, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 14 April 2024

2024 Iranian strikes in Israel → ? – The previous discussion was on moving 'Strikes' to 'strike' version, and it was speedy closed by me as there is a speedy consensus on that matter. However, what has been raised in that discussion is whether to move the article from 'on' to 'in', and also while the discussion was ongoing (for 3-4 hours or so), it was also moved to 'against' (and earned two separate RM/TR requests to revert), therefore there are three possible titles here:

1. 2024 Iranian strikes in Israel
2. 2024 Iranian strikes on Israel
3. 2024 Iranian strikes against Israel

Opening this discussion as a continuation of the earlier discussion. Further discussion on whether to have the year removed from the title per WP:NOYEAR to be carried out in a separate subsection below. – robertsky (talk) 01:55, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Suppprt against. Oppose in / on as it is not clear. SpringKay (talk) 10:52, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Comment: It is worth noting that many of the strikes were against targets in the occupied territories, which are not Israel, so any title that implies the strikes were confined to Israel will invariably be a gross violation of NPOV. Iskandar323 (talk) 11:48, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Preposition: 'in' vs 'on' vs 'against'

3 - The title was fine before as 2024 Iranian strikes against Israel and I don't think it needs to be changed to anything else. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 01:56, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Support "against", accept "on", oppose "in". Amyipdev (talk) 02:33, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

3 because this is part of the Israel-Iran proxy conflict. JohnAdams1800 (talk) 03:49, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

• "on" or "against" Option 1 causes unnecessary confusion with "in", but I don't have that strong of an opinion between option 2 or 3. Gödel2200 (talk) 03:00, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Support "against" or "on". Oppose "in". Blaylockjam10 (talk) 03:02, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

@Flemmish Nietzsche, @Amyipdev, @Gödel2200, @Blaylockjam10, just noting that 2024 Iranian missile strikes in Iraq and Syria and 2024 Iranian missile strikes in Pakistan follow the same pattern, using the preposition "in". RodRabelo7 (talk) 03:35, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

My problem w/using “in” is that some of the projectiles were shot down before they reached Israel. I don’t believe the other strikes you mentioned had projectiles that were shot down in other countries. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 08:33, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Support "against" or "on". Oppose "in". Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 07:12, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

in the contrary to 2024 Iranian missile strikes in Iraq and Syria and 2024 Iranian missile strikes in Pakistan where the strikes took place only in pakistan or only in sytia,iraq here a major part of the strike took place outside of israeli borders so "against" or "on" seems to my to by more accurate then "in" Anticonstitutionnel (talk) 08:32, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

I would prefer a different title entirely, 2024 Iranian attack on Israel. This seems shorter and more to the point than "strikes". This was a direct attack by Iran on Israel. I would prefer keeping the year since past incidents of the Iran–Israel proxy conflict like the 2006 Hezbollah cross-border raid can also be considered Iranian attacks on Israel. Ecrusized (talk) 09:18, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Support "on"; oppose "against" and "in". As for "attack" vs "strikes"; this was clearly a major attack and is described as such by RS but I oppose changing "strikes" for now until the dust settles. Makeandtoss (talk) 10:33, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

• Support 3: "against"; oppose "on" or "in", which imply that the strikes were geographically confined to Israel, when a large part occurred against Israeli forces in the occupied territories – the latter are still "against" Israel as an entity, without being on Israel or in Israel. Iskandar323 (talk) 11:55, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

WP:NOYEAR

Since the Israel against Iran page got NOYEAR'ed, this one should too. (I was not in favor of NOYEARing the other one, but nonetheless it should still be done for consistency...) Amyipdev (talk) 02:04, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Support I don't see an instance where someone could mistake it for any other israel-iran conflict and thus the year serves no purpose. Although I guess the question now is whether it's Iranian strikes on or against Israel. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 02:09, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Comment: Putting this as a subsection of the requested move discussion above. – robertsky (talk) 02:18, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

• Support As per above, I can't think of any other Iranian strikes that would require year specification, so NOYEAR applies here. Gödel2200 (talk) 02:55, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose I prefer keeping the year since past incidents of the Iran–Israel proxy conflict like the 2006 Hezbollah cross-border raid can also be considered Iranian attacks on Israel. The year also allows readers to find the article more easily. Ecrusized (talk) 09:30, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Is there consensus at this point on NOYEAR? Amyipdev (talk) 07:53, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Oppose, WP:NCEVENTS calls for the year of the event in the majority of cases, with NOYEAR applying only to historically unique events (i.e. September 11 attacks). The year is a useful indicator for the reader and keeps it WP:CONSISTENT with other articles in this set. Pilaz (talk) 09:32, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Oppose; year helps keep things in perspective. Makeandtoss (talk) 10:34, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

End of proxy war

In the Iran–Israel proxy conflict the article reads “This is the first direct military confrontation between the two countries since the beginning of the Iran–Israel conflict.” Would this end the proxy war as its open warfare? See more detailed talk page. LuxembourgLover (talk) 02:39, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

The manifold proxy war is definitely over. What the Iran-Israel conflict is now... Well, to coin a phrase it is "the longest now". kencf0618 (talk) 03:41, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

As of yet, I wouldn't consider it an end, since the Al-Asad Airbase retaliation for the Assassination of Qasem Soleimani didn't lead to an "open warfare" between the United States and Iran. But this is still recent, nobody knows about the possible escalations that could follow suit. Christophervincent01 (talk) 04:09, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

WP:CRYSTAL is always controlling. RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 04:14, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

"32 Injured or treated for anxiety" figure

I see that "1 injured" was changed to "32 injured or treated for anxiety" and feel like that's confusing and inappropriate. It makes no distinction between serious wounds and anxiety treatments.

Not trying to downplay the significance of the anxiety attacks that many in the area no doubt suffered from and checked themselves into hospitals for, I can sympathize as I myself struggle with terrible anxiety and require medication to manage it, I can't imagine how terrifying it must have been to be in their situation. But there's an obvious difference between suffering from potentially nearly fatal wounds and having an anxiety attack. Combining them into a single figure instead of listing them separately is less informative.

But it's also WP:SYNTHESIS. The first source only talks about the 1 injured. The second source says "About 31 people were treated for anxiety or injuries." Meaning the 1 confirmed to be physically injured shouldn't be added to the 31 because it looks like the 31 figure already counts the 1 confirmed injured. We could change 32 to 31, but my preference is to just list the 1 injured. At least then we know exactly how many are confirmed to be injured instead. The NBC News source that lists 31 "treated for anxiety or injuries" muddies the waters and should be avoided.

 Vanilla  Wizard 💙 02:42, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

It seems like there was only one real casualty, the one injured you mentioned, and the rest were just minor injuries from heading to shelter when hearing the sirens. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 02:48, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Is adding people with anxiety attacks in the "Casualties and losses" part of the infobox truly pertinent though? Looks like a joke, quite frankly... RodRabelo7 (talk) 04:03, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Well there's no figure yet as far as I know that separates "anxiety attacks" from actual injuries. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 04:05, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

I removed mention of “anxiety” from the infobox: frankly, it did not belong there not only on grounds of non-notability, but moreover due to this ambiguity in the sources. I would argue that self-inflicted injuries are irrelevant in face of the priority that reporting *direct* injuries and casualties takes. ‒overthrows 09:19, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Add info re Apr 13 seizure of container ship

"Commandos from Iran's paramilitary Revolutionary Guard rappelled from a helicopter onto an Israeli-affiliated container ship near the Strait of Hormuz and seized the vessel Saturday in the latest attack between the two countries." https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/world/as-tensions-with-israel-rise-iranian-forces-seize-a-container-ship-near-strait-of-hormuz 75.91.175.71 (talk) 03:54, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

That exists as a seperate article,Iranian seizure of the MSC Aries. That's why it isn't listed here M Waleed (talk) 09:26, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Israel

Should there be an new article for strikes in Iran if Israel responds by directly hitting targets in Iran? PopularGames (talk) 04:20, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Probably, but that hasn't happened yet so let's not speculate. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 04:23, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

In such an event, it would definitely warrant a new article (and a subsection here directing for further) and may need to have a parent. But one thing at a time. Let's not get ahead of ourselves. RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 05:22, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

3 Deaths

There is a dispute among editors (see this discussion & this edit summary) currently about whether to include the 3 Jordanian deaths from the airstrikes.

The dispute in question is the following being in the casualties section of the infobox:

*At least 3 Jordanians killed by missile debris of intercepted missiles by Jordanian Air Force.

References

Can others please discuss this addition as it has been reverted twice. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 05:56, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Probably needs an extra source since other editors had flagged it as dubious. Preferably a proper website. Borgenland (talk) 05:57, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Agree, and I haven't been able to find any other source mentioning this, which you would think would happen by now if it were true. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 06:01, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Visegrad 24 is cited by other sources including CNBC and the Times of Israel. No RSN discussion has occurred regarding its notability. The dubious claim was also my own edit soley due to it being Twitter-based. Twitter-based RS is actually allowed with a perfect example being BNO News, which is almost entirely a Twitter-based RN news organization. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 06:00, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

There's no need to use the stylized 𝕏 character, and we already have a perfectly fine {{cite tweet}} template. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 06:05, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

The Jordanian deaths should be added as spillover. We have done this for spillovers on other articles. Although it needs a reliable news source, not someome on social media. Linkin Prankster (talk) 06:53, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Ethnicity of injured civilian

Users keep adding back that the injured civilian in the attack is an Israeli Bedouin. What does it matter? It's not like Iran deliberately chose them nor this is an ethnic conflict. The information is entirely irrelevant and should be removed. Linkin Prankster (talk) 06:51, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

While Iran may not have deliberately chose them it is important to note that the person injured was not an ethnic Israeli. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 06:56, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

How exactly is it important? It adds nothing and the ethnicity doesn't matter. Israeli Bedouin are also Israeli citizens under the law and this isn't an ethnic conflict. Linkin Prankster (talk) 07:02, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

It's important because Israeli bedouins are Arabs and there was an article not long ago that said while Israel takes the Jewish people to bomb shelters during Hamas' rocket attacks, they deliberately leave the bedouin Arabs unprotected in the deserts under falling Hamas rockets, and sometimes the IDF directly bombs these Arab bedouins.Crampcomes (talk) 07:13, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Your reasoning clearly is a violation of NPOV. We cannot base this on some article long ago which you aren't even linking. And this isn't a place to condemn Israel or any side for that matter, even Iran. Linkin Prankster (talk) 07:30, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

It is important to note that the person injured was not an ethnic Israeli. And also Wikipedia is not about what you think or feel. It's about what the reliable sources say, and reliable sources mention that the injured person was a bedouin.Crampcomes (talk) 07:37, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

What is an ethnic Israeli? Bedouins are civilians of Israel. Israel doesn't just consist of Jews. Wikipedia isn't about what anyone thinks or feels, but your reasoning is a violation of NPOV. This isn't a place for condemning Israel, it's irrelevant to the topic. And you still haven't linked the article you cited. I'll have to add a NPOV tag. Linkin Prankster (talk) 07:52, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Let's try it again. Reliable sources say the injured was a bedouin that's why we say that the injured was a bedouin. In Wikipedia, per Wikipedia policy, we don't include what you think or feel.Crampcomes (talk) 08:03, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

We are not news, WP:NOTNEWS. Just because a detail was considered important enough by some news sites, doesn't mean it's important for an encyclopedia. The detail contributes nothing. Your reasoning also includes allegations by you of discrimination by Israel of Bedouin Arabs in matters of rocket shelters, suggesting this is a neutrality violation. Linkin Prankster (talk) 08:10, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

I think the solution here is to state that she lives at a "Bedouin village", not to state her ethnicity, since it is the most accurate interpretation of the reports. As you can see from the image in the article Unrecognized Bedouin villages in Israel, in contrast to other Israelis that have a concrete shelter or at least a house made out of concrete, the girl probably only had a wriggly tin roof to protect her from the shrapnel (which is what usually harms civilians). So the reader can infer from this information that a strong shelter is important. I also think that the ethnicity information is relevant, since in the eyes of some of many readers (e.g. those who think that Iran is acting on an anti-Semitic basis), they think such information is important. But we don't have accurate info on her ethnicity. Lainad27 (talk) 10:59, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

It is stated later on that it was in a Bedouin village, but maybe that could also be put earlier Alexanderkowal (talk) 11:13, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

That will still be OR, as it is being added based on an assumption that the village is probably unrecognized. We have no proof if it is recognized or unrecognized. Linkin Prankster (talk) 11:24, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Just say "Jew" if that is what you mean. 185.182.71.28 (talk) 11:20, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

This is just a fake. There are Bedouin serving in idf in Gaza. Israel doesn’t “take” people to shelters. They go by themselves. 46.210.18.243 (talk) 09:28, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

according to the israeli policy in matter of IDs the nationality distinct from the citizenship is wrighten on the ID and although israel recognizes many nationalities like jew arab arameen ect israeli is not recognized as an nationality so there is no ethnic israelis but rather israelis from jewish,arab, nationality Anticonstitutionnel (talk) 08:20, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

That's completely untrue. Israeli ID cards don't record ethnicity but their status: whether one is an Israeli citizen, permanent resident or temporary. Israeli ID cards only included the ethnicity of the bearer upto 2015, no longer. Linkin Prankster (talk) 08:54, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

This is untrue. The ethnicity section is empty since 15-20 years ago. And in new IDs it's altogether removed David tm (talk) 11:57, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

There is no such thing as ethnic israeli, israeli is a crizenship that covers ethnic jews, ethnic Arabs, and others. It is not an ethnicity. Chafique (talk) 09:31, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

I second that Bedouin isn’t relevant here and should be removed Alexanderkowal (talk) 08:48, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Bedouins are Israeli citizens just like Jews, Arabs, Druze and so many more. Greetings from an Israeli-Arab in behalf of equality to all Israel haters in wikipedia. Lilijuros (talk) 08:57, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

@Lilijuros ? I agree with you just having “Israeli” is enough and that Bedouin is not relevant and implies nothing Alexanderkowal (talk) 09:13, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

I agree, it is not relevant wether the victim was an israeli ashkenazi or israeli sephardic or israeli druze or israeli bedouin or israeli christian. Chafique (talk) 09:28, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

It is an ethnic conflict. 2A01:36D:118:88AA:1856:C49:DC3E:75E3 (talk) 09:54, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

It is not an ethnic conflict at all? Alexanderkowal (talk) 10:05, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

It's not an ethnic conflict. It's not even a religious conflict (as many Muslim states aren't on side of Iran and some Arab states support or are neutral to Israel). It's at best a national conflict. Linkin Prankster (talk) 10:05, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Agree. On the October 7th attack page there is no mention of the ethnicity of those who've been kill or wounded, even though there were Muslims and Bedouins that have been killed. Iyzn127 (talk) 11:29, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

The only reason why it can be of matter, is since Iran is trying to portrait themselves as a protector of muslims in conflict with Israel.

Other than that, the girl is full blown Israeli, no matter the ethnicity. David tm (talk) 12:00, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

I've searched high and low about this issue. Apparently there's no relevancy to the girl's ethnicity. She was reported to be sleeping when she was hit by the shrapnel. So even if her town/village is recognized or had a shelter, she wouldn't be able to reach it. [3] We should avoid including the injured civilian's ethnicity solely on assumptions that she is suffering from the same plight of some other Israeli Bedouins. Linkin Prankster (talk) 11:32, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 April 2024

Request to change refs to resolve the on Biden's quote calling "the intercepted attacks a win".

Proposed change:

Biden called the intercepted attacks a win for Israel.<ref>https://nypost.com/2024/04/14/world-news/biden-tells-netanyahu-us-will-not-engage-in-offensive-against-iran-calls-saturday-a-win-for-israel-report/</ref>{{bsn}}

and

<ref>{{Cite news |title=Scoop: Biden told Bibi U.S. won't support an Israeli counterattack on Iran|url=https://www.axios.com/2024/04/14/biden-netanyahu-iran-israel-us-wont-support|access-date=14 April 2024 |website=Axios}}</ref>

to:

Biden called the intercepted attacks a win for Israel.<ref name="Axios U.S. won't support">{{Cite news |title=Scoop: Biden told Bibi U.S. won't support an Israeli counterattack on Iran|url=https://www.axios.com/2024/04/14/biden-netanyahu-iran-israel-us-wont-support|access-date=14 April 2024 |website=Axios}}</ref>

and

<ref name="Axios U.S. won't support"></ref>

This resolves the {{bsn}} by using a ref that already exists in the article, from a [reliable source].

Thanks & feedback appreciated. NicheRef (talk) 07:08, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

"Spillover of Hamas-Israel War"

Introduction to the article states this event was a "Spillover of Hamas-Israel war".

This event has nothing to do with that war, as it is a direct response to Israeli bombing of the Iranian embassy in Damascus.

Trying to connect this event to Hamas Israel War damages Wikipedia neutrality.

I suggest to remove this statement from the introduction. SpringKay (talk) 08:44, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Israeli bombing was itself a consequence of Iranian involvement in the Israel Hezbollah conflict, so it is a part of the spillover of Israel Hamas war M Waleed (talk) 09:22, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

I understand your claim, and I agree that the bombing was a consequence of the Israeli- Hezbollah conflict. However, Hezbollah's involvement is part of the general Iran–Israel proxy conflict and it is not specific to the Hamas-Israel war. SpringKay (talk) 09:33, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

The recent escalation of Israel Hezbollah came as a spillover of Israel Hamas war M Waleed (talk) 12:33, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Well done everyone

I just want to express my gratitude that this article has covered all the news accurately and with due weight. I am happy to see the article in being such a good shape. 🙂 Ecrusized (talk) 09:21, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 April 2024 (2)

Iraq officialy supports Iran for the attack Kerosene3 (talk) 09:48, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Megan B.... ^{It’s all coming to me} till the end of time 11:08, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Consulate NOT Embassy

WP:ECR ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:49, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The citation given even states consulate NOT embassy - change to be accurate. 2600:1700:4410:9460:B4B8:1BAD:25C4:7362 (talk) 10:07, 14 April 2024 (UTC) The consulate is located in the embassy compound in Damascus. This has been made clear on the article of the Israeli airstrike. Linkin Prankster (talk) 10:17, 14 April 2024 (UTC) That is still not the embassy - your own citation states consulate and so then too should the article - nothing needs to be made clear when the appropriate language (again your own citation uses it) is used 2600:1700:4410:9460:B4B8:1BAD:25C4:7362 (talk) 10:45, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Why *in* and not *against*?

Don't understand it 84.110.218.178 (talk) 11:15, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Scroll up to Talk:2024 Iranian strikes in Israel#Requested move 14 April 2024 to see the discussion about fixing that. Boud (talk) 11:30, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

The lead should be summarised

The lead is supposed to be a readable summary of the article (like this), not a selection of statements that actually belong in the body. Moreover, an average reader of this English article doesn't know what many of the terms in the lead such as "Houthi", "Bedouin", "Popular Mobilization Forces" or "David's sling" signify. --Z 11:32, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Edit request 14 April 2024

Description of suggested change: "Prime MInister" -> "Prime Minister" when referring to Justin Trudeau under "Other Countries". Just a small copyedit request.

Diff:

−

Prime MInister

+

Prime Minister

Rovenrat (talk) 12:34, 14 April 2024 (UTC)