Talk:Shireen Abu Akleh/Archive 2

Corporation

They refused https://news.walla.co.il/item/3505695 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.53.45.185 (talk) 06:01, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Prime minister

"Israeli prime minister Naftali Bennett initially posted a tweet blaming the death on Palestinian gunmen, citing a video posted by the Israeli military".

I read this tweet. He wrote about some indications (one of them was the video). He did not state that Palestinian gunmen did.

Hear he wrote "it appears likely" and offered "called on the Palestinians to conduct a joint pathological analysis and investigation, " https://mobile.twitter.com/BarakRavid/status/1524288439214120961?cxt=HHwWgoC9qc2QrqcqAAAA

The Palestinians disagree https://www.zman.co.il/live/310693/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.53.45.185 (talk) 06:01, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 May 2022 (2)

Funeral of Palestinian journalist Shireen Abu Akleh after her assassination in Palestine

Funeral of Palestinian journalist Shireen Abu Akleh after her assassination in Palestine

Masry1973 (talk) 08:34, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. I don't think adding a blurry screenshot ofa YouTube video with an overlay is an improvement. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 09:03, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

There are other photos available of the funeral of Sherine Abu Akleh on Wikimedia Commons, which could improve the article.

--Masry1973 (talk) 11:46, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

even her own picture in the info box is not shown, please try to add it, it is also available in wikicommon Arabic Ali S. Alawami 16:31, 12 May 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alawami (talk • contribs)

Chronological order

These incidents should be covered by strictly following the order of events as they unfold, in those sources that provide them. They are there on twitter and facebook apparently. Richard Silverstein, usually highly informed, but nonetheless not usable here since it is a private blog, provides the following account. It is my paraphrase.

According to Palestinian sources, four journalists were present, positioned at the edge of the Jenin refugee camp. The group consisted of Abu Akleh and Ali Samoudi from Al Jazeera, and two local Palestinian journalists, Shatha Hanaysha and Mojahed Al-Saadi. Three shots were fired. The first missed a target. The second hit Ali Samoudi in the back, a shoulder wound. Abu Akleh shouted that her colleague had been wounded, and was in turn hit in the neck below the ear, the bullet exiting her face. The firing continued for three minutes.(Richard Silverstein,'IDF Sniper’s Cold-Blooded Murder of Palestinian-American Al Jazeera Journalist,' Tikun Olam, 11 May 2022 reports this account from Ahmed Khaled Al Najjar’s facebook page)Nishidani (talk) 10:44, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

One might note that both accounts have the two victims shot from a position to their rear, itself an indication of the direction of the lethal fire. So what has to be determined is, whether they were looking towards the area where Israeli troops were positioned or away from them and towards inner Jenin. That will be complicated because the disposition, certainly of the undercover Israeli unit, would not necessarily be identical to that of the marshaled troops on the periphery. Nishidani (talk) 10:54, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Using a free image from Commons

Use a free image from Wikimedia Commons with an appropriate license, instead of the currently used non-free image. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.197.37.151 (talk) 10:48, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Seems to be a valid youtube upload from the station and marked as CC-reuse. Will add. nableezy - 12:29, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Split out the section on death

I think the section on her death should be split into Killing of Shireen Abu Akleh. This event is now becoming notable in its own right. And it is also becoming so detailed that its pretty much taking a disproportionate amount of this article. In such cases it is best to have all the details of her killing (and international reactions) in the child article while keeping a summary of it here.VR _talk 16:13, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

I’ll most likely support this eventually, but I oppose it for now. As long as the story is still developing and accusations of POV-pushing are being slung around (I mean, look at this talk page) I think a split runs too much risk of becoming a POV fork – or at least wasting editors’ time trying to maintain NPOV in two places rather than one. Having a death summary in the bio article essentially takes the issue of making a lede neutrally reflect its body and multiplies it by adding other places that also need to reflect that article body. Would love to hear other editors’ views but my current stance is let’s not do something like that just yet – give it some time, maybe until the RD tag comes off or something, and then we can do a split. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 16:25, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

I'd say wait a bit, some dust to settle, then do that. Selfstudier (talk) 16:30, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

I disagree. She will remain notable abroad for the circumstances of her death. Secondly, the article is way under the average wiki optimal length, at a mere 3000 words. Splitting will just create two stubs.Nishidani (talk) 16:57, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

A split needs to be discussed here, not carried out unilaterally and by an account with fewer than 500 edits per WP:ARBPIA. nableezy - 19:52, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

And for the record, I so far oppose splitting this. What is needed is more material added on her life, not a separate article on her death. nableezy - 19:53, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Agreed. The fact that a split will likely become appropriate at some point in the future does not mean we should split the article now, which would open up (as seen here) serious POV fork and other issues for no clear gain. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 19:59, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

On the other hand, much of this detail on detail breaking news annotation will become quite pointless trivia when the picture clarifies. Were one to do a précis, nothing would be lost were one to trim it to half its length.Nishidani (talk) 21:16, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Background section required.

Since Jenin has been a city subject to almost constant raiding by the IDF and the source of militant/terrorist attacks on Israel, some background detail is required.

(2) The section on death is inept reflecting haste in annotating breaking news. One doesn't start out by saying she was reported as killed, one starts by the bare facts of what happened that day as far as they can be neutrally determined, followed by Palestinian and Israeli versions.Nishidani (talk) 17:03, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Battle of Jenin (2002) "The Jenin camp was targeted after Israel reported that it had "served as a launch site for numerous terrorist attacks against both Israeli civilians and Israeli towns and villages in the area." Plus ça change. Selfstudier (talk) 17:52, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Quite true. Just as Israel has been the origin of what Palestinians (justly) regard as incessant acts of terror over the last 30 years. As of 9 May, 49 Palestinians have been shot dead in the West Bank in operations not restricted to hunting for those respnsible for the four terrorist incidents over the last few months. Innocent people are shot quite frequently,an investigation by the suspected culprit is promised and nothing is ever heard of it later. Take the case of Hanan Khadour shot, almost certainly by an IDF sniper while seated in a taxi in Jenin on 9 April, discussed by Gideon Levy. The Abu Akleh case was almost identical, but received coverage because she is famous, and American. Nishidani (talk) 19:37, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Or most of them were shot because of certain Palestinians who threw Molotov cocktails (or stones) or fired or stabbed (or even tried to blow themselves up). According to haartz: https://www.haaretz.co.il/news/politics/.premium-1.10735502 2.55.190.12 (talk) 07:59, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

lead

this is still a biography of Abu Akleh, not an article on her killing, the autopsy, investigation, or recrimminations. There is zero reason to include half of the material about the death in the lead. Should chop anything about autopsy, bullet, investigation offers. nableezy - 19:32, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

don’t have the time to make changes right now, but this makes sense - will try to work on it later if nobody else can ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 19:51, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

All that needs doing is to excerpt the last para:

On May 11, 2022, Abu Akleh was shot and killed while reporting on an Israel Defense Forces raid on the West Bank city of Jenin. Al Jazeera and the Palestinian Ministry of Health reported that she was killed by the IDF. An Agence France-Presse photojournalist also reported that Israeli forces had shot and killed her. Eyewitness reports as well as statements by other countries and non-governmental organizations additionally characterized her killing as having been perpetrated by Israeli forces. While Israel initially said she was killed as a result of an exchange of fire with Palestinian militants, an Israeli spokesperson subsequently said that it was not yet known who was responsible; the Israeli assertion that Palestinians fired on the IDF was disputed by eyewitnesses and Palestinian figures. An initial autopsy by Palestinians was inconclusive as to who shot Abu Akleh, as the bullet is undergoing testing. The Palestinians refused to agree to Israeli examination of the bullet citing the need for an independent investigation while Israeli officials said that the Palestinians wanted to "obscure its origin".

That detail has no place in the lead. Nishidani (talk) 19:57, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Id retain the first few sentences of that tho. Suggest at the end of the first para this

On May 11, 2022, she was shot and killed while covering a raid by the Israeli military in Jenin, an Area A city located in the West Bank.

be replaced with this

On May 11, 2022, she was shot and killed while covering an Israeli military raid on the West Bank city of Jenin. Al Jazeera and the Palestinian Ministry of Health reported that she was killed by the IDF, while Israel initially said she was killed by Palestinian fire before later saying it was as yet unknown who was responsible.

nableezy - 20:59, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm fine with that.Nishidani (talk) 21:11, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Can you do it? I think with the edit history youre the only one who can return it without it being a revert. nableezy - 21:38, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

This is true, given that she was also one of the leading Palestinian journalists it seems odd the lede gives more attention to her death than her career. Dunutubble (talk) (Contributions) 20:42, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

There arent a ton of sources in English on her life, theres an Arabic interview on Youtube that could be used to flesh out some more details (the Hebrew and Arabic page both cite it). nableezy - 20:59, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

South African reaction?

DIRCO (South Africa's Foreign Affairs Ministry) condemned her killing. Could this be included in the article or is it not important enough? Dunutubble (talk) (Contributions) 20:59, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Oh dear. Please don't let us start a reactions section with flags and soundbites from political talking heads. This is an encyclopedia, not a record of political opinions.Nishidani (talk) 21:02, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

@Dunutubble Why not? I say yes, if that voice is notable. --Masssly (talk) 10:32, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

If we take the page 2021 Israel-Palestine crisis, it was decided there to spin out all the reactions to a separate article. It was overdone somewhat because we spun out important reactions of key players and then had to put some back but the point remains I think valid, the majority of reactions are not that significant including this particular one although it might be worth collecting them up on a separate article. Selfstudier (talk) 11:25, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

@Selfstudier What makes you feel that the source suggested by Dunutubble is not significant? Oh, because it's South African and not "Western"? --Masssly (talk) 08:39, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Every country in the world reporting these events may well carry an 'official formulaic' comment. The reactions sections are lists of ritual statements, mostly devoid of relevance or significance, since they predictably line-up according to what the various foreign ministries decide is the appropriate attitude to take with events in Israel/Palestine. Editors like them because they're easy to do, with nice flagcons, and because they are thought to favour, by their numbers, one side or another. This is hardly encyclopedic because the remarks are empty of significant content. If SA then Australia, then Canada, then Bangladesh, then Iceland. Yawn. The only significant reactions refer to parties intrinsically engaged with the so-called 'peace process'. Nishidani (talk) 09:41, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

@Nishidani I wasn't referring to the source of the reaction, not the significance, or not of it. - -Masssly (talk) 10:10, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

It's a good answer, regardless. I can instead ask you the same question, what is it that makes you feel that the source suggested by Dunutubble is significant? Selfstudier (talk) 10:31, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Title

Per WP:BIO1E and Wikipedia:"Murder of" articles § "Shooting of" / "Stabbing of" (etc.) articles, shouldn't the title of this article be moved to Shooting of Shireen Abu Akleh? Unless I am mistaken, this person was not notable enough for an article before her tragic killing. Havradim leaf a message 00:17, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

My understanding is that "not notable before death" ≠ "no stand-alone notability", because in some cases a person's death leads to coverage of their life in reliable sources and thereby establishes notability. This might be one of those cases, although based on the way RSes have described her ("household name", "among Arab media's most prominent figures") I think she was likely notable before she was killed. There are Arabic-language sources out there from before her death, as-yet-uncited here and with new details. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 00:24, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

She was definitely notable before her killing, that we didnt have an article on her prior to that just means Wikipedia isnt finished. nableezy - 00:31, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Nationality

Shes a Palestinian Journalist, putting American Journalist only is wrong and misleading. 92.253.106.182 (talk) 04:55, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

What is the standard for this in similar articles? Is her citizenship as a Palestinian broadly recognized by other states?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Brokaw

I do not see references to "nationality" as being consistently separate from citizenship in any other articles, nor used to describe place of birth/ethnic background apart from citizenship generally. It may be sporadically used, but in light of the politically charged nature of the evolving news around her death it seems to artificially make conspicuous her ethnic background.

I favor removing the separate listing for nationality vs citizenship. It is not in line with common practice. 98.212.153.36 (talk) 20:07, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

We include nationality (citizenship) as a matter of course in the lead of biographies, and here both nationalities factor in to her biography. The reason the US State Department is making the comments they have made is because she was an American citizen. It also is, according to at least one source, "undoubtedly" a contributing factor to Israel walking back their strident denial of responsibility and blame shifting to promising an investigation. nableezy - 20:27, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Accurate the openning

"while Israel initially said she was killed by Palestinian fire before later saying it was as yet unknown who was responsible."

The israeli prime minister said "it appears likely". 

So, i offer to change: "while Israel initially said it is possible that she was killed by Palestinian fire." https://mobile.twitter.com/BarakRavid/status/1524288439214120961?cxt=HHwWgoC9qc2QrqcqAAAA — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.55.190.12 (talk) 08:13, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

See also section

The See Also section of the page refers to three cherry-picked wiki articles that have no direct connection to this page other than a highly contentious and implausible claim of “people targeted by the IDF”. The only person who was even a journalist by profession was not acting in that capacity when killed. The article would benefit from more relevant referrals such as articles about journalists killed in this particular conflict or other conflicts more generally. This would better reflect Wikipedia being an encyclopedia rather than online propaganda. 77.124.27.113 (talk) 08:26, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

I tend to agree but for a different reason, that these are relatively old cases.Selfstudier (talk) 11:39, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes, the 2002-2003 cases are from quite a different context (Second Intifada) - there are much closer parallels (not all on Wikipedia) from 2018/2019 Iskandar323 (talk) 14:21, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

public controversies over the killing of people by the IDF is the common theme, nothing saying anything about "targeting" if you would like your comment not to reflect being online propaganda. nableezy - 13:38, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Killing of Mohammad Habali is recent and indicative of the value of Israeli investigation among other things. Selfstudier (talk) 14:00, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm inclined to agree. The connecting thread is that those included in the section were killed by the IDF, a position this article does not directly take. 2403:5808:1846:1:48A:6E9:9C4A:55BB (talk) 09:42, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Describing this as "highly contentious and implausible" is itself rather POV. PatGallacher (talk) 14:46, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Now the section has been blanked on the grounds that it is not known who was responsible. We say in the article that "In April 2022, the International Federation of Journalists filed a complaint with the International Criminal Court accusing Israeli forces of systematic targeting of journalists." That complaint identifies 4 cases, one of them being one of the see alsos that have been deleted so I have included that into the article. Selfstudier (talk) 12:48, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

It doesnt even matter who is responsible, all of those are relevant links with Corrie probably being the least relevant. Removing other journalists killed in this conflict is absurd though. Alssa1 please self-revert your edit. nableezy - 13:57, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

So we should list all journalists who've died in the conflict in the See Also section? I imagine that would make it the largest section on the article... Alssa1 (talk) 14:16, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

I believe I said in this conflict. And we list what is relevant, the links removed are relevant and removed without any basis. nableezy - 14:18, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Uh, no. There were 5 and I have included one of them directly into the article so that would be 4 and if we took out Rachel Corrie, there would be 3. Selfstudier (talk) 14:19, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

The links were removed with a basis, you just happen to disagree with that basis. Also, I believe I pointed out to you that if we were to list every journalist who had been killed in this conflict, the "See Also" section would be the largest part of this article. Also why stopped at killed journalists? We could also do injured journalists, killed aid workers etc etc... Alssa1 (talk) 14:22, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Because this was a killed journalist. Given you are in the distinct minority here, Ill return the see also links myself later. Toodles. And no, there was no basis, your edit summary was a non-sequitur, saying Given the fact that there has been no conclusion as to who shot, should we not leave the See Also section blank? That isnt a basis, that is begging the question, and logical fallacies arent actually reasons. nableezy - 14:27, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

It's journalists because the subject of this article was a journalist. It's not every journalist who has been killed, it is journalists killed by Israeli forces, if you like we can include journalists killed by Palestinians..oh, wait, there aren't any.Selfstudier (talk) 14:30, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

You don't understand what a logic fallacy is then. Alssa1 (talk) 14:37, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Category:Journalists killed while covering the Israeli–Palestinian conflict has 7 entries and

Category:People killed by Israeli security forces has 24.

Comments about largest section have no basis. Selfstudier (talk) 14:44, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Been restored, i'd be fine taking out Corrie though. nableezy - 15:05, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Yaser Murtaja is now linked in the article body so that one can come out.Selfstudier (talk) 15:07, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

IDF attack on funeral procession

Al Jazeera has been reporting on the IDF attacking the funeral procession carrying Akleh's coffin. There should be other news coverage being released soon, as the event just happened a few hours ago. Silverseren^C 13:07, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Israeli police beat mourners with batons at funeral procession for veteran journalist (CNN) Selfstudier (talk) 13:30, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

"troubling scenes" (CBS) Selfstudier (talk) 13:35, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

I added a subsection on the funeral. nableezy - 13:37, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Israeli police attack funeral procession for shot journalist Shireen Abu Aqleh images show Al Jazeera reporter Shireen Abu Aqleh’s coffin falling as police grab Palestinian flags from crowd (Guardian) Selfstudier (talk) 14:24, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Already cited. nableezy - 14:28, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Latest Updates: Israeli Police Attack Mourners at Palestinian Journalist’s Funeral (NYT) Selfstudier (talk) 14:34, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Another good quality independent RS News source Shireen Abu Akleh: Israeli forces attack mourners carrying casket of dead Al Jazeera journalist ~ BOD ~ ^TALK 19:02, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

It is notable that the NYTs this morning describes the incident as an 'assault' by Israeli police, while the Guardian speaks directly of IDF troops 'storming' the bier. They've dropped the speciously 'neutral' term 'clashes' which functions as the default word for such incidents. Nishidani (talk) 09:44, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Inappropriate caption

Under the second photograph in the Funeral section the caption reads:

'The Israeli police attacked the funeral of Shireen Abu Aqleh'

Needs de-editorialising. Suggest 'Israeli police presence at the funeral procession for Shireen Abu Akleh' 91.102.86.184 (talk) 19:14, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes, the caption could use a rephrase. No, we shouldn't describe police beating the pallbearers as "police presence". Changed to Israeli police attack pallbearers at Abu Akleh's funeral. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 19:27, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

See the section above. The EU condemned the excessive force. Selfstudier (talk) 19:28, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Widely reported as attacking and assaulting, we dont obfuscate or play down facts to serve a POV as that would be editorializing. nableezy - 20:14, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

As Selfstudier and Nableezy said, the fact that Israeli police attacked the mourners has been widely covered in multiple reliable sources, and so has the international condemnation of the attack been. It's perfectly NPOV to state that Israeli police attacked the funeral procession. Jeppiz (talk) 23:44, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Fair enough, 'police presence' is too malleable. I still think 'attack' is simplistic and one-sided. I agree with the censure of excessive force, but what the police were doing essentially was dispersing the crowd - they backed off immediately after the coffin slipped, which I think is notable in that their aim and purpose was to disperse and not to 'attack'. The whole incident lasted less than a minute - the footage of it shows a standoff, followed by police pushing into the crowd, during which mourners here and there scuffle with the police and some objects are thrown. The crowd pulls back and the police pull back. Whether the police officers nearest the coffin used unprovoked force against the pallbearers themselves or reacted to being lashed out at by the pallbearers seems impossible to adjudicate in my view, but this is the question you have to claim to have the answer to in order to justify 'police attack pallbearers' versus 'police clash with pallbearers' or similar. It's a matter of 4-5 chaotic seconds. I think it's fair to include the heaping of condemnation on the police from all of the various sources without stating as a bald fact that the police attacked the pallbearers, whether or not ostensibly reliable journalists choose charged language in their reportage. I'm aware this is interpretation and not citation on my part, I just think that it's worth taking great care with the language and trying not to be black-and-white where things are muddier than that. 91.102.86.184 (talk) 12:36, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Please read and internalize WP:NOTFORUM, what you think is simplistic or one-sided is not relevant to this page. What is relevant is that reliable sources have called it an attack and an assault over and over and over and over and over. Nothing is muddy here, and your attempts to muddy them with your personal analysis and personal musings is not an acceptable use of this talk page. Kindly stop misusing it. nableezy - 14:06, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Recent edits

This diff seeks to explain the "cause" of the Israeli attack on the mourners as being the fault of the mourners. This is what WAPO says "But Israeli police at the hospital gate refused to let the crowd through and, within minutes, a squad in riot gear pushed forward, setting off stun grenades and beating back the mourners with truncheons. People scattered amid a cascade of thrown bottles and rocks." It does not say "In response" which has now been added following my initial objection as to relevance. So WAPO does not support the claim as stated.

What does ToI say? First off, if this is supposed to support "in response" then the ref is in the wrong place. It says:

"The police said in a subsequent statement that it intervened because rioters took her casket at the hospital against her family’s wishes, and prevented it from being loaded onto a hearse, as previously agreed, for that part of the funeral procession."

The edit doesn't attribute this claim to the police, secondly it completely contradicts what the police have said in another statement In a statement, the Israeli police said they “took enforcement action” after some mourners began chanting “nationalist incitement” and after officers had given the crowd a warning. As the coffin was carried out of the hospital, police said, they were “forced to act” because “rioters began throwing stones toward the policemen.”(NYT)

The claim appears to be exceptional, I cannot find it anywhere else myself, can anyone else find any support other than ToI? Selfstudier (talk) 23:27, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

The NYT now has what appears to be an update of its reporting above and mentions this new (?) Israeli statement, "The Israeli police later said they had intervened because the mourners, who wanted to carry the coffin by foot to the funeral, had refused to put it in a hearse, an arrangement the police said had previously been agreed to with Ms. Abu Akleh’s family. But the police intervention drew shock and condemnation both in Israel and beyond, with the assault on mourners regarded as egregious regardless of its motive."

It goes on to report the views of an independent witness, Mr. Kühn von Burgsdorff, the European Union envoy to the Palestinians, who said that tensions escalated after the police refused to allow mourners to take the coffin on their shoulders to the church prompting a standoff between mourners, who would not allow the hearse to approach the hospital, and the police, who refused to let them leave with the coffin. von Burgsdorff tried to mediate between the police and the mourners. "Realizing it was impossible to persuade the police to change their mind, Ms. Abu Akleh’s brother, Anton, also asked the mourners to put the coffin in the hearse. But neither side would back down, as the mourners held onto the coffin and waved Palestinian flags against the demands of the police."

Idk how we should edit all this into the article, trying to justify Israeli action as a "response" is not going to fly, we need to explain that the police said they wanted x and the mourners said we want y. Is that the reason for attacking the mourners or is the earlier (?) statement about stone throwing the reason?

Selfstudier (talk) 00:33, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

At most that allows for that Israeli police said that is why they attacked, not for WP to repeat their claims as fact. We dont say as fact that the IDF shot her despite that being reported by several sources and the Palestinians, but we should accept as gospel the Israeli justifications for violence at the funeral? The NYT says for example three plastic bottles were thrown prior to the Israeli surge in to the pallbearers. This game where anything Israel says is fact but anything they dispute must not be given any credence is tiresome. I am removing the bit on "in response". nableezy - 03:15, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

The word 'response' is again standard after the adjective 'Israeli' but very rare with regard to 'Palestinian'. It's an example of WP:Systemic bias, asserting that Israel never acts except under provocation, which is, esp. since the NYTs and the Guardian speak of a police 'assault'/'storming', absurdly at odds with a zillion reports over decades. Nishidani (talk) 09:49, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

“Killing of” article has been created

At Killing of Shireen Abu Akleh. Large chunks of the “Death” section here should probably be moved there and replaced with a shorter summary of that article’s content. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 19:49, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Nevermind. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 19:55, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

See #Split_out_the_section_on_death nableezy - 19:58, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Pictures of Shireen Abu Akleh in the streets of Jerusalem.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:21, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Shireen Abu Akleh - house.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:36, 14 May 2022 (UTC)