Template talk:Israel–Hamas war infobox

Regions

While it is true that PIJ operates outside of Gaza for example, it is also true that Israel is not fighting in Yemen, nor in Iraq. We can roughly avoid mention of these intricacies, as we have already done in relation to Israel not fighting in Yemen or Iraq, by sorting into regions. This would give the reader a rough image of the situation. Makeandtoss (talk) 19:29, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

But "the special relationship" is bombing Yemen for Israel. It's part of the war. Irtapil (talk) 01:10, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Can someone put the number of Palestinians murdered by the Israelis in East Jerusalem during this conflict and keep the number updated? 38.99.190.243 (talk) 01:41, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

@Makeandtoss PIJ and Hamas seem to be missing in Lebanon currently? MWQs (talk) 15:51, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Spillover/ other Theatre

I think this should be done in Spillover of Israel-Hamas war, because this article is mainly focused on events that occured Israel and Palestine territories, and it actually starts to become too vague for belligerents. This situation seems to become like Syrian civil war before, so I think it is best to minimize the belligerent as well. Wendylove (talk) 12:17, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

The fighting on the Lebanon border, in the West Bank and in the Red Sea is not "spillover", they are intentional acts committed by Hezbollah and the Houthis as part of the war. "Spillover" is fightingg that unintentionally crosses over into a non-targeted area. For example, the minor engagements and shelling that occured in Tunisia during the First Libyan Civil War is splillover. Hezbollah and the Houthis have both explicitly stated that their attacks are part of the war. In fact there are many sources which state, such as the institute for the study off war, that say the entire goal of the fighting on the Lebanon border is to divert and pin down Israeli units from being otherwise engaged in Gaza. Hamas and PIJ also operate and commits direct attacks on the Lebanon border and in the West Bank. To say that the fighting in the West Bank, Lebanon and the Red Sea "are not part of the war" is not supported by the sources. The fighting in those places are merely different theaters or campaigns of the same war.XavierGreen (talk) 15:24, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

The other regions (West Bank, Lebanon, Yemen, etc.) are definitely part of the war. But the laundry list of USA "support" makes me very uncomfortable. Irtapil (talk) 01:08, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

• Comment I'd suggest proposing some specific alternatives in this RfC. For instance A) eliiminating the "spillover" entirely, B) Keeping it as is and C)'making the "spillover" belligerents part of the main list of belligerents.

If it was put that way I would say that C is a nonstarter, and between A and B I would lean toward B. Coretheapple (talk) 15:29, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

• Comment striking out my earlier comment. Let me put it another way: what specifically are you proposing for this infobox? Are there alternatives you wish to suggest? Coretheapple (talk) 15:36, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Can someone put the number of Palestinians murdered by the Israelis in East Jerusalem during this conflict and keep the number updated? 38.99.190.243 (talk) 01:41, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Why is the US not listed as a belligerent?

Our tax dollars are used to aid the resolution of the conflict. 2601:152:C82:79B0:84F1:F030:4F3B:4F0C (talk) 08:52, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Because that falls under NPOV issues, simply put. Synorem (talk) 08:52, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

The US, UK have ships in the Red Sea and have repeatedly bombed Ye,Eun in support of Israeli shipping. This is public and US freely states it has carried out these military operations. The US freely states it supplies Israel with weapons, and a US base exists in the Negev. All public undisputed knowledge. 2601:803:201:7B00:B06E:EC14:4477:EDFC (talk) 21:56, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

• Yemen

2601:803:201:7B00:B06E:EC14:4477:EDFC (talk) 21:56, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Basically, the US has not sent troops to Israel, so by definition it is not a belligerent in the war. Chong Yi Lam (talk) 14:16, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

It is, however, a supporter of the war. 74.15.65.150 (talk) 18:23, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Can someone put the number of Palestinians murdered by the Israelis in East Jerusalem during this conflict and keep the number updated? 38.99.190.243 (talk) 01:43, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

No graph showing Israeli bombs and attacks on Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, et al but there is a graph depicting Palestinian bombs fired on Israel.

Why is there no graph showing the number of bombs dropped by Israel on Palestine, Syria, Lebanon? There exists graph depicting alleged Palestine-origin bombs. 2601:803:201:7B00:B06E:EC14:4477:EDFC (talk) 22:00, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Can someone put the number of Palestinians murdered by the Israelis in East Jerusalem during this conflict and keep the number updated? 38.99.190.243 (talk) 01:43, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Casualties breakdown - unify format for both sides

The figures for "killed" in the infobox (not the reference note) aren't of a uniform type for both sides. Gaza is a total number, Israel is split to civilian and servicemembers.

This is biased, so the format should be made uniform for both. Either turn Israel's into a total, or Gaza's into a breakdown directly in the infobox and not in a note. I think the latter makes more sense, as it's more informative and nuanced.

Since there are conflicting claims for Gaza's figures a range is needed:

• 17,878 - 23,878 civilians killed
• 6,000 - 12,000 militants killed

Any thoughts before I open an edit request? galenIgh 11:30, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

WP:ARBECR

There is a synthesis issue here. The total death toll given by Gaza Health Ministry, (currently at 29,878) does not announce militant casualties. Ecrusized (talk) 14:25, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

On one hand the policy on synthesis explicitly allows simple arithmetic calculations. I have no opinion whether it's worth doing it here since the figures come from different sources.

However I'm strongly for mentioning the range of militant casualties. There is nothing wrong with mentioning total casualties and military casualties:

• 29,878+ total killed
  • 6,000-12,000 militants killed Alaexis_¿question? 20:41, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I think you should just give up any attempt to mix the casualty figures from the Gaza Health Ministry and the number of militant deaths from Hamas. The figures for total deaths is registered deaths and does not I believe cover the majority of the militant deaths. It is also I believe a gross underestimate of total deaths. Given 6000 as the number of militants killed then most of them must be buried under rubble or their bodies taken back to Israel or people are too afraid to retrieve the bodies because of sniper fire and their deaths have not been registered by the health ministry. You might think the figures are biased but we should first and foremost report things with a neutral point of view as far as the sources are concerned. The actual total killed could easily be twenty thousand more, using CALC with subtraction and different sources will just give nonsense. NadVolum (talk) 00:21, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

::::A lot of conjecture. Various media sources qualify the Hamas-reported total with "the count doesn't distinguish between militant and civilian", so the origin doesn't claim that it's civilian only. galenIgh 12:19, 29 February 2024 (UTC) WP:ARBECR

Perhaps. But I'm unsure about WP:SYNTH. Though the reporting sources or article may be different, ultimately the raw data comes from the same origin. Alaexis notes that simple math is okay. And synth is not a fully rigid concept.

If it's not okay, there's a problem also in the Israel stats. It seems currently the civilian count is a summation of multiple sources, unless I missed a particular source.

::A possible compromise: revert Israel back to a total, and as Alaexis suggested, promote a Gaza militant count range to the main infobox instead of just in a note, and also the Israeli servicemember count. galenIgh 12:15, 29 February 2024 (UTC) WP:ARBECR

It is quite easy to see the Gaza Health Ministry figures cannot include most of the militants killed. Their latest figures say 12260 children 8570 women and 1049 elderly, taking that from their total register deaths of 30035 gives 8156 men. Assuming most of the militants are men and the Hamas one who said about 6000 had been killed is right that would mean only 2156 civilian men killed which is ridiculous, we would expect a higher number of civilian men killed than women because of work in essential services. So we really need to include the 7000 that the health ministry say are missing presumed dead. Unfortunately they say about 70% of them are estimated to be women and children and taking 8570-2156 for civilian men from 7000 leaves 586 which is nowhere near 70% of 7000. I hope you can see there are problems here with using CALC. NadVolum (talk) 15:20, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

I don't think it's a good idea to start messing with the toll figures in the infobox, especially since the conflict isn't over yet. I think it should be reverted back to the Gaza health ministry toll of 30k+ seeing as it has no mention or breakdown of civilian/military deaths, it'd be jumping the gun to do our own breakdown. We should just leave the toll as it comes from the Gaza health ministry.ThePaganUK (talk) 18:19, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

If not the idea to separate militants from the total, then for balance and uniformity:

• Israel's figure needs to be a total as well.
• Estimated range range of killed militants, and reported number of servicemembers, need to be promoted from the notes to directly in the infobox.

Opinions?

galenIgh 21:57, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

WP:ARBECR

Balance and uniformity are not required by any policy or guideline on Wikipedia. Being true to the sources is. NadVolum (talk) 19:29, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Actually it is: WP:NPOV. But even if it weren't there's no policy against it.

"True to sources" – if the calculation-based suggestion that started this section is deemed flawed, the same applies to the current Israel count in the infobox, as it isn't from a single report. Both the current split form and a total are calculations, so equally valid, and indeed the article showed a total from its Nov 18 creation until Feb 22.

Then there's the separate second suggestion, the promote a range of killed militants to the main infobox. galenIgh 13:56, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

WP:ARBECR

In my opinion it's best to differentiate casualties by sources rather than mixing them up. Linkin Prankster (talk) 14:52, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

References

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 March 2024

Change * 30,631+ killed To * 30,631+ civilians killed 193.191.179.1 (talk) 07:45, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Declined. Where do you get that from? The Gaza Health ministry does not distinguish between civilians and military that I have seen in any citation. NadVolum (talk) 10:36, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Gaza Health Ministry that you linked to says "The casualty figures provided by the ministry do not distinguish the difference between civilians and combatants or provide the cause of death. The percentage of civilian deaths is only calculated post-conflict by the UN and various rights groups." NadVolum (talk) 10:38, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

References

Gaza militant killed count - promote into the infobox

In the casualties section of the infobox, Gaza side, below the first line item, directly in the infobox and not in a popup note, add:

* 6,000 - 13,000 militants killed

The full details of the three sources can be left in a popup note. It's better for NPOV. As suggested above by @Alaexis on 2/27 (2nd reply). galenIgh 21:19, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit extended-protected}} template. M.Bitton (talk) 02:57, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Moved from User talk:M.Bitton § Establishing consensus before edit request

 – M.Bitton (talk) 19:42, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for checking the edit request and the comment there.

You said "please establish a consensus for this alteration", but this is currently a problem due to the way two particular editors

interpret WP:ECR (indeed contrary to the suggestion in WP:EDITREQ, and not everyone shares their interpretation according to some previous discussion I read; can't find it offhand).

I don't think the edit req is objectively controversial; the info is already in the article and the other side already uses the suggested format (the Talk discussion mentioned in the edit req is mostly about a different edit idea).

If you feel it needs discussion, could you open back the edit req? Or else, maybe WP:DOIT considering WP:OWN. If someone wants to undo it later, so be it. galenIgh 03:50, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

I read the discussion and I certainly don't see a consensus for your proposed edit, hence my answer. As far as I'm concerned, the ER matter is closed. 19:42, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Notes

Gaza Civilian Casualties in infobox - Edit Request for Clarification

The small footnote reference for the civilian casualties on the Palestinian side in the infobox gives a variety of different tolls from different sources. However, the one that is shown by default without going into that footnote cites the Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry.

Isn't it a violation both of neutrality and of reliable sources to cite a source from 1. a belligerent in the conflict which might have prejudice towards one angle, and 2. something with zero editorial independence which is controlled by a terrorist group (and there is no reasonable expectation that a health ministry official who has a Hamas militant with an AK next to him can possibly be guaranteed to give a neutral perspective).

For these reasons I make an edit request to remove the listed numbers. Another option if others are not satisfied with this (in that event) might be to list the numbers as "disputed" and then display the different sources underneath it. Adonnus (talk) 17:20, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

US intelligence on Hamas casualties

Does the US give the figure of 5,000 - 9,000 Hamas militants killed? As far as I know they only said 20-30% of militants killed. But 20% of what? For example, this US gov website says Hamas' strength was 20,000-25,000. So the figures should be 4,000-7,500? VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 19:50, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Iran as a belligerent in the war

@RamHez: The citation for Iran is about the 2024 Iranian strikes in Israel. This is a synthesis since the attack is not considered a part of the Israel-Hamas war by the references. Ecrusized (talk) 13:12, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Agreed, Iran is not a participant in IH war. Selfstudier (talk) 13:15, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

If we've already included Iranian casualties in Syria from Israeli airstrikes in this article, then naturally Iran's retaliation to those very same Israeli airstrikes is extremely relevant to the information we've already provided. This is clearly Iranian involvement in retaliation to an event that occurred in the northern front of the war. RamHez (talk) 13:15, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Imo, neither of those should be included as neither Syria nor Iran is a participant in the war. Selfstudier (talk) 13:16, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Then both should either be removed or both be kept. Since it's illogical to keep one side of the narrative (the Israeli attacks on Iranian forces in Syria) and not show Iranian retaliation to those very same attacks. RamHez (talk) 13:19, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

"Then both should either be removed or both be kept."

No such measure is needed. You might want to make less drastic edits. See my explanation below. Ecrusized (talk) 13:26, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

There is a difference between the two. One of them is a part of the Israel–Hezbollah conflict (2023–present), which is considered a part of Israel Hamas war, as Hezbollah initiated hostilities in support of Hamas. But Iran's missile strike against Israel is not considered to be related at all to Israel-Hamas war. Ecrusized (talk) 13:24, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Still, Iranian casualties should not be included. Selfstudier (talk) 13:28, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

You're building a rabbit hole, Iran stated it directly retaliated to the source of the attacks on their consulate in Damascus which was a part of Israel–Hezbollah conflict (2023–present) which was initiated by Hezbollah in support of Hamas. It links back to one another. These events are all interconnected, which is in fact related to Israel-Hamas war. Saying that the Iranian missile strikes on Israel is not "related at all to the Israel-Hamas war" is clearly an objectively wrong view. Had the war never happened, neither would these strikes because as I demonstrated, they're chronologically linked RamHez (talk) 13:46, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

If you want to limit the war's article to simply the war in Gaza Strip, do that, but if we are adding parties in the north (Lebanon, Syria), east (Iraq) and south (Yemen), then we must add Iran as well. Especially since this attack was in retaliation for the Israeli attack on their consulate in Syria within the Israel–Hezbollah conflict (2023–present) which is included on this article's casualties. RamHez (talk) 13:49, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't agree with that view. The source you've added for this is entirely synthesis. Your refusal to remove this without removing other properly cited content is concerning. Ecrusized (talk) 14:18, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Iranian strikes were in response to Damascus strike which was a part of Israel Hezbollah conflict which itself was initiated in support of Hama attack on Israel, so I think it should be kept, at least for now , if these are the only strikes and Israel doesn't retaliate and this conflict doesn't escalate further, I think Iran and Syria should be decided upon but not currently as it's an escalating situation M Waleed (talk) 16:14, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Iran's attack on Israel has literally delayed the Israeli offensive on Rafah. Iran should definitely count as a belligerent in this war after the Israeli govt confirmed Iran's immense support (through causing a delay on an offensive on Rafah by applying force on Israel) whether indirect or direct. It has changed the course of the war through forcing Israel to delay its offensive on Rafah which was meant to start this week. RamHez (talk) 15:46, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

This is simply wrong. Just because Israel says their Rafah offensive is delayed due to Iran does not mean that is true. Israel was already under pressure not to pursue a Rafah offensive. Perhaps Iran is just a convenient face saver, who knows? I just do not get this desire to add belligerents left and right for no good reason. The best case for addition as belligerent is the USA. Selfstudier (talk) 16:55, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Iran and Israel have directly attacked one another, IRGC was directly hit by Israeli strikes in Lebanon and Syria, two iranain ships are operating in the red sea, and IRGC has seized Israeli ship in the Persian gulf. So I think it should be listed as beligrent M Waleed (talk) 08:21, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Iran and Israel are fighting with each other, so what, they have been doing that for a long time one way and another. Iran did not know that Hamas was going to launch an attack on Israel and have nothing directly to do with the Israel Hamas/Gaza fighting. Nor does Hezbollah, come to that. Selfstudier (talk) 11:31, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

As after the retaliatory strikes, the matter has cooled down so I think Iran has to be removed M Waleed (talk) 12:37, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Police as combatants

• I removed Palestinian police from the template here. I asked the question "what is the inclusion of the police based on? police normally have non-combatant status under IHL."
• This was reverted here. The edit summary "Palestinian police is a beligrent in Siege of Gaza City,Battle of Jabalia,Siege of Khan Yunis and the planned Rafah offensive, moreover there's also a precedent from Israeli police."
• This, in my view, is not a valid answer to the question "what is the inclusion of the police based on?". It is a description of the state of other Wikipedia articles. This has no bearing on the question asked. What is the policy based reason for inclusion? Sean.hoyland (talk) 09:01, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

  Police is included for Israel too and Gazan police is actively involved in combat against Israel M Waleed (talk) 15:55, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 April 2024

→

Gaza health ministry says 7000 missing not 8000 2001:8003:266B:4D00:81B7:B47B:8752:5B4 (talk) 10:05, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

If you have a look the latest figures separate figures are given for men and for women and children. As of 21 April they were 7,000 missing for men and 4,700 missing for women and children. Those figures are both I believe still some thousands away from the actual figures but they're about the best you'll get from an official source and not unreasonable. They're quite different from their 70% for missing women and children they estimated before - they probably just got that from bombed houses, I guess they've had to stick in Hamas militant deaths into the figures for men as they're mostly not showing up in recorded deaths which are only ones where people can get at the bodies.

I think it is reasonable to add the figures if you don't want to put them in separately. NadVolum (talk) 10:58, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, just looked again and it didn't say the 7,000 were men, it just showed only a man as compared to the Women and Kids one and the number had reduced and would be just silly as the total. But I can't be absolutely certain it means just men. NadVolum (talk) 11:12, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

 Not done - stale, contested request. And it looks like the page says 10,000 now as war rages its course. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:56, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 April 2024

Under belligerents of the war, there should be a "Supported by" the United States of America, with these citations: https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2024/03/06/us-weapons-israel-gaza/ AND https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/2/20/us-vetoes-another-un-security-council-resolution-urging-gaza-war-ceasefire#:~:text=Majority%20of%20members%20voted%20to,killed%20more%20than%2029%2C000%20people.&text=The%20United%20States%20has%20vetoed,ceasefire%20between%20Israel%20and%20Hamas., similar to the "Supported by" section on the War in Darfur page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Darfur. 74.15.65.150 (talk) 18:18, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

 Not done This needs a much broader discussion. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:56, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Casualty Figures Bias

Why do the casualties for Israel list specific civilian casualties, but all the dead of Palestine are lumped in the same category? It's as if the article is implying there are no Palestinian civilians, only combatants, which is disgusting 2605:A601:AF6C:1700:A915:DB4F:28EA:266A (talk) 21:24, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Exactly how many Palestinians were civilians and militias is unknown. Parham wiki (talk) 16:27, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Revised Palestinian fatality figures released (Update needed)

As others here have already pointed out, the math regarding the breakdown of the provided Palestinian fatality figures did not quite add up. Yesterday, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs revised these figures in their most recent infographic on reliefweb.int. So as of May 8, 2024, there has been a total of 34,844 reported Palestinian fatalities in the Gaza Strip since the war started. A total of 24,686 of these have been confirmed and identified, and of this total: 10,006 are men (40%), 4,959 are women (20%), 7,797 are children (32%), and 1,924 are elderly (8%). This is a significant change from what was previously claimed and needs to be updated in the infobox on this wiki page. This also means that 52% of recorded fatalities have been women and children and not >70% so any mentions of the >70% figure in this article should be deemed no longer factual. I would assume then that women and children make up ~52% of the wounded as well but we cannot be sure. These revised figures are more in line with Israeli estimates as far as I can tell (1 “combatant” for every 1.5 “civilian”). As of May 2024, Israel says it has killed 15,000 Hamas members in battle (per The Times of Israel). Based on a precedent in previous conflicts, Israel does not distinguish between male civilians and combatants when they release total fatality estimates of their enemy. If about 10,000 of the recorded Palestinian deaths have been adult males and if 40% of the 10,158 bodies yet to be properly identified are adult males, this would give a total of more than 14,000 Palestinian adult male deaths in the war so far. Now obviously, not all Palestinian men who have died are members of Hamas but the figure is very close to what Israel claims and we would assume it would be because they do not distinguish between male civilians and combatants in the numbers they release like I said. Nathan1223 (talk) 20:52, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

I see a difference between confirmed and identified (OCHA) and confirmed (MoH), because it seems that almost a third of victims have been confirmed, including gender, but not identified – possibly, for lack of identity documents, lack of witnesses, mutilation, speedy burial (in Islam bodies are buried within 24 hours of death), etc. etc. Not impossible that the majority of them were women and children. So, I'd be cautious with treating the OCHA numbers as "revised MoH numbers"; they are not, they use different criteria. — kashmīrī ^TALK 20:59, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

"Revised" was maybe the wrong word then. I see what you’re saying and I don’t necessarily disagree but if we are striving for accuracy, I feel like nonbiased confirmed and identified fatality counts (OCHA) should take inclusion priority over confirmed?/claimed but possibly biased fatality counts (MoH). I just now saw someone had went into more detail about this on the talk section of the separate Casualties of the Israel–Hamas War page. They basically were saying the same thing I’m saying that these new figures demonstrate that the Gaza Ministry of Health claims about the number of women and children killed are impossible. On May 8, 2024, the MoH claimed that out of 34,844 total deaths, 15,002 were children and 9,892 were women (combined, this would be 71.4% of the total). That would imply a maximum of 9,950 men killed, less than the number of men (18-59) the OCHA has already confirmed and would imply that all of those counted but not yet identified are women and children, which is highly unlikely. Nathan1223 (talk) 22:31, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

I just discovered this so I am adding this for clarification... there is a disclaimer below the recent OCHA report with the new figures on ochaopt.org, which reads "The UN has so far not been able to produce independent, comprehensive, and verified casualty figures; the current numbers have been provided by the Ministry of Health or the Government Media Office in Gaza and the Israeli authorities and await further verification." Therefore, these are not separate fatality figures from OCHA as assumed, they are indeed revised figures sourced from the MoH so I stand by the wording in my original post above. As such, I suggest we consider changing the breakdown of the fatality figures in the infobox and in the article to reflect the more up-to-date data we have now. Nathan1223 (talk) 07:39, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

@Nathan1223 I agree the matter merits further discussion. But also this article is covered with WP:ARBPIA restriction and, per the notice at the top, accounts with less than 500 edits can't engage in discussions (althouth the exact scope is being discussed). — kashmīrī ^TALK 10:53, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Confirmed but not identified would be unidentified bodies they're definitely dead, probably Palestinian, but they don't know their name. The identified have name and date of birth and Israeli ID number. Then there is a third category of missing, who are mostly presumed dead under rubble. MWQs (talk) 15:59, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Groups

@Ecrusized: "When there is a large number of participants, it may be better to list only the three or four major groups on each side of the conflict" per Template:Infobox military conflict. As a middle ground solution you can add the PIJ and PFLP outside the collapsible list since they are along with Hamas the three most prominent groups. Makeandtoss (talk) 12:12, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

I don't think that's a rule but a general guideline. Going by my personal estimate, Hamas seems to do 90% of the fighting in the war. That, endorsed by the title "Israel-Hamas war", makes other belligerents seem misleading. Furthermore, I'm not even sure whether they should be included in the collapsible at all. Because collapsible lists are auto collapsed for mobile viewers. Most of the infobox, including dozens of combatant militant groups, and specific units should be removed to an article called Belligerents of the Israel-Hamas war, similar to how Syrian civil war belligerents and infobox is managed with List of armed factions in the Syrian Civil War#Opposing forces. Let me know what you think. Ecrusized (talk) 12:33, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

@Ecrusized: Yes, a general guideline that we should follow. Not a good analogy as the Syrian civil war has multiple sides with dozens of belligerents and groups with complex relationships. This war is as straightforward as Black September and First intifada, where all of the groups are listed without collapsible lists. There is nothing misleading about the fact that despite Hamas being the main armed group (and no its not 90%), there are other secondary groups that are fighting alongside it, including most prominently PIJ, widely cited by Israel as an important combatant, and the PFLP, which is fighting alongside them currently in Rafah. We either remove the collapsible list in par with the aforementioned conflicts, or we take the top three or four in part with the general guideline. Makeandtoss (talk) 12:40, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

We either remove the collapsible list in par with the aforementioned conflicts, or. You don't get to dictate anything. I'm ending this discussion since you seem to be in an non-compromising position. If you revert, you will likely get blocked for edit warring. Ecrusized (talk) 15:04, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

@Ecrusized: Is this sarcastic? I gave a compromise of adding the top three instead of adding all of them. Meanwhile you are still insisting on your initial non-compromising position of keeping all of them in the collapsible list. If you later revert, you will also get blocked for edit warring, as well as treating Wikipedia as a battleground. Makeandtoss (talk) 07:35, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

I said I'm ending this discussion. Stop pinging me. Ecrusized (talk) 09:05, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

@Ecrusized: Sorry to disappoint, but this is a public Wikipedia article and not your private mailbox. You're welcome to end your participation in the discussion, but it is not ending and other editors are welcome to join in. Eventually an RFC or other forms of dispute resolution will be opened. Makeandtoss (talk) 13:33, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

You just pinged me after I said stop pinging me. If you ping once more and I'll report you for abuse of user rights. Ecrusized (talk) 15:31, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 May 2024

Ocha has updated the number of reported casualties. As of May 8th 2024 the numbers are: Total Palestinians: 34,844 of which 24,686, as of April 30th, are identified as: Men: 10,006 (40%) Women: 4,959 (20%) Children: 7,797 (32%) Elderly: 1,924 (8%)

Source: 213.164.196.30 (talk) 12:00, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Not done. Discussion ongoing at main article.Selfstudier (talk) 12:11, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

@Selfstudier if it gets shown it should be labeled "unidentified bodies", people keep confusing it with missing,but I am pretty sure they are two added groups? MWQs (talk) 16:02, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

References

Citation error Israeli military casualties

There's currently a citation error Cite error: The named reference Template:Israel–Hamas war infobox:shinbet If somebody could fix that it would be good. Thanks. NadVolum (talk) 14:04, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

@NadVolum is it still there? MWQs (talk) 16:03, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

No it's been fixed, in fact they, there were two. NadVolum (talk) 18:11, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Newer Hamas militants killed count

14,000 militants. Refs:

• https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-69014893
• https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/gaza-death-toll-how-many-palestinians-has-israels-campaign-killed-2024-05-14/

galenIgh 23:55, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Someone did the edit (using a different ref), so closing the request here. galenIgh 17:47, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Are they all Hamas? Or is that for all groups? MWQs (talk) 12:32, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Update the template

1 egyptian soldier is killed so hope to update the template in other theaters. 172.97.229.55 (talk) 17:08, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

why is there no mention on innocent civilians killed

In the casualties and losses breakdown, for the Israel side there is a clear distinction between civilians killed and soldiers killed but for the Palestinian side the innocent civilian death toll and Hamas fighter death toll is clumped together without making it clear the innocent civilian death toll is much much larger than the Hamas fighter death toll. The entire article frames this war as exclusively between Israel and Hamas insinuating that the innocent civilians who were killed were Hamas fighters, which only serves to sympathize with Israel by solely highlighting the innocent civilians killed on that side while ignoring the innocents on the Palestinian side. KareemMAly (talk) 11:02, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

The Gaza Health Ministry does not distinguish between civilians and soldiers in their reporting. Note [d] does contain the estimates made by Israel and US analysts. Alaexis_¿question? 11:19, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

The number that appears in the info box is derived from the Gaza Ministry of Health, who does not distinguish between he two. 2600:4040:297C:8F00:4CEC:C70D:806A:7A3E (talk) 04:39, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Arms suppliers

@Chong Yi Lam: The inclusion of non-belligerents was deprecated by the community a year ago (see Template_talk:Infobox_military_conflict#RfC_on_"supported_by"_being_used_with_the_belligerent_parameter). If we are to list all arms suppliers, non-belligerents would outnumber belligerents, and the infobox would be bloated (defeating its purpose). Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 05:08, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

That's why I listed "major arms suppliers" not "arms suppliers". A lot of Western countries have sent arms to Israel, but most of it comes from the USA and Germany, and two countries in the list would not make the list bloated. Even Tigray War lists three arms suppliers under the belligerents section, more than in this infobox. Addressing your point about non-belligerents outnumbering belligerents, again refer to Tigray War, where there are only two actual belligerents (Ethiopia and Eritrea) on one side but three arms suppliers. No one is fixing that infobox, so I don't see a problem listing out the USA and Germany here either. Chong Yi Lam (talk) 06:53, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Also @UtoD: I've stated my reasons for adding those two countries in the previous edit so you might want to write a better reason for reverting it. Just saying. Chong Yi Lam (talk) 06:56, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

@Chong Yi Lam: Did you fail to see the infobox for military conflicts stating The practice of writing in a "Supported by" subheading is deprecated. Just because there is a article with a infobox that was created before the deprecation and haven't been updated since or added by a unkowing user doesn't mean it can be added to infoboxes anymore.

Also No one is fixing that infobox, so I don't see a problem listing out the USA and Germany here either comes off as editing to make a WP:POINT about another page. If you see a issue then you should fix it in the Tigray War page rather than taking it on other pages.-UtoD 10:17, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

I did see the deprecation, that's why I did not revert your revert. I was just telling you about your reason for reverting my edit, which seemed weird, as if you did not read the reason for that edit. Chong Yi Lam (talk) 17:18, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Number of Gazans in detention

The figure in the info box for detained Palestinians refers to the total number of Palestinians in Israeli civil detention, which does not include the number of people abducted from Gaza during the war itself, who are held in military prison camps rather than the normal Israeli prison system. The figure – 9000+ – has increased dramatically since October, but this is primarily because of Palestinians detained in the West Bank (and probably Israel proper). The number of Gazans detained, as far as I know, is not reported by the IDF. The box should reflect this somehow. 92.12.103.93 (talk) 16:54, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Good point, but do you have a reference we can use to fix it? MWQs (talk) 13:51, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

"Likely Much Higher" is not encyclopedic

The info box currently contains the following language: "37+ deaths caused by malnutrition[30] (likely much higher)[31]." Reference 31 is to a CNN article that is describing conditions of malnutrition, but it doesn't actually say anything about numbers of deaths due to malnutrition.

This seems to violate WP:FORUM and WP:CRYSTALBALL. The "Likely Much Higher" is basically an entirely unsourced prediction.

(unsigned comment above User:2600:4040:297C:8F00:4CEC:C70D:806A:7A3E)

That statement, or a statement to that effect, should be kept, but with a better sources. I don't think anyone has quantified it, but there are better sourves than CNN reporting it. Try: medical journals, United Nations, WHO, MSF, etc. The overall official count has also been way below reality since 27 October, but we should put it on just one, both is maybe a bit undue. MWQs (talk) 09:09, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

We also need to include infectious diseases, possibly in the section for wounded, there are no estimates of many deaths, yet. Unless this stops soon, infections will be the biggest killer. MWQs (talk) 09:09, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

What the experts are saying implies they believe at least that sort of number of children die of famine every couple of days in the north. They can't declare a famine because of lack of access to check though. This is difficult but I think leaving out likely much higher would be lying. NadVolum (talk) 12:35, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

See https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jun/05/starvation-already-causing-mass-death-and-lasting-harm-in-gaza-agencies-say "Experts from the network, set up by the US in the 1980s to warn of impending crises, initially declared it “likely” that famine was under way in northern Gaza from April", "Under the technical definition of famine, 20% of households must face an extreme lack of food, or essentially be starving. One-third of children must be suffering from acute malnutrition or wasting, and two adults or four children for every 10,000 people must be dying daily from hunger and its complications" and do the math. Though of course that is OR. NadVolum (talk) 12:54, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

@NadVolum but that's number in famine, not deaths? MWQs (talk) 15:40, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

See this part of the criteria "and two adults or four children for every 10,000 people must be dying daily from hunger and its complications" There's some hundreds of thousands still in northern Gaza, I think the UN estimates 300,000, other estimates are higher. NadVolum (talk) 17:39, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

I disagree with "should be kept, but with better sources". It's not that I disagree that if we have sources stating "likely much higher" or some equivalent statement, we shouldn't mention it; I'm disagreeing with the order. When we have better sources, we should include this statement. Until then, this statement should be removed as it isn't sourced and probably OR. Guy Haddad 1 (talk) 14:40, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Are you the originator of the edit request? The reason I ask is because editors must be extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic except for making edit requests. That means that the originator of the request can respond to requests to clarify the request, but other non-extendedconfirmed users cannot participate in consensus forming discussions. They can only make edit requests. Sean.hoyland (talk) 15:27, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm not the one who started the request. I'm new to Wikipedia, so maybe I'm not understanding correctly, but as far as I understand, extended-confirmed status means that I can't edit this page, but it doesn't mention anything about discussion. Am I missing something? Guy Haddad 1 (talk) 19:49, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

You can only make a specific edit request, I've put a welcome-arbpia about it on your talk page. NadVolum (talk) 22:13, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Combining stats for "Per Hamas"

@User:Genabab, the range doesn't work for Hamas report of IDF dead, because those two numbers of dead IDF soldiers were for different time frames, ānd the higher estimate was (according to the current source cited for it) for just 27 October to the last week of December, whereas the LOWER estimate is the most stats from Hamas for the entire war. It is a bit complicated and hard to summarise concisely, but if you don't want two listings I'll try to put the alternative numbers in a footnote. Normally I'd just delete the older less accurate stats, but they got a lot more media attention than the current numbers Hamas report, that are within 10% of Haaretz. And normally we'd not bother listing that the numbers agree, except that they previously (allegedly) didn't. Allegedly, because the current citation looks like they might have mistranslayed or misinterpreted something. I'm trying to find the original story it quotes from AJ. MWQs (talk) 12:27, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Number of Hamas militants killed, per US intelligence

In note i, the number of Hamas militants killed "per US intelligence" should be changed from the current "9,000-12,000" to "8,000-16,000".

The current numbers misinterpret the reference Reuters article, which reads:

...has been reduced to between 9,000 and 12,000 fighters, according to three senior U.S. officials ... down from American estimates of 20,000-25,000 before the conflict.

Notice it says "reduced TO" and not "reduced BY".
Also, the pre-conflict estimate seems to be a Reuters interpretation, as they link to cia.gov. It's not clear that this is what the quoted seniors implied, and other sources cite higher numbers, such as 30,000. galenIgh 14:59, 14 June 2024 (UTC)