Jump to content

Talk:2012 Gaza War: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
m Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Talk:Operation Pillar of Defense/Archive 5) (bot
Line 31: Line 31:
{{ITN talk|19 November|2012}}
{{ITN talk|19 November|2012}}
{{Old AfD multi|page=Operation Pillar of Cloud|date=16 November 2012|result='''keep'''}}
{{Old AfD multi|page=Operation Pillar of Cloud|date=16 November 2012|result='''keep'''}}

== Edit about pre-operation events ==

{{re|Wlglunight93}} I don't understand the logic of this [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Operation_Pillar_of_Defense&diff=628331265&oldid=628331038 edit] and this [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Operation_Pillar_of_Defense&diff=628331779&oldid=628331491 edit]. Why is information from down below copy-pasted above, and then some part of the duplicated information removed but not the rest? The paragraph was in chronological order: stuff in early 2012, then July, August, September, October. Now there is randomly a paragraph talking about October 2012 first, then goes back to beginning of 2012, then July etc. I have reverted this for now. [[User:Kingsindian|Kingsindian]] [[User Talk: Kingsindian|♝]][[Special:Contributions/Kingsindian|♚]] 22:01, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

:[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Operation_Pillar_of_Defense&diff=628387293&oldid=628331779 This] is not duplicated information. It talks about foreign support received by both Hamas and Israel, which is important. I'm restoring it. [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Operation_Pillar_of_Defense&diff=628391691&oldid=628387293 This] is duplicated info indeed. I apologize for that mistake. I didn't notice it was already in the article.--[[User:Wlglunight93|Wlglunight93]] ([[User talk:Wlglunight93|talk]]) 22:09, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
::{{re|Wlglunight93}} I am afraid that makes no sense. The information was copy-pasted from below. How is it possible that you didn't know that this information was already present? Your other edit may or may not be fine, I will respond later. [[User:Kingsindian|Kingsindian]] [[User Talk: Kingsindian|♝]][[Special:Contributions/Kingsindian|♚]] 22:15, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
:::I found that information from the Shin Bet, but I didn't notice it was already there. I'm sorry! It was an honest mistake. You corrected it. The other information about foreign support is nowhere in the article. You made a mistake by removing it.--[[User:Wlglunight93|Wlglunight93]] ([[User talk:Wlglunight93|talk]]) 22:19, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
:::: {{re|Wlglunight93}} I am afraid I don't believe you. I am willing to [[WP:AGF]], but this it too much to stomach. Your edit was a word to word copy paste from below, and even included a reference which said "dead link" from below, which was actually not a dead link. As I said, your other edit may or may not be correct, but I will address it later. [[User:Kingsindian|Kingsindian]] [[User Talk: Kingsindian|♝]][[Special:Contributions/Kingsindian|♚]] 22:36, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
:::::I told you I'm sorry. I accepted your revert. There's nothing more I can do.--[[User:Wlglunight93|Wlglunight93]] ([[User talk:Wlglunight93|talk]]) 22:39, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

== Lead ==

As is so often the case with major Gaza/Israel conflicts, the lead has become bloated and contains duplications (e.g. Jabari assassination). It contains detail that belong in the main sections. As a start I intend to 'declutter' the section on the lead-up to the operation, and to merge the detail into the Background section. And even when it contains detail, the two adversaries are not equally represented. [[User:Erictheenquirer|Erictheenquirer]] ([[User talk:Erictheenquirer|talk]]) 13:12, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

{{ping|201.235.223.225}} Regarding your revert of the text about Jabari being involved in the negotiation of a long term truce, your comment (no discussion by you in "Talk") seems to contain two messages: 1) "Gershon Baskin's opinion can't be used to state facts" and 2) "doesn't belong to lead". Treating 2) first, you believe that the fact that the man, whose assassination started the main conflict, was involved in the negotiations of a permanent peace agreement, does not belong in the Lead section, yet the model details of the rockets fired at Israel does. Could you explain this position instead of embarking on a non-discussed revert, please.

Regarding 1) - Your "Gershon Baskin's opinion can't be used to state facts" - the detailed section "Pre-operation Events" - does exactly that. But anyway, what makes you conclude that Baskin's relating of Jabari's involvement was an "opinion"? Baskin was intimately involved in the formulation process. Please explain in "Talk" this time. [[User:Erictheenquirer|Erictheenquirer]] ([[User talk:Erictheenquirer|talk]]) 14:11, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

:Hi. Gershon Baskin is an unremarkable "peace activist" (meaning left-wing pro-Palestinian, with all due respect) who wrote an opinion piece for a minor anti-Israel newspaper like Haaretz (yes, there are anti-Israel websites in Israel, in a democracy that's not illegal). An opinion column in a biased POV newspaper by a dubious individual is not a [[wp:rs|reliable source]] to state facts, let alone without attribution, let alone in the lead. Besides, he is already included with proper attribution at the end of [[Operation Pillar of Defense#Pre-operation events|this section]], so putting him also in the lead is redundant, POV and undue.--[[Special:Contributions/201.235.60.40|201.235.60.40]] ([[User talk:201.235.60.40|talk]]) 01:22, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
::So you are suggesting that [[Ha'aretz]] is not WP:RS. You can read it's Wiki article, but allow me to highlight a few points: Ha'aretz is Israel's oldest daily newspaper. The English edition is published and sold together with the International New York Times. It functions for Israel much as The New York Times does for the United States. Now let's go to [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard]] - there is not a whiff there of Ha'artz not being WP:RS. So, if you don't mind, I will reject that rebuttal as being invalid.

::[[Gershon Baskin]] is a "dubious individual"? He is a columnist for the Jerusalem Post which has a 'central' political leaning; he has a Ph.D. in international relations; he was instrumental in the negotiations with Hamas leading to Gilad Shalit's release; he has been a key contact person between the Israeli government and Hamas; he was decorated by the Prime Minister of Italy; he was awarded the Histadrut Prize for Peace, the Turkish Foreign Policy Institute Peace Prize and the Tribute of Honor and Courage from the World Movement for Democracy. And you blandly, without any confirming support, brand him as "a dubious person". If that is not a mega-POV, then I have yet to see one. REJECTED. And finally, you believe that the assassination of a key player by a party in a peace negotiation of international importance does not warrant being in the summary prelude? Imagine if a US negotiator were to be assassinated by the Iranians. We would never hear the end of it. REJECTED!!!
::I await a relevant response before reverting. [[User:Erictheenquirer|Erictheenquirer]] ([[User talk:Erictheenquirer|talk]]) 14:12, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
::{{ping|201.235.60.40}}Please see above [[User:Erictheenquirer|Erictheenquirer]] ([[User talk:Erictheenquirer|talk]]) 14:14, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

:::Gershon Baskin '''IS ALREADY IN THE ARTICLE!''' Jabari was not a "US negotiator". He was a senior Hamas terrorist who was the subject of a targeted killing. I wouldn't consider Gershon Baskin a reliable source to state facts, among other things because it contradicts the fact that the assassination of Ahmed Jabari was precipitated by three days of rocket fire from Gaza to Israel (that's not a "truce"). But that's not even my main point. He is already mentioned at the end of [[Operation Pillar of Defense#Pre-operation events|this section]] and his inclusion in the lead (plus without attribution) is redundant and fails [[wp:balance|balance]], [[wp:lead|lead]], [[wp:npov|NPOV]] and [[wp:undue|undue]]. You have Gershon Baskin in the proper section, so why your insistence on adding such a controversy about alleged "truce/peace talks" in the lead? The circumstances surrounding Jabari's death are developed elsewhere in the article.--[[User:Super Cable Guy|Super Cable Guy]] ([[User talk:Super Cable Guy|talk]]) 02:49, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
::::{{ping|Super Cable Guy}}Re yr "George Baskin is already in the article" - that is why there is a Lead to summarise important points from the detailed text. It is quite common.
::::Jabiri was a Hamas negotiator - even more pertinent to this case.
::::Re yr "I wouldn't consider Gershon Baskin a reliable source to state facts, among other things because it contradicts the fact that the assassination of Ahmed Jabari was precipitated by three days of rocket fire from Gaza to Israel (that's not a "truce")." Your reasoning is a flawed 'non sequitur' - there is zero logic in rejecting Baskin as a source of facts about Jabari's involvement in the formulation of a permanent truce (with Israeli knowledge) and offering as your rejection of him, rocket fire during three previous days; firing rockets and formulating a truce are not mutally exclusive in either space or time. You need to prove that Baskin had no knowledge of Jabari's involvement in a permanent truce and you have failed to provide that.
::::Regarding your "precipitated by three days of rocket fire from Israel" claim, I challenge the source of your information. My sources show that in the days prior to Jabari's assassination on 14 November 2012, rocket fire was minimal; and they explain why:
::::<blockquote>'Qassam Count' - there was almost no rocket fire on 11 November. This can perhaps be explained by the fact that Palestinian factions were in talks over a truce and were keen to see calm restored. Israel’s Ynet reported on 11 November: Egyptian Intelligence officials have successfully brokered an end to the current round of escalation in the south, Ynet learned Sunday. No Israeli source has corroborated the report.
::::On 12 November, two rockets were fired into Israel according to 'Qassam Count'. This came amid two days of air attacks by Israel on the Gaza Strip [by far the majority of attacks in the days before 14 November were perpetrated by Israel - See PCHR reports].
::::13 November: After five days of mounting violence, Israel and the Palestinians stepped back from the brink of a new war in the Gaza Strip on Tuesday, sending signals to each other via Egypt that they would hold their fire unless attacked. The report added: Ismail Haniyeh, prime minister of Gaza’s Hamas government, praised the main armed factions in the enclave for agreeing on Monday night to a truce. “They showed a high sense of responsibility by saying they would respect calm should the Israeli occupation also abide by it,” he said.
::::14 November: "Israel destroys the truce" - Yet Israel was not interested in calm. On 14 November Israel carried out the extrajudicial killing of Hamas military chief Ahmad al-Jabari.</blockquote>
::::Second source: "The assassination breaks a day-old lull in what was intense fighting between the Israeli military and Palestinian fighters in Gaza. A tacit truce was reached with the help of Egypt, but Israel has now broken it decisively."
::::Third source: "On November 14, two days after Palestinian factions in Gaza agree to a truce following several days of violence, Israel assassinates the leader of Hamas' military wing, Ahmed Jabari"
::::If you need further confirmation that Israel broke a truce and assassinated Jabari - just give a shout - there are dozens more sources; I have not even started with the Human Rights NGOs.
Now that I've shown you mine, you show me yours. And please, don't stoop to going back to before the truce was announced. That would be plain silly.[[User:Erictheenquirer|Erictheenquirer]] ([[User talk:Erictheenquirer|talk]]) 15:50, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
:Gershon is one of several opinions, and it doesn't belong to the lead, which already shows both points of view. Your proposed addition is repeated and disputed content. Just because it suits your politics, it doesn't need to be said twice. I think you refuse to [[wp:get the point]].--[[User:Super Cable Guy|Super Cable Guy]] ([[User talk:Super Cable Guy|talk]]) 19:46, 24 December 2014 (UTC)


== "Bombing of media facilities" section ==
== "Bombing of media facilities" section ==

Revision as of 04:02, 1 August 2015

"Bombing of media facilities" section

The section was incoherent. I have rearranged the section according to this scheme:

  • Casualties
  • Israeli justification
  • HRW investigation for four of the incidents which they said did not appear to be on military targets
  • One separate incident, Al Shrouk incident, which appeared to be on military target. Also give HRW statement on this. It was repeated twice in different paragraphs, I have combined them and added the references in once place.
  • Reporters without borders, NYT statement
  • NGO monitor statement

Kingsindian ♝♚ 16:44, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Massacre

This article has been linked to at Template:Massacres against Palestinians. If you have an opinion about it, please participate in the discussion.“WarKosign” 06:03, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Operation Pillar of Defense

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Operation Pillar of Defense's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "auto":

  • From January 2015 Mazraat Amal incident: "Report: Six Iranians killed in Israeli strike in Syria, including Revolutionary Guards general". Jerusalem Post. 19 January 2015.
  • From Abdullah of Saudi Arabia: "King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia". Asian History. 1 August 2005. Retrieved 23 October 2011.
  • From China–Israel relations: "It's kosher: Israel embraces Chinese investment". Ejisight. May 15, 2015. Retrieved 14 May 2015.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 23:23, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

B'Tselem acknowledged "challenges IDF faces" etc.

I have good faith reverted this edit. The source cited is simply a newspaper analysis/interpretation of B'Tselem's report. This kind of language does not appear in the B'Tselem report. There is no basis to include such a statement here, where the bulk of B'Tselem's analysis is in the opposite direction. There is no language of acknowledging challenges IDF faced in Hamas mixing with civilians in the B'Tselem report that I could find. Kingsindian ♝♚ 15:42, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:2012_Gaza_War&oldid=674030702"