This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Israel on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IsraelWikipedia:WikiProject IsraelTemplate:WikiProject IsraelIsrael-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographic
Palestine region, the
Palestinian people and the
State of Palestine on Wikipedia. Join us by visiting
the project page, where you can add your name to the
list of members where you can contribute to the
discussions.PalestineWikipedia:WikiProject PalestineTemplate:WikiProject PalestinePalestine-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Terrorism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles on
terrorism, individual terrorists, incidents and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the
discussion and see a list of open tasks.TerrorismWikipedia:WikiProject TerrorismTemplate:WikiProject TerrorismTerrorism articles
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the
Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
You must be logged-in and
extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for
making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic
The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:
Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to
make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.
With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:
Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.
If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!
Removing the links to Berlin and Nice
Firstly because there's no clear evidence as of yet that the perpetrator is affiliated with Islamic state. Secondly because both of those attacks were against soft civilian targets, whereas this one was targeting military personnel and therefore can be seen as a legitimate operation in the military sense.
76.64.142.227 (
talk)
22:19, 8 January 2017 (UTC)reply
ISIS is one of the two groups attributed that are suspected, the Israeli Prime minster and media had put the finger on them. WP:RS connect the events to Nice and Berlin attacks
5.144.59.157 (
talk)
22:51, 8 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Bibi Netanyahu clearly wants to claim that Palestinians in general are "in league" with ISIS, as per the Likudnik-Settler narrative. His claiming as much, and certain Israeli news outlets claiming as much, doesn't make it so.
76.64.142.227 (
talk)
23:57, 8 January 2017 (UTC)reply
No, it's simply going by international consensus. Only Israel and the pro-Israel movement claim Jerusalem as the capital of the Israeli state proper. I'm removing those links again in light of this fact.
76.64.142.227 (
talk)
23:58, 8 January 2017 (UTC)reply
East Jerusalem is technically not part of the "Palestinian Territory, Occupied" (oPt) - areas A,B,C of the Oslo Accords, now mostly referred to as "State of Palestine" by the UN. Of course Arab Nations don't recognize Israeli sovereignity claim on E. Jerusalem and it is often named "Occupied Jerusalem", but it is not technically part of the oPt (or now State of Palestine).
GreyShark (
dibra)
08:42, 10 January 2017 (UTC)reply
United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334: ″Reaffirms that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law..". Whatever the Oslo Accords say, the highest international body is very clear in re-affirming that this territory is viewed as occupied, under international law. Israel effectively annexed it by
its law in 1980, which perhaps should be mentioned.
Axxxion (
talk)
13:09, 14 January 2017 (UTC)reply
No international sources has been presented yet. Honest Reporting is not a RS or a source or importance, they are strictly a pro-right-wing-Israel advocacy group, here they are a
WP:SPS. Really, these guys are complaining about bias for articles with titles like "Four killed in lorry attack on Israeli soldiers in Jerusalem". That is what one would expect when reading the raving rants of a random blog. I'm sure we could find sources like these to claim the media/others are a bunch of anti-Semites on any article related to Israel but we don't include it because it would be
WP:UNDUE just like this whole section is. Here's hoping the war is over by Christmas so everyone can return home.
2001:1970:5DE1:6A00:C56E:8599:F30C:DCDC (
talk)
23:57, 8 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Proposal: removing links to "terrorism"
Israeli soldiers are not civilians. They are a belligerent, hostile, occupying power in the occupied West Bank. I fail to see how an attack on armed combatants and belligerents constitutes "terrorism" unless you're blatantly pushing a POV narrative.
76.64.142.227 (
talk)
00:00, 9 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Targeting belligerent, hostile soldiers is also not "mass murder" unless you consider two sides killing one another in a conventional battle to be "mass murder" as well. Removed link.
76.64.142.227 (
talk)
00:02, 9 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Is the Reporting controversies section really needed? I hope i do not sound rude but
Honest Reporting often takes issues with mainstream news organizations, and there is not much to suggest that this time the news byline
Honest Reporting is upset about makes is more notable than most. Just because the event is notable does not mean that the reactions to it are.
Inter&anthro (
talk)
00:08, 9 January 2017 (UTC)reply
I suggest you read
WP:ARBPIAINTRO, as you are not allowed to edit this page. It appears that the page is now protected, which will not allow you to make the edits. If you wish to contribute to the conversation, please state your case, and an independent person from the subject can draw the conclusion and make the appropriate edit, if needed. - GalatzTalk19:05, 9 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Clearly? anything but. The attack took place at the Armon Hanatziv promenade, which is located in an area that was, in fact, neither Israeli nor Jordanian prior to 1967. It was in no-man's land, between the two, and held by the UN. Therefore, while not in Israel proper, neither is it in "occupied Palestinian West Bank". Let's just leave it in Jerusalem.
Poliocretes (
talk)
19:19, 9 January 2017 (UTC)reply
This was done at the Armon HaNatziv promenade which start at the Talpiut and continue up to Abu Tor, there is also a building called Armon Hantiziv, a Neighborhood and a mountain ridge with that name
37.19.116.113 (
talk)
19:15, 9 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Barring the fact that there's nothing wrong in supporting the attack-- as it's a military operation against a military target, and thus legitimate-- the alleged reaction (your "source" isn't objective, lol) by one advocacy group in another country has nothing to do with the event itself. Totally unacceptable to add, especially when we consider your "source".
There was an unusual tweet by Turkish Deputy Prime Minister Mehmet Simsek that I think should be added to the "reaction" section:
"Again we condemn another despicable act of #terrorism -today in #Jerusalem. Humanity deserves nations to unite against terrorism w/o excuses" — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
186.137.168.178 (
talk)
23:47, 9 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Natenyahu
Of course Natenyahu blames the Islamic State, guaranteeing quick strong international sympathy. Unsurprisingly, nothing is mentioned in the lead about the group that claimed responsibility for this heinous attack.
Makeandtoss (
talk)
12:32, 10 January 2017 (UTC)reply
These are
primary sources. ISIS's warmongering Wahhabi affiliates would be more than ecstatic to claim responsibility as this would bring praise to the group from some. No agendas here, get a secondary source.
Makeandtoss (
talk)
14:02, 10 January 2017 (UTC)reply
No they are not secondary sources, they are a collection of primary sources as their is no commentary, it is just translated primary material. I read Arabic, the quote confirms that the attacker is from the PFLP. But we need secondary sources that mention this. Anyone can claim responsibility, heck I can claim responsibility. Bibi can say whatever he wants, but if facts refute what he says, then no he cannot say whatever he wants. Unless anyone is a fan of living far from reality.
Makeandtoss (
talk)
14:46, 10 January 2017 (UTC)reply
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Israel on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IsraelWikipedia:WikiProject IsraelTemplate:WikiProject IsraelIsrael-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographic
Palestine region, the
Palestinian people and the
State of Palestine on Wikipedia. Join us by visiting
the project page, where you can add your name to the
list of members where you can contribute to the
discussions.PalestineWikipedia:WikiProject PalestineTemplate:WikiProject PalestinePalestine-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Terrorism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles on
terrorism, individual terrorists, incidents and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the
discussion and see a list of open tasks.TerrorismWikipedia:WikiProject TerrorismTemplate:WikiProject TerrorismTerrorism articles
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the
Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
You must be logged-in and
extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for
making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic
The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:
Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to
make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.
With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:
Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.
If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!
Removing the links to Berlin and Nice
Firstly because there's no clear evidence as of yet that the perpetrator is affiliated with Islamic state. Secondly because both of those attacks were against soft civilian targets, whereas this one was targeting military personnel and therefore can be seen as a legitimate operation in the military sense.
76.64.142.227 (
talk)
22:19, 8 January 2017 (UTC)reply
ISIS is one of the two groups attributed that are suspected, the Israeli Prime minster and media had put the finger on them. WP:RS connect the events to Nice and Berlin attacks
5.144.59.157 (
talk)
22:51, 8 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Bibi Netanyahu clearly wants to claim that Palestinians in general are "in league" with ISIS, as per the Likudnik-Settler narrative. His claiming as much, and certain Israeli news outlets claiming as much, doesn't make it so.
76.64.142.227 (
talk)
23:57, 8 January 2017 (UTC)reply
No, it's simply going by international consensus. Only Israel and the pro-Israel movement claim Jerusalem as the capital of the Israeli state proper. I'm removing those links again in light of this fact.
76.64.142.227 (
talk)
23:58, 8 January 2017 (UTC)reply
East Jerusalem is technically not part of the "Palestinian Territory, Occupied" (oPt) - areas A,B,C of the Oslo Accords, now mostly referred to as "State of Palestine" by the UN. Of course Arab Nations don't recognize Israeli sovereignity claim on E. Jerusalem and it is often named "Occupied Jerusalem", but it is not technically part of the oPt (or now State of Palestine).
GreyShark (
dibra)
08:42, 10 January 2017 (UTC)reply
United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334: ″Reaffirms that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law..". Whatever the Oslo Accords say, the highest international body is very clear in re-affirming that this territory is viewed as occupied, under international law. Israel effectively annexed it by
its law in 1980, which perhaps should be mentioned.
Axxxion (
talk)
13:09, 14 January 2017 (UTC)reply
No international sources has been presented yet. Honest Reporting is not a RS or a source or importance, they are strictly a pro-right-wing-Israel advocacy group, here they are a
WP:SPS. Really, these guys are complaining about bias for articles with titles like "Four killed in lorry attack on Israeli soldiers in Jerusalem". That is what one would expect when reading the raving rants of a random blog. I'm sure we could find sources like these to claim the media/others are a bunch of anti-Semites on any article related to Israel but we don't include it because it would be
WP:UNDUE just like this whole section is. Here's hoping the war is over by Christmas so everyone can return home.
2001:1970:5DE1:6A00:C56E:8599:F30C:DCDC (
talk)
23:57, 8 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Proposal: removing links to "terrorism"
Israeli soldiers are not civilians. They are a belligerent, hostile, occupying power in the occupied West Bank. I fail to see how an attack on armed combatants and belligerents constitutes "terrorism" unless you're blatantly pushing a POV narrative.
76.64.142.227 (
talk)
00:00, 9 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Targeting belligerent, hostile soldiers is also not "mass murder" unless you consider two sides killing one another in a conventional battle to be "mass murder" as well. Removed link.
76.64.142.227 (
talk)
00:02, 9 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Is the Reporting controversies section really needed? I hope i do not sound rude but
Honest Reporting often takes issues with mainstream news organizations, and there is not much to suggest that this time the news byline
Honest Reporting is upset about makes is more notable than most. Just because the event is notable does not mean that the reactions to it are.
Inter&anthro (
talk)
00:08, 9 January 2017 (UTC)reply
I suggest you read
WP:ARBPIAINTRO, as you are not allowed to edit this page. It appears that the page is now protected, which will not allow you to make the edits. If you wish to contribute to the conversation, please state your case, and an independent person from the subject can draw the conclusion and make the appropriate edit, if needed. - GalatzTalk19:05, 9 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Clearly? anything but. The attack took place at the Armon Hanatziv promenade, which is located in an area that was, in fact, neither Israeli nor Jordanian prior to 1967. It was in no-man's land, between the two, and held by the UN. Therefore, while not in Israel proper, neither is it in "occupied Palestinian West Bank". Let's just leave it in Jerusalem.
Poliocretes (
talk)
19:19, 9 January 2017 (UTC)reply
This was done at the Armon HaNatziv promenade which start at the Talpiut and continue up to Abu Tor, there is also a building called Armon Hantiziv, a Neighborhood and a mountain ridge with that name
37.19.116.113 (
talk)
19:15, 9 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Barring the fact that there's nothing wrong in supporting the attack-- as it's a military operation against a military target, and thus legitimate-- the alleged reaction (your "source" isn't objective, lol) by one advocacy group in another country has nothing to do with the event itself. Totally unacceptable to add, especially when we consider your "source".
There was an unusual tweet by Turkish Deputy Prime Minister Mehmet Simsek that I think should be added to the "reaction" section:
"Again we condemn another despicable act of #terrorism -today in #Jerusalem. Humanity deserves nations to unite against terrorism w/o excuses" — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
186.137.168.178 (
talk)
23:47, 9 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Natenyahu
Of course Natenyahu blames the Islamic State, guaranteeing quick strong international sympathy. Unsurprisingly, nothing is mentioned in the lead about the group that claimed responsibility for this heinous attack.
Makeandtoss (
talk)
12:32, 10 January 2017 (UTC)reply
These are
primary sources. ISIS's warmongering Wahhabi affiliates would be more than ecstatic to claim responsibility as this would bring praise to the group from some. No agendas here, get a secondary source.
Makeandtoss (
talk)
14:02, 10 January 2017 (UTC)reply
No they are not secondary sources, they are a collection of primary sources as their is no commentary, it is just translated primary material. I read Arabic, the quote confirms that the attacker is from the PFLP. But we need secondary sources that mention this. Anyone can claim responsibility, heck I can claim responsibility. Bibi can say whatever he wants, but if facts refute what he says, then no he cannot say whatever he wants. Unless anyone is a fan of living far from reality.
Makeandtoss (
talk)
14:46, 10 January 2017 (UTC)reply