![]() | Warning: active arbitration remedies 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:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.
|
![]() | Battle of Gaza (2007) was a Warfare good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article should be renamed Palestinian Civil War. [unknown anon editor]
This was a military battle between Hamas and Fatah over the Gaza strip so it should be called the Battle of Gaza (2007), te 2007 added cause there where more battles of Gaza. The Honorable Kermanshahi 17:44, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Note, I am not claiming the material is inaccurate; just that it does not belong here. Jd2718 13:21, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
The quote box adds no information not already present, but distorts the balance of the whole article, pushing a view that the most important aspect of these events is that Palestinians have committed crimes against other Palestinians. 62.56.90.91 09:31, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Removed information about an Israel human rights organization. Nothing coming from Israel on this situation will be near NPOV. Stick with international and accredited groups.
Why is the page title "Battle for Gaza (2007)" and not "Battle of Gaza (2007)"? "Battle for Gaza (2007)" is a one-sided page title with Hamas' point of view. It certainly is not from the Palestinian Authority's point of view. "Battle of Gaza (2007)" is a more neutral title and will also be similar to many of the countless other battles which are named similarly. Also, how can a page move by Batmanand be marked as a minor edit? -- 121.6.67.214 17:18, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Hamas Coup D'etat seems more accurate. Zeq 17:43, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
My impresion is there has been no attempt on the westbank authority and the violence there came from antihamas forces. Coup d'etat is imprecise since hamas is the elected majority. Further we shouldn't judge shooting from one side or the other, in this article but just research it. Both parties have been involved in rather the same crimes, with the accusation of fatah clinging to power hardhandedly in gaza being pronounced. I suspect it is actually the reason behind the current interpalestinean animosity, a matter of precedent. Every war is characterised by attrocities and we have to try to accept it is always both sides living up to them. 77.248.56.242 10:26, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Background section seems rather too short. Shouldn't it begin with the skirmishes and repeated cease-fires, ceasefire collapses, etc, in May? 70.55.90.138 04:06, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Debka is (IMHO) not a WP:RS source. Zeq 14:54, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Why has the older discussion to this page been blanked? Is there something in the older comments that is being suppressed?
Valtam
03:39, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
I suggest to rename the section "Human rights violations" to "military crimes" as keeping human rights is too hard to expect during the war and what actually counts is better described as military crimes (POW killings, civil priperty seizure etc).-- Dojarca 09:31, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
This section reads like anti Hamas propoganda. It is about christians in Gaza. But christains are an insignificant minority of the Gaza population. The section begins
Christians can only continue living safely in the Gaza Strip if they accept Islamic law, including a ban on alcohol and on women roaming publicly without proper head coverings
, but it only becomes apparent later in the paragraph that this is a quote from an "Islamist militant leader". The section goes on to quote "Sheik Abu Saqer, leader of Jihadia Salafiya", but who exactly is Jihadia Salafiya, what is their influence, and what if any is their relationship with the Hamas.
The section is more a less a cut and paste job from an article by Aaron Klein in Jerusalem.
The section lacks any quotes from Hamas members, and says nothing about the position secular muslims. ابو علي (Abu Ali) 23:00, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
WP:BOLD. If you can find what this article needs, add it.-- Flamgirlant 20:55, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
I added the part about CIA intelligence docs a few days ago. I used Debka as a source, but it was pointed out to me that it is unreliable. However, the other source I found, WorldNetDaily, is a subject of some controversy here, and if you visit Talk:Aaron_Klein you'll find he likes to edit his own article a lot. As Abu Ali pointed out above, a lot of this article now contains claims sourced solely from Aaron Klein, who, reliable as he may be, is talking to people that are completely unknown on the net other than through him. Do we keep these claims and quotes, or not? topynate 14:07, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Is the nominator going to finish off the nomination for Good Article tagging of this article?
Unfortunately the image Image:Palestinian_prisoners.jpg is not a fair use on this page, as the article is not about the TV station or its program. Is it possible to get a free image? GB 11:48, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
This article should be improved more. Therefor I put an On Hold tag on it.-- Sa.vakilian( t- c) 18:45, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of July 4, 2007 compares against the six good article criteria:
Imagine a person who is not familiar with Palestine Liberation Organization and Fatah-Hamas conflict want to read this article. As a separate article it should be complete and clear. But at present nobody can understand why this battle happened. I propose to pay attention to lead and background of 2006 Lebanon War.
Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far.-- Sa.vakilian( t- c) 19:19, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
I question if this is a reliable source for any factual claims. A more respected and less politically-extreme newspaper would be a far better choice for referencing. Tim Vickers 22:34, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Reuters now calls this event as a civil war. See: [2] "They have been searching for Fatah men," said the official, Ibrahim Abu An-Naja, alleging Hamas has been carrying out nightly raids on homes since defeating Fatah forces in the territory in a brief civil war last month. -- TheFEARgod ( Ч) 12:46, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
This article is seriously deficient, failing to explain why political differences between Fatah and Hamas led to bloodshed. Here's what the Washington Post said: "The presidential guard, comprising about 5,000 fighters, is the unit slated to receive the U.S. package of training and nonlethal military equipment. The money, arriving now, has prompted Hamas officials and fighters to refer to Fatah as the "Jew American Army" and "Zionist collaborators."" A report from Ynet suggests there is a serious rift between them: "Hani al-Hassan, senior presidential advisor says Gaza war was between Hamas and Fatah collaborators who aided Israel, US. Gunshots fired at al-Hassan's home following statements, Abbas dismisses him from his role". PR talk 17:27, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1192380636961 Zeq 07:42, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Image:Palestinian prisoners.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 21:15, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
This really should not be called the "Battle of Gaza, but the Battle for Gaza. question: Isn't a battle generally only a part of a larger war? Is Hamas at war with Fatah? If so, would this Battle for Gaza be part of an ongoing larger Hamas-Fatah war? Was it a one-battle war? Stellarkid ( talk) 04:36, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
"Hamas took control" sounds like rotation agreement, while in fact it was millitary Coup d'état. Netanel h ( talk) 09:42, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Concerning the recent rename [3] was there any discussion or rename vote here that I missed. Concerning this particular Battle of Gaza which took place in 2007. As it is widely known in RS.-- PLNR ( talk) 06:18, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved. Consensus to retain the current title. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 16:17, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Battle of Gaza (2007) →
Fatah–Hamas battle in Gaza, June 2007 – There have been numerous Battles of Gaza. The title should be unambiguous, clear, and reflect the content of the title. At the time, Battle of Gaza was an obvious title. Now it is ambiguous. Rather than place it between unrelated Israeli-Palestinian battles and other international battles, the proposed name is a simple alternative and the most specific. The date is not necessary, but helpful
Wickey-nl (
talk)
11:34, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
In the first paragraph is built solely on Crookes view, mostly expressed in the bottom three paragraphs in the linked article. While I understand his reasoning in how it led to the decline of EU's influence and didn't allow exploring other alternatives concerning the Peace process. I don't really see him making any direct connection between it and Battle of Gaza. I would appreciate a source that make that connection directly, and or alternative/additional concerning the situation.-- PLNR ( talk) 05:10, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
The section title and first paragraph seem to be an original research based on the leaked paper titled "Palestinian Vision for Resolving the Current PA Crisis".
Which ignore what stated in the document that this is plan to "re-establish and reinvigorate our partnership with the international community on the basis of international law and legitimacy". In case no agreement between the factions is reached, since it the current harmful situation cannot go on indefinitely.
Why we need additional WP:RS sources to weed out the bias.-- PLNR ( talk) 19:56, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
Someone worked hard to emphasis the British, US, Israeli, arab state involvement in favor of Fatah, in any way possible, but reading some of the linked articles, it seems that quotes were selectively picked from sources, on one hand using comments concerning USA on the other hand ignoring comments concerning Iran helping arm and fund Hamas political and military activities.-- PLNR ( talk) 20:09, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
I have thought to address some of those issues in couple of ways. First I have went over the sources and added opposing views in a chronological order. I have merged the section dealing with "British involvement" and "US\ISrael\Arabs involvement" involvement into one. Lastly I summarized several sources about specific deals into one speaking to a policy(Please check I didn't missed any important detail [4]) Hopefully the section should now reflect the power struggle that led to this Battle of Gaza in a more concise way then before. -- PLNR ( talk) 02:36, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
In the preceding period, the US and Israel apparently strengthened Fatah's military power to topple Hamas. Kirtimaansyal ( talk) 16:46, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Battle of Gaza (2007). Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 11:55, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Battle of Gaza (2007). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.abudis.net/Gaza_bombsWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:29, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Battle of Gaza (2007). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:41, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
1) Lede: The Battle is referred to as a 'climax' in the Hamas-Fatah conflict. That term, meaning a 'the most intense or important point; a culmination' is not supported in the quoted source and appears to be a subjective judgement. While important, it was certainly no culmination. My suggestion would be to rather use the less judgemental 'a prominent event'. Altered accordingly. Erictheenquirer ( talk) 10:18, 9 June 2018 (UTC) Erictheenquirer ( talk) 10:21, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
2) "Palestinian Authority": Paragraph 4: "Mahmoud Abbas was under pressure by the international community, who considered Hamas' unacceptable" This sentence appears to be incorrect because I could not find any sources or other evidence that Kenya, Costa Rica, Namibia, South Africa, Iran, India, Indonesia, etc, etc, find Hamas to be unacceptable. = More pro-Israeli WP:BIAS Erictheenquirer ( talk) 09:56, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
3) General structure: This article is complete structural mess with duplications of the same theme under different sub-sections, especially in 1.3, 1.4, and 1.5, which are not logically interlinked. This makes for painful non-encyclopaedic reading and the effective obscuring of the key elements.
4) "International community": This term is improperly used in many places and fails to reflect the provided source. I can only conclude that it is unacceptable WP:OR The concept 'international sanctions' is equally without substance. This is a nasty case of WP:BIAS editing, inserting unsupported POVs that the countries of the world disapproved of the democratically elected Hamas government. Awaiting comment to the contrary. Erictheenquirer ( talk) 13:50, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
The article presents a claim from a press release by Oxfam at face value [5]. I do not think that Oxfam is a reliable source for this sort of political question. So, if the claim is reinserted it should be done using a better source, such as a newspaper. Given the complexity of this legal dispute, this particular article about a battle probably isn't the best place to feature it. Instead, it could possibly be discussed in the article about Israel's relation to Gaza. OtterAM ( talk) 06:02, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Oxfam was just used for the fact that Israel is withholding the tax revenue. Upon reviewing the second source it shouldnt be used for calling it illegal. Im fine with the wording as of now, but the Oxfam source should be returned. Yall seriously need to reexamine your thinking if you think barring Oxfam is going to fly. If yall really want to challenge it as a source Im happy to take it to RSN. nableezy - 06:39, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
I agree with Nableezy ( talk · contribs), a habit has been progressively developing of reverting text with sources, based on ultra-brief and largely subjective RS, BRD, UNDUE, SYNTH, claims, and some arbitration is required on what is perhaps one of the more controversial topic areas in all of Wiki.
Took is to RS/N. It is absurd yall think removing Oxfam is acceptable, especially with the sourcing that I see you use elsewhere. Absolutely absurd. nableezy - 19:49, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
References
On 1 July 2018 Yaniv once again did a "fly-by" revert of sourced material "justified" with his now usual unsubstantiated type of POV related to WP:RS - "Jimmy Carter and ADDAMER (sic) ("Prisoner Support and Human Rights Association") are not reliable sources to state facts, let alone attributed.) His role in "the pattern" is now established beyond any doubt. I seriously object to this type of repeated vandalism. Erictheenquirer ( talk) 14:03, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
The number of casulaties is wrong according to wafa a pna affiliated news agency 416 people of them fighters in the Palestinian National Security Forces and Civilians [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr. Mohmad ( talk • contribs) 14:58, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
References
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Opening sentence of first paragraph, delete added word "the": "The Battle of Gaza, also referred to as Hamas' takeover of Gaza, was a military conflict between Fatah and Hamas, that took place in the Gaza Strip between (delete)the(delete) June 10 and 15, 2007." Durdyfiv1 ( talk) 02:41, 1 August 2020 (UTC)Durdyfiv1
Why isn't there a "strength" part between the "Units involved" and "Casualties and losses" in the infobox? Aminabzz ( talk) 16:21, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Minor typo: "the "unfair is written, one of the quotation marks should be removed Domotorp ( talk) 08:58, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
@ Dovidroth reverted my edits. I suggest we undo their revert.
It might be worth noting that Dovidroth has been banned from the Palestine/Israel Conflict topic for 90 days: /info/en/?search=User_talk:Dovidroth#Notice_that_you_are_now_subject_to_an_arbitration_enforcement_sanction
A summary of my changes which I propose we restore:
1. Specifying the group that Fatah lost the elections to in the introduction.
2. Reorganized a paragraph to flow better with the rest of the section and presented analysis from secondary sources in contrast to the "hearsay" style of writing in the original.
3. Added a quote from the editor of the second largest circulation publication in Israel.
I suggest we restore my changes. DMH43 ( talk) 20:53, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
References
![]() | Warning: active arbitration remedies 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:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.
|
![]() | Battle of Gaza (2007) was a Warfare good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article should be renamed Palestinian Civil War. [unknown anon editor]
This was a military battle between Hamas and Fatah over the Gaza strip so it should be called the Battle of Gaza (2007), te 2007 added cause there where more battles of Gaza. The Honorable Kermanshahi 17:44, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Note, I am not claiming the material is inaccurate; just that it does not belong here. Jd2718 13:21, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
The quote box adds no information not already present, but distorts the balance of the whole article, pushing a view that the most important aspect of these events is that Palestinians have committed crimes against other Palestinians. 62.56.90.91 09:31, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Removed information about an Israel human rights organization. Nothing coming from Israel on this situation will be near NPOV. Stick with international and accredited groups.
Why is the page title "Battle for Gaza (2007)" and not "Battle of Gaza (2007)"? "Battle for Gaza (2007)" is a one-sided page title with Hamas' point of view. It certainly is not from the Palestinian Authority's point of view. "Battle of Gaza (2007)" is a more neutral title and will also be similar to many of the countless other battles which are named similarly. Also, how can a page move by Batmanand be marked as a minor edit? -- 121.6.67.214 17:18, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Hamas Coup D'etat seems more accurate. Zeq 17:43, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
My impresion is there has been no attempt on the westbank authority and the violence there came from antihamas forces. Coup d'etat is imprecise since hamas is the elected majority. Further we shouldn't judge shooting from one side or the other, in this article but just research it. Both parties have been involved in rather the same crimes, with the accusation of fatah clinging to power hardhandedly in gaza being pronounced. I suspect it is actually the reason behind the current interpalestinean animosity, a matter of precedent. Every war is characterised by attrocities and we have to try to accept it is always both sides living up to them. 77.248.56.242 10:26, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Background section seems rather too short. Shouldn't it begin with the skirmishes and repeated cease-fires, ceasefire collapses, etc, in May? 70.55.90.138 04:06, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Debka is (IMHO) not a WP:RS source. Zeq 14:54, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Why has the older discussion to this page been blanked? Is there something in the older comments that is being suppressed?
Valtam
03:39, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
I suggest to rename the section "Human rights violations" to "military crimes" as keeping human rights is too hard to expect during the war and what actually counts is better described as military crimes (POW killings, civil priperty seizure etc).-- Dojarca 09:31, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
This section reads like anti Hamas propoganda. It is about christians in Gaza. But christains are an insignificant minority of the Gaza population. The section begins
Christians can only continue living safely in the Gaza Strip if they accept Islamic law, including a ban on alcohol and on women roaming publicly without proper head coverings
, but it only becomes apparent later in the paragraph that this is a quote from an "Islamist militant leader". The section goes on to quote "Sheik Abu Saqer, leader of Jihadia Salafiya", but who exactly is Jihadia Salafiya, what is their influence, and what if any is their relationship with the Hamas.
The section is more a less a cut and paste job from an article by Aaron Klein in Jerusalem.
The section lacks any quotes from Hamas members, and says nothing about the position secular muslims. ابو علي (Abu Ali) 23:00, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
WP:BOLD. If you can find what this article needs, add it.-- Flamgirlant 20:55, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
I added the part about CIA intelligence docs a few days ago. I used Debka as a source, but it was pointed out to me that it is unreliable. However, the other source I found, WorldNetDaily, is a subject of some controversy here, and if you visit Talk:Aaron_Klein you'll find he likes to edit his own article a lot. As Abu Ali pointed out above, a lot of this article now contains claims sourced solely from Aaron Klein, who, reliable as he may be, is talking to people that are completely unknown on the net other than through him. Do we keep these claims and quotes, or not? topynate 14:07, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Is the nominator going to finish off the nomination for Good Article tagging of this article?
Unfortunately the image Image:Palestinian_prisoners.jpg is not a fair use on this page, as the article is not about the TV station or its program. Is it possible to get a free image? GB 11:48, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
This article should be improved more. Therefor I put an On Hold tag on it.-- Sa.vakilian( t- c) 18:45, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of July 4, 2007 compares against the six good article criteria:
Imagine a person who is not familiar with Palestine Liberation Organization and Fatah-Hamas conflict want to read this article. As a separate article it should be complete and clear. But at present nobody can understand why this battle happened. I propose to pay attention to lead and background of 2006 Lebanon War.
Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far.-- Sa.vakilian( t- c) 19:19, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
I question if this is a reliable source for any factual claims. A more respected and less politically-extreme newspaper would be a far better choice for referencing. Tim Vickers 22:34, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Reuters now calls this event as a civil war. See: [2] "They have been searching for Fatah men," said the official, Ibrahim Abu An-Naja, alleging Hamas has been carrying out nightly raids on homes since defeating Fatah forces in the territory in a brief civil war last month. -- TheFEARgod ( Ч) 12:46, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
This article is seriously deficient, failing to explain why political differences between Fatah and Hamas led to bloodshed. Here's what the Washington Post said: "The presidential guard, comprising about 5,000 fighters, is the unit slated to receive the U.S. package of training and nonlethal military equipment. The money, arriving now, has prompted Hamas officials and fighters to refer to Fatah as the "Jew American Army" and "Zionist collaborators."" A report from Ynet suggests there is a serious rift between them: "Hani al-Hassan, senior presidential advisor says Gaza war was between Hamas and Fatah collaborators who aided Israel, US. Gunshots fired at al-Hassan's home following statements, Abbas dismisses him from his role". PR talk 17:27, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1192380636961 Zeq 07:42, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Image:Palestinian prisoners.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 21:15, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
This really should not be called the "Battle of Gaza, but the Battle for Gaza. question: Isn't a battle generally only a part of a larger war? Is Hamas at war with Fatah? If so, would this Battle for Gaza be part of an ongoing larger Hamas-Fatah war? Was it a one-battle war? Stellarkid ( talk) 04:36, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
"Hamas took control" sounds like rotation agreement, while in fact it was millitary Coup d'état. Netanel h ( talk) 09:42, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Concerning the recent rename [3] was there any discussion or rename vote here that I missed. Concerning this particular Battle of Gaza which took place in 2007. As it is widely known in RS.-- PLNR ( talk) 06:18, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved. Consensus to retain the current title. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 16:17, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Battle of Gaza (2007) →
Fatah–Hamas battle in Gaza, June 2007 – There have been numerous Battles of Gaza. The title should be unambiguous, clear, and reflect the content of the title. At the time, Battle of Gaza was an obvious title. Now it is ambiguous. Rather than place it between unrelated Israeli-Palestinian battles and other international battles, the proposed name is a simple alternative and the most specific. The date is not necessary, but helpful
Wickey-nl (
talk)
11:34, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
In the first paragraph is built solely on Crookes view, mostly expressed in the bottom three paragraphs in the linked article. While I understand his reasoning in how it led to the decline of EU's influence and didn't allow exploring other alternatives concerning the Peace process. I don't really see him making any direct connection between it and Battle of Gaza. I would appreciate a source that make that connection directly, and or alternative/additional concerning the situation.-- PLNR ( talk) 05:10, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
The section title and first paragraph seem to be an original research based on the leaked paper titled "Palestinian Vision for Resolving the Current PA Crisis".
Which ignore what stated in the document that this is plan to "re-establish and reinvigorate our partnership with the international community on the basis of international law and legitimacy". In case no agreement between the factions is reached, since it the current harmful situation cannot go on indefinitely.
Why we need additional WP:RS sources to weed out the bias.-- PLNR ( talk) 19:56, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
Someone worked hard to emphasis the British, US, Israeli, arab state involvement in favor of Fatah, in any way possible, but reading some of the linked articles, it seems that quotes were selectively picked from sources, on one hand using comments concerning USA on the other hand ignoring comments concerning Iran helping arm and fund Hamas political and military activities.-- PLNR ( talk) 20:09, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
I have thought to address some of those issues in couple of ways. First I have went over the sources and added opposing views in a chronological order. I have merged the section dealing with "British involvement" and "US\ISrael\Arabs involvement" involvement into one. Lastly I summarized several sources about specific deals into one speaking to a policy(Please check I didn't missed any important detail [4]) Hopefully the section should now reflect the power struggle that led to this Battle of Gaza in a more concise way then before. -- PLNR ( talk) 02:36, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
In the preceding period, the US and Israel apparently strengthened Fatah's military power to topple Hamas. Kirtimaansyal ( talk) 16:46, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Battle of Gaza (2007). Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 11:55, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Battle of Gaza (2007). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.abudis.net/Gaza_bombsWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:29, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Battle of Gaza (2007). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:41, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
1) Lede: The Battle is referred to as a 'climax' in the Hamas-Fatah conflict. That term, meaning a 'the most intense or important point; a culmination' is not supported in the quoted source and appears to be a subjective judgement. While important, it was certainly no culmination. My suggestion would be to rather use the less judgemental 'a prominent event'. Altered accordingly. Erictheenquirer ( talk) 10:18, 9 June 2018 (UTC) Erictheenquirer ( talk) 10:21, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
2) "Palestinian Authority": Paragraph 4: "Mahmoud Abbas was under pressure by the international community, who considered Hamas' unacceptable" This sentence appears to be incorrect because I could not find any sources or other evidence that Kenya, Costa Rica, Namibia, South Africa, Iran, India, Indonesia, etc, etc, find Hamas to be unacceptable. = More pro-Israeli WP:BIAS Erictheenquirer ( talk) 09:56, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
3) General structure: This article is complete structural mess with duplications of the same theme under different sub-sections, especially in 1.3, 1.4, and 1.5, which are not logically interlinked. This makes for painful non-encyclopaedic reading and the effective obscuring of the key elements.
4) "International community": This term is improperly used in many places and fails to reflect the provided source. I can only conclude that it is unacceptable WP:OR The concept 'international sanctions' is equally without substance. This is a nasty case of WP:BIAS editing, inserting unsupported POVs that the countries of the world disapproved of the democratically elected Hamas government. Awaiting comment to the contrary. Erictheenquirer ( talk) 13:50, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
The article presents a claim from a press release by Oxfam at face value [5]. I do not think that Oxfam is a reliable source for this sort of political question. So, if the claim is reinserted it should be done using a better source, such as a newspaper. Given the complexity of this legal dispute, this particular article about a battle probably isn't the best place to feature it. Instead, it could possibly be discussed in the article about Israel's relation to Gaza. OtterAM ( talk) 06:02, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Oxfam was just used for the fact that Israel is withholding the tax revenue. Upon reviewing the second source it shouldnt be used for calling it illegal. Im fine with the wording as of now, but the Oxfam source should be returned. Yall seriously need to reexamine your thinking if you think barring Oxfam is going to fly. If yall really want to challenge it as a source Im happy to take it to RSN. nableezy - 06:39, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
I agree with Nableezy ( talk · contribs), a habit has been progressively developing of reverting text with sources, based on ultra-brief and largely subjective RS, BRD, UNDUE, SYNTH, claims, and some arbitration is required on what is perhaps one of the more controversial topic areas in all of Wiki.
Took is to RS/N. It is absurd yall think removing Oxfam is acceptable, especially with the sourcing that I see you use elsewhere. Absolutely absurd. nableezy - 19:49, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
References
On 1 July 2018 Yaniv once again did a "fly-by" revert of sourced material "justified" with his now usual unsubstantiated type of POV related to WP:RS - "Jimmy Carter and ADDAMER (sic) ("Prisoner Support and Human Rights Association") are not reliable sources to state facts, let alone attributed.) His role in "the pattern" is now established beyond any doubt. I seriously object to this type of repeated vandalism. Erictheenquirer ( talk) 14:03, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
The number of casulaties is wrong according to wafa a pna affiliated news agency 416 people of them fighters in the Palestinian National Security Forces and Civilians [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr. Mohmad ( talk • contribs) 14:58, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
References
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Opening sentence of first paragraph, delete added word "the": "The Battle of Gaza, also referred to as Hamas' takeover of Gaza, was a military conflict between Fatah and Hamas, that took place in the Gaza Strip between (delete)the(delete) June 10 and 15, 2007." Durdyfiv1 ( talk) 02:41, 1 August 2020 (UTC)Durdyfiv1
Why isn't there a "strength" part between the "Units involved" and "Casualties and losses" in the infobox? Aminabzz ( talk) 16:21, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Minor typo: "the "unfair is written, one of the quotation marks should be removed Domotorp ( talk) 08:58, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
@ Dovidroth reverted my edits. I suggest we undo their revert.
It might be worth noting that Dovidroth has been banned from the Palestine/Israel Conflict topic for 90 days: /info/en/?search=User_talk:Dovidroth#Notice_that_you_are_now_subject_to_an_arbitration_enforcement_sanction
A summary of my changes which I propose we restore:
1. Specifying the group that Fatah lost the elections to in the introduction.
2. Reorganized a paragraph to flow better with the rest of the section and presented analysis from secondary sources in contrast to the "hearsay" style of writing in the original.
3. Added a quote from the editor of the second largest circulation publication in Israel.
I suggest we restore my changes. DMH43 ( talk) 20:53, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
References