This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Gaza flotilla raid article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
A news item involving Gaza flotilla raid was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 31 May 2010. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
This article has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
Material from
Gaza flotilla raid was split to other pages. The former page's
history now serves to
provide attribution for that content in the latter pages, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter pages exist. Please leave this template in place to link the article histories and preserve this attribution.
|
In accordance with Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles#Discretionary sanctions, editors of this article are restricted to 1 revert per 24 hours. Violations of this restriction will lead to blocks. |
This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary. |
On 4 February 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to Gaza flotilla attack. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
Perhaps someone can tell me why, in the description of the attack, there is so much detailed information on every Israeli commando that was captured, but absolutely none on the Marmarites who were actually killed? I realize that much of the information comes from the reports made public by the IDF, but it seems to me that this causes an imbalance in reporting on the other side.
This is an endemic problem with articles on Israel-Palestine, but something that should be addressed as it is de facto bias. Mcdruid ( talk) 03:43, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
Several of the Mavi Marmara belligerents were previously convicted Islamic terrorists, some of those who died, expressed the desire for "martyrdom". These are important points when discussing an incident in which those involved were bringing guns, knives, bulletproof vests, gas masks, sniper scopes and other banned items to a known terrorist group, Hamas.
"One of the IHH operatives aboard the Mavi Marmara participated in the terrorist attack of a Russian ferry in 1996, intended to secure hostages as bargaining chips for the release of Chechens from Russian prisons (although IHH as an organization was not involved in the attack)."
https://www.terrorism-info.org.il/Data/pdf/PDF_10_157_2.pdf
Fifty of the passengers of the Mavi Marmara were found to have connections to global, Islamic terrorist organizations. Among these passengers were men who refused to identify themselves and carried no identification. They did, however, have envelopes filled with thousands of dollars and were equipped with bullet-proof vests, night vision goggles and gas masks (Jerusalem Post, June 4, and June 5, 2010).
At least two were arrested for terror related incidents afterwards. Why were these facts missing from the article? Other articles have followups on the people involved, but this article purposely obfuscates these facts.
Ahmed Luqman Talib Was arrested for terrorism in 2020: https://aijac.org.au/featured/mavi-marmara-passenger-arrested-on-terrorist-charges/
The dead:
Çetin Topçuoglu left a letter hinting that he expected to die as a shaheed and called on others to aspire to a similar death.
Ali Haydar Bengi constantly prayed to Allah to grant him martyrdom. His friends said that he wanted to be a shaheed and that he “had an intense desire to die as a shaheed”
"It was found that 8 out of the 9 casualties belonged to IHH or affiliated groups. The affiliated groups included the Turkish Felicity Party (Saadet Partisi), an Islamic party established in 2001 that espouses cooperation between Muslim countries, war on Zionism and confrontation with the West".
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/mavi-marmara-casualties-identified-as-members-of-turkish-islamist-organizations 136.26.178.95 ( talk) 06:48, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
We should add a link to Report of the Secretary-General’s Panel of Inquiry on the 31 May 2010 Flotilla Incident (July 2011) in the section on the UN response DMH43 ( talk) 05:51, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
It looks like there was a monument to this in Gaza which was deliberately destroyed. Maybe that should be added to the article. Fanccr ( talk) 00:56, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
User @ פעמי-עליון reverted my changes adding details about the killing of the passengers in the lead. Here is there edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Gaza_flotilla_raid&diff=1200092716&oldid=1198337623
Their edit summary: "Undue here, cherry picking POV pushing" but how is it cherry picking to describe the nature of the killing of the passengers? And how does that push a POV?
The rest of the lead quotes directly from Israel's report which has been described as a whitewash by human rights organizations. For example, it quotes the report's description of IHH as a "hardcore group".
I suggest we undo the user's revert. DMH43 ( talk) 21:18, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
Agreed, this is relevant content that is appropriate for the lede, which is supposed to be a summary of the body. The content is relevant, appropriate, and referenced. I do not understand the edit that is attempting to remove it with an edit summary of these details are both leading as well as undue for the lede. Find the appropriate place in the body and keep it balanced pls
. What isn't balanced about the coverage?
Bastun
Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 00:19, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
@ Mistamystery, the mention of "knives" in the palmer report cites the turkel report. "Material before the Panel confirms that this group was armed with iron bars, staves, chains, and slingshots,388 and there is some indication that they also used knives" where the statement about knives cites the turkel report. DMH43 ( talk) 20:27, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
@ DMH43, @ Mistamystery - Does the Palmer Report describe only "some indication that they also used knives" or does it "accept the assertion they were likely used"? IOHANNVSVERVS ( talk) 20:49, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
The section regarding the Mavi Marmara boarding cites several times the "Meir Amit Report", which itself cites anonymous sources within the boarding party. The language used in the report is clearly partisan, and the Meir Amit center is noted on its own page ( Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center) as being closely affiliated with the IDF. Would appreciate a review of the source to ensure NPOV and credibility standards are met. 100.16.19.166 ( talk) 02:46, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Gaza flotilla raid article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
A news item involving Gaza flotilla raid was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 31 May 2010. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
This article has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
Material from
Gaza flotilla raid was split to other pages. The former page's
history now serves to
provide attribution for that content in the latter pages, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter pages exist. Please leave this template in place to link the article histories and preserve this attribution.
|
In accordance with Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles#Discretionary sanctions, editors of this article are restricted to 1 revert per 24 hours. Violations of this restriction will lead to blocks. |
This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary. |
On 4 February 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to Gaza flotilla attack. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
Perhaps someone can tell me why, in the description of the attack, there is so much detailed information on every Israeli commando that was captured, but absolutely none on the Marmarites who were actually killed? I realize that much of the information comes from the reports made public by the IDF, but it seems to me that this causes an imbalance in reporting on the other side.
This is an endemic problem with articles on Israel-Palestine, but something that should be addressed as it is de facto bias. Mcdruid ( talk) 03:43, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
Several of the Mavi Marmara belligerents were previously convicted Islamic terrorists, some of those who died, expressed the desire for "martyrdom". These are important points when discussing an incident in which those involved were bringing guns, knives, bulletproof vests, gas masks, sniper scopes and other banned items to a known terrorist group, Hamas.
"One of the IHH operatives aboard the Mavi Marmara participated in the terrorist attack of a Russian ferry in 1996, intended to secure hostages as bargaining chips for the release of Chechens from Russian prisons (although IHH as an organization was not involved in the attack)."
https://www.terrorism-info.org.il/Data/pdf/PDF_10_157_2.pdf
Fifty of the passengers of the Mavi Marmara were found to have connections to global, Islamic terrorist organizations. Among these passengers were men who refused to identify themselves and carried no identification. They did, however, have envelopes filled with thousands of dollars and were equipped with bullet-proof vests, night vision goggles and gas masks (Jerusalem Post, June 4, and June 5, 2010).
At least two were arrested for terror related incidents afterwards. Why were these facts missing from the article? Other articles have followups on the people involved, but this article purposely obfuscates these facts.
Ahmed Luqman Talib Was arrested for terrorism in 2020: https://aijac.org.au/featured/mavi-marmara-passenger-arrested-on-terrorist-charges/
The dead:
Çetin Topçuoglu left a letter hinting that he expected to die as a shaheed and called on others to aspire to a similar death.
Ali Haydar Bengi constantly prayed to Allah to grant him martyrdom. His friends said that he wanted to be a shaheed and that he “had an intense desire to die as a shaheed”
"It was found that 8 out of the 9 casualties belonged to IHH or affiliated groups. The affiliated groups included the Turkish Felicity Party (Saadet Partisi), an Islamic party established in 2001 that espouses cooperation between Muslim countries, war on Zionism and confrontation with the West".
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/mavi-marmara-casualties-identified-as-members-of-turkish-islamist-organizations 136.26.178.95 ( talk) 06:48, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
We should add a link to Report of the Secretary-General’s Panel of Inquiry on the 31 May 2010 Flotilla Incident (July 2011) in the section on the UN response DMH43 ( talk) 05:51, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
It looks like there was a monument to this in Gaza which was deliberately destroyed. Maybe that should be added to the article. Fanccr ( talk) 00:56, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
User @ פעמי-עליון reverted my changes adding details about the killing of the passengers in the lead. Here is there edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Gaza_flotilla_raid&diff=1200092716&oldid=1198337623
Their edit summary: "Undue here, cherry picking POV pushing" but how is it cherry picking to describe the nature of the killing of the passengers? And how does that push a POV?
The rest of the lead quotes directly from Israel's report which has been described as a whitewash by human rights organizations. For example, it quotes the report's description of IHH as a "hardcore group".
I suggest we undo the user's revert. DMH43 ( talk) 21:18, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
Agreed, this is relevant content that is appropriate for the lede, which is supposed to be a summary of the body. The content is relevant, appropriate, and referenced. I do not understand the edit that is attempting to remove it with an edit summary of these details are both leading as well as undue for the lede. Find the appropriate place in the body and keep it balanced pls
. What isn't balanced about the coverage?
Bastun
Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 00:19, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
@ Mistamystery, the mention of "knives" in the palmer report cites the turkel report. "Material before the Panel confirms that this group was armed with iron bars, staves, chains, and slingshots,388 and there is some indication that they also used knives" where the statement about knives cites the turkel report. DMH43 ( talk) 20:27, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
@ DMH43, @ Mistamystery - Does the Palmer Report describe only "some indication that they also used knives" or does it "accept the assertion they were likely used"? IOHANNVSVERVS ( talk) 20:49, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
The section regarding the Mavi Marmara boarding cites several times the "Meir Amit Report", which itself cites anonymous sources within the boarding party. The language used in the report is clearly partisan, and the Meir Amit center is noted on its own page ( Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center) as being closely affiliated with the IDF. Would appreciate a review of the source to ensure NPOV and credibility standards are met. 100.16.19.166 ( talk) 02:46, 22 April 2024 (UTC)