This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
March 2012 Gaza鈥揑srael clashes article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources:聽 Google ( books聽路 news聽路 scholar聽路 free images聽路 WP聽refs)聽路 FENS聽路 JSTOR聽路 TWL |
Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab鈥揑sraeli 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.
|
Can someone confirm whether this is the most serious violence since the Gaza War?-- Reader1987 ( talk) 15:04, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Regarding the Disputed section - while I can understand how the first incident can be regarded as disputed, the second incident cited is not disputed by anyone as being an outright lie. Why is it in a disputed section? why isn't there a "False accusations" section which can contain any clearly verifiable false accusations by either side? 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.109.19.253 ( talk) 22:03, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
"About 300 rockets were fired...."
I know it's not the article's most pressing issue, but can someone please fix this? The page is protected so I can't. Thanks! Bravemidwesterner ( talk) 01:44, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
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 March 2012 Gaza-Israel clashes'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 "jpost1":
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)Reference named "haaretz1":
Reference named "jpost3":
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 鈿 17:30, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Currently this article contains a large amount of material dedicated to Palestinian attacks. Some of these are really minor "two mortar shells were fired into Israel." I also note that there is List of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel, 2012 that details these attacks. So I don't see the reason for giving a very large amount of space to Palestinian attacks, as compared to Israeli attacks (esp. given that all of those killed, including dead civilians) were on the Palestinian side.
I propose summarizing the attacks by both sides, so they are given roughly equal space. What does everyone else think? VR talk 13:13, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
also about Nishidani note "the 'minor attacks' are not against civilian targets," is just ain't truth - there are two types of targets civilian and military:
contrary to Nishidani another note using non signeling-out targets doesn't make the attack non against civilians, it just fells under the wikipedia's definition of terrorism. forth there is no relation between actively shooting and lunching rocket and mortar attacks against vast variety of cities to what he defined as "and a half million in Gaza, who can't take shelter.": it is again ain't true as the Gazan population as a whole ain't under direct mortar , rocket or missile fire attacks (there isn't even a military maneuvers in gaza or aircraft attacks in the populated areas at least not as mention on popular media sites). and as had been noted on several sources the aircraft attacks had been done in close proxyimity to a rocket / mortar launch site or facility. talk
using the term retaliated by launching make the impression that prior to that there were no mortar or grad attacks (the average amount of Qassam lunched didn't change at all, only the grad average attack changed). 109.226.51.252 ( talk) 12:58, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
This and related pages have ample documentary evidence, the narratives agree, that the taking out of Al-Qaisi was not in response to 'mortar or grad attacks' (name a grad attack in the days before the strikes), but a strategic decision made to thwart an ostensible (never proven) imminent terrorist assault on Israel. In the IDF reports, the motivation for the extrajudicial assassination was to prevent an imminent crime. Once the strikes hit, a response, a barrage of rockets came out of Gaza. The BBC , the Guardian, and many other sources speak of the 40 odd rockets that followed the Israeli attack as 'retaliation'. Please do not use generic arguments when you revert. Give RS evidence, here for example, by providing articles that describe the IDF assault as a response to mortar and grad rockets as you mischievously asserted. I can find no evidence for that. Nishidani ( talk) 13:22, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
'Palestinian terrorist organizations shot more than 80 Grad and Qassam missiles into a dozen southern Israeli towns and villages in a non-stop barrage Friday night and Saturday morning (March-9-10) in reprisal for the death of Zuheir al-Qaisi, head of the Popular Resistance Committees in Gaza.' [2]
Since the beginning of the escalation, over 135' rockets have been fired by Gaza Strip terrorists at Israel. 93 of these rockets hit Israeli territory, injuring 22 civilians and causing damage to a house in the cities of Ashdod and Be'er Sheva. http://www.idf.il/1086-15196-EN/Dover.aspx IDF 12 March 2012
References
Decisive Israeli victory??? 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.109.57.125 ( talk) 06:47, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
ISRAEL fail to take control on Gaza , free people of Gaza stay under Nazi-Zionist attack. free people of Gaza don't surrender to non legal blockade and to the mass mass murder of free people of Gaza... 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.109.57.125 ( talk) 22:13, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
I'm not happy with my changes I just committed! - I was trying to correct/inform a subset of a debate about the death of a child (and her picture being used later by the Badawi). But I didn't realise the general context it was used in.
The argument made in the text at the moment says...
"...Another 74 Palestinians were reportedly injured during the conflict, mostly civilians.[1] Some deaths and injuries among Palestinian civilians during the escalation, which were reported as casualties of the clashes, were later shown to be unrelated to Israeli actions.[24][25][26], although yet further media reports suggest there was a connection with a nearby Israeli airstrike [27]. In summary, the image was from several years ago, with some argument regarding the culpability of the Israeli strike in the child's death. Whether the same furory would have been generated if the photo had been of a recent causality is debatable. The issue also raises concerns about the political use of images of individual victims..."
I'd like to ask for everything from "Some deaths and injuries..." to be deleted, or at least heavily rephrased as it suggests the value of 74 to be incorrect. But the 74 value would not tally the tweet from Badawi, for example. So using that reference to cast doubt on the value of 74 seems very POV/dodgy. The other references also seem sketchy. I'm also concerned about how NPOV they all are.
I seriously don't want to get into an edit war, and don't have time for this, could someone else sort this out? Thanks. Lionfish0 ( talk) 12:24, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 7 external links on
March 2012 Gaza鈥揑srael clashes. 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.鈥 cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 10:18, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
Many sections in the attack details begin with the clause, "Despite the ceasefire...". While factual, its repeated use, combined with the extremely detailed listing of Palestinian attacks, impresses upon the reader a pro-Israel stance. In contrast, in the March 12 description, Israel's actions are limited to a single sentence: On March 12, Israel carried out nine raids against military targets.
Where's the detail for that? It seems like
undue weight is given to Palestinian actions. (Note that I have no dog in this fight. I don't normally edit articles about Israel.) 鈥
howcheng {
chat}
22:02, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on March 2012 Gaza鈥揑srael clashes. 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.鈥 InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:33, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
March 2012 Gaza鈥揑srael clashes article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources:聽 Google ( books聽路 news聽路 scholar聽路 free images聽路 WP聽refs)聽路 FENS聽路 JSTOR聽路 TWL |
Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab鈥揑sraeli 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.
|
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Can someone confirm whether this is the most serious violence since the Gaza War?-- Reader1987 ( talk) 15:04, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Regarding the Disputed section - while I can understand how the first incident can be regarded as disputed, the second incident cited is not disputed by anyone as being an outright lie. Why is it in a disputed section? why isn't there a "False accusations" section which can contain any clearly verifiable false accusations by either side? 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.109.19.253 ( talk) 22:03, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
"About 300 rockets were fired...."
I know it's not the article's most pressing issue, but can someone please fix this? The page is protected so I can't. Thanks! Bravemidwesterner ( talk) 01:44, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
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 March 2012 Gaza-Israel clashes'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 "jpost1":
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)Reference named "haaretz1":
Reference named "jpost3":
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 鈿 17:30, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Currently this article contains a large amount of material dedicated to Palestinian attacks. Some of these are really minor "two mortar shells were fired into Israel." I also note that there is List of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel, 2012 that details these attacks. So I don't see the reason for giving a very large amount of space to Palestinian attacks, as compared to Israeli attacks (esp. given that all of those killed, including dead civilians) were on the Palestinian side.
I propose summarizing the attacks by both sides, so they are given roughly equal space. What does everyone else think? VR talk 13:13, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
also about Nishidani note "the 'minor attacks' are not against civilian targets," is just ain't truth - there are two types of targets civilian and military:
contrary to Nishidani another note using non signeling-out targets doesn't make the attack non against civilians, it just fells under the wikipedia's definition of terrorism. forth there is no relation between actively shooting and lunching rocket and mortar attacks against vast variety of cities to what he defined as "and a half million in Gaza, who can't take shelter.": it is again ain't true as the Gazan population as a whole ain't under direct mortar , rocket or missile fire attacks (there isn't even a military maneuvers in gaza or aircraft attacks in the populated areas at least not as mention on popular media sites). and as had been noted on several sources the aircraft attacks had been done in close proxyimity to a rocket / mortar launch site or facility. talk
using the term retaliated by launching make the impression that prior to that there were no mortar or grad attacks (the average amount of Qassam lunched didn't change at all, only the grad average attack changed). 109.226.51.252 ( talk) 12:58, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
This and related pages have ample documentary evidence, the narratives agree, that the taking out of Al-Qaisi was not in response to 'mortar or grad attacks' (name a grad attack in the days before the strikes), but a strategic decision made to thwart an ostensible (never proven) imminent terrorist assault on Israel. In the IDF reports, the motivation for the extrajudicial assassination was to prevent an imminent crime. Once the strikes hit, a response, a barrage of rockets came out of Gaza. The BBC , the Guardian, and many other sources speak of the 40 odd rockets that followed the Israeli attack as 'retaliation'. Please do not use generic arguments when you revert. Give RS evidence, here for example, by providing articles that describe the IDF assault as a response to mortar and grad rockets as you mischievously asserted. I can find no evidence for that. Nishidani ( talk) 13:22, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
'Palestinian terrorist organizations shot more than 80 Grad and Qassam missiles into a dozen southern Israeli towns and villages in a non-stop barrage Friday night and Saturday morning (March-9-10) in reprisal for the death of Zuheir al-Qaisi, head of the Popular Resistance Committees in Gaza.' [2]
Since the beginning of the escalation, over 135' rockets have been fired by Gaza Strip terrorists at Israel. 93 of these rockets hit Israeli territory, injuring 22 civilians and causing damage to a house in the cities of Ashdod and Be'er Sheva. http://www.idf.il/1086-15196-EN/Dover.aspx IDF 12 March 2012
References
Decisive Israeli victory??? 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.109.57.125 ( talk) 06:47, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
ISRAEL fail to take control on Gaza , free people of Gaza stay under Nazi-Zionist attack. free people of Gaza don't surrender to non legal blockade and to the mass mass murder of free people of Gaza... 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.109.57.125 ( talk) 22:13, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
I'm not happy with my changes I just committed! - I was trying to correct/inform a subset of a debate about the death of a child (and her picture being used later by the Badawi). But I didn't realise the general context it was used in.
The argument made in the text at the moment says...
"...Another 74 Palestinians were reportedly injured during the conflict, mostly civilians.[1] Some deaths and injuries among Palestinian civilians during the escalation, which were reported as casualties of the clashes, were later shown to be unrelated to Israeli actions.[24][25][26], although yet further media reports suggest there was a connection with a nearby Israeli airstrike [27]. In summary, the image was from several years ago, with some argument regarding the culpability of the Israeli strike in the child's death. Whether the same furory would have been generated if the photo had been of a recent causality is debatable. The issue also raises concerns about the political use of images of individual victims..."
I'd like to ask for everything from "Some deaths and injuries..." to be deleted, or at least heavily rephrased as it suggests the value of 74 to be incorrect. But the 74 value would not tally the tweet from Badawi, for example. So using that reference to cast doubt on the value of 74 seems very POV/dodgy. The other references also seem sketchy. I'm also concerned about how NPOV they all are.
I seriously don't want to get into an edit war, and don't have time for this, could someone else sort this out? Thanks. Lionfish0 ( talk) 12:24, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 7 external links on
March 2012 Gaza鈥揑srael clashes. 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.鈥 cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 10:18, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
Many sections in the attack details begin with the clause, "Despite the ceasefire...". While factual, its repeated use, combined with the extremely detailed listing of Palestinian attacks, impresses upon the reader a pro-Israel stance. In contrast, in the March 12 description, Israel's actions are limited to a single sentence: On March 12, Israel carried out nine raids against military targets.
Where's the detail for that? It seems like
undue weight is given to Palestinian actions. (Note that I have no dog in this fight. I don't normally edit articles about Israel.) 鈥
howcheng {
chat}
22:02, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on March 2012 Gaza鈥揑srael clashes. 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.鈥 InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:33, 16 January 2018 (UTC)