This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Al-Ahli Arab Hospital explosion article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8Auto-archiving period: 30 days

Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. Parts of this article relate to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing the parts of the page related to the contentious topic: You must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on this article (except in limited circumstances) 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. If it is unclear which parts of the page are related to this contentious topic, the content in question should be marked within the wiki text by an invisible comment. If no comment is present, please ask an administrator for assistance. If in doubt it is better to assume that the content is covered.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Crime and Criminal Biography Mid‑importance 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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Death Mid‑importance 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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Disaster management Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management 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.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Explosives Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Explosives, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Explosives 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.ExplosivesWikipedia:WikiProject ExplosivesTemplate:WikiProject ExplosivesExplosives articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. Hospitals Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hospitals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hospitals 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.HospitalsWikipedia:WikiProject HospitalsTemplate:WikiProject HospitalsHospital articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Human rights Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights 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.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. International relations High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations 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.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Israel High‑importance 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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Project Israel To Do: history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Assess : Rate the Unassessed Israel-related articles and Unknown-importance Israel-related articles. Categorization : Diffuse articles from Category:Companies of Israel. Cleanup : Cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category and the tool's wiki page. Collaborate : Participate in WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration. Copyedit : Timeline of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict in 2005 Deletion sorting : Participate in discussions at WikiProject Deletion sorting/Israel. Expand : Ayala Procaccia, Diamond industry in Israel, Edna Arbel, Levin Kipnis, Rami Kleinstein, Sephardic Haredim, Zman Tel Aviv, Nachum Heiman, Public Defence (Israel), Prisoner of Zion, Trial of Benjamin Netanyahu, Day to Mark the Departure and Expulsion of Jews from the Arab Countries and Iran, Pre-Modern Aliyah See also Articles needing translation from Hebrew Wikipedia. Geographical coordinates : Add geographic coordinates to Israel articles missing geocoordinate data. Infobox : Add infoboxes to Israel articles needing infoboxes. Maintain : See Israel articles needing attention. Map : See discussion at Module:Location map/data/Israel. Add maps to articles in Wikipedia requested maps in Israel. NPOV : Jewish exodus from Arab and Muslim countries Photo : Add pictures to articles in Wikipedia requested photographs in Israel. Stubs : See Israel stubs. Update : Basic Law proposal: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People Other : Translate to Hebrew : David Bar-Hayim, Guy Bavli, and Guy Oseary. Merge Nahal Rafiah ( draft, heb) into Nahal as requested by Wikipedia authority Israel Palestine Collaboration This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration, a collaborative, bipartisan effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. For guidelines and a participants list see the project page. See also {{ Palestine-Israel enforcement}}, the ArbCom-authorized discretionary sanctions, the log of blocks and bans, and Working group on ethnic and cultural edit wars. You can discuss the project at its talk page.Israel Palestine CollaborationWikipedia:WikiProject Israel Palestine CollaborationTemplate:WikiProject Israel Palestine CollaborationIsrael Palestine Collaboration articles Military history: Middle East / Post-Cold War Start‑class This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale. This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  Middle Eastern military history task force Post-Cold War task force Palestine High‑importance 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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

It is requested that an image or photograph be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible. The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Daily pageviews of this article A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: Reactions to strike on Gaza hospital killing hundreds - Reuters, 17 October 2023

This article has been mentioned by a media organization: Stephen Harrison (October 26, 2023). "Wikipedia Is Covering the War in Israel and Gaza Better Than X". Slate. Retrieved October 31, 2023. The page for the Al-Ahli Arab Hospital explosion states that the "cause of the explosion is contested." Hamas has claimed that Israel carried out an airstrike on the hospital, while Israel, the United States, France, and Canada have said that their intelligence sources indicate that the cause of the explosion was a failed rocket launch by the Palestinian Islamic Jihad from within Gaza.

Should it be under Norway when it is an director of an independent non state organisation making a statement? All the other countries are statements from their government. 80.217.100.31 ( talk) 01:34, 9 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Agree. Done. IOHANNVSVERVS ( talk) 02:03, 9 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Just a quick thing it is misspelled, it should be Norwegian not norwegin. 80.217.100.31 ( talk) 11:18, 9 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Thank you. Done. IOHANNVSVERVS ( talk) 11:23, 9 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Thank you. 49.197.224.249 ( talk) 08:59, 29 March 2024 (UTC) reply

There are lots of government level reactions in other languages that are missing in the English version here. French has Arab League, African union, EU, and UN. Spanish has a few individual countries that aren't here, and Arabic has 16 that mostly aren't here. 49.197.224.249 ( talk) 09:11, 29 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Please feel free to make an edit request proposing specific changes.

- IOHANNVSVERVS ( talk) 09:51, 29 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Why is the arabic version and the english version wildly different?

The english version: "On 17 October 2023, an explosion took place in the parking lot of the courtyard of al-Ahli Arab Hospital in Gaza City during the Israel–Hamas war, resulting in a large number of fatalities and injuries among displaced Palestinians seeking shelter there." "The consensus from various independent studies of videos, images, and eyewitness reports of the explosion, its aftermath, and the blast area suggests that an errant rocket launch from within Gaza is the most probable cause. While this is not a conclusive finding, it is currently considered the likeliest explanation based on the evidence gathered in investigations"

The arabic version translated: "The Baptist Hospital massacre, also known as the Arab National Hospital massacre, is a massacre committed by the Israeli Air Force when it raided the Arab National Hospital “Al-Baptist” in the Al-Zaytoun neighborhood, south of Gaza City, in the early night hours of October 17, 2023. The raid hit Violent Israeli air strikes in the hospital courtyard, which contained dozens of wounded, as well as hundreds of displaced civilians, most of whom were women and children. The Israeli massacre caused a real disaster. It tore apart the bodies of the victims, making them scattered and burned, while the hospital turned into a pool of blood. The National Arab Baptist Hospital is one of the oldest hospitals in the Gaza Strip, and is affiliated with the Anglican Episcopal Church in Jerusalem." Isnr13 ( talk) 22:49, 23 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Because the Arabic version is written by Arabic-speaking editors, mostly from the Middle East/North African, using MENA news sources, which usually have a significant bias when it comes to coverage of Israel and Palestine. Mooonswimmer 23:51, 23 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello, Two outlets have reported on a video published by Israel which shows an Islamic Jihad member admitting that it was one of their rockets which hit the hospital compound. I think if this catches in a few other sources, it should be included in the article. https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/idf-releases-interrogation-footage-of-islamic-jihad-spokesman-admitting-groups-rocket-struck-al-ahli-hospital-at-start-of-war/ https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-796006 Tennisist123 ( talk) 17:49, 8 April 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Tennisist123 apparently you need to use a special form to make change requests.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_requests

Someone linked it above.

49.182.84.107 ( talk) 04:23, 9 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Thanks, that link suggests posting it to the talk page to gain some concensus before posting the formal edit request. Tennisist123 ( talk) 10:38, 9 April 2024 (UTC) reply

This has now made it onto the Telegraph in the UK.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/04/09/israel-hamas-war-latest-news-netanyahu-rafah-offensive-date/#1712646290366 post at 8:04am Tennisist123 ( talk) 10:39, 9 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Added, thank you. BilledMammal ( talk) 03:41, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Nableezy: The investigation belongs - but in the body, not the lede. The issue is that we are providing a minority position with excessive weight, in violation of MOS:LEADREL and WP:BALASP. In addition, I believe we are misrepresenting the source; the implication is that they are casting doubt on the entire theory, when they are only casting doubt on whether a specific launch of rockets was related. BilledMammal ( talk) 06:20, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

It seems like either that, or a summary along those lines is desperately needed in the lead for balance ... Otherwise the lead would just be POV. Iskandar323 ( talk) 07:40, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Without it, the lede matches the consensus of reliable sources - that a misfired rocket was probably, though not conclusively, to blame. WP:NPOV doesn't mean presenting all POV's with equal weight and as having equal validity, it means giving POV's prominence in proportion to their prominence in reliable sources. BilledMammal ( talk) 07:44, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Dozens and dozens of RS have repeated the FA findings, so it's due. Iskandar323 ( talk) 07:56, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Can you link those "dozens and dozens" of reliable sources that have repeated the FA findings? I'm only finding a couple of reliable sources that have reported on them - and reporting on a finding is not the same as repeating and endorsing a finding. BilledMammal ( talk) 08:34, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

No, reporting something is not the same as endorsing it. Reporting it can still make it due, however (it's already attributed). Endorsement world be relevant only for Wikivoice. Prominent RS examples of coverage: [1], [2], [3]. Also repeated in this pertinent Mondo critique of the HRW report. And here it appears that FA did a further follow up report in February that re-confirmed some of their earlier findings. Iskandar323 ( talk) 08:50, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Reporting on a viewpoint doesn't make it WP:DUE; DUE talks about how widely a view is held, not how widely it is reported.

The sentence we are discussing refers to the 15 February 2024 report referenced in the New Arab article; the other sources that you mention are about a different report. Do you have "dozens and dozens" of reliable sources discussing the 15 February 2024 report? BilledMammal ( talk) 08:56, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

If it's just Qatari-financed The New Arab, it might not be due. Alaexis _¿question? 09:34, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

If it belongs in the body then a summary of it belongs in the lead. Only including the conclusions of one set of sources is a NPOV violation. nableezy - 10:45, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Also FA source holds greater weight since it is the most recent investigation. Makeandtoss ( talk) 11:05, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

and it's an actual investigation, involving evidence; as opposed to news sources just repeating either the lines of governments or the opinions of random guest commentators. Iskandar323 ( talk) 11:39, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Many news sources did their own investigations - and it's worth noting that even Forensic Architecture changed their initial report, from alleging it was an artillery striking to agreeing that it was probably a rocket. BilledMammal ( talk) 11:48, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Good. They have internal fact-checking, verification and reassessment processes in place. Sounds reliable. Iskandar323 ( talk) 11:52, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

The question here isn't reliability, it's significance. BilledMammal ( talk) 12:02, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Not everything that is in the body needs to be mentioned in the lede, and the notion that we need to present two points of view with equal prominence is WP:FALSEBALANCE; FA's position is the view of a very small minority, and by included it in the lede we are giving it undue prominence. BilledMammal ( talk) 11:25, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Forensic Architecture is a highly esteemed organization whose findings cannot be dismissed as the view of a "very small minority." WP:DUE: pages should "fairly represent all significant viewpoints," FA is certainly such viewpoint. Makeandtoss ( talk) 11:35, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Yes, it's a pretty significant viewpoint in the context. Tbh, I think we could cite FA directly with attribution given the volume of citation/esteem the organisation has generally received over the years in both news and journal sources. Iskandar323 ( talk) 11:44, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

One source isn't sufficient to establish a viewpoint as "significant" - and Forensic Architecture's methods have their critics. BilledMammal ( talk) 11:48, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Art news ...? That's the bar? Iskandar323 ( talk) 11:51, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

One highly esteemed source, yes, is enough to establish a significant viewpoint. FA's art news critics are irrelevant. Meanwhile, NYT's numerous critics, including RS such as the intercept, are plentiful. Makeandtoss ( talk) 11:57, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

There's also WP:DATED. The line about the "currently likeliest scenario" is referenced to a source from 23 October. That's pretty immediate to events, and now stale and old (and yes dated) from an analytical standpoint. Iskandar323 ( talk) 11:41, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Yeah, so why are we mentioning the intelligence assessments of Israel and three other countries aligned with Israel – that's like the POV motherlode. The intelligence outlets of Israeli allies are hardly independent sources in a conflict they're supporting, and, per the above, just because media report on them, doesn't mean they're endorsed or necessarily due. Iskandar323 ( talk) 11:48, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

I would suggest for the same reason we are mentioning the claims of Hamas and PIJ - but that isn't the topic of this discussion. BilledMammal ( talk) 12:09, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Misrepresentation of the source

I'm opening a separate section, as the above section has become focused on whether inclusion is WP:DUE, and overlooked the other concern, that we aren't accurately representing the source. We say they "cast doubt on the errant rocket launch theory", but the source is limited to casting doubt on two specific claims, making no statement about the overall theory. In addition, Forensic Architecture has previously said they believe the most likely cause of the explosion is a rocket. BilledMammal ( talk) 12:02, 21 April 2024 (UTC) reply

They may have conceded that a video image they had relied on probably showed a rocket in early January but for the later investigation they are saying not a rocket. They also allege that Israeli evidence was part of a disinfo campaign. Since we do not have conclusive proof, only probabilistic conclusions, I see no reason why an outlier from a reputable source should not be included in the lead, it's a bit like "Israel disputes this...", we always put that in, don't we? Selfstudier ( talk) 11:39, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Somewhat OR on my part but when one considers Israel's 14 October demand for the evacuation of 22 hospitals in the northern Gaza Strip and an earlier small strike on al-Ahli and then what happened at al-Shifa and all the other hospitals, I think some sources that are alleging a "pattern" and "intent" around the hospital network are possibly on the right track, time will tell. Selfstudier ( talk) 11:46, 22 April 2024 (UTC) reply

I agree with BilledMammal the source is drastically represented. The lead, as it existed, vaguely claimed that FA "cast doubt" on the findings. But the actual FA report is essentially a nothingburger - it says that:

1) The Israeli military claims about which specific rockets caused the incident were not correct.

2) An anonymous aerospace expert (?) says the rockets ran out of fuel and thus could not have caused the damage to the hospital.

3) "What happened at al-Ahli remains inconclusive"

4) The Israeli military has attacked other hospitals and runs propoganda

In other words - they have no idea what happened, but they think Israel in generals sus. I'm not actually sure why we're even citing this given how little this source actually offers - it honestly feels like an attempt to inject false balance against an overwhelming and contrary consensus from reliable sources. Toa Nidhiki05 14:46, 26 April 2024 (UTC) reply