Talk:Bombing of the Gaza Strip

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: rejected by reviewer, closed by Narutolovehinata5 talk 11:33, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Collapse of Palestine Tower in October 2023

• ... that Israel's bombing of Gaza has been compared to history's most destructive bombing campaigns, including the bombings of Dresden and Cologne? Source: Financial Times
  • ALT1: ... that the Israeli military is using an artificial intelligence system dubbed "the Gospel" to select targets for its Bombing of Gaza? Source: The Guardian
  • Reviewed: [[]]

Created by CarmenEsparzaAmoux (talk). Self-nominated at 07:41, 22 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Bombing of Gaza; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• General eligibility:
• New enough:
• Long enough: - Not met, per WP:DYKSPLIT
• Other problems: - Splits from non-new articles are ineligible, but if the copied text does not exceed one-fifth of the total prose size, the article can be considered eligible as a fivefold expansion of the copied text.

Policy compliance:

• Adequate sourcing:
• Neutral: - There is a lot of imprecise language: "Experts stated", "Experts warned", "Public health experts", unqualified uses of "large" etc. Needs a thorough copyedit.
• Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:
• Other problems: - Combined with the above imprecise language throughout, the article needs a thorough copy edit.

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Unfortunately, this article is currently ineligible for DYK as the majority of its content has been sourced from other Wikipedia articles, and as far as I can tell the 5x expansion requirement for this kind of DYK has not been met. My recommendation is to nominate the article at GA as this would mean the article would meet the third newness clause: promoted to good article status; Seddon ^talk 22:53, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Featured picture scheduled for POTD

Hello! This is to let editors know that File:Damage in Gaza Strip during the October 2023 - 29.jpg, a featured picture used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for March 16, 2024. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2024-03-16. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page. If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 14:14, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

The bombing of Gaza is an ongoing aerial bombardment campaign on the Gaza Strip by the Israeli Air Force during the Israel–Hamas war. During the bombing, which began on 7 October 2023 after a Hamas-led attack on Israel, airstrikes have damaged Palestinian mosques, schools, hospitals, refugee camps, and civilian infrastructure. The campaign has been compared to other major historical bombing campaigns, including the bombings of Dresden and Tokyo during World War II. This photograph shows damage following an Israeli airstrike on the neighborhood of Rimal in Gaza City on 9 October 2023.

Photograph credit: Wafa / APAimages

Recently featured:

• Fushimi Inari-taisha
• White-cheeked honeyeater
• Ethel Reed

Hamas run casualties

There is an ongoing disagreement between editors about whether "Per Hamas:" should be included on the casualty count for this article.

• Yes – As the editor who added it. In similar-style of articles where one side directly involved in the conflict states the casualties, that said is also mentioned. Examples of this include Siege of Mariupol ("Per Russia" / "Per Ukraine"), Battle of Kherson ("Per Russia"), and even for this conflict with the Siege of Khan Yunis having "Per Israel" & "Per Hamas". This was removed by CarmenEsparzaAmoux with the reasoning, "discussed extensively on related talks". That is not a valid reason for removal as each article and topic must be discussed individually unless a Wikipedia-wide consensus for the conflict for it takes place. A large discussion has not taken place as far as I am aware, and other articles in this conflict have notes when one side of the conflict states the casualties. I !vote to restore this until a community consensus decides not to specifically either in relation to the Israel-Hamas war (affecting all articles under it) or it is removed from all war infoboxes (very unlikely). Do to CTOPS nature, I am not restoring it for at least 24 hours if no responses are given here. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 18:45, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

TL;DR – Support !vote for the Infobox format and layout as of this edit with an oppose !vote to the layout as of this edit, the current layout. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 22:19, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

• No – I don't have any issue with a note similar to the one used on the Israel–Hamas war infobox: "Per Gaza Health Ministry, the total number of deaths are 31,553" with a breakdown listed below. Just searching that page's talk archive for the term "Hamas-run" comes up with multiple discussions about using the phrase "Hamas-run" prior to the GHM: Updating language: The term "Hamas-run", RFC on infobox casualties, Why are we using Hamas casualty figures for civilians?, infobox attribution inline.
  This is all to say that although there is no Wiki-wide consensus, this exact topic has been discussed at length by many more editors on the main war page than are likely to contribute here. Neither the term "per Hamas" nor "per Hamas-run GHM" are included in the infobox there in regards to the GHM or total civilian casualty counts, so I would be strongly disinclined to introduce that language here. CarmenEsparzaAmoux (talk) 20:06, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

@CarmenEsparzaAmoux: — In that case, would you restore that part of the addition then? I do not want to as that is a reversion, but we both seem to be in agreement a “Per GHM” is acceptable. Note, I still believe “Per Hamas” is better and I will let others comment on that, but “Per GHM” should be added/restored. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 20:28, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

@WeatherWriter I actually never removed that part of the addition! Per GHM is included now as a footnote, similar to how the Israel-Hamas war infobox currently displays the information. CarmenEsparzaAmoux (talk) 20:42, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Ok then we still don't fully agree on the format then. The footnote is not actually the standard method. The Template:Israel–Hamas war infobox even shows that, where it says "Per Israel" or "Per Hamas" format outside of a footnote. As I stated in my "Yes" !vote earlier, that is used on tons of other articles like the Battle of Kherson or even Siege of Khan Yunis. The format which you removed should be like this:

Per the Gaza Health Ministry:

• 30,717+ people killed
• 72,156+ people injured
• 7,000+ missing

That is the standard format for casualty articles, which is also used in the Israel-Hamas war infobox. Basically, what I'm asking you to restore is the bolded "Per" format, removing the enf note, which is not the standard format. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 20:57, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

I think where there might be a little oversight here is that there's a slight but important distinction made in the format used based on casualty type. I'm not sure when the decision was made, but the bolding "Per" format is used for Palestinian militant casualty totals as provided by Hamas (you will see that in the article and template you posted above), while the footnote format is standard when discussing GHM casualty counts within the Gaza Strip. Since we're discussing GHM numbers from within Gaza in this article, I think using the latter format makes more sense. CarmenEsparzaAmoux (talk) 22:14, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

I guess we shall have to agree to disagree on that then. I will be keeping an eye on this discussion to see if and/or when other editors comment or !vote about this. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 22:16, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Sounds good. Overall, I think you're absolutely right that a consensus on standardization across articles is a great idea (even if we disagree on what that standardization should be!) CarmenEsparzaAmoux (talk) 22:19, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

References