Talk:2003 Route 60 Hamas ambush

This article was nominated for deletion on 31 August 2015. The result of the discussion was keep.

Terrorism High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Terrorism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles on terrorism, individual terrorists, incidents and related subjects 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.TerrorismWikipedia:WikiProject TerrorismTemplate:WikiProject TerrorismTerrorism articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Israel Low‑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

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Project Israel To Do:

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

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:

You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic

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.

Further information

The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:

Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.

With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:

Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.

After being warned, contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topic sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.
Editors may report violations of these restrictions to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!

Removing prod on the assertion that detailed coverage related to major law suit more than a decade after the event establish enduring notability.E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:58, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sources...[edit]

None of the sources indicate that this attack alone was disruptive to peace - they indicate that this was one of several. Therefore, the insinuation that it was this attack alone is not verified by the sources. Also, the "interpreation" is that of the reporter, not the government. I have also removed all mention of Qawasmeh - Haaretz did not link him to this attack, and what it did say was that the IDF had been looking for him for two years. Therefore, to associate Qawasmeh's death with this attack and to COATRACK it with four citations for the same sentence is incorrect. MSJapan (talk) 03:06, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple articles discuss this incident as one of many disruptions to the peace process that summer. A few of these are in article. As far as I know, MSJapan is the only person who has introduced the idea that "this attack alone" disrupted the peace process.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:44, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Except you very [1] clearly wrote "the (emphasis mine) attack was described as disruptive to the peace process" not "this attack, as well as others was described as disruptive". Do you really not see the difference in those two statements, and how the first does not reflect the actual statements made in the articles? Look at the diff.

The problem is that you consistently write what you think happened, then afterwards you go google terms to find sources where names appear so you can add them to support what you think, but you're not actually reading the sources. Then you blame other people because what you wrote isn't supported by fact. MSJapan (talk) 16:58, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Qawasmeh assasination[edit]

The articles on this targeted assassination of Qawasmeh. who was the Hamas terrorism commanded in the Judean Hills/Hebron area at the time of this murderous ambush discuss the ambush in which Tzvi Goldstein was killed and other injured as part of the increase in Hamas capacity, will, and intention to commit acts of terrorism in this region which led to the decision to designate him for assassination. I try to report what sources say, not to base my editing on my personal opinion that "process ultimately failed for reasons unrelated to this event," as MSJapan does above. Moreover, News articles in Haaretz the Philadelphia Inquirer and other reputable papers are not merely the "reporter's" "interpretation" , thees papers have editorial processes and reporters have to back their assertions up with sufficient evidence to satisfy editors. Not a perfect process, but the best we've got. So, let's try to keep relevant articles on the page and rely on them - mot our personal opinions - to record the events as they happened and were responded to in 2003.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:42, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your personal POV is showing - "murderous ambush"? The point is that by you placing one sentence in this article in an aftermath section about Qawasmeh, you are tying it to this event, saying that "because of this attack, Qawasmeh was killed" and that is not what happened, nor does the Israeli media even say that. He was looked for for two years. There are approximately three or four events mentioned along with this attack in every article on it, and Qawasmeh was not deemed responsible for this attack. Therefore, you cannot insinuate that he was. The claim you are making above tying the incidents does not appear in any of the sources. Why is this such a difficult concept for you to understand? MSJapan (talk) 17:06, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Gunmen emerged form hiding along a road to shoot up a car - killing a man. That is what a "murderous ambush" is. Plain English.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:19, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Whose usage? Yours, or the source? That's the issue, and that's really a lot of the issue - you're not paraphrasing, you're rewriting information to put it in inflammatory terms that suit your point of view of the incident. MSJapan (talk) 20:27, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]