Jump to content

Talk:October 2024 Iranian strikes against Israel

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Disambiguation

@Fuzheado: See WP:NAMB. Hatnotes are not for related articles. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 22:40, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's not exactly that relevant guideline to this situation. The reason why that disambig is valid is because that article used to be called "2024 Iranian strikes against Israel" which can cause a lot of confusion. - Fuzheado | Talk 01:20, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No. A user will arrive on this article through a link to another page, which would have already clarified that this occurred in October, or by searching up this title. There is no confusion here. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 23:51, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request

Hello. I'm Noam from Israel. Yesterday I was taking shelter from the rockets from Iran to my country Israel. I live in Jerusalem. I'd like to help you guys with improving the article, but because of the protection, I cant. Can you explain how to send an edit request? I'm new to wikipedia. Noam Atadgy (talk) 02:58, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Use {{edit extended-protected|October 2024 Iranian strikes against Israel}} Sportsnut24 (talk) 03:08, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Noam,
I would like to comment and say you will very likely not receive ECP access. This talk page allows you to ask ECP users and request that a particular topic or a correction be made. Just post what you want here and a ECP user will review it and choose to add it if need be. 192.184.149.115 (talk) 06:28, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Add maybe, something like, "The war had led to extreme depression, anxiety, frustration, anger and fear for the israeli people"? Noam Atadgy (talk) 14:27, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sportsnut24: I hope you don't mind, I inserted the word "Use" before the edit request template and referenced the template with Tlx, so the template is named rather than displayed. It makes no sense to display the template without an actual request. —Anomalocaris (talk) 06:48, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Add maybe, something like, "The war had led to extreme depression, anxiety, frustration, anger and fear for the israeli people"?? Noam Atadgy (talk) 14:27, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
First of all you need a WP:RS that says this. Secondly, war is generally considered to be viewed negatively by the involved populations to the point that what you claim is generally assumed. If the war caused widespread elation among the population that would certainly be noteworthy, but simply saying that it led to (an apparently typical) amount of "depression, anxiety, frustration, anger and fear" is not. This is fully expected and readers can find this covered in the Effects of War article. JSory (talk) 04:10, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Attack on Mossad headquarters, Nevatim and Hatzerim air base

The Iranian media reports an attack on Mossad headquarters, Nevatim and Hatzerim Air Force Bases, as well as [anti-missile] radars and groups of Israeli tanks. Is there any confirmation of such statements? https://en.mehrnews.com/news/222293/Iran-to-hit-all-Israel-infrastructures-if-Zionists-not-curbed There is also information that the Iron Dome was ineffective against ballistic missiles and cruise missiles. This should be mentioned in the article 91.210.248.204 (talk) 08:16, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mehr News is not saying whether the targets were hit or not, it is just quoting Major General Bagheri's statements. Mehr News is not wrong about anything, since it didn't report on anywhere actually being hit or targeted, but was only quoting a general.
There is some confirmation that these targets where hit.
https://www.npr.org/2024/10/04/nx-s1-5140058/satellite-images-dozens-iranian-missiles-struck-near-israeli-air-base
https://www.turkiyetoday.com/region/how-will-strike-on-nevatim-air-base-affect-israels-military-ops-61015/
https://www.hindustantimes.com/videos/world-news/hezbollah-gloats-as-iranian-missiles-hit-nevatim-hatzerim-bases-that-house-f-15-f-35-jets-101727863488331.html
While there is no report to say the attacks actually hit Mossad's headquarters, there is confirmation that some missiles landed near it, (and they could have possibly caused damage but I've seen no source that confirms this yet.)
https://www.cnn.com/world/live-news/israel-lebanon-war-hezbollah-10-1-24-intl-hnk/index.html
https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/23-missiles-reportedly-hit-nevatim-and-tel-nof-military-bases-during-iran-attack/ Viral weirdo (talk) 18:29, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of sourced material

@XDanielx: Contrary to your edit summary, [1] the content relating to the proximity of the damaged school to the airbase is not in the headline, it is in the sub headline (“ The building is not far from an Israeli air base.”) so there’s no clickbait intentions, and that subheadline claim is also supported by the video in which the reporter says on the outskirts of town (1:15) The Gedera school is exactly at least 3 kilometers away from the Tel Nof Airbase which was the likely target per the Skynews report. Why did you remove sourced content with its reference from both the lede and body? Makeandtoss (talk) 15:57, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding which was the likely target per the Skynews report – to be fair the reporter in that video is a bit more careful than saying it was likely or probable ("it could be that the Iranian missiles were aimed at that airbase, but missed" @ 1:26) which is the sort of cautious speculation I'm seeing in other RS. Anyway, while I don't have an issue with including the proximity, the removed wording said "next to"; shouldn't we just state the actual distance (3 kilometres) matter-of-factly if we're going to include it? GhostOfNoMan 16:23, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"News headlines—including subheadlines—are not a reliable source."
PrimaPrime (talk) 16:25, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Same claim still supported by the video. Mentioning three kilometers would probably be original research. We can say “school close to an airbase” per Skynews in both lede and body, and say in attribution in the body that base could have been the target. Makeandtoss (talk) 17:19, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
close to would be better than the original next to, but still an exaggeration of what the source says. Even the subheadline (which is not an RS as PrimaPrime said) says not far from, which is weaker than close to. The newscaster's language on the outskirts of town seems even weaker.
I think it would be fine to say something like One reporter suggested that the missile could have been aimed at an airbase in the region, though it's probably not lede-worthy. If we can find a source for the 3km distance, that might be best. — xDanielx T/C\R 19:18, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@XDanielx: This was not in the lede and no one said it is lede worthy; it certainly isn't. What belongs in the body is the fact that this school was close to an airbase, which was removed. There are no sources for the 3 km distance as I have checked. Best we stick with the phrasing of the RS of Skynews which has said that the airbase was on the outskirts of the town in which the school was hit. So the phrasing in the lede would be a "school in a town near an airbase was hit." or "school, located in a town near an airbase, was hit." Makeandtoss (talk) 21:55, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All of Gaza is "close to" a military target by the 3 km standard, but I don't think we'll be looking to include that anywhere. PrimaPrime (talk) 18:40, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The distance is relative and depends on the precision of the weapons.VR (Please ping on reply) 00:39, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to the important distinctions made by VR above, the Washington Post has also highlighted the school's proximity to the airbase: "a school not far from the base in Gedera". Now we have two RS highlighting this relationship. @XDanielx: @PrimaPrime: Makeandtoss (talk) 10:44, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was never against mentioning the airbase, as long as we're not exaggerating the statements of the underlying sources. — xDanielx T/C\R 15:51, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PrimaPrime you removed sourced content here from Aljazeera and masrawy which is literally quoting from Maariv by claiming that “No such report in Ma'ariv” without providing any source to back your claim or discredit the reliable source quoting it. I don’t think this is how it works on wikipedia, if you can’t cite a source to back your claim can you please undo diff that removed sourced content ? Stephan rostie (talk) 19:13, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If Maariv has supposedly made the claim in question then surely it can be located and cited from there directly. If not then it seems Al Jazeera was not "literally quoting" after all. PrimaPrime (talk) 20:34, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The point is that it is your ONUS to prove and discredit a reliable source, not me. It often happens on wikipedia to e.g cite the Jerusalem post for something mentioned by WSJ or quoted from it without searching for the WSJ article which they are quoting from. You didn’t provide any proof or source to discredit the cited reliable source. It is your ONUS. Stephan rostie (talk) 08:24, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ONUS, huh? "The responsibility for achieving consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content."
But in the interest of wasting less of my time I'm going to do your research for you. Here's the only recent article in Maariv referring to Nevatim. What does it say?
"The Iranian attack that happened two days ago led to significant damage to an aircraft garage at the air force base in Nevatim, the AP news agency reported..."
In other words, Maariv didn't report "severe damage to the base". The AP reported damage to a single hangar. Al Jazeera lied - what else is new. PrimaPrime (talk) 16:50, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Damage

So it turns out from satellite images that the damage to the Israeli air base targeted wasn't very "minor". The damage includes 2 hangers severely damaged, damage on the runway, and the possibility of aircraft damaged or destroyed Mauzer's random BS (talk) 06:08, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here's an NPR article about it.
https://www.npr.org/2024/10/04/nx-s1-5140058/satellite-images-dozens-iranian-missiles-struck-near-israeli-air-base David O. Johnson (talk) 20:08, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lede

@PrimaPrime: Can you explain why you reordered the paragraphs lede in which it now speaks first of interceptions then about missile impacts? [2] Makeandtoss (talk) 09:02, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That would be called "chronological order". PrimaPrime (talk) 17:14, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree and have reverted. The focus oof this article is on the strikes, not their interceptions, so the priority for the second lede paragraph is for the strikes. Makeandtoss (talk) 20:30, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Better to wait for more opinions. Makeandtoss (talk) 20:36, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Additional target of Iranian Strikes

I propose that the Hatzerim Airbase be added to the list of Iranian targets during the attacks. CrazyFruitBat911 (talk) 20:08, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Youtube video

I just came across this video on youtube. I don't know if this could be helpful to the article? G-13114 (talk) 21:06, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Houses damaged in Hod Sharon outcome section

I don't understand why a restaurant is more important than 100 houses, in a way that collateral damage to the restaurant gets included on the fact-file template, but the houses don't. Can someone clarify that? Viral weirdo (talk) 08:56, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a reference saying that 100 houses were damaged? The Mountain of Eden (talk) 00:27, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Add Hungary's reaction

There is no mention of Hungary's reaction to Iran's attack on Israel. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban publicly condemned Iran's actions on Twitter and expressed support for Israel. We can read here: https://hungarytoday.hu/iranian-attack-prompts-viktor-orban-to-summon-national-security-cabinet/ Adijos08 (talk) 08:46, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, see this edit. You did not specify the wording, so please respond if you think I did not add Hungary's reaction the way you envisioned that the reaction should be added. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 17:04, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 21 October 2024

October 2024 Iranian strikes against Israel → October 2024 Iranian strikes into Israel – The difference between using "into" and "against" is clear; "into" implies precision strikes targeting certain sites, while "against" imply indiscriminate bombing. While the April 2024 Iranian strikes against Israel could be argued as indiscriminate due to the use of several types of non-precision projectiles such as drones, clearly this was not the case for the September incident which exclusively used highly precise ballistic missiles as evidenced by the bombing of airbases. Makeandtoss (talk) 10:42, 21 October 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. Bensci54 (talk) 16:49, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose: I'm not sure I agree with nominator's distinction that "against" implies indiscriminate whereas "into" implies targeted, but assuming that this distinction is an accurate distinction, since the vast majority of the missiles were shot down, we don't really know what the targets were. Given the large quantity of targets, it is possible (if not likely) that the targets were wide ranging, making the attack as a whole indiscriminate. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 16:14, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Something's a bit off in grammar and/or syntax. Borgenland (talk) 17:38, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's another good point. Iran launched misiles into Israel. Iran could have struck inside Israel if it planted bombs inside Israel, but the proposed name "strikes into Israel" makes no gramatical sense. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 17:55, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Change to on: I think on is a much more fluid and clear name than "into" or "against". Also, the page on the retaliation strikes against Iran used the word "on". TheFloridaMan (talk) 02:17, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. "October 2024 Iranian strikes against Israel" sounds more natural than "October 2024 Iranian strikes into Israel". RedactedHumanoid (talk) 20:51, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisting comment: Consensus against "into" has formed. Need additional time to see if consensus for "on" forms or if consensus will settle on the current title. Bensci54 (talk) 16:49, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A typo in a Jpost article, leading to misinformation

The Jpost article said the attacks caused 150 billion shekels worth of damage which is equal to about 50 million dollars worth of damage. This is quite obviously a typo considering that the currency exchanges are only true if you replace "Billion" with "Million". Also, 150 billion shekels is more than Israel's entire military budget which makes me think that it didn't likely lose that much The ultimate editorxyzyazz (talk) 13:56, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. See this edit (ignoring the less than optimal edit summary). The Mountain of Eden (talk) 18:57, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:October_2024_Iranian_strikes_against_Israel&oldid=1255064375"