Jump to content

Talk:2024 Nuseirat rescue operation/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 June 2024

Your article states ‘Palestinians were killed’ but omits that 274 Palestinians and three Israeli hostages were killed as part of the ‘rescue’. Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cw44ve90dppo https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/06/10/israel-hostage-rescue-death-toll/ 49.180.185.133 (talk) 22:21, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

That is already stated in the article lead? Selfstudier (talk) 22:23, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 June 2024

Clarification 2601:243:2301:AAC0:F47F:62D5:67C9:4A7B (talk) 03:11, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Jamedeus (talk) 05:46, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Video of rescue

Video under free license, for the #Rescue section:

−
== Rescue ==
+
== Rescue == [[File:YAMAM-Operation-Arnon-2024-06-08.webm|thumb|A [[YAMAM]] takeover force teams up with 3 of the hostages and rescue them from the house where they were kept]]
A YAMAM takeover force teams up with 3 of the hostages and rescue them from the house where they were kept


Thank you, · מקף Hyphen ෴ · 13:11, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

  •  Done

SYNTH in lead

Can someone please explain to me like I'm 5 why the following, which has remained in the lead for several days, is not WP:SYNTH:

The Gaza Health Ministry does not distinguish between civilians and combatants in its statistics, nor how they were killed or by whom.

But the following, which has been removed for being SYNTH, for some reason is:

A United Nations investigation has found that the IDF frequently attacks civilian targets without "distinction, proportionality and precautions".

The former cites two random, irrelevant articles not about this event, one from seven months ago and one from eight months ago. The latter cites a UN report that was released a few days ago. Seems to me like one of the most flagrant violations of NPOV I've seen on here. Dylanvt (talk) 11:50, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

I suggest putting the second one back in without the lengthy quote and cite that this was in reference to this particular attack not just any attack, just use the same RS that was used in the article body (the removal said it was not in the body but that's not actually true, it is). No idea what the synth assertion is about. Selfstudier (talk) 13:27, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
I added a sentence at the end of the lead. Selfstudier (talk) 15:11, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
I think “nor how they were killed or by whom” should be removed unless better sources can be found to replace the ones that do not mention the topic of this article. I have already found a source for “The Gaza Health Ministry does not distinguish between civilians and combatants in its statistics” and placed it in this article. Wafflefrites (talk) 15:03, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
Agreed. Removed. The combat statistics methodology statement is totally indue and irrelevant in the lead. It doesn't help explain the actual subject at all. It is a meta discussion and belongs only in the body, if it's even there. Also single-sourced to CNN. The BBC source was from Nov. WP:ONUS applies. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:14, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, just checked. It's one sentence in the body that would hardly warrant verbatim replication in the lead even if there wasn't a serious meta discussion problem in a lead context. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:19, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
@GidiD I saw the info that you added and moved it to the Casualties section due to this discussion on the talk page. I also trimmed info from the Casualties section that could be taken as synth and added another relevant source. Am glad that the sources you provided are relevant to this article. :) Wafflefrites (talk) 01:37, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Strong condemnation from the UN calling the Nuseirat operation a Massacre

On June 14, 2024, UN human rights experts condemned a massacre by Israeli forces in the Nuseirat Refugee Camp in Gaza. During a hostage rescue mission on June 8, Israeli forces, allegedly aided by foreign soldiers and disguised as displaced persons and aid workers, executed an attack that killed at least 274 Palestinians, including 64 children and 57 women, and injured nearly 700. The operation involved brutal ground and air assaults, inflicting widespread terror, death, and despair among the residents

OHCHR](https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/06/un-experts-condemn-outrageous-disregard-palestinian-civilians-during-israels). Loguerto (talk) 21:56, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 00:04, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Borrell

Borrell congratulated captives on their release while he called the operation "another massacre of civilians" and said that the EU "condemns this in the strongest terms." Selfstudier (talk) 20:39, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Borrell said the deaths were "appalling" and, in the same tweet or immediately afterward, told the hostages they "are free and safe today". He also said, "We share the relief of their families and call for the release of all the remaining hostages." I don't know how to incorporate this without including both parts, what you quoted and what I found. I'm sort of a Russia supporter, so I'm biased against EU Borrell, so I'll let other editors decide if and how to incorporate in the article.--FeralOink (talk) 09:58, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Return the title to the correct term recognized by the united nation as it was masacare carried by the israel offence army and american forces that arrived from artificial harbor as an attempt to rescue hostages but ended up killing 5 hostages in operation and masacaring 200 citizens in the process. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:599:925:1923:F93D:38B4:EBF3:A229 (talk) 15:52, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 9 June 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. This discussion has been open for a while, and I feel that there's quite a divided opinion here, and it's not really going anywhere. If the page was merged per the discussion above, it may be worth taking another look at this RM. (closed by non-admin page mover) Zippybonzo | talk | contribs (they/them) 21:11, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

2024 Nuseirat rescue operation → Nuseirat raid and rescue – Most sources are dual referencing this as a raid, attack or assault rather than just as a rescue. Guardian "Israeli attacks in central Gaza killed scores of Palestinians, many of them civilians, on Saturday amid a special forces operation to free four hostages held there, with the death toll sparking international outrage." NYT "Israeli soldiers and special operations police rescued four hostages from Gaza on Saturday amid a heavy air and ground assault",CNN "Israel’s operation to rescue four hostages took weeks of preparation and involved hundreds of personnel, its military said. But the mission began with a trail of destruction in central Gaza and ended in carnage, according to local authorities." Selfstudier (talk) 15:06, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Question. Since you !voted Wait in the proposed merge vote above, I'm not sure I understand what you suggest. Do you propose to rename this article and keep Nuseirat refugee camp massacre? Or do you propose to merge them under this name? Alaexis¿question? 15:23, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
This is an RM for this article. The merge request is a separate discussion. Selfstudier (talk) 16:01, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
If this RM succeeds, would you support the merger of the two articles? PrimaPrime (talk) 18:34, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Haven't decided yet. Doesn't depend on the outcome of this discussion anyway. Selfstudier (talk) 18:36, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Support per nom. Calling it a rescue operation only presents the Israeli POV, ignoring the hundreds of Palestinians who were killed. Also support something simpler like Nuseirat raid or Nuseirat attack.VR (Please ping on reply) 16:08, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Oppose, I have seen many more sources referring to it as an operation and rescue rather than a raid. Galamore (talk) 17:39, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Let's see them, I have shown 3 to the contrary and can show 4 more. Selfstudier (talk) 17:40, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
CBS "The complex raid deep into a built-up refugee camp in central Gaza to rescue four held hostage by Hamas on Saturday" Selfstudier (talk) 17:42, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
First paragraph of this article reads "
"The complex raid deep into a built-up refugee camp in central Gaza to rescue four held hostage by Hamas on Saturday was the largest rescue operation". Snipped quotes are not a greta look Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 17:59, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Right, "the complex raid". Duh. Selfstudier (talk) 18:05, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
The "complex raid " was a "rescue operation" - as the current title says. Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 18:22, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
That sentence refers to it as both a raid and as a rescue, which obviously fits the proposed title of "raid and rescue" --Gimmethegepgun (talk) 20:12, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
As I wrote below, I don't oppose renaming it "Rescue raid" vs. the current "Rescue operation" Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 20:15, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
"Raid" should come first before "rescue" though, as the raid killed 274 Palestinians while the rescue operation freed just 4 hostages. The main objective of this operation was apparently to rescue those 4, but the means of carrying that out involved massacring hundreds of innocent civilians that clearly carry greater significance and thus should be prioritized in the title, in any form. Chong Yi Lam (talk) 07:54, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Oh please stop. "massacring hundreds of innocent civilians", are you just swallowing everything Hamas' "Health Ministry" puts out? Yes, they killed a lot of Hamas people in the raid. Also one Israeli soldier was killed by said "innocent civilians". Civilians like the Al Jazeera "journalist"/free lancer, Abdallah Aljamal, and their family who held the hostages for months were also killed. It's a tragedy that some families sign up their children to be human shields for terrorists but there are stranger things. It's tragic that civilians were killed. It's not a massacre, that would implies intent to murder large numbers of civilians. Monopoly31121993(2) (talk) 10:44, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
[T]hat would impl[y] intent to murder large numbers of civilians. To be fair, the intention of the operation does not matter as much as the events that happened as the operation unfolded. The truth is that hundreds of Palestinian people died during the operation, mainly at the hands of the IDF, and, civilian or not, they were still casualties and the number is sufficient to warrant a "massacre" title. Chong Yi Lam (talk) 15:18, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
to add to that statement, according to the “stater intent” criteria, not a single October 7 massacre would be called as such because Mohammed deif told militants to not target civilians on his October 7 speech The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 15:49, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
No, the purpose and nature should come first (rescue operation), then the means (raid). The high amount of casualties, whose nature (militant vs. civilians), cause of death (killed by IDF, caught in crossfire and killed buY Hamas) and even number are not known, is not a factor in determining an article's name. Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 12:05, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
So what you're trying to do here is undermine the mass killing perpetrated by the IDF in the process of freeing a measly 4 people? It seems illogical, at best, to disregard the deaths of many for the rescue of few. Chong Yi Lam (talk) 15:10, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
We don't know how many people were killed, we don't know their nature (combatants vs. uninvolved civilians) and we don't know how they died.
What we do know is that this was an operation to rescue hostages, and that what we should call the article, and have a detailed section for the casualties.
Those "measly" people were civilian hostages, whose kidnapping and holding was a war crime
IHL, and law in general, is not a numbers game where the side that suffers more casualties is presumed to be 'good' - killing 100 bad guys to save 10 good ones is perfectly legal and acceptable Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 17:48, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
1,000-ish casualties is not "crossfire" - that would be a descriptive disservice to the point of euphemism. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:17, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
we don't know that there were 1000 casualties, and there's no reason to believe that in a massive firefight involving hundreds of people there wouldn't be 1000 casualties Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 17:50, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Well I'm glad we're now at massive firefight, not "crossfire". Iskandar323 (talk) 17:57, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
These are not mutually exclusive terms, and refer to diffenrt things - you can be caught in the crossfire of a massive firefight. Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 17:59, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
The new Arab "Israel committed a massacre in the Nuseirat refugee camp in central Gaza on Saturday, killing hundreds of civilians, according to Gaza authorities. Israel called the assault on Nuseirat a “complex daytime operation” aimed at releasing four Israeli captives held in the refugee camp." Selfstudier (talk) 17:43, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
AJ "Israel’s raid on the Nuseirat refugee camp has caused outrage, with the EU calling it “a massacre”. The death toll has risen to 274 and more than 698 others injured, according to Gaza’s health ministry." Selfstudier (talk) 17:46, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
WAPO "The death toll from an Israeli raid on the Nuseirat refugee camp has risen to 274 Palestinians, Gaza’s Health Ministry said Sunday. Israel’s Saturday raid, one of the bloodiest in the war, on the central Gazan camp freed four hostages." Selfstudier (talk) 17:47, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
First sentence in the relevant section of this link : "Israeli forces rescued four hostages in central Gaza on Saturday" Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 18:00, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Cherry picked short quote. Selfstudier (talk) 18:06, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
As of now, the entire quote on that section is "Israeli forces rescued four hostages in central Gaza on Saturday — Noa Argamani, 26; Almog Meir Jan, 22; Andrey Kozlov, 27; and Shlomi Ziv, 41. All “are in good medical condition” and were transferred to a hospital for examinations, the Israel Defense Forces said. They were taken hostage from the Nova music festival during the Hamas attacks on Oct. 7." Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 18:10, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
My quote still says "raid", sigh. Selfstudier (talk) 18:13, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Slight problem is that it is not actually in the link you provided. At least not now. Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 18:23, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
WAPO again "An Israeli raid on the Nuseirat refugee camp that freed four hostages killed at least 274 Palestinians on June 8, Gazan health officials said." Selfstudier (talk) 18:34, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
That's a different link from the one above. You should delete the one above, as it doesn't actually have the text you claim to be quoting from it. Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 18:40, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
It does if you scroll down far enough, its a live blog. Selfstudier (talk) 18:59, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Or An updated WAPO permalink "Israel’s military launched one of the bloodiest raids of the war Saturday, killing more than 200 Palestinians in a brazen operation to rescue four hostages from the central Gaza Strip." Selfstudier (talk) 19:04, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
The new Arab , Al Jazeera and WAPO are about as far left and pro-Hamas as you can find in the English media world. Try getting some centrist sources. Monopoly31121993(2) (talk) 10:45, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
I started with those, presumably you didn't read them. In any case, it seems to be across the board, left or right. Selfstudier (talk) 11:06, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Weak support: This is a aspect event in the sources, so an "and" title makes sense. The existing title would only realistically work if this was an operation with a minimal footprint. It was quite the opposite. One could hardly imagine a more massive footprint. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:26, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
At the same time, I see some stronger options emerging below. I'm increasingly in favour of having something more directly fingering the killing in the title. "Raid" has been noted to be mildly euphemistic in other discussions, and indeed "raid and rescue" is arguably still only reflecting one side, i.e. the Israeli action side of events, and not the perspective of the massacre victims. Coverage such as that from the Intercept strongly supports asserting yet further balance. Iskandar323 (talk) 02:41, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
Strongly oppose, this was by the very definition of the word a massacre, with intentional killings. I have already pointed out the problem with “RS” and their inability to point out Israel as a perpetrator and use passive words to describe Palestinian killings (using “have died”), let alone call their crimes for what they are. Not only did it involve bombings but several reports of Israeli troops storming apartment floors and executing their occupants. There is an established intent, this was a massacre and must be labeled as such The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 03:49, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
There's no evidence that the IDF were responsible for significant civilian casualties, nor that those killed were civilians. Citing Hamas figures isn't permissible on Wikipedia. KronosAlight (talk) 07:48, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
There are reports of Israeli soldiers shooting occupants in their own homes. Several videos and photos of the massacre have surfaced. The “Khamas health ministry” is sole source counting the victims of the massacres in Gaza but also a gigantic undercount. Hence, the only reason they are “inaccurate” is because the real death toll is much higher The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 09:57, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
The "occupants" shot in their home were war criminals holding hostages in their homes Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 12:00, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
According to a Twitter account who based this accusation on distorting the euro med report. Not even the isf has been able to make up its mind on whether to say he held one or many hostages (maybe because the occupants didn’t). Several instances of the idf falsely branding journalists as militants means it isn’t to be trusted, or everything said by them having to be followed by according to the IDF The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 12:06, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
No , according to reliable sources - https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/idf-confirms-abdallah-aljamal-was-holding-3-hostages-in-his-home-in-nuseirat-alongside-his-family/ Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 12:12, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Quote:
”According to the IDF, the three hostages were held by Aljamal alongside his family. They were rescued yesterday by special forces.“
It cannot be denied that the times of Israel is reliable (and Wikipedia classes it as RS), and here they are specifically stating that this is only the IDF’s word of mouth. As I have also mentioned, the slander originated as a tweet by an account, which picked up massive traction before the IDF had even commented on it. This account points to a report that had no mentions of any hostages and spun its own conclusion The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 12:35, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Reelable sources (ToI and others) report that the IDF confirmed Al Jamal was a war criminal holding hostages. That's what the article says. What happened before the IDF statement is irrelevant. Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 12:41, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
(Le Monde) "Al Jazeera rejects Israeli claims that journalists killed were 'terror operatives'
The Israeli army labeled the two journalists killed in Gaza as 'members of terrorist organizations,' a claim Al Jazeera strongly denied on Thursday as 'false' and 'misleading.'"
Given Israel's banana republic banning of AJ, I know who to believe. Anyway, not really relevant to the move discussion. Selfstudier (talk) 12:16, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
As AJ employed one of these war criminals, I can see why they would want to deny the allegations. And they don;t deny he was holding the hostages - a war crime - just that the claims that he also directed Hamas drones.
Do you think the EU is comprised of Banana republics, for banning RT? Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 12:20, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
WP classes AJ as GREL and has deprecated RT. Selfstudier (talk) 12:27, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
tells us more about WP than about AJ. And as I wrote above, even AJ does not deny they held the hostages - a war crime. Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 12:30, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
They have neither confirmed nor denied. Why would AJ deny it if the person involved is not an employee? And this is still not relevant to this move discussion. Selfstudier (talk) 12:34, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
How would they know whether or not the journalist was holding the hostages? Whereas they obviously would know whether or not he worked for them, which they deny --Gimmethegepgun (talk) 11:19, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
There is a page Nuseirat refugee camp massacre and that argument should be made there or else an argument made here for the merge of this article into that one. Selfstudier (talk) 08:35, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Has the discussion not moved here? Or am I mistaken The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 09:59, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
It's a bit confusing, there is a merge discussion on this page to merge the "massacre" article with this one and then there is this RM to change the title of this article. So I guess what you want to do is to not merge the massacre article to here but instead the reverse.
But if you want to object to the move on general principles, that's OK too. Selfstudier (talk) 10:28, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Oppose: The current name describes exactly the mission and the purpose of the operation. It was a rescue mission to free hostages. Owenglyndur (talk) 08:11, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
  • wait For the merge discussion result, if two articles got merged then the title should be renamed as proposed, otherwise if the two would remain separate, which I personally support, then this article shouldn’t be renamed
Stephan rostie (talk) 10:15, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Half-support: The event has been labeled as a massacre by outlets such as Al Jazeera and while people were rescued, I think the massacre should be prominently mentioned as well; with the title being shorted to raid, because including raid and rescue is not only long but attempts to portray the event as something extremely heroic eve though about 200 people were killed. That would mean a merging of the separate massacre article onto this one. Clammodest (talk) 22:19, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Oppose - As many have mentioned, this event has been described by many outlets rightly as a massacre, yet another by the IDF who can't help but commit war crimes. It should be merged into the Nuseirat refugee camp massacre, not have its name changed. The current article is just an expression of narcissism and POV bias. EmilePersaud (talk) 03:09, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
Partial support. RS are reporting two events which are both notable in their own right and not mutually exclusive: there was an Israeli raid that rescued four hostages and in the process, 270+ people were killed. Individually, both massacre and rescue are POV as they're both reported widely in RS, and rescue operation is arguably more POV than massacre as it is a euphemism. I support a merge to Nuseirat rescue and massacre. Jebiguess (talk) 03:15, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
support - I would call it just a "raid" or "rescue and massacre", but out of current vs proposed I prefer the proposal to the current title. MWQs (talk) 06:59, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
Comment - user has been blocked as a sockpuppet. Jdcomix (talk) 01:57, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
Oppose- there were numerous sources (above) using "rescue operation" or some variant of it. To repeat
There are many more, some listes in the section above ("POV Title") Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 17:53, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Cherry picked quotes. First one, CNN, says "The Israeli military rescued four hostages in a special operation in the Nuseirat refugee camp, central Gaza, that Gazan authorities said killed 236 people and injured more than 400 others. CBS already shown by myself contradicting. 3 NYTs? Not going to bother checking the rest. Selfstudier (talk) 17:59, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
To me that list demonstrates that the current title has a massive point of view problem, even if they weren't misrepresented, they're all from the USA except the one from Israel iself. And the Israeli one is one of the less reliable sources from Israel. MWQs (talk) 07:05, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
Ynet is Israel's largest circulation mainstream newspapers, it is one of the most reliable print news sources in the country.
If you want to add the UK, Canada and Australia to the list above (covering all major English speaking countries' sources, here you go:
  • Reuters (UK) "Israel keeps pounding central Gaza as Palestinian death toll in hostage rescue raid rises to 274" [7]
  • Reuters (UK) "Benny Gantz delays statement after hostage rescue" [8]
  • ABC (Australia) "Abdullah Joudeh was in Gaza's Nuseirat Refugee Camp 5 when Israeli special forces rescued four Hamas hostages" [9]
  • ABC (Australia) "Joy and anger over hostage rescue" [10]
  • Sky News (australia) "‘Magnificent’ Israeli hostage rescue a ‘great shot in the arm’ for the government" [11]
  • CBC (Canada) "'It's a miracle we survived,' says father of 5 whose home was destroyed in Israeli hostage rescue raid" [12]
...and for good measure, India:
  • Times of India "Israeli Ground Troops Exit Central Gaza Strip After Hostage Rescue & Fighting" [13]
Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 18:31, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
The first one says "rescue raid" that's the title proposed.
I'm glad you remembered India, The Wire (India) and Newslaundry are rated more reliable than TOI. and Sky News Australia is trash (it's not the same as Sky News UK), try SBS World News Australia.
but the list is still a bit skewed because two of the biggest English speaking countries you're missing are South Africa and Ireland, plus Malaysia and Pakistan use English locally. "Dawn News" is probably the most reputable English source from Pakistan.
you don't need to restrict to English speaking countries, plenty of others have English news, France 24, and obviously Al Jazeera.
MWQs (talk) 07:26, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
No , the tile proposal is "raid and rescue". I already wrote I'd be ok with "rescue raid" Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 11:57, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
You mean where you quoted "The complex raid deep into a built-up refugee camp in central Gaza to rescue four held hostage by Hamas on Saturday" and left out the next 5 words which read "was the largest rescue operation"? how did that happen? I am trying very, very hard to assume good faith here, but it is not easy. Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 18:05, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Still says "raid" ,either way. Selfstudier (talk) 18:06, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
what's the reason you left out the next 5 words? Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 18:10, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
I said, either way, with or without, still says "raid". Selfstudier (talk) 18:12, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
would you mind answering the question? what's the reason you left out the next 5 words? Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 18:16, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Irrelevant question. Selfstudier (talk) 18:17, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
I think it is very relevant, but if you don;t want to answer, that's fine. Everyone can see what you did there and make up their own minds. Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 18:21, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
What's the reason you left out the entire Eastern Hemisphere except Israel? You've got a long list, but just 5 news outlets, and 4 of them are all from the same country. A country whose general stance on this war is at odds with most of the planet, as demonstrated by nearly every UN vote. MWQs (talk) 07:13, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
NYT "Israeli soldiers and special operations police rescued four hostages from Gaza on Saturday amid a heavy air and ground assault" Contradicts all 3 NYTs. Selfstudier (talk) 18:01, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
USA Today "Militant-held Israeli hostages were among the more than 200 people killed in the raid that freed four captives" Selfstudier (talk) 18:11, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
This link says "Hamas says 3 hostages, including an American, were killed in Israeli rescue raid" Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 18:17, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Ahram online "The United States and Britain provided support to the Israeli raid that released four captives in central Gaza on Saturday and killed more than 240 Palestinians and wounded 400" Selfstudier (talk) 18:13, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
BBC "Four hostages kidnapped by Hamas have been reunited with their families, after being rescued in a raid that Palestinian officials say killed scores of people." Enough "raids" yet? Selfstudier (talk) 18:16, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
I don't object to renaming it '2024 Nuseirat rescue raid " Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 18:19, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Comment: Merge this article and Nuseirat refugee camp massacre into one article titled Nuseirat refugee camp raid. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 18:43, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Or consider: Nuseirat refugee camp killings and hostage rescue. I oppose calling it "raid and rescue" as that prioritizes the rescue of four people over the killing of approximately two hundred. Either just 'raid' or 'killings and hostage rescue [operation]'. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 04:34, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
I think this is the best solution here. Clammodest (talk) 22:20, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
+1 also support this as preferential to the proposed title. Having killings in the title is more reflective of the nature of the coverage than just "raid", which, ironically has been labelled as mildly euphemistic in other contexts. This is supported by fresh RS sourcing such as this piece from the Intercept. It takes a pretty spectacularly violent event to stick up from the general landscape of carnage sufficiently for even the EU foreign minister to label it a 'bloodbath' – a strongly indicative voice. Iskandar323 (talk) 02:34, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
+1.VR (Please ping on reply) 05:24, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
I can go along with this (or something similar) as well. Selfstudier (talk) 09:35, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
Support this alternative, preferable to the current title and objectively labels the main aspects of the event. Also open to the shorter "raid" alternative title. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 07:10, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Support: But only if it means we merge this article with Nuseirat refugee camp massacre. Obviously both the Isreali POV and the Palestinian one are relevant here, the new title captures both and should be present in the title. Saying just a raid or "Massacre", without also stating that it was a rescue operation ignores the context of the vast majority of articles on this subject---which is another reason Nuseirat refugee camp massacre either needs to be removed entirely or merged into this one. This is one event, having two articles for same subject just with different POVs fulfills the WP: Deletion Policy criteria.Tobyw87 (talk) 20:59, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
support: It is both a "raid" but also an "rescue operation" afterall, maybe Nuseirat raid and rescue operation or Nuseirat raid and rescuing operation could work too. Both the Israeli pov and Palestinean pov matter in this operation. The general execution of this operation included both raid and rescuing segments, and ignoring either would not be WP:NPOV. Josethewikier (talk) 17:04, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
Support Nuseirat raid and rescue operation or Nuseirat raid. Many sources have been provided above that refer to this as a raid or attack. Calling it a raid alone also doesn’t imply that nobody was rescued, or that the purpose wasn't to rescue israeli prisoners. Whereas the current title very much does imply that there weren't nearly 1,000 casualties, mostly civilian, including women and children.
Remember that titles must be descriptive; the current title is clearly not descriptive and clearly not neutral. A typical person, wanting to find an article about an event with 1,000 casualties, would certainly not think to include the words "rescue operation" in their search query. Non-neutral titles are only to be used if one specific name has become so common that it's essentially become a proper noun for the subject, which is clearly not the case for this raid, especially since it's only happened a few days ago. Dylanvt (talk) 03:29, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
I continue to support a move, but it's become clear that "raid" is still too euphemistic for an event that killed nearly 300 and injured nearly 700, including many children, many by airstrikes in crowded streets. Nuseirat refugee camp attack seems like a better solution, but certainly not the only solution. Dylanvt (talk) 12:39, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
Support Per Dylanvt. JDiala (talk) 05:33, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Comment I think this is a better NPOV title for a combined article covering both this and the Nuseirat refugee camp massacre article. The reasons for such a combined page under such a NPOV title are stated in my comment in that talk section. I'll quote it here for convenience: "The events are inextricable. It makes no sense to have two articles that each frame the same events in different ways. That's a recipe for two separate POV articles when a single NPOV article is clearly the preferred, encyclopedic approach. I'm not aware of any other Wikipedia pages about similar events that are structured like this. There are not separate pages discussing the military vs civilian aspects of other remotely similar events, such as pages about battles, bombings, hijackings and associated rescue operations, etc. All of arguments for separate pages are better directed toward arguments about how to title, frame, or structure a single combined page." Niremetal (talk) 07:45, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Oppose for now because a merge discussion is in progress. Once the scope of the article is clarified, we can discuss the name. By itself, the proposed name seems alright. Alaexis¿question? 07:48, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Oppose : Anti-Israel editors want to spin the successful Israeli rescue operation as a victory for Hamas so they follow Hamas' PR campaign and calling it a "massacre" of Palestinian civilians. This fits nicely with Hamas' larger "genocide" narrative whose variants many of the editors here have helped promote on pages like Gaza Famine. It's the same disgusting narrative they continue pushing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Monopoly31121993(2) (talk • contribs)
Anti-Israel editors what does that make you? M.Bitton (talk) 14:19, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Certainly not the exact opposite as you so patronizingly insinuate. Drop the hate. Get back to what Wikipedia is actually about, an encyclopedia of facts not activist framing of ongoing events. This war has been a disaster for the Wikipedia community. Russia, Turkey, Iran, China and ever other dictatorship that has banned Wikipedia is laughing themselves silly at how easy it has been to destroy the objectivity of Wikipedia. Monopoly31121993(2) (talk) 17:48, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Cut the polemics, do everyone a favor. Selfstudier (talk) 18:07, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Why not rename it Nuseirat raid, rescue, extraction and airlift out of Gaza operation or something like that? It was a rescue operation in hostile territory and the current title is fine. Figureofnine (talk • contribs) 19:12, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Oppose It was clearly a rescue operation, and removing this fact from the title is actually inserting a POV. The fact there were casualties is incidental; the operation was mounted to rescue hostages, and I don't think anyone is seriously denying that. -Fahrenheit666 (talk) 10:58, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
    What the operation's goals were doesn't matter as much as how it happened. Israeli airstrikes killed over 270 people, most of whom were civilians, during the rescue operation for four people. Targeted attacks like these are by definition a massacre, and is arguably as notable as the rescue if not more so due to the high death toll on par with the Re'im and Be'eri massacres on 10/7. Obscuring the massacre or describing it as "incidental" is POV-pushing. Jebiguess (talk) 03:22, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
    But the proposal specifically includes "rescue" in the title.VR (Please ping on reply) 04:52, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
Oppose The operation was not planned as a raid. The mission was not to tactically attack Hamas assets in Nuseirat, but to free the hostages. Many reliable journals clearly reflect this in their titles and text. (NYT, CNN, NBC, BBC, WSJ and many more). Here is just one: "How Israel's Mission to Rescue Four Hostages Unfolded". GidiD (talk) 11:08, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
The operation was not planned as a raid. Yes it was, see (CNN) An Israeli operation rescues four hostages and kills scores of Palestinians. Here’s what we know
"The first phase of Saturday’s operation saw the IDF target militant infrastructure with pre-planned strikes, Hagari said." Selfstudier (talk) 11:15, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
Key line: "Unusually, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) opted for a daytime raid on the Nuseirat camp" Iskandar323 (talk) 13:50, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Support if there’s a merger Rescue & raid seem to be the most common descriptions in reliable sources, so it seems like the best description if the articles are merged. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 21:07, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Oppose Based on supporting the merge proposal above and the follow up RM below, and the arguments I presented there, meaning moving to the suggested new title would be a waste of time if content is going to be merged etc. CNC (talk) 13:33, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Support "Nuseirat raid", or this proposed title although it is less WP:CONCISE per BilledMammal. This proposal is also fairly clumsy logically. The rescue (and killings) took place during the raid, neither is an adjacent topic to the raid. The very first line of the article is "The Nuseirat rescue operation … was a raid carried out by". If it was a raid, why not call it a raid as a fairly NPOV term for a military operation, until/unless some clear COMMONNAME evolves for that operation and its consequences.Pincrete (talk) 06:53, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Oppose per points already made, and we should adhere to WP:NOTOPINION - merging the operation and concurrent massacre into one clearly represents a particular stance, and means that we are no longer taking an NPOV position. To borrow from what @Websurfer2 says in support - because there is substantial information coming out indicating a lot more to say about it in the context of the deaths, of which the rescue was just one portion. Having two articles means we have a dedicated place for that information. Smallangryplanet (talk) 16:39, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Discussion

@Selfstudier:, as I said above, I don't think it's right to discuss renaming when there is an ongoing merge discussion. If the scope of the article isn't clear, how can we discuss whether the name is appropriate or not? Alaexis¿question? 07:52, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

The scope of this one will become clear hopefully. Not sure why people are alleging POV fork at the other but not putting up an AfD. Either way nothing wrong with an RM and a merge discussion at the same time, some have concurred with condition, that's another idea. Selfstudier (talk) 08:14, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Mainly because there is already a merge discussion; it could be seen as forum shopping. BilledMammal (talk) 10:01, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Sort of, the merge discussion is for the "massacre" article to be merged here, not for this article to be merged there. I suspect we will arrive at the answer in due course, by a roundabout route, if not immediately. Selfstudier (talk) 10:31, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 14 June 2024

I have moved the duplicate move discussion under the existing one and made it a subsection. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 00:14, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

2024 Nuseirat rescue operation → 2024 Nuseirat rescue operation and massacre – Together with a merger with Nuseirat refugee camp massacre. See discussion above at #Proposed merge of Nuseirat refugee camp massacre into 2024 Nuseirat rescue operation, which shows clear consensus for a merge if the combined name is appropriate. Onceinawhile (talk) 19:00, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Support: UN sources which I need not relist here all refer to this incident as a massacre, so at least this article's title should have the word massacre in it if not at all removing the supposed intent of a rescue operation in it. --Masssly (talk) 21:55, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Support: Merge the articles into the massacre, dub it as "rescue operation and massacre" or just massacre. 2024 isn't necessary, though. Jebiguess (talk) 01:07, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
Oppose – Responding to original move: Agree with Weather Event Writer. Repeating:

This article is related to the rescue mission. Nuseirat refugee camp massacre, as of this message, still exists as an article. Renaming means creating a WP:CONTENTFORK.
— User:WeatherWriter

Either don't rename this article, or merge the articles and rename the resulting article. If you think a merge is more appropriate, use the merge template and reassess consensus. Relspas (talk) 14:46, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
Support This is precisely what I thought the name should be after supporting the merge proposal based on POVFORK and lack of ARTICLESIZE issues. There are numerous issues with this article, from neutrality to balance, so this merge and re-naming would help resolve some of these; balance at least, as well as involve more editors who can address POV concerns ideally. CNC (talk) 13:26, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
Support — Many sources note the event as a rescue and a mass civilian death. Such as CNN, The Guardian, and The Los Angeles Times. Roasted (talk) 23:05, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Strong oppose I agree that there are neutrality issues in both of the related articles, and to a degree their titles, but this proposal is simply attempting to resolve that not by finding a NPOV name, but simply listing both of the two PoV ones. Above, I have supported either this article, or ideally the merged articles simply being called the Nuseirat raid which is a neutral term for a military operation (during which hostages were rescued and many, many Palestinians killed). Massacre would anyway generally only be used in an article title if it had evolved as a COMMONNAME, I may be wrong, but it appears that as yet, this raid has not acquired any COMMONNAME.
Oppose. What was the purpose of this operation? Israeli forces entered there to rescue kidnapped Israeli citizens. According to media reports, the "other side" hid behind its citizens and caused civilians to also be killed in the rescue operation. It's terrible, it's very, very sad and it's even shocking, but the rescue operation is not a massacre.Galamore (talk) 06:33, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
the "other side" hid behind its citizens and caused civilians to also be killed in the rescue operation This is complete crap. Israeli forces bombed a civilian area in order to cover their withdrawal, when their rescue operation went wrong. Selfstudier (talk) 13:56, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Since each side presents it differently in the media, I don't know what the "truth" is. But the question is, why did the IDF forces go in there at all? Their whole purpose was to kill? Galamore (talk) 04:58, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
Oppose, The main topic here is, of course, the rescue operation. While there were civilian deaths, it is important not to conflate this with a massacre, which necessarily implies intent. The current name accurately reflects the content of this article. ABHammad (talk) 17:54, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Strong support Clearly, the rescue operation was not carried out without the massacre taking place, so the two are linked, per RS reporting. Makeandtoss (talk) 07:08, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Support merging, but weak oppose this name since it's not the most WP:CONCISE, and including two labels which are essentially different POVs about the same event makes it sound a bit awkward. I think "rescue operation" is perfectly accurate, but editors feel it sounds too positive or what not, "Nuseirat raid" seems like a better compromise. — xDanielx T/C\R 18:59, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

What should we change about this article? It's biased towards Zionists in cases

Those who want to, Let's try to begin the process of Removing Pro-Zionist content or editing it to a fair perspective. Macarius Ibne Mito (talk) 12:42, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

@Macarius Ibne Mito: Erm, that's not very helpful and if you wouldn't mind self reverting the page move, that would be good as well, since there is an ongoing RM discussion. Selfstudier (talk) 13:38, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2024_Nuseirat_rescue_operation/Archive_2&oldid=1251027109"