Talk:2021 Israel–Palestine crisis/Archive 5

Is this a Third Intifada?
Some of the news source like Slate and Al Jazeera start calling this event the Third Intifada.

Example of it: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/05/israel-palestine-third-intifada.html CrusaderToonamiUK (talk) 16:45, 17 May 2021 (UTC)


 * There is speculation by some that the events could lead to that. But that's all it is at the moment, speculation. It's a good headline to hang an analysis on.Selfstudier (talk) 16:50, 17 May 2021 (UTC)


 * All right then we will wait till there is more to this recent event. CrusaderToonamiUK (talk) 16:55, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
 * See 2014 Jerusalem unrest, some sources refered to it as "Third Intifada". Does it make current events the fourth intifada? &#8220;WarKosign&#8221; 17:02, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Intifadas are a prolonged period of conflicts, and Palestine is nowhere near what it was when Arafat was alive, the last Intifada lasted for half a decade in the early 2000s and since its end in 2005, every year since 2006 there have been claims whenever there were such tensions that a 3rd Intifada could arise. Palestine no longer has the capacity for that and I am sure a ceasefire will be in effect in days or even months at most, however it can be classified as a small duration war like the 2014 Gaza War, but that is ONLY WHEN there are sufficient WP:RS stating it as such. However it is true there are numerous WP:RS besides the slate source you mentioned that claims this could possibly trigger a "3rd Intifada", and tensions are indeed highest since 2005. So I will just mention that "some have feared that this could trigger one", whether it actually does or not would take years to determine, my views are irrelevant, its what WP:RS says that goes, however if senior editors wish to remove that addition, I will not add it back either simply because its too early, though the fact that some feared the crisis could lead to one per WP:RS can be mentioned I think. Dilbaggg (talk) 17:09, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I think that whole last paragraph is UNDUE for the lead, it's also not in the article body. Btw, sputnik is a deprecated source.Selfstudier (talk) 17:16, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Selfstudier All right feel free to remove it then, I agree its too early, to term it as Intifadas we should wait for years or at least till WP:RS mentions it confirmatory rather than just as a possibility. Now all of them just says it could trigger one as opposed to actulayy triggering one, WP:Too Soon applies too besie UNDUE, I approve your removal. Thanks. Dilbaggg (talk) 17:28, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't like to revert things if I can avoid it.Selfstudier (talk) 17:34, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Another set of events in 2015 were claimed as 'the third intifada'. That never caught on, though the time span was far longer. One can only speak of a 'third intifada' retrospectively, if sources concur after the event, which means it is far too early.Nishidani (talk) 17:30, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Al Jazeera is Qatari state news, and Qatar is involved first as the Hamas activities are commanded from Doha. And Doha provided safeheaven for Hamas operations and operatives. Obviously Al Jazeera should be taken as the least serious source of information. https://thepeninsulaqatar.com/article/15/05/2021/Foreign-Minister-meets-head-of-Hamas-Political-Bureau-in-Doha --Rectangular dome (talk) 18:45, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Source is speculative (Is This the Third Intifada?); it doesn't state that it is, it says that it might become it, and specifically lists some reasons why it might not. Definitely not enough to call it that in the article voice yet, and clearly WP:UNDUE for the lead as long as it's just speculative.  --Aquillion (talk) 18:18, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I see that my request that the text citing the view 'The conflict is said to have reached a level unseen since the Second Intifada in the early 2000s' be removed was closed immediately as foruming. It wasn't. The rationale was obvious: anyone looking at the 2014 Gaza War's length and casualties knows that.Nishidani (talk) 20:51, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Since when do we judge a conflict by his casualties though.--Rectangular dome (talk) 08:19, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Recently Scroll the Indian news source also coined the term the Third Intifada.

https://scroll.in/article/995100/israel-palestine-conflict-are-we-witnessing-the-early-stages-of-a-third-intifada CrusaderToonamiUK (talk) 15:47, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 May 2021
Please update the casualties infobox:

In the right-hand side, under "Gaza", "change 20–130 militants killed" to "20–130+ militants killed", per the BBC source provided.

In the right-hand side, under "East Jerusalem", add "1 Palestinian Killed"

In the left-hand side, add a new section "East Jerusalem", containing "6 Israeli's Injured".

Per Reuters. BilledMammal (talk) 07:48, 18 May 2021 (UTC) It's already 150+ anyways.(ps. They keep Israel data low for criticsm ;-) that s why they cite Hamas so much, but when it comes to Israel they have more doubts than philosophers.) --Rectangular dome (talk) 09:01, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 160 militants were reported killed. It's hard to keep up, I prefer to wait for the operation to stop and then update with stable numbers. &#8220;WarKosign&#8221; 09:55, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't see why at the same time the Hamas figures keeps being updated, and here people need to ask many times for a change. (Ps. flagrant double standard for me).--Rectangular dome (talk) 11:59, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * When I tried to find figures I found it far easier to find data on Gaza figures than Israeli ones. Far more sources report the former, and include it in a paragraph on tangential reporting on the event, whereas they often do not include Israeli casualties in the same articles. That may explain why the data is harder to keep updated. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 15:13, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: These numbers are generally out of date by the point someone looks at the edit request. Feel free to put the updated numbers and sources on the talk page, but there's no need for an actual edit request. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:58, 18 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Reopened for now. What you are saying about the Gaza figures makes sense, though my concern was more about the discrepancy between the cited source and our figures. However, that is not why I am reopening - I think in the general babble you missed the request for the East Jerusalem figures, and the supporting Reuters source. These are considerably more stable, so I don't think you were applying your reasoning to them? BilledMammal (talk) 07:04, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: See also WP:NOTNEWS. In conflicts with fast-moving escalation such as this, attempting to keep an "accurate" accounting of deaths is impossible. Better to not have it than try to sort out the competing claims. Whether the east Jerusalem attack should be included can be decided in a month or two when there are better ways to determine the figures.   Eggishorn  (talk) (contrib) 17:06, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: WP:NOTNEWS. See above. Run n Fly (talk) 17:35, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 May 2021 (4)
In the Diplomacy section, please add note of the statement from the USA and UK, saying that Israel has a right to defend itself.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/blinken-reiterates-israels-right-to-defend-itself-theres-false-equivalence-being-made-between-israel-hamas/

https://www.timesofisrael.com/eu-british-pm-back-israels-right-to-defend-itself-from-iranian-strikes/

https://www.timesofisrael.com/us-israel-has-right-to-respond-to-rockets-palestinians-have-right-to-safety/ Ester9001 (talk) 15:40, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Individual stances by states are in the International reactions to the 2021 Israel–Palestine crisis article. We arent going to include only those supportive of Israel when it is a tiny minority and we arent going to include all the statements in support of the Palestinians or opposing Israel's actions as it will overwhelm the article, so we have them all in a child article.  nableezy  - 15:47, 18 May 2021 (UTC)


 * The US and UKs support is the only thing which has blocked united security council resolutions to call for end of hostilities.
 * It is relevant.
 * Ester9001 (talk) 17:27, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Ester9001 (talk) 17:27, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Ester9001 (talk) 17:27, 18 May 2021 (UTC)


 * In fact, it is the US only, 14 to 1. The right to self-defence is just a truism. The reason given by the US for blocking a ceasefire call was that it might disturb their behind the scenes efforts to calm the situation.Selfstudier (talk) 17:44, 18 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Truism smuism. Every man and nation has a right to defend itself, and the US and UK and Germany made those statements about the right to defense before the United Security Council blocks, a week before at the start. --Ester9001 (talk) 17:47, 18 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Glad you agree with me.Selfstudier (talk) 17:53, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Follow up on the ruse?
There has been very little coverage as far as I can see in the foreign press of the outcome of the ruse (and it was, from a purely military perspective very shrewd in its potential for a winning blow) concerning an imminent invasion. We have 3 sources (St atesman) saying it was a major success but now note Maariv states that it was subsequently judged to have been a failure or to have fallen far short of its aims. . Worth keeping an eye out for some reliable report in English on this.Nishidani (talk) 15:57, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * It could have been an honest mistake. And no, I'm not WP:FORUM baiting, it's a piece of information that should be mentioned in the article. &#8220;WarKosign&#8221; 17:17, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I've checked and we do now mention it. Deception is a standard war tactic the world over so is neither a surprise nor 'morally' objectionable. 'Honest mistakes' doesn't ring right, though. It appears so far that the tactic failed to achieve their aim (Aluf Benn, is Israel’s most failed and pointless Gaza operation ever. It must end now Haaretz 18 May 2021 'Israel’s land forces have been consigned to the marginal role of deceiving and confusing the enemy into descending into tunnels in the hopes of trapping them through airstrikes. Even this doesn’t seem to have succeeded – large numbers of Hamas fighters were not inside the tunnels that were bombed.') Nishidani (talk) 23:19, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Mentioning children casualties in the infobox
I noticed that children Palestinian casualties keeps getting removed from the infobox. But on the Israeli side we have a breakdown by both nationality (mentioning Indian and Thai) and breakdown by ethnicity (mentioning Arab-Israeli). I think we are going to do a demographic breakdown we should be consistent, otherwise we should only breakdown by combatant and non-combatant.VR talk 16:02, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Mentioning children is especially important as we otherwise don't have reliable figures in the breakdown of civilians and militants killed on the Palestinian side. Its is also WP:DUE as nearly every news source mentions this. Pinged .VR talk 16:07, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Agreed, returning it.  nableezy  - 16:15, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Expanding slightly, if you want to break down military vs civilian casualties for Israel, including those suffering from anxiety in the count and not even saying so, because the sources do, well the sources also break down the Gaza casualties by age and it is just as DUE to include in the infobox.  nableezy  - 16:20, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * "Casualties" has a well defined meaning, which usually only includes those physically wounded or killed. Social and psychological effects (anxiety, ...) can be mentioned somewhere in the article, if the sources mention it, but not in the infobox, lest we confuse our readers. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 17:04, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry. I see EcoGraf's edit rationale states that infoboxes don't make that distinction normally. His argument certainly holds for the infobox of the 2014 Gaza War where as here a quarter of those killed in Gaza were children (ca.515).Nishidani (talk) 16:41, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Hamas ofcourse controls the hospitals and ministry of health which publishes the death certificates and has been accused by Israel of fabricating and inflating number of child deaths. Perhaps that is why it was removed? Ester9001 (talk) 17:30, 18 May 2021 (UTC)


 * First, regarding your comment, "we break down civilians/military for israel but not palestine", this is incorrect. Based on the available sources we have, we have provided an overall toll of civilian and military dead among the Palestinians and broke that down to the lower (per Hamas/PIJ) and higher (per Israel) estimate of militant dead. Wikipedia infoboxes customarily contain the overall numbers of dead and/or a breakdown between civilian and military, with sometimes a breakdown in nationalities. However, the infoboxes do not contain a breakdown among male, female and children. This is information, like I said, that is more appropriate for the main body of the article. If we include the numbers of children for one side, we would have to include the numbers for the other side as well, which gradually leads to an overinflation of the infobox and WP policy/guidelins state we should avoid overinflating the infobox. Finally, regarding your comment about Israelis suffering from anxiety, there has already been a discussion on that issue during both this and the 2014 Gaza conflict and consensus is the infobox includes only physical casualties that are directly a result of the conflict. As RandomCanadian has said, those suffering from anxiety can be mentioned in the main body of the article, but they have no place in the infobox. infoboxes sometime contain breakdowns between nationalities, however, as you pointed out, the figure on the Israeli side also contains the mention of the two Arab-Israelis, which is an ethnical breakdown, which I think should be removed from the infobox. In principle, I agree with your proposal that maybe it would be best to do a combatant/non-combatant breakdown, while mentioning the rest of the information in the main body of the article. So, I would kindly ask Nableezy that you cancel your edit here  until a clear consensus can be reached on the figures that would be included or excluded from the infobox as per WP guidelines so an edit war could be avoided. Thank you. EkoGraf (talk) 17:54, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * What guideline? And yes, we do breakdown civilian/military for Israel and not Palestine, saying that is incorrect is dumbfounding given the infobox is readily available for anybody to look at. We include that 11 civilians and 1 soldier was killed on the Israeli side, but amalgamate those two things together for the Palestinians. Yes, we include what each side says is the "militant" death toll in Gaza, but we dont actually say how many civilians were killed. I dont think there is a clear consensus for your removal of the number of children, so no I will not self-revert my edit.  nableezy  - 18:00, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Any suggestion that the Palestinian Ministry of Health inflates child death figures is an anti-Palestinian conspiracy theory. Think how many people would need to be in such a conspiracy to allow this to happen. People who don’t understand the region seem to think that every person in the Gaza administrative bureaucracy is somehow a Hamas militant.

They publish names, locations, ages etc on a regular basis. This type of information is very difficult to fabricate.

If you want additional evidence, note this desperately sad tweet from the Norwegian Refugee Council today: We sadly confirmed today that 11 of over 60 children killed by Israeli air strikes in #Gaza over the last week were participating in our programme helping them deal with trauma. All of the children between 5 and 15 years old were killed in their homes. If just one NGO had been treating 11 of the children, it is entirely reasonable that another 50 children had died given the scale of Gaza’s population. Onceinawhile (talk) 18:06, 18 May 2021 (UTC)


 * "What guideline?" WP:EDITWAR and WP:CONS. "I dont think there is a clear consensus for your removal of the number of children, so no I will not self-revert my edit." The question here is not if it should be removed, but instead if it should be included. And a clear consensus does not exit in this regard at this point. You inserted the information after the discussion regarding its inclusion was started and did not wait for the discussion to reach a conclusion, as guidelines require us. "but we dont actually say how many civilians were killed" We don't say it because there are no sources (either Israeli or Palestinian) that say how many of the dead are actually civilians, only claims by both sides how many are militants. Also, please stick to WP:GOODFAITH. In any case, I still think 's proposal may be the best solution. Best regards! EkoGraf (talk) 18:27, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Im sorry, but my reverting your revert doesnt make my revert editwarring and yours not. I have made one revert here, I have not edit-warred and do not intend to. You have likewise made one revert here (that Ive taken the time to count at least, have not checked the history). The guideline I asked for was what says children should not be listed in the infobox. Cus WP:DUE would seem to say it should be when every source that discusses numbers seemingly includes that material. No, I did not insert the information after the discussion was started, I returned the material that had been remove by you without any discussion at all. Also, the UN yesterday said 116 civilians, including 61 and three pregnant women have been killed. I'd be fine including civilians without breaking down children in the infobox like that.  nableezy  - 18:37, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for providing the source on 116 civilian dead and I agree that it should be included in the infobox, while moving the children figure to the main body of the article. Regards! EkoGraf (talk) 20:12, 18 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Reminder All information must be based on WP:RS. It's beyond our remit to criticise sources as "palestinian" or "israeli" propaganda. Ideally, we have independent reliable sources to confirm the numbers. If they disagree, then we need to report all significant viewpoints per WP:NPOV, cited to reliable sources. See for ex. 2014 Gaza War, where competing counts are given in the infobox. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 18:52, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Has Israel or any other major player disputed Palestinian figures for either total killed or number of children killed? As pointed out, this information is hard to fabricate. Since RS's take both of these figures from Gaza MOH at face value and since no one disputes it, we don't even need to attribute it and can state it in wikivoice.VR talk 19:05, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * NYT says the numbers cannot be independently verified. So they should remain attributed. ProcSock (talk) 20:58, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The numbers were backed by the UN per WSJ: United Nations officials said Monday that 116 civilians, including 61 children and three pregnant women, had been killed in Gaza since Israel launched its military operation last week. So shouldnt just be attributed to the MOH.  nableezy  - 21:36, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Source says: In total, 212 people, including 61 children and 36 women, have been killed in Gaza since last Monday, according to the Palestinian health ministry. ... United Nations officials said Monday that 116 civilians, including 61 children and three pregnant women, had been killed in Gaza since Israel launched its military operation last week. ... A spokesman for the Gaza health ministry denied manipulating figures, saying it has the names of everyone killed in Gaza and could verify those with international organizations. UN doesn't seem to verify MOH's figures. I guess we could give both sets, however, but I imagine they will be verified once it stops being a current event so don't see the point. Or just attribute separately. ProcSock (talk) 22:47, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Which country's casualty statistics do get independently verified? I am not aware of any country which arranges third party audits of these statistics. I could see the "wounded" statistics might benefit from an audit, as there can be subjectivity there, but counting death certificates entails no subjectivity. Onceinawhile (talk) 22:07, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

I think it should be included, perhaps with attribution if other editors feel like it is warranted. CPCEnjoyer (talk) 14:03, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Neutrality dispute. 18 May 2021 (7)
All disputes of neutrality is highlighted in a Bold Italic.

In 2.4 (Arab communities in Israel), it states "In Acre, a Jewish man was attacked and seriously injured by an Arab mob armed with sticks and stones while driving his car. In Bat Yam, Jewish extremists attacked Arab stores and beat pedestrians. An Arab motorist was also beaten in the street, an incident which was caught live by an Israeli news crew. An Israeli soldier was severely beaten in Jaffa, and two civilians including a paramedic and a police officer were shot by Arab assailants in Lod and Ramla. An Israeli news crew was attacked by Jewish extremists in Tel Aviv, and a Jewish family which mistakenly drove into Umm al-Fahm was attacked by a mob before being rescued by other local residents and police."

Usage of "Arab mob" or "Arab assailant" is a possible dispute of neutrality. Using the word Arab could impose that the editor is an anti-Arab. I suggest that "Arab-extremist" be used instead of just using "Arab" as for it sounds as if all Arabs are extremists.

— Chxeese (talk) 18:41, 18 May 2021 (UTC)


 * That would be because Judaism is a religion so one may be a Jewish extremist, but Arabian is an ethnicity, one cannot be an extremist of his ethnicity. Muslim-extremists would fit. --Ester9001 (talk) 18:48, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Jews are also an ethnic group, ethno-religious.--Rectangular dome (talk) 08:47, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Not all Arabs are Muslims. That is like saying all Americans are Christians. Additionally no Muslim-extremist claimed responsibility for the attack, making it unfitting. -- Chxeese (talk) 18:57, 18 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Exactly my point. The Israeli were police, may have contain (if proportional to the national population) 20% arab, 20% Russian, christian / athiest / whatever. --Ester9001 (talk) 18:55, 18 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Broken record here, go by the sources. That JP/ToI would report on this way does not surprise me so best thing would be to see if there is are alternative sources saying it differently.Selfstudier (talk) 18:58, 18 May 2021 (UTC)


 * 'Arab-extremist' just does not sound right to me, surely it should be either Islamic-extremist, or arab far-right or some such terminology. That is all I was trying to say really. --Ester9001 (talk) 19:01, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Historic dispute section unclear
There is a sentence that does not make sense as follows; can a qualified editor please fix "The land was taken and destroyed by the Jordanian government following the 1948 Arab–Israeli War.[66]" land has not been destroyed. Perhaps they mean the buildings on the land were destroyed. The Irish Times article cited says the land was "razed". The meaning of that is also unclear but it might mean buildings on the land were razed. The Irish Times article goes on to say "The Palestinian families facing eviction moved – also legally, according to the Jordanian government – into the houses before Israel took East Jerusalem in 1967." So if the buildings were "razed" or destroyed" were new buildings built after 1948. If there are no answers to the questions the sentence could simply be removed. Caferoma (talk) 06:09, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The same fellow reports for the FT and there is an article today on the same subject. In that, it says "Palestinians were first housed in Arab districts in East Jerusalem by Jordan, which controlled that part of the divided city for 19 years after the birth of Israel in 1948." but otherwise doesn't refer to razing or destruction. I will take a look around see what else I can find.Selfstudier (talk) 08:48, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Good grief! How on earth did that get in? Thanks for noticing it. The error arose because newspaper reporters apparently don't take time to read the history. The Ottoman Jewish area rose up with the purchase of property around the Shimon HaTzadik|Shimon HaTzadik tomb. There were two trusts involved, Ashkenazi and Sephardi, and they jointly chipped in to buy the revered sage's cave and 4 acres of land nearby. The Sephardic portion lay next to the tomb, by the Nablus road, that of the Ashkenazis further south, where a vacant compound was marked off. It was on the latter portion that Jordan built 28 units for refugees. The Ashkenazis during the British mandate eventually built on that particular stretch, but land on the Jaffa road. S further Jewish area was at Umm Haroun (now called Nahalat Shimon), west of the Sephardi site. All of these, and a further site, have been the subject of the legal disputes at Sheikh Jarrah since the 1970s. The details are in  the Sehikh Jarrah Affair paper, which I see has been questioned as the output of a 'think tank' and less preferable than newspapers. It is a sided but excellently documented sifting and analysis of the historical documents, far superior in quality to all of the newspaper sources we have used.  I'm short on time but will fix this, unless someone else reads up and does it.Nishidani (talk) 09:11, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * This detailed report says that "Under contention are approximately 28 residential structures, currently housing descendants of 27 of the Palestinian families who arrived in 1956 (about 500 people) and 5-6 settler groups (about 30 people)." and notes "28 houses were built for the original Palestinian residents of the neighborhood in 1956. Since then, some units have been joined and others subdivided and expanded." So that clears that up, I think. Just the razing/destruction bit to sort out, perhaps although it seems clear there was new construction.Selfstudier (talk) 09:13, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Ir Amim is very strong on the post 67 occupation history (and logic), whereas Reiter and Lehrs (2010) go into far greater historic depth. I am perplexed that it could be tagged as unreliable because it was published by a 'think tank'. Lior Lehrs for one has cooperated with Palestinian scholars on writing about the history of East Jerusalem, has suggested that Area C (60%) of the West Bank be redefined as an area jointly under Israeli-Palestinian management, and thus wrested from the Oslo   interim definition as purely under Israeli control. The scholarship is of a high order.   Nishidani (talk) 09:29, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, I can't find any other references anywhere to razing/destruction but since "razing" is sourced I think we can use that and then add the fact of subsequent construction, that should be OK?Selfstudier (talk) 10:18, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * If it is a single newspaper's claim, then it comes under 'extraordinary' and requires other good sources (not involved in journalistic meme reproduction as is often the case) before it can be mentioned, I would think. Of course I'm 'Irish' and very wary therefore of such sources:)Nishidani (talk) 10:31, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Since the same author, I'm thinking that the Irish paper allowed some things that didn't make it past the FT editors.Selfstudier (talk) 10:56, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request for 19 May 2021
Gaza-Israel Fatalities timeline
 * 10 May: Gaza 28/ Israel 3
 * 11 May: Gaza 4/ Israel 1
 * 12 May: Gaza 21/ Israel 4
 * 13 May: Gaza 34/ Israel 2
 * 14 May: Gaza 39 / Israel 0
 * 15 May: Gaza 13 / Israel 1
 * 16 May: Gaza 53/ Israel 0
 * 17 May: Gaza 20 / Israel 1 [203]

Can we please make this into a table? Frankly, using slashes as delimiters is not the way we do things on Wikipedia. Also keep a reference column so we can always verify the reference(s) for each day, as references for Gaza and Israel may be separate. Also, add a total to the bottom that aligns with what we are showing on the infobox. If the war continues for multiple weeks, we could turn this into the basis of a new article just for casualties. ItsGrrreat (talk) 12:50, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * (a) I don't know how to do tables. I'd be happy if someone could do that. (b) There is only one reference for all the data (assembled by a team of NYTimes journalists from all reports available - the NYTs is particular about multiple checking to get the stats right), so the table needs only that one source.(c) It's too early to add a total to the bottom, though it could figure as a empty slot, since we only have this data from the NYTs for 8 days, and lack figures for 18-19-20th, and other days if the rumoured ceasefire doesn't come into effect tomorrow.Nishidani (talk) 13:13, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Onceinawhile (talk) 15:23, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks indeed Onceinawhile. I'll edit that in.Nishidani (talk) 15:28, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Not sure if differentiation between Palestinian Israelis and Jewish Israelis is meaningful, as some Arab-Israelis that were killed were killed by Gaza rockets, while one was killed during protests against Israel. Also, three of civilian casualties in Israel were not Israeli citizens. I think this table should focus more on where they were killed, rather than trying to establish affiliation. ItsGrrreat (talk) 22:02, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Good points. Obviously improvements can be made. It's late here, and not my area of expertise. Nishidani (talk) 22:05, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Dar Yusuf Nasri Jacir for Art and Research
The Dar Yusuf Nasri Jacir for Art and Research suffered extensive damage caused by a raid of Israeli forces. Any help improving the article would be appreciated. Thank you, Thriley (talk) 15:25, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * That of course cannot be mentioned here, since, to date, this is only attributed by the Jacir family to the IDF and the claim requires independent confirmation. In any case, I have wikified the article and provided some further sources.Nishidani (talk) 16:58, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

questions needing review on the subject of Rockets Fired By Gaza & Israel
Why is there not a single picture of a rocket shot from Gaza to Israel (the ones that actually made it to the ground)? Why is there only a picture of the media building, which was used as a human/status shield for Hamas (to fire rockets right next to the building, knowing full well that Israel would be reluctant to conduct an air strike on it because they would get backlash)? The caption reads "Aftermath of Israeli bombing of a building in Gaza, 14 May 2021" in the causes it says " - Planned decision by the Supreme Court of Israel on the eviction of four Palestinian families in the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah." " - Closure of the Damascus Gate by Israeli authorities" And " - Storming of the al-Aqsa Mosque by Israeli police"

Why can't it explain that the main reason it was bombed was that Hamas was firing rockets right next to the building(!)?
 * Source? Also please remember to sign.Selfstudier (talk) 22:25, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

“Evictions”: is the term neutral?
I’d like to suggest changing “evictions” in the second paragraph of the intro to any of “forced removal”, “forced displacement” or “dispossession”. Terms like “eviction” and “property dispute” are sanitized to the point of being misleading, and don’t adequately portray the facts on the ground or the legality of the situation. The fact that these terms are strongly preferred by one party (the occupying power) should give us serious pause re: WP:NPOV.

I have a number of sources to support this change, generally endorsed by WP:RSP:

From the International Court of Justice: “Israel: ICC must investigate forced displacement of Palestinians in Sheikh Jarrah and attacks against civilians in Gaza”

From CBS News: “The United Nations Commission for Human Rights has called the forced removal of Palestinian families a potential war crime. Israeli officials have called it a ‘real-estate dispute between private parties.’”

From Al Jazeera: “Sheikh Jarrah residents speak out on Israel’s forced expulsions”

From Haaretz: “Democrats Urge U.S. to Act Against Israel's 'Abhorrent' East Jerusalem Evictions: Several Democratic lawmakers are calling for an investigation on whether Israel’s ‘forced displacement for Palestinians’ violates U.S. laws”

I do not want to start people foruming, I just think this merits discussion and probably a change. I think “forced removal” is a more accurate legal description; “eviction” is better suited to a more banal dispute over residential tenancies.WillowCity (talk) 20:09, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * A detailed description of the circumstances is already present. This is just highly inflammatory language that would bias the article in favor of one side. We can use banal words, then lay out the entirety of the facts in the article, and let the readers decide on what they think of it.--RM (Be my friend) 20:33, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I think it is accurate, not inflammatory. With the utmost respect, it sounds like you are saying that banal language that would bias the article in favour of one side is preferable to bold language that runs a risk of the same.WillowCity (talk) 20:42, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Banal language, just dryly describing the bare facts, is not bias. People can read the rest of the description and reach their own conclusions.--RM (Be my friend) 20:44, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * By that logic, we should describe the the Indian Ocean Tsunami of 2004 as "a large wave". As well, "forced removal" is an equally dry description, it just reflects international as opposed to Israeli domestic legal opinion.WillowCity (talk) 21:38, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The criteria is a balance of sources so if most sources are saying eviction we should go with that. I need to check about "property dispute" and similar phrasing, that sounds a bit off to me but I could well be wrong.Selfstudier (talk) 21:40, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * NYT says "which Israeli officials dismiss as "a real estate dispute," so I think we might avoid that.Selfstudier (talk) 13:46, 19 May 2021 (UTC)


 * From the WP page on Eviction: "Eviction is the removal of a tenant from rental property by the landlord. In some jurisdictions it may also involve the removal of persons from premises that were foreclosed by a mortgagee (often, the prior owners who defaulted on a mortgage)". As the families being removed are neither tenants being removed by a landlord nor being foreclosed on by a mortgagee, the term eviction is not only biased, but wholly inaccurate. Eviction is not "dryly describing the bare facts", it implies fault on those being removed. "Forced removal" is much more accurate as far as "bare facts" go. But if the "forced" part is really too biased, we could go with "removal of six Palestinian families from their homes in Sheikh Jarrah". "Removal" is the most neutral you can get, it implies no fault or reasoning, just the bare facts. --eduardog3000 (talk) 14:05, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I sympathize with this view especially since forced displacement has been the UN view for quite some time but if rs are mainly calling it eviction(s), then we're sort of stuck with it.Selfstudier (talk) 14:12, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Here OHCHR is calling it "forced evictions" as well as IL violation.Selfstudier (talk) 15:13, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * According to the court ruling the families had no legal right to occupy the properties, hence they were Squatting. The article on squatting uses "eviction" to describe removal of occupants from the properties for which they have no legal right. It has nothing to do with mortgage or rental. &#8220;WarKosign&#8221; 15:26, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The article that is quoted to suppor the Palestinian POV also uses the term eviction, once with and once without 'scare quotes'. &#8220;WarKosign&#8221; 15:35, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * That's true from an Israeli law standpoint. There are several problems with the application of Israeli law in an occupied territory (according to international law), not least differing ethnicity based evidentiary standards. That is the explanation for some sources, if not a majority, referring to it as forced displacement or similar.Selfstudier (talk) 15:50, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Sheikh Jarrah property dispute article uses 'eviction' 19 times, 'displacement' once and not even once 'forced displacement' or any other expression with 'force'. It makes sense: so far no force has been used (except in protest against planned eviction) and nobody can be certain that eventual eviction, if it will happen, will be forceful. &#8220;WarKosign&#8221; 16:05, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia isnt a reliable source, and a biased Wikipedia article isnt an argument for language in another article. What are reliable sources however, such as al-Jazeera, Reuters, NYTimes, Washington Post do indeed use expulsion and expelled. Eviction is also used, but it is not the only phrasing used and it should not be the only phrasing used here.  nableezy  - 16:21, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't think that's a fair portrayal of at least NYT (haven't checked others). They use eviction as many times as expulsion in that article. In other articles like this they overwhelmingly use eviction. In their header, on your very link, they use "Palestinian evictions". ProcSock (talk) 20:32, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Pretty sure I said evictions is also used. But that it is not the only term used, and we should likewise also be using expulsion.  nableezy  - 03:18, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * "Forced displacement" is another one of those expressions like "belligerent occupation", it can be a bit misleading if one just assigns ordinary meanings to the individual words. FD includes displacement not only due to conflict/violence but also due to persecution or hr violations generally.Selfstudier (talk) 11:02, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 May 2021
The reason for the crisis is mostly the Hamas firing rockets onto Jerusalem and Tel Aviv 188.64.207.189 (talk) 07:59, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.  Mel ma nn   08:41, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * A war start with a beligrant attack, not with an excuse. Germany also had a motives to attack Poland, still the war began when Germany attacked, not when they payed reparations and they were 'collectively' mad. It's like writing on WWII article, the violence started when Germany was angry and when Poland occupied their land, or citing a diplomatic incident on the border of Germany.

So I can recommend adding the hostility were initiated by Hamas launching hundreds of rockets, which is well documented for anyone who read the press. And you can add, Hamas justify its attack on a b & c. Anything else is Stockholm syndrome. :-)--Rectangular dome (talk) 10:45, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Arguments about "who started it" generally lead nowhere. The best one can do is identify proximate causes and events but the conflict itself, this being merely another episode in it, began a long time ago.Selfstudier (talk) 10:54, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 May 2021 (2)
In the "Lebanon and Syria" subsection of "Escalation", within the first line, the words 'from' and 'the' do not have a space inbetween them.

On 13 May at least three rockets were fired fromthe coastal area of Qlaileh just South of the Palestinian refugee camp of Rashidieh in the Southern Lebanese district of Tyre across the Israeli–Lebanese border, landing in the Mediterranean Sea. Hezbollah denied responsibility for the rocket launches and Lebanese Army troops were deployed to the area around the refugee camp, finding several rockets there. Change to: On 13 May at least three rockets were fired from the coastal area of Qlaileh just South of the Palestinian refugee camp of Rashidieh in the Southern Lebanese district of Tyre across the Israeli–Lebanese border, landing in the Mediterranean Sea. Hezbollah denied responsibility for the rocket launches and Lebanese Army troops were deployed to the area around the refugee camp, finding several rockets there. zer0talk 08:19, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done  Mel ma nn   08:44, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Phrasing - third holiest site vs sacred in Judaism
...the compound of the al-Aqsa Mosque, the third-holiest site in Islam, located on the Temple Mount, which is sacred in Judaism

Why does this sentence clarify the Al-Aqsa Mosque as the third holiest site in Islam, but simply says the Temple Mount is 'sacred in Judaism'? It is the holiest site in Judaism. I believe the article should say the cite is sacred for both faiths, or clarify both parties' relationship with the location. 2A10:8002:83AE:0:C455:1029:DB39:1637 (talk) 12:39, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * You are correct, no reason for this discrepancy. Fixed. &#8220;WarKosign&#8221; 13:09, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Btw, "third" is a fabrication, all the refs refering to it as the third are baised and not well addressed, and certainly not Islamic in nature. For Shia it's certainly not the third, and for Sunni Hajj places are more sacred. Wikipedia has became a place for folk science.

Btw you can also add positive stories in your cover. Eg, the Jew killed by "protesters", who gave his kidney to an Arab woman. Or the Arab paramedic who saved a Jew stabbed and lynched in Tamra last week. https://www.timesofisrael.com/jewish-riot-victims-kidney-gives-new-lease-of-life-to-arab-woman/ --Rectangular dome (talk) 15:14, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

The original request is ✅. Another one for a different subject may be added in the usual way.Selfstudier (talk) 15:20, 20 May 2021 (UTC)


 * See WP:EXCEPTIONAL. Let's update the status of the mosque here after you were able to change it at Al-Aqsa Mosque.
 * Regarding positive stories, we certainly should include them in the riots section. Let's wait for the events to stop unfolding and higher quality sources to start summing everything up. &#8220;WarKosign&#8221; 15:24, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Small edits
Second paragraph should read 'right-wing' as opposed to 'Far-Right' Jewish nationalists - it is a large march which encompasses Jews from various levels on the spectrum. Does source specifically say 'far-right'?

First sentence of third paragraph reads as if Israel should have been expected to accept the ultimatum issued, perhaps consider restructuring the sentence.

Finally please change 'airstrikes on Gaza' to 'on targets in Gaza'. Israel didn't 'strike Gaza', that surely breaches impartiality guidelines. Durdyfiv1 (talk) 02:43, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Two of the three sources specifically mention 'far-right. " David O. Johnson (talk) 03:29, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Caferoma (talk) 06:09, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Yeah David, two left-wing sources and a third which I've noticed doesn't qualify as a reliable source. The editorial position on this page is quite frankly ridiculous. Durdyfiv1 (talk) 14:21, 19 May 2021 (UTC)


 * I assume you mean that Haaretz and NYT are left wing, personally I think NYT is somewhat right wing. Intercept is also green in RSP although it might need attribution sometimes. The usual thing, rather than complaining about sources used, is to seek out some that take a contrary position and then we can perhaps see about some sort of edit.Selfstudier (talk) 15:04, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Or we could try using sources that aren't generally anti-Israel when referring to Israeli events... That may also work. Durdyfiv1 (talk) 01:12, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Ceasefire, approved by Israel gov
https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog-may-20-2021/

--Ester9001 (talk) 19:22, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Fingers crossed there's no backsliding.Selfstudier (talk) 22:40, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * It will continue, (tommorow, next week, next month, next year,...) simply because rocket attacks is it's raison d'être. Wikipedia should include Hamas ideolgy of " destroying Israel and kill the Jews" has a motive in the context. --Rectangular dome (talk) 23:04, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Predicting the future is a dicey business.Selfstudier (talk) 23:17, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * We'll see if there will be a ceasefire, then we can update the page. Colin Zhong (talk) 00:57, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

"Caused by" section of the info box biased?
Is the "Caused by" section of the info box biased? From reading the current three causes is seems the Israeli side caused the crisis alone. I think this needs to be expanded with the referenced information in the section "Background". For example the often delayed election dates in the Palestinian areas could be mentioned. What do you think? 2001:56A:F868:D500:8001:CCDB:C527:D60 (talk) 04:47, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * It was already discussed several times, the consensus up to now is that while it could well be a minor contributing factor (along with failed Israeli elections and other things as well), there seems little evidence for direct causality. The only event that sources consistently mention for (proximate) causality is Sheikh Jarrah and things escalated from there. Of course, there is a deeper causality but not of a proximate nature.Selfstudier (talk) 11:03, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The box is rather arbitrary IMO, and has no clear inclusion criteria with a sound basis in policy. If the standard used were WP:DUE, ie amount of coverage in sources, then yes that could be mentioned. It's questionable to exactly what degree it did matter. I'm not sure I'd say it's "biased", however, and think this is just a peril of current events. It will probably be improved once we get some scholarly analysis. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:14, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 May 2021
Please change the timing of the conflict from: (2 weeks and 1 day)
 * 6 May 2021 – present

To (2 weeks and 1 day)
 * 6 May 2021 – 21 May 2021

Because the conflict has been ended with armstice 182.1.16.166 (talk) 05:02, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Already done by Euro Know. Animal lover 666 (talk) 08:19, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Need to Add New Section about Egyptian Involvmenet.
So, In sort, Egypt brokered a cease-fire between Israel and Palestine. Here is the full text for said deal https://www.haaretz.com/the-egyptian-cease-fire-proposal-1.5255539 https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20210520-israel-confirms-unconditional-gaza-ceasefire-agreed-with-hamas Also, Egypt was enacting alot of pressure on Israel and the United States https://edition.cnn.com/2021/05/19/politics/biden-netanyahu-relationship/index.html there are already 2 committees from Egypt as of now monitoring the situation, This is a very good win for Egypt and I think it should be mentioned, because they insisted that the Ceasefire would come into effect at 2 o'clock the same exact hour where Egyptian Forces overran the Bar Lev line and inaugurated the New Suez Canal, it is clearly meant to be a message, also, the amount of medical aid sent via the Rafah Crossing should be mentioned as well as Israel tried to shut it down, but Egypt refused.
 * Which was accepted

All in all, I think the part of Egypt should be acknowledged in this.
 * Could be mentioned in the diplomacy section, maybe. Of course the pressure for a ceasefire was coming from a lot of places but Egypt is a long time arbiter between these two since Israel/US won't actually speak to Hamas directly.Selfstudier (talk) 11:46, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Egypt's involvement is easily supported. Egypt also credits Biden: . Bar Lev line and alleged attempt by Israel to shut down the Rafah crossing fall under WP:EXCEPTIONAL and need really good sources. &#8220;WarKosign&#8221; 11:51, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

I think that it MUST be mentioned in the diplomacy section, Because Egypt in the more detailed article is very empty, and the last thing that came from it is I think the 13th of May, but how so if the major participant and the ones who sponsored, created, and provided this ceasefire proposal is Egypt? I mean, its mentioned by France24, like I linked, and the UN Chief https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/05/1092372

As for the Rafah Border Crossing, the best I got for that is only some local Arab Sources and Anonymous Secruity personeel, however, I think it is verified that an Israeli and Egyptian committee did meet to discuss the border and the fact that the Rafah Border Crossing can provide logistical support to Hamas must be met with force, Egypt apparently had its committe leave and said that there would be no Border Crossing that being shut, it is now indefientnly open, and as for the 2 O'clock thing, while it could be a coincidence, I think its too specific for that, because Apparently the Egyptians insisted very much on it being on 2, a weird and specific time for that, but it could be a message.
 * Here's a good source for Egypt's involvment: . Rafah crossing needs a very good source, so far there is none. Regarding time I can speculate that it's because 2:00 Israel (and Gaza, which uses the same time zone) is 0:00 GMT - but I unless there are sources attributing any signficance to the exact time I don't think we should.&#8220;WarKosign&#8221; 15:31, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Should we put supporting countries?
There's countries that support one side over the other, the U.S supports Israel, Iran supports Palestine, etc. Should we put those in the parties to civil conflict? Countries that have actually done something in support of one of the parties should be placed imo, not just people who says Israel has a right to self defense or Palestine has a right to exist. For example, to clarify anything, the United States sold $750+ million dollars of weapons to Israel during this conflict and supports Israel, so they can be placed under Supported (Israel) or something. Austria, which just said they support Israel but haven't gotten involved, is not needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:182:381:6820:310B:5AF5:1204:9F40 (talk) 12:39, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't think that would add much value to the article, tbh. Plus people would disagree about who was pro, anti and the rest.Selfstudier (talk) 17:02, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * It would be confusing, as many countries are ambiguous and there is no Manichean truth. what is true is most of the western world support Israel right to defense, and most of the Islamic world the Palestinian warfare. --Rectangular dome (talk) 19:30, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Supporting a country's right to self defense is like saying 1+1=2. There are lots of rights, that's only one of them.Selfstudier (talk) 21:47, 21 May 2021 (UTC)


 * This was also the in the U.S. The point is, reactions are mixed. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 21:51, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

War?
Isn't this technically a war? This is certainly more than a conflict if they are launching rockets at each other.
 * Considering there has been no formal declaration of war, no. The broader Arab–Israeli conflict was punctuated by the 1948 Arab–Israeli War, Suez Crisis, Six-Day War, Yom Kippur War and so on. Until there is an official declaration of war (or equivalent authorization of a "policing action" or somesuch) this should remain a "conflict". Alternatively, when WP:RS start calling it a war, so will we. The current name of "crisis" I think will serve until such time, as this is a flashpoint of the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict. BSMRD (talk) 04:52, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Well what's the difference between crisis and war? A declaration? They're launching rockets. This is clearly more than a simple crisis, right? UB Blacephalon (talk) 06:49, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Are there many sources calling it a war? I'm guessing not. Considering this conflict is (so far) less intsense than many previous ones that aren't considered wars, this one is not a war (yet). &#8220;WarKosign&#8221; 07:24, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Technically speaking there cannot be a "war" between occupier and occupied because occupation is the result of war, there can only be "resistance" to occupation which is the case here and not only in Gaza. That is also a reason why we also refer to the IP conflict as a conflict even though it has gone on for so long, it is not technically a war because there is an occupation. The only annexed part, East Jerusalem and a part of the rest of the WB, is not legally recognized outside of Israel so that is also an occupation.Selfstudier (talk) 09:22, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Claims of occupation are actually irrelevant. Definition of war is "a state of armed conflict between *different nations or states* or different groups within a nation or state". Since this conflict is between a state and a terrorist organization, it cannot be called a war. &#8220;WarKosign&#8221; 09:53, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
 * There is no "claim" of occupation, it is an established fact. The state of occupation negates it being a war without the need for any further explanation, discussions about declarations or anything else.Selfstudier (talk) 09:59, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for demonstrating how people make this claim. It's a pointless discussion, we agree that this article shouldn't have "war" in the title and the reason is less important. &#8220;WarKosign&#8221; 10:41, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
 * "diferent Groups within a nation of state". Arabs vs jews? Israel (country) vs Palestine (Territory)? Now that there is ground troops going in gaza, Im surprised they haven't declared it yet! UB Blacephalon (talk) 02:47, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
 * There aren't ground troops in Gaza: . David O. Johnson (talk) 03:21, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Not all Wars have a formal declaration, it was more of a 17th C to 20th C thing, most 21st Century wars like Tigray War are happening without formal declaration as did past wars such as Hundred Years' War of the 14th-15th C. With that says this should only be classified as a war like the 2014 Gaza War was when WP:RS started calling it a war. Opinions of Wikipedia editors is irrelevant in this regard, if WP:RS starts calling the 2021 conflict a war like the 2014 war, the 2021 conflict should also be called a war. it fits the definitions of wars, but we have to wait for WP:RS to call it here, after a possible WP:RfC. Dilbaggg (talk) 07:37, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
 * It is nonetheless of interest that a part of the Israel-Palestine conflict is considered as a "war" but that the entire thing is a "conflict". The press seem at 6's and 7's when it comes to describing what is happening now because the events are not restricted to Gaza.Selfstudier (talk) 10:36, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
 * So because Israel, Palestine, and wikipedia doesn't call it a war, neither should we? Hmm. Alright when IS it a war then? Is this a major conflict because it does not seem like a crisis. Its a crisis for the people.
 * It seems AP has begun to refer to the conflict as a war ; "Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu signaled the fourth war with Gaza’s Hamas rulers would rage on."

I think you misunderstand me, the Gaza War I recently voted to change it to that from conflict. I didn't have any choice because so many RS were describing it like that. However, logically speaking it makes no sense to call the larger problem a conflict while describing an interim event as a war.Selfstudier (talk) 16:42, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Exactly! Now that its escalating its more than a crisis by all accounts and almost into a war. A lot of people are speculating that its going to turn into a war and I already assumed it was and they just never said. Oh, and there is ground troops in Gaza or at least they're going to. I've seen a lot of videos saying that. UB Blacephalon (talk) 21:33, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
 * We will DEFINITELY call it War after WP:RS calls it war, but as of now there are no WP:RS calling it war, before editing please learn WP:RS policy, opinions of editors are irrelevant, it will definitely however be called a war ONLY AFTER WP:RS starts calling it a war, as was the case with 2014 Gaza War. It definitely reached the point of a war, but KEEP IN MIND, Original Research is not allowed here and you can change the title to 2021 Isreael-Palestine War only when WP:RS calls it war. Dilbaggg (talk) 12:40, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
 * While I understand that I can't use my opinion to edit wikipedia, it might be a while before that will happen as currently we have no idea what the status of the conflict will be like going forward. It's only a matter of time before something happens. But if its not a war yet, its really not a crisis or a conflict so I don't know what to call it. UB Blacephalon (talk) 17:40, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I did think violence was OK (and it is supported by some sources as well) but it was not to be.Selfstudier (talk) 17:57, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
 * If violence is the answer to this problem, so be it. I think they should go to war without nukes. UB Blacephalon (talk) 18:31, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
 * My above point wasn't solely directed at you UB Blacephalon, but all editors who wan't to call it war, sure enough, it will be much like the Gaza War (2008–2009) and 2014 Gaza War when Wp:RS starts calling it as a war, we just have to wait till WP:RS says it is a war, and if they do, indeed we should name it as a war. Wikipedia's guidelines are the real deal, and we will call the event a war when WP:RS starts doing it. Cheers. Dilbaggg (talk) 19:56, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
 * If that's the case why don't people trust Wikipedia if were THIS strict? UB Blacephalon (talk) 16:56, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Sources have to first call it a war before we rename it to that, I think it’s better if we split this article to one for Palestinian protests against Israel in the west bank, and one for the ongoing intensifying conflict between Gaza and Israel. Some sources seem to be calling the ongoing intensification between gaza and israel a major conflict. Ridax2020 (talk) 18:34, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * You're right. More and more news organizations are using the word "conflict" or "war" to describe the situation. NY Times Reuters  BBC  Deutsche Welle.
 * There is an article called the Russo-Ukrainian War, although there was no formal declaration of war between Russia and Ukraine. -- Tobby72 (talk) 08:40, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

New raid on Al-Aqsa & possible violation of the ceasefire
There has been a new violent raid on Al-Aqsa mosque. if this is counted as a violation of the ceasefire it could me renewed fighting. Check citation 146.115.75.143 (talk) 15:45, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * What this is pointing to and I think it is right that you bring it up is that the "crisis" is and always was about more than just Hamas/Israel and the usual yada yada. The ceasefire is between Israel and Hamas, and now the NRC, the UN and the world and his wife are lining up to say that is only the beginning and not the end. Quite so, else we are just, as usual, waiting for the next round. The section above is around the same point.Selfstudier (talk) 17:30, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * From what I've seen in the news there was no raid, just worshippers attacking police officers = business as usual at the temple mount. &#8220;WarKosign&#8221; 18:19, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * One way of looking at it, another way is to take the position that the Israeli police shouldn't be there to begin with and then no-one would be able to throw anything at them.Selfstudier (talk) 18:35, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Israel holds all the cards in Jerusalem, yet the city has never been more divided Says it all, really.Selfstudier (talk) 18:40, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * For the record, this isn’t really business as usual. There are always lots of police in the Old City, and infighting doesn’t happen with any regularity afaik. ProcSock (talk) 10:45, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

You have an issue whereby you quote left-wing, often anti-Israel sources about Israeli matters. The agreement under Oslo was that matters pertaining to security at the compound be handed over to Israel. Don't post propaganda when you can post facts. Durdyfiv1 (talk) 20:17, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Which quote was that? I gave a link/title, I didn't quote anything. It was the agreement at Oslo to conduct a graduated handover of Area C to Palestine, what happened to that? Or is that particular fact inconvenient?Selfstudier (talk) 21:44, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Please bring a source that say that cease fire is broken. The attack by Islamists on Temple mount and self defense of Israeli police is not part of cease fire --Shrike (talk) 11:47, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, not quote, I meant cite - you cited CNN. What Oslo proposed would only come into effect once, and only if, the Palestinians accepted peace but it was violated and doesn't really hold any weight. Agree on Shrike's point. Durdyfiv1 (talk) 19:48, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Should the heading change to “Eleven-Day War (2021)”?
I have seen many news article cite the ceasefire as end of “11-day war” including AP, Chicago Tribune, SCMP ,etc. As least I think very few people would consider this as just a “crisis” following many rockets and strikes. I would support name change to conflict or war. Thitut (talk) 16:46, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * It wasn't a war. It was a conflict. Euro know (talk) 16:52, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * What seems to be happening in many sources is that they are reverting to calling it what they always called it, the Israeli Palestinian conflict or variants of that. Which seems reasonable seeing as that's what it is. Anyway, there is still an open RM that should be resolved.Selfstudier (talk) 17:26, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Could you elaborate? Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 22:48, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Damage section
We will need a retrospective Damage assessment section now that estimates are flowing in (the NYTs update article I cited mentions 1,000 homes destroyed in Gaza. Of course the section should be divided into Palestinian and Israeli. It can incorporate also material from the Casualties section. Nishidani (talk) 17:14, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Do you have a good source for totals? I can't find one yet. Ynet and walla provided some summary articles but there are no English versions I can find yet. I expect IDF or some ministry to release numbers that we can cite as official Israeli statistics. &#8220;WarKosign&#8221; 18:17, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * There are numerous sources for length of tunnels destroy, sewage work demolished, and the housing datum is of course provisory. Anything we have at the moment can be put in, and then adjusted as the official statistics from Israel, the Palestinian side, and of course reliable tertiary sources comes in.Nishidani (talk) 20:32, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The casualty figures/bombs dropped/missiles fired/etc should also be updated and we need to remove inline arbitrary inclusion of the numbers. So for example reporting what the count was as of a certain date. Obviously we should continue to include what happened on particular notable days, however. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:11, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I'd also like to condense some of the refs. In some cases more refs were added to support a slight amendment to a sentence resulting in a bit of ref overkill (I've just done it myself), but this can be condensed down to a couple of the sources verifying the whole sentence. It's a bit of a chore to do, though. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:12, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Hamas background section
Hamas history During the 1980s, Hamas sprang from the Muslim Brotherhood, through the 1990s, Hamas evolved as an armed force. After Oslo Accords were signed in 1993, Hamas carried out suicide bombings in Israel. Hamas is opposed to two-state solution, the map of Hamas for the state of Palestine includes the territories of Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank. Since the coup against Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas in Gaza, every time Israel and Palestine fight, it is a military battle between Israeli forces and Hamas’s Izzedine al-Qassam Brigades. Today, Hamas has emerged as the most powerful political entity in Palestine.

I can't see any need for this. Hamas's background is thoroughly treated in the linked article to the name. Add it, and then one would have to add other articles about the history of Israel's occupation of Gaza, its withdrawal in 2005, its economic strangulation of the territory every since, after it disagreed with the outcome of the Palestinian elections, etc.etc.etc. Why not put then for balance, Israel's background or that of IDF. All you get is bloat. The source itself is marginal: its account is pointy (ignoring that Abbas, the US and Israel tried to stage a coup against Hamas after the latter won the election etc., and it was nipped in the bud by a counter-coup.  We still have a lot of stuff to cover as the retrospective political, NGO and scholarly analyses flow/flood in.Nishidani (talk) 09:58, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Agree. While perhaps a brief background on Hamas might help with a reader’s understanding of the article, by this reasoning we would also need to include a ‘brief’ background on the State of Israel, and the conflict in general. It can’t be done, and it wouldn’t be reasonable anyway. Readers will just have to click on the respective wikilinks to learn more. ProcSock (talk) 10:38, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Not sure why this part was moved, looks more natural in its original location, i.e. part of this crisis background. Infinity Knight (talk) 18:01, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I initially moved it to a more appropriate place since it wasn't about the background but only about Hamas. Then it was taken out altogether and commented here. It doesn't seem like a particularly useful addition to the article, people who don't know about Hamas or any of the other players can simply link click out for the info and get the whole story not just edited highlights.Selfstudier (talk) 18:18, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * This is not about generic Hamas history present in other pages. The content is both about Hamas and Israel, about relevant history leading to this specific crisis. The source summarizes this crisis and its roots. Infinity Knight (talk) 19:10, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Molotov cocktails?
This has been added into the lead but none of the sources say that Molotov cocktails were thrown. The only reference to them is in a BBC source (the last one) where it says they were stockpiled but then later only mentions the stone throwing.

I think we need a source specifically saying they were thrown, I find it odd that all the other sources don't mention this.Selfstudier (talk) 11:15, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * BBC is WP:NEWSORG that not friendly towards Israel. So even if they mention it we should too Shrike (talk) 11:48, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Your sources for this assertion? The BBC has a policy of neutrality, and at various times both 'sides' accuse it of being too friendly towards the 'other side'. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:52, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Since I added it, I'm going to self revert that. In part because it's controversial and disputed and so more collaborative to discuss, and also because at a closer look the BBC mentions it for stockpiling but then omits it in the next sentence. Sources definitely support cocktails being used in other parts of Israel and the WB, like Lod and Beita but that paragraph is about al-Aqsa. There is some coverage of this on TOI and JPost but I agree it's strange that (with a quick search) it doesn't appear to be covered by international RS, except when attributed to Israeli police. Since there's a good chance it isn't true as a matter of fact, that adds to the reason to keep it out unless it's decided that it is. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:51, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Quite a few sources, such as this (no idea if this one is reliable) mention stockpiling of stones and "bottles" or molotov cocktails prior to police "raid". I didn't see a mention of throwing of the bottles anywhere, only stockpiling. &#8220;WarKosign&#8221; 12:02, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Shrike, that source that you have added is not for the same event, that is for the more recent clash and what it says is "Palestinians threw stones and Molotov cocktails towards police near the Al-Aqsa Mosque complex" and then describes where Al-Aqsa is, it doesn't even say that the Palestinians were in the compound. So it would be good if you would revert that please.Selfstudier (talk) 12:37, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I still think that BBC source is carries enough WP:DUE weight to use it Shrike (talk) 12:41, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * It can only be used to say that they were stockpiled, which is sort of not news, if you see what I mean. And I still find it strange that no-one else mentions it.Selfstudier (talk) 12:50, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * A lot of sources mentioning the stockpiling. Considering the extensive reporting about molotovs being thrown recently, and minimal reporting on them being thrown earlier, it's probably fair to conclude that they probably weren't actually thrown earlier. But I think the stockpiling is probably supported. Whether it is worth mentioning in the lead is a different thing. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 13:05, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * For what it's worth, I found that Reuters source when I was searching earlier. It's this article on Reuters' site. They actually removed that "A Reuters eyewitness said..." sentence from their own site (without any notice of amendment), if you look at archive of page from Google you'll see that it used to contain this text. I suspect Yahoo News is just behind on the sync. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 12:42, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * They now say petrol bombs. Does it the same like Molotov? --Shrike (talk) 12:49, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's the same thing. But that's not the point, it's not the same event being described in the article, those were the new clashes the other day. I am willing to concede that Palestinians used petrol bombs, I am just not convinced that they did it in the compound on the day we are considering.Selfstudier (talk) 12:54, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * According to Peter Beaumont, 'at least one firebomb' was thrown. One of the great difficulties in this area is pluralizing. One becomes 'many ', a single person's behaviour in a large crowd is then reported, mainly through border police news handouts, to characteristic of the crowd itself. No detail on where it landed, if anyone was endangered. I think it is a negligible datum, but others may well disagree.Nishidani (talk) 15:49, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Again, that seems to be the repeated clashes of the other day not the original escalation.Selfstudier (talk) 15:53, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Current event tag
Do we take this down? Or it needs to stay up a bit longer? Selfstudier (talk) 18:54, 22 May 2021 (UTC)


 * it should be auto removed by bot when the criteria is met ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 20:37, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Data conflict
I think the figure for 16 May (53) includes the casualties in the massive airstrikes on the residential buildings on 15 May when 42 were killed, many on al-Wehda Street  Nishidani (talk) 20:33, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Rocks thrown onto Western Wall Plaza
The article (section Escalation-Temple Mount) does not mention the fact that around 8:00–9:00 am on the 10th of May 2021, several rocks were thrown from the Temple Mount plateau/Haram al-Sharif onto the Western Wall Plaza. At the time, the Jewish morning prayer was being held there by students of various Religious Zionist Yeshivot (religious colleges). In my opinion, the mention of this incident, which I have personally witnessed, could add some relevant background information to the police intervention in the al-Aqsa compound. Here are two news reports referring to the event: https://fox40.com/news/national-and-world-news/palestinians-israel-police-clash-at-jerusalem-site-53-hurt/ https://thewest.com.au/news/conflict/hundreds-of-palestinians-injured-in-israel-c-2799130 Elendil 03 (talk) 21:55, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * You do know that your second source there is dated the 9th? I can't access the other source, it is one of those closed to Europeans.Selfstudier (talk) 22:07, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The closest thing in the source was "Police said protesters hurled stones at officers and onto an adjoining roadway near the Western Wall", so nothing there backs up what the editor is suggesting even if we uncritically believe one side's account of the clashes. Of 19 (talk) 00:11, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

I would recommend adding much on this in the context of the Israeli Police on the Temple Mount. There are quire a few links of stones stored in the al Aqsa mosque for the purpose of throwing on Jews at the Kotel down below. For example on Friday May 7, 2021 the police were there to stop the Arabs from trying to kill the Jews. The next night since there was outrage over the police action, some rocks made it over and the Kotel was evacuated. If anyone wants to gather the sources I think it would help even out the article.Saxophonemn (talk) 12:19, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * There may be "quite a few" sources but I assume you haven't any? Especially citing "for the purpose of throwing on Jews at the Kotel down below"? Selfstudier (talk) 13:50, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * This article (not a RS) mentions several historical precedents and says that "worshipers were actually stockpiling rocks to rain down on the Western Wall plaza". Stockpiling rocks is supported by other sources, intention is hard to prove. Probably no hurdling rocks down at the plaza took place; if it did there would probably be a lot of reports attesting to it. &#8220;WarKosign&#8221; 14:34, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

@Selfstudier: You’re right, the articles I linked to refer to the events of the previous day. I was looking for a report about the events I had witnessed, therefore, I forgot to check the date. Admittedly, there weren’t that many rocks (I counted three in my area), this is not something news typically make a fuss about (especially given the same thing had happened the day before). My impression was that the police intervention was in part meant to prevent stone throwing, but in certainly started before any successful attempt to do so judging from the noise. So I might very well have been wrong. Elendil 03 (talk) 22:18, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Schools, hospitals
Hello, the allegation against Israel of damaging schools and hospitals is unfounded. Firstly, only the first ref of the long list of refs say so ( the others are there for decorating), and it's actually a quotation from an un envoy, not a forma statement. Secondly Israel has alleged, and provided footage, that some of the rockets fall short (≈25%)... Blaming Israel doesn't respect the NPOV.

Please change it to " according to an UN envoy hospitals and schools have been damaged, by Israeli airstrikes, which Israel deny, and accuses jihadists groups of carelessly shooting rockets from civilan area and falling short on palestinan area". This is supported by many declarations.

Eg : " The IDF says some of the Gaza civilian fatalities were killed by the terror groups’ own rockets falling short and exploding in Gaza." https://www.timesofisrael.com/rocket-fire-from-gaza-halts-for-8-hours-then-renews-as-idf-continues-airstrikes/amp/

--Rectangular dome (talk) 15:28, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. The claims are not unfounded; the provided sources that mention damage to schools and hospitals (The Guardian and Al Jazeera) are both considered generally reliable as seen on the list of Perennial sources. Also, the source you provided doesn't mention damage to hospitals or schools at all. TimSmit (talk) 16:20, 20 May 2021 (UTC)


 * The Gaurdian and Al Jazera are both bi-ased. Exactly ZERO schools have been hit by Israel airstrikes. OBVIOUSLY, why would they hit a school, you people... incorrigible delinquents.
 * (and he did link source, don't you see the blue writing?)
 * --Ester9001 (talk) 19:25, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * There is extensive accounts of IDF counter claim that rockets fall short :

"More than 800 rockets were fired into Israel from Gaza since Monday, the IDF said, adding that 150 fell inside the Strip, and another 200 were intercepted by the Iron Dome." https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/cogat-announces-closure-of-gaza-border-crossing-over-rocket-fire-667730/

"Since the latest war erupted last week, Palestinian militants have fired more than 3,200 rockets at Israeli cities. Most were intercepted or fell short, in Gaza, but hundreds made it through." https://apnews.com/article/israel-middle-east-israel-palestinian-conflict-e57afb90dbc60ceda6c6cfa6888a4c5b

So far some 1,750 rockets have been fired at Israel, of which 300 fell short in the Gaza Strip, the Israeli military said. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/biden-expects-spiralling-israel-gaza-conflict-end-soon-2021-05-12/

Since then Israel has attacked hundreds of targets in Gaza, causing earth-shaking explosions across the densely populated territory. Gaza militants have fired 1,800 rockets into Israel, including more than 400 that fell short or misfired, according to the military. https://www.france24.com/en/middle-east/20210514-israel-pounds-gaza-with-air-strikes-paving-way-for-potential-ground-invasion

"Hamas continued to launch rockets almost continuously into the southern part of the country. The Israeli military said more than 2,000 rockets had been fired from Gaza since the fighting began Monday, with about 400 of them falling short and landing in Gaza itself." https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/05/14/israel-gaza-conflict-latest-updates/%3foutputType=amp

Hamas bombed the Gaza strip with hundreds of rockets, it's important to mention that, instead than partially take blind accusations whitout counterclaims.

Add "allegedly" on claims against Israel. There is absolutely no certainty on that information, it's an allegation (for now). NPOV obliged to not take side on allegations coming from both parties and their supports. --Rectangular dome (talk) 21:03, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * No answers? :-) --Rectangular dome (talk) 17:25, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Looked for an edit request, couldn't find one.Selfstudier (talk) 17:42, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

The edit request is here : "Please change it to " according to an UN envoy hospitals and schools have been damaged, by Israeli airstrikes, which Israel deny, and accuses jihadists groups of carelessly shooting rockets from civilan area and falling short on palestinan area"."

Please, change the line in the introduction to precise "according to an UN envoy" and " according to Israel hundreds of rockets have fallen short in the Gaza strip" ( 500 rockets could explain civilan casualties, so it's an important information)

The paragraph in Question, doesn't specify the source or the Israel side : " Israel began a campaign of airstrikes against Gaza; by 16 May, some 950 targeted attacks had demolished, completely or partially: 18 buildings including four high-rise towers, 40 schools and four hospitals, and also struck the al-Shati refugee camp.[39][40][41][42][43][44] In addition, at least 19 medical facilities have been damaged or destroyed by Israeli bombardment.[45] By 17 May, the United Nations estimated that Israel had demolished 94 buildings in Gaza, comprising 461 housing and commercial units.[46] " --Rectangular dome (talk) 19:27, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Update killed per Israel in the infobox
"Israel has said it killed at least 225 militants during the fighting" https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-57195537.amp

The number of militants killed hasn't been updated for days in the infobox. Change "150" to "225+" --Rectangular dome (talk) 10:42, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:16, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * This is an error. The figure is based on adding up 200+,including 25 senior commanders, as if they were distinct. WP:OR aside from dumb math. Secondly, it came from a speech by Netanyahu and is patently ridiculous. We do know for certain that 66 children were killed, and, together with women, we get to a figure of over 100 for civilian casualties. That would mean  a maximum of 143 militants if every male figure over 18 were treated as a Hamas militant (nonsense: we know the names of 2 doctors who weren't Hamas militants, and a 100% Hamas proportion for all males killed is obviously ridiculous). I have attributed to Netanyahu, but we need an official source (IDF), not some  wild pseudofactoids in a campaign pitch by the PM.  Nishidani (talk) 13:01, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Well we can also find your claims ridiculous...that's why it should be written according to Hamas, according to un envoy, according to Israel etc

I personally think Hamas has a good interest in hiding that its "army" has been obliterated and exagerating civilian casualties. It can be a powerful propaganda .--Rectangular dome (talk) 17:22, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 May 2021 (2)
The ceasefire has been broken by Israeli Defence Force 105.154.145.39 (talk) 11:24, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Source?Selfstudier (talk) 11:27, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * They would appear to be correct   BSMRD (talk) 14:05, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The ceasefire between Hamas and Israel is for the conflict in Gaza. Biden called it 'unconditional', meaning there are not conditions regarding Jerusalem or anything other than Gaza. Also, even if it was part of the ceasefire, those articles you gave said "Israeli police reportedly threw stun grenades and drove out worshippers after Palestinians threw rocks and Molotov cocktails at troops stationed in the area.", so it it's true, it's the Palestinians would have been the ones who broke the ceasefire. 84.229.154.9 (talk) 15:27, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:33, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Lead figures
Is there any reason to mention police chief Kobi Shabtai and not the cabinit member in charge of the police (Amir Ohana)? Animal lover 666 (talk) 13:47, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Ohana does not have any influence really over the police, his sole role to appoint the commissioner. Other than appointing someone, the person appointed does not have to follow his orders.--Geshem Bracha (talk) 08:49, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Casualties for the airstrikes on the 'metro'
We should update the infobox for Palestinian casualties as more information is being published regarding people who are buried in Gaza tunnels, most likely already dead. It seems IDF wasn't exaggerating when they talked about hundreds of Hamas fighters that died inside their tunnels during the Israeli airstrikes on the 14th. I thought it was a bluff by Israel but now the ministry of health in Gaza is admitting it. Please pay attention to this. I could update the infobox myself but I prefer to wait for the final number to come out. So far they talk about 320 dead in total, which would mean only dozens were killed in the Israeli airstrikes on the 'metro' instead of hundreds (maybe around 80). We should specify the number in text body as well. Also I would like to hear from other editors. Any thoughts on this?--SoaringLL (talk) 14:30, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg 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. Run n Fly (talk) 19:12, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 May 2021 (3)
I think the decision to "close" the conflict with the ceasefire was a bit over-eager, even if the Gaza ceasefire continues to hold, violence is clearly still occurring. I think the article still needs to read as though conflict is still ongoing until we can get at least 24 hours of peace, moving to past tense seems very premature. BSMRD (talk) 14:53, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Yes it seems BSMRD is right here.There was just a new raid of the same type that triggered the conflict to begin with, this needs to be reopened. 146.115.75.143 (talk) 15:45, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * No need to reopen anything (yet). The "raid" that triggered the conflict was normal police operation, Hamas just needed an excuse to attack for political reasons. Now it does not need an excuse, so this time it will not "defend" Al-Aqsa mosque. &#8220;WarKosign&#8221; 19:04, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I'd watch Sheikh Jarrah.Selfstudier (talk) 19:08, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. Run n Fly (talk) 19:11, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 May 2021 (4)
Remove the drones from the Palestinian casualties in the infobox. Drones are not casualties, we don't report lost guns or planes in a conflict as casualties either. Also, the link to the PFLP should probably link to Abu Ali Mustapha brigades, similar to the al-Aqsa martyrs, especially as the source citing their involvement refers to the brigades, not the party. BSMRD (talk) 23:46, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. I'll note that losses of material and equipment are sometimes included, for ex. Battle of Leyte Gulf (planes, ships); Battle of Ligny (guns [cannons]). In either case, this is not an uncontroversial request and consensus needs to be formed, one way or the other, on what exactly goes in the infobox and what doesn't. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs)  04:01, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

How many jews killed in unrest?
Is this the only one? https://www.timesofisrael.com/you-believed-in-coexistence-lod-jewish-man-killed-by-arab-mob-laid-to-rest/ Peregrine Fisher (talk) 14:59, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I believe they number 6. See the info box, and do your sums, taking 3 foreigners and 2 Palestinian Israelis from the figure of 11 (7, if the figure is 12).Nishidani (talk) 15:12, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Arab-Israelis are Israelis too, why are you counting Jews?--Geshem Bracha (talk) 08:54, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 May 2021 (2)
Change

On the night of 13 April, the beginning of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, an Israeli police squad raided the Haram al Sharif and, brushing aside mosque attendants, severed the loudspeaker cables used to broadcast the al-Aqsa muezzin's ritual call to prayer so that the speech being delivered by President Reuven Rivlin below, at the Western Wall, for Memorial Day in Israel would not be disturbed. At the same time, they blocked off access to the Damascus Gate where Muslim worshippers congregate during the holiday. The barriers at the Damascus Gate were eventually removed some two weeks later in the wake of protests. On 15 April, a TikTok video of a Palestinian teen slapping an ultra-orthodox Jewish man went viral, leading to several copycat incidents. The next day, tens of thousands of Palestinian worshippers were turned away from al-Aqsa, on the first Friday of Ramadan when Israel imposed a 10,000-person limit on prayers at the mosque. On the same day, a Rabbi was beaten in Jaffa causing two days of protests. On 22 April, the far-right Jewish supremacist group Lehava held a march through Jerusalem chanting "death to Arabs". On 23 April, after a fringe military groups fired 36 rockets at southern Israel, the IDF launched missiles at Hamas targets in the Gaza Strip. In the following days, a Palestinian boy and a 19-year-old Israeli settler were killed. On 6 May, the Israel Police shot and killed a 16 year-old Palestinian during a raid of Nablus in the West Bank.

to

On 8 April at 2 AM, 15 Jewish families, accompanied by an Israeli police force, entered houses in Silwan bought from their Palestinian owners by the Ateret Cohanim organization. Fireworks and stones were launched at the houses and at vehicles including that of a Meretz Jerusalem councilmember who came to support Palestinian residents. Al-Aqsa preacher and former Jerusalem grand mufti Ekrima Sa'id Sabri issued a fatwa calling to boycott the sellers. He was arrested two days later on 10 April. On 9 April, Israeli police beat Member of Knesset Ofer Cassif during a protest against planned evictions of Palestinians in Sheikh Jarrah. On 10 April, an Israeli bus was pelted with stones and set on fire in the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Isawiya.

On the night of 13 April, the beginning of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, an Israeli police squad raided the Al-Aqsa mosque and, brushing aside mosque attendants, severed the loudspeaker cables used to broadcast the al-Aqsa muezzin's ritual call to prayer so that the speech being delivered by President Reuven Rivlin below, at the Western Wall, for Memorial Day in Israel would not be disturbed. At the same time, they blocked off access to much of the Damascus Gate plaza, a popular place of congregation for local Palestinians, including Muslim worshippers, during the holiday. Spokesmen for police variously claimed the barriers were installed in order to prevent friction and ensure safe access to the Haram al Sharif, as preemptive riot control or in order to allow better pedestrian flow into the old city Violent clashes between Israeli police and Palestinians erupted at the Damascus Gate that same night, with Palestinians hurling rocks at passing busses. Clashes continued nightly thereafter until barriers were removed by police on 25 April. On 15 April, a TikTok video of a Palestinian teen slapping an ultra-orthodox Jewish man went viral, leading to several copycat incidents. The next day, tens of thousands of Palestinian worshippers were turned away from al-Aqsa, on the first Friday of Ramadan when Israel limited prayer in the Al-Aqsa mosque to 10,000 vaccinated Palestinians due to "'high morbidity rates' from coronavirus in Palestinian Authority areas". On the same day, a Rabbi enquiring about an apartment was beaten in Jaffa causing two days of protests. Arab protesters chanted "settlers, go home" and clashed, hurling rocks and fireworks, with police who separated between them and a Jewish protest. Tensions have been fueled by gentrification by Jews of traditionally Arab Jaffa. On the night of 21 April, clashes broke between Jews and Arabs in downtown Jerusalem. On the night of 22 April, the far-right Jewish supremacist group Lehava held a march through Jerusalem "to restore Jewish dignity", ending at the Damascus Gate, while chanting "death to Arabs". A group of Jews also attacked a home in the Old City, attempting to set it on fire, while a group of Arabs attacked a Jewish driver and set his vehicle on fire in Wadi Joz. Over 100 Palestinians and 20 policemen were injured in clashes that night. The following days saw a spike in attacks on Jews throughout Jerusalem including stone throwings, firebombings and mob beatings. On 25 April a Jewish youth was attacked by Arabs in the mixed Jewish-Arab city of Ramle while three Arab workers were attacked by a group of Jews in Jerusalem. On 23 April, after fringe military groups fired 36 rockets at southern Israel, the IDF launched missiles at Hamas targets in the Gaza Strip. In the following days, a 19-year-old Israeli settler was killed in a drive-by shooting while waiting for a bus at Tapuach junction in the West Bank and a 16 year-old Palestinian was shot and killed by Israeli troops during a raid of Nablus in the West Bank. "

Changes in bold and strikethrough :

"On 8 April at 2 AM, 15 Jewish families, accompanied by an Israeli police force, entered houses in Silwan bought from their Palestinian owners by the Ateret Cohanim organization. Fireworks and stones were launched at the houses and at vehicles including that of a Meretz Jerusalem councilmember who came to support Palestinian residents. Al-Aqsa preacher and former Jerusalem grand mufti Ekrima Sa'id Sabri issued a fatwa calling to boycott the sellers. He was arrested two days later on 10 April. On 9 April, Israeli police beat Member of Knesset Ofer Cassif during a protest against planned evictions of Palestinians in Sheikh Jarrah. On 10 April, an Israeli bus was pelted with stones and set on fire in the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Isawiya. 

On the night of 13 April, the beginning of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, an Israeli police squad raided the Haram al Sharif Al-Aqsa mosque and, brushing aside mosque attendants, severed the loudspeaker cables used to broadcast the al-Aqsa muezzin's ritual call to prayer so that the speech being delivered by President Reuven Rivlin below, at the Western Wall, for Memorial Day in Israel would not be disturbed. At the same time, they blocked off access to much of to the Damascus Gate plaza where , a popular place of congregation for local Palestinians, including  Muslim worshippers, congregate during the holiday.  Spokesmen for police variously claimed the barriers were installed in order to prevent friction and ensure safe access to the Haram al Sharif, as preemptive riot control or in order to allow better pedestrian flow into the old city  The barriers at the Damascus Gate were eventually removed some two weeks later in the wake of protests. '''Violent clashes between Israeli police and Palestinians erupted at the Damascus Gate that same night, with Palestinians hurling rocks at passing busses. Clashes continued nightly thereafter until barriers were removed by police on 25 April. ''' On 15 April, a TikTok video of a Palestinian teen slapping an ultra-orthodox Jewish man went viral, leading to several copycat incidents. The next day, tens of thousands of Palestinian worshippers were turned away from al-Aqsa, on the first Friday of Ramadan when Israel imposed a limited prayer in the Al-Aqsa mosque to 10,000 -person vaccinated Palestinians limit on prayers at the mosque due to "'high morbidity rates' from coronavirus in Palestinian Authority areas".  On the same day, a Rabbi enquiring about an apartment was beaten in Jaffa causing two days of protests. '''Arab protesters chanted "settlers, go home" and clashed, hurling rocks and fireworks, with police who separated between them and a Jewish protest. Tensions have been fueled by gentrification by Jews of traditionally Arab Jaffa.  On the night of 21 April, clashes broke between Jews and Arabs in downtown Jerusalem.  On the night of 22 April, the far-right Jewish supremacist group Lehava held a march through Jerusalem "to restore Jewish dignity", ending at the Damascus Gate where Palestinians had been protesting nightly, while chanting "death to Arabs".  A group of Jews also attacked a home in the Old City, attempting to set it on fire, while a group of Arabs attacked a Jewish driver and set his vehicle on fire in Wadi Joz. Over 100 Palestinians and 20 policemen were injured in clashes that night. The following days saw a spike in attacks on Jews throughout Jerusalem including stone throwings, firebombings and mob beatings. On 25 April a Jewish youth was attacked by Arabs in the mixed Jewish-Arab city of Ramle while three Arab workers were attacked by a group of Jews in Jerusalem. ''' On 23 April, after a fringe military groups fired 36 rockets at southern Israel, the IDF launched missiles at Hamas targets in the Gaza Strip. In the following days, a Palestinian boy and a 19-year-old Israeli settler was killed in a drive-by shooting while waiting for a bus at Tapuach junction in the West Bank were killed. On 6 May, the Israel Police shot and killed and a 16 year-old Palestinian was shot and killed by Israeli troops during a raid of Nablus in the West Bank.  "

These changes expand on the housing factor to the riots (Silwan, Jaffa, prior protest in Sheikh Jarrah), expand on the sequence of violence and fix factual issues such as the blocking off of the Damascus Gate (the gate itself was open, the steps going down to the plaza were blocked off) and a double report of the death of the same Palestinian teen. All added information is sourced. The original text might have changed a bit since I starting writing this yesterday.

Elsewhere in the article, there appears to be a double mention of the death of a Lebanese protestor, who was also a reserve Hezbollah fighter. The mention in the infobox cites Al Jazeera but I cannot find any other mention on the web of a second protestor dying, and the 3 sources cited for the mention in the body of the article don't mention a second protestor being killed, just the same man Mohammad Tahhan, while another protestor was injured. 93.172.116.31 (talk) 17:15, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

--


 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. This type of requested change is outside the scope of an edit request.  A new discussion would need to take place to establish a WP:CONSENSUS that these changes are needed and supported by the Core Content Policies.   Eggishorn  (talk) (contrib) 20:45, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

About Sheikh Jarrah property dispute subarticle:
the subarticle here starts with: "The long-running dispute over land in Sheikh Jarrah is considered a microcosm of the Israeli–Palestinian disputes over land since 1948.[66] Israel's laws allow Jews to file claims over land in the West Bank and East Jerusalem which they have owned prior to 1948, but reject Palestinian claims over land in Israel which they owned.[67][68][69][70]"

well there is a lot of unaccurasy here: 1. every person, Jewish, Muslim, Arab, Druze, and others can claim ownership to property owned prior to 1948 and after it, by law, many non Israeli ciztizens Palestinians fails to claim property ownership in Israel, since Israeli law granted the state of Israel all the lands it had control in after the end of 1947–1949 Palestine war, the disputed land, was bought by jewish trust prior to the war, and it was residented by Palestinian refugees but Jordan didnt make it an eminent domain after conquering west bank in 1948, and therefore by law, the land ownership remained under its owners of prior to the war. - both laws considered legal by both Israeli and UN Rules. saying that the law is only pro jewish is absurd since Israeli Court also evicted 350 resident of Amona Settelment, after Palestinians showed ownership papers of the land.

in 1982 the residents and the owners came to agreement states that: the resident acknowledge the owner's ownership of the land, and agreed to pay rent to avoid evictions. In 1993 the owners requested eviction of the residents for not paying rent. Some residents asked for cancelation of the agreement, but Israeli court denyied the plea, non agreement between the land owners and its residents, and the residents refusal to pay rent is the main reason of the treat of eviction by the court verdict.

you may add other groups Interpretations of the events, but this is just Interpretations, and not the reasons that given by the court verdict which are being justified by Israel laws.


 * Try and remember to sign. OK, there is an article currently titled Sheikh Jarrah property dispute that is being looked at right now and you might be better off trying to influence that because ultimately what's in there will end up in here (a shorter version). Also we really need secondary sources commenting on things, what courts said and so on is primary source material, what we want is newspapers, scholars and so on commenting on those primary sources. Lastly, if you want to ask for an edit here, you need to say what specifically you want altered or added, change X to Y, that sort of thing, like it is done further up the page and provide those secondary sources in support of your proposed changes.Selfstudier (talk) 18:38, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

sorry I am new just learned to sign, ty for the help.

this is more updates with links:

the subarticle here starts with: "The long-running dispute over land in Sheikh Jarrah is considered a microcosm of the Israeli–Palestinian disputes over land since 1948.[66] Israel's laws allow Jews to file claims over land in the West Bank and East Jerusalem which they have owned prior to 1948, but reject Palestinian claims over land in Israel which they owned.[67][68][69][70]"

well there is a lot of unaccurasy here: 1. every person, Jewish, Muslim, Arab, Druze, and others can claim ownership to property owned prior to 1948 and after it, by law, many non Israeli ciztizens Palestinians fails to claim property ownership in Israel, since Israeli law granted the state of Israel all the lands it had control in after the end of 1947–1949 Palestine war, the disputed land, was bought by jewish trust prior to the war, and it was residented by Palestinian refugees but Jordan didnt make it an eminent domain after conquering west bank in 1948. . Therefore by law, the land ownership remained under its owners of prior to the war. - both laws considered legal by both Israeli and UN Rules. saying that the law is only pro jewish is absurd since Israeli Court also evicted 350 resident of Amona Settelment, after Palestinians showed ownership papers of the land.

in 1982 the residents and the owners came to agreement states that: the resident acknowledge the owner's ownership of the land, and agreed to pay rent to avoid evictions. In 1993 the owners requested eviction of the residents for not paying rent. Some residents asked for cancelation of the agreement, but Israeli court denyied the plea, non agreement between the land owners and its residents, and the residents refusal to pay rent is the main reason of the treat of eviction by the court verdict.

you may add other groups Interpretations of the events, but this is just Interpretations, and not the reasons that given by the court verdict which are being justified by Israel laws. Nahnieli (talk) 19:11, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Interpreting laws is complex. We need WP:SECONDARY sources for that, especially in complex and highly-controversial situations like this one, and especially when (at a glance) an editor is arguing for an interpretation that seems to contradict all existing secondary sources.  Do you have decent reliable secondary sources that interpret it the way you say? --Aquillion (talk) 22:09, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Censorship with extra steps
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2021_Israel%E2%80%93Palestine_crisis&diff=1024662164&oldid=1024660749 Baratiiman (talk) 13:20, 23 May 2021 (UTC)


 * What are you talking about? Not a single sentence was removed in that edit, except the removal of one source (Times of Israel) (hence the negative diff delta) that didn't seem to verify extra info and seemed redundant to the existing sources. Suggest you strike the accusation. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 13:26, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2021_Israel%E2%80%93Palestine_crisis&diff=1024656315&oldid=1024655739 Baratiiman (talk) 14:07, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Ah, so that's what the issue is about. Yes, I didn't think your section dedicated to the 'tech' used by each side (with sources including: JNS, Fox News, Forbes contributors, Business Insider) was appropriate. I wasn't the only one who objected to this. Perhaps other editors can help advise on how and where to best include it. I don't immediately see where it could fit in, but it might be able to fit in somewhere, but not under its own section. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 14:14, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't object to a dispassionate analysis from some reliable sources about relative techs but the presentation was a bit limited and I didn't really understand the purpose of including that material.Selfstudier (talk) 14:21, 23 May 2021 (UTC)