Talk:2023 Israel–Hamas ceasefire/Archive 1

Title
What sources are calling this a "ceasefire"? The ones I see seem to be calling it a pause or truce;. 331dot (talk) 08:57, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
 * The Guardian, Haaretz, and NYT. That said, we haven't seen the text. kencf0618 (talk) 15:02, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
 * If there even is an actual document. 331dot (talk) 21:36, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I think it's actually a truce., Homerethegreat (talk) 08:35, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
 * This article refers to the differences. I think truce better reflects the situation, what do you think? Homerethegreat (talk) 08:36, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, I endorse "truce". Israel has made it clear that the war is continuing. 331dot (talk) 10:18, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I can agree. Truce would be better than "ceasefire." And what happens when a (possible, but unlikely) permanent ceasefire begins? That would justify changing the article name as well. Historyday01 (talk) 13:13, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Truce is a redirect to ceasefire, because they're the same thing. They can be anything from very short-term to permanent. X2023X (talk) 20:52, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Wait. If the short description has the word "truce" then why not the entire article? Historyday01 (talk) 21:03, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Hamas broke ceasefire.
Reported that Hamas fired rockets into Israel 15 mins after the ceasefire began. Source Tankcomdestroyer (talk) 14:55, 24 November 2023 (UTC)


 * It takes a while for ceasefires to settle in. That's how these things work. kencf0618 (talk) 15:01, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I've heard that Israel broke the ceasefire as well... Historyday01 (talk) 17:05, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Suggestion
I suggest to add the Template Current. I feel that information may change rapidly as the event progresses. - Selvasivagurunathan m (talk) 14:41, 25 November 2023 (UTC)


 * The template was removed by a bot as this article is not being constantly edited, and that template should not be used for more than a day. 331dot (talk) 14:54, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is a very good idea. Historyday01 (talk) 15:01, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Appreciate your help by providing a response. I understood now. - Selvasivagurunathan m (talk) 14:57, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

On the Health Ministry
Whenever an article says "Hamas-controlled" or "Hamas-run" health ministry, the framing is intended to be biased, because obviously a government institution is run by the government of Gaza. We don't say "American-run DHHS." Bisexual Antifa Terrorist (talk) 22:52, 24 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Most reliable sources use that phrasing, like the BBC. If you disagree with their use of that phrasing, you need to take that up with them, not us. It's used because Hamas took over governing Gaza by force in 2007. 331dot (talk) 14:57, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * "Hamas-run," IMO, is blatant POV, and part of the media bias that shouldn't be stated in wikivoice. The UN/WHO (don't remember which) say that they consider data from the ministry to be reliable. —M3ATH (Moazfargal · Talk) 21:32, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I have removed "Hamas-controlled" from the article accordingly. —M3ATH (Moazfargal · Talk) 21:34, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
 * User:David O. Johnson readded the phrase. It is true that RS say that the ministry is Hamas-controlled, but this is, once again, part of the media bias. Not saying that these sources aren't reliable, but they are biased and we shouldn't be taking these biases into Wikipedia.
 * Take this example: If the American department of commerce says that the American economy is doing well, do we say: "The Democrat-run DoC says this or that?" No, because it would sound like we are discrediting the information.
 * The Gaza Heath Ministry is trusted by the WHO and rights groups like the Human Rights Watch See this source. —M3ATH (Moazfargal · Talk) 12:10, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree. I think we should remove "Hamas-controlled" or "Hamas-run" Historyday01 (talk) 13:34, 28 November 2023 (UTC)


 * It should be restored. Gaza and the West Bank are supposed to be governed as a single entity, but Hamas took over Gaza by force in 2007.  This is why "Hamas controlled" is used in the media. 331dot (talk) 13:40, 28 November 2023 (UTC)


 * For a long discussion on this, see also: --Orgullomoore ( talk ) 16:29, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Failed verification on "prevention of Red Cross visits" statement
Failed verification for the reference following this statement:

Reference: "Israeli official says Hamas has enough hostages to cover 2–3 day truce extension". Reuters. 29 November 2023.

Looks like something went wrong with the references there.

Torr3 (talk) 15:53, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Broken note
There is a broken cite note next to this statement:

Torr3 (talk) 15:57, 2 December 2023 (UTC)


 * This has now been fixed. Torr3 (talk) 17:35, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Edit Request
The second to last paragraph of the "Incidents during ceasefire" section shifts into present tense until the end of the paragraph. Could someone with permission to do so change the tense to match the rest of the section? I mean where it starts with "As of 29 November 2023," Ultraneutral (talk) 02:30, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Imprisonment for speech and nonviolent protest.
Vox is a bias source and shouldn't be used as a citation of a claim that would be disputed. The article isn't of good quality, for example they say that Palestinians in the west bank are tried in military courts, but this is only true for zone C as I understand it. DanMan08 (talk) 13:45, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
 * According to WP:RSPVOX Vox is generally considered reliable. A source being biased does not in and of itself preclude its use on Wikipedia, as all sources have bias, unless you are alleging it is so biased that they discard basic journalism standards or just make things up out of whole cloth. To challenge the reliability of a source, visit the reliable sources noticeboard. 331dot (talk) 14:12, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Exactly. I have a sense the OP made the comment they did because they dislike what the source is proving. Historyday01 (talk) 14:45, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
 * DanMan08, Wikipedia tries to be written from a neutral point of view. The media has its own biases no matter the topic. We're just summarizing what the sources with different points of view say. While many people will disagree with some statements in this article (including myself), this does not mean that Arab-Israeli conflict-related articles are trying to take sides. See Neutral point of view/FAQ. — Davest3r08 > : )  (talk)  12:52, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Edit request opening text weighted language
The section "On 1 December, the truce ended with Hamas alleging that Israel rejected a hostage exchange deal to prolong the truce, and Hamas then launched rockets into Sderot. Israel responded with air raids on Gaza with the Gaza Health Ministry reporting 20 deaths" is not supported by the sources linked or rather the language used is heavily weighted.

"and Hamas then launched rockets into Sderot." none of the three sources linked verify this information the only source is an IDF claim that a single (not multiple) rocket was intercepted by the Iron Dome. Comparatively multiple sources detail the resumption of IDF bombings in Gaza which would be the resumption of violence. At the same time the statement made by Hamas in this section is defined as "Alleging" showing a rather weighted bias in claims by opposing forces and indeed the Hamas claim would also mean Israel's refusal to be a breaking of the truce.

I think a re-writing of the section to "Israel claimed Hamas resumed rocket fire thus resumed their attack on Gaza" would be more accurate. Galdrack (talk) 17:54, 26 December 2023 (UTC)