Talk:Battle of Beit Hanoun

The Battle of Beit Hanoun is a battle taking place in Beit Hanoun
Is it necessary to say in the lede that "The Battle of Beit Hanoun is an ongoing battle ... taking place in Beit Hanoun"? It seems a bit repetitive to me, is there a better way of phrasing this or is it Wiki standard to phrase it this way? SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 04:53, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Neutrality contested
I think the neutrality of this article is heavily contested. Actually it is more like a piece of Al Jazeera propaganda machine website. It says Israelis are withdrawn from beit hanoun, which is certainly wrong and also it says Beit hanoun become depopulated, then says people returns to the town, paradox. The fact is that 252nd infantry division which is the combat division, evacuated the city after fully Israeli victory and hand over the city to the Gaza Division of IDF. The city now under Israeli control and the result of battle is certainly Israeli victory. Also on map description it says "claimed" Israeli advance, but this "claimed" is not exist for Hamas' side. Somebody should correct this. AmSiDeAth (talk) 12:00, 28 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Al Jazeera is RS, I don’t know what sources say the city is under Israeli occupation. Many locals there are also reporting that there are no vehicles or soldiers in the city, and also post videos which can be geolocated including the welcome to Beit hanoun sign The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 08:26, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * that Times of Israel report, which is mentioned in references says Beit hanoun is under Israeli control (Gaza Division of IDF).
 * Also, if Israelis are left the city which side control the city now? Hamas? I think all sources (except AJ) says that Israel controls the city. AmSiDeAth (talk) 15:48, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * From what date? Israel declared that Beit hanoun was under their control on December 18, and they withdrew on the 24th, proven by residents photographing the aftermath of the battle and reporting an absence of forces The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 06:08, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
 * If Israel left the city on December 24, which side controls the city right now? Hamas? Also, ISW and other institutions that follow the war closely and prepare maps of the conflicts, continue to show Beit Hanoun under Israeli control. And I think I don't need to say that ISW prepares its maps based on satellite images and not Israel's claims, that is, if it shows this city under Israeli control, Israeli soldiers must be present in the city. AmSiDeAth (talk) 19:51, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
 * ISW seems to show all the areas that have been under Israeli control, as it doesn’t depict Israeli forces withdrawing from any areas, for example the Port of Gaza which is still shown as being part of Israeli “clearing operations” on the map though proven by videos taken of the place in the November ceasefire shows absence of Israeli forces for over a month.
 * Aljazeera is a reliable source, and one of the only ones that has reporters in Gaza itself, so the claim that “Israel withdrew from Beit hanoun” followed by reporters going there, showing several landmarks including the entrance sign, as well as reporting absence of Israeli troops or vehicles means that it is substantiated The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 13:46, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Now two questions arise. firstly, if Israel has withdrawn from Beit Hanoun, Gaza Port, etc., then these areas are now under the control of Hamas? Because one side has to rulling these areas. And if the answer to the first question is yes, then why is the result of the Battle of Beit Hanoun written as Inconclusive, because if Hamas controls Beit Hanoun, Hamas terrorists are won this battle. AmSiDeAth (talk) 20:23, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
 * "Institute for the Study of War (ISW)" has published a new report where it mentionined that Hamas and allied faction fighters have again infltrated the areas from where Israeli forces withdrawn due to re-positioning. https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/iran-update-january-16-2024 Sam6897 (talk) 11:39, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I’m not sure if I should say “Palestinian victory” yet. According to local journalists Beit hanoun still does not have israeli military presence and the ISW reports that Saraya al quds have launched missiles from there indicating paramilitaries still have ground there and that Israel had failed to dismantle the paramilitaries there
 * https://twitter.com/HossamShabat/status/1747614666925158806
 * https://twitter.com/HossamShabat/status/1747581224997073242 The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 07:39, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Outcome
This is specifcially for the northern axis of gaza. In December, when israel had just withdrawn from beit hanoun, i labelled the battle "inconclusive" as the withdrawal seemed voluntary with a weakened hamas in the town. However the palestinian militants seem rooted in their towns and have even attacked israeli forces stationed east of beit hanoun readily. In this case, would it not be a clear vicotry for the militants as israeli forces have failed to clear the towns? I will try to discuss before changing The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 14:43, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 April 2024
I would like reword the article and change the words Hamas says, to Hamas claims. I believe Hamas says (albeit true as they are "saying") paints the wrong picture as if these claims are facts. Nowhere have we seen destroyed Merkava tanks. I believe the article would be better worded as "Hamas claims." As these are in fact claims.

claims 1. state or assert that something is the case, typically without providing evidence or proof.

^Evidence provided above. IdontreadonlyLEAD (talk) 23:56, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone may add them for you. — Sirdog (talk) 05:09, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Awesome. Is there a way to close this request window? Or should I not worry? IdontreadonlyLEAD (talk) 09:20, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 April 2024
"In spite of this, clashes continued in the town with Israeli forces retreating on the 24th of December"

^ 4th line of the first paragraph. I am proposing a change of "retreating" to "withdrawing."

Britannica Dictionary definition of RETREAT 1
 * movement by soldiers away from an enemy because the enemy is winning or has won a battle.

Britannica Dictionary definition of WITHDRAWAL 1 [count] a : an act of moving something away or taking something away The general authorized the withdrawal of troops from the fields. a withdrawal of support b : an act of ending your involvement in something He announced his withdrawal from the campaign. [=announced that he would no longer be involved in the campaign]

It is evidently a IDF withdrawal. The editor who wrote that knows what narrative they are attempting to construct with the use of retreat. The use of the word retreat here is used as a connotation, in an attempt to construct the narrative that the IDF have suffered a military defeat.

Total lack of neutrality and a clear bias shown. Egregious wording in an attempt to construct a narrative in which the IDF have been handed a military defeat at the hands of Hamas. IdontreadonlyLEAD (talk) 08:35, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:05, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 April 2024 (2)
"On 15 November, Hamas announced that it destroyed four Israeli vehicles with Yasin 105 rocket propelled grenades in Beit Hanoun."

I am proposing that announced be changed into claims.

Claims; to say that something is true or is a fact, although you cannot prove it and other people might not believe it:

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/claim

Announced has the connotation of that which is being announced, is factual information. IdontreadonlyLEAD (talk) 08:41, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:05, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 April 2024 (3)
The IDF claimed to have advanced beyond the city on or prior to 12 November, and it released a video showing the IDF Harel Brigade operating south of Beit Hanoun.

I am proposing a change from "claimed" to "announced".

Claims; to say that something is true or is a fact, although you cannot prove it and other people might not believe it:

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/claim

Evidence was produced of the IDF Harel Brigade operating south of Beit Hanoun. Evidently they have advanced beyond the city. With evidence produced it is no longer a "claim"

Claim is used here by the editor in another attempt to paint a false narrative of a Hamas military victory.

Once again, egregious editing on this page. A clear bias is shown with repeated attempts to minimize IDF successes. There are repeated attempts on this page to use "claims" for the IDF, whereas it is the opposite for Hamas alleged successes.

Evidence of bias;

The Al-Qassam Brigades said that it detonated an anti-personnel improvised explosive device (IED) targeting IDF forces sheltering in a house in Beit Hanoun.

Al-Qassam brigade "said" IdontreadonlyLEAD (talk) 08:56, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:05, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 April 2024 (4)
On 31 October, Israeli forces claimed to have advanced into the outskirts of Beit Hanoun to conduct clearing operations, in an attempt to besiege Gaza City.[14]

This sentence needs to be reworded.

This is my proposed change, remove the words "claimed to have advanced"

"On 31 October, Israeli forces advanced into the outskirts of Beit Hanoun to conduct clearing operations, in an attempt to besiege Gaza City.[14]"

This sentence is cited with this article, https://www.euronews.com/2023/11/01/israel-hamas-war-in-maps-israeli-forces-advance-in-to-beit-hanoun.

Excerpt from said article;

"as of 31 October, Israeli forces advanced into Beit Hanoun in the northeastern Gaza Strip to conduct clearing operations and extended their positions along the coastal line in the northwestern Gaza Strip."

It is not a claim that they advanced.

Claims; to say that something is true or is a fact, although you cannot prove it and other people might not believe it:

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/claim

More evidence of IDF advance;

"A second point at which Israeli forces appear to have entered Gaza is from the northeastern corner of the Strip near the town of Beit Hanoun, according to footage and satellite imagery. Video distributed by the Israeli army and geolocated by CNN shows dozens of soldiers advancing on foot across sandy terrain and, in a different clip, a bulldozer pushing through sandy soil to create a lane free from IEDs (improvised explosive devices)."

https://edition.cnn.com/middleeast/live-news/israel-hamas-war-gaza-news-10-31-23/index.html IdontreadonlyLEAD (talk) 09:04, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Please stop creating duplicate requests.  (talk | contribs) 09:12, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * None of these are duplicate requests. They are all for different sentences throughout the page. It is not my problem that there are similar mistakes throughout. Not a good look for you, evidently you have not read my proposed changes before you commented. IdontreadonlyLEAD (talk) 09:19, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * You have submitted 6 separate requests on this talk page, most of which seem to be pro-Israel and requests for wording changes. Please slow down and stop submitting requests every half-hour. Thank you.  (talk | contribs) 09:27, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * All for different issues. Pot calling the kettle black, on the 8th of April you made 10 contributions in less than one hour. With all my edits I have provided citations and reasoning. Why do you not rebuff my arguments. Instead you attack me for making 6 edits, in a time deemed by you to be too fast. If I am breaking a rule, then show me what rule I am breaking. If you do not like my proposed changes then go ahead, rebuff them. All you seem to be doing is accusing me of being pro-Israel and telling me to "slow down."
 * What kind of rebuttal is that "slow down."
 * This is a literal Ad hominem attack.
 * You are a Journeyman Level 3 editor engaging in an Ad Hominem attack. IdontreadonlyLEAD (talk) 09:46, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Woah... perhaps we should get a more experienced editor to look into this issue.  (talk | contribs) 09:49, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree. Invite them along please.
 * To the more experienced editor, If the problem is the multiple edits on the same page. I was under the impression that different edits for different sections/sentences would have to have their own separate edit request. If the problem is the multiple edits, next time ill collate them all into one edit request instead of 6 separate requests.
 * Thank you, IdontreadonlyLEAD (talk) 09:56, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I've asked for help of other editors at WP:ANI. In addition, yes, there is a guideline on making multiple requests, at WP:MAKINGEREQ,   (talk | contribs) 10:22, 8 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Just to note, I came here via my watchlist and not AN/I. I will take a look at the article and the edit requests later today. I haven’t looked through all the them besides a quick skim so far, so I cannot say if they should be done, not done, or discussed before being done yet. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 11:47, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:04, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Why is the status "Palestinian victory"?
I just keep seeing people make biased edits in all these pages of this war. The IDF took over Beit Hanoun and disbanded the local battalion from fighting like an orderly battalion. However, they withdrew since everything was destroyed. Then, later it was reported that PIJ launched a rocket from there. I think it should be in status of ongoing on the main battle. רונלד15 (talk) 14:11, 9 April 2024 (UTC)


 * The IDF advanced beyond Beit Hanoun on November 12, but they never exerted full control of the city. Qassam brigades continued targeting Israeli forces in the city throughout December
 * Hamas is not a conventional army, so “dismantling battalions” does not mean anything here as they can regroup easily, just as what happened with the rest of north Gaza.
 * The claim that they dismantled Hamas is challenged by this: Hamas continues to keep attacking Israeli forces even before the withdrawal. There were still fierce clashes and they weren’t able to control the town. After Israeli withdrawal the situation was unclear and I was hesitant to put a result, but it became increasingly obvious that the militants presence in Beit Hanoun was still very significant and nullified all clearing operations. For example, like you said, the PIJ using to launch rockets into Israel. Also, the Al Aqsa martyrs brigades shooting down a drone over Beit Hanoun, the mujahideen brigades shelling Israeli forces east of the town, and Hamas, which Israel claimed to have dismantled in Beit Hanoun, launching attacks on and sniping soldiers there.
 * https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/iran-update-february-22-2024
 * Videos uploaded by Hamas targeting IDF east of Beit Hanoun in March
 * https://www.aljazeera.net/amp/videos/2024/3/8/شاهد-كتائب-القسام-تقنص-ضابطا
 * https://www.aljazeera.net/amp/programs/2024/3/10/شاهد-القسام-يلقي-قذيفتين-بمسيرة-على
 * In late March Israel launched an incursion into northeast Beit Hanoun which Hamas was able to confront. Israel invaded Gaza with two goals, to destroy Hamas and to rescue the hostages, both goals in which it had failed fighting in beit Hanoun, and despite razing the town to the ground the IDF was demonstrably unable to destroy or greatly reduce militant activity in the area which is why it says “Palestinian victory”
 * Operations in Beit Hanoun published by Qassam Brigades
 * https://www.aljazeera.net/amp/programs/2024/3/26/شاهد-القسام-تدمر-آليتين-عسكريتين The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 06:30, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * How is it obvious that the militant presence in Beit Hanoun is still significant? You have 3 videos published by Hamas and you have deduced that a significant presence still exists? "nullified all clearing operations" that is a bold claim. No IDF sources say this. IdontreadonlyLEAD (talk) 09:09, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I have provided several sources, more than one that indicate not only hamas, but other groups are still operating in beit hanoun well after israel "declared victory". You are intentionally overlooking the other sources The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 09:58, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Sporadic attacks are different to a significant presence. Israel claims to have destroyed significant tunnel infrastructure and captured all Hamas compounds in Beit Hanoun. According to them (IDF) they achieved their goals and handed over responsibility to the Gaza division. Because Militants have returned doesn't mean that the IDF lost the battle. What sources am I over looking? IdontreadonlyLEAD (talk) 11:21, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Sporadic attacks would be an occasional attack here and there. Based on these sources not only is this presence continuous, but also by multiple factions. Not to mention several other attacks not covered here. I was initially hesitant, you can see in the older messages but the amount of attacks and continued presence points to a compleet failure to defeat or degrade militants there
 * reference this map, where the sporadic attacks appear as a faded purple, while the attacks in and around beit hanoun are more opaque following "israel dismantling the battalions". Also note the high concentration of attacsk in north gaza where hamas is upposedly "dismantled"
 * https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/iran-update-april-3-2024 The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 14:49, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/iran-update-april-3-2024 The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 14:49, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Status in infobox
The status previously read: Main Battle: Palestinian victory Incursions: ongoing. I edited this here to Ongoing. My edit summary reads: Failed verification. Sources do not mention Beit Hanoun let alone "victory". Please don't try to write the article in the infobox - ie the claim is not supported by the refs cited nor is it supported by the body of the article.

This was reverted by withe the edit summary: I have literally put sources both verifying Israeli withdrawal and the continued control of militants, how is that not a victory? Do I really need to drag the sources from the battle section, then two additional references were added with the edit summary: Me when I’m in a “admit Israel lost a battle” and my opponent is a Wikipedia editor so that it now reads as follows:


 * Main Battle: Palestinian victory  Incursions: ongoing.

Aljazeera mentions ... withdrawal of the 13th battalion of the Golani Brigade ... but does not mention Beit Hanoun. Roya News reports: the Israeli occupation army withdrew from Beit Hanoun in the northern Gaza Strip. Neither mention defeat, victory or that the withdrawal was forced by Hamas. What we do know is that the IDF came, it wreaked death and destruction, it left the city and took up positions outside the city, some Hamas came back and fighting has continued. Withdrawal and retreat are not synonymous. While a retreat or forced withdrawal might be construed as defeat, the sources are not telling us this. Labeling this as a Palestinian victory on the basis that the IDF chose to withdraw and some Hamas came back is an editor's conclusion or opinion. It is not what sources are telling us. It is WP:SYNTH and/or WP:OR. Furthermore, we don't usually declare a victor at half-time (ie while the battle is still ongoing). We wait until the sources tell us the fighting is over and, if there is a result where one side has been called the victor in a consensus of WP:RSs, then we should write the body of the article to reflect this and then populate the result parameter. Cinderella157 (talk) 08:44, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Also both those sources, Al-Jazeera and Royanews use the term occupation army. I struggle to believe these articles have any neutrality what so ever. IdontreadonlyLEAD (talk) 09:14, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Israel is objectively an occupation army, and wether people like it or not AJ is a reliable source. It is also the sole news agency to operate independently of the IDF in gaza, so in many cases it is the only source The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 10:13, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Might not be reliable in some situations, such as the Arab-Israeli conflict, but it has been decided a generally reliable source, see WP:ALJAZEERA.  (talk | contribs) 10:17, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * There is no denying that there is a bias, however in cases like this war it is the only source, especially with the on-the-ground situation in gaza which is inacessible to most news agencies The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 10:25, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree. When there is no other coverage, biased is better than none.  (talk | contribs) 10:27, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Israel declared full control.  (talk | contribs) 10:38, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * The IDF claimed to have achieved their operational aims. However, sources also say that the declaration was premature. We do not have independent RSs calling this a victory for the IDF (or a defeat). Cinderella157 (talk) 11:37, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Therefore, I agree with changing the status to ongoing until a victory of either side is confirmed by independent sources. In addition, a sentence like "Both sides have declared victory, however, no independent coverage has confirmed either claim." could be added.  (talk | contribs) 11:43, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * As I don't see a source saying that Palestinians have claimed victory, I think ongoing is the best course at the moment, though it could also be left unpopulated. Cinderella157 (talk) 11:57, 10 April 2024 (UTC)


 * It was premature, but they claimed to have de dented hamas there on December 18
 * https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/idf-signals-full-control-over-beit-hanoun-in-north-gaza/
 * https://www.timesofisrael.com/idf-solidifies-hold-in-northern-gaza-as-israel-allows-expanded-aid-into-strip/amp/
 * https://www.criticalthreats.org/analysis/iran-update-december-18-2023 The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 10:41, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

I want to make this crystal clear, the next editor who edit wars over this is getting blocked. Start an RFC, discuss it thoroughly, do whatever, but don't touch it without consensus. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:03, 25 April 2024 (UTC)