Talk:Children in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict/Archive 6

Removing blah blah
"The media has been used manipulatively to create support for different sides. Children have been the victims of indoctrination, school closures, medical problems and post-traumatic stress as a result of the conflict. At the same time, various educational projects have been established to counter indoctrination and negative stereotypes."

None of this accurately reflects the body of the article as a summary, and treats the quite distinct responses to terrorist threats as identical, when the responses of, and impacts on, children in Israel and WB/Gaza are profoundly different, and require careful distinctions. Are Israeli children the 'victims of indoctrination'; are Israeli school frequently over the past decades closed for long periods because of a potential terrorism threat? Is post-traumatic stress in Haifa the same as in Gaza City (not according to the medical literature: the latter has a sophisticated number of studies citing long-term trauma persistence for a large percentage of the population, etc.etc. Rather than a generalistic blather of mirrored victimhood, it is best to leave the issue to the body of the article (which is still quite unsatisfactory in its negligence of much relevant material. Nishidani (talk) 21:48, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Invited comment on B'Tselem material
I was asked to comment on this removal of the quotes of the Israeli embassy's reply to the B'Tselem report. I have no expertise in the subject matter here, I have no personal connection to this subject, and I frankly have no idea why I was contacted. But I have an hour to spare, so here goes:

The B'Tselem report itself is imo notable and worth the one-or-two-sentence summary it has (not contested). I assert that it is currently incorrectly summarized however: the report very explicitly asserts that minors' rights are violated (not "potentially") (p. 25), and the cited laws are almost all from the Convention on the Rights of the Child and Israeli military and civil law. The Geneva Conventions are mentioned only once, and not with respect to children or a specific crime, so are not worth mentioning.

To the removed material: first, the B'Tselem report is an advocacy/think-tank type of organization, which means its research is self-published. It may be of excellent quality, and academics will cite it, but it's not like peer-reviewed academic research. WP:RS has not decided to make an explicit policy on these types of organizations, so they have to be individually assessed by editors, but in general I think it is appropriate if, with these types of reports, an official rebuttal is presented. (If it were peer-reviewed academic research on the other hand, politicians shouldn't get their rebuttal printed imo). Of course the report itself should also be notable, either politically/popularly or in the academic/policy sphere.

In this case the rebuttal is given by the embassy in London. Now, I do take issue with the specific phrasing and quotation used from the source, but instead of presenting that, I will suggest the editors instead quote from the official rebuttals on B'Tselem's page: one from the IDF and one from Justice. These are much more useful for the reader as well, since clicking the source gives them access to the full argument, while in the Guardian piece it seems the argument had been recycled through several political channels. To not give undue weight to a rebuttal is important, and summarizing complex arguments in one or two sentences without looking like WP:OR is difficult. It seems both sides agree in principle that some minors are violent criminals and Israel law in theory should protect these rights. So perhaps the summary of the rebuttals should look like, The Israeli government responded officially to the report, arguing that minors' rights are protected in the justice system and that it responds appropriately to minors' offenses [cite IDF rebuttal], and criticizing the report's methodology [cite Justice rebuttal]. Could be better I suppose, but that's all I got. SamuelRiv (talk) 21:37, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Israel's military operations
Operation :OFERET YEZUKA: 2008-2009 Operation :ZUK EITAN : 2014 Operation :SHOMER HOMOT: 2021 2.55.25.92 (talk) 05:52, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Photo
I removed this photo:



Really cool that that happened. But in an encyclopedic article about a war its probably a bad idea to highlight the good things one side does, and highlight the bad things the other side does. This photo is incredibly WP:UNDUE. Polygnotus (talk) 18:22, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

NPOV
This article is a weird mess. Wikipedia shouldn't choose sides; especially not in a conflict where both sides did horrible things. The article seems to focus on children who are engaged in military action instead of those who are the victims of it. It would probably be wise to delete the entire thing as a POV-fork of the main article about the war. Note that other wars also don't have "children in... x" articles.

The choice of topic dooms this article to be a POV fork, because a country that is very rich can afford to not send its children to war (e.g. by using drones) or when they do they can afford advanced weaponry and armor. Both sides rely on indoctrination (religious or not) to keep the conflict going for yet another generation, but only for one side this is mentioned in the article. Polygnotus (talk) 15:05, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Child Casualties
This aricle is obscenely out-of-date. Why no mention of the children killed in Gaza and Israel thus far and continuing without any end in sight? Where's the credibility? What's the point? 217.180.216.106 (talk) 03:40, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Addressing issues with copyediting
This article is full of bad writing. Because of WP:ECP, I can't make edits, so I'm going to go through and submit a whole bunch of edit requests to try and improve it. Just want to leave a heads up that I'm not intending to spam the talk page, and that I'm very much open to feedback on my proposed changes. Jokojis (talk) 00:45, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 February 2024
Please change The Israeli–Palestinian conflict has historically involved and affected children on both sides, in the leading paragraph to Children and Children's rights have long been a focal point of the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Jokojis (talk) 00:40, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: No explanation for this proposed change. Elli (talk &#124; contribs) 21:34, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 February 2024 (2)
Please change In the 1929 Hebron massacre,[3] 67 Jews were killed, young children among them; Arab youths initiated the violence by hurling rocks at Jewish students as they walked by.[4] to ''The 1929 Hebron massacre claimed the lives of 24 yeshiva students, as well as children under 5. ''. New source included. The former phraseology quantifies the impact of the event overall, rather than the impact towards children. Jokojis (talk) 03:22, 17 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Jokojis (talk) 23:21, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Jokojis (talk) 23:21, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

provided pictures too one-sided
The pcitures on the page dont fully cover both sides. for example: right after the pciture of the childs bedroom covered in blood, the 3 next pictures are children depictad in a pro-hamas enviorment or narrative. or: "Child's shoe found after Gazan rocket fire hit a mall, injuring a child and others" but no comparable picture of Israeli Attacks with child cassualitie, especially from the past months. Kabi13 (talk) 19:12, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Neutrality compromised
it is totally one sided and talks according to Israeli propaganda. It doesn't include that how many children of Palestine and Gaza are killed by IDF. A thousand of Palestinian children are killed by Israeli forces till now. So kindly remove this article from Wikipedia to ensure the neutrality of this website 154.198.89.144 (talk) 18:13, 11 April 2024 (UTC)