Talk:Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip

Requested move 31 May 2024

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

The result of the move request was: Moved. Editors recognised that there was more than one time when Israel invaded the Gaza Strip, and that those times were significant. The consensus view was that the invasion which began in October 2023 was the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Particularly in relation to the invasion during the Six-Day War, several editors argued that the 1967 event would not be commonly sought by the term "Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip", and exercised their judgement of primary topic accordingly. (closed by non-admin page mover) Adumbrativus (talk) 04:51, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

– Just like we don't have a date on Israel-Hamas war, as that is by far the most significant of the wars between Israel and Hamas, the current invasion of Gaza Strip is by far the most significant of the invasions of Gaza Strip. It is the longest in duration, most extensive in damage, the highest in casualties and received the most international attention. VR (Please ping on reply) 18:54, 31 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 07:40, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip (2023–present) → Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip
 * Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip → Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip (disambiguation)


 * Support per nom Parham wiki (talk) 12:37, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Support while both 2009 and 2014 saw boots on the ground, this current war saw a longer protracted invasion and a guerrilla war longer than both of the other instances combined. It is distinct enough to warrant its own name The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 03:16, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Support Deals with the date issue and provides a disambiguation for reader convenience. Selfstudier (talk) 09:14, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Unlike the Israel–Hamas war example in the nom, and despite the recent events, surely the 1967 invasion during the Six Day War remains the most significant and far-reaching Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip? Prior to that invasion, the area was Egyptian territory and was not under the sphere of influence of modern Israel, and the events that occurred in Gaza since them have all sprung from that. The current war is certainly of huge importance, and the most sought-after right now, but looking at the longterm significance criterion of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and WP:RECENTISM I don't think there's a clear winner here and I think the current situation of having a disambiguation page is correct. Cheers &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 06:46, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * the events that occurred in Gaza since them have all sprung from that. I don't think that's the case. The current events, a de facto leveling of Gaza arise by virtue of Hamas involvement in Gaza and all of the subsequent Israel Gaza wars. For that matter, the 67 war is not the only invasion, there was 48 and the Suez crisis and the unsourced cherry picking of the ptopic is merely an assertion on your part. Selfstudier (talk) 10:40, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't think I'm the one who's "cherry-picking" here... I'm saying there's no primary topic between the multiple invasions of this territory over the years, particularly the original one that kicked off the whole concept of Gaza being a disputed territory in the first place, whereas you're making the classic mistake of saying "this item in the news right now must be the primary topic because it's important and getting loads of coverage". Perhaps I phrased my oppose poorly, because I'm not saying the current invasion isn't a contender for PT, only that it isn't the only one and it is WP:RECENTISM to claim otherwise. Cheers &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 10:35, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
 * The situation bears comparison with Israel–Hamas_war -> Gaza–Israel conflict / Gaza War.
 * Then Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip should maybe go there as IHwar does since it is a component of the same war (the dates were also removed for IH war even though there are many wars between Israel and Hamas, just titled differently.
 * However it is resolved for disambiguation purposes, I still think the dates should come off the same as for IH war (or the dates should go back on for that). Selfstudier (talk) 11:02, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
 * The 1967 invasion of Gaza was very much part of the invasion of Sinai. It is possible in the future that we spinout Six-Day_War into Israeli invasion of Gaza and Sinai. But I don't think we'd call that article "Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip" or "1967 Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip". It would also make little sense to separate the Israeli invasion of Gaza from the Israeli invasion of Sinai.VR (Please ping on reply) 13:24, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Whether or not there would be a dedicated article to the invasion of Gaza in 1967 isn't really relevant in determining primary topic. It could be a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT, whichever broader article it falls under. This title is a descriptive sentence-case name describing the event, not a specific proper name such as "World War II". And the question we ask ourselves is which historical events that descriptive name could describe. Did Israel invade the Gaza strip in 1967? Of course they did. Did they also do so in 2023? Yes. So both those topics are contenders for primacy here. Dismissing the 1967 one as part of a wider campaign is missing the point. CHeers &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 10:39, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

My point is while your argument is based on WP:PT2, we can't ignore WP:PT1, which is whether this title is "the topic sought when a reader searches for that term." While "Invasion of Gaza Strip" to describe the 1967 war is technically correct, RS don't use that term that way. At best RS might use "Israeli invasion of Gaza and Sinai", but more likely they would use the word "Front" as opposed to "Invasion", and most simply use "1967 war" or "Six day war". Consider other recent examples: In each of these cases, PT1 dominates mainly because few would use the given term to describe the more historically significant PT2 target.VR (Please ping on reply) 16:11, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
 * PT1 never dominates over PT2. We're an encyclopedia, not a current affairs magazine. The recent war is certainly highly significant, but not the only one that's highly significant. Why did you become a Wikipedian if you're only interested in modern history? &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 21:54, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't think this particular case is at all clear from any perspective and disambiguation is frequently argued over in general, editors can differ in opinion. I would let this go ftb and then try to address the disambiguation in general rather than specific to this article. Selfstudier (talk) 09:41, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
 * The Six-Day War is not commonly called "Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip" – the latter is neither a synonym nor a WP:COMMONNAME of the Six-Day War. In constrast, I believe that Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip is the COMMONNAME and thus PRIMARYTOPIC for the ongoing developments. —  kashmīrī  TALK  20:13, 16 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Support. It's WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, thus incomparably more likely to be searched by readers. Of course, historical events can be linked to from a hatnote. — kashmīrī  TALK  20:18, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Was planning on closing this discussion based on current consensus to move as proposed, but instead thought I'd add my opinion that I agree with the proposed move to make it easier for someone looking for an easy RM close, based on current lack of !votes. Overall, despite the initially convincing argument regarding PRIMARYTOPIC and RECENTISIM, the rationale that the Six Day War was never the commonly referenced as an "Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip" is more compelling, and thus, moving the other title to disambag, to make way for this article, makes the most sense in this case. Most notably, of the articles currently in the disambig list, only one of them has "Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip" in the title, which should confirm that there is only one article with this COMMONNAME at present. CNC (talk) 19:34, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose Israel has invaded gaza many times. So the date should exist to avoid confusion at-least until current conflict ends. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gsgdd (talk • contribs) 10:03, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Israel has warred with Hamas many times but the Israel-Hamas war date was removed? Selfstudier (talk) 15:46, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose: Israel has indeed invaded Gaza many times, especially in conflicts that were not related to Hamas, in 1956 and 1957. This would be a confusing name change. Makeandtoss (talk) 10:28, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * no one is proposing Hamas in the title. Would you not agree that this invasion is far more destructive and signficant than previous invasions?VR (Please ping on reply) 05:28, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * What I was saying is standardizing the name like that risks overshadowing these other past invasions. Of course it is the most significant but removing the year removes any context to it and makes it too general. Makeandtoss (talk) 06:59, 5 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Support: Gaza has been invaded before, but those other instances are not primarily known or categorised as "invasions of Gaza" generally, nor the "invasion of the Gaza Strip" specifically. The proposed title is the clear WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, and the base name was very notably unused prior to this event (so if it was used before, it passed everyone by). The disambiguation page was created afterwards, and "invasion of the Gaza Strip" still redirects here (as of me posting this comment). Iskandar323 (talk) 16:14, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Support There was no self-governing Gaza Strip until after 1967, and of the three invasions since then, this is clearly the primary topic. 🐔 Chicdat Bawk to me!  12:07, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Start date
Sometimes airstrikes happen in advance of boots on the ground. Other times, boots on the ground and airstrikes start at the same time. In this case, airstrikes started before the incursions. This is similar to United States invasion of Afghanistan, when airstrikes started on Oct 7 (strange coincidence) but incursions didn't start until Oct 19. But that article still starts from the initial airstrikes and this article should do the same. It was obvious from the initial airstrikes that they were made with an intent to invade (eg see this Times of Israel article from Oct 8).VR (Please ping on reply) 04:00, 14 June 2024 (UTC)


 * there are 4 dates that can be considered which are 7 October (based on your justification)
 * 9 October (when airstrikes were intensified and the plans for an invasion were starting to come through)
 * 13 October (that is when ground incursions were made, there is a geolocated map that is trying to gather all Israeli incursions in the two weeks at that point)
 * 27 October - the true full-scale invasion
 * I would lean on 27 October, but this isn’t a strong suggestion, as all 4 dates can be considered and you have given a good justification for your set date The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 06:00, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I think that bombing done as a prelude to the invasion, with the specific intent of invasion, should constitute a part of that invasion.VR (Please ping on reply) 19:41, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

There are other reasons to consider the start date Oct 7, not Oct 27. The sources make the Oct 7 distinction, but not the Oct 27 distinction:
 * The Gaza Health Ministry, UNRWA and all other sources count Palestinian casualties starting Oct 7. I have never seen a single source treat pre-Oct 27 and post-Oct 27 casualties separately.
 * Likewise, the bombing of Gaza Strip, which has been a constant theme during the invasion, started on Oct 7 and has continued well past Oct 27.
 * In the Gulf war article, "17 January – 28 February 1991" is given as the date for "Operation Desert Storm". Yet 17 January is the beginning of Gulf War air campaign, whereas the ground operations began later.
 * Israel's term for the invasion, "Operation Swords of Iron", officially started on Oct 7. For example, Times of Israel published "Oct 9: Day 3 of Operation Swords of Iron".
 * Israel formally declared war on Oct 8 and on the same day announced an "offensive" in the war declaration
 * Accusations of Israeli war crimes and Gaza genocide likewise span starting Oct 7 and make no "Oct 27" distinction.
 * The first Gaza Strip evacuation, which was obviously a prelude to the invasion, was announced on Oct 13, although Netanyahu told Gazans to "leave now" as early as Oct 8.VR (Please ping on reply) 15:07, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 June 2024
change starting date from 7 October 2023 to 27 October 2023 as the article said a few weeks ago as the Israel hamas war started october 7 but this proper invasion started 27 October 2023 173.72.3.91 (talk) 16:57, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ Skitash (talk) 17:10, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Did you notice the talk page discussion ("Start date") to change it to 7 October? I find it strange to claim a consensus at the request of a single IP. If anything, I think they should have joined that discussion. Renerpho (talk) 22:21, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I'll revert that change. I think there are further reasons to keep the date at October 7, and I'll post them above too.VR (Please ping on reply) 14:48, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Edit-undo.svg Undone: This request has been undone. As per above – macaddct1984 (talk &#124; contribs) 12:13, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Per this
@Kashmiri, you're an experienced editor, was wondering, now that there is strong support for Al Jazeera's reliability to be changed from "reliable" to "no consensus" at the WP:RSN are you still sure that Al Jazeera is an appropriate source for something like this? — 48JCL 17:53, 11 July 2024 (UTC)


 * now that there is strong support for Al Jazeera's reliability to be changed from "reliable" to "no consensus" No such consensus. Selfstudier (talk) 14:10, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
 * @Selfstudier Thanks! It's so wrong. Picking up a few imprecise articles – that every single news media has – and then trying to smear the entire publication. It's so POV driven. I have no energy to go and defend against those nonsense claims. Just note that Ad Fontes assesses Al Jazeera's reliability as comparable to that of the BBC or CNN. (Note: I'm not mentioning Ad Fontes' bias parameter, since per several WP discussions it actually means partisanship, not actual bias.) — kashmīrī  TALK  08:40, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

"law book"
The IDF and the Shin Bet seized an intelligence treasure of Hamas in the form of mountains of documents, files and computers. Among other things, competency tables, equipment lists, classified maps and instructions on what to do if captured were found.

https://news.walla.co.il/item/3678740 77.126.1.49 (talk) 07:07, 20 July 2024 (UTC)