Talk:Re'im music festival massacre/Archive 2

Massacre: credibility
Is there any account beside ZAKA that attests to 260 people killed? ZAKA is questionable considering their insistence that babies were beheaded, although the military rejected this. Hamas outlined in a conference that “the operation only targeted military bases and compounds” and that “there were clear instructions from the top commander of al-qassam brigades to avoid targeting civilians”. If true, and if adhere to, this possibly give greater credence to the notion that many were caught in the crossfire between the IDF and Hamas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by El-Baba (talk • contribs) 08:51, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
 * The IDF wasn't even there until several hours after it had happened. The people in the video you posted are cops and security (Notice how they're all dressed in black, those are cop uniforms) who were bravely defending civilians AFTER hamas started firing on them. I personally know people who were there, was given a complete description from several sources and can attest to what happaned. It was a massacare and nothing else. Snir102 (talk) 12:48, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
 * It was a party, there was no army there. That's why no one was killed in the crossfire either. The survivors resent the fact that the army did not arrive on time to save them. ALL OF THEM were murdered by Hamas terrorists. They were shot and burned to death. They were so proud of it and even uploaded live streaming to social media; to the delight of their viewers in Gaza. Hamas left such destruction that some of the bodies have not been identified to this day (link).
 * Now, when the leaders of Hamas realize their end is near. so they ridiculously try to hide the war crimes they committed. They even claim not even one civilian was killed! (link) It's absurd. Some of the media that have always been very critical of Israel, maybe even anti-Israel, tremble at the sight of the horrors and the smell of the charred bodies (link). Denying these heinous crimes is no different than holocaust denial.
 * it's important to remember: They kidnapped women, Holocaust survivors in their ninth decade of life, and were evil enough to record and distribute the videos themselves (link). Even the Nazis hid their heinous crimes. But the Palestinian terrorists know that there are people in the world that are so filled with hatred to Jews and Israel, who will always be ready to defend any crime against them. ℬ𝒜ℛ (talk) 15:30, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 October 2023
Hamas is organisation like ISIS — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A06:C701:45A6:4C00:5402:77C:49F3:9BEA (talk) 13:35, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
 * ❌ That comparison is for Hamas & Criticism of Hamas rather than this article. Jim 2 Michael (talk) 19:21, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

rape
The link for the Association of Rape Crises Centers in Israel does not, at all, say that it has evidence of rape or sexual violence in this conflict. What it says is various reports emerging from Gaza indicate. Second, the Zeenews link (this), does not back up At least two Hamas militants admitted during their interrogations in acts of rape. What it says is An alleged leaked footage claiming to be of a Hamas fighter supposedly contains these admissions. There is no reliable source claiming this is the case, and it should be removed. As should the misstatement on the Rape Crises Center source.  nableezy  - 01:07, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Could you post write here the exact same quotes for other users to see? Borgenland (talk) 01:36, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I removed Zee because I found it made no specific mention of Reim. Borgenland (talk) 01:39, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Also removed several others because there was no explicit mention of Re’im. Borgenland (talk) 01:46, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Picture of a rape victim from the Supernova festival massacre is available on telegram channel documenting the attrocities. The link is: https://t.me/Haatdocereport 94.230.157.58 (talk) 17:55, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
 * We don't want these sources, we want reliable ones – those from trusted news sources. Toadette  (let's chat together) 17:57, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Response
The article should say how long it took for the Israeli army & police to arrive at the scene as well as how many militants they killed & how many they arrested. Jim 2 Michael (talk) 03:45, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes it should. Do you have sources that can be used? Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:36, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Sexual assault claims
The paragraph on sexual assault claims should be reverted. The source clearly says "The person did not say they had witnessed these incidents, and at one point was recounting videos they had seen on social media."

The sentence about having testimonies should be removed or moved. The source headline does not match the interview. The only reference to rape in the interview is this: "We saw a lot of them falling down... We don't know, some of them probably dead, some of them probably kidnapped/raped." SluggishSchizophrenic (talk) 03:07, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 8 October 2023

 * 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: not moved. Per consensus, geographic naming. (closed by non-admin page mover) – robertsky (talk) 05:52, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Re'im music festival massacre → Supernova music festival massacre – This reflects the name of the festival, and it is well-attested to in sources. Seems like a more natural title to include the name of the festival than to use the location. — Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 21:29, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose - based on precedents from Category:Attacks on music venues; other historical examples have all been named geographically, either after the locale in question (2010 Stavropol bomb blast, 2003 Tushino bombing) or after a more distinct venue within that locale (Dolphinarium discotheque massacre, Manchester Arena bombing). Supernova being the name of the event is not a geographical locator, and only further obscures recognisability; 2/3 of the sources above specify the location as well, as do many other news sources, some of which even do not mention the name of or give alternative names to the event   . Benjitheijneb (talk) 22:23, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
 * The festival is not called the "Supernova festival", it is called "Supernova Sukkot Gathering" and was the Israeli edition of the Universo Parallelo festival, hosted by the entity called Tribe of Nova on Facebook, which only has "Nova" as its logo. The festival is not called "Nova" and is not called "Nature Party" or whatever, which is also found in the sources. The usual sources widely diverge and are mostly inaccurate about all this, which is normal. The accurate source is Billboard. See also the official event web page.—Alalch E. 01:17, 9 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Oppose. As a creator of the Ruwiki version of the article I know that the festival has many names in various sources and choosing one particular one might be confusing for the reader. The current name IMHO is better. With regards, Oleg Y.  (talk) 02:37, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Oleg. Impractical.—Alalch E. 03:20, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Per aboveBlackOrchidd (talk) 09:07, 9 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Oppose. As per Benji, convention states geographic naming. --Jurryaany (talk) 11:55, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose per all above  Abo Yemen ✉  12:56, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
 * "Massacre" is a POV name, but can be justified if it is overwhelmingly used by RS. Is that the case here? VR talk 14:07, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
 * @Vice regent Tentative but I think "massacre" is ok to use here. Quick list: It seems to be pretty roundly comfortably used. I'm not sure if massacre is mentioned verbatim in policy about POV language, but I think "massacre" may be slightly distinct from terms like "terrorist". Massacres are less ambiguous in the sense that there's a more agreed definition that it has to be unarmed civilians that are being killed. "Terrorism" is more ambiguous because it's contentious whether or not the target has to be civilian and unarmed. toobigtokale (talk) 16:08, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Rename to Supernova Sukkot festival massacre. As far as I know this was between Re'im and Be'eri and not exactly located in Re'im. Sgnpkd (talk) 16:52, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
 * "Supernova Sukkot" is not a natural, recognisable or descriptive title. It would be more like WP:PROMO than WP:NCE to use branding like this. A simpler route would simply be to go down the lines of 'Israeli music festival massacre' or 'Israeli rave massacre', since these are actually the key terms in most headlines, and there are not so many music festival massacres around (i.e. there are none) that this requires any further disambiguation. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:02, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Rename to Israeli music festival massacre per WP:COMMONNAME. Re'im and Be'eri are not entirely accurate, and most RS are referring to the event by this less geographically- and location-specific name. For example Reuters, CBC, Tablet, among others. Longhornsg (talk) 18:21, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Support  Abo Yemen ✉  18:24, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Support toobigtokale (talk) 18:35, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I’d support renaming the article to Israeli music festival massacre or Music festival massacre in Israel. It’s more common for articles to mention Israel than Re'im or Be'eri. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 20:27, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Still oppose, this title would imply that the music festival or the massacre associated with it occurred across a wider area of Israel, creating further ambiguities. The majority of news sources which specify a location within Israel at all repeatedly associate it with Re'im ("in", "at" or "near") and not with Be'eri      - and in fact the two of the above which mention Be'eri   mention it in entirely different contexts to the music festival massacre, referring to attacks within Kibbutz Be'eri itself. (Compare also other events are also named after places they occurred near to rather than in/at: the Cantaura massacre occurred near Cantaura, the Massacre of El Amparo near to El Amparo, the Nanoor massacre in Suchpur near Nanoor). The music festival and its massacre is definitely associated with Re'im in common usage, and thinking that "Israel" alone is identified as its primary geographical location seems very flawed. Benjitheijneb (talk) 21:40, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Support 199.172.169.17 (talk) 16:38, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Per aboveEladkarmel (talk) 18:59, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose any move. Current title is accurate. Support Benjitheijneb's comment. Paul Vaurie (talk) 02:42, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose citing Benjitheijneb's comment. Borgenland (talk) 16:46, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Benjitheijneb's citing of precedent. AstralNomad (talk) 22:52, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Strong support as per WP:COMMONNAME. Every single news source I've found is using the term "Supernova massacre". The fact that it's unusual on Wikipedia to refer to an event by the event name is irrelevant in my opinion. Kidburla (talk) 10:42, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Your argument is correct, but I'm unable to determine that "Supernova massacre" is the WP:COMMONNAME; can you help by providing some evidence for the claim? —Alalch E. 15:31, 13 October 2023 (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.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 October 2023
Change "The details of their whereabouts and condition of the hostages not publicly known" to "The details of their whereabouts and condition of the hostages is not publicly known" Teneab (talk) 11:23, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
 * thanks NotAGenious (talk) 19:57, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Fact check the death toll claims
Up to this moment, there is still no verified source of the claimed massacre death toll. There is evidence from testimonies of the assault, but no official death toll disclosed. No Israeli officials or UN bodies have confirmed the death toll count. The news article citations point to circular citations of other news media, with no verified source of truth for the claim. The claim can be traced back to one APNews article originating this "260" figure, citing Zaka - a search and rescue Israeli NGO - as their source. However, Zaka has never shared or disclosed such number on their social media platforms, although they have been actively sharing statistics on found bodies in other regions of the ongoing conflict. No other news platform have reported this from Zaka. Besides, no other officials or organizations on the ground have shared such figure either.

Request to frame it as "reportedly from APNews". Request to note the limited information available to verify this claim.

--Kiba09 (talk) 15:24, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 October 2023 (2)
Change Militants to Terrorists. Hamas is a terrorist organization!!! Can you imagine calling the people who carried the 9/11 attacks militants??? You are out of your mind. Jacob Koren (talk) 18:59, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: per WP:DECISION and WP:MORALIZE NotAGenious (talk) 20:02, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
 * | This was discussed in detail. NotAGenious (talk) 20:04, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Hamas territories
Hama militants should be modified to hamas terrorists Schmichael1985 (talk) 19:44, 16 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Read the request above you Teneab (talk) 12:46, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

This are not militants
they are terrorists. Hamas is known to be a terror organisation. They are recognized as such by many countries. This attack was part of a bigger terrorists atack which included murder,rape,and kidnapping of babies, children, women old people and non Israeli work immigrants. 85.250.14.59 (talk) 15:05, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 October 2023
The terror attack was executed by Hamas Terror organization. There were 1,300 murdered, over 3,000 injured and 199 kidnapped. 2A06:C701:49DB:6900:FD:BD41:2263:995F (talk) 22:41, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 15:47, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
 * This was the total Israeli death toll for the whole war. Borgenland (talk) 15:50, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Militants -> Terrorists
If we’re calling the massacre “a terror attack” in the second paragraph (which it is), shouldn’t the words “Hamas Militants” changed to “Hamas Terrorists” in the opening line? Daniel1817 (talk) 01:49, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
 * No. Someone presumably just added that to the lead tendentiously, and it should probably be voiced as a perspective on events, and treated similarly in the body somewhere, which it isn't at present. Iskandar323 (talk) 02:36, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
 * It was a pro-Israeli account which added it as well as numerous out of context statements that were later removed. Not sure how it got unnoticed. Borgenland (talk) 03:11, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 October 2023
Change ‘Hamas militants’ to ‘Hamas terrorists. Hamas is officially a terrorist organization. For reference: https://www.state.gov/foreign-terrorist-organizations/ 66.74.128.176 (talk) 04:21, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Please see MOS:TERRORIST and the numerous other discussions on this page and its archives. Tollens (talk) 04:28, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 October 2023
The massacre was a terrorist attack, as claimed by the page, therefore, under the assumption terror attacks are done by terrorists, I ask that in the sentence in the top of the page, the word “militants” will be changed to “terrorists”, as that sentence is the first thing seen by anyone who enters the page, and the 2 words can have very different context. There is no doubt this people are terrorist, making a terrorist act in the name of an organisation labelled as a terror organisation by many countries of the west, and that massacre could be described only as an act of terror by anyone who doesn’t have a clear agenda, and would undoubtedly be described as that by everyone, in a vacuum. Roee dromi (talk) 22:53, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: The same point was brought up in the section above, please read through that guideline. Broad consensus will be required to make this change, which is unlikely to emerge considering the conflict is currently ongoing. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:30, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

i24News
Re source: “We saw Hamas gunmen kill and rape", i24NEWS, October 14, 2023. This is a made-up quote by the i24News twitter account, if anyone cares. 78.19.228.16 (talk) 18:41, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

The witness in the accompanying video says only that as she was fleeing “we saw a lot of people falling down: we don’t know, some of them probably dead, some of them kidnapped, they were raped, all the things you hear about.” It’s clear she’s speculating about those left behind as she was moving fast. The twitter account Wikipedia is using as a source https://twitter.com/i24NEWS_EN/status/1713176997550023071 inserts “we saw hamas gunmen kill and rape” as a direct quote in an entirely different part of her story. 78.19.228.16 (talk) 19:23, 28 October 2023 (UTC)


 * @78.19.228.16 I second this. This should not be used as a source. However, there are more reliable sources as to rape taking place during the massacre. 78.45.43.113 (talk) 21:22, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * @78.45.43.113 for example, in this article by Reuters
 * https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israeli-forensic-teams-describe-signs-torture-abuse-2023-10-15/ 78.45.43.113 (talk) 21:24, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * There are good sources already in the article, but this one should be removed. As to your source, Israel Weiss and the unnamed reservist recounted many atrocity stories at this press event, familiar from other conflicts. One, of pregnant women who had been ripped open and had their babies pulled out, dates at least to English stories of the Irish Rebellion of 1641. Its imagery traces back to the Bible. Which is not to say that it absolutely could not happen. The account at the Sabra and Shatila massacre is entirely credible. 78.18.95.194 (talk) 18:26, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Remove line “Testimonies were also provided by eyewitnesses who survived the massacre.[34]” from Hamas' assault section. Falsified quote in reference. 78.18.95.194 (talk) 19:12, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Michael Vaknin †
“Michael [Vaknin] had a twin brother, Osher. We knew he was dead, but thought Michael was still alive. Then we got the message that he too was not with us any more.” Source: We looked at Hamas videos to find our friends - jewishnews.co.uk Darknesstaker (talk) 23:13, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Current information in the article (last sentence under "Casualties"): The event's organizer, Osher Vaknin, was killed in the attack, while his twin and co-organizer Michael went missing. Michael's death is confirmed also here. Darknesstaker (talk) 02:47, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Fixed Richard-of-Earth (talk) 08:34, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
 * @ Isn't † inappropriate in this context? Mcljlm (talk) 01:24, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Motives
I won't wade into the merits of the reasons for the attack, but can someone find an alternate source for Fox News? It's already considered generally unreliable in this case as per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources. Borgenland (talk) 16:52, 3 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Yes, FTLOG let's please removed anything that Fox News has to say on this. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:50, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Video Clip
Can you please add this video clip to this article. https://twitter.com/danielamram3/status/1720567153533878442?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1720567153533878442%7Ctwgr%5E5f0cd2329dbc1959d28c9f42e01c012db94e2de9%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Frotter.net%2Fforum%2Fscoops1%2F822324.shtml This video clip show multiple civilian corpuses from this mascare. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.137.74.162 (talk) 15:01, 4 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Twitter is not a reliable source and Wikipedia is not a link directory. Seawolf35 (talk - email) 16:23, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 November 2023
Change “Palestinian militants” to “over 3000 Palestinian terrorists from the terror organization Hamas” 93.173.2.71 (talk) 21:01, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. M.Bitton (talk) 19:16, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I think the word terrorists should reference Hamas as the source and over 3000... reference 2023 Hamas attack on Israel as source Navado (talk) 18:30, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Lede problem
The line “including a greater number” in the lede makes no sense. CarlStrokes (talk) 00:02, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Good catch. I revised the wording to "wounded many more" Loksmythe (talk) 00:53, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 November 2023
Change the word militants with the word terrorists. 2A02:14F:1EE:C099:E3ED:A824:52A6:7B0E (talk) 07:45, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me!  15:45, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Video warning?
The video currently in the article shows some pretty disturbing stuff, dead and mutilated bodies, etc. Should there not be some type of warning for disturbing images before the video starts? I imagine most people unaware of the videos contents would not want to see that. Virreoh (talk) 15:09, 6 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Confused how/why this video is even aloud here tbh 72.241.118.68 (talk) 15:17, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * This shouldn't even be in the infobox to begin with. We had a similar discussion in the main war page that led to a similar video being removed. Borgenland (talk) 15:22, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * As noted in the other discussion, Wikipedia is not the platform for such videos. Iskandar323 (talk) 16:37, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * It appears that it was snuck in on the sly with edit summary "better pic". Iskandar323 (talk) 16:39, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * What is the policy-based reason for not including the video beyond generic pronouncements that "Wikipedia is not the platform for such videos". Loksmythe (talk) 03:27, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Per WP:ONUS, the community decides what to include, which applies as equally to WP:GRATUITOUS content as an other. More generally, all hosted media content is there to add encyclopedic value only, not WP:DECOR (or gore). Iskandar323 (talk) 03:55, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * There’s similar video in the info box for Battle of Shuja’iyya. Seems appropriate to me—video footage of an event is of encyclopedic value for an article about the event. Zanahary (talk) 08:56, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * That's whatsboutism and relates to the local consensus there. Iskandar323 (talk) 09:32, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Also, has anyone been able to find where the video came from? Borgenland (talk) 15:51, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * It's an IDF video imported direct from a reddit feed. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:15, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * How is it whataboutism? It’s an example of precedent. Zanahary (talk) 16:05, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * there are rules in Wiki regarding WP:OTHER and WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. That other stuff are mentioned does not necessarily mean it is a certified precedent or must be done the same way for all. Borgenland (talk) 16:11, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * That’s correct. It’s also not whataboutism. I’m not deflecting criticism, I’m pointing out precedent (whether ‘certified’ or not). Zanahary (talk) 18:19, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree. I think there is a good basis to include it. Maybe not in the infobox, just because it shows the aftermath rather than the attack itself. Riposte97 (talk) 07:24, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

As 9/11 the right definition is a terror attack made by terrorists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks Ades Matthew (talk) 21:55, 7 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Not militants - terrorists
 * Not killing - murdering
 * Not only 270 - it's important to refer to the total number of citizens around 1,400 in total and 242 kidnapped and inside hamas tunnels not reporting anything about their condition - because referring to the attack itself the total numbers are also important to understand it was under much bigger attack being explained in the beginning of the article. Ades Matthew (talk) 22:07, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I do agree with these comments, so you have my consensus. Let's see what others say. Neutral Editor 645 (talk) 17:02, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I also agree. Zanahary (talk) 17:31, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * This isn't a page about the whole set of attacks, it is just about the festival attack, so it will reflect the relevant details, not those of the wider topic. And the language used will continue to reflect reliable sources and the input of Wikipedia guidelines. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:10, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * The context of the festival attack, within the wider Oct 7th Hamas massacres, is important, however. The language used should reflect those used in similar pages, such as 9/11, 7/7 London bombings and January 2015 Paris attacks - i.e. terrorist attacks. Neutral Editor 645 (talk) 11:39, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * This isn't about the whole 2023 Hamas attack on Israel, and it is not even clear that this was a planned terror attack like those other examples. There continues to be a black hole of information around the events of 7 October, but there is currently nothing on the page suggests that the Palestinian militants crossing over from Gaza even knew of the festival in advance, let alone the notion they had plans to attack it. Iskandar323 (talk) 12:07, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Irrelevant - it was still part of the Oct 7th Hamas massacres and was an internationally condemned terrorist attack on civilians. Neutral Editor 645 (talk) 12:30, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * But it was also part of a clearly military operation, i.e. 2023 Hamas attack on Israel, and hence it is not quite so simple as pigeonholing into a single characterization. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:09, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Calling October 7th a military operation is inaccurate. It was a massacre of civilians with deliberate horrible brutality, there were no military goals whatsoever. Drsmoo (talk) 13:40, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Apart from it involving the breaching of a heavily militarised barrier enforcing a military blockade, and the subsequent assault of eight military bases ... Sure. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:00, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Agreed, a typical “management of savagery” style brutal massacre and mass torture/rape of civilians.Drsmoo (talk) 15:22, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * WP:NOTFORUM applies to a bunch of comments here.  nableezy  - 15:24, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Absolutely. This needs external intervention to resolve - clearly some here are confusing the internationally accepted consensus with personal opinions. Neutral Editor 645 (talk) 16:21, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Hamas is a terror organisation 2A00:A041:3A96:D100:6C:4C78:F48D:4974 (talk) 20:07, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Adding antisemitism as a motive, in the info box
"Palestinian political violence" and "anti-Zionism" are listed in the info-box as motives for Hamas' massacre, however should we also consider adding "antisemitism" as a motive?

Antisemitism as a motive is central to Hamas' attacks on Israeli/Jewish communities and is listed under their ideologies in the info box on their main Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas

While not all of those massacred were Jews, the vast majority were.

Looking to build a consensus here. Neutral Editor 645 (talk) 17:16, 6 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Suggest checking if pages of previous Hamas attacks were also labeled to help others make up their minds. Borgenland (talk) 17:43, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Other pages for Hamas attacks do not seem to have motives boxes to begin with, but then again, they were much smaller in death toll and geopolitical significance. If we do choose to list motives in this article, then contributors should seriously consider listing antisemitism as a motive, in line with the motives listed on the main Wikipedia page for Hamas. Neutral Editor 645 (talk) 14:21, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Hamas includes various sources referring to antisemitism. Mcljlm (talk) 22:07, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I think we need to be as careful here as we should be at Palestinian genocide accusation, where there is discussion of assigning genocidal motives to Israeli leaders for the bombing of Gaza. There are sources that say Hamas is motivated by anti-semitism, and then there are sources that say Hamas' attack was a response to the occupation.VR talk 05:25, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Can the same then not be said about listing antisemitism as a Hamas motive/ideology, on their main page? Regardless of whether or not Hamas' violence is allegedly in response to occupation, Hamas' antisemitic ideology and motives are well documented and not contested. Also, the Palestinian genocide accusation and Hamas' antisemitic motives are not mutually exclusive things. The contentious discussion around Palestinian genocide accusations should not affect our ability to accept the overwhelming consensus for Hamas' antisemitic motives. Neutral Editor 645 (talk) 15:26, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Number of casualties
Just drawing your attention to the fact the number of dead has certainly surpassed 260. Israel Hayom listed the names of 292 Israelis killed at the music festival so far ("נרצח/ה במסיבה ברעים"). Haaretz lists an additional 63 names (and a total of 324) as having been "killed at the outdoor rave near Re'im". That is a total of at least 355 victims, and I almost certainly missed a couple. Surely some journalist has caught onto this already? https://story.israelhayom.co.il/israelatwar?_gl=1*1gshiti*_ga*MTc0MzM3NDgzMy4xNjkyNjI3MzQy*_ga_510EBDDMBG*MTY5OTQyNDQ1OS4xMi4xLjE2OTk0MjQ0NjQuNTUuMC4w https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-10-19/ty-article-magazine/israels-dead-the-names-of-those-killed-in-hamas-massacres-and-the-israel-hamas-war/0000018b-325c-d450-a3af-7b5cf0210000 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A06:C701:4B05:B800:8F0:1A9A:FA57:4EAB (talk) 07:44, 10 November 2023 (UTC)


 * It has increased further. It now stands at 364. Nowhere of things (talk) 18:34, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

New Police investigation points that Israeli combat helicopter hit civilians at festival
This new police investigation published in harretz that points out that, an IDF combat helicopter hit some revelers. Should be added.https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-11-18/ty-article/.premium/israeli-security-establishment-hamas-likely-didnt-have-prior-knowledge-of-nova-festival/0000018b-e2ee-d168-a3ef-f7fe8ca20000 Marshmallowjunkie (talk) 06:39, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I added this, an editor is claiming that it is fake based on an older PolitiFact article on a tweet by the IDF, which isnt the subject of the Haaretz article, and with this NEWSru source saying the police denied it. But in my view this is well sourced to one of the best Israeli sources we have available to us, and I see nothing policy based to remove it.  nableezy  - 19:17, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Haaretz is anything but a trustworthy source. It's one of the least respected journals in Israel.
 * The video that circulated was originally linked to an article in Hebrew describing the helicopter attacking targets in Gaza. The narrative that this happened in Israel is blatant disinformation. Since Haaretz is now paywalled, I can't see what they wrote about it, but the original article out of which this video came, reveals that this allegation is just plain false.
 * https://www.ynet.co.il/news/article/b111niukzt
 * It's Ynet which is a much more trustworthy journal in Israel.
 * And the caption under the video from the article, "תיעוד תקיפת חיל האוויר ברצועת בפתיחת המלחמה (צילום: דובר צה"ל)"
 * translate roughly to: "Documentation of the Israeli Air Force attack in the Gaza Strip at the start of the war (Photo: IDF Spokesperson)"
 * The whole section is fake news, so at least provide challenges, such as the PolitiFact News.ru articles you have above and the fact that this assertion was heavily refuted online. It was shared in a ton of places, and a ton of people called it out for being untrue.
 * I'm quite angry this made it to the article in its current form. 69.249.102.223 (talk) 19:29, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * This was published on November 18, making Ynet on October 15 discussing something different decidedly not relevant to this material. The YouTube video has nothing to do with what Haaretz published. As far as least respected, ok lol, whatever you say. Finally, per the latest set of clarifications opn the Arab-Israeli conflict, non extended-confirmed users may only participate on talk pages to post constructive edit requests. If disruptive commentary like the above continues this talk page may need to be protected.  nableezy  - 19:46, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I did however add the Police denial citing Times of Israel.  nableezy  - 19:50, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * In what world am I being disruptive other than you not liking what I have to say? If you can't engage in dialogue in two ways, then maybe you shouldn't be using the talk page yourself, Mr. "lol whatever you say"
 * Nevertheless, the article being from October 15th is actually very relevant because it proves that it was the original source for the video being discussed. It's not until about a month later that the article's video, often shared with the article itself, began making rounds on social and traditional media with the false claims that this was at the music festival. The fact that a video over a month old was shared across media platforms is enough to question the associated claims' authenticity. 69.249.102.223 (talk) 20:08, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I just read it. I don't like it. Either it needs to go into more depth and detail the whole social media controversy regarding the incident and detail the debate on both sides, or it needs to be removed entirely because we don't know the truth behind the claims. The way it is now does not necessarily portray accuracy. 69.249.102.223 (talk) 20:13, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Again, the social media reaction about a different video has nothing to do with this.  nableezy  - 20:15, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * The disruption is the rant about fake news. But as you wish.  nableezy  - 20:14, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I provided clear evidence that challenges the information you posted. There was nothing disruptive about it. Frankly, I would sooner accuse you of being disruptive for accusing me of being disruptive, taking the focus away from the article's content by shifting to personal attacks. 69.249.102.223 (talk) 20:21, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Again, the only participation you may engage in on this page is to make constructive edit requests. Full stop.  nableezy  - 22:50, 19 November 2023 (UTC)


 * I was the one who has originally asked to remove the fake content as I found the denying sources which I have mentioned here. Currently the article has the following info: "According to Haaretz's journalist Josh Breiner, a police source said that a police investigation indicated an IDF helicopter which had fired on Hamas militants 'apparently also hit some festival participants.'[27] The Israeli police denied the Haaretz report.[28]"
 * IMHO it's easier to remove this entire content as it's pretty absurd as clearly one journalist misunderstood something and then police clearly stated that it was fake news. If police would have released it on the first place they would not deny it later. With regards, Oleg Y.  (talk) 20:12, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, I just made a similar statement a few seconds after you wrote this.
 * It should just be removed entirely. We don't know enough about it. This is encyclopedia, not a news aggregate 69.249.102.223 (talk) 20:15, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Then we should remove all news articles? Which would leave exactly what on this page?  nableezy  - 20:15, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Because there's a little concept known as nuance; you see, some information can be highly contested and heavily debated, without a common consensus. In this case, there is not enough of a consensus to describe, with encyclopedic knowledge, about the incident because there's simply not enough information about it.
 * As a counter to your rhetorical question, should we add an article on Wikipedia for every news article ever created? I just read an article about a lost kitten in New York. Does that deserve an entry? 69.249.102.223 (talk) 20:19, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * No, but when we do have a notable event based entirely on news sources then it is curious, to say the least, to claim that news sources should not be used because we are not a news aggregate. Everything on this page is from the news media. Its only this material that brings up things some would rather not be covered that is being challenged.  nableezy  - 22:31, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

I had previously added this content here at 23:50 – 23:52 18 November in a different section. It was removed by User:Oleg Yunakov at 18:01, 19 November 2023. Now, Haaretz is listed as a "green" source at WP:RSP (in fact, as far as I recall, Haaretz is the only Israeli newspaper thus listed). So the thing to do is to include the material and to include the denial, as the article currently does. --Andreas JN 466 22:08, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Do we plan to collect all the fake news and then their denials? I believe for that we have a separate page (Disinformation in the 2023 Israel–Hamas war). With regards, Oleg Y.  (talk) 22:11, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Per WP:RSP Haaretz doesn't have a reputation for publishing fake news, on the contrary. --Andreas JN 466 22:15, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Are we saying that mistakes can't happen and anything which would ever come out of Haaretz would be the immanent truth? I do not mean that they did it on purpose, but we all are humans and mistakes can happen. And here it's clearly mentioned with multiple sources and video proof (links are given above) that it was a mistake. Perhaps and most likely an honest mistake. So what is the point to add this honest mistake and then write that it was a mistake rather then removing the mistake on the first place? :) With regards, Oleg Y.  (talk) 22:22, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * It isnt a mistake just because you think so. We have Haaretz, a known reliable source, reporting on what their sources say. We have the police denying it. We include both. You just thinking it is a mistake does not make it so, and if it is a mistake Haaretz will publish a correction. The video has nothing to do with this, and this repeated invocation of a video from weeks ago to dispute new reporting is as bogus as the rest of the complaint here.  nableezy  - 22:29, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Not sure why you are trying to add me into the equation. I have never said that as much as YOU want this to be added it shouldn't be and didn't say that I am not not sure why do YOU want so much to try to show that Israel killed their own people when it was mentioned to be incorrect. Could we please going forward concentrate on the facts and not on me or you? If it's not too hard. I'd appreciate it. We have two facts: A. Josh Breiner said that police told him they hit. B. Police said that thy didn't say it. So what is the point to add misleading info and then correction saying it was misleading? With regards, Oleg Y.  (talk) 23:20, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * The facts are that Haaretz reported something and a police spokesman denied it. Why exactly are we supposed to believe the police spokesman over Haaretzs anyway? Your personal opinion on if something is true or not is not something I am interested in debating. What does interest me is properly summarizing the material in the sources, and this is something that is reliably sourced.  nableezy  - 23:28, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Also, attributing this to Brenner is incorrect, Haaretz, being a professional newspaper, has editors, a byline does not mean that the reporter is the sole person responsible for the material. This should be attributed to Haaretz, not Brenner. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 23:30, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Are we trying to create a conspiracy theory that Police is trying to lie and cover it up? :) If it's not the case then I see no point to say the incorrect statement. But since we were able to show the truth at the end this is what matters. An intelligent reader will get the proper understanding after reading it. :) With regards, Oleg Y.  (talk) 00:44, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Nobody is creating anything, and it remains your personal belief that this is an incorrect statement and that the police denial is the "truth". Wikipedia is not concerned with what you think is true. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 01:59, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * It seems you didn't read what I wrote. I can repeat. A. Josh Breiner said that police told him they hit. B. Police said that thy didn't say it. B happened after A. With regards, Oleg Y.  (talk) 03:00, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, and we include both A and B. You are under the impression that the Israeli police's public statements are The Truth and as such anything that contradicts it is a lie that should go unmentioned. I am not under that impression however, and neither is Wikipedia. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap"> nableezy  - 04:18, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I was aware of the Nov 9 Politifact piece. I didn't think it had anything to do with the Nov 19 Haaretz report. The Politifact piece is about social media users misattributing IDF video coverage included in this Grayzone article (which didn't actually claim the footage was from the music festival but just presented it as showing what IDF (not police) pilots firing on "vehicles streaming back into Gaza from the Nova electronic music festival and nearby kibbutzes" and "on unarmed people exiting cars or walking on foot through the fields on the periphery of Gaza" saw) to the festival. The footage isn't from the festival. Haaretz on the other hand are quoting a police source speaking of IDF combat helicopter use at the festival.
 * I agree with Nableezy: if Haaretz retract the story (which I think is unlikely, but who knows) we'll report that. I'll keep an eye. At the time of writing, however, the Haaretz article is unchanged.
 * (Note that Grayzone is not a reliable source per WP:RSP, though the Mako outlet's interviews with IDF helicopter pilots that they're quoting on their page may be.)
 * I must say it feels somewhat unseemly to be arguing about these details, given the magnitude of what happened that day. :( Let's spare a thought for what all those who died that day, who nearly died, or were injured, or were taken hostage, or lost loved ones, or indeed those who piloted those helicopters, went through (or are going through). I can only imagine what it might feel like for someone who was personally affected by this horrible event to come to a discussion page like this. Andreas JN 466 23:24, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Israeli helicopter now reported to kill some of the festival goers
Israel reported that Hamas was the sole culprit of ant festival deaths on oct 7th- we were told it was premeditated. Now we're learning that it became a target but might not have been one intentionally and the IDF killed an unreported number of festival goers.

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-11-18/ty-article/.premium/israeli-security-establishment-hamas-likely-didnt-have-prior-knowledge-of-nova-festival/0000018b-e2ee-d168-a3ef-f7fe8ca20000 66.44.122.214 (talk) 06:25, 20 November 2023 (UTC)


 * This is the official statement by the Israeli policy about this claim: " Contrary to the publication, the police investigation does not refer to the activity of the IDF forces, and therefore no indication was given of any harm to civilians caused by any aerial activity at the site.
 * The preliminary findings of the ongoing national inquiry, spearheaded by law enforcement and communicated to the international media, cast a spotlight on the profound and reprehensible acts committed by Hamas terrorists during the Nova music festival. Any effort to downplay the severity of these atrocities, as depicted in the misleading Haaretz newspaper publication, deserves unequivocal rejection." Marokwitz (talk) 07:03, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

PNA "denial"
The reported "denial" by the PNA of Hamas' responsibility is mistranslated. If you read the actual statement in Arabic, there are two material misrepresentations: the statement does not claim that Israel killed everyone, but rather that Israeli sources reported that Israel initiated "Hannibal" directive permitting them to kill everyone; and it does not deny Hamas killings but rather that these reports cast doubt on Israel's official account.--Exjerusalemite (talk) 09:53, 20 November 2023 (UTC)


 * That mistranslation does sound very likely. Is there something specific in the wiki page that needs to be changed? Is there a better translation available, e.g. Al-Jazeera English? Irtapil (talk) 01:23, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Also, was this massacre just Hamas? (as in started by, even without allowing for potential friendly fire) It's currently written like it I'd, but there were three other groups involved that day. Irtapil (talk) 03:35, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Were the PIJ, PFLP, and DFLP not there?
Was this massacre just Hamas? Currently most of this page is written as if it was, but there were three other groups involved that day (see Template:2023 Israel–Hamas war infobox) Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the PFLP, and the DFLP. It seems weird that this location would have been only Hamas, given it was one of the largest msssacres. If this location was just Hamas then that's notable and needs some well referenced clarifying in this wiki article. But if it's unclear which groups did it, the article should reflect this rather than repeating the over-simplified narrative found in headline-only versions of the news. Irtapil (talk) 03:50, 24 November 2023 (UTC)


 * I would hope that we will eventually have the sourcing to be clear about the organizations that participated in the attack with a higher degree of specificity and certainty. But in the meantime, what you are urging goes somewhat against the burden/method of establishing WP:verification and WP:weight for a given encyclopedic statement in a given article.  If the sources only specify Hamas as assailants, that's what we have to go with, even if they are generalized news reports and even if we find the resulting coverage improbably reflects the full story.  Until sources indicate involvement of other organizations, we cannot presume to indicate they likely were present, no matter how rational a conclusion that feels to us. Even saying that other groups were likely to have been involved is unverified WP:OR unless we have a source saying as much.  But again, it's to be hoped that this lack of clarity in the sourcing is temporary. <b style="color:#19a0fd;">S</b><b style="color:#66c0fd">n</b><b style="color:#99d5fe;">o</b><b style="color:#b2dffe;">w</b><b style="color:#B27EB2;">Rise</b><b style="color:#d4143a"> let's rap</b> 03:51, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Which sources say that organizations other than Hamas have been involved at the festival? My very best wishes (talk) 19:48, 25 November 2023 (UTC)