Talk:Siege of Khan Yunis

Grammar
Article has multiple overlinks of "israeli forces", mistake of prefix The in capital letter, possibly more — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.138.252.191 (talk) 20:37, 10 December 2023 (UTC)


 * I have addressed this in my recent edit. Please let me know if I've missed anything. Thanks, SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 16:06, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Disputed map
The map in this article appears to violate WP:IMAGEOR, because it seems to illustrate/introduce unpublished ideas/arguments. Particularly, while the Commons file cites the Institute for the Study of War, the depiction of the areas of operation of the al-Quds Brigades does not appear to have been sourced from there. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 16:05, 11 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Fixed The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 14:49, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Update
"Twenty-one Israeli soldiers are killed in an explosion and subsequent building collapse in Khan Yunis, Gaza Strip, making it the deadliest day for the Israel Defense Forces since the ground invasion began. (Sky News)" (As seen on Portal:Current Events)

Certain inside sources claim a Palestinian death toll of at least forty to fifty during the day of the attack, (Al Jazeera) (Haaretz) although it is unclear whether these deaths are linked to the same explosion referred to above, according to my understanding. — Urro[ user ] [ talk ] [ edits ] 00:04, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

(talk | contribs) 12:58, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

False claim of palestinian victory
palestinians didnt win anything, israel withdrew because their goals were met, and are moving to smaller scale raids Kwabat5 (talk) 13:10, 7 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Agree with kwabat, this is a political claim and isn't grounded in reality. Not encyclopedic. Asafg8 (talk) 13:12, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * What goals were met? Genabab (talk) 15:03, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * "Israeli Victory" It also makes Wikipedia appear like a propaganda site. It's common to attribute victory to the side that was blockaded. example:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Leningrad 196.235.53.160 (talk) 15:04, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Neither Israeli nor Palestinian victory. It's better to call this an "Israeli Withdrawal". Hind242 (talk) 15:09, 7 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Please see the ongoing Request for Comment discussion below, which is to determine what the consensus is about the result of the siege and battle. In short, the RfC is the “formal” discussion to make the result determination. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 15:53, 7 April 2024 (UTC)


 * The state's goals were to eliminate the fighting power of "Hamas". That did not happen. Whatever their plans for the near future (Rafah, the northern front, etc), they did not meet their military objectives in Khan Younis - or anywhere else in the Gaza Strip. 2600:8800:2309:6200:B5CE:AE57:F34A:F5F7 (talk) 19:02, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

False Claim of Israeli Victory
An apt resultbox would only say "Full Israeli withdrawal" without stating that Israel has won considering Hamas is still active in Khan Younis. Moreover, the source given says: "Israel says it defeated Hamas in a key city" this doesn't count as a trustworthy source according to Wikipedia guidelines. VortexxWW (talk) 15:03, 7 April 2024 (UTC)


 * It doesn't say that Israel has won. It says: "Israeli withdrawal from southern Gaza". As objective as it can get, which is definitely the way it should be written in Wikipedia. UnsettledEditor (talk) 15:13, 7 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Please see the ongoing Request for Comment discussion below, which is to determine what the consensus is about the result of the siege and battle. In short, the RfC is the “formal” discussion to make the result determination. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 15:53, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Result Discussion - RFC
There are several editors in disagreement about how to state the result of the battle. Which option fits best? (Options picked from all previous main-space versions of the result section)


 * 1) Palestinian victory, withdrawal of Israeli forces as in this version
 * 2) Palestinian victory, withdrawal of Israeli forces from southern Gaza as in this version
 * 3) Israeli withdrawal as in this version
 * 4) Israeli withdrawal from southern Gaza as in this version
 * 5) Israeli victory and subsequent withdrawal as in this version
 * 6) Other result not previously used

The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 15:13, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

The documentation for Template: Infobox military conflict gives guidance on and restricts how the result parameter is populated. This guidance is given voice buy MOS:MIL. The documentation reads:
 * result – optional – this parameter may use one of two standard terms: "X victory" or "Inconclusive". The term used is for the "immediate" outcome of the "subject" conflict and should reflect what the sources say. In cases where the standard terms do not accurately describe the outcome, a link or note should be made to the section of the article where the result is discussed in detail (such as "See the Aftermath section"). Such a note can also be used in conjunction with the standard terms but should not be used to conceal an ambiguity in the "immediate" result. Do not introduce non-standard terms like "decisive", "marginal" or "tactical", or contradictory statements like "decisive tactical victory but strategic defeat". Omit this parameter altogether rather than engage in speculation about which side won or by how much.

How the result parameter for this article is populated should be considered through the lens of this guidance. None of the options offered for consideration in this RfC are consistent with this guidance (save the last). Furthermore, how the parameter is populated must reflect what the sources explicitly tell us - not what we might conclude they mean. It has nothing to do with what individual editors perceive to constitute victory. Any argument that relies on such perceptions would fall to WP:OR and/or WP:SYNTH. Cinderella157 (talk) 00:14, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Survey

 * Option 5 — On this version of the Wikipedia article the “Israeli victory” was cited by this news article from NPR which stated, “Israel's defense minister said the military has defeated Hamas in the southern city of Khan Younis. The “subsequent withdrawal” was cited by this NBC News article. RS does indicated Hamas was defeated in Khan Yunis & that Israel withdrew from the city after said victory. So, I must choose option 5. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 15:13, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * which reliable sources say Hamas was defeated? I remind you the IDF did say the same in Gaza a few months ago, and the isw then reported that Hamas had restored its fighng strength, and re-entered land across the North. What is the proof the IDF isn't eaggerating again? Genabab (talk) 15:16, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Source was listed. The bearer of proof (WP:ONUS) is now on others to show Hamas wasn’t defeated. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 15:17, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * In my opinion this article suggests that Hamas was still fighting in Khan Yunis. Such as with ambushes and rocket attacks on Israel and what not. Which suggests to me that Hamas was not defeated. I also consider it a stronger source than the Israeli defense minister as that is a rather weak source. Radiourgía Promithéas (talk) 15:19, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * There is this source here which does have a paywall. It describes the IDF’s declaration of victory as “premature” and this was before Israeli forces withdrew today
 * https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/repeated-raids-in-gaza-raise-prospect-of-endless-war-c1f37011 The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 15:31, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @WeatherWriter Both sources listed don't say that it was an Israeli victory. saying Israel said it won and a 3rd party source saying Israel won are two different things. The NBC article itself seems to stress that it is unclear what the withdrawal indicates. Genabab (talk) 17:14, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I am not arguing that Israel won, in fact the contrary. I am mentioning another instance, north Gaza, where israel says “we won” only for Hamas to resurge and demonstrate its ability to still engage in large scale operations against the IDF such as Zeitoun. Israel saying “we won” isn’t indicative of victory especially when the reality on the battlefield demonstrates otherwise The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 17:16, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I would note that we are mainly dealing with WP:NEWSORG sources. NEWSORG sources are a qualified reliable source. Where they are quoting or repoting the Israeli defence minister, they are a reliable source for what the defence minister said. However, it does not mean that the defence minister is reliable. More importantly, the defence minister is not independent. It is a fact that the Isralie defence minister said they won. It is not a fact that Israel won because he said they did. We cannot use this to state in a Wiki voice that Israel won. It must be attributed in prose. What is presented in an infobox is stated in a Wiki voice. Cinderella157 (talk) 00:27, 8 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Option 1 - full withdrawal of the besieging force (Israel). Hamas shows its presence in the area almost immediately, hence a Palestinian victory: [1https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/five-rockets-fired-from-khan-younis-at-gaza-border-communities-hours-after-idf-withdraws-ground-troops/ ] VortexxWW (talk) 15:22, 7 April 2024 (UTC) (Struck per WP:ARBECR and WP:PIA) The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 15:38, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Cross-border rocket firing might qualify for a Palestinian victory as it implies an Israeli failure to secure the Gaza envelope settlements. If this source is added to the article, Option 1 definitely stands. Yezhi283825 (talk) 15:27, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Option One - Hamas is still in the area, was still fighting the IDF before the withdrawal and murdering IDF soldiers. Furthermore, option two to me seems unnecessary. It's about the battle of Khan Yunis, IDF retreating is only relevant to well Khan Yunis. But I see no problem with options one, two, three and four over all and all of them seem generally accurate. Radiourgía Promithéas (talk) 15:23, 7 April 2024 (UTC) (Struck per WP:ARBECR and WP:PIA) The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 15:38, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * RS only says that, it does not confirm a victory. Israel has declared a similar victory in north Gaza by saying they had “dismantled Hamas” yet Hamas was able to still fight in large scale operations such as last month’s Zeitoun. This is the same in khan yunis, and this is emphasised not only by yesterday’s ambush, but also by the immediate shelling of communities adjacent to khan yunis after Israeli forces withdrew The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 15:44, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Option 5 I agree with The Weather Event Writer . ElLuzDelSur (talk) 07:40, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
 * This account is a blocked sock. Selfstudier (talk) 14:27, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I would argue that Option 1 is the most befitting — All the articles cited above suggest that Palestinian militants were still fighting in Khan Yunis, including an ambush in the eastern parts of the city the day before the withdrawal. This does not qualify as a defeat. What exactly is 'victory' is subjective, but the ToI articl citing continued shelling of Gaza envelope would imply Israeli failure to achieve their primary objective and thus qualifies as a defeat in my opinion. Yezhi283825 (talk) 15:24, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I stand by this one. 2A02:AA1:1646:2B48:60F1:B3FF:FE55:DF7C (talk) 16:08, 7 April 2024 (UTC) (Struck per WP:ARBECR and WP:PIA) The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 16:10, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Option 4.
 * We in Wikipedia cannot determine who won, we ca only cite reliable sources. If enough reliable sources will claim that Israel\Hamas won, we can use it also. But for now, we can only say "Israel withdrawl from southern Gaza".
 * It is important to emphsize, we cannot determine who won, it is not our job. 147.235.201.116 (talk) 15:34, 7 April 2024 (UTC) (Struck per WP:ARBECR and WP:PIA) The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 15:38, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Option 3 or 4 To declare Israeli victory we would need statement from reliable neutral source, not just Israel claiming so. Borysk5 (talk) 15:46, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Palestinian victory. In my opinion you don't declare that you that you want to eliminate Hamas from Khan Younis by besieging the city, bombing and destroying the heck out of it, occupy it step by step, receive a deadly ambush by Hamas and then withdraw from the City and claim that your operation was successful, especially when Hamas fired a salvo of rockets from Khan Younis at Israeli settlements, directly after Israeli forces withdrew from the City. 2A02:AA1:1646:2B48:60F1:B3FF:FE55:DF7C (talk) 16:02, 7 April 2024 (UTC) (Struck per WP:ARBECR and WP:PIA) The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 16:03, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I would say that Option 1 is the most befitting — All the articles cited above suggest that Palestinian militants were still fighting in Khan Yunis, including an ambush in the eastern parts of the city the day before the withdrawal. The ToI articl citing continued shelling of Gaza envelope would imply Israeli failure to achieve their primary objective and thus qualifies as a defeat in my opinion. 2A02:AA1:1646:2B48:60F1:B3FF:FE55:DF7C (talk) 16:15, 7 April 2024 (UTC) (Struck per WP:ARBECR and WP:PIA) The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 16:22, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Option 1 -
 * Israel invaded khan yunis with the intention to defeat Hamas in the area as well as to save the hostages, and they claimed to have “defeated Hamas” in the city yet Hamas maintained a strong presence in the city, including an ambush that took place just yesterday. After Israeli forces withdrew Hamas immediately began shelling border communities, indicating that they have control over the area and use it as a platform to launch operations. A clearing operation that achieves none of its, neither defeating Hamas or rescuing the hostages, only for the city to fall under the control of those it was supposed to be cleared of is by every definition of the word a defeat for the attacked The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 16:24, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Plus one to this, basically 2600:8800:2309:6200:B5CE:AE57:F34A:F5F7 (talk) 19:05, 7 April 2024 (UTC) (Struck per WP:ARBECR and WP:PIA) The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 19:06, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * It is too early to determine or state the result, as the battle is not (officially) finished: only the intense part of it, and now the tactic shifts to focused raids. The claim about Palestinian victory is absurd: more than 3,000 Hamas and PIJ gunmen were killed and hundreds were arrested, while the IDF lost only ~40 soldiers. In addition, many terrorist infrastructures, including tunnels and rocket launchers, were destroyed - Hamas lost many valuable assets. That Hamas was not wiped out to the last man standing and some survivors remaining is not a Palestinian victory. The goal of the IDF was not to conquer Khan Yunis to stay there indefinitely but to clear the terrorist infrastructure inside it.  M ath K night  16:46, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * While the number 3,000 is certainly questionable, I do agree with this, Option 4 might be the most appealing in this case. Yezhi283825 (talk) 16:50, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

It takes 4 people to shoot barrage of rockets, would that mean that if the rest was eliminated it's not a Israeli victory ?Log1223 (talk) 17:22, 7 April 2024 (UTC) (Struck per WP:ARBECR and WP:PIA) Ecrusized (talk) 17:54, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Israel saying “we won” isn’t proof especially with the constant Hamas presence in khan Yunis throughout the entire battle (even after Israel has supposedly stated that they defeated Hamas there). Hamas was able to inflict a major ambush that the IDF admitted killed 6 people, and the IDF even admitted that soldiers were being killed in the south after that supposed defeat of Hamas. Israel’s claims are not matching the situation on the ground The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 17:24, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I sited a source, it's not "Israel says it's won", it's stating a quantity fact. Hamas is hiding underground, there will always be some left overs. The issue here is if this terror organization suffered a fatal blow in the area, and the answer is yes as most of it's hiding tunnels in area is gone. Since Israel fights Hamas, it doesn't make sense to talk about "Palestinian" victory, unless you are saying Hamas = "Palestinians". Thanks. Log1223 (talk) 17:52, 7 April 2024 (UTC) (Struck per WP:ARBECR and WP:PIA) Ecrusized (talk) 18:03, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Hamas’ entire strategy is to hide underground, this is why they’ve lasted this long. Hamas being able to continue executing attacks, and retaining control challenges the Israeli POV that they have defeated Hamas, especially with how they are trying to vanquish them with a conventional invasion. The reason I say “Palestinian” is because of the involvement of the other armed groups such as the PIJ, Fatah, PFLP and the other smaller militant factions. The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 17:58, 7 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Option 1 or 2 - Israeli objective of defeating Hamas hasn't been accomplished so far. With the ground offensive coming to an end, this phase of the Israel-Hamas conflict appears to have ended in a Hamas victory. Ecrusized (talk) 17:52, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * There is no credible source that argues that the "ground offensive has come to an end". Log1223 (talk) 17:56, 7 April 2024 (UTC) (Struck per WP:ARBECR and WP:PIA) Ecrusized (talk) 18:03, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Five separate references in the article express that IDF has withdrawn from Khan Younis. Also, please note that as a non-ECP user, you cannot participate in ECP page move or RfC discussions, hence your comment above has been struck. Ecrusized (talk) 18:00, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * — Question, do you have a source which states either “Hamas victory”, “Hamas won”, “Israel lost”, “Israeli defeat” or something along those lines that directly indicates Hamas won the battle? Without a source explicitly stating that, there is no backing behind your statement, hence why I am just asking about one. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 18:34, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't have one, I don't think such sources will become available for a few days since this "battle" only ended this morning. Ecrusized (talk) 19:09, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I also don't like the fact that you're accusing me of having "no backing behind your statement" for commenting on one of the options in your RfC. Ecrusized (talk) 19:12, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I’m not accusing or anything like that. On Wikipedia, a reliable source is needed to support claims made. In your !vote, you made statements without any sources. When I asked if you had a source, you then replied you did not yet. There is no accusations occurring or anything. If I may make an observation though, since you do not have any sources to back up your reasoning for it being a “Hamas victory”, your !vote, may be seen to others as original research. That was the only reason I was asking about whether or not you had a source to back up your !vote claim and reasoning. Personally, since you did confirm you do not have a source yet, my personal belief is that your !vote doesn’t have solid ground and is original research. Again, that is my personal belief currently and doesn’t mean I am accusing you or anything. My question was just to answer my curiosity as well as potentially others. Hopefully that explains why I asked that question. Again, no accusations were being implied. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 19:18, 7 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Option 3 or 4 - Reliable sources does not attribute victory to either side. What happened was that the IDF withdrew. IDF claims they met their objective and is preparing for the Rafah offensive. "Victory" should not be attributed to any side without reliable sources. - UtoD 19:22, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Option 1 --- As per Battle of Beit Hanoun, as per many battles from the 2006 Lebanon War, this was a positional battle with Hamas retaining its positions (even using a fully-functional tunnel just yesterday to ambush and kill >4 Egoz unit soldiers), the withdrawal of the IDF makes it objectively a Palestinian victory. Two days ago some other user corrected the status of the 2006 Battle of Ayta ash-Shab from "Israeli withdrawal" to "Hezbollah victory, Israeli withdrawal". The Battle of Beit Hanoun is given as a Palestinian victory since December, and the conditions were the exact same (IDF withdraws, Hamas retains the field). If the IDF re-invades Khan Yunis somewhere in the future and manages to "win", then it would be another battle, the Second Battle of Khan Yunis, with another article. This one is over. BubbleBabis (talk) 19:47, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Option 3/4: RSes haven't definitively said whether a side obtained a victory, they've merely stated that Israel was withdrew. Hamas has claimed victory, but that's somewhat expected. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 22:30, 7 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Other - leave blank The guidance (per MOS:MIL and the template documentation) is quite explicit and limiting in how to populate this parameter. There are no good quality sources that would attribute victory to either side. There are not even WP:NEWSORG sources that do this. This might be viewed as a military operation by Israel, with the aim of clearing Hamas from the area (more or less). Israel has withdrawn but was not forced from the field. Was the operation a success or failure? That is not for us to determine or judge but a matter for WP:RSs. In any case, we are presenting this as a military conflict with a result, not an operation, with an outcome that may be presented as a success or failure. Furthermore, success or failure of an operation are not directly synonymous with victory or defeat. Arguments that they are fall to WP:SYNTH. What we know is that Israel came, it caused a lot of death an destruction (without suffering much in return) and then left of its own accord. Stating that Israel withdrew against the result parameter is not permitted per MOS:MIL. Such a simplistic statement is somewhat misleading, since it might imply that Israel was forced to retire, where this was not the case. We might state that the engagement was inconclusive but again, to do so, we would need RSs that explicitly state this to be the result. None have been presented. There is nuance to what has happened for which an infobox is totally unsuited. The nuance is best left to prose. It cannot be effectively represented by simple phrases, it does not belong in the infobox.
 * None of the RfC options presented comply with the guidance per MOS:MIL and/or are explicitly supported by RSs. In this case, where there is nuance to the result, the guidance would leave us with two options: to direct the reader to a section where the result is discussed (through sources) such as an aftermath section or we may remain silent on the result. In this case, there is nothing that resembles an aftermath section. There is no section within the body of the article to direct the reader for an explanation of the result. It isn't even mentioned in the lead! Consequently, we cannot apply this option at this point in time. Even if the lead were amended now (but not the body), we would not direct the reader to the lead from the infobox. Ultimately, the only option left to us at this time that is consistent with P&G is for the result parameter to be left blank. This is a perfectly acceptable option explicitly supported by P&G.
 * Per WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE, the infobox is to summarise key points from the [body of] the article. It tells us not to write the article in the infobox and that the article should remain complete without the infobox. This obsession with the infobox is clearly contrary to our guidance on infoboxes. Cinderella157 (talk) 01:56, 8 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Option 3 or 4 per the wording used in the sources. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:33, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Agree with Option 3 or 4 for now – to say exactly how this military engagement has finished. After several days there may be some more analysis regarding whether this may be considered Palestinian victory.--Oloddin (talk) 23:34, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Agree with Option 1 HOWEVER given that 80% of the city was destroyed, I think it might be fair to characterize it as a pyrrhic victory. However, it also might just be WP:TOOSOON to characterize the outcome of this, as it might have no impact on the greater strategic situation as this conflict moves forward, but at minimum, a city has been leveled. Might need to wait for the academics to characterize this one. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 14:39, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Option 3 or 4 for now, considering the possibility of conflict resuming. NasssaNser 09:12, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Leave blank, Option 5 as a secondary but equal vote it's just too early, and it seems that Israel has had overwhelming but incomplete success. Therefore, we should leave it blank (and hopefully stable) until we have a proper analysis. FortunateSons (talk) 13:11, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Leave blank - there are no good quality reliable sources that would attribute victory to either side, thus this would be WP:OR. Marokwitz (talk) 20:54, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Option 1 or 2 I don't understand why there should be any confusion at all over this. When you lay siege to a city, your goal is to capture it. It is a victory if you capture and hold it entirely, and it is a defeat if you fail to capture and hold it and root out the defenders. Israel failed both in its goal of capturing Khan Yunis and in its goal of completely destroying Palestinian fighters in the city, there is no reason why it should be described as anything other than a Palestinian victory (and it does not matter when news agencies repost Israeli officials claiming they won as a form of borderline propaganda). RealKnockout (talk) 21:31, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Counter point: This news article from NPR states, “Israel's defense minister said the military has defeated Hamas in the southern city of Khan Younis. You have not provided a source either to say it was a "Palestinian victory", while I just provided a source that states Israel won. Could you provide a source for "Palestinian victory"? The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 21:34, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
 * This source does not say anywhere that Israel won, it's simply quoting a statement by the Israeli defense minister claiming Israel won, this doesn't mean anything.
 * The only part where the article legitimizes the claim is when it says "The appearance by Gallant and the senior officers lent credence to the claim that Israel's military had effectively dismantled the Hamas forces defending the city." But it is well-known now that the IDF no longer has a presence in Khan Yunis or its surroundings, so even that point relies on a reality that no longer exists. RealKnockout (talk) 00:59, 25 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Comment Wait or determine first which sources can be used to decide who won. Senorangel (talk) 04:56, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Option 3 or 4 for now. To declare Israeli victory we would need statement from (multiple) reliable neutral source(s), not just Israel claiming so. -what else would they say after all. Clearly this was not an Israeli victory in the ordinary sense, but equally denying a victory to them is not for the other side. We should stick to uncontestable facts, and in this case withdrawal, whether tactical/temporary or not, was the result for the time being. Pincrete (talk) 09:29, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Option 6:I believe it wouldn't be appropriate to decide between "X withdrawal" or "Y victory" without conducting thorough research and documentation, which hasn't been done yet. I strongly disagree with making a decision based solely on the statements of the involved parties. It's advisable to keep the result section pending until scholarly research is conducted; redirect it to the "See Aftermath" section, where the outcome can be described in detail..-- Imperial [AFCND]  06:21, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Options 3 or 4, or inconclusive, or just leave blank: There are far too few independent and secondary, let alone expert sources discussing these conflicts in sufficient detail and without detail to make comprehensive determinations about the tactical, strategic implications, etc. Though, on the face of it, another pointless carpet bombing and series of morality-devoid genocidal massacres. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:50, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Visegrad24
Visegrad24 is not a reliable, credible, or accurate source, it is literally a set of social media accounts run by a singular polish citizen currently resident in the UK. it has been known to post active propaganda and false information; especially on behalf of the Hungarian government. The section dependant on its "reporting" needs to be removed. Alastair Alan Percy Warner (talk) 15:23, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Do you have a source for this? Visegrád 24 should be discussed at WP:RSN due to the reliability linked (usage by CNBC, Daily Express, Euractiv and The Times of Israel) and misinformation listed in the Wikipedia article. You can open a discussion at WP:RSN to determine its reliability. Until a reliability discussion occurs though, it is presumed to be reliable. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 15:31, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * There are plenty of sources in their own wikipedia article, including cases of false information reported specifically about the Israel-Hamas War. But I will do so. Alastair Alan Percy Warner (talk) 16:50, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Completely agree: I find that the March 2024 section gives undue weight to Visegrad's Tweet, which, in my opinion, seems to have been intended to go viral and spark debate rather than serve as a reliable assessment of Hamas's capabilities in Khan Younis fit for Wikipedia. Thank you for pointing this out SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 20:27, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Contradiction
Due to an edit by over on List of military engagements during the Israel–Hamas war, the list article contradicts this articles result by stating the siege was a “Palestinian victory”. This contradiction was changed by myself to match this article (i.e. no “victor” yet), however, Based guyy reverted that change. Therefore, the list article and this article contradict each other and attempts to change this have failed. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 18:17, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * The edit on the other article showing a "Hamas Victory" appears to have been undone. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:31, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Evidential Standards
The claim that 2 Merkava tanks were destroyed isn't backed by anything other than Hamas' word. It's just one of those videos where they shoot an RPG, hit and then go. No evidence of the tanks' destruction. The claim should be removed or, at the very least, the article should reflect that it's merely a claim without any solid backing. EpistemicKarma (talk) 18:33, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I am currently looking into it to see if it has any backing. If I (or anyone else) cannot find any other source for it soon, I will remove it from the article shortly. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 18:54, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ — Source and claim removed as I could not find a reliable source to back it up! The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 18:59, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Now I see, however that, using the same source and with exactly the same degree of evidence the claim is that 3 Merkavas were disabled. Again, no evidence to that effect, just the acceptance that engagement means the tanks were disabled. EpistemicKarma (talk) 14:30, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Israeli reentry+Current events contradiction
It appears Israel has reentered the city and proceeded to restart the siege, which Portal:Current events has already covered. I would make a proper edit request that we add the new info to fit, but I don't have enough certainty this is the case other than the below article, which might just be describing a one-off raid.

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israeli-troops-storm-back-into-eastern-khan-younis-bodies-recovered-hospital-2024-04-22/ PhilosophicalSomething (talk) 23:08, 23 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Best to wait to see if it’s a renewed operation or a brief incursion/raid The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 03:23, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Infobox#Result
Per Template:Infobox military conflict, the parameter result should either display "X victory" or "Y victory" alone. Else, link to "See Aftermath". Imperial [AFCND]  08:54, 5 May 2024 (UTC)


 * , True. You should contribute to the RfC above on the result. Cinderella157 (talk) 22:04, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 May 2024
Yfz206 (talk) 18:41, 16 May 2024 (UTC) the 3000 killed have no backed source (other than israeli source) and so this informations should be pointed.
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Charliehdb (talk) 10:19, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 June 2024
To be added to the beginning: Isvind (talk) 03:20, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅   [[User:CanonNi ]]  (talk • contribs) 12:34, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

should we prepare a 2nd Battle of Khan Younis article?
Instead of saying "ongoing" here, as it seems the IDF is preparing to attack Khan Younis yet again, we should make a 2nd Battle of Khan Younis article Genabab (talk) 21:19, 1 July 2024 (UTC)