Talk:White phosphorus munitions/Archives/2012/April

Hebrew language sources
The following content was added by on 22 April 2012:

News report on 31 Oct 2011, reveled that a Grad missile landed in the Outskirts of Ashkelon had white phosphorus.

News report during November 2011, showed that at least one rocket in the barrage on Zikim had WP

The Ynet News reported that in 19 Nov 2011, it was allowed to report that 4 of the mortars landed in Hof Ashkelon Regional Council had white phosphorus

The first assertion has no supporting reference included. The second and third assertions use Hebrew language sources. Can editors please help find English language media reports corresponding to the second and third assertions? And help find one or more news media references for the first, also? I'm not opposed to admitting the Hebrew language references if no others can be found, but English would be preferable for en.wikipedia. I should note that I have taken this content out of the article, probably temporarily, until this can be resolved. Thanks, –  OhioStandard  (talk) 14:04, 22 April 2012 (UTC)


 * A copy paste error - it should be noted that it is for 2010 and not 2011 some English sources (One incident on the lost the ref for the 31 Oct 2011 for now)


 * For Aug 2010 I can't find any English sources
 * 15 Sep 2010 - http://sderotmedia.org.il/bin/content.cgi?ID=747&q=7, http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3955467,00.html (also have info about the 19 attacks)
 * 19'th of Nov 2010 http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3987012,00.html
 * 31 Oct 2011, should be ignored as it can be only find in two places that can't be as an RS
 * Can't find any translation for the Channel two news broadcast.
 * 109.226.14.184 (talk) 14:38, 22 April 2012 (UTC)


 * That's good; I will also try to help with this. More discussion soon, trying to finish now, to get to a good "rest" place, so we can discuss more easily, without confusion. I will say, too, that Ynetnews is a good source for a reference, and Haaretz, too. Arutz Sheva is not very much accepted on English Wikipedia, although you will find argument about that, depending on the purpose for which it is used. See here for an example. Thank you for your patience. –  OhioStandard  (talk) 14:56, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Arutz Sheva reiterating Israeli Channel 2
I just removed the following from the article:

On 21 August 2011, Arutz Sheva very briefly mentioned a report it said had been broadcast on Israel's Channel 2 televsion. The Arutz Sheva reiteration of the report stated only that mortar shells asserted by unnamed munitions experts to have contained white phosphorus were fired from Gaza on that same day, and landed near Kibutz Kerem Shalom.

It's my understanding that the regular contributors in the "Israel-Palestine conflict" topic area mostly agree that Arutz Sheva will not be used for claims of this nature. I'm relying in part on RSN discussions in saying so, but mostly on comments I've seen some of my Jewish wiki-friends make among themselves about the publication. But regardless of that, in this particular case, at least, the "we heard it on televison", second-hand thing seems to me somewhat less desirable than we might like for our articles. – OhioStandard  (talk) 15:57, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Missed that http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4112021,00.html is it better ? I can search for the T.V news report but it would be in Hebrew.109.226.14.184 (talk) 16:33, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Israeli ambulance services
The following content was added by on 22 April 2012; I've moved it here for discussion:

As of 2009 the Israeli medical emergency forces are guided how to treat white phosphorous victims, and are ordered to have equipment to handle white phosphorous

This Hebrew language reference is a primary source. That doesn't mean it's bad, but a secondary source would be preferred, especially one in English, if possible. It was placed in the "Israeli-Palestinian conflict (2009–2012)" section of the article. If it is to be reinstated, I'd suggest it go in the "Gaza War (2008-2009)" section, instead, since that is its correct temporal context. – OhioStandard  (talk) 16:24, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I hope some could be good (sorry all in Heb ):

109.226.14.184 (talk) 17:17, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
 * http://www.haaretz.co.il/news/science/1.1241086 references to the guide
 * http://news.nana10.co.il/Article/?ArticleID=609650
 * http://www.news1.co.il/Archive/001-D-187379-00.html