Talk:Destruction of cultural heritage during the Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip
Destruction of cultural heritage during the Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: August 31, 2024. (Reviewed version). |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. Parts of this article relate to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing the parts of the page related to the contentious topic:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. If it is unclear which parts of the page are related to this contentious topic, the content in question should be marked within the wiki text by an invisible comment. If no comment is present, please ask an administrator for assistance. If in doubt it is better to assume that the content is covered. |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Destruction of cultural heritage during the Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Destruction of cultural heritage during the Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip at the Reference desk. |
This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination.
Discussions:
|
Possible sources
[edit]- https://www.riwaq.org/
- https://www.thenation.com/article/world/gaza-cultural-genocide/
- https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/04/everything-beautiful-has-been-destroyed-palestinians-mourn-a-city-in-tatters
- https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/1/14/a-cultural-genocide-which-of-gazas-heritage-sites-have-been-destroyed
- https://www.npr.org/2024/02/04/1226295081/gaza-iconic-sites-destroyed-in-war
- https://www.theguardian.com/world/gallery/2024/jan/11/palestinian-cultural-heritage-gaza-destruction-in-pictures?ref=upstract.com
- https://worldcrunch.com/focus-israel-palestine-war/cultural-genocide-israel-gaza
- https://carnegieendowment.org/sada/91577
- https://www.museumsassociation.org/museums-journal/news/2024/01/widescale-destruction-of-cultural-heritage-in-gaza/
- https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/1/14/a-cultural-genocide-which-of-gazas-heritage-sites-have-been-destroyed
- https://www.aljazeera.com/program/upfront/2023/12/22/israel-gaza-war-why-are-culture-and-society-targets
- https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2024/3/25/why-archaeologists-must-speak-up-for-gaza
- https://www.aljazeera.com/program/the-bottom-line/2024/1/11/french-historian-israel-destroyed-4000-year-old-culture-in-gaza
John Cummings (talk) 10:20, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 April 2024
[edit]This edit request to Destruction of cultural heritage during the Israel–Hamas war has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change "The medieval Qasr al-Basha (also known as Pasha's Palace) was left in ruined after Israeli bombardment.[35][34]" to "The medieval Qasr al-Basha (also known as Pasha's Palace) was left in ruins after Israeli bombardment.[35][34]" Thegkz (talk) 12:12, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- Done Jamedeus (talk) 17:01, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you Thegkz for spotting that and Thegkz for fixing the typo. Richard Nevell (talk) 17:22, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Misleading edit summary
[edit]@BilledMammal: Your edit summary ["Sources generally refuse to attribute blame for the general destruction, though specific instances are attributed"] is factually incorrect as sources that are reliable according to Wikipedia, i.e. Al Jazeera, Middle East Eye, Jacobin and The Nation to cite a few examples, have explicitly cited Israel as the perpetrator as a whole, and not in specific instances. [1], [2], [3], [4]. Adding also EuroMed monitor [5]. Not only that but they have called it a cultural genocide. Waiting for your self-revert of the move given the factually incorrect edit summary. Makeandtoss (talk) 12:09, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- You've listed sources that there is also generally a consensus are biased. Less biased sources, such as the Heritage for Peace, decline to attribute general blame. We should keep the title neutral, and provide the detail in the article where appropriate context can be given.
- Further, per WP:PCM,
The discussion process is used for potentially controversial moves
. It was inappropriate for you to boldly move this article - you should have been aware that such a move would be controversial. BilledMammal (talk) 12:16, 1 May 2024 (UTC)- The sources provided above are all reliable sources according to Wikipedia and neutrality does not mean censorship of what reliable sources are saying. I took the bold move in alignment with RS per BRD, which is within my right, and your revert, which despite also being within your right, was made contrary to RS. There is no need for this to be controversial as RS are clear, and I would expect better good faith editing here. Makeandtoss (talk) 12:26, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Requested move 1 May 2024
[edit]- 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. to Destruction of cultural heritage during the 2023 Israeli invasion of Gaza. (non-admin closure) ToadetteEdit! 11:40, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
Destruction of cultural heritage during the Israel–Hamas war → Israeli destruction of cultural heritage during the Israeli invasion of Gaza – RS are clear in not only attributing the destruction of Gaza's cultural heritage, which is obvious as Israel is the party destroying Gaza, but also in calling this destruction deliberate and systematic. The current title is misleading and implies the destruction occurred as a result of fighting in the war, rather than as a result of deliberate and systematic Israeli campaign, as demonstrated by RS: Al Jazeera, Middle East Eye, Jacobin and The Nation to cite a few examples, which called it even a cultural genocide. [6], [7], [8], [9] Also we have a similar article Destruction of cultural heritage by the Islamic State. Makeandtoss (talk) 12:31, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. Per Human Rights Watch, Isreal is the primary cause for this destruction - but thus not the only cause, and thus the proposed title would both be inaccurate and an WP:NPOV violation. Further, the sources presented by the nominator in support tend to be biased; for example,
There is a consensus that Jacobin is a generally reliable but biased source
. Neutral and reliable sources tend to either attribute the claim that Israel is responsible for all the destruction , or decline to make any claim, attributed or not, about who is responsible. (For example; The Guardian, Heritage for Peace, and the BBC)
- See also this HRW report, which says between 10 and 20 percent of rockets launched fall short and hit Gaza, making it difficult or even impossible at times to determine who is responsible for a specific incident. BilledMammal (talk) 13:37, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for providing an extra reliable source that shows that Israel has been primarily destroying cultural heritage. I will add that to the reliable sources cited above that have said that such efforts by Israel are systematic and deliberate. As for the original research and synthesis made, I won’t be taking it into consideration. Makeandtoss (talk) 16:06, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- That's some interesting theory. Basically God of the gaps stuff – really testing the limits of the language of that HRW report. Even if we go along with that errant missiles logic, it's well known that Gazan militants missiles are pretty poxy things that don't do any damage, let alone have the ability to do much destruction. So ... do you have any source directly stating that an errant militant missile even hit, let alone destroyed a piece of cultural heritage? And if not, please can you leave your OR at the door. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:55, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose as this article focuses on all destruction of cultural heritage, not just the destruction Israel is responsible for (even though they are responsible for most of it). Adding "Israeli" to the article title would be a harmful re-scoping; we shouldn't need to make sure destruction was caused by Israel to include it in this article. Elli (talk | contribs) 03:02, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose as it would unduly restrict the articles scope to only actions taken by one of the cultural combatants, both for destruction directly caused by Palestinian armed groups and due to dual use by them. This would either be a misleading title or the cause for an unnecessary spin out. Also per the arguments above, it’s quite clear that the less biased the RS is, the more it’s clear that Israel is not the only responsible party. FortunateSons (talk) 08:38, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Any sources for non-Israeli destruction of cultural heritage? Any reliable, independent RS that demonstrate your other, lesser claim that don't solely rely on IDF information or testimony? Iskandar323 (talk) 18:03, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Lesser claim (I assume being dual use) is widely known and not generally denied, but yes, by the nature of it, generally relies on IDF testimony, but it’s cited by the BBC article above in a way that makes it plausible, and there are cases where alleged video footage exists. There are also other cases with video footage, but it all naturally originates from the IDF, there simply is no truly neutral RS in Gaza right now.
- Regarding the main claim, the (relatively) neutral RS do not claim that the damage was caused exclusively by Israel, so neither should we. There is also at least shared responsibility for destruction by Israel if there is dual use, and it’s implausible that they can fight inside without at least damaging cultural heritage, even discounting the statistical number of rocket failures, but that’s neither here nor there.
- However, I believe the issue at the core of my vote to be addressed by the suggestion from K.e.coffman (maybe adding the word strip at the end to disambiguate from Gaza City), so while I object to the original move request, I don’t object to the alternative. It’s possible that we will have more specific information in the future (in either direction), but based on what is currently available, I would consider it optimal.
- FortunateSons (talk) 19:38, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Any sources for non-Israeli destruction of cultural heritage? Any reliable, independent RS that demonstrate your other, lesser claim that don't solely rely on IDF information or testimony? Iskandar323 (talk) 18:03, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Support, but there's no need to mention Israel in the title twice; this doesn't read well. Suggest Destruction of cultural heritage during the Israeli invasion of Gaza, or Destruction of cultural heritage during the 2023 Israeli invasion of Gaza (since there were several invasions), to match the main article: Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip (2023–present). Including "invasion" in the title sufficiently indicates the primary responsible party, IMO, while correctly reflecting the scope of the article. --K.e.coffman (talk) 11:26, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- I would support this middle ground solution between the opposing views. Makeandtoss (talk) 11:44, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Support this proposal—blindlynx 17:41, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Support this version per the rationale described. Scope is correct. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:46, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Support per my comment above FortunateSons (talk) 19:39, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Support under the title of Destruction of cultural heritage during the 2023 Israeli invasion of Gaza for the reasons outlined by K.e.coffman. Richard Nevell (talk) 15:43, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Please fix typo
[edit]On 7 October 2023, Hamas attacked Israel, killing more than a thousand people including nearly 700 civilians (of which 36 were children). Some 259 hostages we're also taken. we're -> were WeInTheUSA (talk) 18:35, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
Requested move 31 July 2024
[edit]- 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. (non-admin closure) RodRabelo7 (talk) 10:26, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
Destruction of cultural heritage during the 2023–2024 Israeli invasion of Gaza → Destruction of cultural heritage during the Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip – The parent article is Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip. A RM found that the 2023 invasion is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the term "Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip".VR (Please ping on reply) 02:12, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support Seems a straightforward change; the new title is shorter without losing clarity and is consistent with the main topic title. Richard Nevell (talk) 19:52, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Strong support for the reasons mentioned above. Makeandtoss (talk) 07:21, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support per nom. मल्ल (talk) 21:00, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- oppose unless we expand scope (but I would support the change with expanded scope) - "Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip" has happened on more than one occasion. Most notably in 1967, but also possibly during the Suez Crisis? There might have also been some ground assaults between 2005 and 2023? FourPi (talk) 09:13, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- But it looks like I'm too late for the primary topic? so "support with expanded scope", if we can find anything relevant. I don't feel strongly enough about it to re-open debate on the main topic. FourPi (talk) 09:52, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Destruction of cultural heritage during the Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Richard Nevell (talk · contribs)
Reviewer: Personisinsterest (talk · contribs) 11:51, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
- Just want to say, this is my first GA review. Anyway, the article seems fine, and it's about an important topic. Will review soon. Personisinsterest (talk) 11:51, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
Comments, suggestions
[edit]I made a few minor edits: Took away a redlink, added some commas, and corrected some numbers from October 7th. (Not anyone's fault, new data came out). I also moved a statement from one section to another because I thought it fit better there, but I removed it once I saw it was already there. Kept it removed from the other section because it was in the other. Doesn't matter. Sorry.
Anyway, I would suggest linking Gaza genocide in sentences about the ICJ case. I would say to make a Background section and put "Cultural heritage in Gaza" and "Destruction of cultural heritage" in it, with the exception of the second paragraph of the latter which can go to events. And finish refs 4 and 5. Doesn't matter for the review, just a suggestion.
Review
[edit]1) Well-written
- 1a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct
- 1b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation -
Cultural genocide is a value-laden term.
2) Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check
- 2a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline
- 2b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose)
- 2c) it contains no original research
- 2d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism (32.4% on Earwig, only significant thing is a quote.)
3) Broad in its coverage
- 3a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic -
Yes, except for the lead. The first paragraph is fine, but the lead, which is supposed to address the main aspects of the topic, doesn't here. It dedicates a paragraph to the genocide accusations (which do have a place, just not as a paragraph) which are only mentioned once in the body. I feel the last paragraph should hold the genocide accusations, to tie it into the systemic cultural destruction. Anyway, there should be a paragraph in the middle that talks about some specific cultural destruction, as that is the main part of the article.
- 3b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style)
4) Neutral:
- 4) Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each -
Only thing is that it should be worded "The destruction has been characterized by some as cultural genocide" in the lead. Without this, it gives the false impression that this is a mainstream conclusion, and not just something that many but only some analysts say.
5) Stable:
- 5) Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute
6) Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio
- 6a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content
- 6b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions
Overall: - Great article, just fix lead. pass @Richard Nevell
- Thank you for the helpful feedback, Personisinsterest. Good point about the lead so I'll get onto that. I saw a recent new story about the Great Omari Mosque which may need to be integrated into the article, so I'll look into that at the same time. I should be able to get to that this week. Hopefully sooner rather than later but it's shaping up to be a busy one. Richard Nevell (talk) 20:47, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
- No problem, and thanks for bringing this issue to light. Personisinsterest (talk) 06:24, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Personisinsterest Here is the additional information I've added, and this diff shows the changes addressing the points raised in the review, primarily adding more detail to the lead and adding qualification around cultural genocide as suggested. Let me know if further changes are needed to fully address your points. Richard Nevell (talk) 22:53, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- You have done all the needed changes, and with the article passing the other criteria, it passes. Personisinsterest (talk) 01:23, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- The destruction of cultural heritage in Gaza is a really important part of what’s happening right now, and it’s kind of overlooked. I’m glad people are doing this. Personisinsterest (talk) 01:25, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Personisinsterest Here is the additional information I've added, and this diff shows the changes addressing the points raised in the review, primarily adding more detail to the lead and adding qualification around cultural genocide as suggested. Let me know if further changes are needed to fully address your points. Richard Nevell (talk) 22:53, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
Did you know nomination
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Crisco 1492 talk 10:41, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- ... that cultural heritage sites damaged during the Israeli invasion of Gaza include the Great Mosque of Gaza, an ancient port, a university library, and cemeteries?
- Source: The information in the hook is drawn from a few different sources:
- Gostoli, Ylenia; Abu Riash, Abdelhakim (2023-10-20). "'We were baptised here and we will die here': Gaza's oldest church bombed". Al Jazeera. Archived from the original on 2023-10-28. Retrieved 2024-04-01.
- "Images show major damage to Gaza's oldest mosque". BBC News. 2023-12-08. Archived from the original on 2024-06-21. Retrieved 2024-06-26.
- "How Israel has destroyed Gaza's schools and universities". Al Jazeera. Retrieved 2024-05-25.
- Diamond, Jeremy; Darwish, Muhammad; Salman, Abeer; Brown, Benjamin; Mezzofiore, Gianluca (2024-01-20). "At least 16 cemeteries in Gaza have been desecrated by Israeli forces, satellite imagery and videos reveal". CNN. Archived from the original on 2024-01-20. Retrieved 2024-04-04.
- Gostoli, Ylenia; Abu Riash, Abdelhakim (2023-10-20). "'We were baptised here and we will die here': Gaza's oldest church bombed". Al Jazeera. Archived from the original on 2023-10-28. Retrieved 2024-04-01.
- "Images show major damage to Gaza's oldest mosque". BBC News. 2023-12-08. Archived from the original on 2024-06-21. Retrieved 2024-06-26.
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Victoria Siddall
- Comment: The choice of image may not work as well with Alt1.
Richard Nevell (talk) 21:36, 2 September 2024 (UTC).
- GA status confirmed, nominated within time frame, QPQ done, article has been stable since. Both hooks are fine - backed up by refs and neutral. GTG --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:04, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
Table
[edit]@Richard Nevell: thank you for creating this very important article, and in particular for all the hard work to get it to WP:GA status.
I have taken the liberty to add a table of sites, based on the latest UNESCO list. It still needs work to identify all the sites, and importantly, to write articles about each of them. Other columns could be added, such as a thumbnail image, or the date of destruction, or details of the exact current status (i.e. how badly destroyed each one is). Similar to the tables at List of towns and villages depopulated during the 1947–1949 Palestine war or Canaanite and Aramaic inscriptions.
What do you think?
Onceinawhile (talk) 09:21, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- I have written notices inviting help at four wikiprojects ([10], [11], [12], [13]): WP:PALESTINE, WP:ISRAEL, WP:IPCOLL and WP:ARCH. Onceinawhile (talk) 09:34, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for adding the table, Onceinawhile, it's a very useful record. Ultimately, I think that the list may end up having its own article as damage to more sites is confirmed it may simply become too long and a summary could be kept here. The format of List of damaged cultural sites during the Russian invasion of Ukraine works quite well. Having individual articles on the damaged or destroyed sites is an important step. Richard Nevell (talk) 10:20, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you Richard. That List article is a helpful precedent, and I agree it may well be right – either now or later – to split the UNESCO list out of this article. I am happy with whatever you decide, since you have led the way here. Onceinawhile (talk) 13:33, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for adding the table, Onceinawhile, it's a very useful record. Ultimately, I think that the list may end up having its own article as damage to more sites is confirmed it may simply become too long and a summary could be kept here. The format of List of damaged cultural sites during the Russian invasion of Ukraine works quite well. Having individual articles on the damaged or destroyed sites is an important step. Richard Nevell (talk) 10:20, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Update on status of various sites
[edit]Various possible updates here, which I may get around to cross-checking on page at some point, but otherwise, others are welcome to. Iskandar323 (talk) 20:19, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia good articles
- History good articles
- GA-Class Arab world articles
- Low-importance Arab world articles
- WikiProject Arab world articles
- GA-Class Archaeology articles
- Mid-importance Archaeology articles
- GA-Class Architecture articles
- Mid-importance Architecture articles
- GA-Class Crime-related articles
- Mid-importance Crime-related articles
- GA-Class Terrorism articles
- Low-importance Terrorism articles
- WikiProject Terrorism articles
- WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography articles
- GA-Class culture articles
- Mid-importance culture articles
- WikiProject Culture articles
- GA-Class International relations articles
- Mid-importance International relations articles
- WikiProject International relations articles
- GA-Class Israel-related articles
- Mid-importance Israel-related articles
- WikiProject Israel articles
- GA-Class Islam-related articles
- Low-importance Islam-related articles
- WikiProject Islam articles
- WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration articles
- GA-Class military history articles
- GA-Class Middle Eastern military history articles
- Middle Eastern military history task force articles
- GA-Class Post-Cold War articles
- Post-Cold War task force articles
- GA-Class Palestine-related articles
- Mid-importance Palestine-related articles
- WikiProject Palestine articles
- Wikipedia controversial topics