Talk:Middle Eastern crisis (2023–present)

Israel under the Casualties section

This looks like it need some work. Since I am not an extended confirmed user I can't do it but i would suggest something like.

1,189 people where killed(https://www.barrons.com/news/new-tally-puts-oct-7-attack-death-toll-in-israel-at-1-189-3e038de6) and 3,400 injured(https://thehill.com/policy/4247805-israeli-death-toll-from-hamas-attack-surpasses-1000-top-military-officer-says/) in the 7th of October attack. At least 200,000 civilians have been internally displaced from both Israels northern and gazan border.(https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/dangerous-stasis-israels-northern-border-leaves-evacuees-limbo-2024-01-11/)

Since then 378 Israeli soldiers have died in the Gaza strip and 2448 have been wounded.(https://www.gov.il/en/pages/swords-of-iron-idf-casualties) On the northern border and in Lebanon 44 civilians and 70 soldiers have been killed.(https://www.timesofisrael.com/lebanese-official-says-hezbollah-agrees-to-us-ceasefire-proposal-with-comments/)

While this wouldn't be a finished product I do think that it would be a step up from the current text which is both outdated and gives the image that there have only been 12 israeli military deaths and 6 civilian deaths since the 7th of october. Jjoonnii (talk) 16:51, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

@Jjoonnii I don't see any part of the article that implies only 12 Israeli military deaths and 6 civilian deaths since 7 October. Could you point out the specific section of the article? It is also possible that you commented this on the wrong talk page by accident. VoicefulBread66 (talk) 10:55, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

”In total, 12 IDF soldiers, including deputy commander Alim Abdallah, and 6 civilians were killed in strikes from Lebanon into northern Israel.” Jjoonnii (talk) 14:47, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

@Jjoonnii I've updated the section based on your suggested text with minor changes. It's indeed much better than what was there before. Alaexis_¿question? 20:54, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 November 2024

Putting the HTS in the same column as Israel and the US is a funny POV, considering the US takes them as a terrorist organisation.

Either remove the HTS from the Infobox, or put it in its own column if its offensive is really deemed to be a part of the crisis — 🧀Cheesedealer ^!!!⚟ 01:56, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

 Done Source did not confirm that it was aligned with the other parties in that column. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 19:56, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Syrian conflict?

I think the Syrian conflict should also be added to this article. This includes the recent offensive by Tahrir al-Sham against Iranian and Syrian forces that resulted in the capture of Aleppo.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 23:08, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes, i approve of this decision, because if it wasn't for Israel and Iran attacking each other, it probably wouldn't have happened, Go ahead. Superyassi362 (talk) 13:27, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

I disagree. Unless you can provide a reliable source that establishes a conneaction between this series of conflicts and the Northwestern Syria offensive, that should not be added. "it probably wouldn't have happened" is not sufficient proof to add this into the article. VoicefulBread66 (talk) 03:49, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

There are plenty of sources that make a connection: Guardian, WSJ, Washington Post and so forth.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 18:27, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

I dunno. The events in Syria are a part of the Syrian Civil War, so it'll likely lead to duplicated info.

Also, the Syrian conflict doesn't really overlap with the conflicts described in this article. Are there any countries/armed groups that participated in the Syrian civil war and in Israel-Hamas/Hezbollah/etc war?

The Guardian article you've linked says that the events in Syria were set in motion when Hamas attacked Israel. That may well be true but they're not explicitly saying that these events are part of one crisis. I think we should write in this article that the crisis's consequences include the rebels' victory in Syria, wikilinking that article while making it clear that it's not in the scope of this one. Alaexis_¿question? 19:52, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

"Are there any countries/armed groups that participated in the Syrian civil war and in Israel-Hamas/Hezbollah/etc war?"

Yeah, Israel (see this section of the article). JasonMacker (talk) 00:36, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Reverts

Smallangryplanet, can you please explain why decided to revert the edit that introduced neutral point of view and why adding an issue to a maintenance template is vandalism? Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:13, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

I don't see how removing Palestinian victims of Israeli bombing is NPOV. Is there any dispute that Palestinians were bombed in the Gaza Strip? VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 02:03, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

In statements about military operations such as bombings, it is the location that's specified, not the nationality that lives there. Bombing of Dresden doesn't say that it was a "bombing of the Germans" or "bombing of the Dresdenites". I know you're very well aware of this. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 02:45, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

@Thebiguglyalien this is exactly why I reverted it as not being NPOV – Bombing of Dresden is a reference to a specific assault, so making it appear as though there was an isolated, solitary "Bombing of Gaza" is an obvious editorialisation. Besides, the wikilink in question is already to a page called Bombing of Gaza, and the next sentence refers to Palestinians, so it makes sense in context.

With regards to the WP:PROSELINE removal the article is not an article that attempt[s] to be (and should be) prose, but end[s] up looking like timelines. It looks like there's already a talk topic about this here where other editors want the page to be more like a timeline, so I suggest taking it up with them. Smallangryplanet (talk) 10:23, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

@Vice regent and Smallangryplanet: Re "bombing of Palestinians" I don't see how this is a NPOV issue, this is an English issue. "making it appear as though there was an isolated, solitary "Bombing of Gaza" is an obvious editorialisation" - if you make that (incorrect) assumption then you'd make the same assumption as it is right now. The article is Israeli bombing of the Gaza Strip, not Israeli bombing of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. Naturally, the people that are in the bombed location are the people being bombed. (If anything Palestinians is too general, as the mention is for the Gaza Strip; Gazans would be the specific identifier). DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 11:19, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

"Gazans" would be incorrect, because not every Palestinian living in the Gaza Strip is from Gaza. If it's not an NPOV issue and instead an English issue, then surely the sentence as-is is correct, or is it grammatically incorrect to say "bombing of Palestinians" ? Smallangryplanet (talk) 11:39, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

No one person living in a territory is necessarily from that territory wheresoever, but it is safe to assume the vast majority of people who suffer from the bombing of Gaza are, well, Gazans.

It is not grammatically incorrect per se but rather tautological and thus poor writing. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 11:59, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

How about I change it to "Israel retaliated by bombing Palestinians and invading the Gaza Strip." ? That's factual (they've been bombing the West Bank too) and backed up by the article. Smallangryplanet (talk) 12:04, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Israel-Hamas War indicates the West Bank is a minor spillover rather than a main focus, considering it doesn't seem to be considered important enough to include in the lead of a more specific article I wouldn't say it's important enough to include in the lead of this broader article (although that may change in the future). I'd suggest either what I originally had (removing "Palestinians"), or shortening further with "Israel retaliated by [[Israeli bombing of the Gaza Strip|bombing]] and [subsequently?] [[Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip|invading]] the [[Gaza Strip]]." DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 12:36, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

It's included in the infobox list of casualties etc. And we're not referencing it directly, just that Palestinians have been bombed since 7th October 2023. I don't understand the need to remove "Palestinians" from this lead, especially as the crisis in the region keeps spiralling outwards and onwards. Smallangryplanet (talk) 13:07, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

I don't currently have an issue with including or removing "Palestinians" in and of itself, but its current placement warrants removal as it is improper style. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 13:17, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

What would be proper style here? (Genuinely asking) Smallangryplanet (talk) 13:56, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

@Smallangryplanet: without the unnecessary repetition. If there is a reason to specify the targeted group, then inclusion would be warranted, but not otherwise. "bombing Kurds in Syria" is proper, but "bombing Kurds in Kurdistan" or "in Rojava" is unnecessary repetition. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 10:57, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

@DatGuy understood - fixed. Thanks! Smallangryplanet (talk) 13:46, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Then the first sentence should be changed from "...which began with the Hamas-led attack on Israel..." To which began with the Hamas-led attack on Israelis and invasion of Israel...". If we're gonna use rhetoric that highlights victims it should go both ways Fyukfy5 (talk) 21:00, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

The October 7th attack is one incident, though. (It would be one thing if the Israeli bombing of the Gaza Strip ref was to a specific attack, but it refers to an ongoing aerial bombardment campaign.) Smallangryplanet (talk) 11:05, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 December 2024

Please add {{Extended confirmed topicon}} to the top of the article, since the article is protected but the icon is missing. — ypn^2 02:27, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

 Done sort of - the topicon template is for userpages while {{pp-extended|small=yes}} is for these sorts of pages. (More here.) Smallangryplanet (talk) 10:32, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 December 2024

Please add "Northwestern Syria offensive (2024)" because the crisis in the Middle East is not limited against Israel only, I Know it is a part of the Syrian Civil War but it coincides with the Israel-Hamas-Lebanon war, let's make the discuss the conflicts in the Middle East generally in this article, after accepting you can make "Northwestern Syria offensive (2024)" part of the Middle Eastern crisis (2023–present) and the Syrian Civil War. 178.81.55.110 (talk) 15:01, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Not done (yet)... I'm a little confused, where to you want to add Northwestern Syria offensive (2024)? - Adolphus79 (talk) 15:11, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

In event section and infobox, This article is supposed to bring together all the conflicts in the Middle East after 2023 generally. 178.81.55.110 (talk) 15:40, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

@178.81.55.110 This article is about the series of conflicts in the Middle East which are linked in one way or another to the Israel–Hamas war. As the Northwestern Syria offensive doesn't really have any link to that, it should not be included in this article (unless you can provide a reliable source that establishes a link). VoicefulBread66 (talk) 03:50, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

I've WP:BOLDly added it to the article — while I didn't include it in the actual edit, my rationale is that, per the NYT and others, the rebel offensive was the direct result of the weakening of Hezbollah and Iran in the Iran- and Hezbollah-Israel conflicts. DecafPotato (talk) 06:42, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

@DecafPotato Please add this rationale into the section on the article. VoicefulBread66 (talk) 07:51, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Done. DecafPotato (talk) 03:11, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Edit Request

Change the sentence in the lede from "Israel retaliated by bombing Palestinians..." To something more scholarly/relevant like "Israel has retaliated with an extensive ground campaign and airstrikes against Gaza with the stated goal of destroying Hamas and releasing the hostages" Fyukfy5 (talk) 21:06, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

 Not done — Please see the discussion on this talk page above under the header "Reverts" DecafPotato (talk) 21:20, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Edit Request

Please change the first sentence from "...which began with the Hamas-led attack on Israel..." To which began with the Hamas-led attack on Israelis and invasion of Israel..." This is consistent with the following sentence which states that Israel "Retaliated by bombing Palestinians and invading the territory". Fyukfy5 (talk) 21:25, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

@Fyukfy5, I urge you to participate in the ongoing discussion instead of making separate edit requests. DecafPotato (talk) 20:40, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Syrian opposition in infobox

Currently, the infobox displays the Syrian opposition alongside the former Assad government on the "Iranian side" of the infobox under the "combatants" header. I know this is because Israel's invasion of Syria technically is against the opposition, but I think it's silly to put the opposition on the same "side" as the former government given that a huge part of the crisis was the opposition ousting that government and forming a new Syria. I therefore propose three options for a resolution to this.

1. The current status quo (Ba'athist Syria alongside the Syrian opposition)

2. Third side (Syrian opposition separate from both Ba'athist/Iranian side as well as the Israeli side)

3. Israeli side (Noting that the Syrian opposition directly opposes the former Syrian government and Iran; and that the Israeli attacks have been mostly against former government facilities/bases and that the victorious rebels have not militarily opposed any of the Israeli actions)

If I receive no response, I'll WP:BOLDly choose Option 3, because I think it makes the most sense, but I'm curious to see what others think. DecafPotato (talk) 18:31, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

they are at war with the transitional govt. The govt isnt happy but is too tired to care is what i've seen but that doesn't mean it goes into israel's side. I believe a 3rd side works because they fought against the ba'thists (backed by iran). SCR@TCH!NGH3@D (talk) 12:13, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Could we add a subtitle for 'Fifth Arab-Israeli War'

There aren't a ton of sources using that, but I don't want to rename the article, I just want it added as an alternate to the opening of the page.

Israel is at full scale war with Hamas(one of the two governments of Palestine and the one that won the last election) and Hezbollah(the strongest non-governmental force in the world, stronger then the actual Lebanon army), is invading Syria(an Arab nation and one they never reconciled with unlike Jordan and Egypt), plus skirmishes with the Houthis(one of the two main factions vying for power in Yemen and the one holding the capital) and arab militias in the West Bank. This is full scale war with a death toll that surpasses the First, Second, Third, and Fourth Arab-Israeli Wars. Israel is fighting multiple Arab state entities.

The fact Iran is the main funder and isn't Arab isn't inherently exclusionary either, the Soviets funded the Arab Nations significantly in the Third Arab Israeli War and had their own pilots involved and fighting in the Fourth One. And on the other hand, Israel had massive British and French help in the Second Arab Israeli War.

No it's not the popular name, only a couple articles are using it, I'm making mostly an academic case, but given I just want it as an alternate subtitle somewhere in the first paragraph I think that's enough. 2604:3D09:1F7F:8B00:6C02:1E6F:B299:9942 (talk) 05:26, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Edit Request- Clean up or get rid of the belligerents infobox

Currently the belligerents infobox has the Syrian rebel groups and Assad-led Syrian government as being on the same side despite them not fighting anyone except each other. The nature of this page is that its about many different conflicts so I don't how to effectively make the infobox correct, maybe just link to pages on each different conflict? Maybe it's as simple as moving the Syrian rebel groups to the other side, although this still would show that Israel and the Assad-led government were in a conflict before it fell which I haven't seen reports on. Fyukfy5 (talk) 14:38, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Edit Request - update casualty counts

Update the casualty counts (Many reports that the Palestinian casualties are 45K+, Israeli casualties are 1,804 per Kan 11 - Israel's state media) and add Casualty counts from the rebel victory in Syria. Fyukfy5 (talk) 14:54, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

My bad, I didn't realize the Syrian civil war isn't part of this article, disregard the second part of my request. Fyukfy5 (talk) 15:41, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Retaliation

I don't think that this wording reflects the inline sources ([1],[2]).

Can you provide quotes which support the current wording ([the 7 October attack was a retaliation to the escalating Israeli violence against Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza.)? The WP describes the preceding period as follows The tensions in Gaza followed a violent summer in the West Bank, where tit-for-tat attacks flared between Palestinian militants on one side and Israeli forces and Jewish settlers on the other. They mention attacks by both sides and only say that they preceded the October 7 events chronologically rather than being their cause. Alaexis_¿question? 22:21, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

 Done - the first source says it more explicitly, the second provides additional context. I can add more RS for this but probably not until later today. Smallangryplanet (talk) 10:02, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. As you can see, it's Hamas that says that this was in response to the blockade, as well as recent Israeli military raids in the West Bank and violence at al-Aqsa Mosque. The rest of the quotes describe attacks by both sides (see my quote above, also year of rising tensions between Israel and Palestinians in the West Bank. Since our sources attribute this claim, we should do the same. There is also another question of whether this is lede-worthy but we can discuss it separately. Alaexis_¿question? 20:34, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Sure, I mean, I think we can reliably trust that the group launching the attack is a trustworthy source of information on why they launched the attack. I've updated it to attribute it to Deif in particular. I think it is not worth a separate argument - or any argument - on if it is lead worthy, since MOS:OPEN makes it clear that a lead should establish the context in which the topic is being considered by supplying the set of circumstances or facts that surround it, and this is crucial context for understanding everything that follows. (Otherwise we are telling people that This Sort Of Thing Just Happens, and that is both inaccurate and unhelpful to the reader.) Smallangryplanet (talk) 11:11, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Edit Request

Under the casualties tab, change "A majority of... scholars believe" to "A poll conducted by [ ] found that a majority..." Or "A majority of scholars polled..." Unless they asked all the scholars (or almost all) we can't know what a majority believe, only what a majority of those who answered believe. Fyukfy5 (talk) 14:29, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Improving article quality

This article is heavily based on a previous article that was heavily nonstandard and didn't present information that well. I have started the process at User:Fantastic Mr. Fox/sandbox of moving the information around so that it is chronological. I copied over everything to do with Israel-Palestine, but there is no format yet to split up the article into more readable chunks. Help would be greatly appreciated to complete this project. Fantastic Mr. Fox (talk) 15:31, 22 December 2024 (UTC)