Jump to content

Talk:Nuseirat rescue and massacre

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk | contribs) at 11:20, 5 November 2024 (→Requested move 12 October 2024: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 June 2024

The Nuseirat massacre (initially codenamed Operation Seeds of Summer and renamed Operation Arnon[6]) was a raid carried out by Yamam, the Shin Bet and Israel Defense Forces with intelligence support from the United States[7] in the Nuseirat refugee camp on 8 June 2024 to recover hostages taken from the Re'im music festival massacre during the 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel.[8 78.149.135.232 (talk) 23:09, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit extended-protected}} template. Jamedeus (talk) 01:14, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Original operation's name

Summer Seeds - זרעי קיץ 

הראש (talk) 23:18, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge but label it correctly

While this allegedly was inteded to be a rescue operation (debatable considering israeli action over the past year). This was in fact a massacre, it is the only applicable term that accurately describes what occurred on the ground according to virtually all reputable reporting. Not labeling it as a massacre is simply disingenuous and dangerous. The level of civilian casualties exceeded 100 civilians. The dictionary desribes the term as "an indiscriminate and brutal slaughter of people" That is an accurate description of the events on the ground. It is important, not just from a morality perspective but also from a historical perspective. Let's make these decisions just based off of actual events instead of projecting biases. Andy chacha (talk) 13:50, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

if merged, it is basically Wikipedia saying that it views Palestinians as subhumans who the mass killing of hundreds isn’t even worthy of being called a massacre or acknowledged, and that the lives of 4 Israelis have priority over 250 Palestinians. The merge should have been the other way around, but Wikipedia doesn’t consider bombing 100 Palestinians civilians as they pray at dawn to be a “massacre” so it’s really hopeless with this kind of admin and moderators The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 14:43, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
that is as unfortunate as it is shameful. I guess the hasbara field in occupied palestine is operating at full capacity for this to occur. My impression had been that Wikipedia had been combating that however I guess I am mistaken. I guess if this isn't going to be a place of factual reference, then my continued support of this website is a waste of time and resources. Thank you for the heads up, I appreciate it. Andy chacha (talk) 16:49, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Andy chacha@The Great Mule of Eupatoria. Please join the discussion below. Also, even if you don't perfectly agree with the proposed title, please do indicate if you think its better than the current title.VR (Please ping on reply) 19:27, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 12 October 2024

2024 Nuseirat rescue operation → Nuseirat rescue and killings – There are two narratives about this event. For Israelis, this was a daring rescue operation to liberate 4 hostages. For the Palestinians it was the brutal killing of 250+ people in the span of a few hours. Per WP:NPOV, Wikipedia can't take sides. There is consensus to merge Nuseirat refugee camp massacre here, and while "massacre" has POV connotations, "killings" does not (see WP:KILLINGS), and has ample precedent (Dunmanway killings, 1971 Newry killings, 2014 killings of NYPD officers etc). The "2024" is unnecessary because there has only been one rescue operation in Nuseirat.VR (Please ping on reply) 19:22, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak oppose - it seems like a reasonable attempt at a compromise, but it's a little odd to use "killings" in reference to a battle, even a one-sided battle with many civilian casualties. I think "rescue operation" is perfectly accurate, but if there are concerns that it sounds too positive, "Nuseirat raid" also seems concise and fitting. — xDanielx T/C\R 22:32, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • How about Nuseirat rescue and massacre? This will cover both events without whitewashing either of them.
while "massacre" has POV connotations If it did, we wouldn't have Netiv HaAsara massacre, Alumim massacre, Kissufim massacre and Kfar Aza massacre (whose total casualties amount to less than half than those killed in the Nuseirat refugee camp massacre). M.Bitton (talk) 00:11, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Those attacks had no military targets in sight, so the "massacre" label shouldn't be particularly controversial. In this case, anything with "massacre" would be a controversial WP:POVNAME. — xDanielx T/C\R 00:36, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's your WP:OR-based "opinion" that I simply do not agree with. Those who commit massacres can claim whatever they want to justify the unjustifiable (they always do and sometimes, they even believe their own fairy tales), but what they cannot do is change the facts. M.Bitton (talk) 00:37, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It would be difficult to argue that the operation had no legitimate purpose at all when we have pictures of the rescued hostages. WP:OR applies to content and isn't relevant in discussions like this. — xDanielx T/C\R 02:14, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing remotely legitimate about the killing of hundreds of souls for the the sake of rescuing 4. M.Bitton (talk) 02:27, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@M.Bitton would you still consider "Nuseirat rescue and killings" to be a better title than the current one? VR (Please ping on reply) 17:47, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Vice regent: the current one is obviously not an option and "killings" doesn't quite cut it (as per the reasons that have been mentioned in this RM). The one that I fully support is Nuseirat rescue and massacre. M.Bitton (talk) 17:50, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you were to rank the three options, which would you assign #2 and which would you assign #3? VR (Please ping on reply) 19:54, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think that would be more accurate as long as the article reflects the events and details. I do disagree that the term massacre has p.o.v. connotations, it may be emotive but the term has a defined and specific meaning that clearly applies in this event. That is my proverbial two cents Andy chacha (talk) 00:37, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Somewhat support, though I would best say to use “massacre”, this proposal at least acknowledges Palestinians being killed as opposed to the original title focusing exclusively on the mission itself without any references to a massacre The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 02:44, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, we don't change titles to fit narratives, we use titles that reflect the reliable sources. Even if people were killed (as happens in many rescue operations), the event was a rescue operation, and this is how major sources portray it. Galamore (talk) 08:29, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
so the “narrative” Wikipedia wants to follow is to dismiss 250 Palestinians being killed and prioritising 4 Israelis being rescued? Not the best look for a “neutral” website The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 11:10, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It isn't an endorsement of any narrative. Calling a rescue operation a rescue operation doesn't imply any judgement about collateral damage. — xDanielx T/C\R 17:55, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A massacre cannot be described as a rescue operation, and besides, the notability of Nuseirat refugee camp massacre has never been disputed. M.Bitton (talk) 17:58, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The retrieval of captives (or hostages) is a rescue. The killing of 250+ civilian bystanders is a massacre. Isoceles-sai (talk) 15:43, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I don't see the improvement. The suggested use of 'killings' would be misleading to readers, as if the killings were intended (is there a major RS using this term to refer to the event at all? besides Qatari-owned channels?) This was a rescue operation, which like many other operations, also had uninvolved casualities, that should not change the article titles like other operation pages. HaOfa (talk) 09:13, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is a massive difference between a rescue operation with some casualties, and an operation that killed hundreds of Palestinians to get 4 Israeli hostages The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 11:09, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What's your source for 'hundreds'? ABHammad (talk) 16:55, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Gaza health ministry, which is historically reliable and has been consistently cited. Sorry, the “umm akshually it’s the khamas run health ministry” isn’t an argument at this point The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 04:11, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The killings happened. We cannot know what the intent was, but if we do find out then that should be reflected in the article. Please focus on the question at hand.
250 civilians killed is a massacre, the word 'massacre' is already in the title of one of articles to be merged. The word 'massacre' should be in the title of the resulting merged article. Isoceles-sai (talk) 15:47, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have a source for 250 civilians killed? As far as I can tell, the Gaza Health Ministry alleges 250 killed total; given that Hamas militants engaged Israeli forces during the rescue, it would be reasonable to assume that at least some of those are militants.
In addition, the Gaza Health Ministry isn't reliable on individual incidents. This is comparable to the Al-Ahli Arab Hospital explosion, where they overestimated casualties and falsely attributed blame. BilledMammal (talk) 10:30, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Like @XDanielx said, "rescue operation" fits perfectly. I've seen major WP:RS also using 'hostage rescue', but killing is not often used, at least not in titles. The Palestinian casualties—sources say scores/dozens (not sure how many militants)—should definitely be mentioned, but I don't think they don't belong in the title. ABHammad (talk) 17:02, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Nuseirat refugee camp massacre is the article that is named after the massacre (a notable subject). The only reason the merge has been proposed is because some editors felt that the two (the rescue and the massacre) which took place at the same time can easily be covered in the same article, but that can only succeed if the massacre is not whitewashed, that's why I proposed the neutral title Nuseirat rescue and massacre. M.Bitton (talk) 17:25, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
'massacre' would be here a POV violation since there was no intent to kill people, even if unrelated people were unfortunately killed. I'll also ask you to prove that the 'massacre' is a notable subject, Western sources do not portray the event in this way. Galamore (talk) 18:46, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The proof is in the article whose notability has never been disputed. Also, the attempt to replace the word massacre has already failed miserably (see Talk:Nuseirat_refugee_camp_massacre#Requested_move_12_June_2024 for more info). M.Bitton (talk) 19:32, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@M.Bitton That's not a proof, a proof should come from neutral reliable sources that show the term 'massacre' is frequently used when referring to this event Galamore (talk) 19:42, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Those who took part in that RM disagree with you (for all kind of reasons that I suggest you read). M.Bitton (talk) 20:01, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like many did not even get involved in that RM, probably out of expection that the merge that finally happened would take place. Why vote on a rename when you support a delete/merge? I don't see how that makes the massacre title notable (or neutral in the first place). That should be proven using WP:RS and not Wikipedia discussions. HaOfa (talk) 20:20, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The relevance of the number of the involved (a respectable 25 in this case) is true for all RMs, the rest is your irrelevant guesswork. The article is notable (the massacre did take place and is covered and commented on in multiple RS) and anyone who disagrees with the word massacre should read the RM. M.Bitton (talk) 20:30, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Hezbollah-affiliated al-Mayadeen? The extremist Mondoweiss? Qatar-run state media? If that's what you call respectable sources ... well, I don't think we have a serious base for discussion here. In Wikipedia we follow reliable sources. I prefer to rely on sources that consensus describe as reliable, we have enough of those on WP:RSN. There's no need to cherry-pick opinionated activist outlets. ABHammad (talk) 06:55, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I’m sure you’d rather the “reliable sources” Wikipedia uses to dismiss blowing up civilians as massacres that say Israelis get killed while Palestinians somehow just die in the same sentence Like the bbc
just because their governments do not worship Israel, and their client state the USA which cannot even condemn them for their crimes doesn’t make it a non-reliable source. Especially Al Jazeera which unlike your “reliable sources” that cannot even acknowledge that the 1 tonne bomb dropped on 100 people praying was by Israel, actually has reporters on the ground in Gaza The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 08:01, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Intent does not really matter here. The fact is that 250+ civilians were killed by the military. This is a massacre in my mind. Isoceles-sai (talk) 15:36, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Somewhat support provided we go with "Nuseirat rescue and massacre" - this incorporates the names used commonly by RS. WP:NDESC makes it clear that this is an appropriate use of these terms together, and will accurately describe what happened, regardless of the intent of the participants. (Which we can discuss as WP:CRYSTAL all day long to no useful end.) Smallangryplanet (talk) 08:05, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I’d support this too. If we use the “Intent” argument then not a single October 7 massacre should be labelled as such because Hamas alluded to not targeting noncombatants in its opening speech The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 08:16, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support 'Nuseirat rescue and massacre'
I agree with @Smallangryplanet @M.Bitton in naming the merged article 'Nuseirat rescue and massacre'.
@The Great Mule of Eupatoria @Andy chacha and @Vice regent make a good argument for the use of the word "massacre'. It is already in the title of one of the articles to be merged and not including it in the merged article would violate NPOV. Isoceles-sai (talk) 16:04, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Including "massacre" would be the NPOV violation, since it amounts to explicitly taking a side on the controversial matter of whether the operation should be considered a massacre. By using a plain factual title we can avoid taking either side (we're not stating that it's not a massacre), which is the only way to comply with WP:NPOVNAME. All the mainstream news organizations (PBS, NPR, CBS, NYT, AP, CNN) avoid "massacre" in their own voice for this reason; we should do the same. — xDanielx T/C\R 19:02, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When those whose voices count (the UN human rights experts who condemned the massacre) speak, the others take a walk. M.Bitton (talk) 19:10, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The sources calling this a massacre are all partisan sources, like Francesca Albanese (the first expert they mention), whoever wrote that UNISPAL post (with language like "umpteenth massacre" and "Israeli Occupation Forces"), Middle East Eye, Al Jazeera, Mondoweiss, etc. Not sure why those partisan sources would be the only ones that count. Sources with a semblance of neutrality, like the ones I mentioned above, are unanimous in not using the word in their own voice and not taking a position on the matter. — xDanielx T/C\R 21:38, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We're used to the boring song: anyone who states bothersome facts about Israel is ♪"partisan bla bla bla"♪... Anyway, there is a massive difference between the human rights experts and the usual cheerleaders of Israel (who lost all credibility). M.Bitton (talk) 21:46, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are you really denying that Israel is an occupying force? The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 03:07, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are you asking whether I consider Gaza occupied? My personal views on that aren't really relevant. Regardless, using extremely loaded language like "Israeli Occupation Forces" or "the Zionist entity" is a very clear indicator of bias. It's not really about whether or not the terms are accurate, it's about the refusal to refer to an entity by its actual name. — xDanielx T/C\R 19:12, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good point. So now we should not say 'Gaza' but 'State of Palestine'. Isoceles-sai (talk) 13:13, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Calling a force that has been militarily occupying a country, much less one for over 30 years an “occupation” is not bias, it’s common sense The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 11:20, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The event, by definition, was a massacre. Now the word may also be emotive, but the fact remains that it was a massacre. It has already part of the title of one of the articles.
The Wikipedia definition: "A massacre is an event of killing people who are not engaged in hostilities or are defenseless." Isoceles-sai (talk) 06:47, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That definition appears to be from Wikiquote? Definitions vary, but most definitions involve additional elements beyond that. Collins for example lists one definition with "cruel", another with "unnecessary, indiscriminate", and another with "wanton or savage". — xDanielx T/C\R 19:34, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support "Nuserait rescue and massacre" - this seems the best way to incorporate both topics. I'm flabbergasted at some of the comments, particularly the ones claiming that acknowledging the disproportionate amount of civilian deaths is a "narrative" or POV pushing. A massacre is a massacre, it doesn't matter if the perpetrators "didn't intend" to kill unarmed civilians (they never do). I also agree with M.Bitton, human rights organizations like Euro-Med Monitor and the UN have more weight than news outlets who cannot even use active voice when the perpetrator is Israel. Removing massacre from the title seems like the first step to remove content during the merge resulting in an article where the hundreds of deaths are merely an afterthought. The point of the merge is to consolidate overlapping data. But we're stil talking about two different events, and they should be properly covered, starting with the title. - Ïvana (talk) 02:04, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
it doesn't matter if the perpetrators "didn't intend" to kill unarmed civilians (they never do) History saw a plenty of massacres where the perpetrators did want to kill unarmed civilians. Galamore (talk) 12:30, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Gaza_genocide#Genocidal_intent_and_genocidal_rhetoric. M.Bitton (talk) 12:59, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support "Nuseirat rescue and massacre": This has been explicitly termed a massacre by Norway’s Deputy Foreign Minister [1], as well as by UN experts [2], Doctors Without Borders [3], the EU [4], and Oxfam [5]. The use of this term by top diplomats and humanitarian organizations points to the severity of the events that took place, and to me, is sufficient to define what happened as a massacre. The title should reflect that reality to maintain accuracy and clarity. CarmenEsparzaAmoux (talk) 05:07, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@CarmenEsparzaAmoux would you also support "Nuseirat rescue and killings" as a second choice? VR (Please ping on reply) 01:42, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support "Nuseirat rescue and massacre" per @CarmenEsparzaAmoux and others. There already was a page for the massacre, and per @M.Bitton it was decided to merge them together as long the massacre is not whitewashed/downplayed. The title should now reflect the fact that content for both is and will be contained within it, if only one or the other is in the title that violates NPOV and the consensus reached for the merger, and doesn't reflect the content of the page. Raskolnikov.Rev (talk) 19:09, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose any title with massacre. Massacre is inherently a POV title, and should only be used if it is the common name for an event. This does not reach that. No opinion on other changes. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:12, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, the best sources do not use these terms when describing the topic. PeleYoetz (talk) 13:02, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We're way past that (the issue of the titles of both articles has been settled). This RfC is about the title that covers both (the rescue and the massacre). M.Bitton (talk) 13:46, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Both articles have stable titles without a consensus (so far) to rename, but the other is supposed to be merged into this one, which I think means 2024 Nuseirat rescue operation is the default name until there's a consensus for something else. It's also just the original title, before the accidental POVFORK. — xDanielx T/C\R 15:09, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The consensus for the other article has been cemented with this RM. In other words, the natural title for an article that covers both has to be Nuseirat rescue and massacre. M.Bitton (talk) 15:17, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's not really our WP:MERGE process - we don't normally change the target's name, unless the merge discussion had a consensus to do so. By default, we just do the merge and leave possible renames to future discussions (as the closer did here). — xDanielx T/C\R 15:35, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's not what closing statement of the previous RfC says. M.Bitton (talk) 15:42, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
RfC? — xDanielx T/C\R 15:53, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, some editors, including myself, didn’t participate in that RM, because as a POV fork the title didn’t matter - the pertinent discussion was the merge discussion.
That RM has no bearing on the title of this article. BilledMammal (talk) 15:58, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, some editors who participated in that RM didn't participate in the RfC. It's not for us to judge what matters and what doesn't. The Rm was about what the community thinks of the title of the other article, something that is directly related to a possible merge of two article covering two distinct events (the rescue and the massacre) that took place at the same time. M.Bitton (talk) 16:09, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support with massacre as a bolded aka The UN experts, all 15 of them, signed a statement referring to this as "the umpteenth massacre by Israeli forces in Gaza" and the EU's Borrell, while congratulating the captives on their release, called the operation "another massacre of civilians" and a "bloodbath", that a bunch of US based sources refrained from the terminology is not really a surprise, although WAPO at least managed to quote experts who criticized the lack of proportionality and failure to take into account likely civilian casualties. Together with the other RS using the term, this is the least possible outcome until these potential war crimes are properly investigated.Selfstudier (talk) 14:49, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support "Nuserait rescue and massacre" per argument made by M.Bitton of preserving WP:NPOV. We have consensus for massacre in the title and also coverage from WP:RSP as pointed out by Selfstudier. To add on to Ivana and Carmen's point about top diplomats and humanitarian organizations - these are all WP:SECONDARY sources and should be given at least equal weightage to journalistic outlets, if not more, especially since the so called WP:RSP sources refuse to fully quote them and report on the matter. CoolAndUniqueUsername (talk) 05:05, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @CoolAndUniqueUsername would you also support "Nuseirat rescue and killings" as a second choice? VR (Please ping on reply) 01:42, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't support "Nuseirat rescue and killings". Although it may appear that the word "massacre" is a violation of WP:NPOV, there is an exception if the term is widely used in English-language media (see WP:POVNAMING). "Killings" also downplays the severity of the situation. The UN has referred to this as the umpteenth massacre by Israeli forces.
    In terms of ranking, both "Nuseirat rescue operation" and "Nuseirat rescue and killings" are tied for the bottom position for me. CoolAndUniqueUsername (talk) 15:59, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. We need to combine both the rescue page and the massacre page. We can worry about pedantics of exactly what its called in a later move. We need to focus on calling this page what this was and removing the POV of it only being a rescue. Similar ideas I like: Nuseirat rescue and massacre, Nuseirat incident, Nuseirat hostage raid
with regards to BilledMammals arguments, most of the sources on the Nuseirat refugee camp massacre also don't always call it rescue. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 03:02, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support the proposed title is a reasonable compromise to provide NPOV for both aspects of this incident. RachelTensions (talk) 16:57, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I Oppose per Mountain of Eden and Necrothesp. The current name is the most precise and accurate for describing the event. Adding to that, sources using 'massacre' seem subpar, while more reliable sources avoid this language, and Wikipedia should too. The main event was a rescue operation, with the deaths as collateral damage of the operation. OdNahlawi (talk) 20:40, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The main event was the massacre of hundreds of souls. The so-called "rescue" of four people doesn't even come close. M.Bitton (talk) 12:44, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have a WP:RS that refers to the deaths that resulted from the operation as the "main event"? or would that be your WP:OR? The Mountain of Eden (talk) 20:15, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
strong support for "Nuserait rescue and massacre"
Ultimately, there is no avoiding the fact that at least *276* people were killed and almost 700 were injured. While only four people were rescued from captivity. It is astonishing there is even a debate here. I'm not sure people here even comprehend just how massive that really is. Framing this massacre as "just a rescue operation" conceals in the page what should absolutely be in the title. How can we really think for a second that the rescue of 4 hostages trumps the foremost mention of the death of almost 300 people?
Even if we want to take a purely clinical view, as was kindly laid out by @CarmenEsparzaAmoux, reliable sources completely vindicate this view. Which to reiterate, include:
1. The Norwegian foreign minister: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/6/8/israels-war-on-gaza-live-israeli-army-to-be-added-to-un-child-harm-list?update=2961797
2. The UN: https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/06/un-experts-condemn-outrageous-disregard-palestinian-civilians-during-israels
3. Doctors without borders: https://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/latest/our-response-israel-gaza-war
4. EU Diplomats: https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jun/08/israel-rescues-four-hostages-in-gaza-taken-from-nova-music-festival
5. Oxfam: https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/oxfams-reaction-nuseirat-operation-released-four-hostages-and-killed-least-274
An even more comprehensive list of sources is given by Raskolnikov.Rev.
There is basically no debate here. It should be called a massacre alongside a rescue. Genabab (talk) 14:09, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly support "Nuserait rescue and massacre". I share the views expressed by @M.Bitton and others. We have credible sources that refer to this event as a massacre, and the consensus reached during the merger explicitly stated that the characterization of the massacre should not be downplayed. This concern is precisely why I opposed the merger, as I anticipated that efforts would be made to minimize the significance of the massacre. It is particularly worrying that several now banned socks were involved in this attempt. Lf8u2 (talk) 03:00, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nuseirat rescue and massacre. The original proposal of "killings" makes the title weird; but while I was initially hesitant to support massacre, a look at sources discussing the incident proves this should not be controversial, since the term is used by RS in their own voice such as Al Jazeera, Jacobin, The Intercept, and most importantly UN experts, as well as top EU officials. Makeandtoss (talk) 09:49, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:June 2024 events in Israel

Why is this category used in the article? The incident took place in the Gaza Strip, not Israel, but I am asking here first before removing to see if I have missed anything? Makeandtoss (talk) 09:44, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree that the article should not be in Category:June 2024 events in Israel. The incident occured in the State of Palestine. 147.161.189.104 (talk) 19:23, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nuseirat_rescue_and_massacre&oldid=1255527954"