Talk:Kamal Adwan Hospital sieges/Archives/ 1

Interrogation of Ahmad Kahlot

Do reports of the interrogation of Ahmad Kahlot deserve the prominence/weight that they currently have on this article? All the information (two paragraphs of text) is supported only by statements/claims of the Israeli military or Jewish/Israeli publications, raising concerns of distorted WP:NPOV. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 21:22, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

I agree. I do not believe they deserve the prominence they currently have. CarmenEsparzaAmoux (talk) 22:34, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

If the statement read per: the IDF claimed it was used as a Hamas military base and subsequently destroyed it in 2023.

That would be NPOV as well as due weight. Is the destruction of a hospital and the reason why not of due weight? Homerethegreat (talk) 07:50, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

It's getting coverage, but not in that many reliable sources. There's YNet [1] but I don't see much pickup outside of right-wing sources yet. Andre🚐 22:53, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

The Times has an article about it. They use guarded language and note issues with the testimony and we should do the same. Alaexis_¿question? 09:32, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

TOI is considered left-leaning,[2] YNET is considered left of center [3] Jerusalem Post Center-Right [4], Jewish Insider - Center [5]. Homerethegreat (talk) 13:55, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

The reports should not be taken as the absolute infallible truth like they currently are in this article. Salmoonlight (talk) 11:14, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

I've made some changes in that direction. Alaexis_¿question? 12:30, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

I made some significant changes [6]. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 00:55, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Your changes fall afoul of MOS:CLAIM, however. Andre🚐 01:23, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Not sure I understand. You reverted my entire edit because I used the word "claimed" too many times?

Can others review this - @Alaexis, @Homerethegreat, @CarmenEsparzaAmoux, @Salmoonlight

IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 01:35, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Indeed, your edits seem to have disregarded the above discussion about how to balance the claims. Andre🚐 01:42, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

I don't see how my edit is contrary to what has been discussed here. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 02:08, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

The point of MOS:CLAIM which was addressed in the prior edit is neither to cast doubt on either side nor to assume that a contested assertion is correct. Your edit was casting doubt on the Israeli side. Andre🚐 02:11, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

I still don't understand. If the only thing wrong with my edit is the use of the word "claimed" then it should be reworded and not entirely reverted - WP:PRESERVE. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 02:24, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

You don't understand, but I don't want to keep going back and forth. Claim is not just a word choice. It's an attitude. Your edit summary says it all. It's not UNDUE to be NPOV. CLAIM is about suspending judgment, but your edit appeared to judge that the Israeli statements were unlikely. Andre🚐 02:47, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

While your edit could use some copy-editing, it fixes the neutrality issues. I don't understand why anyone would revert it. Also, "claim is an attitude" ??? Salmoonlight (talk) 03:14, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Is there something about MOS:CLAIM that is unclear to you? To say that someone asserted or claimed something can call their statement's credibility into question, by emphasizing any potential contradiction or implying disregard for evidence Seems clear to me that this edit did do this. Andre🚐 03:18, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

@IOHANNVSVERVS, I've reviewed your edit. @Andrevan is right about the use of the word "claimed," normally we should use more neutral options. You've also added the reaction of Gaza Health Ministry, which should be included in my opinion, so I've restored that part. Alaexis_¿question? 15:32, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 19 December 2023

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) Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 08:22, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

---

Kamal Adwan Hospital → Kamal Adwan Hospital siege – Article is primarily about the siege of the hospital rather than the hospital itself. मल्ल (talk) 22:29, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

I would support the creation of an article about the siege using large portions of the text from the siege section, while retaining a more concise high-level summary on a separate page about the hospital itself. CarmenEsparzaAmoux (talk) 22:38, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

• Support to be more WP:PRECISE, this article is wholly (aside lead) on the siege, (2023 could be added to the title aswell). If other editors believe the hospital should be an separate article itself and is notable, then the resulting redirect should be converted into one. If this article is converted during this RM, then my vote can be annulled. But right now this article is wholly on the siege, with nothing on the hospital itself. Prior to the recent conflict, it was a redirect itself to List of hospitals in the State of Palestine, which could be re-considered. So the topic of this article is the siege, which just happened to be in this hospital. DankJae 02:53, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Oppose If so there would be no article named after the hospital itself, only the siege on the hospital. Either how both topics seem to be too small at its current form to warrant different article names. Best remain as it is and have a 2023 Israel Hamas section in the page. Homerethegreat (talk) 07:52, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

• Support This article is about the siege. Not opposing seperate article for hospital. REDISCOVERBHARAT (talk) 13:46, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

• Support, there is almost no information on this page about the hospital itself. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 01:10, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose, the article can be named hospital and be about all aspects of the hospital. The term "siege" doesn't add much. Andre🚐 19:55, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Support to be more WP:PRECISE, this article is wholly (aside lead) on the siege. If other editors believe the hospital should be an separate article itself and is notable, then the resulting redirect should be converted into one. If this article is converted during this RM, then my vote can be annulled. But right now this article is wholly on the siege, with nothing on the hospital itself. Prior to the recent conflict, it was a redirect itself to List of hospitals in the State of Palestine, which could be re-considered. So the topic of this article is the siege, which just happened to be in this hospital. Parham wiki (talk) 09:03, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose, more content about the hospital itself can be added in future. Alaexis_¿question? 21:40, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Families deny

Why is a family denying a family member of theirs is not a terrorist worth including, with as much if not more authority than Israel’s claims? According to Hamas Israel has killed only noncombatants. Why elevate such a claim for them? Paradox Seeker (talk) 13:47, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, WP:MANDY on any Hamas denial IMO. Andre🚐 19:59, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Israel hasn't provided evidence the arrested men and boys were militants, so they remain allegations/accusations. If RS cover the denials, we should include them. CarmenEsparzaAmoux (talk) 17:03, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

I think a more neutral way to handle it would be to say they were arrested on allegations of terrorism, which in itself shows it’s unverified. Family denying does fall under Mandy. Paradox Seeker (talk) 17:22, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

MANDY is an essay of zero relevance to NPOV. nableezy - 23:40, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

This article as written is garbage, no one wants to fix it then do whatever. None of this is good faith balanced reporting. Paradox Seeker (talk) 23:42, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Your personal feelings don't cancel out Wikipedia's content policies or constitute new ones. Please make an actual argument and be constructive instead of whining about how this article is biased against Israel. Salmoonlight (talk) 13:02, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

It’s 100% relevant if one motivates the other. Paradox Seeker (talk) 00:34, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

It’s the belief of a few random wikipedians, it has no force whatsoever and calls to follow it while ignoring core policy will be chuckled at and ignored. nableezy - 12:41, 24 December 2023 (UTC)