Talk:Killing of Alon Shamriz, Yotam Haim, and Samer Talalka

Requested move 18 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: not moved. Per consensus. – robertsky (talk) 01:56, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

---

Killing of Alon Shamriz, Yotam Haim, and Samer Talalka → Israeli army killing of three Israeli hostages – The names of the people killed arent the story here, and this violates WP:CONCISE and WP:NOTMEMORIAL nableezy - 18:31, 18 December 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. — mw (talk) (contribs) 20:48, 25 December 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 17:52, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Alternatives?

• "Three Israeli hostages shot dead by the Israeli Army "
• "Israeli army shooting of three Israeli hostages"
• "Three Israeli hostages shot by Israeli Army"

Support a move to Israel Defense Forces killing of three Israeli hostages. Gets across the same idea, while being more specific. XTheBedrockX (talk) 01:51, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

It's less specific, it could also refer to 3 members of the Beibis family (allegedly killed by an airstrike), and 2 other sets of 3 hostages that were implied (by one side) to have been killed by the IDF. The army doesn't do airstrikes, but the proposed title is still not very clear. And one of the sets of 3 hostages was described as "killed by Israeli weapons" which could mean anything. It's important to distinguish this very clear incident from those ambiguous claims. Irtapil (talk) 00:48, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Weak oppose I don't see how this violates WP:CONCISE or WP:NOTMEMORIAL. The "Killing of [name(s) of victims]" is what appears to be typically used on Wikipedia, even when the victims are non-notable (see Killing of Hadeel al-Hashlamon, Killing of Sa'ad Muhammad Youssef al-Atrash, Killing of Abdel Fattah al-Sharif, Killing of Avi Sasportas and Ilan Saadon, Killing of Yuval Castleman). Mooonswimmer 09:25, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

In each of those cases it is about a single person (or two in one case, and that one Id probably rename too), here the story is that the army killed three hostages. And I very much doubt that people are searching for these names as opposed to army killed hostages. nableezy - 15:00, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Oppose. Proposed name is not specific as it is plausible (and claimed by Hamas) that other hostages were accidentally killed by Israel, and the number three is not sufficient for precision. Other articles such as Killing of Osama bin Laden include the person name. This might be renamed in the future if a common name emerges. Marokwitz (talk) 08:09, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Can you please provide a single reliable source that says these people were not killed by the Israeli army? Because on its face, with Israel investigations finding that one soldier shot all three initially and then several more shot the last one when he came back out of the building, that strikes me as the most baldly untrue assertion I’ve seen made on Wikipedia in years. nableezy - 15:06, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Where did I say these people were not killed by the Israeli army? Please read again... Marokwitz (talk) 15:10, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Youre right, I apologize for my misreading. Sorry, coffee first next time. nableezy - 15:29, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Strongly Oppose A concise title is in place. Further details should appear in the lead, just as in other cases like Killing of Osama bin Laden and not United State Army killing of Osama bin Laden.

Lets use the same standards as in the case of the kidnapping and murder of three Israeli boys by Hamas 2014 Gush Etzion kidnapping and murder - where the title does not mention the one who did the killing. GidiD (talk) 08:57, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Weak support per common name. The media has been referring to this as the three hostages, israeli hostages etc Mason (talk) 21:00, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Support. While I agree and appreciate that the standard way to do this should be "Killing of [names]", I think this should be an exception. The incident and the article *are* about the fact that the country killed hostages from that country, and that is what's notable. In the examples above (except OBL), the victim is non-notable, but their killing is notable for the general reaction to it. It would be futile to try figuring out a new title to explain why a generic murder was relevant in every single case. Moreover, adding who killed them would not actually clarify anything in most cases. "American killing of OBL" doesn't explain anything. In this case, there is a clear way to explain in the title why this was notable. It was notable because the IDF killed three Israeli hostages. This is a very rare case, but the title should be a variation of that in the name of clarity. lethargilistic (talk) 23:05, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Support as well. The way that this incident will be referred to historically will not be by the names of the dead and it will not leave out who killed them. This is specifically significant because of who they were. Personally I also think that there should be clarity re: the terminology of hostages, as it seems they were able to escape at some point (? implied, but unclear from reports) and would have more accurately been considered former hostages. Averagecryptid (talk) 09:20, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose per @Marokwitz Dovidroth (talk) 12:52, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose per @Marokwitz. With regards, Oleg Y. (talk) 23:57, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose per @Marokwitz. Kavas (talk) 12:05, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography has been notified of this discussion. — mw (talk) (contribs) 20:49, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Human rights has been notified of this discussion. — mw (talk) (contribs) 20:49, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject International relations has been notified of this discussion. — mw (talk) (contribs) 20:49, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Israel has been notified of this discussion. — mw (talk) (contribs) 20:49, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Palestine has been notified of this discussion. — mw (talk) (contribs) 20:49, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose not necessary. Andre🚐 12:17, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Support as the current name is too long Abo Yemen✉ 13:01, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Support.The incident and the article *are* about the fact that the country killed hostages from that country, and that is what's notable. In the examples above (except OBL), the victim is non-notable, but their killing is notable for the general reaction to it per lethargilistic. With the possible exception of Israel, the three individual names are not generally known nor likely to be remembered. Pincrete (talk) 10:18, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

The new title is ambiguous there are another 3 incidents it could also describe, but I do agree the old title is not ideal. An improvement would be "Israeli army shooting of three Israeli hostages" or' ideally the even less ambiguous "Three Israeli hostages shot dead by the Israeli Army". Irtapil (talk) 00:48, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Because, there's at least three other events I've heard of that have been described (by one side) as "3 Israeli hostages killed by IDF". The Beibis family mum and two kids was widely reported. Plus at least 2 other sets of 3 hostages, a set of 3 young men (not the same three), and a set of 3 elderly men, which i each only heard of once but the demographics of the hostages were clearly different sets.

Specifically "Army" helps a bit because two of those were implied as Airstrikes, but "shot by" makes it unambiguous that this is a separate well documented incident where there's no ambiguity about who killed them.

Irtapil (talk) 00:48, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

I think these are good ideas. "Shooting" would be better, IMO. lethargilistic (talk) 01:56, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Relisting comment: for discussion of alternative titles. – robertsky (talk) 17:52, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose. The current title is definitely better than the proposed title. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:50, 8 January 2024 (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.