Usage | Template |
---|---|
Page protection | {{rfpp}} |
AIV | {{AIV}} |
Archive box | {{Archive top}} |
Archive colapsed | {{collapse top}} {{hat}} |
Check marks | {{Done}} |
Discretionary sanctions | {{Article discretionary sanctions}} |
User | {{user}} |
Columns | {{div col}} |
Link anchor | {{anchor}} |
Reports
edit- 49.182.183.237 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) – Tripped filter 139 (Fixed position vandalism, details). Report false positive. DatBot (talk) 11:06, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
User-reported
edit- Paaldabba (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) – On User talk:Jeraxmoira: vandalism after final warning. WP:NOTHERE - Personal Attack [[1]]. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 08:02, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
- 66.99.22.162 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) – On Tony Pashos (diff): vandalism after final warning. Vandalizing since years; the edit here is a highly offensive racial slur. Gotitbro (talk) 08:24, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
- Insufficient recent activity to warrant a block. Two edits today, previous was May. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 09:07, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
- 119.71.205.132 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) Evidently a vandalism-only account. — 👻🎃 Paper9oll 🎃👻 (🔔 • 📝) 10:07, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
- 72.89.228.86 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) Returning for a block for disruptive editing on Mike Lawler BLP to do the exact same immediately. A medium-term p-block on that article may be in order. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 10:37, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
- 217.164.84.114 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) – LTA. Remsense ‥ 论 11:08, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
- Scarlett Schuppe (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) – On Agrostistachys (diff): actions evidently indicate a vandalism-only account. My Pants Metal (talk) 11:34, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
Candidates for speedy deletion | Entries |
---|---|
User requested | 2 |
Empty articles | 0 |
Nonsense pages | 0 |
Spam pages | 0 |
Importance or significance not asserted | 0 |
Possibly contested candidates | 4 |
Other candidates | 23 |
Wikipedia files with unknown source – No backlog currently |
---|
Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status – No backlog currently |
---|
Wikipedia files missing permission – No backlog currently |
---|
Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale – No backlog currently |
---|
Disputed non-free Wikipedia files – No backlog currently |
---|
Orphaned non-free use Wikipedia files – No backlog currently |
---|
Replaceable non-free use Wikipedia files – No backlog currently |
---|
Wikipedia files with a different name on Wikimedia Commons – No backlog currently
Wikipedia files with the same name on Wikimedia Commons – 6 items
Non-free files with orphaned versions more than 7 days old needing human review – 9 items
Requested RD1 redactions – 7 items
Proposed deletion – No backlog currently |
---|
User-reported
edit- Xveilhan (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal) The user has only made edits to Xavier Veilhan, yet there has been no proof of identity provided on Wikipedia throughout the 13 years of editing (WP:REALNAME) toweli (talk) 11:19, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- It would be inappropriate to block someone for their username without discussion after they've been editing for 13 years. Secretlondon (talk) 11:30, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- And it's really obviously COI. Secretlondon (talk) 11:31, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- Therealbetng (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal) – Violation of the username policy as a promotional username. Even though its an IP posting spam on this user's talk page, I still think the name matches the spam posted on there, and the user is registered. 🔥YesI'mOnFire🔥(ContainThisEmber?) 11:43, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- Blocking an account from editing won't stop spam from an IP. They've never edited from that account. Secretlondon (talk) 12:01, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- And what if they decided to log in that account to edit? Is it better to just block them? 🔥YesI'mOnFire🔥(ContainThisEmber?) 12:12, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- Then we block when they login and edit. – robertsky (talk) 13:50, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- And what if they decided to log in that account to edit? Is it better to just block them? 🔥YesI'mOnFire🔥(ContainThisEmber?) 12:12, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- Blocking an account from editing won't stop spam from an IP. They've never edited from that account. Secretlondon (talk) 12:01, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- IKAR LA 1 (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal) promotional role account. has been making edits intermittently for a while despite warnings, so reason to thing they won't stay stale forever. I blocked myself, but reversed on second thought because I've written a few articles related to IKAR. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 03:32, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
- WhitneyFamily (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal) – Violation of the username policy as a promotional username. Username implies shared use, and has made COI edits at Gil Whitney article. My Pants Metal (talk) 11:25, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
Current requests for increase in protection level
editPlace requests for new or upgrading pending changes, semi-protection, full protection, move protection, create protection, template editor protection, or upload protection at the BOTTOM of this section. Check the archive of fulfilled and denied requests or, failing that, the page history if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.
Reason: The regime in Iran executed Jamshid Sharmad based on coerced false confessions extracted under torture. Sharmad worked closely with the Tondar group, which the regime often seeks to discredit. The Islamic regime has a history of targeting and discrediting opposition figures and dissidents through misinformation campaigns, including the spread of false information on Wikipedia. Therefore, in cases like this, it is crucial to verify edits and consult with reliable sources. Specifically, Gazelle Sharmad, Jamshid Sharmad’s daughter, can help clarify issues and verify accurate information due to her firsthand knowledge.
This request for page protection is also based on similar incidents involving other members of the Iranian opposition, such as the page on Reza Pahlavi. The pages of opposition figures have been frequent targets of disinformation and bad-faith edits. Given these risks, it is essential to take proactive measures to maintain the integrity of this page. DavidSallam (talk) 00:00, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- I don't see anything in the recent history that gives me cause for concern, not yet. Drmies (talk) 00:02, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- Declined – Likely collateral damage as one or several users who are making improvements would be affected by the requested protection. Lectonar (talk) 08:04, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason: there is lots of POV pushing and brazen/large edits + rewrites without regard for ongoing discussion in the talk page
see:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Instant-runoff_voting&diff=prev&oldid=1254208089
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Instant-runoff_voting&diff=prev&oldid=1254146037
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Instant-runoff_voting&diff=prev&oldid=1254048805
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Instant-runoff_voting&diff=prev&oldid=1253161951
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Instant-runoff_voting&diff=prev&oldid=1252389457 Affinepplan (talk) 00:17, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- No objections to temporary page-protect, if it's combined with opening something on WP:DRN. – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 00:50, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. Lectonar (talk) 08:31, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
Temporary extended confirmed protection: BLP policy violations – Disruptive editing unsourced additions to a BLP by an IP user. Sciencefish (talk) 08:59, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – L. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 11:47, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
Indefinite semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – There appears to be some kind of active edit war going on over the budget in the infobox. The page was recently temp protected twice in response to disruptive editing. Lenny Marks (talk) 20:58, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- Note It seems that at least some of the previous edits that resulted in the protection were related to the same content about the budget in the infobox. Lenny Marks (talk) 21:01, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
Indefinite semi-protection: Before it was turned into a redirect and still now, Gallery of sovereign state flags has been semi-protected to prevent disruptive editing. For some reason, the article it now redirects to is not also semi-protected. Can this be fixed?. ―Howard • 🌽33 22:53, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason: Persistent edit warring over substantial (3K+ bytes) changes to article - see article talk page. As the editor initiating the changes has 415 edits semi-indef may provide some relief until cooler heads prevail. Oblivy (talk) 05:00, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
- Declined This can't be solved via protection; it's a content dispute, borderline slow edit war, which needs more eyes. Getting a WP:3O might be a good idea. Lectonar (talk) 08:08, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
Reason: Mobile editor is making unconstructive edits. GoodDay (talk) 06:00, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
- Declined – Warn the user appropriately then report them to AIV or ANI if they continue. Lectonar (talk) 07:42, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protection: Persistent addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 10:31, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism and sockpuppetry. Annh07 (talk) 10:38, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
- Automated comment: One or more pages in this request appear to already be protected. Please confirm.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 10:59, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent sockpuppetry. Bgsu98 (Talk) 10:48, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – IP hopper keep adding "transgender" to describe the serial killer in this film with no sources. It's not true and their other edits have been on pollical pages. Mike Allen 10:51, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
Current requests for reduction in protection level
editBefore posting, first discuss with the protecting admin at their talk page. Post below only if you receive no reply.
- To find out the username of the admin who protected the page click on "history" at the top of the page, then click on "View logs for this page" which is under the title of the page. The protecting admin is the username in blue before the words "protected", "changed protection level" or "pending changes". If there are a number of entries on the log page, you might find it easier to select "Protection log" or "Pending changes log" from the dropdown menu in the blue box.
- Requests to downgrade full protection to template protection on templates and modules can be directed straight here; you do not need to ask the protecting admin first.
- Requests for removing create protection on redlinked articles are generally assisted by having a draft version of the intended article prepared beforehand.
- If you want to make spelling corrections or add uncontroversial information to a protected page please add {{Edit fully-protected}} to the article's talk page, along with an explanation of what you want to add to the page. If the talk page is protected please use the section below.
Check the archives if you cannot find your request. Only recently answered requests are still listed here.
Current requests for edits to a protected page
editPlease request an edit directly on the protected page's talk page before posting here
Ideally, requests should be made on the article talk page rather than here.
- Unless the talk page itself is protected, you may instead add the appropriate template among
{{Edit protected}}
,{{Edit template-protected}}
,{{Edit extended-protected}}
, or{{Edit semi-protected}}
to the article's talk page if you would like to make a change rather than requesting it here. Doing so will automatically place the page in the appropriate category for the request to be reviewed. - Where requests are made due to the editor having a conflict of interest (COI; see Wikipedia:Suggestions for COI compliance), the
{{Edit COI}}
template should be used. - Requests to move move-protected pages should be made at Wikipedia:Requested moves, not here.
- If the discussion page and the article are both protected preventing you from making an edit request, this page is the right place to make that request. Please see the top of this page for instructions on how to post requests.
- This page is not for continuing or starting discussions regarding content should both an article and its discussion page be protected. Please make a request only if you have a specific edit you wish to make.
My suggestion is to leave out the following 2 sentences in the "German complicity" paragraph as they seem to be based on misunderstandings:
"She also highlighted police suppression of pro-Palestine protests throughout Germany[509] as evidence of state complicity.[508] Karen Wells et al. highlight how Germany has entrenched its complicity in Israel's actions by banning use of the word "genocide" in reference to Israel.[471][better source needed]"
1. In general violent protests are not allowed in Germany. As some of the first pro-Palestine protests were violent, they were sometimes forbidden by courts, if they were expected to turn violent. But that is common policy in Gemany with all subjects and not special for pro-Palestine protests.
Meanwhile, there even is a calendar concerning pro-Palestinian protests[2] with daily up to 20 protests all over Germany. Thus, there is no general police suppression of pro-Palestine protests as is suggested by the current wording.
2. The word “genocide” is not banned in reference to Israel in Germany - maybe that was a misunderstanding: What is not allowed in Germany is to call for genocide against Jews. The slogan “From the river to the sea” is seen as such call and banned. Gilbert04 (talk) 15:34, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
- @FortunateSons: A quick browse shows at least for the first part support for removal, can you add any additional incite? -- Cdjp1 (talk) 12:38, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- I can confirm that both statements are broadly true. IMO, the best resource for this discussion (in the contemporary context) is probably Steinberg: Versammlungsfreiheit nach dem 7. Oktober - NVwZ 2024, 302. Direct citation: “Die Subsumtion unter diesen Tatbestand bereitet aber auch sonst Probleme. Die Stadt Frankfurt a. M. hatte dem Anmelder einer Versammlung „Frieden in Nahost" am 2.12.2023 untersagt, während der Versammlung zur Vernichtung Israels aufzurufen, dem Staat Israel das Existenzrecht abzusprechen, sowie die Aussagen „Israel Kindermörder", „Juden Kindermörder", „Israel bringt Kinder um" sowie „From the river to the sea" zu tätigen. Diese Beschränkungen hob das VG Frankfurt vollständig auf. Auf die Beschwerde der Stadt differenzierte der VGH Kassel Aufrufe zur Vernichtung Israels verstießen - wie gesagt - gegen § 111 StGB und die Aussage „Juden Kindermörder" erfülle den Tatbestand der Volksverhetzung (§ 130 StGB). Demgegenüber wurden andere Außerungen wie „Kindermörder Israel" oder die Bezeichnung der israelischen Militäroperationen in Gaza als „Genozid" nicht beanstandet und die Entscheidung des VG insoweit aufrechterhalten. Es sei davon auszugehen, dass bei den militärischen Verteidigungshandlungen Israels auch Kinder zu Schaden kämen. Eine solche laienhafte Zuspitzung sei im Rahmen der Meinungsfreiheit hinzunehmen. Anders hatte der VGH Mannheim am 21.10.2023 ein Verbot der Parole „Israel Kindermörder" und „Israel bringt Kinder um" durch die Versammlungsbehörde trotz bestehender Zweifel über deren Strafbarkeit aufrechterhalten; im Verfahren des vorläufigen Rechtsschutzes sei nur eine summarische Prüfung möglich; eine einmal getätigte Äußerung könne nicht rückgängig gemacht werden. Die Unterscheidung zwischen antisemitisch und antiisraelisch stellt sicherlich eine Gratwanderung dar, die hier im Einzelnen nicht beschrieben werden kann“autotranslated: “However, the subsumption under this offense also causes other problems. On December 2, 2023, the city of Frankfurt am Main had prohibited the person registering a meeting "Peace in the Middle East" from calling for the destruction of Israel during the meeting, from denying the State of Israel the right to exist, and from making the statements "Israel, child murderer," "Jews, child murderer," "Israel kills children" and "From the river to the sea." The Administrative Court of Frankfurt completely lifted these restrictions. In response to the city's complaint, the Administrative Court of Kassel differentiated that calls for the destruction of Israel violated - as mentioned - Section 111 of the Criminal Code and that the statement "Jews, child murderer" constituted incitement to hatred (Section 130 of the Criminal Code). In contrast, other statements such as "Israel, child murderer" or the description of Israeli military operations in Gaza as "genocide" were not objected to and the Administrative Court's decision was upheld in this respect. It can be assumed that children would also be harmed in Israel's military defense actions. Such a lay exaggeration must be accepted within the framework of freedom of expression. On October 21, 2023, the Mannheim Higher Administrative Court upheld a ban on the slogans "Israel, child murderer" and "Israel kills children" by the assembly authority despite existing doubts about their criminal liability; in the interim legal protection procedure, only a summary examination is possible; a statement once made cannot be reversed. The distinction between anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli is certainly a balancing act that cannot be described in detail here.” There is no broad ban on pro-Palestinian protests either, and they were even allowed to happen on Oct. 7 of this year (in some cases). While there are legal disputes on specifics for both, I’m pretty confident that no reasonable person would disagree with “broadly permitted” regarding both claims. FortunateSons (talk) 16:54, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Bonus: there can be cases where something isn’t criminal, but can be restricted in other ways, for example due to different burdens of proof or social pressures. FortunateSons (talk) 17:11, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- I can confirm that both statements are broadly true. IMO, the best resource for this discussion (in the contemporary context) is probably Steinberg: Versammlungsfreiheit nach dem 7. Oktober - NVwZ 2024, 302. Direct citation: “Die Subsumtion unter diesen Tatbestand bereitet aber auch sonst Probleme. Die Stadt Frankfurt a. M. hatte dem Anmelder einer Versammlung „Frieden in Nahost" am 2.12.2023 untersagt, während der Versammlung zur Vernichtung Israels aufzurufen, dem Staat Israel das Existenzrecht abzusprechen, sowie die Aussagen „Israel Kindermörder", „Juden Kindermörder", „Israel bringt Kinder um" sowie „From the river to the sea" zu tätigen. Diese Beschränkungen hob das VG Frankfurt vollständig auf. Auf die Beschwerde der Stadt differenzierte der VGH Kassel Aufrufe zur Vernichtung Israels verstießen - wie gesagt - gegen § 111 StGB und die Aussage „Juden Kindermörder" erfülle den Tatbestand der Volksverhetzung (§ 130 StGB). Demgegenüber wurden andere Außerungen wie „Kindermörder Israel" oder die Bezeichnung der israelischen Militäroperationen in Gaza als „Genozid" nicht beanstandet und die Entscheidung des VG insoweit aufrechterhalten. Es sei davon auszugehen, dass bei den militärischen Verteidigungshandlungen Israels auch Kinder zu Schaden kämen. Eine solche laienhafte Zuspitzung sei im Rahmen der Meinungsfreiheit hinzunehmen. Anders hatte der VGH Mannheim am 21.10.2023 ein Verbot der Parole „Israel Kindermörder" und „Israel bringt Kinder um" durch die Versammlungsbehörde trotz bestehender Zweifel über deren Strafbarkeit aufrechterhalten; im Verfahren des vorläufigen Rechtsschutzes sei nur eine summarische Prüfung möglich; eine einmal getätigte Äußerung könne nicht rückgängig gemacht werden. Die Unterscheidung zwischen antisemitisch und antiisraelisch stellt sicherlich eine Gratwanderung dar, die hier im Einzelnen nicht beschrieben werden kann“autotranslated: “However, the subsumption under this offense also causes other problems. On December 2, 2023, the city of Frankfurt am Main had prohibited the person registering a meeting "Peace in the Middle East" from calling for the destruction of Israel during the meeting, from denying the State of Israel the right to exist, and from making the statements "Israel, child murderer," "Jews, child murderer," "Israel kills children" and "From the river to the sea." The Administrative Court of Frankfurt completely lifted these restrictions. In response to the city's complaint, the Administrative Court of Kassel differentiated that calls for the destruction of Israel violated - as mentioned - Section 111 of the Criminal Code and that the statement "Jews, child murderer" constituted incitement to hatred (Section 130 of the Criminal Code). In contrast, other statements such as "Israel, child murderer" or the description of Israeli military operations in Gaza as "genocide" were not objected to and the Administrative Court's decision was upheld in this respect. It can be assumed that children would also be harmed in Israel's military defense actions. Such a lay exaggeration must be accepted within the framework of freedom of expression. On October 21, 2023, the Mannheim Higher Administrative Court upheld a ban on the slogans "Israel, child murderer" and "Israel kills children" by the assembly authority despite existing doubts about their criminal liability; in the interim legal protection procedure, only a summary examination is possible; a statement once made cannot be reversed. The distinction between anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli is certainly a balancing act that cannot be described in detail here.” There is no broad ban on pro-Palestinian protests either, and they were even allowed to happen on Oct. 7 of this year (in some cases). While there are legal disputes on specifics for both, I’m pretty confident that no reasonable person would disagree with “broadly permitted” regarding both claims. FortunateSons (talk) 16:54, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- I've removed #2. But there does seem to be evidence that pro-Palestine protests have been banned in parts of Germany at times.[3][4][5].VR (Please ping on reply) 14:55, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. Maybe the following article gives a bit more clarity.[[6]] Gilbert04 (talk) 18:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Unfortunately that source seems incomplete. Germany has indeed suppressed peaceful criticism of Israel.[7] And Washington Post says "A planned photo exhibit in southwestern Germany was canceled as a result of social media posts by its curator, including one describing “genocide” in Gaza."[8] VR (Please ping on reply) 22:32, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. Maybe the following article gives a bit more clarity.[[6]] Gilbert04 (talk) 18:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Consider changing "The Israeli government rejected South Africa's allegations, and accused the court of being antisemitic, which it often does when criticised" to "The Israeli government has been accused of consistently weaponizing antisemitism against it's critics, including in the ICJ ruling." Ecco2kstan (talk) 23:12, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- The Weaponization of antisemitism page hyperlinked over "often done" has many sources to draw from regarding the accusations' consistency and nature.
- My main concern with the original text is that it's voiced as if it's an observation made by a Wikipedian. The benefit here is that the weaponization of antisemitism has a clearer consistency grounded outside of Wikipedia. Perhaps other ways to word this out include adding a time scale (increasingly accused since Oct. 7th) or specifying the critique (against critiques of their actions since Oct 7th).
- If a lead paragraph change is necessary, there may be reason to outline Israeli motives and conditions for the genocide, including Zionism and anti-Arab racism. Ecco2kstan (talk) 23:25, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Ecco2kstan, how about: "The Israeli government rejected South Africa's allegations. Supporters of Israel say that accusing Israel of genocide is both antisemitic[11][12] and a form of Holocaust erasure[13], but others argue antisemitism shouldn't be exploited to shield Israel from such allegations.[14][15][16][17]".VR (Please ping on reply) 00:12, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not as familiar with the Holocaust erasure claims, but I'm happy with that reworking! If that weaponization of Holocaust denial detail isn't on the weaponization of antisemitism page already, it might be a worthwhile phenomenon incorporate if there's more citations you can find. I might look into it myself. Thanks! Ecco2kstan (talk) 03:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- That does sound quite balanced. +1 from me. Neutral Editor 645 (talk) 18:02, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Vice regent: Would you please make this change, so we can close this request? ~Anachronist (talk) 21:28, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Ecco2kstan, how about: "The Israeli government rejected South Africa's allegations. Supporters of Israel say that accusing Israel of genocide is both antisemitic[11][12] and a form of Holocaust erasure[13], but others argue antisemitism shouldn't be exploited to shield Israel from such allegations.[14][15][16][17]".VR (Please ping on reply) 00:12, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Stated Israeli tank losses in casualty and losses infobox are incorrect, attributed article from Business Insider states "The IDF again had problems with anti-tank missiles during the 2006 war in Lebanon, when Hezbollah employed Russian-made Kornets. Though about 50 Merkavas were damaged, only five were destroyed, according to the IDF, which also struggled with poorly maintained vehicles and ill-trained crews." Casualties and losses box states this number as if it was from current conflict. Article does, however, state that "Israel has lost nearly two dozen tanks during fighting with Hamas since October 7." I believe losses of tanks in the infobox should be fixed to reflect this. 155.225.2.98 (talk) 14:17, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
Handled requests
editA historical archive of previous protection requests can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Archive.
17 protected edit requests | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Updated as needed. Last updated: 00:18, 31 October 2024 (UTC) |
13 template-protected edit requests | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Updated as needed. Last updated: 16:01, 30 October 2024 (UTC) |