Talk:Huwara rampage

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Thank you for creating this article! I encourage you to create more articles! Have a good day!

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 16:53, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Hawwara Pogrom

This event is referred to in most press reports as the Hawwara Pogrom. Why does the article's title does not follow this established usage, and disassociates the attack from its ethno religious dimensions? Best, R. 23.93.189.234 (talk) 21:49, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Which press reports? Afaics, the international press are in general referring to it as a rampage. Selfstudier (talk) 22:06, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

It's been described as a pogrom by By'selem Rabolisk (talk) 12:08, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

That's not a press report. And that's only one source. Multiple RS refer to it as a rampage. Selfstudier (talk) 14:41, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Considering that according to the article itself, the Israeli Finance Minister called for the town to be annihilated and Israeli troops sat back and did nothing, it looks exactly like how pogroms have operated in the past. Both the Nation and Time magazine refer to the incident as a pogrom, so don't sit back on your 'international press' laurels here.

[1]https://www.thenation.com/article/world/palestine-israel-huwara-pogrom/

[2]https://time.com/6264116/west-bank-attack-palestinian-civilians/

And here's the pro-Zionist Jerusalem Post in case you need further evidence:

[3]https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-734007

And Haaretz, which is also an Israeli press organisation:

[4]https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-03-04/ty-article/.premium/israeli-settlers-threaten-another-hawara-pogrom-on-saturday-night/00000186-ad5d-de2a-a1ee-af5f092f0000

Change the title of the article. Andecombogios (talk) 02:47, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Reuters, ToI, AJ, WAPO, BBC, NYT all refer to it as a rampage in their own voice and without scare quotes. It does seem unusual to refer to an attack on Palestinians using a word originally used to refer to attacks on Jews. Rampage seems more suitable for English ears. I'd be happy to set up a redirect though, would that help? Selfstudier (talk) 08:48, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Also seems like it should be unusual for Israel to attack Palestinians in a way Jewish people were attacked for centuries, but here we are. 24.104.226.80 (talk) 19:24, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Maybe should be included in the lead that it has also been called a pogrom. "Rampage" does seem a bit odd, are there other similar events titled as rampages on Wikipedia? Seems there is no "Wikipedia: List of Rampages". IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 02:40, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Lightburst (talk) 14:56, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that the 2023 Huwara rampage, a late-night spree of arson and vandalism by hundreds of Israeli settlers, was the worst flare-up of Israeli settler violence in the northern West Bank in decades? Source: US prods PM to condemn Smotrich’s ‘repugnant, disgusting’ call to wipe out Huwara. Times of Israel. How the Israeli settler rampage was emboldened by the new far-right government. The Guardian.
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Sophie Freud

Created by Iskandar323 (talk). Self-nominated at 19:14, 5 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/2023 Huwara rampage; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• I shall review this Storye book (talk) 16:23, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Thank you for creating this article. It needed to be written. It is impossible for anyone, with any point of view or no point of view, to make this a neutral article, but within the requirements of WP and DYK, this article is written in a neutral manner, in my opinion.

• Earwig does find a few short phrases without quote marks which match the source. However I don't think that that is enough to count as plagiarism. Nevertheless, because this is such a contentious subject, others may wish to check my decision: Earwig's comparison is here.
• ALT0 has 197 characters, which I believe is justified in this case, because we need to be detailed and precise about what we are saying.

This is good to go. Storye book (talk) 16:45, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Israeli settlers attack on burin

The Israeli settlers attack on burin is not a part of the rampage, it happened a day previously and has no connection to the rampage. אקסינו (talk) 15:18, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Missing infromation from the background

The background section seem to miss that this very area had 12 attacks in the month preceding to that event, that the parking lot had crimminal acitivity by the operator for the last 8 months, that the owner who is a convict had mocked and celebrated the shooting . That the townhall had celebrated the attack in Neve Yakov.

Surly wikipedia does not try to use a single point of view articale, and the lack of that infromation was just because the editors did not have the time to add this information and some editor would add this info decpite it was written in Hebrew and Arabic (and not english). 2A00:C281:12D9:1000:8021:2629:E170:9D4D (talk) 08:23, 7 March 2023 (UTC) 2A00:C281:12D9:1000:8021:2629:E170:9D4D (talk) 08:23, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

References

Wording choices, mention of subsequent attack

If the article is going to refer to the Israelis as "settlers" (which is an undoubtedly biased term, and which we cannot say with certainty about all of the participants), then at the very least it should also refer to the Palestinian who killed the two Israelis as a "terrorist" and not a "gunman," which smacks of whitewashing criminal behavior. Either that, or change the wording from "settlers" to "Israelis residing in the West Bank," which is factually accurate and not biased.

It should probably also be noted that an American citizen and former US Marine (who, as it happened, was residing in the West Bank, not that the terrorist checked) was shot in the head while driving through Huwara, three weeks after the murder of the Yaniv brothers and the subsequent "rampage."

https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/369037

https://www.jta.org/2023/03/19/israel/former-us-marine-seriously-injured-in-west-bank-shooting-attack-in-huwara 2603:7000:7A01:67F3:8A:32A9:42D6:C3CE (talk) 02:34, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

'Settler' is a euphemism we use for 'colonist', which is what all Israelis in the West Bank are. We use it because mainstream English sources (as opposed to French or Italian usage) don't want to upset their readers by calling a spade a spade, as Zionists openly did down to the 1950s.

'Gunman' is an inadequate term as well, not much 'better' than 'terrorist' for describing someone who commits a murder, for the word properly refers to a professional killer, who offers his services for money. About 5% of any army will, as US studies show, consist of 'natural born murderers' who use their uniform as a cover to do the kind of killings civil life doesn't extend impunity to. Being shot in the head is unfortunately commonplace in the West Bank, particularly in liquidating wounded people, in what, by another euphemism, the Israeli army calls 'verifying' a kill. Israel National News is a trash source.Nishidani (talk) 03:03, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Good remark on 'gunman'. I think the word 'assailant' in general is best for neutral reason. 'Shooter' is also a good option though maybe it may refer to a professional sport shooter. So we can also go with 'armed assailant'. How they should be described outside the media/wikipedia is obviously, a matter of personal stance and irrelevant to the discussion.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 19:34, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Murderer is probably the best term for anyone who, not directly provoked, shoots at another person with intent to kill, applicable to anyone, whatever their ethnos, position or allegiance. But one would never get a consensus for applying that over all such objective instances of the definition, since it would apply across enemy lines. I was just reading of a young SS officer who had 50 Jewish workers under his guard in September 1939. He shot them all. The Wehrmacht hauled him before a military tribunal which sentenced him to three years in prison, gaving him this moderate sentence after taking into account his youth and 'spirited sense of adventure' (excessive personal enthusiasm for the cause). (Léon Poliakov, Bréviaire de la haine) (1951) 1993 p.38) He was released on an amnesty.Nishidani (talk) 21:05, 22 March 2023 (UTC)