Template talk:Israel–Hamas war infobox

friendly fire

BilledMammal, the sources you have dont quantify it, and there is no real dispute the overwhelming amount of devastation has been from Israeli strikes, not misfired rockets. But also, there are sources for Israel having killed its own civilians at Re'im and Beeri as well ([1], [2]). So if you want to note friendly fire, note it on both sides. nableezy - 17:32, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

@Nableezy: Are there any reputable estimates of numbers beyond "not zero"? I've only seen numbers for IDF shooting each other in Gaza.

Also, I think there might be some dispute about mistranslation or other misinterpretation for the Hebrew Haaretz source? Their English edition issued some sort of contradiction.

Irtapil 01:47 (edited) Irtapil (talk) 02:04, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

@Nableezy: I actually do think "caught in crossfire" situations could potentially explain a substantial proportion of casualties, I'm just curious for if any more detail has emerged. (Clarifying that because my curiosity often comes across as much more disagreeable than I intend it to? Probably because so many people disingenuously "just ask questions" in Internet arguments?) Irtapil 01:55 (edited) Irtapil (talk) 02:04, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Visit Friendly fire during the 2023 Israel–Hamas war to elaborate further. I don't fully understand difference between friendly fire in general and "mistaken identification". Is that a sub-set, were intent was to kill, vs where a soldier was standing too close/in wrong area, but IDF wasn't planning on killing them? Please continue discussion on Talk:Friendly fire during the 2023 Israel–Hamas war if need be ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 17:36, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Abbreviations

Please do not replace names with abbreviations considering that these acronyms should be defined in the infobox first and foremost. Makeandtoss (talk) 13:27, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

The infobox is already needlessly long, and many of the names are quite well known by abbreviations. Infoboxes are meant to be concise, and this one is not. Abbreviations should be defined in prose, not in the infobox. WMSR (talk) 18:07, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Not listening to RfC

Baratiiman, please explain here ASAP why you reverted my edit without any edit summary. The items were removed per WP:ONUS based on the RfC: Perm Link to consensus/closure. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 16:25, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

But that link leads to "no consensus"? Irtapil (talk) 01:44, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Minor Lebanese belligerents remain in infobox after removal of Lebanese Hezbollah

Hello all, was just curious on how people feel about retaining two quite trivial belligerents in the 2023 Israel-Lebanon border clashes, namely the Amal Movement and the Islamic Group (Lebanon), in this infobox now that Lebanese Hezbollah has been removed. IMO, seems rather strange to retain the other two. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 08:27, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Adding the United States as a belligerent

@Tamjeed Ahmed: Opening this discussion for you, so you can present your arguments for why you believe the United States should be added as a belligerent. My initial impression is that they shouldn't be, as I am seeing no such characterization in reliable sources. BilledMammal (talk) 13:09, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

According to news reports, the U.S. military used helicopters to thwart a Houthi rebel attack on a Maersk container ship in the Red Sea, resulting in the sinking of three rebel ships and the death of 10 militants. Apart from this, according to the Council on Foreign Relations, the United States has been involved in the Israel-Hamas war since the beginning of the conflict. The U.S. has been providing military aid to Israel and has been doing joint planning with Israel for decades to ensure it can defend itself. The U.S. has also sent warships and military aircraft into the Eastern Mediterranean to support a counteroffensive against the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip. Tamjeed Ahmed (talk) 13:58, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Regarding According to news reports, the U.S. military used helicopters to thwart a Houthi rebel attack on a Maersk container ship in the Red Sea, resulting in the sinking of three rebel ships and the death of 10 militants. I don't think the scale of that is sufficient to say that the US is involved in the broader conflict.

Regarding Apart from this, according to the Council on Foreign Relations, the United States has been involved in the Israel-Hamas war since the beginning of the conflict. Can you provide a link?

Regarding The U.S. has been providing military aid to Israel and has been doing joint planning with Israel for decades to ensure it can defend itself. The U.S. has also sent warships and military aircraft into the Eastern Mediterranean to support a counteroffensive against the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip. This has previously been discussed; the US is providing support, but isn't a belligerent. BilledMammal (talk) 14:05, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

The "special relationship" are bombing Yemen! The world ignored Yemen completely last time that was happening. Let's not repeat that. Let's not wait till Yemen looks low Gaza (again) before we bother adding it. I'll even risk my own pathetic country ending up on the list of shame to get this not ignored. Irtapil (talk) 01:31, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Oppose Yemen and this war are still somewhat separate at the moment. US is not a belliergent on the Israeli front. ~Politicdude (About me, talk, contribs) 20:17, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

No, it's not. Ansar Allah are attempting to disrupt shipping specifically with the purpose of weakening, or at least protesting against, the Israeli attacks on Gaza. It's not working, the USA is just going to crush them and keep letting Israel get away with murder, but that is their stated reason for what they are doing. Irtapil (talk) 01:20, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm aware of that, hence why I said "somewhat separate." ~Politicdude (About me, talk, contribs) 01:22, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Separated by Saudi Arabia, but certainly part of the same war. Japan and Germany were both WWII? and they weren't even at war about the same thing. Irtapil (talk) 01:27, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

They seem to be a fairly objectionable bunch of fanatics who urgently need to read a second book (judging mostly by the banner they used to fly before they switched to a Yemeni and Palestinian flag combo) but i can't disagree with them about what's happening in Gaza right now being very wrong and urgently needing to stop. A stopped clock is right twice a day. Irtapil (talk) 01:25, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

USA yes + UK yes - but the big laundry list of followers seems excessive? (But I'm biased because I'm Aussie and bloody angry.) Irtapil 01:15 (UTC) (edited) Irtapil (talk) 01:41, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

…and I am very curious to know @the platypus' own bias on this? you seem to feel very strongly on some issues about this war, but I can't quite make sense of the pattern? You being so strongly opposed to adding the USA on the same side as Israel contradicts the pattern I thought I'd guessed. Irtapil (talk) 01:41, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Please stop with the excessive replies. If you have something to say put it all in one post. Thank you! ~Politicdude (About me, talk, contribs) 01:42, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Palestinian Authority as a belligerent

@Parham wiki: Why was PA added to the infobox? PA is not waging war alongside Israel or Hamas. I would revert this but I'm already at 1RR. Ecrusized (talk) 19:34, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

See source. Parham wiki (talk) 19:44, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Care to be a little more elaborate? I do not see a mention of PA in the large source you've posted without adding title or date nor did you quote something. Ecrusized (talk) 19:50, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Palestinian security forces dismantled planted IEDs in Jenin on December 30. Palestinian security forces are controlled by the PA. Parham wiki (talk) 20:04, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

This a very strong synthesis of what the source says. Please self revert. Ecrusized (talk) 20:05, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

 Done Parham wiki (talk) 20:08, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Ages of children killed

@NadVolum: How do you know that Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor is including anyone under 18 as children? I didn't see this in their report. Ecrusized (talk) 20:12, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

I haven't anything definitive, but there are two strong indicators. Firstl;y they supply data to the UN and lobby the UNHCR. The UN definition of a child is a person of 18 or younger so having comparable figures woul help. Secondly the Gaza Health Ministry figures for the rate of deaths for children compared to women is about 1.1 to 1, that is given their relative proportions in the population as 37% and 30% with children being 14 or under. The relative rate is also near to 1.1 for the EMHRM figures if we assume proportions of 47% and 26% if children are 18 or below - but the comparative death rate of children would be 1.6 to 1 if we used the 37% to 30% percentages. NadVolum (talk) 20:46, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Okay with that said, please self-revert as you are directly adding original research. Ecrusized (talk) 20:59, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Straight calculations showing things is allowed per WP:CALC and their main target is the UN, but I'll have a check firt to ee if there is a good source and revert if not. It just makes a total mess of the figures to assume they are comparable though because children are such a large proportion of the population of Gaza. NadVolum (talk) 21:08, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

"I'll have a check firt to ee" Umm what? Also this is not a calculation, you are making assumptions and adding those as facts into the article..... Ecrusized (talk) 21:25, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Okay found thisd [3], it is from them about Gaza and it refers to children of 18 and below. NadVolum (talk) 21:11, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Not really. That only says "Children under the age of 18, who make up 47% of the 2.3 million people living in the Gaza". It does not say those who have been killed in Gaza were under 18. WP:SYNTH. Also do you have a source that Gaza Health Ministry classifies children as under 14 and not under 18? Under 18 is the international definition of children, and above 18 is considered an adult. Ecrusized (talk) 21:23, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

No I think I have to oppose you on this point. I am not going to self revert on the supposition that they talk about a different age of children in the same article as they talk about figures for children killed. NadVolum (talk) 21:26, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

You have added that, one of the ministries counts children as under 14 yrs old, and another monitor as above 18 yrs old. Without any reference, what so ever. And for arguments sake, you are saying that this is WP:CALC. Great.... Ecrusized (talk) 21:33, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

It's you who seems to thing that EMHRM is all over the place with children's ages in a single document and will refer to it as 18 and their proportion in the country as 47% in one place and then talk about children's deaths in another without saying any different figures. You need some evidence to back up disputing what they say. 'll look up where I got the 14 for Gaza. NadVolum (talk) 21:41, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

I got the age of 14 from the pie chart in Casualties of the 2023 Israel–Hamas war which is from [4], I 'll see where they got it from though. NadVolum (talk) 22:00, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Okay thanks for finding a source. However, PrimaPrime has removed the children from the EMHRM in the meanwhile as you can see in the discussion below.... Ecrusized (talk) 22:02, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm happy with the childrens age being removed. The figures now come via the Palestinian authority and they use 18 just like EMHRM so no problems on that account to worry about. I may easily have been wrong about the Gaza Health Ministry and perhaps the figure only came from that study of their reliability, I can't even find the Health Ministry mentioning any total figures never mind for children at any time now! NadVolum (talk) 23:36, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

i thought they were using under 15? Irtapil (talk) 01:06, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

@PrimaPrime: Why did you remove the breakdown of children and women from EMHRM estimate in your recent edit? Ecrusized (talk) 21:47, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

We can't list them all under "civilians" without that being stated by the source. PrimaPrime (talk) 21:50, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

I see, thanks for the clarification. Next time please try to leave an edit summary. Ecrusized (talk) 21:53, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Just list a total? Give estimates of % military elsewhere, don't nest it. Irtapil (talk) 01:13, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Sources for Gaza figures

The basis for the Gaza Health Ministry figures and the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor are quite different. The health ministry figures are for registered deaths. Also children are 14 or below - 37% of the population. Men and women are about 30% of the population each and the elderly 3%.

The Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor are estimated figures based on the registered deaths but include many of the missing and assessments from the damage. They count children as 18 and below - 47% of the population. They don't seem to say anything about the elderly so this means the men and women would be about 26% each of the population.

The figures aren't comparable put together without attribution to one or the other, I believe most of the figures are from the Gaza Health Ministry but note 'e' confuses things by specifying both for the number of deaths. NadVolum (talk) 20:15, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

@NadVolum: They count children as 18 and below. How do you know this? Ecrusized (talk) 20:28, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Basically as I just put above because that's what their target audience expects and because the figures don't make any sense otherwise. NadVolum (talk) 21:02, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Revisiting the source as far as I can on what's happened I may have been wrong and anyway it is moot now anyway that the figures come via the Palestine Ministry of Health. NadVolum (talk) 23:38, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Figures are weird

Now I'm really confused. The Palestinian authority according to what it says in the citation counts children as 18 and below and take up 47% of the population - and have about 9000 deaths. And women would make up about 26% and had 6450 deaths. That means for every one woman killed only 0.77 children are killed - which strikes me as too low, one would expect them to die at a slightly higher rate than women. However the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor which classifies children the same estimates 11833 children and 6009 women. Its figure for women is lower than the recorded number even though it includes missing people. And that gives one woman killed for every 1.05 children which is much closer to what I'd expect! If anyone can resolve that mess I'd be very grateful! NadVolum (talk) 00:06, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

If we are going by guesstimates here, I would say that EMHRM uses the same data as Gaza Health Ministry, but adds up the missing as fatalities. Ecrusized (talk) 09:23, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

i think you've got the math backwards? Irtapil (talk) 01:07, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Sorry I meant as a rate per person so children had a 5% higher chance of being killed than women which I'd have thought would be about right - or far righter than the rate from thr Gaza Health Ministry figures where I think they're probably not being reported as much. NadVolum (talk) 19:36, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

OPT

@PrimaPrime: The Palestinian territories are occupied per every single RS reporting on the war. Your repeated reversions without edit summaries are bordering edit warring. [5] Makeandtoss (talk) 15:10, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

The UN and most countries use State of Palestine which has the benefit of being more concise, befitting the purpose of an infobox. There's already a lot of info in that field. PrimaPrime (talk) 20:02, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

@PrimaPrime: WP reflects RS. Since you have provided no RS to back your claim it will be reverted. Makeandtoss (talk) 12:51, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

And you have? The fact is that our article on the subject is titled simply Palestinian territories and not Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories because that is needlessly precise, and brevity is a virtue in an infobox that already includes several other regions.

You've also made this same change at other infoboxes without edit summaries or developing a talk consensus based on sources, so spare the terse outrage.

• WaPo: "Six maps explain the boundaries of Israel and Palestinian territories"
• DW: "The Palestinian territories comprise the Gaza Strip, controlled by the Hamas militant group, and the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem."
• Britannica: "Palestine, area of the eastern Mediterranean region, comprising parts of modern Israel and the Palestinian territories"
• Guardian: Simply "Palestinian territories"

Every single RS, you say? DW even follows the Israeli view that Gaza wasn't occupied.

Given that we've already relegated everything outside of Israel/Gaza into "spillover" collapsibles, I have half a mind to say we should do the same here. PrimaPrime (talk) 10:05, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

I am sure then if your concerns revolve around the status of Gaza now that you will not revert my edit which specified that the West Bank is occupied. Makeandtoss (talk) 10:54, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

I think I've seen occupied territory on UN stuff. Israel is occupying territory belonging to the state of Palestine. Irtapil (talk) 01:12, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Regions

While it is true that PIJ operates outside of Gaza for example, it is also true that Israel is not fighting in Yemen, nor in Iraq. We can roughly avoid mention of these intricacies, as we have already done in relation to Israel not fighting in Yemen or Iraq, by sorting into regions. This would give the reader a rough image of the situation. Makeandtoss (talk) 19:29, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

But "the special relationship" is bombing Yemen for Israel. It's part of the war. Irtapil (talk) 01:10, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Can someone put the number of Palestinians murdered by the Israelis in East Jerusalem during this conflict and keep the number updated? 38.99.190.243 (talk) 01:41, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Spillover/ other Theatre

I think this should be done in Spillover of Israel-Hamas war, because this article is mainly focused on events that occured Israel and Palestine territories, and it actually starts to become too vague for belligerents. This situation seems to become like Syrian civil war before, so I think it is best to minimize the belligerent as well. Wendylove (talk) 12:17, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

The fighting on the Lebanon border, in the West Bank and in the Red Sea is not "spillover", they are intentional acts committed by Hezbollah and the Houthis as part of the war. "Spillover" is fightingg that unintentionally crosses over into a non-targeted area. For example, the minor engagements and shelling that occured in Tunisia during the First Libyan Civil War is splillover. Hezbollah and the Houthis have both explicitly stated that their attacks are part of the war. In fact there are many sources which state, such as the institute for the study off war, that say the entire goal of the fighting on the Lebanon border is to divert and pin down Israeli units from being otherwise engaged in Gaza. Hamas and PIJ also operate and commits direct attacks on the Lebanon border and in the West Bank. To say that the fighting in the West Bank, Lebanon and the Red Sea "are not part of the war" is not supported by the sources. The fighting in those places are merely different theaters or campaigns of the same war.XavierGreen (talk) 15:24, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

The other regions (West Bank, Lebanon, Yemen, etc.) are definitely part of the war. But the laundry list of USA "support" makes me very uncomfortable. Irtapil (talk) 01:08, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

• Comment I'd suggest proposing some specific alternatives in this RfC. For instance A) eliiminating the "spillover" entirely, B) Keeping it as is and C)'making the "spillover" belligerents part of the main list of belligerents.

If it was put that way I would say that C is a nonstarter, and between A and B I would lean toward B. Coretheapple (talk) 15:29, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

• Comment striking out my earlier comment. Let me put it another way: what specifically are you proposing for this infobox? Are there alternatives you wish to suggest? Coretheapple (talk) 15:36, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Can someone put the number of Palestinians murdered by the Israelis in East Jerusalem during this conflict and keep the number updated? 38.99.190.243 (talk) 01:41, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Why Australia but not Iran?

Why are we getting so deep into the weeds for "supported by" on one side? Irtapil (talk) 00:15, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Because some editors really like adding flag lists to templates. Recurring problem :) PrimaPrime (talk) 10:07, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Newer IDF-estimated casualty figures

Estimated 9000 Hamas killed:

https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-782150 46.31.101.123 (talk) 23:56, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Why?

What is the purpose of this template? Why is this infobox not directly in the article? InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:48, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Palestinian estimate for Hamas casualties

The following is an explicit estimate for the number of Hamas militants killed, coming from a Palestinian source. First such source I found. It's from a Ramallah-based Palestinian author who wrote a book about Hamas, and is a board member of a Palestinian think tank. I don't know if that's considered reliable, but if "Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor" is good enough for one of the existing references, maybe this one passes muster as well.

In an interview published in The New York Times on 2023/12/05:

"If we look at the numbers, Hamas's military is about 50,000 fighters. About 4,000 have been killed so far. That's not a significant number."

The 50K total force estimate is notably above what more well-known sources say, but with the person's background and the way he phrased the sentence quoted above, assumably the 4K estimate, if anything, won't overshoot.

213.137.71.3 (talk) 19:14, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for th link, it was very interesting. He sounded quite pragmatic. Sometimes spokesmen for extremists tailor what they say to sound reasonable and cover up what they really mean but he didn't seem like that. The 50,000 fighters certainly doesn't jell with the other figures around - the closest other figure is 40,000 and most seem to think 20,000 to 25,000. It's definitely possible though, he said something about half of them being professional so perhaps they have the equivalent of reservists for the other half. The 4,000 is close to my own estimate though I'd like to know how he got to that with all the disruption. NadVolum (talk) 21:05, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

EuroMedHRM an unreliable source?

Note D estimates the number of Hamas militants killed based on figures from EuroMedHRM. I doubt the reliability of their numbers. On Jan 13 they retweeted someone named Maha Hussaini who claimed "Over 800,000 Palestinians who didn't evacuate Gaza City & the northern areas". That's in complete contradiction to all western media that says most people in the Gaza Strip have moved to the south. EuroMedHRM retweeting that casts doubt on the reliability of their other figures, seeing that their source verification or interpretation is lacking. 213.137.73.55 (talk) 21:32, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

I think it's quite problematic. There is an ongoing discussion about it here. Alaexis_¿question? 21:54, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

I tried to mention it there, but it was reverted out. 213.137.70.222 (talk) 15:57, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Their figures do make sense as estimstes of actual numbers of deaths. I understand about numbers of dead under the rubble making the Gaza Health Ministry recorded deaths rather low, but they are obviously missing a quite disproportionate number of children which I can only explain by many of them being buried without the ministry being told. I'm happy with them given with attribution and as estimates. NadVolum (talk) 22:58, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

As to the number of militants killed, yes it may be anywhere up to double what they say. However it is nowhere near what the Israeli say and I'm definite about that after checking the numbers of dead from the Gaza Health Ministry. NadVolum (talk) 23:13, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Considering the number from the Ramallah author mentioned above, which was 4000 on Nov 30, the 2800 militants calculated from the EMHRM figures seems very unlikely. 213.137.70.222 (talk) 15:51, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

That probably included the number killed in Israel. I agree though - I think the EMHRM figure is very likely to be too low. NadVolum (talk) 08:06, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

1,500 Militants killed inside Israel

The following have been pointed out in the talk page about the war.. The Israeli said 1,500 militants killed a few days after they said 1,000: [6], [7], [8], [9], [10]. NadVolum (talk) 22:47, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Elsewhere in some talk page, I think someone mentioned that the 1500 figure was later reported as 1000. I'm not sure where it was.

Maybe write a range: 1000-1500. 213.137.70.222 (talk) 15:53, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

US estimate for Hamas casualties

US intelligence estimates the number of Hamas combatants killed as 20-30% of 25,000-30,000. That's a range of 5,000-9,000.

213.137.72.107 (talk) 00:30, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

To add to Note D:

−

+

---- Per US intelligence: * 5,000-9,000 militants (as of 21 January 2024)

---

Per US intelligence:

• 5,000-9,000 militants (as of 21 January 2024)

213.137.71.140 (talk) 01:56, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Definitely attribute like that. Also that probably includes the number killled in the attack on Israel but does it say? NadVolum (talk) 08:04, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

References

 Done Sagflaps (talk) 14:17, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 January 2024

Replace

spillover

with

spillover

Ayunipear (talk) 19:22, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

 Not done for now: I can't find spillover</div> in the source. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 19:16, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Gaza breakdown missing references

A recent edit by User:TheAwesomeAtom changed the Gaza casualty breakdown without providing references.

Should either add references, or revert? 213.137.66.52 (talk) 17:22, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

The reference is already there. It's the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics citation already in the infobox (It's ref #39 at the moment of this comment). I didn't mark that for all the statistics though, because I am far better at research then wikitext and I have a bad habit of breaking it. If someone wants to copy that inline over to the breakdown numbers without breaking the infobox, I would be grateful to them. By the way, thanks for asking before reverting! TheAwesomeAtom (talk) 18:50, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

I can't edit extended-protected pages. Maybe someone else could? The PCBS ref is nonideal; it just timeouts for me. It seems even the Web Archive has problems with that site. I'm sure there are other sources, but so far didn't find one.

By the way, I'd remove the plus signs after the numbers ("12345+"). It isn't what the source says.

And yeah, Wikipedia's wikitext has become too complex for its own good. Excessive use of transclusion, templates, modules, parser functions... I don't know why people edited the references so, but I think some could be turned into plain ones. Maybe the #invoke is supposed to sidestep some limits (?), but I don't get the #tag:ref. 46.31.102.126 (talk) 20:10, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Two civilians to one militant

This 2:1 ratio seems to be based on the study by Yagil Levy of the Open University of Israel saying 61% of the deaths were civilian. However that figure counts all men of military age as militants as documented in [11]. They say this assumption should be documented along with any use of the 61% or 68% by another group. It would certainly also explain how the IDF could say they'd killed 9000 militants. NadVolum (talk) 15:29, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Why is the US not listed as a belligerent?

Our tax dollars are used to aid the resolution of the conflict. 2601:152:C82:79B0:84F1:F030:4F3B:4F0C (talk) 08:52, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Because that falls under NPOV issues, simply put. Synorem (talk) 08:52, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

The US, UK have ships in the Red Sea and have repeatedly bombed Ye,Eun in support of Israeli shipping. This is public and US freely states it has carried out these military operations. The US freely states it supplies Israel with weapons, and a US base exists in the Negev. All public undisputed knowledge. 2601:803:201:7B00:B06E:EC14:4477:EDFC (talk) 21:56, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

• Yemen

2601:803:201:7B00:B06E:EC14:4477:EDFC (talk) 21:56, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Basically, the US has not sent troops to Israel, so by definition it is not a belligerent in the war. Chong Yi Lam (talk) 14:16, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

It is, however, a supporter of the war. 74.15.65.150 (talk) 18:23, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Can someone put the number of Palestinians murdered by the Israelis in East Jerusalem during this conflict and keep the number updated? 38.99.190.243 (talk) 01:43, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

No graph showing Israeli bombs and attacks on Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, et al but there is a graph depicting Palestinian bombs fired on Israel.

Why is there no graph showing the number of bombs dropped by Israel on Palestine, Syria, Lebanon? There exists graph depicting alleged Palestine-origin bombs. 2601:803:201:7B00:B06E:EC14:4477:EDFC (talk) 22:00, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Can someone put the number of Palestinians murdered by the Israelis in East Jerusalem during this conflict and keep the number updated? 38.99.190.243 (talk) 01:43, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Unprovoked Israeli violence against Palestinian civilians in West Bank.

This should be a topic that includes the military and civilian attacks by Israel on an isolated and wholly civilian population not affiliated with, or having access to, Gaza. 2601:803:201:7B00:B06E:EC14:4477:EDFC (talk) 22:02, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Casualties breakdown - unify format for both sides

The figures for "killed" in the infobox (not the reference note) aren't of a uniform type for both sides. Gaza is a total number, Israel is split to civilian and servicemembers.

This is biased, so the format should be made uniform for both. Either turn Israel's into a total, or Gaza's into a breakdown directly in the infobox and not in a note. I think the latter makes more sense, as it's more informative and nuanced.

Since there are conflicting claims for Gaza's figures a range is needed:

• 17,878 - 23,878 civilians killed
• 6,000 - 12,000 militants killed

Any thoughts before I open an edit request? galenIgh 11:30, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

WP:ARBECR

There is a synthesis issue here. The total death toll given by Gaza Health Ministry, (currently at 29,878) does not announce militant casualties. Ecrusized (talk) 14:25, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

On one hand the policy on synthesis explicitly allows simple arithmetic calculations. I have no opinion whether it's worth doing it here since the figures come from different sources.

However I'm strongly for mentioning the range of militant casualties. There is nothing wrong with mentioning total casualties and military casualties:

• 29,878+ total killed
  • 6,000-12,000 militants killed Alaexis_¿question? 20:41, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I think you should just give up any attempt to mix the casualty figures from the Gaza Health Ministry and the number of militant deaths from Hamas. The figures for total deaths is registered deaths and does not I believe cover the majority of the militant deaths. It is also I believe a gross underestimate of total deaths. Given 6000 as the number of militants killed then most of them must be buried under rubble or their bodies taken back to Israel or people are too afraid to retrieve the bodies because of sniper fire and their deaths have not been registered by the health ministry. You might think the figures are biased but we should first and foremost report things with a neutral point of view as far as the sources are concerned. The actual total killed could easily be twenty thousand more, using CALC with subtraction and different sources will just give nonsense. NadVolum (talk) 00:21, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

::::A lot of conjecture. Various media sources qualify the Hamas-reported total with "the count doesn't distinguish between militant and civilian", so the origin doesn't claim that it's civilian only. galenIgh 12:19, 29 February 2024 (UTC) WP:ARBECR

Perhaps. But I'm unsure about WP:SYNTH. Though the reporting sources or article may be different, ultimately the raw data comes from the same origin. Alaexis notes that simple math is okay. And synth is not a fully rigid concept.

If it's not okay, there's a problem also in the Israel stats. It seems currently the civilian count is a summation of multiple sources, unless I missed a particular source.

::A possible compromise: revert Israel back to a total, and as Alaexis suggested, promote a Gaza militant count range to the main infobox instead of just in a note, and also the Israeli servicemember count. galenIgh 12:15, 29 February 2024 (UTC) WP:ARBECR

It is quite easy to see the Gaza Health Ministry figures cannot include most of the militants killed. Their latest figures say 12260 children 8570 women and 1049 elderly, taking that from their total register deaths of 30035 gives 8156 men. Assuming most of the militants are men and the Hamas one who said about 6000 had been killed is right that would mean only 2156 civilian men killed which is ridiculous, we would expect a higher number of civilian men killed than women because of work in essential services. So we really need to include the 7000 that the health ministry say are missing presumed dead. Unfortunately they say about 70% of them are estimated to be women and children and taking 8570-2156 for civilian men from 7000 leaves 586 which is nowhere near 70% of 7000. I hope you can see there are problems here with using CALC. NadVolum (talk) 15:20, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

I don't think it's a good idea to start messing with the toll figures in the infobox, especially since the conflict isn't over yet. I think it should be reverted back to the Gaza health ministry toll of 30k+ seeing as it has no mention or breakdown of civilian/military deaths, it'd be jumping the gun to do our own breakdown. We should just leave the toll as it comes from the Gaza health ministry.ThePaganUK (talk) 18:19, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

If not the idea to separate militants from the total, then for balance and uniformity:

• Israel's figure needs to be a total as well.
• Estimated range range of killed militants, and reported number of servicemembers, need to be promoted from the notes to directly in the infobox.

Opinions?

galenIgh 21:57, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

WP:ARBECR

Balance and uniformity are not required by any policy or guideline on Wikipedia. Being true to the sources is. NadVolum (talk) 19:29, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Actually it is: WP:NPOV. But even if it weren't there's no policy against it.

"True to sources" – if the calculation-based suggestion that started this section is deemed flawed, the same applies to the current Israel count in the infobox, as it isn't from a single report. Both the current split form and a total are calculations, so equally valid, and indeed the article showed a total from its Nov 18 creation until Feb 22.

Then there's the separate second suggestion, the promote a range of killed militants to the main infobox. galenIgh 13:56, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

WP:ARBECR

In my opinion it's best to differentiate casualties by sources rather than mixing them up. Linkin Prankster (talk) 14:52, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

References

ref formatting problem

When viewed in the mobile app there's a visible "</ref>" tag after Per Hamas: ~6,000...

Also, not sure if this is related, but the casualty figures Per US Intelligence, Per Hamas are visible with a desktop browser, but not in the mobile app. Uhoj (talk) 00:55, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 March 2024

It's not 71,980+ palestinians wounded in Gaza but 71,920+ as you can see here : https://palinfo.com/news/2024/03/04/879522/ YoParis75 (talk) 21:14, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: As of today, the article has already been updated with a more recent (sourced) number that does not match either of those two. popodameron ⁠talk 23:35, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 March 2024

Change * 30,631+ killed To * 30,631+ civilians killed 193.191.179.1 (talk) 07:45, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Declined. Where do you get that from? The Gaza Health ministry does not distinguish between civilians and military that I have seen in any citation. NadVolum (talk) 10:36, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Gaza Health Ministry that you linked to says "The casualty figures provided by the ministry do not distinguish the difference between civilians and combatants or provide the cause of death. The percentage of civilian deaths is only calculated post-conflict by the UN and various rights groups." NadVolum (talk) 10:38, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

References

Almost definitive civilian and militant count

(Note: Calculations are not original research, see WP:OR.)

Using Israel's confirmed ratio of 2:1 (civilians to militants),(1) and their militant estimate of 13,000 militants dead,(2) the Israeli version of civilians dead is 26,000.

Using Gazan sources, with the GHM death toll at 30,878 (3), and the Hamas militant death estimate at 6,000, that leaves 24,878 civilian deaths. Also, the GHM, using bare minimum civilian deaths including women, children, elderly, doctors, UN workers, and journalists adds up to 22,971, or ~23,000.(4)(5)(6)

The US State Dept. estimates 5,000-9,000 militants dead.(7)

This leaves the death toll at 23,000-26,000 and the militant toll at between 5,000-12,000. Personisinsterest (talk) 21:11, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

The numbers you cite are from different sources and different times, weeks and months apart. I don't think there's a big problem with that if it's a min/max range (and not a "definitive" number), but the below can't be extrapolated over time:

The 2:1 ratio estimate was 3 months ago with no reason to assume it holds constant.

:But mainly, see the recent discussion about calculations above, under the Casualties breakdown section. Some people opposed a similar idea. galenIgh 01:46, 9 March 2024 (UTC) WP:ARBECR

There's now a 1-1.5 ratio which Politico says results in almost 26k deaths. https://www.politico.eu/article/israels-netanyahu-says-he-will-defy-bidens-red-line-and-invade-rafah/?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=social Personisinsterest (talk) 21:14, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

:::A good catch. Some unclarity there. Politico's ratio-to-number conversion only acknowledges the low end of the range. Hamas's own numbers are lower than the high end. But the middle of the range concurs. Better wait for more reporting. galenIgh 21:40, 10 March 2024 (UTC) WP:ARBECR

I do think with Hamas now claiming 6,000 dead, the previous SYNTH issue is substantially obviated because we finally have numbers for both total and combatant deaths coming from the same ultimate source, just as on the Israeli side we have numbers coming from that state's armed wing on the one hand and its civilian officials on the other.

This would result in:

Per Hamas:

• 25,272 civilians killed
• 6,000 militants killed

Per Israel:

• 13,000-19,500 civilians killed
• 13,000 militants killed

PrimaPrime (talk) 05:15, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

The 6000 is fine for how many Hamas militants were killed. we don't know how they got it - probably by seeing how many of their members were missing. However the figure cannot be subtracted from the health ministry figure because that is recorded deaths and there is no indication of how many Hamas militant deaths it has recorded. Recorded deaths are not estimates of actual deaths, they are where the dead body has been seen and in most cases identified. We just have to continue saying we don't know how much of the total is militants. If you look at [12] you'll see that earlier in the war UNOCHA did some checks on th ministry figures to see how many of the deaths of its own members or families was recorded and found only 62% had been. If that is still true, and it probably is or worse I think, then the current figure for actual deaths is 50,000 or more. Also please note that the 2:1 figure was got by what they called a 'conservative estimate' where all children, women and elderly are counted as civilians and men from 19 to 64 are counted as potential combatants [13] - this isn't some Israeli trick, it is quite often used even though it is highly misleading if you don't know. The figures are from different sources and you can't just use CALC like that. NadVolum (talk) 15:26, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

>"recorded deaths are not estimates of actual deaths, they are where the dead body has been seen and in most cases identified".

::::::That's incorrect even as far as Hamas' officials claim. A recent article said more than 40% of the Gaza count is "based on accounts from 'reliable media sources', though the ministry doesn't cite or say which sources those are". galenIgh 15:42, 14 March 2024 (UTC) WP:ARBECR

Did you actually read that beyond the headline? Did you automaticlly translate 'reliable sources' to 'unreliable sources'? Did you not see that they were not recording bodies under the rubble or hastily buried or decomposing somewhere but can't be reached? NadVolum (talk) 17:37, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

----

@PrimaPrime, generally makes sense to me. That 6,000 count is what prompted the previous discussion but there was disagreement or not enough consensus. Maybe need to solicit more feedback, minding WP:POLL.

There was also my alternative suggestion. No feedback so far, but I don't see how anyone would object. I'd edit directly if I had sufficient permissions.

:::::Regarding the Per Israel civilian range, I'd wait for more reporting than just the Politico article. It's not clear enough there. Also previously, numbers coming from the army and politicians weren't exactly the same. So need more reporting to establish it better. galenIgh 15:27, 14 March 2024 (UTC) WP:ARBECR

The lastest figures from Gaza had about 72% women and children which by your CALC leave 8800 men. Taking 6000 from that leaves just 2800 civilian men killed. This is the ridiculous area you get into with CALC here. Please just desist until you get something to actually work with. Just wanting better figures doesn't make some spurious numerology work. NadVolum (talk) 15:47, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

That's why the idea was number ranges, which reflect the uncertainty when including everyone's claims.

:::::::(Indeed the resultant numbers from Hamas' claims are ridiculous, and they goofed up, but that's not the topic at hand.) galenIgh 16:05, 14 March 2024 (UTC) WP:ARBECR

What do you mean by goofed up? Their figures for recorded deaths make quite reasonable sense to me. NadVolum (talk) 17:03, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

If we were in the business of rejecting Hamas numbers based on sheer implausibility or speculation about their methods, we wouldn't have their claim to have killed 1,600 Israeli soldiers in the infobox.

Indeed I opposed attempts to synthesize a civilian/combatant breakdown out of different government and NGO sources. But now the figures are not from different sources any more so than the Israeli numbers.

Obviously we are continuing to clearly attribute the claims to each side and not making a single definitive claim in wikivoice - that will definitely have to wait until after the war, if at all. PrimaPrime (talk) 17:04, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

They are from duifferent sources. One was Hamas saying about 6000 of their men were killed. The other is the Ministry of Health saying how many deaths they have recorded. They don't claim that is the total number of deaths or anywhere near it - they currently guess there might be 10,000 not recorded under the rubble. It may easily be double that or more using the UNOCHA figures for how many deaths they had which weren't recorded. Recorded deaths and estimates of actual deaths are two quite different things. NadVolum (talk) 17:11, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

And what was that about goofed up? NadVolum (talk) 17:13, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

As to the number of IDF deaths, compare that to the Israeli claim of militants killed to what Hamas said. It is very common in war to claim more than double the casualties of the enemy. NadVolum (talk) 17:16, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

This is covered by the extended confirmed restriction, and non-EC editors such as galenIgh may not participate in this discussion. nableezy - 17:40, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Israeli casualties

Why aren't Israeli casualties since 8 October included in the infobox? Makeandtoss (talk) 14:35, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Gaza militant killed count - promote into the infobox

In the casualties section of the infobox, Gaza side, below the first line item, directly in the infobox and not in a popup note, add:

* 6,000 - 13,000 militants killed

The full details of the three sources can be left in a popup note. It's better for NPOV. As suggested above by @Alaexis on 2/27 (2nd reply). galenIgh 21:19, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit extended-protected}} template. M.Bitton (talk) 02:57, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Moved from User talk:M.Bitton § Establishing consensus before edit request

 – M.Bitton (talk) 19:42, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for checking the edit request and the comment there.

You said "please establish a consensus for this alteration", but this is currently a problem due to the way two particular editors

interpret WP:ECR (indeed contrary to the suggestion in WP:EDITREQ, and not everyone shares their interpretation according to some previous discussion I read; can't find it offhand).

I don't think the edit req is objectively controversial; the info is already in the article and the other side already uses the suggested format (the Talk discussion mentioned in the edit req is mostly about a different edit idea).

If you feel it needs discussion, could you open back the edit req? Or else, maybe WP:DOIT considering WP:OWN. If someone wants to undo it later, so be it. galenIgh 03:50, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

I read the discussion and I certainly don't see a consensus for your proposed edit, hence my answer. As far as I'm concerned, the ER matter is closed. 19:42, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Notes

Gaza Civilian Casualties in infobox - Edit Request for Clarification

The small footnote reference for the civilian casualties on the Palestinian side in the infobox gives a variety of different tolls from different sources. However, the one that is shown by default without going into that footnote cites the Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry.

Isn't it a violation both of neutrality and of reliable sources to cite a source from 1. a belligerent in the conflict which might have prejudice towards one angle, and 2. something with zero editorial independence which is controlled by a terrorist group (and there is no reasonable expectation that a health ministry official who has a Hamas militant with an AK next to him can possibly be guaranteed to give a neutral perspective).

For these reasons I make an edit request to remove the listed numbers. Another option if others are not satisfied with this (in that event) might be to list the numbers as "disputed" and then display the different sources underneath it. Adonnus (talk) 17:20, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

US intelligence on Hamas casualties

Does the US give the figure of 5,000 - 9,000 Hamas militants killed? As far as I know they only said 20-30% of militants killed. But 20% of what? For example, this US gov website says Hamas' strength was 20,000-25,000. So the figures should be 4,000-7,500? VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 19:50, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Iran as a belligerent in the war

@RamHez: The citation for Iran is about the 2024 Iranian strikes in Israel. This is a synthesis since the attack is not considered a part of the Israel-Hamas war by the references. Ecrusized (talk) 13:12, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Agreed, Iran is not a participant in IH war. Selfstudier (talk) 13:15, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

If we've already included Iranian casualties in Syria from Israeli airstrikes in this article, then naturally Iran's retaliation to those very same Israeli airstrikes is extremely relevant to the information we've already provided. This is clearly Iranian involvement in retaliation to an event that occurred in the northern front of the war. RamHez (talk) 13:15, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Imo, neither of those should be included as neither Syria nor Iran is a participant in the war. Selfstudier (talk) 13:16, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Then both should either be removed or both be kept. Since it's illogical to keep one side of the narrative (the Israeli attacks on Iranian forces in Syria) and not show Iranian retaliation to those very same attacks. RamHez (talk) 13:19, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

"Then both should either be removed or both be kept."

No such measure is needed. You might want to make less drastic edits. See my explanation below. Ecrusized (talk) 13:26, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

There is a difference between the two. One of them is a part of the Israel–Hezbollah conflict (2023–present), which is considered a part of Israel Hamas war, as Hezbollah initiated hostilities in support of Hamas. But Iran's missile strike against Israel is not considered to be related at all to Israel-Hamas war. Ecrusized (talk) 13:24, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Still, Iranian casualties should not be included. Selfstudier (talk) 13:28, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

You're building a rabbit hole, Iran stated it directly retaliated to the source of the attacks on their consulate in Damascus which was a part of Israel–Hezbollah conflict (2023–present) which was initiated by Hezbollah in support of Hamas. It links back to one another. These events are all interconnected, which is in fact related to Israel-Hamas war. Saying that the Iranian missile strikes on Israel is not "related at all to the Israel-Hamas war" is clearly an objectively wrong view. Had the war never happened, neither would these strikes because as I demonstrated, they're chronologically linked RamHez (talk) 13:46, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

If you want to limit the war's article to simply the war in Gaza Strip, do that, but if we are adding parties in the north (Lebanon, Syria), east (Iraq) and south (Yemen), then we must add Iran as well. Especially since this attack was in retaliation for the Israeli attack on their consulate in Syria within the Israel–Hezbollah conflict (2023–present) which is included on this article's casualties. RamHez (talk) 13:49, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't agree with that view. The source you've added for this is entirely synthesis. Your refusal to remove this without removing other properly cited content is concerning. Ecrusized (talk) 14:18, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Iranian strikes were in response to Damascus strike which was a part of Israel Hezbollah conflict which itself was initiated in support of Hama attack on Israel, so I think it should be kept, at least for now , if these are the only strikes and Israel doesn't retaliate and this conflict doesn't escalate further, I think Iran and Syria should be decided upon but not currently as it's an escalating situation M Waleed (talk) 16:14, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Iran's attack on Israel has literally delayed the Israeli offensive on Rafah. Iran should definitely count as a belligerent in this war after the Israeli govt confirmed Iran's immense support (through causing a delay on an offensive on Rafah by applying force on Israel) whether indirect or direct. It has changed the course of the war through forcing Israel to delay its offensive on Rafah which was meant to start this week. RamHez (talk) 15:46, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

This is simply wrong. Just because Israel says their Rafah offensive is delayed due to Iran does not mean that is true. Israel was already under pressure not to pursue a Rafah offensive. Perhaps Iran is just a convenient face saver, who knows? I just do not get this desire to add belligerents left and right for no good reason. The best case for addition as belligerent is the USA. Selfstudier (talk) 16:55, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Iran and Israel have directly attacked one another, IRGC was directly hit by Israeli strikes in Lebanon and Syria, two iranain ships are operating in the red sea, and IRGC has seized Israeli ship in the Persian gulf. So I think it should be listed as beligrent M Waleed (talk) 08:21, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Iran and Israel are fighting with each other, so what, they have been doing that for a long time one way and another. Iran did not know that Hamas was going to launch an attack on Israel and have nothing directly to do with the Israel Hamas/Gaza fighting. Nor does Hezbollah, come to that. Selfstudier (talk) 11:31, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

As after the retaliatory strikes, the matter has cooled down so I think Iran has to be removed M Waleed (talk) 12:37, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Police as combatants

• I removed Palestinian police from the template here. I asked the question "what is the inclusion of the police based on? police normally have non-combatant status under IHL."
• This was reverted here. The edit summary "Palestinian police is a beligrent in Siege of Gaza City,Battle of Jabalia,Siege of Khan Yunis and the planned Rafah offensive, moreover there's also a precedent from Israeli police."
• This, in my view, is not a valid answer to the question "what is the inclusion of the police based on?". It is a description of the state of other Wikipedia articles. This has no bearing on the question asked. What is the policy based reason for inclusion? Sean.hoyland (talk) 09:01, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

  Police is included for Israel too and Gazan police is actively involved in combat against Israel M Waleed (talk) 15:55, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 April 2024

→

Gaza health ministry says 7000 missing not 8000 2001:8003:266B:4D00:81B7:B47B:8752:5B4 (talk) 10:05, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

If you have a look the latest figures separate figures are given for men and for women and children. As of 21 April they were 7,000 missing for men and 4,700 missing for women and children. Those figures are both I believe still some thousands away from the actual figures but they're about the best you'll get from an official source and not unreasonable. They're quite different from their 70% for missing women and children they estimated before - they probably just got that from bombed houses, I guess they've had to stick in Hamas militant deaths into the figures for men as they're mostly not showing up in recorded deaths which are only ones where people can get at the bodies.

I think it is reasonable to add the figures if you don't want to put them in separately. NadVolum (talk) 10:58, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, just looked again and it didn't say the 7,000 were men, it just showed only a man as compared to the Women and Kids one and the number had reduced and would be just silly as the total. But I can't be absolutely certain it means just men. NadVolum (talk) 11:12, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 April 2024

Under belligerents of the war, there should be a "Supported by" the United States of America, with these citations: https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2024/03/06/us-weapons-israel-gaza/ AND https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/2/20/us-vetoes-another-un-security-council-resolution-urging-gaza-war-ceasefire#:~:text=Majority%20of%20members%20voted%20to,killed%20more%20than%2029%2C000%20people.&text=The%20United%20States%20has%20vetoed,ceasefire%20between%20Israel%20and%20Hamas., similar to the "Supported by" section on the War in Darfur page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Darfur. 74.15.65.150 (talk) 18:18, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Casualty Figures Bias

Why do the casualties for Israel list specific civilian casualties, but all the dead of Palestine are lumped in the same category? It's as if the article is implying there are no Palestinian civilians, only combatants, which is disgusting 2605:A601:AF6C:1700:A915:DB4F:28EA:266A (talk) 21:24, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Exactly how many Palestinians were civilians and militias is unknown. Parham wiki (talk) 16:27, 4 May 2024 (UTC)