This article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Israel on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IsraelWikipedia:WikiProject IsraelTemplate:WikiProject IsraelIsrael-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Terrorism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles on
terrorism, individual terrorists, incidents and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the
discussion and see a list of open tasks.TerrorismWikipedia:WikiProject TerrorismTemplate:WikiProject TerrorismTerrorism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographic
Palestine region, the
Palestinian people and the
State of Palestine on Wikipedia. Join us by visiting
the project page, where you can add your name to the
list of members where you can contribute to the
discussions.PalestineWikipedia:WikiProject PalestineTemplate:WikiProject PalestinePalestine-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the
Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
You must be logged-in and
extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for
making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic
The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:
Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to
make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.
With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:
Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.
This wasn’t an incident, but an attack.
Moreover, the writer of this page seems to have an opinion and not just telling facts about the attack but trying to justify the attack. instead of explaining the Ramallah lynching it tells what happened before, which is not the subject.
Happy to see it fixed thank you.
2001:4DF4:8BA0:2:A56F:4616:593B:588A (
talk)
08:04, 6 August 2022 (UTC)reply
References 19, 20, 23, 24 are broken links. Reference 19 have a right archived version
this. References 20 and 23 have an archived version
this and
this. Reference 24 is a Google Translate link, but the correct archived version is
this. I can't make edits due to the page's protection. --
Vgg5465 (
talk)
13:57, 1 November 2023 (UTC)reply
See
Artists4Ceasefire PIN DESIGN AND SYMBOLISM - "Artists4Ceasefire enamel pin is composed of a red background to symbolize the urgency of the call to save lives. The orange hand conveys the beautiful community of people from all backgrounds that have come together in support of centering our shared humanity. The heart being cradled in the center of the hand is an invitation for us to lead with our hearts, always, to lead with love. When we lead with love, we understand that all of our fellow beings deserve to be loved and protected." This is inconsistent with
this content written using Wikipedia's editorial voice, no less. That is a very obvious problem that any competent editor should be able to understand and avoid. And let me take this opportunity again to remind people that there is a Universal Code of Conduct.
Section 3.3 – Content vandalism and abuse of the projects of the Wikimedia Foundation Universal Code of Conduct, prohibits "Systematically manipulating content to favour specific interpretations of facts or points of view". In other words, willfully biased editing is not allowed.
Sean.hoyland (
talk)
03:56, 13 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Referring to the two Israelis as "IDF reservists" is an inaccurate representation. They should be referred to as civilians, because they are civilians. IDF reservists makes it seem like they are willingly involved in the military. Almost all Israeli's are required to be reservists, and that does not change the fact that they are civilians. It should still be mentioned that they are reservists, but for the opening paragraph it should be changed to "Civilians". In summary change " Israel Defense Forces reservists." to "civilians."
Ed1225 (
talk)
17:33, 19 May 2024 (UTC)reply
The Israeli press called them "reservists" or "soldiers". They were reporting for duty in uniform with their weapons. Not civilians.
Zerotalk03:06, 20 May 2024 (UTC)reply
FWIW, this is one of the more interesting and puzzling requests I have personally seen in the topic area. The perspective is surprising, that foreign soldiers on active duty on foreign soil are civilians because they are reservists. This is a way of thinking I've not seen before. I wonder how common it is in Israel (or Russia), how it comes about and whether any Wikipedia articles address it.
Sean.hoyland (
talk)
07:23, 20 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Minor corrections to the record here. They were not on "active duty on foreign soil". They were reservists (as non-combatant drivers) of a foreign country driving in a civilian car to report for reserve duty -- which is not the same as active duty -- who were detained at another foreign country's roadblock. They were then transported by the local police to a police station. They were also in plainclothes, if one were to look at the (quite disturbing) photos of the incident, because reservists (in any country's military) are not considered to be on "duty" until they reach their base for assignment. This is different than the case of reservists who are activated to serve on active duty, such as what is occurring during the current Israel-Hamas war. So yes, technically, they were still civilians at the time of their detention, but
non combatant would be a more appropriate word here.
Zero0000, what sources support your statement that they were in uniform, because
photos and video (not linking) of the lynchings beg to disagree?
Longhornsg (
talk)
07:55, 20 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks. So, in fact, I now realize that I probably don't really understand the nuances of the transition from non-combatant to combatant status as a non-combatant moves through time and space to report for duty as a combatant.
Sean.hoyland (
talk)
08:05, 20 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I looked up the Jerusalem Post of the time and read the account of a journalist eye-witness that he knew that one of them was a soldier because of the khaki trousers and military boots. That's all I know about what they were wearing. Maybe they were dressed differently? The story linked above speaks of Arab headdress. I think that the clothing issue is confused by the rumor that they were undercover operatives. The Hebrew wiki explicitly says that their personal weapons were taken from them, so I take it that they were armed. It also says their duty began the day before(?). Israel considers enemy soldiers to be military targets whether they are on duty or not (same as US military law, also international law, see para 1677
here) so I don't see why the same shouldn't hold in reverse. In any case, none of this matters because we follow sources and all of the many sources I have looked at in the past couple of hours refer to them consistently as reservists or soldiers so we should too.
Zerotalk09:18, 20 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Of course, IHL also says they should be treated as POWs.
Thanks for your thoroughness. The page could use a lot of work anyway, so will make sure the language is also faithful to what the sources actually say.
Longhornsg (
talk)
16:30, 20 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Incident section wrong link.
Currently the link of Vadim Nurzhitz Rank (OR-4) leads to Oregon's 4th congressional district however it should be a link to NATO Ranks like in Avrahamis case.
217.91.168.125 (
talk)
14:49, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply