Talk:Timeline of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict in 2022

Speculation and developing stories

@User:Dunutubble Don't you think it would be best to omit adding certain events until there are more developments to the story? I was going to add a little phrase about the shooting in Ariel, but then I had second thoughts. Chances are the assailants are Palestinian, and the motive is terror, yet there is always a sliver of doubt. Should we be including suspected terrorist attacks only a few hours after they have taken place, when the identity of the assailants and their motive remain unknown? It's a bit speculative. Mooonswimmer 00:45, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Credibility of January 6th's Sources

I looked at the sources for "A 25-year-old Palestinian was hit and killed by a settler vehicle at the Beit Sira checkpoint. The driver reportedly turned himself in to authorities." and found in the first sentence of the source Middle East Monitor[1] the words "Two Palestinians were killed this morning by Israel in separate occasions in the occupied West Bank." Referring to a vehicle death caused by an Israeli civilian as "by Israel" strikes me as weasel-wording and makes me question the credibility of the source. The Wikipedia edit as-is mentions the driver turned himself in to authorities but doesn't mention the driver was on his way to work, which leads me to believe the death may have been accidental. In fact, the only other source from OCHA[2] refers to the incident with the more neutral "hit" rather than "ran over" the previous source uses. OCHA also brings up another incident from January 5th that isn't mentioned in the Wikipedia article at all, where "in Umm al Kheir (Hebron), an elderly Palestinian man was critically injured after being hit by an Israeli police truck that was confiscating unregistered vehicles; according to Israeli sources the truck had been stoned at the time of the incident." - EricSpokane (talk) 17:01, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

The death of the victim in the latter incident is recorded at January 17. Tell me exactly what you would like to change and I will change it, the victim is dead either way. Selfstudier (talk) 17:13, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Minor Edit Suggestions

Hi all, since Selfstudier pointed out that I do not meet the minimum number of edits for editing AI conflict related pages I will keep a running list here of minor edits I think should be considered. (For major edits, I will create individual requests.)

1. Top box currently says "just short summaries neutrally worded together," better way to say this is either to write "just short neutrally worded short summaries" or you can emphasize need for neutral tone and balanced high quality references in a subsequent sentence. This depends on what you want the objective of that box to be.
2. March 15 typo in sentence "Israeli forces said they came under attackafter" -- should read "attack after"
3. May 20 wiki page link for Masafer Yatta is redundant given link exists for it under May 4, a date and event that is directly referred to in this May 20 update.

Thanks! theraefactor (talk) 21:01, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

2 and 3 are done, maybe try 1 again? "just short neutrally worded short summaries" has short twice. I tweaked it a bit. Selfstudier (talk) 22:44, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Regarding

1. Yes, sorry for the typo. I see you understood my intended correction. Thanks!
2. I saw you made an additional change, which I think removes context. Israelis were conducting raids/arrests based on recent terrorist attacks. Therefore, the context for the arrest of the two Palestinians should probably be left in, i.e. that two were arrested on suspicion of terrorism.
3. Great edits. Thanks!

theraefactor (talk) 22:56, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

It doesn't matter why they were being arrested, they weren't shot. In case you are not aware, Israeli based sources including their newsorgs routinely refer to every Palestinian as terrorist, you should pay no attention, I could just as well write instead that they were being arrested for resisting occupation, the point on which everyone will agree (and maybe not always even then) is that they were arrested. Selfstudier (talk) 23:26, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Oh ok, thanks for the clarification. theraefactor (talk) 23:29, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

New development regarding Abu Akleh Killing

Not sure if this is something to add to the timeline, feel free to opine and edit: https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-57-u-s-lawmakers-demand-fbi-state-dept-investigate-shireen-abu-akleh-killing-1.10812248 -- theraefactor (talk) 23:03, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

If things are already in main articles (for instance, some of the Masafer Yatta material was material that I had added at that article quite recently) then I think there is no need as long as there is a link out to the detailed article. Idk how exactly you look at this page, for me it is an aide memoire because I always forget smaller items and waste time looking for them all over again later to add to an article or to create a new one. Selfstudier (talk) 23:32, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Nice work.

North8000 (talk) 17:38, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Recent revert

I fail to see why details about a Palestinian who did something else in March and which is already included in the article for March 29 are at all relevant to the killing of a Palestinian on June 1. That the Israeli forces were there to carry out a punitive demolition is relevant because that is why the Israeli forces were at the location but the reason for that demolition is completely irrelevant (there is no causal chain that leads to the current killing). Or to put it another way, if one was writing up the fact of the demolition in the Bnei Brak article (it's not in there atm), would one include a statement to the effect that while the Israeli forces were doing the demolition they killed a Palestinian? Also see the top of the page "Nor do entries require a great amount of extraneous detail, just short neutrally worded summaries and good references". Selfstudier (talk) 21:25, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

I think it's worth mentioning as it highlights the cycle of the violence with one event leading to another. Alaexis_¿question? 08:07, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

That's what I mean by causality, I don't see how the June 1 killing is "caused by" (or lead from) the Bnei Brak event (unless the suggestion is that it was revenge, which does not appear to be the case). One could simply say that all events are caused by the AI conflict, right? Or one could highlight the fact (also in the sources) that all punitive demolitions are considered illegal by the international community and that's the reason for the killing, or the cause can be (pick a cause from 1917 to now). Do you see what I mean? That stuff is just journalist infill taking advantage of the fact that the demolition was of the house of some other Palestinian who had earlier committed a crime but otherwise has nothing to do with the current killing afaics. The exact circumstances of the killing are not even clear at this point, that information would be preferable.Selfstudier (talk) 08:19, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

The note about "when they came under fire" should possibly still be in there, or at least something about a fire fight breaking out (if reliably attested), but explaining the cause of the punitive demolition is undue and makes it less neutral, and would in turn require counterbalancing with an explanation of Israel's policy on enacting forms of collective punishment. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:39, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

That "Palestinian who did something else" deliberately killed passersby for being Jewish. The Bnei Brak attack was the reason IDF were there in the West Bank. Even a pro-Arab ref mentions that in the opening sentence. If it's described earlier in the article, doesn't forbid it to be mentioned again. This page is about the Israeli–Palestinian conflict in 2022, and if a story has new developments it's worth mentioning. Replacing this information with "punitive home demolition" changes the meaning to imply that they came to demolish a random house for collective punishment. And, of course, the information about the killing of a Palestinian would be relevant in the Bnei Brak attack article. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 00:44, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

There are other related facts, selectively adding information is what is Orwellian. To reiterate, there is literally no need to write an entire article in this timeline but if needs be that can be done and not only for this particular killing. I have added undue tag for causally distant information and added material to balance the cherrypicking.Selfstudier (talk) 09:38, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Cherry-picking is what you did adding a regulation that's not mentioned as important to this story in the sources. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 14:04, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Great, an editor insists on putting stuff in because it's in the sources but then takes stuff out that's in the sources.Selfstudier (talk) 14:06, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

And says "keep it short" after first making stuff unnecessarily longer.Selfstudier (talk) 14:13, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

If it's described earlier in the article, doesn't forbid it to be mentioned again. when adding something and Jenin raids are mentioned above. when removing. Double standard much? Selfstudier (talk) 14:24, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Concerning your edit,

You added that "Israel conducts near-daily raids" for one particular event when those raids are already right there on this page, visible to anyone. It's just a word clutter that doesn't provide any valuable information at all. Yabad is not that close to Jenin, anyway.

The source mentioning the 2021 regulation is about different incident the next day. The sources for this demolition and killing don't mention this regulation.

As for demolitions being "condemned by critics" – this belongs to Israeli demolition of Palestinian property article. There are no specific condemnations of this demolition in the sources, and even if there were, it doesn't belong here, unless very notable, because otherwise this list of events would be cluttered with trivial reactions. There are three instances of demolitions on this page, and you can't just add this generic message to them all. There's no criticism or reactions in other events on this list. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 15:29, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Look, these unwarranted additions to short summaries as required by the userbox at the top the article were started by yourself because you wanted to include additional information that you approve of and you added it even though the addition was being disputed in talk. Well, other editors can follow the example and start adding things that they approve of, can't they? Having it both ways isn't an option. If you want to return to the short summaries that were normal in this article prior to your intervention, we can do that or we can have a POV free for all, your choice.Selfstudier (talk) 15:36, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

It wasn't "started by me", but by two other editors. You alone reverting the three of us. The Bnei Brak attack was a relevant addition that increased the text from 238 to just 315 characters, keeping it concise inline with the rest of this page. Your irrelevant false-balance self-admitted-POV info increased it to 902, making it the single largest such incident on the list by far, despite not being close to the most important. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 17:16, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Quite happy to await the views of others. The first editor was non ecp so that's not a revert, the second was a revert, my first. Your first edit to this page, ever, was to show up two days later to revert me and I did not revert you. The next revert is also yours, again another edit of mine.Selfstudier (talk) 17:35, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

What is this? Three editor came to add the info, you alone remove it.

And why did you add the 2021 regulation, for example? How's that relevant? --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 18:03, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

I'm just pointing out, with diffs, who it is doing the edit warring (how you described it in your linkouts to the projects). At the time of your first revert, myself and one other editor had expressed the view in talk that the material being added was undue but you ignored that discussion and imposed your POV instead (in other words, you edited against consensus, 2 to 1 at that time).(Selfstudier (talk) 18:04, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

It's me against consensus?! Three editors adding information, you alone removing it. If we count talk page, that's 3 to 2 for adding. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 18:41, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Non ecp editor doesn't count, what you should have done per WP:ONUS (on those wishing to include disputed material) is to record your opinion in talk and then waited to see what other editors might say (onus also says material may not be added until there is a consensus). Selfstudier (talk) 18:44, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

The fact that the demolition was carried out against the home of a terrorist who murdered five innocent people merely due to their non-Arab identity is relevant. Can't omit that if you say there was a demolition!חוקרת (Researcher) (talk) 10:40, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

It isn't omitted, it is still in the article. Because I don't edit war. It shouldn't be in the article because it has no relevance to the killing on 1 June. None. It's OK, the POV game is open to be played by more than one person as I said above. Selfstudier (talk) 10:44, 6 June 2022 (UTC)