Talk:Kfar Aza massacre

I change the description of this village ("Kfar" is village in Hebrew) from "settelment" to "kibbutz". That because this vilagge defines itself and has to properties of a Kibbutz. I think that the name "settelment" is misleading (it is usually used for Israeli settlement, while Kfar Aza is within the Green Line (Israel)). Please accept the change. Yonathan33 (talk) 19:48, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

I think "community" is fine. I'm trying to not overuse "kibbutz", and I think it fits as an alternate. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 20:09, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

I'm getting a bit of mixed feedback on these claims from RS upon a more thorough examination; none seem to be willing to put the claims in their own voice. While we're waiting for more information, is there a better way to describe this stuff? Should we omit it until we get independent verification, or should we keep it attributed to the soldiers on-scene, as it is now? — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 20:48, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Not 100% sure either. BBC reports, with a correspondent on the ground, that civilians were beheaded (at least one woman). The commander the journalist talked to - David Ben Zion - also stated that only some of the civilians were beheaded, and not all. The Times of Israel also stated that the dead babies claim came from another journalist from i24 talking to a commander in the town (unsure whether same one as BBC article). Itai Veruv also claimed there were dead babies, but not necessarily in Kfar Aza.

The Hill stated that the decapitated babies claim came from an interview between Nicole Zedeck of i24 and Ben Zion. The Hill article also stated that an Israeli major heard claims of decapitated babies, but there were no photos or videos. Currently, all claims come from Israeli soldiers in the town and Ben Zion. The AA article also states that the Israeli government couldn't confirm the babies claim.

I think it's best to add the claims of the decapitated babies into the article - they are one of the reasons the massacre is so notoriously gruesome - but mention that all claims came from the soldiers in the town and their commander Ben Zion, with no photo or video evidence available, along with the Israeli govt's lack of knowledge per AA. Jebiguess (talk) 21:01, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Jebiguess, all the sources do not include the claim that all of them were beheaded. These are some of the 40 babies who were murdered.

This journalist (Margot Haddat) claims she confirmed:

https://nypost.com/2023/10/10/hamas-kills-40-babies-and-children-beheading-some-of-them-at-israeli-kibbutz-report/ שמי (2023) (talk) 21:46, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

First off, the NYPost is not generally considered a reliable source, and the article doesn't make any claims I haven't mentioned above. Haddad's tweet, however, adds more clarity to the claims. This Daily Dot article is pretty good at explaining the history of the claim, and it's assessment of the baby killings was that it appears to be true. No one is denying that the killings of the babies happened, only that the specific claims about 40 babies should be mentioned with a degree of caution until more journalists enter Kfar Aza and more primary and secondary sources are available. Jebiguess (talk) 21:57, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

From what I’ve been told about Judaism, photographing corpses is bad. Honoring the dead is important, and there is something I don’t quite understand about witnessing corpses making people impure (again not a Judaism expert). All that is to say, there may be a cultural/religious reason that we aren’t seeing these pics. Hi Biktor627 (talk) 10:45, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

The President of United States, Joe Biden confirmed that he saw photo evidence of babies beheading: “I’ve been doing this a long time. I never really thought that I would see, have confirmed, pictures of terrorists beheading children.”

However later White House press retracted the claim as: A White House spokesperson later clarified that US officials and the president have not seen pictures or confirmed such reports independently.

It will be a lot more helpful to cite all pieces edited. LeJawwad (talk) 12:16, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

The White House released a statement clarifying that “Biden hasn’t seen pictures or confirmed such reports” so he lied, stop spreading propaganda

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12621085/amp/joe-biden-confirms-pictures-Hamas-beheading-children.html Areejdf (talk) 21:02, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

I WAS SAYING THE SAME THING, STOP UNCITABLE INFORMATION. LeJawwad (talk) 08:11, 16 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Two things:

1. The NY Post made be deprecated, but all they are doing is reposting the independent confirmations from Haddat (though it may be better to wait until it's actually published)

2. Other RS have independently corroborated the claims made by the IDF:

• The Messenger: "Dozens of babies were brutally murdered — some even decapitated — by Hamas terrorists inside a kibbutz in southern Israel during Saturday's shocking assault on Israeli civilians, according to journalists who were let in to see the aftermath of the massacre" [1]
• CNN: What I saw, hundreds of terrorists in full armor, full gear, with all the equipment and all the ability make a massacre. Go from apartment to apartment, from room to room and kill babies, mothers, fathers in their bedrooms… They locked themselves in the protection rooms of their houses and people were out with their children and they killed them. They killed babies in front of their parents, and then killed the parents. They killed parents and we found babies between the dogs and the family killed before him. They cut heads of the people." [2]

Longhornsg (talk) 00:33, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Now CBS, citing a direct eyewitness first responder (not the Israeli military or government):

• "Yossi Landau, the head of operations for the southern region of Zaka, Israel's volunteer civilian emergency response organization, told CBS News on Wednesday that he personally saw adults and children, including babies, who had been beheaded."

Longhornsg (talk) 14:41, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

This CBS News article implies that they did not confirm the report themselves nor receive corroboration from anyone else. It is my understanding that news organizations will often require more corroboration/confirmation that just that before making less serious claims. This feels like an instance of a news organization letting its standards slip in order to fit a preconceived narrative. It may ultimately turn out that these claims are true, but I do not feel that this specific news article meets Wikipedia's guidelines for a credible source. ROADKILL (talk) 08:23, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

The Times of Israel source cited in the article states "A reporter from i24 News said that an IDF commander told her that they had found the bodies of some 40 babies, some of whom had been beheaded." i24NEWS cited David Ben Zion as the IDF commander who made those claims. In 2021, David Ben Zion was the Deputy Head of the Samaria Council according to 7ISRAEL National News. In February 2023, Ben David was reported by 7ISRAEL to have said "the village of Hvara should be wiped out, this place is a nest of terror and the punishment should be for everyone". "Enough with nice talk about building and strengthening settlements," "The other inline source in that sentence is paywalled. If it's reliable at all, can someone with access be more specific as to what it says? Are there any other, better sources or do we intend to rely on one statement made by someone who wants to wipe out Palestinian villages? Kire1975 (talk) 09:49, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

The Times wrote

We can attribute it rather than stating in the wikivoice in the meantime. Alaexis_¿question? 12:29, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Kire1975, please be more careful. This edit summary is irrelevant and completely unnecessary. Don't throw around factoids or claims or suggestive remarks that can easily be misunderstood or misapplied. Drmies (talk) 12:41, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Factoid? Suggestive remark? Instead of casting aspersions, could be you be specific? Kire1975 (talk) 19:59, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Firsty, the article contains viral false information that 40 children are claimed to have been beheaded, which went viral after a misrepresentation by Belarusian media.

This should be added:

The Belarusian media outlet NEXTA claimed "Israel showed the world bodies of 40 beheaded Israeli babies", which went viral, despite being a misrepresentation. ^[1]

Secondly, the inclusion of journalists on site validates these these allegations if it does not clarify that the journalists that accessed the site have not witnessed any evidence of beheadings.

This should be added:

Journalists that accessed the site have not witnessed any evidence of beheadings. SluggishSchizophrenic (talk) 21:26, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

  Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit extended-protected}} template. See discussion above. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 14:04, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

• The Independent
• Washington Post
• Times of Israel
• ABC (Australia)

Longhornsg (talk) 00:24, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Ynet. It's in Hebrew, of which I don't understand anything, but it appears to be fairly detailed based off of the google translation. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 02:01, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Following a discussion in the article's Talk page I ask you to replace the word "settlement" when refering to Kfar Aza in the word "Kibbutz" or "Community". The word "settlement" is misleading because it is usually used to describe Israeli settlement while Kfar Aza is within the Green Line (Israel). Yonathan33 (talk) 06:32, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

  Done ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 14:06, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Too macabre, as reporter states, for me to discuss further. In French. Here you go... https://twitter.com/margothaddad/status/1711756690574479651#m

No more disputes over this matter 2601:40:C481:A940:E908:2F8E:C8E4:99D6 (talk) 07:45, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Where are the children??? This photo already have been confirmed that it belongs to adults https://fr.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/ni-une-guerre-ni-un-champ-de-bataille-mais-un-massacre-un-officier-superieur-sur-les-lieux-du-massacre-du-kibboutz/ Areejdf (talk) 10:43, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

2607:FEA8:3B5E:4E00:398A:D8F8:A897:F296 (talk) 22:36, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

the report about the beheading of babies has been discredited, this post is extremely biased, please look at the sources and the content of this page.

Sources:

• i24news
• CBS
• New York Post
• Independant

New york post and CBS by the way is not known for supporting Israeli agenda. But I guess you'll keep calling it biased untill you see the pictures yourself? דוב (talk) 23:00, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

  Not done: Closing without changes as topic is being discussed at length and through an RFC below. Tollens (talk) 10:52, 14 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In the line "and it had taken two for the Israel Defense Forces to wrest back full control of the community." would it better if it were "and it had taken two days for the Israel Defense Forces.." Milktime (talk) 00:04, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

  Already done Looks like the change has already been made: ...and it took two days for the Israel Defense Forces to wrest back full control of the community. (revision 1179733653) Qzekrom (she/her • talk) 03:10, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

The one who spreads the lie, tweeted that she doesn’t know for a fact if it happened or not https://x.com/beltrew/status/1712023042560291083?s=46&t=KbbT_q4q8xaJ5tlDeA-aKA [ also the Israel army didn’t confirm the story https://theintercept.com/2023/10/11/israel-hamas-disinformation/]https://theintercept.com/2023/10/11/israel-hamas-disinformation/ . Wikipedia, be accurate for once and delete the false article Areejdf (talk) 05:05, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

It did happen

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/israel-babies-killed-hamas-terror-attack-kibbutz-kfar-aza-first-responders-say/ David O. Johnson (talk) 05:21, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

where is the evidence of the 40 babies being slaughtered? Give me the proof, a picture of their dead bodies or a funeral, and what about their families statements!! I have numerous pictures and proofs of Palestinians kids being killed and tortured by Israel. Areejdf (talk) 05:35, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

This CBS News article cites a spokesperson from Israel's military, and does not claim that that CBS has received any other corroboration. I do not believe that claims from the Israeli military can be seriously considered as credible without corroboration. Would we consider an uncorroborated and unconfirmed claim by the Russian military as sufficient? Or to use a more famous and specific example, if a media outlet reported that a US Government spokesperson said that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction, would we accept that as a credible citation for the claim that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction? The answer, I hope, would clearly be NO.

Respectfully, this does not meet Wikipedia's guidelines for a credible citation of 40 beheaded babies. ROADKILL (talk) 08:03, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

"This CBS News article cites a spokesperson from Israel's military, and does not claim that that CBS has received any other corroboration."

That's not true.

It's right in the middle of the CBS article:

"Yossi Landau, the head of operations for the southern region of Zaka, Israel's volunteer civilian emergency response organization, told CBS News he saw with his own eyes children and babies who had been beheaded."

"I saw a lot more that cannot be described for now, because it's very hard to describe," he said, speaking of parents and children found with their hands bound and clear signs of torture." David O. Johnson (talk) 08:11, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

You are correct that that was NOT a military spokesperson. I unfortunately misread the article and apologize for my mistake. That being said, I still do not believe that this is sufficient to meet Wikipedia's guidelines for a credible source. The article implies that they did not confirm it themselves nor get anyone else to corroborate the claim. That doesn't mean this won't turn out to be true, but for now I believe that we lack sufficient corroboration to report this claim as fact. ROADKILL (talk) 08:17, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

It is better to remove that part. We can add it back once proof is available. That shouldn't be hard as these kids must have families and they will make public statements later 117.219.135.238 (talk) 09:55, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

I agree with removing the children part, unless Wikipedia wants to promote propaganda which is not acceptable Areejdf (talk) 10:45, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Wikipedia operates based on WP:RS, not on what a new SPA account happens to believe or not believe. Jeppiz (talk) 11:46, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

@ROADKILL, your argument seems moot. Nowhere in this article does it say that there were 40 beheaded babies. It says that some victims were beheaded, and it says also babies were killed. Both of those claims are verified in numerous reliable sources. I agree it should not say there were "40 beheaded babies" but I don't see that claim in the article. Jeppiz (talk) 09:14, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

In this edit here [3], information was removed from the lede, with the edit summary reading, "Non notable, please give the solid reference", but the sources are given in the body of the article.

The lede isn't supposed to have any references, anyways. David O. Johnson (talk) 08:18, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

That removal looks like downright vandalism, or complete lack of knowledge of WP policies. Reported in leading media throughout the world. Jeppiz (talk) 08:39, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

This article is disinformation. Multiple news outlet have back tracked the story detailed here and no concrete evidence has been provided to back up this claim. All we have is hear say from the IDF and they have even made comments to say they have no evidence to back up this claim. This article should be removed until it has concrete confirmation that this has occurred. PatsyJ69 (talk) 13:49, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Everything you say is wrong. Multiple journalists have visited Kfar Aza and independently confirmed the massacre. It has been reported in detail in media of record in English, Spanish, French, German, Italian etc. That some propaganda accounts on Twitter say otherwise is entirely irrelevant. We go by WP:RS on Wikipedia. Jeppiz (talk) 14:04, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Oh, is that so? Could you point me to a single article that does not just point to the claim made by an IDF soldier or other articles that point to that IDF soldier's claim? I'm guessing you can't.

You guys keep on getting caught in a lie. Biden had to walk back his lie about having seen the bodies.

When the dust has settled and the full truth is out, I will do everything I can to make sure you face sanctions from Wikipedia for spreading these inflammatory lies. 128.84.126.211 (talk) 14:26, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

While it is not true it's just an IDF soldier's claim, it wouldn't matter even if it were. Again, WP:RS applies. If BBC, CNN, The Times, Le Monde, Die Zeit and others all held the evidence credible, so would Wikipedia. Also, read WP:NPA and WP:NOTAFORUM. Jeppiz (talk) 14:58, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Jeppiz, here. Just listing the number of mainstream news sources that endorse the rumour means nothing. I worked for months in Kfar Aza, so I have a personal emotional investment in seeing that shocking massacre correctly written up. The only ostensible reason I have found given to explain the government's curious ongoing refusal to state unambiguously that they have proof children were beheaded (as opposed to some shot in the head) is the one that suggests respect for the dead means the photographic evidence, if there is any, cannot be made public. Special pleading. No one wants to see such evidence made public - they simply want to be sure that such evidence exists, and has been independently shared with the President of the US and the intelligence communities. Nishidani (talk) 15:24, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Nishidani, you are 100% correct. We should not repeat rumours and need to be careful. I wrote above I am not in favor of including a claim of beheaded kids, because I have not seen sufficient WP:RS support. What I have seen widely reported is mass killings, killing of babies (method not stated) and some beheadings. In this subthread, the IP claims that nothing happened and this article should be deleted. That is clearly nonsense. Between denying everything and repeating unsubstantiated claims, there's a middle road of repeating the facts that are supported. Jeppiz (talk) 15:31, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Jerusalem Post tweet about independently verifying it:

https://twitter.com/Jerusalem_Post/status/1712460425529372821

Warning NSFW or NSFL: https://twitter.com/israelipm/status/1712471782303867144?s=46

I think having alleged was appropriate since there was no pure confirmation previously, but I don't see why the JPost or Israel would make this up.

Entirely possible that they're AI generated images, but it seems unlikely. 1.157.208.97 (talk) 15:35, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

twitter link expired photos taken down

jfc 69.249.102.223 (talk) 15:51, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

backup, again NSFW: https://imgur.com/a/EWSpqbM

again, entirely possible that this is Israeli propaganda but seems unlikely. 1.157.208.97 (talk) 15:58, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

This is a outrageous lie, IDF Itself put out an statement that It is a false accusation.

There is no evidence whatsoever, It is a lie and whoever wrote it Is spreading lies about the resistance of Palestinians. S.AbdulBasit20 (talk) 15:45, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

it seems your the one with the personal agenda here

not a single reliable western source has outright denied the claims thus far. just that many have not 100% confirmed it

there is enough eyewitness testimonial to include it in the article, plus the controversy itself is enough to warrant its inclusion 69.249.102.223 (talk) 15:50, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

S.AbdulBasit20, the article doesn't claim that. Pick a fight somewhere else. Drmies (talk) 16:40, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

User Makeandtoss just did a number of drastic and undiscussed changes, in violation of all sources. Makeandtoss removed from the lede the sentence that killings and beheadings took place, despite it being well sourced. Makeandtoss instead inserted, multiple times, the utterly irrelevant claim that no verification exists for "40 beheaded babies"; a claim the article didn't even make. This is shockingly poor editing, even worse in an article under ArbCom protection. Having reverted once today, I hope someone (in the best case Makeandtoss themselves) will revert these remarkably poor edits. Jeppiz (talk) 17:13, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Yeah,I think the "beheaded babies" allegation is somewhat of a red herring. Mainstream sources don't seem to actually doubt that children were killed in the massacre. Hemiauchenia (talk) 17:17, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

For the record, I've brought this issue to ANI [4] as it is just one of many policy violations on ArbPia articles by Makeandtoss in the past few days. Jeppiz (talk) 17:44, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

I reverted the changes discussed above, although retaining a SkyNews source which might be helpful. It's probably fair to say that there is some "confusion" about beheadings, ages and numbers, so I left a remark to that effect. -St.nerol (talk) 18:38, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

@St.nerol Should the links to Decapitation and Dismemberment not be removed from the Attack Type heading for this article, given that the claims are disputed? Including them there makes it seem as though it were unquestionably factual. Wschreyer (talk) 19:48, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Israeli officials claimed 40 babies were beheaded, and then continuously contradicted themselves. The decapitated children unconfirmed claim spread so wildly that it was uttered by the president of the United States, who, to make things worse, claimed to see pictures of it. This certainly deserves to be mentioned in the lede, not only because it has negative implications, but also because the lede is a summary of the body including any prominent controversies. Furthermore, I have not seen any source reporting on alleged decapitation. "with beheadings, dismemberment and the killing of children being reported, although with some confusion" is not a descriptive and honest sentence on what had happened, and certainly doesn't reflect reliable sources and the investigative reports done by CNN and Sky News (in contrast to the initial parroting done by some RS without question). Makeandtoss (talk) 19:24, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

There are two separate claims here: "babies were decapitated" and "children (including babies) were killed". The controversy here seems to specifically be about whether babies were specifically decapitated, not whether babies were killed by Hamas, which does not seem to be widely disputed. Hemiauchenia (talk) 19:35, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

No babies were killed and no babies were beheaded. There is no single piece of evidence to proof this. 89.205.128.124 (talk) 19:39, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

The journalist was there saw dead babies. The are videos who published about the killing. 2A00:A041:1CE0:0:A898:B2DC:56E4:2D45 (talk) 19:41, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

The journalist walked it back and tweeted that she hasn’t seen dead bodies

[5]https://x.com/beltrew/status/1712023042560291083?s=46&t=KbbT_q4q8xaJ5tlDeA-aKA Areejdf (talk) 21:07, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

They did not claimed it and they were not officials. It was people who was there. The israeli government listen to them . The essay at Wikipedia contradict the sources. just read the sources. They are from the beginning spoke about *part* of them, not *all* of them.

From the first: "including about 40 babies and small children — **some** with their heads chopped off. [6].

I add the zaka man, the journalist (Margot Haddat). 2A00:A041:1CE0:0:A898:B2DC:56E4:2D45 (talk) 19:40, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

We have enough reliable sources to report on this propaganda spin. NBC newsMakeandtoss (talk) 23:29, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

I'm not convinced this is propaganda spin, other sources, like The Telegraph, are reporting that Blinken remarked that he had personally seen images of dead babies with bullet wounds. [7] Hemiauchenia (talk) 23:38, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Hemiauchenia: Bullet wounds is something, and 40 decapitated babies is something else. Makeandtoss (talk) 11:31, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Per Anadolu Agency[8]: A French reporter based in Jerusalem, Samuel Forey, said on X that he was in the Kfar Aza settlement, located less than 2 kilometers (1.2 miles) from northeastern Gaza, on Tuesday but no one had mentioned the alleged decapitations. "I have verified with two emergency services (wishing to remain anonymous, as the subject is sensitive) that have collected many corpses. Both affirm that they have not witnessed such atrocities, without saying that it did not exist." Kire1975 (talk) 00:20, 15 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Anadolu Agency has been found to be unreliable for international politics, see Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#Anadolu_Agency_(controversial_topics) so it's not usable. Hemiauchenia (talk) 00:23, 15 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

See [9]. This might a source of some of the disruption. Given that Al Mayadeen is widely seen as a pro-Syria/Hezbollah propaganda outlet, I don't think their criticism are worth giving a toss about. Hemiauchenia (talk) 20:14, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

We should not pay attention to news sites that are not neutral (such as Al-Mayadeen), but we should search for the truth as well, and continue to implement all Wikipedia policies, including neutrality and documenting the truth. Osama Eid ^(talk) 20:24, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Template:Press added Kire1975 (talk) 02:15, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

change One member of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) who had responded to the site said in an interview with I24NEWS that some corpses of the killed 40 children had been discovered beheaded,[14][15] Israeli soldiers in the town stated that several civilians had been beheaded.[5] CBS News later interviewed Yossi Landau, regional head of the first responder organisation ZAKA, who corroborated that both babies and minors had been beheaded alongside corpses of dismembered adults.[16]

The IDF stated to Insider that they would not investigate the allegation further, citing that it would be "disrespectful for the dead" to do so. to the information about the casualties number being 40 children was proven to be false Aishasaltt (talk) 21:56, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

  Not done Please establish a consensus before making an edit request. Hemiauchenia (talk) 21:58, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

The Intercept is considered "generally reliable" but also "a biased source, so uses may need to be attributed" at WP:RSP. The "disrespectful for the dead" claim is also reported at WP:BUSINESSINSIDER but "There is no consensus on the reliability of Insider." Kire1975 (talk) 01:48, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Would this sentence in the lede reflect the body accurately?

"Despite reports of beheadings occurring, a claim that 40 babies were decapitated gained widespread media coverage, but was later walked back on by Israeli officials and has not been independently verified." Makeandtoss (talk) 11:57, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

• Wait I am not sure it would be WP:DUE to add to the lede what did not happen, but open to add it to the body of text after we have confirmation about what happened. The claim was reported in media so debunking it in the body if it's not true would make sense. As WP is WP:NOTNEWS, better to wait until we know whether it's false. Should not take long. Jeppiz (talk) 17:54, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Wait. If this is one of those breaking news blips, we may want to just affirmatively write what happened (i.e. mass casualty event, some people burned to death, some people mutilated), rather than jump here at this point. Let the facts come out. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 18:06, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

• Support a sentence along those lines. Many reliable sources are reporting that they are unable to verify this information. Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 18:15, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply
• No As far as I can tell, Israel initially said they could not confirm the claims, and then later supported them, so they've not really walked them back. Hemiauchenia (talk) 18:19, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

  NBC News and CNN reported otherwise, two reliable sources. Makeandtoss (talk) 11:46, 14 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Status quo is sufficient so no need for RFC now.Makeandtoss (talk) 13:50, 14 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

• Wait, as above. Let reliable sources evaluate the claims once the dust has settled and the initial outrage has passed. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 04:08, 15 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Some users unfortunately seem unable to distinguish between the claim 40 babies were beheaded (unverified) and the claim multiple killings of old and young, some victims beheaded (well verified). Removing the second claim despite all sources because one finds no support for the first claim is poor editing, just like inserting the first based on sources saying the second is poor editing. Unfortunately we see users repeating both of these mistakes. I would urge users to be more careful in their editing and not remove what is well sourced (mass killings and beheadings) nor add ehat is poorly sourced (40 beheaded babies). Jeppiz (talk) 17:48, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

I've removed the sentences from the lead again. We need reliable secondary sources to support this kind of information, and none have been provided. (These two sources do not confirm that anyone has been beheaded.) If supportable, it should also be covered in the article body and not just in the lead. Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 18:05, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure this is just carelessness (at least on the part of some users). Just because the 40 babies beheaded claim is dubious, does not mean that babies/children were killed is. Hemiauchenia (talk) 18:29, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Ed, you have violated the strict 1RR in place on this article. Please self-revert, or be reported. Moreover, references for the beheadings are given in the text. While your edit warring to remove sourced content is bad enough, violating the clear red line 1RR is unacceptable. I try to assume good faith, but this much "carelessness" starts to look intentional. Jeppiz (talk) 18:44, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

I've reverted my edit per [10]. Jeppiz and Hemiauchenia, please remember to assume good faith and not cast aspersions. Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 19:51, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

My comments weren't about your edits, to be truthful. Hemiauchenia (talk) 19:54, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

The indenting made it look like it was in response to me! Never mind, I misread the indenting. Apologies.

I've added a {{failed verification}} tag to the info in question. Neither of the sources given support the information we have, especially on immolation. Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 19:57, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

I've provided citations to the CBS news and NBC news stories, which support the immolation and dismemberment claims. Hemiauchenia (talk) 19:59, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Immolation as a result of Israeli actions has been commonplace in Gaza for 15 years, so it is not improbable that the same occurred when Hamas militants invaded Israel. This is also true of dismemberment (a father in Beit Hanoun the other day was found wandering around with bits and pieces of his children's limbs). The only difference is, one is done at a distance, impersonally, the other executed by militants directly with their victims. Nishidani (talk) 20:32, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Nishidani, you know I hold you in respect and you're a valuable contributor, but the above is very rare yet clear breach of WP:NOTAFORUM. This talk page is to discuss the massacre in Kfar Aza. Jeppiz (talk) 20:37, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for saying pointing that out. I too have respect for Nishidani as an editor, but there's no point in pontificating on related issues here, or resorting to special pleading and conspiracy theories. And I think equivocating what Hamas did (which is just a series of crimes against humanity), and cases of apparent Israeli aggression, is beyond the pale. Hamas was intentionally targeting children, in schools, daycares, and youth centers. Not the same thing. Symmachus Auxiliarus (talk) 03:04, 15 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Presumably both dismemberment and immolation in those cases were induced by the use of explosives? I'm unclear as to whether explosives were specifically used in this attack. Hemiauchenia (talk) 20:38, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

This might be a usable source in regards to the "40 decapitated babies" discussion.

Regarding the lede of the article, I do not understand why "though there was controversy regarding claims that babies had been decapitated" is included. If the claim is, in fact, misinformation (which appears quite possible), it shouldn't be given false balance in the lede. The "allegations of beheadings" section should suffice. Philomathes2357 (talk) 04:02, 14 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hello everyone, our goal at Wikipedia is to document facts and write history, noting that what we write here or in any other article will remain for years, and even after our death it will be read many times. Let us remember that we write for future generations.

We must avoid editing wars, cooperate rationally, and implement Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

The information is very conflicting, especially in light of the rapid development of events. I hope that the editors will follow (neutral) Arab and foreign news. Any party’s retraction of its claim is questionable, and what was built on doubt will remain doubtful.

I hope you avoid editorial wars, and write relationally and in accordance with Wikipedia standards and policies. With a commitment to neutrality and correct documentation. — Osama Eid ^(talk) 19:36, 13 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hey there, I just wanted to point out that the leading paragraph and section about casualties currently contradict each other both from a content perspective and a references perspective. HeyDimpz (talk) 00:45, 14 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Could you explain what you mean? David O. Johnson (talk) 07:51, 14 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

It looks like it got addressed. At the time I posted my comment the Casualties section detailed the beheadings of babies statement had been walked back, but the leading paragraph lacked that addition. The casualties section also pointed out that articles referenced in the leading paragraph was modified, archived or updated.

But again, its been fixed. HeyDimpz (talk) 22:15, 15 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Re, this edit. WP:BUSINESSINSIDER is not a reliable source. It's a reversion of an edit of mine that's less than 24 hours old. Please undo or seek consensus to change WP:BI. Kire1975 (talk) 20:21, 15 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Is there any real doubt that Insider is actually accurately reflecting what the IDF said? I don't think this IDF comment adds much to the article, so I don't have a huge problem with it being removed, so I'll let others weigh in. Hemiauchenia (talk) 20:33, 15 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Per WP:REDFLAG: Any exceptional claim requires multiple high-quality sources. Kire1975 (talk) 03:43, 16 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Is there any problem with now stating in Wikivoice that beheadings took place, and that people of all ages (including children) were murdered? All of that would seem well-sourced. The article currently says there are "claims" this happened, and does it best to cast doubt on it. It was all good to be careful when news first emerged, as per WP:NOTNEWS. In the first hours, even a couple of days, we had conflicting media reports and both hasty confirmations and hasty "fact-checks". Somewhat confusingly, some of those sources (while WP:RS in themselves) are still used even though more facts have since emerged. Is there any support in any reliable source from the past days to continue to say these are "claims" rather than to follow most sources that describe them as facts? We should not make claims that cannot be supported, but neither should downplay facts that can be sourced. Jeppiz (talk) 17:17, 16 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, I think the recent Sky News article for example demonstrates that most of what Israeli sources claimed happened probably really did occur. I think the wording could be tightened, but I don't think it does it best to cast doubt, it's just phrased cautiously, reflecting the uncertainty in the early reporting. Hemiauchenia (talk) 17:26, 16 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Considering that these deaths are used as a pretext for hate crimes at protests, the killing of Wadea Al-Fayoume in Plainfield and war crimes by Israel, we should be painstaking in adhering to all WP:VERIFICATION rules to the letter. Kire1975 (talk) 17:27, 16 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

That is a red herring if ever there was one. Of course we should adhere to WP:VERIFICATION, but the question here is whether there is any doubt in any RS about the abundant verification already present in many RS. Jeppiz (talk) 22:04, 16 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

What is being asked for here? To censor the word claims? Besides the short mention in the lead, it only appears in the "Allegations of beheadings" with much confirmation of doubt in RS that they are true. Kire1975 (talk) 23:19, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

https://themedialine.org/top-stories/evidence-on-display-at-israels-forensic-pathology-center-confirms-hamas-atrocities/

Babies were found without heads. Whether they were cut off or blown off, before or after their death is unknown. Regardless, they were in fact, unquestionably, beheaded.

Please add this to the main article, too, since i can't use the talk page there. 2601:40:C481:A940:8150:610F:D350:E508 (talk) 15:57, 20 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Pardon me but The Media Line is restating what is already in the article as reference #4.   –Skywatcher68 (talk) 16:09, 20 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Just found this eyewitness testimonial. She saw kids without heads on the street.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=JP6dtCmrf-Y 2601:40:C481:A940:8150:610F:D350:E508 (talk) 16:32, 20 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, YouTube is not an acceptable source.   –Skywatcher68 (talk) 16:36, 20 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

I believe this whole section about allegations should be removed, if the story is verified according to WP:RS then put in a section about it. If it hasn't - then it does not arrent a section that literally invites conspiracy theorists and cranks. Delete it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jacker1968 (talk • contribs) 10:01, 23 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

The problem is that there are reliable sources which support both sides; just read this Talk page from the top if you want examples. Regarding conspiracy theorists and cranks, Wikipedia has ways of dealing with them:

• WP:CONSPIRACY
• WP:FANATIC
• WP:FRINGE   –Skywatcher68 (talk) 14:07, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Initial reports said over a 100 were killed. This was downscaled to over 70. Then we had 52 victims confirmed, with 20 missing (some were taken as hostages back to Gaza like Daffa Adar). There is a gap of 11 between the confirmed victims and the victims listed by name, which number 41. I presume that 11 must refer to victims whose remains were so charred as to require forensic identification, but that is only a guess. No babies are mentioned and the youngest listed victim is a 14 year old lad from the Kutz family (all 5 of whom were slaughtered). Of the 41, 12 formed part of the security guard or had military functions. Nishidani (talk) 11:19, 27 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Shrike: Did you bother to even read my edit summary? Makeandtoss (talk) 18:55, 4 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

I did read the confirmation is relevant to the dicussion also this information does not appear in the article so there is no duplication Shrike (talk) 19:24, 4 November 2023 (UTC)Reply