Talk:Al-Khisas raid

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Al-Khisas raid article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Warning: active arbitration remedies

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

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Further information

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.

After being warned, contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topic sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.
Editors may report violations of these restrictions to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!

Palestine Mid‑importance

	Palestine portal 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Middle East Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Middle Eastern military history task force

massacre?

Is 10 a "large number"? I personally think not. In which case this should be renamed to "incident" or "attack" or similar. Otherwise any terrorist attacks that kill 10 or more people should likewise be listed as a "massacre". Wikipedia will quickly fill up with "massacres" diluting those that really are massacre of large numbers of people. Oboler (talk) 13:00, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Renaming, per the discussion here NoCal100 (talk) 19:48, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I disagree. ten people killed is enough to qualify as a massacre and the reliable sources cited use the term "massacre" and not "raid. Tiamut^talk 13:22, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, which cited source calls it a 'massacre'? The Benvinisti books calls it "attack" (4 times), "retaliatory raid" (once) and "raid" once. The NYT article also calls it a raid, in the headline. NoCal100 (talk) 16:07, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. My bad. I thought this was another article where I remember such a source being appended. No worries. For now, because of the lack of a reliable source, I'l accept "raid". Please note however, that the definition of a massacre that was operative at Wikipedia for some time was more then 10 civilians killed in a single incident. This was qualified under that definition. But I'm not willing to war over it, particularly if a new consensus on how to define a massacre is emerging. Tiamut^talk 16:27, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess Oboler and NoCal100 will agree to moving Mercaz HaRav massacre to Mercaz HaRav attack ? After all, fewer people were killed at Mercaz HaRav... While we are at it: Munich massacre should be moved to Munich raid?? Anyway, KimvdLinde collected definitions of the word "massacre" here:[1] I suggest we move this back. Regards, Huldra (talk) 19:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I see now I could have been clearer when I wrote "Agreed". I agreed with Oboler's suggestion that the article should be renamed to "incident" or "attack" or similar, but not with his rationale of "10 is not a large number". The number of those killed is not a factor in deciding what to call the article - which should be what reliable sources call the incident. That is why I referred to the discussion here, which ended with an apparent consensus to name articles "by the name most commonly used in reliable sources". The reliable sources for this article call the incident a raid or an attack, not a massacre. NoCal100 (talk) 03:04, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Archived version of that discussion here, --Huldra (talk) 17:59, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think the more pertinent discussion is here. Cheers, pedrito - talk - 03.12.2008 07:58

Rename to "Al-Khisas massacre"

Any objections to changing the name to "Al-Khisas massacre"?

See: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration/About the use of the word massacre

IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 15:55, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

details wrong

I was skimming through this article. Some basic information here is wrong:

This raid could not have been conducted by the Yiftach Brigade as it did not exist at the time. The Third Battalion of the Palmach was active in the area and later became part of Yiftach.
The Palmach Book Vol 2 page 32 notes a raid conducted on the village of חסאס (likely Khisas) on 28.12.47. And while that book is not objective, it tends to get dates right.

Tzafrir (talk) 22:03, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be right on the Yiftach Brigade not being formed at the time. As for the date: I just checked Bevenisti; and he says 18 December; I'll try to check the other sources , too, Huldra (talk) 22:32, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Benny Morris, 2004, The Birth of the Palestine Refugee, revisited pp. 79-80, says the same ("he night of 18–19 December") Huldra (talk) 22:41, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And Ilan Pappe says the same (though I put less trust in him: he is notoriously sloppy on details), Huldra (talk) 22:45, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Tzafrir: I have corrected the Yiftach Brigade info, but not the date, due to all the sources giving the 18th as the date, Huldra (talk) 22:50, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What sources support that it was Palmach's "3rd Battalion,

which later became part of the Yiftach Brigade"? IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 22:57, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I took that from the Yiftach Brigade-article, the source is the Palmach website (in Hebrew), Huldra (talk) 23:10, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Palmacb website in Hebrew? Is that a good source? Maybe we just attribute the attack to the Palmach. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 23:12, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I would say it is a good source about what became of the Palmach Battalions, IMO, this isn't terribly important, except it is in line with Yiftach Brigade later behaviour in the 1948 war, Huldra (talk) 23:19, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]