Talk:Refaat Alareer/Archive 1

Archive 1

PhD thesis

He finished his PhD in 2017. The thesis link should be added, instead of citing other sources.

http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/70032/1/FBMK%202017%2067%20-%20IR.pdf Naimulkhan (talk) 20:53, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Done Thanks, User:Naimulkhan, Huldra (talk) 21:02, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Date of death

Both the BBC and Euro-Med Monitor say Israel killed him on Wednesday 6th, not the 7th as stated in the article. A quick glance at the sources already in the article shows the their reports are dated the 7th, but are actually quite vague about the exact time he was killed. I don't have time at the moment to investigate further, so I won't change it yet, but perhaps someone can look into it more closely? --NSH001 (talk) 21:11, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

I have also been trying to confirm the date. @NSH001 could you please quote the lines in these stories that say it was the 6th? I can’t find it in either of them. Innisfree987 (talk) 21:17, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Oh sorry I see, they say Wednesday. I’ll look for more confirmation… Innisfree987 (talk) 21:21, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Tweet

@Nableezy: We shouldn't be using tweets without secondary RS explaining their context, just like how the NYT provided context on his behavior. Makeandtoss (talk) 13:54, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

WP:SPS allows for self-published material on the page of the author of that material. I think it is necessary to include that Alareer was saying the claim was bullshit and that was what he was mocking. nableezy - 13:56, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

@Nableezy: I think that policy refers to self-publishing in the context of his expertise; ex: Kissinger's tweet on geopolitics would qualify, but not his every tweet. Makeandtoss (talk) 14:01, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant WP:ABOUTSELF, which says you can cite a person's own words for their views in their own article. A self-published expert can be cited anywhere. WP:SPS was about the former; Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications. and then in WP:ABOUTSELF: Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, usually in articles about themselves or their activities, without the self-published source requirement that they are established experts in the field. nableezy - 14:07, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 December 2023

Refaat Alareer was also widely known as an unapologetic anti-Semite who is on record making horrendous statements about the Jewish Population. When writers espouse such grotesque anti-Semitism, their reporting on the Arab-Israeli conflict cannot be trusted. In fact, it should discount them from being published at all.

Sources: https://www.stopantisemitism.org/antisemite-of-the-week-6/refaat-alareer-the-new-york-times-favorite-bigot https://honestreporting.com/new-york-times-guest-essayist-refaat-alareer-compared-israel-to-nazi-germany-over-100-times/ https://www.nationalreview.com/news/the-medias-favorite-israel-bashing-pundit-reveals-his-vile-antisemitism-for-all-to-see/ https://www.campusreform.org/article/upenn-reportedly-sponsored-palestinian-writer-who-joked-about-hamas-burning-baby-in-oven-after-it-allegedly-ignored-warnings-/24292 Kevinjohnhall (talk) 18:36, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

None of those are reliable sources. So no. nableezy - 18:54, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

The individual wrote these comments on his public facing Twitter/X account, are you saying the individual himself is not a creditable source? When did Wikipedia get into the propaganda business, either write the facts or erase the whole piece. Kevinjohnhall (talk) 19:24, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

No, I am saying those sources are not reliable for their interpretations of what Alareer wrote. That he wrote Israel is as bad as Nazi Germany is not in dispute. That this means he was antisemitic however is. Anyway, I added what actual reliable sources say, like the NYT, about the view Israelis hold of him. nableezy - 19:25, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

@nableezy Alareer was of Semitic heritage. You should clarify by saying "Jewish anti-Semitism." This is important because it appears that when the mainstream media use the word, anti-Semitism, they are referring to racism against Jewish people only. Racism and violence by people against other Semitic people such as Palestinians is rarely couched in that terminology.

Additionally, the statement: "That this means he was antisemitic however is" is not true.

Alareer might strongly dislike Israel for what he reasonably perceives as an unlawful occupation of Palestine, as well as a long history of unlawful killing, jailing, and subjugation of Palestinians over many generations.

Notwithstanding the fact that it is incorrect that such actions are equivalent or tantamount to what the Nazis did to the Jewish people during World War II, some experts on genocide, including an Israeli expert, have endorsed the position that Israeli attacks on Gaza civilians constitute genocide. https://www.democracynow.org/2023/10/16/raz_segal_textbook_case_of_genocide

@Kevinjohnhall Israeli leaders and commentators have employed disparaging and dehumanizing language in reference to the Palestinian civilians. Many implied that these civilians deserve to be harmed, attacked, and/or killed.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/oct/16/the-language-being-used-to-describe-palestinians-is-genocidal

Since the time these Israeli leaders and commentators made these remarks, the facts on the ground in Gaza speak for themselves.

Alareer was an unarmed civilian. He was not a military or high ranking government official who was ready, willing and able to made good on his remarks and threats with an army using advanced weaponry against defenseless civilians trapped in an enclave.

Context matters. The ability to wield violence with deadly or traumatizing/disabling/dismembering effect against the human subjects of your verbal threats and dehumanizing remarks matters. These Israeli leaders are reporting, commenting, and shaping discourse. Are you calling on them to be ignored? I'm not. Biolitblue (talk) 07:44, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Proposed edit

Since I do not enjoy editing privileges, I'm proposing an edit to the article here.

In the 4th full paragraph, 1st sentence, which reads:

"On 6 December 2023, Alareer was killed in an Israeli airstrike, along with his brother, sister and her three children, during the 2023 Hamas-Israel war."

...

I propose changing "2023 Hamas-Israel War" to read "2023 Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip."

The subject in question was an unarmed Palestinian civilian living in Gaza. He was not a member of, or affiliated with, Hamas.

Biolitblue (talk) 05:45, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Edited accordingly. Makeandtoss (talk) 10:32, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. Biolitblue (talk) 19:53, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Statement of fact on antisemitism

Alaexis are you seriously disputing that saying as a statement of fact that he made antisemitic statements, and in the lead no less, is POV? Do you think challenged edits require consensus does not apply to you or something? nableezy - 21:19, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Well, we have the NYT article that says But in Israel, he was notorious for comments he made online and in his classroom that were virulently anti-Israeli and antisemitic.

In fact it's easy to find evidence confirming this, e.g., "Are most Jews evil? Of course they are." Alaexis_¿question? 22:24, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Except that is from a right wing source without any substantiation that it actually happened. The NYT does contain that, yes, but most sources do not make such statements about Alareer. CNN does not mention antisemitism, BBC does not mention antisemitism, Literary Hub does not mention antisemitism. This is an exceptional claim and a single line in a single source does not justify its inclusion. You also did not answer if you think the requirement to gain consensus for challenged material applies to you. Do you? nableezy - 22:35, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

National Review calls him a "professor of literature with a history of making vile antisemitic comments."

As regards the tweet, I actually didn't realise that Algemeiner is a hassidic New York newspaper, and not a German one. They are not the only one, it's also reported in the Daily Pennsylvanian, The Jerusalem Post and some other outlets. They are either biased or have other issues, so I wouldn't use them in the article, however it's unlikely that they just made it up, considering his other well documented tweets. Alaexis_¿question? 23:12, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

National Review is not a reliable source lol. But, one more time, you also did not answer if you think the requirement to gain consensus for challenged material applies to you. Do you? nableezy - 23:15, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Just answered it below. Why is NR not a RS? Alaexis_¿question? 23:15, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Sources are not reliable by default, but you can see WP:NATIONALREVIEW: Most editors consider National Review a partisan source whose statements should be attributed. nableezy - 23:17, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm happy with attributing the statement in the article. Alaexis_¿question? 23:19, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

And I would say it is not reliable period, it is an avowedly partisan outlet that has published disinformation and never corrected it, for example. nableezy - 23:23, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Of course there should be consensus, hopefully other editors will chime in too. Alaexis_¿question? 23:15, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

But in the absence of such a consensus you think it is acceptable to re-revert and then add what is contested to the lead? nableezy - 23:16, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Considering that it's been reverted again, I don't think that this particular thread is helpful any more. Alaexis_¿question? 23:20, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

But it hasnt been removed from the body. The question stands. nableezy - 23:22, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

I think the best approach to deal with his controversial remarks is to share the remarks themselves, if they are noteworthy (which not all the remarks that his detractors claimed were problematic are) and let the reader decide whether they are antisemitic or not. There is considerable disagreement over, for example, whether or not comparing Israeli policy to that of Nazi Germany as Alareer had done many times is antisemitic. Seeing as the situation in Gaza is evolving rapidly right now, statements like the ones Alareer has made may come to be viewed differently based on information available to us in the future. For example, if the claim about babies which he mocked had turned out to be true, his remarks would be viewed differently than they are now, when he turned out to be right that the claims were false. Unbandito (talk) 23:43, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

I am ok with it being in the body but not in the lede. After all, someone died and it doesn’t feel respectful to put it in the lede and it appears he was beloved by a group of people. NYT is a prominent source. Also I don’t really find saying that someone made Antisemetic comments as offensive; it doesn’t mean the person was Antisemetic, just his comments. Wh15tL3D09N (talk) 23:22, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

I find this sentence Responding to somebody who called him a "disgusting human being" for the tweet, Alareer said the claim was "Israeli lies and fabrications". more problematic Wh15tL3D09N (talk) 23:23, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Mostly because it’s a tweet and doesn’t seem to fit in the paragraph and because the word lies is already in another paragraph above it. But yeah, people say stupid things online sometimes. I am sure it was just his comments that were Antisemetic and maybe in real life he was nicer to Jewish people Wh15tL3D09N (talk) 23:27, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

He was calling the baby in the oven rumour Israeli lies and fabrications. Not sure why that is problematic since he ended up being right.

I disagree with this edit made by Alaexis. We shouldn't use wiki voice to say he was antisemitic (most of his critics assume antizionism = antisemitism anyway). Did he compare Israel to Nazi Germany? Yes. Is that antisemitic? I would say no but other people disagree. If you desperately want to say he was antisemitic then the comment should be attributed to someone instead of treating it as an indisputable fact. Majority of RS make it clear that his problem was with Israel/zionists. - Ïvana (talk) 00:00, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

I see.. the last sentence placement in that paragraph is weird.. made me confused. I will go and attribute the "antisemetic comments" to the New York Times. I don't know much about this professor, but it does appear he was very contentious. Been looking at some older articles.

In this one, the NYT portrays him as a peaceful teacher

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/16/world/middleeast/gaza-university-israel-poet.html

Later, and in the above article, a note was added; he appeared peaceful in his teachings in front of a NYT reporter, but his actual teachings were different

In the class witnessed by a Times reporter, Mr. Alareer taught a poem by the Israeli poet Yehuda Amichai, which he called “beautiful,” saying it underscored the “shared humanity” of Israelis and Palestinians. He said he admired how it showed that Jerusalem is a place “where we all come together, regardless of religion and faith.”

However, in a video of a class from 2019, he called the same poem “horrible” and “dangerous,” saying that although it was aesthetically beautiful, it “brainwashes” readers by presenting the Israelis “as innocent.” He also discussed a second Israeli poem, by Tuvya Ruebner, which he called “dangerous,” adding “this kind of poetry is in part to blame for the ethnic cleansing and destruction of Palestine.”

When The Times asked Mr. Alareer about the discrepancy, he denied that there was a “substantial change” in his teaching and said that showing parallels between Palestinians and Jews was his “ultimate goal.”

NYT seems to have changed its reporting of him in 2023.

Wh15tL3D09N (talk) 00:56, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Description of death is inaccurate and misleading, insults Israel's targeting and "precision strikes" claims.

Recommend the cause of death be listed as "likely targeted assassination." "Likely targeted assassination" is a purely factual statement that improves accuracy and understanding, whereas "airstrike" falsely creates ambiguity where there is none. It also respects Israel's repeated claims that it is not carpet bombing Gaza (which would be a war crime) but rather that each strike is targeted individually and with precision. https://euromedmonitor.org/en/article/6014/Israeli-Strike-on-Refaat-al-Areer-Apparently-Deliberate Spiritu (talk) 17:18, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

I agree but the word "apparently" should appear before "deliberately targeted." I'm not aware of any source that has verified that the killing was definitively a targeted assassination yet. Furthermore, the quoted source itself says "apparently" in the title.

Thus the applicable sentence should read as follows, in pertinent part:

The Euro-Med Monitor released a statement saying that Alareer was apparently deliberately targeted... Biolitblue (talk) 05:29, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

The Euro-Med Monitor is hardly a neutral source. Let's see what other sources say about it. Alaexis_¿question? 20:55, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Alaexis:

Thank you for your comment.

1) I'm not the individual who made the edit to the article claiming that the subject was deliberately targeted. In fact, I'm the one who suggested adding "apparently" precisely because we do not have verification. Furthermore, the source itself qualified that assertion with the word, "apparently" in the title of its article. My suggested edit has since been incorporated into the article by another editor with whom I had no contact.

2) Given that IDF likely has custody or control of the crime scene and area, obtaining conclusive forensic evidence might not be possible. It would likely require extensive searching and excavation. The IDF may have also concealed, destroyed, or taken any forensic evidence into custody. Therefore, whether the killing was a targeted assassination or not may never be ascertained.

3) I could not find evidence supporting the assertion that Euro-Med Monitor is "hardly a neutral source." It appears that their human rights work focusses on Gaza with respect to the conflict. However this alone, without more, doesn't support a claim of bias.

Employees, advisors and trustees of the group include people of Jewish heritage who are respected in the their field, as well as other individuals from various backgrounds. Biolitblue (talk) 02:44, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://x.com/itranslate123/status/1719701312990830934?s=20. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, provided it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Innisfree987 (talk) 08:04, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

See my comments above. --NSH001 (talk) 08:47, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Copyright

Alareer's poem If I must die was removed as an alleged "copyvio". This poem was written at least 9 years ago, possibly earlier (Alareer 2014). On 1 November this year, he added it to his twitter timeline (and, I think, pinned it to the top of his timeline, but I can't be sure as I effectively don't have a twitter account). The reason is obvious: he realised, given the incessant bombing/shelling/explosions, and Israel's explicitly stated programme of genocide, that sooner or later he would be murdered/assassinated by Israel, and he wanted the news of this to reach as many people internationally as possible. Indeed the very text of the poem says as much – just read the first 3 lines. He may not have signed a formal, legal document releasing copyright, but he has done the next closest thing. It would be ridiculous to try to ask his widow for such a release. And in the final analysis, this is a classic case for WP:IAR. Accordingly I have restored it to the article. --NSH001 (talk) 06:54, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Source: Alareer, Refaat R. (Spring 2014). "Gaza Writes Back: Narrating Palestine". Biography. 37 (2): 537. doi:10.1353/bio.2014.0031. ISSN 1529-1456. NSH001 (talk) 06:54, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

This is simply a no-go; copyright is not just en-wiki policy but a matter of Wikimedia Terms of Use. Where the copyright owner chose to publish his own work in no way implies he has released that work in terms compatible with Wikimedia use. Please don’t make me report this to WP:Copyright problems. Innisfree987 (talk) 07:27, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

If there are more secondary sources discussing the poem (and the translations?), I think it would be great to expand this section with summaries of those discussions. We just can’t reproduce the whole poem. Innisfree987 (talk) 07:37, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) No, it has nothing to do with where he released his poem. It has everything to do with how he released it, where he makes it as clear as can be that it should be distributed as widely as possible. For obvious reasons. --NSH001 (talk) 07:43, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

There is no administrator who will assent to this, and the Foundation lawyers even less. I’m going to request RevDel now so we’re completely clear here. Innisfree987 (talk) 07:59, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Good luck with that. Thankfully, our admins can read and understand what is going on. The fact is that Alareer wanted his work to be distributed as widely as possible, and said so. The poem has already been reproduced gazillions of times all over the internet. In addition, there is no monetary consideration involved. The idea that it might go as far as WMF lawyers is laughable. There is no chance that anyone might want to take legal action for copyvio. --NSH001 (talk) 08:46, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

By the way, the section below is incorrect. The source is not Twitter, it is Alareer's journal article from 2014, which I cited above. --NSH001 (talk) 09:10, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

@Innisfree987: The poem, as mentioned by @NSH001:, is part of a book published in 2014; it is not a standalone poem, but a brief quotation of the book, and therefore does not limit any commercial opportunities for the copyrighted book, per criteria #2 of WP:NFCCP. Furthermore, this addition fulfills all the ten criteria mentioned in WP:NFCCP, so this quotation certainly can be used per WP guidelines without any copyright issues. Makeandtoss (talk) 09:28, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, Makeandtoss. I forgot to mention that Biography is an open-access journal, difficult to see how it would be possible to sustain a copyvio claim for a small piece of text taken from an open-access journal. As far as I am aware, the journal article is itself only part of the book. --NSH001 (talk) 10:57, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Let's wait for a copyright expert to appear. Assuming they give the OK, I will include the source (required by NFCCP) when I restore it, unless someone else beats me to it. We can then get rid of the ugly tweet quote box as well. --NSH001 (talk) 11:15, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

The widespread reproduction of If I must die elsewhere is not Wikipedia's concern. Wikipedia's policy on copyright is quite clear - don't use copyrighted material unless there is explicit release or the criteria of WP:NFCCP are met. I don't think anyone here is trying to claim that this work isn't still under copyright?

So, is there an explicit release? If someone wants to point one out please do so; pinning it to the top of your twitter feed isn't such a release, nor (IMO) is it explicit in the words of the poem. Presuming an intention is not the way to go. Neither is the line "nobody would sue anyway", copyright decisions are not based on this.

Does NFCCP apply? I'm not convinced by the argument that it's only a small part of a journal, so minimal usage is established - it appears to be the entirety of a separately composed work. It's inclusion in a larger work like the issue of Biography linked above (incidentally one that it's own metadata says is not open access) at a subsequent point does not change that. I offer no opinion over whether reproduction meets WP:NFCC#8 (context).

As there's no issue about Biography using the material - it was an essay Alareer wrote - there's no problem about linking to the Biography article within the text of this article. In the main body if it provides context or as an external link otherwise.

I'd suggest that if a consensus can't be reached, someone lists this at Wikipedia:Copyright problems so wider opinions can be sought. Nthep (talk) 16:59, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

As I don't think consensus is going to be reached here, I've listed the issue at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2023 December 16 for wider attention. Nthep (talk) 19:05, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Whether a journal has a paywall has no bearing on whether copyright has been released. And a poem that has not been released cannot be reproduced in full even if it was published within a book, as many poems are. Innisfree987 (talk) 16:33, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Neil, I agree we cant reproduce the entire poem here. We can and should include people discussing it and the various renditions and translations of it, but no we cannot include copyrighted work, and a poem as a creative output is by default copyrighted unless it is released, in full here. nableezy - 17:03, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Citation needed

A cite should be added for the following:

According to The New York Times, Alareer was notorious in Israel due to his "virulently anti-Israeli and antisemitic" comments in the classroom and online.

Additionally, if you could add a neutral 2nd source cite supporting the assertion that would be helpful.

One researcher has concluded that "[i]t is clear from the secondary literature that there is bias against Palestine in American news coverage" and that the NYT evinces such bias.

https://web.mit.edu/hjackson/www/The_NYT_Distorts_the_Palestinian_Struggle.pdf Biolitblue (talk) 05:43, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Social media impact of one of the subject's poem

Actor Brian Cox recently read Alareer's poem, "If I must die." According to the Washington Post, it was viewed more than 12 million times in a tweet as of December 14, 2023.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2023/12/14/brian-cox-refaat-alareer-poem/

Given its social impact, I think it should be added to the article.

Biolitblue (talk) 06:02, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Add citation

The widely cited and shared poem "If I Must Die" was translated into Spanish by literary translator D. P. Snyder and published as "A Bilingual Poem from Gaza" by the well-known magazine World Literature Today on December 14, 2023. Dorothy Potter Snyder (talk) 15:36, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Baby in oven false?

I've read first hand accounts of Eli Beer who discovered a baby with grill marks and another baby cut from its mother's womb. Why does this article dismiss the baby in the oven claim as outright false? There are many other documented cases of Hamas tying up and burning Israelis alive on 10/7, so it's not unimaginable.

https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/hamas-roasted-babies-in-ovens-israel/#:~:text=Mr%20Moskowitz%20said%20he%20saw,of%20a%20pregnant%20woman's%20womb. 2601:182:CD00:1640:E059:289F:177C:FAD6 (talk) 23:04, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

An NYT article is cited to support that whole sentence, and the statement made is consistent with that source. —Alalch E. 23:24, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

antisemitism claim

The two sources here are both listed as unreliable or biased and they both distort what Alareer said. In his following tweet he calls the claim Israeli lies and fabrication. Note also that Israeli journalists have called the claim itself baseless. and unverified. Something that isn’t included in these propaganda pieces either. nableezy - 19:25, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Also, for sourcing on the claim being false, see Haaretz saying flat out that it is false. nableezy - 21:04, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

since this has been covered in the nytimes piece, i added a bit, including their saying the initial claim was discredited nableezy - 19:08, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Initial claim that he said it, or that babies were put into ovens? Whether it happened or not, it was a grotesque think to say Oneofff (talk) 21:45, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

The claim that a baby was murdered by burning it to death in an oven is what was false, and he was mocking that obviously false propaganda in his tweet. I think that the claim is grotesque, and apparently so did he. And he was right. nableezy - 22:21, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

That's one interpretation. What he said disgusted many people and left him open for accusations of anti-semitism. It might have been OK if families had not been burned, babies killed and women raped. The atrocities of Oct 7 were awful. Israel has over-reacted but Hamas's actions that day were brutal crimes. Oneofff (talk) 14:34, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

WP:NOTFORUM nableezy - 15:08, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

There is not one single confirmed case of rape by Hamas on 10/7. Not one. Brusquedandelion (talk) 09:22, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

his eldest daughter's family also now killed

https://lithub.com/refaat-alareers-daughter-and-grandchild-have-been-killed-in-an-israeli-airstrike/ at first glance source seems decent. I never heard of it before. it's not at WP:RSP or WP:RSN archives. Jeremyb (talk) 03:47, 27 April 2024 (UTC)