Archives: Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112
	Subpages: Israel and the Occupied Territories discussion: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8; Talk:Jerusalem/capital
	This page has archives. Topics inactive for 60 days are automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

You are an administrator, so you may disregard the message below You are seeing this because of the limitations of {{If extended confirmed}} and {{If admin}} You can hide this message box by adding the following to a new line of your common.css page: .ECR-edit-request-warning { display: none; } Stop: You may only use this page to create an edit request This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is subject to the extended-confirmed restriction. You are not an extended-confirmed user, so you must not edit or discuss this topic anywhere on Wikipedia except to make an edit request. (Additional details are in the message box just below this one.)

Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article relates to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a contentious topic. The following restrictions apply to everyone editing this article: All participants in formal discussions (RfCs, RMs, etc) within the area of conflict are urged to keep their comments concise, and are limited to 1,000 words per discussion. Citations and quotations (whether from sources, Wikipedia articles, Wikipedia discussions, or elsewhere) do not count toward the word limit. 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 (except in limited circumstances) Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. 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.

This page is subject to the extended confirmed restriction related to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

	Israel is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 8, 2008.
Article milestones Date Process Result February 16, 2007 Good article nominee Not listed May 25, 2007 Good article nominee Listed September 4, 2007 Peer review Reviewed September 30, 2007 Featured article candidate Promoted June 23, 2010 Featured article review Demoted April 20, 2012 Peer review Reviewed Current status: Former featured article

This  level-3 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Israel Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Israel on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IsraelWikipedia:WikiProject IsraelTemplate:WikiProject IsraelIsrael-related Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Project Israel To Do: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Assess : Rate the Unassessed Israel-related articles and Unknown-importance Israel-related articles. Cleanup : Cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category and the tool's wiki page. Collaborate : Participate in WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration. Copyedit : Timeline of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict in 2005 Deletion sorting : Participate in discussions at WikiProject Deletion sorting/Israel. Expand : Ayala Procaccia, Diamond industry in Israel, Edna Arbel, Levin Kipnis, Rami Kleinstein, Sephardic Haredim, Zman Tel Aviv, Nachum Heiman, Public Defence (Israel), Prisoner of Zion, Trial of Benjamin Netanyahu, Day to Mark the Departure and Expulsion of Jews from the Arab Countries and Iran, Pre-Modern Aliyah See also Articles needing translation from Hebrew Wikipedia. Geographical coordinates : Add geographic coordinates to Israel articles missing geocoordinate data. Infobox : Add infoboxes to Israel articles needing infoboxes. Maintain : See Israel articles needing attention. Map : See discussion at Module:Location map/data/Israel. Add maps to articles in Wikipedia requested maps in Israel. NPOV : Jewish exodus from Arab and Muslim countries Photo : Add pictures to articles in Wikipedia requested photographs in Israel. Stubs : See Israel stubs. Update : Basic Law proposal: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People Other : Translate to Hebrew : David Bar-Hayim, Guy Bavli, and Guy Oseary. Jewish history Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jewish history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jewish history on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Jewish historyWikipedia:WikiProject Jewish historyTemplate:WikiProject Jewish historyJewish history-related Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Palestine Top‑importance 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 Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Judaism Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Countries This article is within the scope of WikiProject Countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of countries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CountriesWikipedia:WikiProject CountriesTemplate:WikiProject Countriescountry WikiProject Countries to-do list: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Check out the article alerts; see if anything catches your fancy. Cleanup : clean-up listing for Countries Stubs : de-stub articles in Category:Stubs by region. Other : add {{WPCountries}} to talk pages of related articles, and assess. Asia Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Asia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject AsiaTemplate:WikiProject AsiaAsia Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Western Asia (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Western Asia, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Western AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Western AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Western AsiaWestern Asia Israel Palestine Collaboration This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration, a collaborative, bipartisan effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. For guidelines and a participants list, see the project page. See also {{Palestine-Israel enforcement}}, the ArbCom-authorized discretionary sanctions, the log of blocks and bans, and Working group on ethnic and cultural edit wars. You can discuss the project at its talk page.Israel Palestine CollaborationWikipedia:WikiProject Israel Palestine CollaborationTemplate:WikiProject Israel Palestine CollaborationIsrael Palestine Collaboration

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations: Shabi, Rachel; Kiss, Jemima (18 August 2010). "Wikipedia editing courses launched by Zionist groups". The Guardian. Retrieved 25 December 2012.{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) "Topics that spark Wikipedia 'edit wars' revealed". BBC News. 18 July 2013. Retrieved 18 July 2013. Omer Benjakob (December 7, 2017). "After Trump Move, Jerusalem Battle Now Plays Out on Wikipedia". Haaretz. The main Wikipedia article for Israel presently lists Jerusalem as Israel's capital. Aaron Bandler (December 18, 2025). "In new change, main Wikipedia 'Israel' entry says Jewish state committing 'genocide'". Jewish News Syndicate. Retrieved December 19, 2025. As of Dec. 11, Wikipedia states as a matter of fact, just some 425 words into its main page on Israel, that "following the Oct. 7 attacks in 2023, Israel began committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza." Mathilda Heller (December 21, 2025). "Wikipedia's Israel page now unequivocally states Jewish state is 'committing genocide'". Jerusalem Post. Retrieved December 23, 2025. The edit was made on December 11 and has not been reversed despite extensive discussion between editors. The section appears at the end of the third paragraph in the top section of the page.

Readerships and mentions

This article has been viewed enough times to make it onto the all-time Top 100 list. It has had 74 million views since December 2007. This article has been viewed enough times in a single year to make it into the Top 50 Report annual list. This happened in 2023, when it received 13,344,140 views. This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 14 times. The weeks in which this happened: July 13 to 19, 2014 July 20 to 26, 2014 July 27 to August 2, 2014 August 3 to 9, 2014 July 2 to 8, 2017 December 3 to 9, 2017 May 9 to 15, 2021 May 16 to 22, 2021 October 8 to 14, 2023 October 15 to 21, 2023 October 22 to 28, 2023 October 29 to November 4, 2023 November 5 to 11, 2023 June 15 to 21, 2025 Section sizes Section size for Israel (53 sections) Section name Byte count Prose size (words) Header Total Header Total (Top) 44,496 44,496 543 543 Etymology 7,259 7,259 173 173 History 86 149,857 0 5,135 Prehistory 2,603 2,603 65 65 Bronze and Iron Ages 11,974 11,974 365 365 Classical antiquity 12,325 12,325 162 162 Late antiquity and the medieval period 10,783 10,783 278 278 Modern period and the emergence of Zionism 12,847 12,847 660 660 British Mandate for Palestine 22,608 22,608 979 979 State of Israel 69 76,631 0 2,626 Independence and early years 9,801 9,801 513 513 Arab–Israeli conflict 18,340 18,340 647 647 Peace process 14,222 14,222 777 777 21st century 34,199 34,199 689 689 Geography 8,922 17,858 380 839 Tectonics and seismicity 3,278 3,278 199 199 Climate 5,658 5,658 260 260 Government and politics 10,975 94,665 333 3,599 Administrative divisions 4,045 4,045 78 78 Israeli citizenship law 1,825 1,825 72 72 Israeli-occupied territories 15,680 41,013 699 1,478 International opinion 14,534 14,534 415 415 Accusations of apartheid 10,799 10,799 364 364 Foreign relations 14,844 20,989 588 798 Foreign aid 6,145 6,145 210 210 Military 12,373 12,373 592 592 Legal system 3,445 3,445 248 248 Economy 9,492 33,698 430 1,389 Science and technology 14,517 14,517 506 506 Energy 3,059 3,059 132 132 Transport 3,479 3,479 181 181 Tourism 1,234 1,234 56 56 Real estate 1,917 1,917 84 84 Demographics 15,289 38,572 591 1,754 Major urban areas 2,644 2,644 132 132 Language 6,345 6,345 250 250 Religion 6,294 6,294 405 405 Education 8,000 8,000 376 376 Culture 2,622 31,282 87 1,554 Literature 2,203 2,203 110 110 Music and dance 3,065 3,065 115 115 Cinema and theatre 1,609 1,609 88 88 Visual arts 3,734 3,734 181 181 Architecture 3,436 3,436 158 158 Museums 2,788 2,788 138 138 Mass media 3,953 3,953 174 174 Cuisine 3,230 3,230 177 177 Sports 4,642 4,642 326 326 See also 38 38 0 0 Notes 45 45 0 0 References 28 13,830 0 0 Sources 13,802 13,802 0 0 External links 1,647 1,647 0 0 Total 433,247 433,247 14,986 14,986

view · edit Frequently asked questions Q1: Why is Jerusalem listed as Israel's capital in the infobox? A1: Israel declares Jerusalem to be its capital, and has its seat of government there. However, the lack of international recognition is notable, hence the subtext was added "(limited recognition)" as the result of a 2018 request for comment (RfC). For further information see Status of Jerusalem. Q2: Why does the article's introduction state that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza, even though this is heavily contested and neither the ICJ nor the ICC have issued a final judgment? A2: The text Following the October 7 attacks in 2023, Israel began committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza was added following a November 2025 request for comment (RfC), which concluded that Israel should be described in the introduction as committing genocide without in-text attribution. For further information see Gaza genocide and another relevant RfC which was previously held there.

These questions arise frequently on the talk page concerning Israel.

Why is Jerusalem listed as Israel's capital in the infobox?

Israel declares Jerusalem to be its capital, and has its seat of government there. However, the lack of international recognition is notable, hence the subtext was added "(limited recognition)" as the result of a 2018 request for comment (RfC). For further information see Status of Jerusalem.

Why does the article's introduction state that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza, even though this is heavily contested and neither the ICJ nor the ICC have issued a final judgment?

The text Following the October 7 attacks in 2023, Israel began committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza was added following a November 2025 request for comment (RfC), which concluded that Israel should be described in the introduction as committing genocide without in-text attribution. For further information see Gaza genocide and another relevant RfC which was previously held there.

This section is permanently on this talk page and does not get archived. It is for mobile-device users for whom the the normal talk page header and FAQ are not shown.

Should the section title Gaza-Israel conflict:

A keep it's original name, or

B be renamed to:

B1 October 7 crisis, or

’B2' October 7 war, or

B3 Post-2008 conflicts, or

B4 Post-2008 conflicts and the Gaza Strip?

This crisis so far has expanded beyond Gaza, and has included Syria, Lebanon, Iran, and the Red Sea. I think we should expand the scope for this one. ✾✾ 🙞 quái hoa 🙝 (talk) (contribs) ✾✾ 18:19, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RFC is undue; the section's scope is beyond October 7. Triggerhippie4 (talk) 21:52, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Triggerhippie4: I’ve added another option after re-reading the section ✾✾ 🙞 quái hoa 🙝 (talk) (contribs) ✾✾ 02:30, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I renamed the section. It's not RFC-worthy and should be closed. Triggerhippie4 (talk) 02:58, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• B3. The section extends beyond October 7th so it should not be the first two and the section extends beyond Israel and Gaza as it talks about other conflicts(Israel Iran etc). I prefer B3 over B4 as B3 already covers Gaza so I see no need to extend it to include the Gaza strip in the section title. GothicGolem29 (Talk) 02:53, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• I'm closing this RFC, as it appears to have been posted in error with no prior discussion or an edit conflict. If the original poster has concerns, they are welcome to start a discussion. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 03:20, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  understandable have a good day ✾✾ 🙞 quái hoa 🙝 (talk) (contribs) ✾✾ 04:02, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We now have a statement at the 3rd paragraph of introduction that Israel is "committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza." Arguably, the Nakba produced more destruction, more expulsion, and more death than the Gaza genocide, at least in proportion. Should that not be also called a genocide as well? The present wording of the same paragraph is the following (sources removed):

"Israel declared independence at the end of the British Mandate on 14 May 1948, and neighbouring Arab states invaded the next day. A 1949 armistice left Israel with territory beyond the UN plan; no Arab state was created, as the Gaza Strip and the West Bank came under Egyptian and Jordanian control. Most Palestinian Arabs fled or were expelled during the Nakba, leaving a minority in Israel, while the country's population grew in later decades as Jews fled or were expelled from the Muslim world."

In all honesty I don't have a fixed opinion in either direction, I am just trying to make sense of words and facts. Place Clichy (talk) 12:19, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Nakba is identified in the lead of that article as ethnic cleansing, not genocide. Genocide usually involves a high death toll and brutality; ethnic cleansing usually focuses more on displacement and more insidious harassment, etc. However, I note that the Nakba infobox includes the Gaza genocide as part of the Nakba, so I'm a bit of a loss here. Cremastra (talk · contribs) 22:12, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would guess that it is either due to the debate over where the line is between ethnic cleansing & genocide &/or a rather literal interpretation of the Ongoing Nakba framework, under which the genocide would be considered a part.

However, I don't know if I'm convinced by said reasoning & we definitely can't state as such in this article without highly reliable sources to back up said interpretation. As such, I think it'd be best to stick with the article's current description of the Nakba. Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 00:09, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This makes me wonder if the ongoing debate about genocide wording isn't a bit plagued by recentism, a known systemic bias. This recentism may also affect the sources themselves from which the consensus above was deemed to be inferred. Arguably, the Nakba produced more loss of territory, property, and life (in proportion).

Among the articles quoted on the table on this talk page which mentioned genocide, I notice that some describe the Gaza events as a second Nakba, equating it with genocide or worse, and another sees the continuity of Israel's settler colonial policies and practices of massacre and genocide, beginning with the 1948 Nakba. Another states that "on two occasions, in 1948 and in 2023–2024, this anxiety has led to the mainstreaming of the genocidal imagination". If the genocide is in fact made of all Israel actions since 1948 including settler colonialism, then the wording that "Following the October 7 attacks in 2023, Israel began committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza" does not really reflect that. I think we can all agree that the conflict did not start on 7 October 2023, although much of what I read here seem to make it believe. This makes me deplore that we lose the meaning of words and facts. Place Clichy (talk) 16:48, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See Palestinian_genocide_accusation#Nakba. There isn't yet a consensus that the events constitute genocide. However, it can be mentioned as an ethnic cleansing, as that label does have consensus among scholars. JasonMacker (talk) 01:31, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Description of suggested change: To ensure journalistic balance, the lede should explicitly state that the State of Israel vigorously disputes allegations of genocide. Israel has formally rejected these claims as "baseless" and "outrageous," maintaining that its military actions constitute a lawful defense against Hamas following the October 7 attacks. During proceedings at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), Israel’s legal team argued that the IDF’s efforts to facilitate humanitarian aid and warn civilians are fundamentally incompatible with genocidal intent. Including this dispute is essential for fairness, as much of the evidence cited against Israel originates from the Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry—a source whose data is contested for its lack of transparency and failure to distinguish between combatants and civilians. Note on International Law: In its January 2024 ruling, the ICJ did not determine that genocide was occurring, but rather that some of the rights claimed by South Africa were "plausible," ordering Israel to take steps to prevent any potential genocidal acts while the full case proceeds. See edit request below:

Diff:  Warning Unnamed parameter |1= set to default value. Please change it. Failure to use {{Text diff}} to specify your requested text changes, if not adequately described above, may lead to your request being denied.
Ri5009 (talk) 18:47, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Text diff added and fixed. Ri5009 (talk) 18:58, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: Edit requests are for noncontroversial changes only. The wording at issue was the subject of extensive recent talk page discussion, including a well-attended request for comment, and will not be changed without consensus to do so. Day Creature (talk) 19:43, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Following the RfC, the article now says Experts, human-rights organisations and UN officials have described Israel's actions as war crimes and crimes against humanity. Following the October 7 attacks in 2023, Israel began committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. Something I still don't understand, as I said in the RfC, is why it makes sense to come out saying Following the October 7 attacks in 2023, Israel began committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza and not, for instance, Following the October 7 attacks in 2023, Israel began committing war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. At least re: the war crimes assessment, it would be, as I said, far easier to find a scholarly consensus that war crimes have been committed compared to a consensus on genocide Placeholderer (talk) 02:09, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think the current wording accurately conveys the idea that Israel was already committing war crimes and crimes against humanity before October 7, but only began committing genocide after that date. Day Creature (talk) 16:53, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know, no RfC has concluded that Israel only began committing genocide after October 7, having not previously been committing genocide. I'm sure plenty of sources would argue there's been a continual genocide since 1948, as @Place Clichy no relation alludes to above. War crimes, meanwhile, only applies as a concept during war.

And there has certainly been no RfC consensus that Israel was already committing war crimes and crimes against humanity before October 7 Placeholderer (talk) 18:18, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification: As far as I know, no RfC has concluded that Israel only began committing genocide after October 7, having not previously been committing genocide as in, the instigating genocide RfC only concluded that we can refer to the Gaza genocide as a genocide in its first sentence without attribution—with no "start" time given. While the RfC here is closed with post-Oct 7 wording, I think that part of the conclusion is unsafe since a "start time" was not in the scope of the RfC (at least, as far as I was following it) Placeholderer (talk) 18:30, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ping. Indeed, if we consider the contributions of academic scholars listed on this page alone, the one sure thing that can be said is that no black and white short statement can be confirmed with certainty. There are many, many, ways to describe the present and past situation, and academic inputs confirm that. Therefore, affirming in wikivoice that "Following the October 7 attacks in 2023, Israel began committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza" is quite a leap, to the point it is misleading on several accounts. Many argue that a genocide is ongoing, many argue against it, many prefer referring to war crimes or ethnic cleansing, many consider the 1948 Nakba events and subsequent settler colonization as part of the same continuum. Concision is good, but we should probably find a sentence that leaves more space to this variety of academic points of view, because that variety IS the academic consensus. Place Clichy (talk) 21:58, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Description of suggested change:

Diff:  Warning Unnamed parameter |1= set to default value. Please change it. Failure to use {{Text diff}} to specify your requested text changes, if not adequately described above, may lead to your request being denied.
SvenningT (talk) 18:17, 21 December 2025 (UTC) Please remove the refeerence to Israel committing genocide since 7 October 2023. It is quite plausible that some aspects of Israel's warfare in Gaza during the intervening period may be gnocidal, but the law on is very complicated and judgment should await the outcme of legal processes.[reply]

 Not done The current wording is a result of this discussion/RfC. Because this article is a contentious topic that falls under WP:CT/PIA, non-extended confirmed editors can only contribute through edit requests. So you were right in making an edit request, but this request is far from uncontroversial, and for that reason it isn't actionable. Let me know if you have questions Placeholderer (talk) 18:43, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Change “Following the October 7 attacks in 2023, Israel began committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza.” to “The International Court of Justice (ICJ)ruled that the risk of genocide is "plausible" but did not rule that genocide occurred. The International Criminal Court (ICC) has pursued charges of crimes against humanity and war crimes, but not pursued formal charges of genocide.” ~2025-41916-07 (talk) 18:23, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done The current wording is a result of this discussion/RfC. Because this article is a contentious topic that falls under WP:CT/PIA, non-extended confirmed editors can only contribute through edit requests. So you were right in making an edit request, but this request is far from uncontroversial, and for that reason it isn't actionable. Let me know if you have questions Placeholderer (talk) 18:44, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Remove the line that says, "Following the October 7 attacks in 2023, Israel began committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza." This is an opinion not a fact, and it is an opinion that is not supported by facts. BenGoodLuck (talk) 19:24, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done The current wording is a result of this discussion/RfC. Because this article is a contentious topic that falls under WP:CT/PIA, non-extended confirmed editors can only contribute through edit requests. So you were right in making an edit request, but this request is far from uncontroversial, and for that reason it isn't actionable. Please review the previous discussions on this page—there have been lots of edit requests nearly identical to this. Let me know if you have questions Placeholderer (talk) 19:33, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

DELETE "Israel is committing genocide against the Palestinian people" OR include opposing view! ~2025-42050-46 (talk) 19:25, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done The current wording is a result of this discussion/RfC. Because this article is a contentious topic that falls under WP:CT/PIA, non-extended confirmed editors can only contribute through edit requests. So you were right in making an edit request, but this request is far from uncontroversial, and for that reason it isn't actionable. Please review the previous discussions on this page—there have been lots of edit requests nearly identical to this. Let me know if you have questions Placeholderer (talk) 19:33, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated the FAQ with another frequently asked question. Since I summarized the RfC but was involved in that RfC (and opposed the proposal) I'm mentioning the update here so people can check/verify if I faithfully summarized the RfC Placeholderer (talk) 19:52, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I believe that was due. You wrote: "The text Following the October 7 attacks in 2023, Israel began committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza was added following this RfC, which concluded that Israel should be described in the introduction as committing genocide without in-text attribution. For further information see Gaza genocide and another relevant RfC which was held there."

A comment: this page gets direct incoming visitors from the outside of Wikipedia, and a FAQ section is probably especially targeted at them. In this regard, RfC is jargonesque. I suggest using instead the wording of both the question and answer at Talk:Gaza genocide about the RfC there, with minimal change, especially since the RfC here basically said that what applies there applies here:

• Question: Why does this article state that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza, even though this is heavily contested and neither the ICJ nor the ICC have issued a final judgment?
• Answer: A September 2025 request for comment (RfC) about the Gaza genocide article decided to state, in Wikipedia's own voice, that it is a genocide. Another December 2025 request for comment concluded that Israel should be described in the introduction as committing genocide without in-text attribution.

Note that this wording, in its question, also addresses objections, which is very important: people who are genuinely looking for the answer to this question (why does Wikipedia state without attribution that Israel has committed genocide) want to see that objections were addressed. Place Clichy (talk) 23:49, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I used the structure/jargon from the first answer (about Jerusalem), but I'd be up for changing both to spell out request for comment (RfC). But I think that description of the Gaza genocide RfC falls into something I've complained about before—that RfC was narrowly about making the first sentence of the article a sane first sentence, not a discussion of whether or not there's ever any place for in-text attribution in describing the genocide. The Israel RfC shouldn't have been about "implementing" the Gaza genocide RfC. But I griped about this at length in the Israel RfC (and I may yet gripe more above), so I'll spare the word count here.

And this is me naturally saying "I think my version is better"—I shouldn't make the final call Placeholderer (talk) 00:23, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've made some changes implementing some of the feedback, pending discussion on the rest Placeholderer (talk) 16:31, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

An encylopedia entry on Israel should not claim that after October 7, 2023 Israel began committing a genocide against the Palestinians, as that is not truthful. ~2025-42268-94 (talk) 03:22, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: Please see the FAQ at the top of this page, and the citations in the article. – bradv 06:23, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Description of suggested change: Please add that the Wall Street Journal Editorial staff strongly rejects the characterization that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza, "The case law at the International Court of Justice requires a finding that 'intent to destroy the group, in whole or in part, must be the only reasonable inference which can be drawn from the pattern of conduct.'" The article notes that the definition of genocide was changed by a "sleight of hand," that Israel is not trying to destroy the Palestinian people, and that Israel's actions of warning civilians in advance and trying to move them away from the fighting is in contrast to genocide. See link: https://www.wsj.com/opinion/amnesty-international-report-israel-genocide-hamas-gaza-811acf05?mod=article_inline

Diff:  Warning Unnamed parameter |1= set to default value. Please change it. Failure to use {{Text diff}} to specify your requested text changes, if not adequately described above, may lead to your request being denied.
~2025-36083-57 (talk) 21:40, 22 December 2025 (UTC) P[reply]

 Not done I think this would be a fair detail to propose at Gaza genocide, but that article doesn't have a space (as far as I can see) for newspaper editorial positions—the opinions included are more along the lines of governments, NGOs, and academics—so this would be an outlier Placeholderer (talk) 22:36, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Placeholder Temp accounts are not permitted to edit in this topic area. I missed that you had replied, but this request is not uncontroversial, so they can't make it. 331dot (talk) 22:43, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't replied yet, but I do think proposing addition of a reasonable source's opinion is constructive (at least, compared to "An encyclopedia can't say it's genocide you're all evil"), and given the topic a relatively uncontroversial request Placeholderer (talk) 22:48, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that this is as uncontroversial as it seems to you. Many might wonder why the views of an American newspaper should be called out specifically in this article. 331dot (talk) 22:58, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the fact it would be an out-of-place spotlight was the reason I'd reject the proposal. By my reckoning "uncontroversial" doesn't have to mean "right".

And I'd just like to see more edit requests that are actual requests. At the very least this is an example for people to see that not all edit requests have to say "cut the genocide claim" Placeholderer (talk) 23:03, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Uncontroversial" is generally understood in reference to CTOPs with a 30/500 restriction to mean "something that no reasonable person would disagree with" and that does not require discussion to achieve a consensus. 331dot (talk) 23:09, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but if I saw a plausibly GF request that I thought made sense to implement, but that a reasonable person could conceivably disagree with me about, I think it would be an appropriate course of action for me to just implement it myself as EC, even if that means I mark something as  Done that's technically an inappropriate use of an edit request.

And at the very least (for real this time), plausible/reasonable edit requests need not be reverted for breaking protocol; it's enough that it's  Not done. I think excessive reverting of edit requests risks making good-faith visiting editors sour on Wikipedia and prompt a Streisand effect-type situation that leads to further unconstructive edit requests.

Not to say that the flood of nearly identical "cut the genocide claim" requests are helpful to keep up, and certainly not to say that walls of text with varying degrees of obliviousness about WP's process are helpful to keep up, but rather to say that requests like this one are neither of those and warrant more lenience Placeholderer (talk) 23:24, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are free to take up what a non-EC user proposes on your own responsibility if you choose, they just cannot discuss it.

I have left some inappropriate requests up before, but this page has been flooded today(and generally since the genocide statement was added). 331dot (talk) 23:49, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

this page has been flooded today(and generally since the genocide statement was added). Maybe that's a sign that it's not the best idea to include the statement as currently written. SuperPianoMan9167 (talk) 01:02, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The statement was included after an extensive discussion. No matter what the result was, many people would disagree. 331dot (talk) 01:22, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

+1 On the one hand, we have groups urging for the statement's removal, as they see it as an example of "Wikipedia's antisemitism"; on the other hand, we have groups urging for the statement to be kept, saying "to remove it would be censorship". SuperPianoMan9167 (talk) 01:30, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the following sentence, with citations, to the lead: Israel and several other countries, including the United States, dispute that its actions constitute genocide. I think this mention of the opposition is acceptable, but I'm sure this change will be contested, so I am preemptively opening a discussion to decide if something like it should remain or not. SuperPianoMan9167 (talk) 01:52, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Remove Israel committed genocide. The definition of genocide is the deliberate and systematic killing or persecution of a large number of people from a particular national or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group. Israel warned the population to move so they would not be harmed. They sent food and supplies. Hamas hid behind human shields, embedded themselves in the UN and other organizations etc etc. Palestinians had been given so many opportunities for full statehood by Israel, including the Abraham accords in 2005. They rejected and refused. If they were committing genocide, why do that? Only the majority of Muslim nations call for the elimination of Israel and hatred of Jews..including death to Jews. The only democracy in the Middle East has a Jewish population of many opinions and the VAST majority only want peace and certainly do not call for the death of Muslims and Arabs as a people. Oct 7 was a clear example of the desire to commit genocide of Jews. Yet again. If this is allowed, once we are all gone, another group will be next. Maybe you and your family? Hard to believe, isn’t it? Unfortunately, that is the long history that we have endured…yet still we love. Yet still we want peace. Despite the world hating us just because of our religious belief or genetic makeup or for those “unlucky” to call themselves friends or Partners of Jews. Please remove genocide. Stop spreading misinformation and hate. Jenb11 (talk) 04:40, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: See the responses to the multiple previous edit requests concerning this. Day Creature (talk) 05:00, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New accounts are not permitted to edit in this topic area. Please see your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 08:42, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is requested that an edit be made to the extended-confirmed-protected article at Israel. (edit · history · last · links · protection log) This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y". The edit may be made by any extended confirmed user. Remember to change the |answered=no parameter to "yes" when the request has been accepted, rejected or on hold awaiting user input. This is so that inactive or completed requests don't needlessly fill up the edit requests category. You may also wish to use the {{EEp}} template in the response. To request that a page be protected or unprotected, make a protection request.

Description of suggested change:

Diff:

Qazxwsecd (talk) 17:38, 23 December 2025 (UTC) Here are the sources: ^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]}[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want made. Note that Wikipedia itself is not a reliable source (see WP:CIRC). Day Creature (talk) 01:09, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Note: requestor edited original request to include RS and re-opened. IsCat (talk) 03:48, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I added sources. Qazxwsecd (talk) 00:09, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm opening this thread in response to an apparent dispute over the lead, which is 543 words long at the time of this comment. @Nikkimaria attempted to rework it, but was reverted by @Onceinawhile with the edit summary "needs consensus". On one hand, I would not consider that to be a good reason to revert, and would ask Onceinawhile to explain why exactly they disagreed with Nikkimaria's edit. On the other hand, while MOS:LEADLENGTH says that the leads in most featured articles contain about 250 to 400 words, perhaps the complexity of the article subject warrants the extra ~140 words. I don't have a strong opinion of this at the moment. Chess enjoyer (talk) 04:45, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to overall length, I would argue that the current lead overemphasizes history - it's meant to represent the whole article. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:47, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The point about whether it overemphasizes history has had a great deal of discussion on these talk pages. Cutting out significant parts of it needs discussion first. Onceinawhile (talk) 05:22, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All right, so do you have arguments to present one way or the other? Nikkimaria (talk) 00:48, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

The claim that Israel is committing genocide is not an accurate statement of fact, but rather an ideological claim that is false. ~2025-43990-60 (talk) 21:14, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Not done: It is not stated as fact in the article. OTOH, you are incorrectly stating that it is only an ideological claim as fact. O3000, Ret. (talk) 21:25, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Change: Following the October 7 attacks in 2023, in which the Hamas government of Gaza and its allies killed about 800 Israeli civilians in one day, Israel began committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza.[c] Israel and several other countries, including the United States,[44][45] dispute that its actions constitute genocide.[46] To: Following the October 7 attacks in 2023, in which the Hamas government of Gaza and its allies killed about 800 Israeli civilians in one day, Israel began retaliating in what has become the Israel-Hamas war. Some have made allegations that Hamas’s attack was an act of genocide or a genocidal massacre against Israelis[55][56][57], while others allege that Israel has been committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. ~2025-43925-87 (talk) 21:28, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Not done: Sorry, but you must gain consensus for such a change before making an edit request; and since you are not Extended Confirmed, you cannot discuss this. Actually, you can only make non-controversial edit requests on this topic. See extended confirmed for the restrictions. O3000, Ret. (talk) 21:49, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]