Jump to content

Talk:French Hill attacks

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Requested move

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. There is no consensus for this move. We determine consensus based on strength of arguement and the proposer gives no arguement why French Hill Junction attacks is the common name even if it is more accurate. On the other hand the opposer gives evedience for the current title being the common name. Consensus is weak given the lack of participants but given that this has now been open a month I think it's the best we're going to get. Dpmuk (talk) 13:11, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]



French Hill attacksFrench Hill Junction attacks — These attacks (mostly) didn't take place in French Hill, but at the junction commonly known as "French Hill Junction" - which is out side of French Hill. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 11:54, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose. Google [1] [2] gives me no ghits at all for the proposed title, but 824 for the existing title and all seem relevant (your results may vary). In the absence of any evidence for the common usage of the more "accurate" name, the move must be rejected in terms of WP:AT. The article text is the place to point out the actual location of the attacks. Andrewa (talk) 20:18, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
[edit]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. 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, providing 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. Diannaa (talk) 00:35, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on French Hill attacks. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:26, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 May 2025

[edit]

Wording of the Hamas attackers should be changed from "terrorist" to "militant" to ensure neutrality by Wikipedia. Unless Wikipedia is also ready to label IDF members involved in attacks on civilians as terrorists too. From: "In July 1993, a car was hijacked in the junction by a Hamas terrorist, and the woman driving the car was killed."

To "In July 1993, a car was hijacked in the junction by a Hamas militant, and the woman driving the car was killed." RealFactChecker101 (talk) 01:27, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not done. Hi RealFactChecker101, Wikipedia does not independently determine which groups are considered terrorist organizations; it follows the designations made by reliable, authoritative sources. Hamas is officially designated as a terrorist organization by numerous governments and international bodies, including Australia, Canada, the European Union, Israel, Japan, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States. In contrast, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), regardless of one’s views on their actions, are not designated as a terrorist organization by any of these entities.
Describing members of Hamas as "terrorists" in contexts involving deliberate attacks on civilians is consistent with these official designations and with reliable sources. Replacing "terrorist" with a more neutral term like "militant" would obscure this factual distinction and risk misrepresenting the language used by high-quality sources.
Therefore, I will not implement this requested change. Friendly, Lova Falk (talk) 12:54, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree with you. Please have a look at MOS:TERRORIST and also at the consensus at Hamas and October 7 attacks. These very clearly say "militant" instead of "terrorist". Laura240406 (talk) 13:48, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Laura240406 for pointing this out. I was not aware of this. Lova Falk (talk) 14:36, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]