Talk:Rafah offensive
Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. Parts of this article relate to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing the parts of the page related to the contentious topic:
If it is unclear which parts of the page are related to this contentious topic, the content in question should be marked within the wiki text by an invisible comment. If no comment is present, please ask an administrator for assistance. If in doubt it is better to assume that the content is covered. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Proposed merge of Super Bowl massacre into this article
Article covers the same topic as this article, although in different detail. ForsythiaJo (talk) 01:56, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- I'd support merging that into this article. Historyday01 (talk) 18:38, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Also support merging ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 00:43, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
- Strong oppose - Very notable incident with lots of deaths and deserves its own article. The Rafah offensive is an ongoing battle that is still not over and it will get expanded over time Abo Yemen✉ 12:30, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose - Notable in its own right. The incident was planned in concurrence with the Super Bowl to fly under the radar in the news cycle. It cannot be so quickly dismissed. ☞ Rim < Talk | Edits > 22:13, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose — For an additional reason: From a technical standpoint, this article would become too big. Yue🌙 04:54, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Requested move 13 February 2024
- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jerium (talk) 23:03, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
Rafah offensive → Proposed Rafah offensive – The offensive on Rafah has not occurred yet- the article title speaks as if it has. Alternatively could be Planned Rafah offensive, idk, but I think Proposed works for now. - presidentofyes, the super aussa man 19:37, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose as proposed: The suggested title sounds like it is describing a proposal. Who is proposing it? Who is it being proposed to? I'm also not sure the article title should depend on whether such an offensive has begun or not. I think there are other articles on Wikipedia about various planned, feared, expected, anticipated and hypothesized events that have not yet occurred that don't say that explicitly in their titles. Also, considering the incursion of 11 February and the airstrikes of 3–12 February, it does not seem clear that such an offensive has not yet begun. — BarrelProof (talk) 22:41, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose Saying it is "proposed" is incorrect and promotes misinformation. This request should be withdrawn.Historyday01 (talk) 18:37, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose Rafah offensive is CONCISE and clear topic name. There have been bombings in Rafah already. Article body itself can address the finer nuances of whether a major offensive happened or didn't etc.. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 00:43, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy close The offensive is planned, not proposed. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 17:16, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy close per Hades. CarmenEsparzaAmoux (talk) 16:27, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
Timeline
What's with this long timeline for an offensive that hasn't taken place? Some of the subsections are just one sentence long. They should be merged into a more cohesive prose, removing unnecessary or repeated details. Super Ψ Dro 11:04, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
Why is this not marked as ongoing?
Israel has conducted operations in Rafah for over a month now, why is this not marked as an ongoing event? Bill3602 (talk) 19:29, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
- Military operations != military offensive; the latter is an escalation of the former. Yue🌙 04:57, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
"Deadline for the offensive"
Under February 19, it says:
Israel sets a deadline for the offensive, saying it will begin if the hostages aren't freed by Ramadan.
However, the actual date of the offensive is not pegged to the beginning of Ramadan; it merely says an invasion will take place at some point if their demands are not met by Ramadan. 675930s (talk) 11:01, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
Evacuation plans?
Would it be relevant to put Israeli announcements of evacuation plans on the timeline? I've two sources right now: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-03-15/israel-prepares-rafah-evacuation-after-netanyahu-approves-plan https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/3/13/israels-war-on-gaza-live-netanyahu-vows-to-finish-the-job-in-rafah 675930s (talk) 08:02, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Edit
The statement "Netanyahu stated [...] "Whoever tells us not to operate in Rafah, is telling us to lose the war" is repeated both in 17 and 18 February.31.221.171.151 (talk) 16:07, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Ah, no, sorry, the second is "an ear".31.221.171.151 (talk) 16:10, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
RAFAH - published plan
Exposing N12: step by step - this is what the Israeli plan for the Rafah operation looks like — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A0D:6FC0:B6D:E300:B873:AFBF:5311:4BA4 (talk) 07:44, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Addition casualty
The child that was saved from its mother's womb has died.
21 April "One woman who died in the strike was pregnant, but doctors were able to save the baby through C-section"
Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68903591 Patrikooke (talk) 08:30, 26 April 2024 (UTC)