This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Misinformation in the Israel–Hamas war article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
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. 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:
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. 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. |
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: |
On 14 October 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved from Disinformation in the 2023 Israel–Hamas war to Misinformation in the 2023 Israel–Hamas war. The result of the discussion was moved. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
@ Iskandar323: Much of this article's content was directly copied from other articles. Should these duplicated sections be included as excerpts instead? Jarble ( talk) 18:23, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
The Arab–Israeli conflict is designated as a contentious topic with special editing restrictions. Editing and discussing this topic is restricted to extended-confirmed users (logged-in users with 500 edits and 30 days tenure). You are not logged in, so you are not extended confirmed. Your account is extended confirmeddoes not have the extended confirmed flag, but you are an administrator, so your account is extended confirmed by default. |
The result of the move request was: moved. After much deliberation and relisting, I am seeing a clear consensus to move. ( closed by non-admin page mover) Reading Beans ( talk) 15:39, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
Disinformation in the 2023 Israel–Hamas war → Misinformation in the 2023 Israel–Hamas war – Much of the substance of the body seems to be about misinformation rather than intentional disinformation. It's a bit of a mixed bag here, but I think if we're to keep the body then we might want to change the title. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 18:32, 14 October 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. BD2412 T 02:45, 22 October 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. estar8806 ( talk) ★ 21:21, 2 November 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Polyamorph ( talk) 19:17, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
I know this article is new, but the POV on it is just through the roof. To take an obvious example: to the best of my knowledge, we still don't know the truth of the "40 beheaded babies". According to the article, it's misinformation. It might very well be, but how do we know? And how come the article focuses so much on that particular point, but no mention of the misinformation campaign claiming there were no beheadings, and that no children were killed, though both are well documented. If the aim of this page is that anyone just adds whatever they think is misinformation, I can foretell a lot of edit warring and POV pushing. If we are to keep it, a much more balanced approach would be needed, with roughly equal sections on misinformation from both sides (unless there is evidence one side produces more misinformation). Jeppiz ( talk) 22:02, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
In the section Allegations of beheadings, there is enough evidence to cast doubt on some of the more wild and outrageous claims of human rights abuses. For while the US President said he had seen the pictures, was not the Whitehouse later forced to backtrack on the claim? Given how dodgy these claims have proven to be, should not people stop banging on about them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.166.210 ( talk) 11:01, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
A quite odd disinformation campaign was israel falsely saying Taylor Swift's bodyguard is gonna fight in Israel
https://thenamal.com/amp/featured/taylor-swift-gets-trolled-by-official-twitter-account-of-israel/ Hovsepig ( talk) 08:42, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
GnocchiFan ( talk) 20:46, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
There are substantial differences between the Arabic version of wikipedia pages that I think are notable for this page. For example, this page itself, whose Arabic version is called "Israeli propaganda during operation al aqsa flood". Also the Al-Ahli hospital explosion, which in all languages is shown as not clear who is responsible, except for in Arabic, where only Israel is labeled as responsible. Also the main page of the war, which in all languages chronicles Hamas attacks on civilians on October 7th, but in the Arabic version this is totally omitted. I believe that wikipedia should be able to admit its own shortcomings, and mention these on this page. LlanitoSheep ( talk) 21:12, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
Some of the sources are being an articles and blogs without any other "proper" sources indicated in them. It looks like the author is using the articles that he/she read, instead of using the proper sources, or writing that there are many official sources giving different stories about them. 89.79.15.76 ( talk) 23:29, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
I’m not sure if conspiracy theories about the war would qualify as disinformation or not, but there are definitely plenty of the former. If this article isn’t the right place, maybe someone should create 2023 Israel-Hamas war conspiracy theories instead. To give just one example, Alex Jones has claimed that Netanyahu deliberately allowed the attack to happen by issuing a “stand down” order to the IDF; so has Charlie Kirk. 2604:2D80:6984:3800:0:0:0:7B67 ( talk) 01:08, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
U.S. Representative Cory Mills has actively promoted “paid crisis actor” theories regarding dead Palestinian civilians, see: [2] 2600:1014:B072:E984:40AF:89E8:B1B1:2AC1 ( talk) 19:33, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
This is a slogan. No one thinks that this is a factual claim, but a moral comparison which deals with the barbaric cruelty of both organizations. One might think that the comparison is wrong, but it is not misinformation. החבלן ( talk) 10:46, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
This is partly in response to the anonymous comment above from 31 October 2023 regarding neutrality of this topic. I'm not sure how accurate that it, but thought I'd provide some sources for anyone interested in using them.
The fact that Jackson Hinkle hasn't got a mention here yet tells me there could well be some bias. He's been regarded as "Twitter's most viral misinformation spreader" on anti-Israel in regards to the conflict, so it's surprised he's not referenced here.
I'm not cross-referencing which sources have already been used on the topic, so here just a quick Hinkle related list, mostly RS:
I also posted some links to the Pallywood topic, though I think many if not most have already been picked up here.
- CommunityNotesContributor ( talk) 02:45, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
https://www.bild.de/politik/ausland/politik-ausland/israel-bombardiert-gezielt-zivilisten-bild-entlarvt-die-schlimmsten-gaza-luegen-85742234.bild.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by שמי (2023) ( talk • contribs) 12:24, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
It seems disingenuous to describe Jackson Hinkle as a communist without any sort of qualification. He's a pro-Trump right-wing influencer, if anything. 92.24.63.200 ( talk) 18:09, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
How Musk’s X Is Failing To Stem the Surge of Misinformation About Israel and Gaza
https://web.archive.org/web/20231121165714/https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2023-israel-hamas-war-misinformation-twitter-community-notes/ https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2023-israel-hamas-war-misinformation-twitter-community-notes/ CommunityNotesContributor ( talk) 16:14, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Misinformation in the 2023 Israel–Hamas war has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the (Fake videos) chapter and after the last paragraph that talks about the fake nurse video. Add in the following sentence as the (last sentence);
"Additionally according to Esther Chan from RMIT FactLab CrossCheck, an analysis by open-source investigators had determined that the video was likely doctored to artificially include in fake sounds of explosions."
source; https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/from-pallywood-to-us-troops-four-viral-claims-about-the-hamas-israel-war-fact-checked/8k4zj3x9h 49.181.47.40 ( talk) 20:11, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
I've reinstated coverage of the beheaded babies, which I had removed a month ago. Given the page move I think it's now clearly in scope. DFlhb ( talk) 14:50, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
from sources I've seen (including wiki) Israel didn't exactly "attack the church" but rather carried out an airstrike on a nearby target, accidentally damaging the side of the church building next door. The incident was tragic of course and probably negligent on Israel's part, but wording is important, especially in an article about "misinformation". MoshiachNow ( talk) 12:01, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
I was wondering about the source of the fake al-shifa nurse video. Who or what organization created it, published it, etc. According to this: https://www.thedailybeast.com/israels-comically-bad-disinfo-proves-theyre-losing-pr-war it was published on the arabic account of the israeli governments foreign affairs ministry, it would be nice to get more information on that, apparently the identity of the person in the video is in question. Was the original source an account called osint613? It looks like the account was IsraelArabic according to https://www.thenation.com/article/world/israel-gaza-propaganda-biden/ Fanccr ( talk) 09:36, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
This article goes into detail about attempts by the far-right and white nationalists to pass themselves off as pro-Palestinian by creating sockpuppet accounts. Their motive is to lure in new followers by expressing support for Palestine and then gradually exposing them to more overt antisemitism and bigoted rhetoric. So far it seems to be having some success, unfortunately. It’s mainly happening on Twitter/X, but 4chan’s /pol/ board is helping to organize these campaigns. 2604:2D80:6984:3800:0:0:0:8887 ( talk) 10:02, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
Hello; I'm a longtime editor but not in any contentious topics and I don't know how to mark this for high concern. Hope someone sees this soon.
Hamas.com is a website put together by Israel which has quite a one-sided narrative; however, it also contains lots of legitimate videos of the Hamas activities on the day of October 7th. It is a useful website given how most of these videos have been scrubbed from major websites on the internet such as X, leaving this site as one of the few ways these videos can be accessed.
When you Google "is Hamas.com legit" the infobox quotes from this page, meaning this section has very high visibility on the internet. However, the sentence "Israeli government accounts have widely shared the website hamas.com claiming that it belongs to the armed group" is unsourced; with the only quote offered clearly showing the Israeli spokesperson acknowledging Hamas does not own the website.
More importantly, "its completely in English, BBC Verify confirmed that its a fake website." Is ambiguous nearly to the point of misinformation. The claim that it's a website owned by Hamas is fake (but this claim is unsourced!), but the claim that the videos hosted on it are fake is a very different claim for which there is much evidence to the contrary.
Overall grammar is also poor and lacks credibility.
REQUESTING an experienced editor in this topic to overhaul this section, given the high visibility thanks to Google search. Ideally would include specific sources for the origin of the website (Israel) and the videos themselves (Hamas) rather than simply claiming the entire website is "fake" without probing into these critical details.
REQUESTING to include information regarding the widespread claims that the website hosts malware and is meant to add viruses to your computer. This can be debunked by searching Hamas.com in any of the popular virus scanners (ex. VirusTotal) DoctorTamago ( talk) 08:31, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
This article ought to also cover the burning of people alive by Hamas, in addition to the discussion of beheadings of children. Source (27) used in this article, for example, discusses the topic somewhat:
“The proportion of bodies we’ve received who are charred is high,” Kugel explained. “Many have gunshot wounds in their hands, showing they put their hands up to their faces in defense. Many were burned alive in their homes. … We know they were burned alive because there is soot in their trachea, their throats—meaning they were still breathing when set on fire.”
194.193.223.241 ( talk) 17:33, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
Lengthy new piece from the Intercept on the sustained, concerted propaganda pushing during the conflict. Iskandar323 ( talk) 16:21, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Guys we shouldn't be quoting sources like Al Jazeera (media arm of a monarchy with limited press freedoms) or OpenDemocracy (loosely sourced site full of unproven conspiracy theories)
Any sections referencing them are clearly to serve an agenda and should be taken out
HonestEditor51 (
talk) 05:24, 11 March 2024 (UTC)Struck under
WP:ARBECR &
WP:PIA. The
Weather Event Writer (
Talk Page) 14:28, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
Al Jazeera is a Qatari state-owned news organization considered generally reliable. Editors perceive Al Jazeera English (and Aljazeera.com) to be more reliable than Al Jazeera's Arabic-language news reporting. Some editors say that Al Jazeera, particularly its Arabic-language media, is a partisan source with respect to the Arab–Israeli conflict. Al Jazeera's news blogs should be handled with the corresponding policy.” In short, Wikipedia editors and consensus has determined that despite being state-owned media, Al Jazeera is a reliable source for information. If you believe it is no longer a reliable source for information, you can open a discussion at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard. Note, you need to provide evidence (with links to sources) that show why it is no longer considered reliable if you start a discussion on the noticeboard. The Weather Event Writer ( Talk Page) 05:32, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
Israel having received prior warning of an attack is listed as a conspiracy theory with no evidence, although this article says they did. should it be changed to having an unknown extent of classified evidence instead?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/12/israel-hamas-war-egypt-warned-foreign-affairs-gaza
Mrloggy ( talk) 09:45, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
https://www.the7eye.org.il/504682 https://www.camera.org/article/poynter-politifact-fact-check-misleads-on-beheadings/?fbclid=IwAR3hzzOgxPGv-mDk71lBGHcKRVW5pJVKwAFfZOXfHiq8NLLLipQaujNWxHA
The article (and the press) mix up several claims. There is the false claim that 40 babies' heads were beheaded in the Gaza village (the claim that was made on the internet and in the press but not by official Israeli officials and it was not proven that it was even said by Zeka or soldiers). There is the claim (which is not false) regarding cases of decapitated/severed heads and there is the estimate regarding forty dead babies (a press report. The speaker was not introduced. It states that the number of murdered children, infants and teenagers was about 40). I will comment that the collection and identification of the bodies, some of which were dismembered, took more than a month, and Zaka people or soldiers are not pathologists. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.126.10.137 ( talk) 15:26, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
Maybe this article should be renamed to Disinformation in the Israel–Hamas war? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:21, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
You have to mention: "יש להדגיש כי בזק"א אחראים רק על פינוי הגופות ולא על זיהויין, עליו אמונים המשטרה והמכון לרפואה משפטית שבאחריות משרד הבריאות."
"It should be emphasized that the ZAKA is only responsible for removing the bodies and not for their identification, which is entrusted to the police and the Institute of Forensic Medicine under the responsibility of the Ministry of Health."
At the past you mentioned something like that ( about the possibility of mistakes ) But it was deleted 2.55.14.11 ( talk) 08:48, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
It's so obviously biased and and lacks any neutral POV. And if you're going to mention "IDF misinformation," you need to mention "Hamas misinformation," too. Why doesn't the article mention anything about Hamas literally making up on the spot that the hospital explosion which was from an Islamic Jihad missile was an Israeli bombing, and decided to go with "500 deaths?" Nobody here is questioning how Hamas figures in this war are greatly exaggerated and published literally minutes after an incident, with no way of possibly getting accurate figures beforehand?
Shame on everyone involved in this propaganda article 72.78.76.172 ( talk) 20:41, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
:I'd like to emphasize the point that it is totally unfair and obviously prejudicial to include a section on IDF misinformation while omitting a section on Hamas misinformation. Even if everything noted in this article is factual, it is intellectually dishonest and grossly unethical to thoroughly canvas every example of Israeli misinformation and skirt over the countless examples of Hamas misinformation. This is not okay. The section should be removed until an equally exhaustive section covering Hamas misinformation is added.
:By portraying a grotesquely lopsided account of misinformation in this war, you reveal a clear bias. More importantly, you give the impression that Israel systematically falsifies reports whereas Hamas propaganda is accidental, if it exists at all. There's literally no mention of Israel taking pains to neither dispute nor substantiate Hamas's slander that Israel bombed Al-Ahli Hospital. Of course, it turned out that an errant (and recklessly fired) Islamic Jihad missile was shown to be the real culprit. While the article mentions the Al-Ahli Hospital explosion, all it can muster on the topic is a minor point about Al Jazeera's contested authorship of a Twitter account that posted a video about it. This is unfair and glaringly incomplete. The Hamas propaganda regarding the Al-Ahli Hospital explosion is just one example of the numerous inaccuracies and outright lies propagated by Hamas, all of which are overlooked in this article.
:I propose that at least one of these steps is taken to rectify this article’s unfair treatment of misinformation in the Israeli-Hamas war.
:1. Add some kind of caveat to the article acknowledging that it is incomplete and that misinformation by Hamas is not covered.
:2. Add an equally exhaustive section on Hamas misinformation. (Preferred)
:3. Remove the section on Israeli misinformation. (This should be done if step 2 is not taken)
Joshuakoloski (
talk) 21:11, 16 May 2024 (UTC) Non EC editor.
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
A disclaimer should be added to the start of this article acknowledging that Hamas misinformation is not covered and Israeli misinformation is disproportionately canvassed. Joshuakoloski ( talk) 21:25, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
{{
Edit extended-protected}}
template.
EvergreenFir
(talk) 21:40, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
@ Peleio Aquiles: you added: "Catholic officials and Member of British Parliament Layla Moran, who maintained contact with refugees in the church, stated, on the contrary, that no Palestinian belligerants were in the area and that the two women had been killed by the Israeli army, who were the ones preventing the refugees from leaving."
I don't see such a statement by Moran mentioned in the sources, only a brief statement that her relatives were in the church. Am I missing something? — xDanielx T/ C\ R 22:37, 26 May 2024 (UTC)