Archives:1,
2,
3,
4,
5Auto-archiving period: 30 days
The subject of this article is
controversial and content may be in
dispute. When updating the article,
be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a
neutral point of view. Include
citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
Please stay
calm and
civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and
do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. Ifconsensus is not reached,
other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.
This article is written in
British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other
varieties of English. According to the
relevant style guide, this should not be changed without
broad consensus.
King David Hotel bombing was a History good articles nominee, but did not meet the
good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be
renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Terrorism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles on
terrorism, individual terrorists, incidents and related subjects 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.TerrorismWikipedia:WikiProject TerrorismTemplate:WikiProject TerrorismTerrorism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography 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.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Death 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.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
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 articles
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 articles
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the
Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
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 on any edits related to this topic
The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:
Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to
make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.
With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:
Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.
If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!
The source linked to for the "60th anniversary events" does not talk about "events"
It talks about one small event primarily composed of former IZL members, and Netanyahu is misquoted.
George Marantz
Should the article mention George Marantz, referring the Haaretz article[1] and/or its republished text[2]?
Mcljlm (
talk) 02:48, 9 May 2021 (UTC)reply
It's an interesting story but, without any further indication that it might be true or any reliable source confirming that the story itself was of historical importance, I think it is too fringe. As an aside (original research warning) the idea that the Hagana gave money to the Irgun to carry out the attack is perfectly plausible but the amount of 70,000 pounds is impossibly high. I don't believe the Hagana had such large amounts to give away (equivalent to over 3 million pounds today).
Zerotalk 04:10, 9 May 2021 (UTC)reply
One interesting aspect of the Haaretz article is that it has a photograph of the hotel, likely taken from the YMCA, as the bomb went off. The article includes a photo of the document in the Haganah archives, which it might be worthwhile having translated. ←
ZScarpia 20:37, 31 August 2021 (UTC)reply
Mirror newspaper: eyewitness account published the day after the bombing.
On the occasion of the UK's Prince William staying at the King David Hotel in 2018, the Mirror published an article which had the report on the bombing published the day afterwards appended. Journalist Barbara Broad was entering the hotel as the bomb went off. Of particular interest in her report is the inclusion, at the end, of what Emil Christian, the telephone operator at the hotel who received the bomb warning, told her.
Mirror - Steve Myall -
King David Hotel bombing killed 91 and struck at heart of British rule in Palestine - now Prince William is staying there, 26 June 2018: Daily Mirror reporter Barbara Broad was walking in through the hotel entrance when the bomb exploded. ... In an hotel telephone booth I talked with Emil Christian, Arab telephone operator who received a telephone message from one of the terrorists a few moments before the explosion. "A voice suddenly came on the line saying, 'The building has been mined. You have four minutes to escape,'" Emil told me. The line then went dead while the operator tried vainly to give warning in time to the hotel military headquarters and secretariat.
Someone with authority to edit this article certainly needs to fix the link to "Palestine Post" in this subsection as it links not to the predecessor paper to The Jerusalem Post but rather to the current postal organisation servicing The Territories. This is a fairly egregious error.
72.105.77.191 (
talk) 03:14, 6 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Okay, don't see a reason why not. Done.
Iskandar323 (
talk) 19:13, 19 August 2022 (UTC)reply
"Terrorist attack"?
"The King David Hotel bombing was a terrorist attack"?
From past discussions in Wikipedia I was told that the official policy of Wikipedia is not to take sides and identify an attack or organization as terroristic, which is why
Hamas and
Second Intifada are not classified as such. Is there an explanation for these double standards?
2A00:A040:197:1220:9095:D57C:54E5:D02F (
talk) 12:32, 15 September 2022 (UTC)reply
All of those pages make reference to terrorism, so I'm not sure where this double standard claim is coming from. However, in this particular instances, the terroristic nature of the act is particularly well attested in reliable sources, our go-to, including tertiary ones such as the Encyclopedia of terrorism. This page also has a section that explains at length why the act was considered terroristic, alongside Irgun itself, which was condemned by all the authorities involved. "Irgun was branded a terrorist organisation by Britain, the 1946 Zionist Congress and the Jewish Agency."Iskandar323 (
talk) 13:57, 15 September 2022 (UTC)reply
Lots of attacks are called terrorist attacks on WP, so you are mistaken (just for example,
Afula mall bombing, but lots more). The Second Intifada wasnt a terrorist attack, and the views on Hamas are wider than "terroristic". nableezy - 14:20, 15 September 2022 (UTC)reply
I recommend taking a look at this article's talkpage archives. ←
ZScarpia 19:41, 18 September 2022 (UTC)reply