Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:47, 10 November 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the November 2024 Amsterdam riots article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 1 day

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: You must be logged-in to an extended confirmed account (granted automatically to accounts with 500 edits and an age of 30 days) You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on this article (except in limited circumstances) Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, 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 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.

The contents of the 2024 antisemitic riots in Amsterdam page were merged into November 2024 Amsterdam riots on 8 November 2024. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page.

This article is rated Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Crime and Criminal Biography Low‑importance 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 Misplaced Pages. 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Football This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Israel Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Israel on Misplaced Pages. 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-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 Misplaced Pages. 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 Misplaced Pages requested maps in Israel. NPOV : Jewish exodus from Arab and Muslim countries Photo : Add pictures to articles in Misplaced Pages 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. Israel Palestine Collaboration This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration, a collaborative, bipartisan effort to improve Misplaced Pages'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 Palestine 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 Misplaced Pages. 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 ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Netherlands This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the Netherlands on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.NetherlandsWikipedia:WikiProject NetherlandsTemplate:WikiProject NetherlandsNetherlands An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

It is requested that a photograph of the preceeding game or riots be included in this article to improve its quality. Wikipedians in Amsterdam may be able to help! The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

According to independent sources, not only Jewish football fans were attacked and beaten, but also Jewish tourists, including women and children, as well as non-Jewish ones who could not prove they weren't Jewish. Also, evidence of WhatsApp communications between the Muslim attackers has been published, proving that the attacks had been premeditated and highly organised before the football match. Therefore it was not a 'football riot'.

This article is absolutely ridiculous

Israeli fans provoked the attack

Reports are also coming from sources that Israeli fans first chanted anti-Arab slogans, vandalized private property, and even attacked a local taxi driver, confronting law enforcement. We should cover both viewpoints, not just label this attack against Israelis due to media bias toward Israel. GrabUp - Talk 09:48, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

There are also numerous reports that the attack was premeditated, prior to the game, with hundreds of perpetrators reportedly organized and blocking off alleyways and streets. This would debunk the entire biased narrative, which attempts to shift blame onto the victims of an atrocity. It is not customary for Misplaced Pages to engage in such rhetoric.

See these articles by DPA International and the Jewish Press, which claim that Israeli authorities had pre-warned the Dutch authorities, as well as this article by DW, which claims that Israeli authorities had already pre-anticipated tensions. Neutral Editor 645 (talk) 17:48, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

@Neutral Editor 645: Can you provide WP:RS to back your claim There are also numerous reports that the attack was premeditated, prior to the game, with hundreds of perpetrators reportedly organized and blocking off alleyways and streets. GrabUp - Talk 17:51, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

@GrabUp two things can be true at once here:

• We should cover the Maccabi supporters' behavior prior to the match. That objectively shouldn't be whitewashed (as some have already tried), as it almost certainly raised tensions in Amsterdam prior to the attacks and provides some degree of context.
• We shouldn't artificially create a WP:FALSEBALANCE in framing the behavior and attacks as one and the same. There's objectively a gap between football fans being bigoted assholes and angry mobs physically assaulting said fans - to claim that the former justified the latter would be equivalent to (wrongly) claiming the pro-Israel mob that attacked students at the UCLA encampment a few months back was justified because the encampment used inflammatory rhetoric, or that said rhetoric is just as bad as assault.

A large majority of RSes are effectively doing what I've described above - they note the Israeli behavior, but still frame it as an attack on Israelis because large-scale physical violence is logically a step up from inflammatory bigotry. The Kip 20:36, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

I have read they were doing this for two days without police stoping them, that the violence they encountered was opposition to their behaviour on the third day. LamontCranston (talk) 06:44, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes. And it's important to note violence against the Arab cab driver and others, theft and destruction of property, and violence on both sides instead of framing this as one side attacking another. 173.49.61.70 (talk) 04:22, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

References

1. https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/israeli-hooligans-provoke-clashes-amsterdam-after-chanting-anti-palestinian-slogans
2. https://www.trtworld.com/europe/israeli-hooligans-target-palestinian-symbols-stirring-tension-in-amsterdam-18229830

General question: Are Middle East Eye and TRT World trustworthy sources? I mean, we also don’t cite Al Jazeera here on Misplaced Pages, don’t we?--FPSalman (talk) 11:44, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes, they are reliable sources. Who told you we don’t cite Al Jazeera? GrabUp - Talk 11:46, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

@FPSalman: Even Israeli news outlet confirmed this. GrabUp - Talk 11:49, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Well, Al Jazeera is Qatar’s governmental propaganda channel. I always thought Misplaced Pages was professional, but okay.--FPSalman (talk) 11:53, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

@FPSalman: BBC is also a British government-funded channel, so is it also a propaganda channel? Frankly, yes, BBC is a biased news outlet towards Israel. GrabUp - Talk 11:54, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Not just TRT and middle east eye, Times of Israel , Wafa, BBC all reported the same too Stephan rostie (talk) 12:07, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

TRT is a state-owned enterprise, and Middle East Eye has been criticized for bias as well. Generikuser (talk) 15:07, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

@Generikuser: What about BBC? Is it not state-owned? GrabUp - Talk 15:08, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

There is a clear difference between TRT and BBC. TRT has been cited here (WP:TRT) as being unreliable in cases of COI. As the topic matter at hand involves Israeli citizens, Turkish government could be construed to have a conflict of interest. BBC has been cited here as being reliable as per consensus on Misplaced Pages.

DarkSpartan (talk) 15:47, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

@DarkSpartan: They were not talking about what Misplaced Pages accepts or not; they were saying TRT is state-owned, so I gave the example of the BBC, which is also state-owned. Consensus can be changed, but that’s not what we are discussing here. Even the BBC mentions what TRT and the Middle East Monitor have stated. GrabUp - Talk 15:52, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

@GrabUp: can I see the BBC link/s in question? DarkSpartan (talk) 16:06, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

There is no question about the BBC’s article here. GrabUp - Talk 16:07, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

I ask for this as you may not use those sources (TRT or Middle East Eye) as they are both unreliable. You can use BBC source however, as it is reliable. DarkSpartan (talk) 16:13, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

@DarkSpartan: You can’t say that TRT and Middle East Eye are totally unreliable. Aside from TRT’s status, can you provide any RfC or consensus where Middle East Eye was considered unreliable? GrabUp - Talk 16:22, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Replying to the IP: I don’t have to get consensus for that, because sources like BBC, CNN and Times of Israel also mentioned that Israeli fans first chanted anti-Arab slurs, attacked private property, assaulted a taxi driver, and pulled down a Palestinian flag. GrabUp - Talk 16:55, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Someone please provide context and neutrality.

The way this article is currently framed is that the Israeli fans behaved poorly and then as a postscript, there happened to be a riot and they were attacked. The lede now is all about what they did wrong and next to nothing about the actual riots. Could someone please straighten this out with some context and neutrality. The Maccabi fans interrupting the minute of silence wasn't nice but that's in the lede?? MaskedSinger (talk) 13:12, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

I think the instigating aggressive and racist behavior by the Israeli fans prior to the eruption of violence should indeed be mentioned in the lede. Though i agree with you that booing during the minute of the flood victims isn’t that important or much related here.

As for the reason that there is not much said about the violent incident details itself is that there is not much things to tell, just a violent riot that caused 10 injuries after a football match, thats all. Stephan rostie (talk) 13:31, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

I do think the booing by the Israelis during the moment of silence for Spain should remain as it's being widely reported on social media as a motive for violence. Mozumder (talk) 22:49, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Edit Request: Add mention of "Amsterdam Pogrom" as an alternative naming

Given the frequent reference to the Amsterdam attacks as the "Amsterdam pogrom", I request that the opening sentence is reworded to: "The November 2024 Amsterdam attacks, also known as the Amsterdam pogrom, were a series of attacks targeting Israeli fans of Maccabi Tel Aviv occurred in Amsterdam, Netherlands, on the night of 7 November 2024."

The "November 2024 Amsterdam attacks" have also been repeatedly referred to as "the Amsterdam pogrom" - see examples such as these articles by Ynet News, the Anti-Defamation League, the Pittsburgh Jewish Chronicle and Der Spiegel.

It is common for incidents to be referred to by multiple names, which are acknowledged in the opening sections of their respective Misplaced Pages articles. For example, see the article for the 7 October Hamas-led attack on Israel, which also acknowledges the alternative namings of "Operation Al-Aqsa Flood" (among Palestinians), "Black Sabbath" and "Simchat Torah Massacre" (among Israelis) and "7 October attacks" (internationally). Neutral Editor 645 (talk) 17:32, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Note: Some comments here have been removed per WP:ARBECR IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 19:53, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Support addition as it is used by the mayor of Amsterdam and not just certain media outlets Shadow4dark (talk) 19:24, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

as it is used by the mayor of Amsterdam

What is used by the mayor of Amsterdam? Because she said it reminded her of pogroms, that means we should use "Amsterdam pogrom" as a title for this article? Bitspectator ⛩️ 19:28, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Not in title just in lede. Shadow4dark (talk) 19:58, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

In Wikivoice? As an alternate title (which is what this thread is about)? Why do you think a non-RS saying something reminded them of a pogrom justifies either? Bitspectator ⛩️ 20:03, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above states "reworded to: "The November 2024 Amsterdam attacks, also known as the Amsterdam pogrom," We don't need change the title to a pov point but just add alternative titles in to lede. Shadow4dark (talk) 20:19, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Because she said it reminded her of pogroms, that means we should use "Amsterdam pogrom" as a title for this article?

As an alternate title (which is what this thread is about)? Why do you think a non-RS saying something reminded them of a pogrom justifies either?

This is now the third time I'm asking you. Why would a non-RS saying something reminds them of a pogrom mean we should use "the Amsterdam pogrom" as an alternate title? Bitspectator ⛩️ 20:31, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2024/11/jewish-history-behind-dutch-soccer-attacks/680601/ Shadow4dark (talk) 21:11, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

So instead of answering that question you share a link to article in the culture section (WP:RSOPINION) of The Atlantic calling this event the "Dutch Soccer Pogroms" in the WP:HEADLINE. I can't read past the paywall. Are you suggesting a change be made to our article? Bitspectator ⛩️ 21:19, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

No, just showing RS source as i can read it here. Shadow4dark (talk) 21:21, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Deleted per WP:ARBECR

The President of Israel is calling this a pogrom is not sufficient grounds to call this article "Amsterdam pogrom", and you are not an EC editor. You may not leave comments that are not straightforward edit requests. This is the third time you have been reminded:

, Bitspectator ⛩️ 23:12, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

The term 'pogrom' is not suitable for this article and could be argued to hyperbole. This whole incident is nothing more than badly behaved racist football hooligans starting violence then setting themselveses as victims. No different to Millwall fans going to Birmingham City and going on a rampage. The only difference here is that not many Millwall fans would be serving or reservists military nor claim victimhood.

This whole article has strayed into propaganda and should be deleted or reduced to a one line entry on a football hooligans entry elsewhere. HuttonIT (talk) 12:18, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Edit request: Add Islamophobia to background, not just antisemitism, as this involves attacks instigated by Jews against Muslims. Thanks.

To maintain article neutrality and by preventing Jews as the only victims, please change:

There has been a significant increase in antisemitic incidents in the Netherlands during the Israel-Hamas war.

to:

There has been a significant increase in Islamophobic and antisemitic incidents in the Netherlands during the Israel-Hamas war.

You can use any of the news sources describing the rise in Islamophobic incidents in the Netherlands, such as https://www.newarab.com/opinion/dutch-pro-israel-politicians-contribute-islamophobia

or

https://research.rug.nl/en/publications/anti-semitism-and-islamophobia-in-the-netherlands-concepts-develo Mozumder (talk) 22:23, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

 Not done I see no connection to Islamophobia that isn't WP:OR. The term is not used in our article. So, no reason to talk about Islamophobia in the background. Bitspectator ⛩️ 23:20, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Non-meaningful opening description should be removed

Current opening reads:

On 7 November 2024, following a UEFA Europa League football match in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, between Israeli club Maccabi Tel Aviv, and Dutch club Ajax Amsterdam, Maccabi Tel Aviv fans were targeted in a series of attacks. Some Maccabi Tel Aviv fans had been filmed beforehand pulling down and burning Palestinian flags and chanting anti-Arab slurs.

Why does a page describing a violent coordinated mob attack against fans need to include a description of the victims' fan hooliganism?

In a different page about women rape, would you find the need to describe that the victims were wearing short skirts?

Frzporsa (talk) 22:56, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Because it is widely reported that these burnings (likely) provoked the attacks (which is not the same as justifying the attacks). Dajasj (talk) 23:10, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

• Because the chronology is clear. The provocations by the Israeli Ultras took place before any attacks upon them.

The current lede is awful and is a biased whitewash in Misplaced Pages's voice. That intro needs to go, or to be fixed. Andy Dingley (talk) 01:10, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

OK. What would you change specifically? Bitspectator ⛩️ 02:40, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

The opening chronology is backwards, and that is a highly partisan presentation of events. Saying Maccabi Tel Aviv fans were targeted and then had been filmed beforehand burning a Palestinian flag creates the false impression that this was instigated as attacks on the Israeli football spectators. Which will then be excused by some editors as, "Oh, but we mention both viewpoints!". That's not good enough. WP can't flip the order like that, to present the consequence as the initial cause.

This has to begin with the events that began it: a range of provocations by the Israelis, both inside and outside the stadium, some violent. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:19, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

@Andy Dingley the chronology is as such because the mass-scale physical violence is the primary subject of the article (we don't start the lead of Shinzo Abe's assassination by describing his dealings with the Unification Church), was a notable escalation of the situation, and affected a wider group than just the provocateurs - if it'd remained vandalism/bigotry/other general hooliganism by racist Maccabi ultras, we likely wouldn't have an individual article on it and it'd probably be filed away as another comparatively minor incident(s) at Anti-Palestinianism during the Israel–Hamas war and/or Islamophobia during the Israel–Hamas war. The proper chronology is presented anyways starting with the background section and following throughout the article.

That's also all not to say that the lede becoming fully chronological would probably induce the opposite partisan complaint that we're framing the attacks as justified. As I said above, there's objectively a gap between football fans being bigoted assholes and angry mobs physically assaulting said fans - to claim that the former justified the latter would be equivalent to (wrongly) claiming the pro-Israel mob that attacked students at the UCLA encampment a few months back was justified because the encampment used inflammatory rhetoric, or that said rhetoric is just as bad as assault. In this case, the "we mention both viewpoints!" is the correct path to follow. The Kip 09:48, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

The ethnicity of attackers

Many of the attackers are actually of Moroccan Riffian descent living in Amsterdam, why isn't that mentioned here? 196.87.40.128 (talk) 22:57, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Do you have any reliable source that discusses the ethnicity of the majority of the attackers? Neutral Editor 645 (talk) 23:10, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Geert Wilders appears to be claiming this, but we should wait for reliable sources. Dajasj (talk) 23:15, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

References

1. PVV-leider Wilders stelt dat 'Marokkaanse moslims' achter geweld zitten - https://nos.nl/l/2543687#UPDATE-container-81857604

The motives

There isn't enough evidence of "antisemitism" other than politicians claims (according to the citation in the motive section, skynews and new Arabia only repeat what the politicians says). Likely it was a violent reaction to Israeli football hooliganism and bigotry rather than actual antisemitism Dauzlee (talk) 23:12, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

 Not done No source. Bitspectator ⛩️ 23:18, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

There is no source and concrete evidence for the alleged "antisemitism" either. Only dutch or western politicians says it was antisemitic. At least change it to like "antisemitism (alleged)" Dauzlee (talk) 23:51, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

We have major news outlets directly calling these attacks antisemitic.

We have other news outlets using quotations around "antisemitic acts" Dazzling4 (talk) 00:12, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

CNN did not prove it was antisemitic other putting it on its headline.

According to NYT: "The authorities in Amsterdam on Friday were investigating what they called antisemitic attacks on Israeli soccer fans that took place amid a charged atmosphere surrounding a soccer match involving a visiting Israeli team." It quote the authorities, does not prove the attack is actually antisemitic.

According to WSJ: "AMSTERDAM—Dutch authorities said they were tightening security to protect Jews and Jewish sites as they investigate an overnight wave of violence in which Israeli soccer fans were chased and beaten by crowds in the capital in what leaders of both countries called antisemitic attacks." Again they says it was the authorities who claim it was antisemitic. Leader of a country is not an expert.

According to Reuters: "AMSTERDAM, Nov 8 (Reuters) - Amsterdam banned demonstrations for three days from Friday after overnight attacks on Israeli soccer supporters by what the mayor called "antisemitic hit-and-run squads", and Israel sent planes to the Netherlands to fly fans home." A mayor is not an expert.

According to npr: "Dutch Prime Minister Dick Schoof said on social media he had followed updates over the "antisemitic attacks" on Israeli supporters of the Tel Aviv Maccabi soccer team "with horror," and said the violence had been "completely unacceptable," while Israel's foreign minister, Gideon Saar, said on social media he plans to travel to the Netherlands urgently for an "unplanned visit.""

According to the guardian: "Amsterdam police have made more than 60 arrests after what authorities called “hateful antisemitic violence” against Israeli football fans."

They all quote authorities and country leaders while not proving or giving evidence the attack is because of antisemitism. In conclusion there isn't definitive or concrete evidence that the motives is because of antisemitism, at best it should be changed into "antisemitism (alleged)" Dauzlee (talk) 00:31, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

If national leaders, local authorities, and reliable news sources generally referring to or treating the attacks as antisemitic isn’t enough to list antisemitism as a motivation, what do you suggest is? The Kip 03:27, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Not hearsay. Kire1975 (talk) 09:13, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

The US president also confirmed the "40 beheaded babies" hoax. Politicians aren't journalists or academics. --ΝΗΜΙΝΥΛΙ 19:07, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Schooff is Islamaphobic. Kire1975 (talk) 07:10, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Edit request : Add Mossad agents under the infobox

Since sources and confirm that Mossad agents accompanied Maccabi fans during the November 2024 Amsterdam attacks, adding this detail to the infobox would improve clarity and comprehensiveness. Their presence is a significant part of the event’s context, highlighting the level of security involved. Including this information aligns with Misplaced Pages’s principle of providing a complete, unbiased account, as it captures all notable aspects that shaped the security and perception of the incident.

As this fact is already established in the article’s body with reliable sources, this addition would not be controversial. Imteghren (talk) 23:26, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Is there any sourcing to say they participated in the clashes themselves? Bitspectator ⛩️ 23:30, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

While Mossad agents did not engage directly in the clashes, they were present to support the security of Maccabi fans, adding an elevated security dimension to the events preceding, during and after the attack. Their presence underscores significant preparatory measures and security protocols important to understanding the incident's scope.

Including this detail in the infobox provides context on the level of coordination involved, which would benefit readers’ comprehension of the events. Noting Mossad’s role as 'supporting presence' (e.g., Mossad (supporting role) ) improves clarity and aligns with sources , , as well as the quoted statements below.

Quotes from the following sources:

Subsequently, the Mossad sent a message to Dutch authorities requesting that they bolster security in the vicinity of the stadium where the Maccabi Tel Aviv match was taking place. However, the NSC was not briefed on this step, the official says.

On Tuesday, Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf reported that, in addition to Maccabi’s regular security personnel, Mossad agents will join the team in Amsterdam to provide maximum protection.

"I have instructed the head of the Mossad (David Barnea) and other officials to prepare our courses of action, our alert system and our organisation for a new situation," Netanyahu said in a video statement during a meeting at the foreign ministry to oversee the evacuation of Israelis from Amsterdam.

https://www.barrons.com/news/israel-pm-orders-mossad-to-prepare-plan-to-prevent-unrest-at-sporting-events-a975aea3

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/security-official-indicates-a-lack-of-coordination-between-mossad-nsc-on-threats-to-israelis-in-lead-up-to-amsterdam-attacks/

https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/sports/article-827683 Imteghren (talk) 00:01, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 November 2024 (2)

This edit request to November 2024 Amsterdam attacks has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The attack wasn't anti semitc, as the target were Isralies and not jews specifically. It should be labeled as anti Israeli sentiment or anti zionism Nils2088 (talk) 23:30, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Those news article also didn't prove the attacks is because of antisemitism, they just reporting on what those politicians says. To me, those "attacks" are rather a reaction against racist and bigoted football fans, macabi football fans were known for their racism even according to Israeli media. Dauzlee (talk) 00:02, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

The sources clearly say "antisemitism". Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 00:10, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Can you read the article first? It quote the words of politicians not actually saying those attack is because of antisemitism. There isn't concrete evidence it was antisemitic other than politicians claims. They just jump into the conclusion the attack was "antisemitic". Dauzlee (talk) 00:19, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

 Already done; the word "antisemitic" is currently only mentioned in quotes in the article. ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 15:36, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Antisemistism > Anti-Arab???_Anti-Arab???-20241109003600">

I know this article is fresh and new and most of the 'reliable' sources are claiming these attacks to be 'anti-semitic', but I just feel like the language used in the article is bias towards the Maccabi supporters. They had clearly provoked and instigated the Arabs in Amsterdam, but I feel that it is just blipped over. Let's not forget those, there are two sides to this story, and one is being taking more seriously. Fishthatflies (talk) 00:36, 9 November 2024 (UTC)_Anti-Arab???"> _Anti-Arab???">

What do you want changed specifically, and why? Bitspectator ⛩️ 01:09, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

@Fishthatflies I’ll repeat what I commented above:

Two things can be true at once here:

• We should cover the Maccabi supporters' behavior prior to the match. That objectively shouldn't be whitewashed (as some have already tried), as it almost certainly raised tensions in Amsterdam prior to the attacks and provides some degree of context.
• We shouldn't artificially create a WP:FALSEBALANCE in framing the behavior and attacks as one and the same. There's objectively a gap between football fans being bigoted assholes and angry mobs physically assaulting said fans - to claim that the former justified the latter would be equivalent to (wrongly) claiming the pro-Israel mob that attacked students at the UCLA encampment a few months back was justified because the encampment used inflammatory rhetoric, or that said rhetoric is just as bad as assault.

A large majority of RSes are effectively doing what I've described above - they note the Israeli behavior, but still frame it as an attack on Israelis because large-scale physical violence is logically a step up from inflammatory bigotry.

Also, but I just feel like the language used in the article is bias

Then find reliable sources to counter that supposed bias. We follow, not lead - if most RSes say it’s antisemitic, we do too. It’d be WP:OR to do otherwise. The Kip 01:14, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Regarding your point about WP:FALSEBALANCE: It is a well-attested fact that the first assault was conducted by Maccabi hooligans against a local cab driver. I agree with you in principle, but the facts are not as you portray them. Carlhakon (talk) 11:35, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Reports of being pre-planned in the lead

@Andrevan I'm not sure "Some reports indicated the attacks on Israelis were pre-planned" is due in the lead, at least not until we have more reports on the matter then De Telegraaf & the Jerusalem Post repeating De Telegraaf.

We should also try to avoid MOS:WEASEL with phrases like "some reports" - If it's to be said at all, it should be explicitly attributed to De Telegraaf. Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 00:53, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm fine with explicit attribution, but if you want to remove those reports I think that would imbalance the lead and we should also remove the Ch4 tweets about flag-burning from the lead. They're just as valid Andre🚐 00:55, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

The Ch4 tweet supplies a video where a member of the Amsterdam police describes the incident followed by Maccabi fans around a fire. We could change the flag burning to flags being torn down as there are plenty of reliable reports on that with accompanied videos, but that's in no way the same as a single report of potential pre-planning of the incident. Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 01:06, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Torn down would be better Andre🚐 01:08, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

I would leave it out from the lead altogether for now. De Telegraaf is not very clear on when it was announced. A day in advance, or a week? That's unclear. It only says "well in advance", so people could join from all of the Netherlands. But The Netherlands isn't big. For the "story" it is relevant it was announced before or after Wednesday night, and we don't know that. Dajasj (talk) 08:40, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

I don't agree. According to the report in the UK Telegraph, attacks on the Jewish football fans were planned in advance and co-ordinated using WhatsApp and Telegram. The Telegraph has seen messages from a group chat called Buurthuis, a Dutch word for a type of community centre, which were posted on Wednesday, the day before the match. One message says: “Tomorrow after the game, at night, part 2 of the Jew Hunt. Andre🚐 09:03, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

I just an article by RTL Nieuws by a tech journalist focused on the spread of calls on Telegram and Snapchat. He has messages from Thursday.

But regardless, if you say "well in advance", I would think it was before Wednesday. Dajasj (talk) 09:12, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

There is so much unknown. We only know there were calls online, but we do not known which calls have been followed up. So it is not possible to call people planners. Dajasj (talk) 10:12, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

If reliable sources say that they were planning and coordinating in advance, I'd say that'd be reason enough to call them planners. Andre🚐 10:15, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

But that's my point, I don't see them doing that. They say it was "planned" in advance, and show messages. But nowhere do they say they are planners or that people in that group did the attacks. It is not unlikely, and the messages are appaling, but I'm trying to avoid claims that are not clear yet. Dajasj (talk) 10:28, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

And now I am a bit confused why increased police presence on Wednesday is relevant for the section on Thursday? Should that not be discussed in the previous section? Dajasj (talk) 10:30, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Why isn't that relevant in the context of the planning that happened on Wednesday and the stuff that happened on Wednesday? I don't know about this split, anyway, Background and Attacks. Sounds like there were attacks happening in the background section. Maybe we should split it up differently. Andre🚐 10:34, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Well chronologically we first discuss the Wednesday events, then the planning after the first incidents and then the Thursday events. But why would you say the police presence was increased for Wednesday evening while chronologically the article is after Wednesday evening? Dajasj (talk) 10:39, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

The article seems to imply at the end of the "background" section which I just combined that things were calm, but it seems like there was a continued escalation. I think it's also misleading because the article implies the attacks weren't premeditated, but if that's the case how did Mossad and the police both warn and increase their protection? Not to mention we know that they were planning to come prepared with fireworks on Wednesday, the night before the game. Why are you so uncertain that this counts as premeditation? Andre🚐 10:42, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Mossad and police warned because there are general tensions around Gaza and Israel in the Netherlands, afaik. I am not saying they are not premeditated, I included the article from RTL Nieuws which included specific information about the calls for action. But it's relevant that the calls were after the casino incident, flag burning and taxi driver incidents, afaik. So yeah, it appears to be an escalation, with calls to action. But that is - I believe - different from planning. Dajasj (talk) 10:48, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

It says here that Mossad warned of a potential threat to Israelis and Jews. Not general tensions. They were requesting an immediate and significant increase in security for Israelis near the soccer stadium Andre🚐 10:50, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

The attcks were pre-planned as has be reported in the Jerusalem Post, WSJ and De Telegraaf. The way the lede is currently laid out is an insult to wikipedia - lets put upfront everything the fans did to justify the attacks and then as an afterthought mention that the attacks were planned in advance. This isn't to say the Israeli fans were well behaved and didn't say inflamatory stuff but seriously.... MaskedSinger (talk) 19:20, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

At the time, Jerusalem Post didn't independently report that attacks were pre-planned, but were just quoting De Telegraaf here.

Please assume good faith here as this is a current event where available information is rapidly changing, people are trying to handle volatile reporting. The details on what was/wasn't pre-planned are still being looked into by news orgs, but the Jerusalem Post's warnings from the Mossad might be referring to something different to what De Telegraaf is reporting. The Mossad's warnings seems to have been both a general warning over security, but also that they "received a single report regarding a targeted threat against an Israeli citizen, a former Border Police soldier."

With regards to WSJ articles however, I can't read them, so I can't say anything on them. If you have more details, please share what you can find. Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 20:00, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Could we please clarify in the introduction that "in advance" means one day? See the text in the article itself. The introduction does not match that given its focus on one source which is vague about it. Dajasj (talk) 22:26, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

@Butterscotch Beluga Copy/pasted straight from the article:

Messages circulating on the Telegram platform appeared to have been used to encourage and coordinate attacks, police said.

Telegram said that it closed down a group chat that might have been linked to the incidents in Amsterdam and that Telegram is prepared to cooperate with Dutch authorities. “Calls to violence are not tolerated on the Telegram platform,” Telegram Chief Operating Officer Mike Ravdonikas said.

One video verified by Storyful showed people taking down a Palestinian flag as a crowd cheered and chanted “F— you Palestine.”

Police said that on Wednesday night there had been minor scuffles in the city center involving supporters of the Maccabi, Fenerbahce and Ajax soccer teams. They said Maccabi supporters at one point on Wednesday removed a Palestinian flag from a facade and vandalized a taxi. A Palestinian flag was set on fire in another location, they said.

Authorities said taxi drivers appeared to be involved in planning to confront Maccabi supporters. They said taxi drivers had driven on Wednesday night to a casino where Maccabi supporters were gathered. Police said they evacuated the supporters and avoided a major confrontation at the casino despite minor scuffles.

There were clashes on Thursday afternoon between Maccabi supporters and other people, police said, which involved fights on both sides and heavy fireworks. At that point, police said they were generally able to keep the large groups separated.

They said problems arose late at night, after the game had ended, when people began attacking Maccabi supporters in different parts of the city. Police gathered a large group of Maccabi supporters to protect them and moved them to hotels by bus, they said. MaskedSinger (talk) 11:29, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Missing statement from the State of Palestine

Ref: https://x.com/Palestine_UN/status/1854908908881477785 Abvayad (talk) 03:18, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

@Abvayad: It would be best if you could find a secondary source reporting on it. While WP:PRIMARY sources regarding this can be also reliable, secondary sources are preferred. GrabUp - Talk 03:32, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

@GrabUp Secondary sources

- https://www.trtworld.com/middle-east/hamas-israeli-crimes-in-gaza-led-to-amsterdam-unrest-18230058

- https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/11/8/israeli-football-fans-clash-with-protesters-in-amsterdam Abvayad (talk) 03:38, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

- https://nltimes.nl/2024/11/08/palestinians-blame-amsterdam-attacks-maccabi-fans-despite-telegram-calls-violence Abvayad (talk) 03:42, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

@Abvayad:  Done, Thanks GrabUp - Talk 03:44, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Missing the statement from Palestine Football association

Ref: https://x.com/PSFA28/status/1854981506256846889 Abvayad (talk) 03:29, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Edit Request: non-Jewish sources calling it Pogrom

"Jewish news reports have described this incident as a pogrom." Should become "Jewish news reports, major Dutch newspapers and Dutch politicians described these events as a pogrom."

Jewish sources are not the only ones calling it a pogrom, so do titles of Dutch news articles. I think "events" is far more neutral than "incident", which expresses an opinion that this is (wiktionary) "A (relatively minor) event that is incidental to, or related to others.", (Merriam-Webster) "an accompanying minor occurrence or condition".

References:

https://www.msn.com/nl-nl/entertainment/nieuws/halsema-heeft-het-over-pogrom-hele-krachtige-term/ar-AA1tKFM6 whose title translates to "Halsema talks about 'pogrom': 'Very powerful term'". Halsema is the mayor of Amsterdam.

https://www.dagelijksestandaard.nl/midden-oosten/pogrom-in-amsterdam-krijgt-diplomatiek-staartje-inlichtingendienst-nederland-faalt-israel-reageert-woedend whose title translates to "Pogrom in Amsterdam gets diplomatic tail: Intelligence Netherlands fails, Israel reacts furiously"

https://www.dagelijksestandaard.nl/politiek/bizarre-eerste-reactie-uit-het-amsterdamse-stadhuis-op-pogrom-in-amsterdam-scooterjongeren-terroriseerden-joodse-supporters whose title translates to "Bizarre first reaction from City Hall to pogrom in Amsterdam: 'Scooter youth' terrorized Jewish supporters"

https://www.dagelijksestandaard.nl/binnenland/knettergekke-beelden-van-pogrom-in-amsterdam-hamas-moslims-checken-id-bewijzen-in-amsterdam-ben-je-israelier whose title translates to "BREAKING IMAGES of pogrom in Amsterdam: Hamas Muslims check ID cards in Amsterdam: “Are you Israeli?!”"

https://www.dagelijksestandaard.nl/politiek/thierry-baudet-veroordeelt-pogrom-in-amsterdam-en-wijst-oorzaak-aan-dit-is-wat-massa-immigratie-ons-brengt whose title translates to "Thierry Baudet condemns pogrom in Amsterdam and points out cause: 'This is what mass immigration brings us'"

https://www.telegraaf.nl/watuzegt/958801344/amsterdam-is-synoniem-geworden-voor-de-eerste-europese-pogrom-na-7-oktober whose title translates to "Amsterdam became synonymous with the first European pogrom after Oct. 7"

https://www.telegraaf.nl/watuzegt/919786574/pogrom-op-7-oktober-was-gewelddadig-symptoom-van-collectieve-psychose-miljoenen-moslims whose title translates to "Pogrom on Oct. 7 was violent symptom of collective psychosis millions of Muslims"

https://www.powned.tv/article/israelische-media-furieus-na-pogrom-in-amsterdam-overgeleverd-aan-antisemitische-arabieren~2441/ whose title translates to "Israeli media furious after pogrom in Amsterdam: 'At the mercy of anti-Semitic Arabs'"

Lionel Elie Mamane (talk) 05:53, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

None of these are perennial sources. — hako9 (talk) 11:44, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

They are not listed as perennial sources for English Misplaced Pages? Obviously, they are not in English. The curated list is mostly for English-language sources. My edit request is to say local-to-the-Netherlands sources call it a program... and that happens in the local language (Dutch), not English.

English Misplaced Pages says of De Telegraaf: "De Telegraaf is the largest Dutch daily morning newspaper." So what two of the references I gave say is that "The largest Dutch daily morning newspaper calls it a pogrom in its headlines / article titles".

The Dagelijkse Standaard doesn't have its own English Misplaced Pages article but is used as source all over it, just look at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?search=Dagelijkse+Standaard&title=Special%3ASearch&ns0=1

PowNed is a Dutch public broadcaster; again my edit does not say "it is a pogrom as shown by these sources", but "a sizeable part (but not the totality nor the consensus) of the public discourse in the country where it happens calls it that", and a public broadcaster titling on it is evidence of that.

The MSN link contains an article by RTL Boulevard, again a rather famous-in-the-Netherlands, and long-running, source from one of the main Dutch media sources, the TV channel RTL4 which English Misplaced Pages qualifies as "the most-watched commercial station in the country". However, it is not used as source of their own editorialising, but as source of a quote of the mayor of Amsterdam. At the Dutch level, they seem to be a pretty notable and reputable source. I see no reason to think they would have grossly misquoted the mayor.

Lionel Elie Mamane (talk) 20:50, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

WP:HEADLINES are not reliable sources. The mayor's statement is already in the article, Dagelijkse Standaard has been described by NRC, a newspaper of record, as the Dutch Breitbart, & the linked articles from De Telegraaf are both opinion articles.

As for PowNed, I can't find much on it in general, but it doesn't seem like much of a reputable source, they look to be very entertainment based. Again though, I can't really find if anyone holds them in high regards. Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 21:40, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Missing media reported links between Maccabi and the IDF

If you are going to allow comments that allege that the attacks were preplanned, it seems that you should also include reference to the fact that at least one media outlet has suggested a link between Maccabi and the IDF.

Here's one article in the Helsinki Times

https://www.helsinkitimes.fi/world-int/25763-israeli-hooligans-racist-chants-and-provocation-in-amsterdam-spark-international-outrage.html

Notso Stupid (talk) 06:02, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure about the source's reliability, and they say "reportedly" without elaborating on what led them to the statement... seems like probably just speculation based on the fact that most Israelis serve in the IDF? — xDanielx /_C\ 07:17, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

I agree that the source is unreliable and the claim unattributed but it's about balance. Where's the support for the claim that Maccabi fans preplanned the attacks? Even the word 'indicated' used on this page creates a bias because the cited article using the word 'alleged.' Notso Stupid (talk) 07:36, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

@Notso Stupid I agree that the source is unreliable and the claim unattributed but it's about balance.

Consider WP:FALSEBALANCE.

As I've said earlier on this page, Misplaced Pages follows; it doesn't lead. If you're concerned the article is biased, find reliable sources to counter that bias. Openly admitting that a source is unreliable and a claim murky, but then saying it should be added anyways for "balance," is not the way to go about things here. The Kip 09:08, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Missing references to Maccabi fans behaviour on returning to Israel

The times of Israel ran an article, which included more video of Maccabi fans chanting anti-Arab slogans at Ben Grunion similar to the ones that allegedly triggered the attacks. This is important to establish that the chants were a consistent theme, the fans are unrepentant about the behaviour, and that a group of them were clearly were not acting like the victims of antisemitism, but instead were acting like hooligans on an away trip to cause damage.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/maccabi-fans-filmed-chanting-racist-slogans-against-arabs-upon-arrival-at-ben-gurion-from-amsterdam/ Notso Stupid (talk) 06:18, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

We shouldn't use a live WP:NEWSBLOG for this. — xDanielx /_C\ 07:12, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Missing reference to Maccabi fans prior history of this type of behaviour

The Middle East Eye ran an article on this incident. Within the article is this observation:

These fans are an expression of a culture that is not just prevalent among a handful of racists; rather, it has become routine in stadiums, with chants of "death to Arabs" or "may your village burn" often heard in Israel long before 7 October 2023.

The behaviour of the Israeli fans in Amsterdam was thus nothing new. A recent report by the New Israel Fund found a significant increase in expressions of violence in football stadiums in the 2023/24 season, with incidents rising by 18 percent - a significant increase over the previous year, which had already seen violence and racism reach a decade-high peak.

Here is a link to the original article. It contains a link to the New Israel Fund report in Hebrew.

https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/israel-football-hooligans-bring-culture-genocide-amsterdam Notso Stupid (talk) 06:27, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

@Notso Stupid MEE has this piece marked as an opinion column - going by WP:NEWSOPED/WP:RSOPINION, it could be used for an attributed statement by the author, but unless evidence is provided that he's an especially notable subject-matter expert, it's highly discouraged to be used for statements of fact in Wikivoice. The NIF report could maybe be used, but it's similarly a primary source, and we'd also need someone here who can read Hebrew. The Kip 09:18, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Here's an English article by the NIF

https://www.nif.org/stories/human-rights-democracy/reporting-racist-incidents-in-israeli-soccer/

Here's a link to Al Jazeera

https://www.aljazeera.com/videos/2007/6/24/fighting-racism-in-israeli-football

Here's another by NIF

https://www.nif.org/stories/shared-society-combating-racism/reporting-on-racism-in-soccer/

Plus there are numerous other articles about fans targeting Muslim players, the controversy surrounding Beitar FC. etc.

. Notso Stupid (talk) 09:42, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Include attacks against Maccabi fans on Wednesday

I don’t have the permission, but can someone please include the following in the article:

“On Wednesday night, November 6th, an Israeli man ended up in an Amsterdam canal, with someone on the quayside shouting the Dutch antisemitic slur “kankerjood” (literally “cancer Jew”) to the man in the water.” Source: https://www.at5.nl/artikelen/229412/spanningen-in-de-stad-afgelopen-nacht-palestijnse-vlag-van-gevel-gehaald-en-man-in-de-gracht WikipediaNummer1 (talk) 09:19, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Doing it Dajasj (talk) 09:24, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! I have added an additional sentence, with one more source:

On Wednesday night, November 6th, an Israeli man ended up in an Amsterdam canal, with someone on the quayside shouting the Dutch antisemitic slur “kankerjood” (literally “cancer Jew”) to the man in the water. The man in the water was also forced to shout ‘Free Palestine’.” Second source: https://www.volkskrant.nl/binnenland/hoe-de-oorlog-in-het-midden-oosten-amsterdam-in-geweld-onderdompelde~b7d4494b WikipediaNummer1 (talk) 09:32, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Looks good, thanks again. For completeness, the uncensored version of the video as published by AT5 can be found here https://x.com/NasreRotterdam/status/1854477194090713122 WikipediaNummer1 (talk) 09:45, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Images circulating, videos showing

Why do we emphasize that images or video show something, when reliable sources confirm something took place? It makes reading the article unnecessarily hard and more like a collection of social media posts? But maybe I am not aware of a rule, so please let me know. Dajasj (talk) 10:10, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Many of the sources simply say that images showed something or that something was on a video circulating but they make clear that it is not known when exactly it took place. If reliable sources qualify things by attributing them to the images, videos, or police, or a person, we should do the same with the same level of caution and qualification. Andre🚐 10:33, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Videos of Maccabi fans running around carrying wooden planks and metal bars

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ySHIOYyJ95A I think some reference to this news report may be useful. It shows Maccabi fans in groups of 20-30 running around carrying makeshift weapons. It does seem like the Maccabi fans came out much worse off than those they fought with; however, my perception of this video is that Maccabi fans actually instigated the attacks. Would rather not call into question all the good work done here in putting together this article, but I get the impression that the narrative in the article is very biased in favour of the Maccabi fans. TagPro129 (talk) 11:34, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

We want to avoid original research on primary source clips like that, WP:OR Dazzling4 (talk) 15:43, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

So the fact that this video clearly shows Maccabi Tel Aviv fans picking up metal pipes and wooden planks in order to attack people isn’t noteworthy and shouldn’t be included in the article? That’s the main point I’m making. Whether or not they instigated the attacks or not is up for debate, but the very least you can do is publish the facts.

TagPro129 (talk) 21:26, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Chronology

Hi @טבעת-זרם, you added the coordination by taxi drivers. However you added it before the Wednesday events, while it appears the coordination started after the events (as discussed in later paragraphs). So it is duplicate and suggests it started earlier than it did, afaik. Dajasj (talk) 11:37, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Edit request

In background, please change "attack by Palestinian terrorists" to "attack by Palestinian militants" per MOS:TERRORIST — 🧀Cheesedealer 14:29, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

misrepresentation of telegram messages

"calls for attacks on Jewish supporters thoughout the day were shared in Snapchat and Telegram groups."

The referenced article and its screenshots contain no mention of attacks on Jews, but of Israelis and Zionists. They may also be Jewish, but the wording here makes it sound like they were being targeted for their religion and not because of war, politics and the events of the previous evening. Lorenai (talk) 17:02, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Fixed it.--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 17:52, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

But the source specifically says "Jews." Andre🚐 18:29, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

I think they refer to the RTL source, so other wording is relevant. Not all Telegram/Whatsapp/Snapchat groups use the same words obviously. Perhaps use "Maccabi supporters"? Dajasj (talk) 19:21, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

There are multiple reliable sources showing that they were asking people if they were Jewish and referring to Jews Andre🚐 19:23, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, but this question is about the messages. The RTL sources uses other words like Lorenai said. Dajasj (talk) 19:29, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

The messages include the phrase "Jew Hunt" Andre🚐 19:33, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

In one Telegram group, while the RTL article cites groups that use Israelis and Zionists. Dajasj (talk) 19:36, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Although I see that I wrote the sentence, including "Jewish supporters". But that was not in the source. Dajasj (talk) 19:38, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

It's in the Telegraph source. Andre🚐 19:43, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Statement by Amsterdam City Councillor Jazie Veldhuyzen

Large amount of info here that needs to be included: https://youtube.com/watch?v=jnFNkZB-RE0&si=_p7TOQvheke14M00 Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 17:33, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

How is the Spanish flood relevant ?

It looks like you’re trying to demonize the Israelis with something that had no relation to the attack. Spanish people didn’t attack them Kingoflevant (talk) 18:41, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

What happened is that during a match, a moment of silence was called for the victims of the floods in Spain, however Maccabi Tel Aviv fans refused to honor it (likely because Spain had recently recognized the State of Palestine as a sovereign country) and began chanting "In Gaza there are no schools, because we killed all the kids". This moment of intense disrespect was filmed, such as the football fans chanting "death to arabs" and "let the IDF win, fuck the arabs", and you can watch it for yourself. I don't insinuate that you inherently agree with them, but you should try and be a bit more nuanced in regards to what happened, especially with western media consistently bending over backwards for Israel's government and atrocities. GabMen20 (talk) 21:59, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

@GabMen20, is there any claim in any source that not observing the minute of the silence motivated, inspired, contributed to or was cited in any way by the attackers? I'm all for nuance, but the question is: is it relevant?

The question is not whether Maccabi fans should have observed the minute of silence, or whether it was rude or disrespectful for them not to do so. The question is: does any reliable source make a factual claim about a link between the minute of silence for floods in Valencia and the targeting of Israelis on the streets of Amsterdam the same night. I have not seen such a claim, but feel free to provide it. Samuelshraga (talk) 08:41, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Dutch newspaper NRC says the stadium was mostly quiet, except for a small part of the Israeli supporters area. Seems like we might be making it too big here Dajasj (talk) 09:08, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

@MaeseLeon, is it really that relevant to include it in the lede? It looks like a minor thing in the broader context. Dajasj (talk) 11:42, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

@Dajasj Of course it is. It shows how those hooligans were intent on attacking and insulting everything and everyone, including the memory of 200+ dead Europeans. Go imagine if someone had done something similar regarding Yad Vashem, it'd at the top of the lead and of every media outlet in the world. It also help explains why they might be badly received in Spain in the future too. MaeseLeon (talk) 11:50, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

As far as I have read, most violence seems to be related to Israel-Palestine, not too Spanish people. It seems unlikely that this has provoked violence (I have seen little sources either way). We shouldn't need to include everything wrong the supporters have done, in particular in the introduction. Dajasj (talk) 11:55, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

SkyNews reliability

SkyNews re-edited a story about this because it "didn’t meet Sky News’ standards for balance and impartiality." Kire1975 (talk) 18:47, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Good call-out. Let's make sure the citations in the article are accurate Andre🚐 18:51, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

It appears that they actually deleted commentary from the original reporting in order to reduce mention of Maccabi fans' violence, in fact. --ΝΗΜΙΝΥΛΙ 19:13, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

The article's title is partial and misleading

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Ignoring the partial wording throughout the entire article, the title stands out like a sore thumb. This article is already extremely partial by dealing with a football Hooligan clash and treating it as a racist antissemitic attack, but the title specifically misleads the reader. It is worded in a style identical to that of the November 2015 Paris attacks, a series of terror attacks that left 138 dead. A Hooligan fight should not be treated the same as a terror attack because it is not the same as a terror attack. It was also not a "riot" as the infobox suggests. I believe the article should be renamed to indicate that the event wasn't a one sided attack but rather a clash, a fight involving the two sides, where both sides fought and not just one side attacked.

This is of course ignoring that the very existence of this article is dubious, as it is the first time I've seen an article dedicated to a specific fight between groups of supporters. If any of these football-related fights that gets media repercussion should have an article, then perhaps there should be an article dedicated to the fights between Peñarol and Botafogo supporters in Rio de Janeiro that resulted in a serious dispute between the government of Rio de Janeiro, CONMEBOL, CBF and AUF and in the arrest of 21 people . My point being that we shouldn't create articles everytime supporters fight and everytime there is repercussion to those fights. Eduluzsci (talk) 19:47, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

 Not done reliable sources refer to the attacks as antisemitic attacks. Andre🚐 19:51, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

How about this primary source that shows Maccabi fans running around with metal poles and wooden planks? https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ySHIOYyJ95A

Primary source overrules secondary sources, surely?

TagPro129 (talk) 21:34, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Actually the opposite. Andre🚐 21:36, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

What? You can see it with your own eyes in the video. How could a journalist sitting at his computer 100 miles away constitute a better source than a journalist filming the action for the entire world to see?

TagPro129 (talk) 21:41, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is based on WP:SECONDARY sources, not original research. Andre🚐 21:45, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi. Why exactly can a news report not be used as a source? I’m confused. Could you explain the issue with the source please?

TagPro129 (talk) 22:20, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

I was referring to your statement about what can be seen in the video. There isn't anything actionable about your edit request that I can tell. Andre🚐 22:28, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

@Andrevan A primary source is not original research. A video tells the story better than State-owned media. Eduluzsci (talk) 23:32, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

@Andrevan Cite reliable sources that said thus without any relevant bias Eduluzsci (talk) 23:31, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

@Andrevan The nature of whether it was motivated by antissemitism or not isn't specified by media, but by the belligerents. This response also ignores that the events weren't attacks but rather confrontations -- as another user showed a video depicting the Maccabi Tel Aviv fans also engaging in confrontation -- and as such should be classified as clashes, fights, or confrontations, but not as attacks. As I've shown, the classification as "attacks" is factually incorrect and misleading. Eduluzsci (talk) 23:40, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 9 November 2024

It has been proposed in this section that November 2024 Amsterdam riots be renamed and moved to 2024 Amsterdam football riot. A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil. Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly. Links: current log • target log • direct move

November 2024 Amsterdam attacks → 2024 Amsterdam football riot – There is no single WP:COMMONNAME, so we must rely on WP:NDESC. "Riot" is most WP:CONSISTENT with most articles at Category:Association football hooliganism (1999 Rotterdam riots, 2008 UEFA Cup final riots, Querétaro–Atlas riot etc). "Riot" also more inclusively captures property damage and other acts of hooliganism that took place, which can't be described as "attacks". The word "football" or "soccer" in the title is necessary as that is the most recognizable aspect of this event. All the clashes centered around the football fans. "November" is unnecessarily WP:OVERPRECISE. VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 21:33, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Support - I agree that riot is a better description as it more closely encompasses the individual aspects of this page, including vandalism, threats, & harassment. I also agree that WP:CONSISTENT should apply here. Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 21:50, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME, the most common reference is attacks not a riot. Andre🚐 21:56, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Per WP:COMMONNAME, there is "no single, obvious name that is demonstrably the most frequently used for the topic by these sources". Certainly not "November 2024 Amsterdam attacks".VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 22:09, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Almost all sources refer to it as "Amsterdam attacks." Andre🚐 22:12, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Weak support - I think "football riots" might be misleading, because it was not really related to the football itself. I mostly focus on Dutch media coverage: "Riots" ("rellen") appears to be pretty common "Attacks" ("aanvallen") not so much as far as I can find, although obviously more specific incidents are described as attacks. Many sources generally refer to it as "Violence" ("Geweld"), which could also be an option. But based on Dutch sources, I would go for "riots" here. November might be needed in the title however, because I remember other incidents of violence earlier this year (although far less than this). Dajasj (talk) 22:21, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

@Dajasj Thanks for providing those sources. As for disambiguating by November, do those other events already have an article on wikipedia, or have a reasonable chance of having an article? If not, then we don't need to disambiguate.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 23:19, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Probably not, that'a true Dajasj (talk) 06:30, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Oppose - I think "attacks" is indeed the WP:COMMONNAME per Andre. But also, "riot" doesn't really capture the attacks conducted by several small groups, spread across the area, acting in coordination. — xDanielx /_C\ 00:18, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Oppose. The attacks were primarily performed by pro-Palestinian protestors, not football fans. Both Ajax and Maccabi are primarily associated with Judaism, and the attacks were performed on Israelis because they were Israelis, not because of the football club they chose to support. If we're going by WP:NDESC, the definition of football hooliganism says it constitutes violence and other destructive behaviors perpetrated by spectators at association football events. Making the title consistent with other examples of football hooliganism falsely implies that it was primarily Maccabi fans rioting after the football game.

It's difficult to comment on what WP:COMMONNAME is because nobody has provided English-language sources. However, Google Trends indicates that "attack" is consistently more common than "riot". Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 00:42, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

• Strong oppose football riot would imply this was football-related violence which it certainly was not, it was ethno-political violence that happened to involve one set of particular fans. Abcmaxx (talk) 00:46, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Support per WP:COMMONNAME and for greater accuracy as 'riots' seems more fitting and encompassing.
Edit: to clarify, I support the use of 'riot', or alternatively 'clashes', but am neutral to the inclusion/exclusion of 'football' Mason7512 (talk) 01:10, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Is it the COMMONNAME? Bitspectator ⛩️ 01:45, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I think so, although it is hard to precisely and objectively measure. Here is a global Google search term comparison which seems to show 'riot' is used more: Mason7512 (talk) 02:07, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

That's not the correct spelling though. Check the above comment by Chess. Bitspectator ⛩️ 02:11, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Looking at it, the stand alone Amsterdam is misspelled (my apologies), but the two relevant search terms are spelled correctly, are they not? Mason7512 (talk) 02:15, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, you're right. Bitspectator ⛩️ 02:20, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

The comparison by Chess () is not plural. so i made a 4-way comparsion () and it shows that 'riots' is slightly more popular than 'attack'. Mason7512 (talk) 02:18, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

That clearly shows that attack is more widely used in English-speaking countries. This also doesn't include only reliable sources. That is a graph of search term interest, and not usage in sources.Andre🚐 02:40, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

On the contrary, it clearly shows that riots is more widely used. M.Bitton (talk) 13:18, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

"Race riots" might be the best term as it explains why the riot occurred. Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 04:50, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

• Support replacing "attacks" with "riots" as that is the Common name (as demonstrated by Mason7512). The comparison is even clearer when quotes are used and all terms are compared (see 1 and 2). M.Bitton (talk) 02:44, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

  We shouldn't look at the plurals-only version; why exclude "Amsterdam attack" which is more prevalent than "Amsterdam riot"? I'm also not sure we should use phrase searches (quotes), excluding a variety of minor variations, such as "Attack in Amsterdam" which is more prevalent than "Riot in Amsterdam".

  Moreover, Google Trends is at best a rough proxy for prevalence in secondary coverage, which is what ultimately determines WP:COMMONNAMEs. Here I think it's best to look at secondary coverage directly. Even if we specifically search for articles containing "Amsterdam riot", most such articles still use "attack" more than "riot". — xDanielx /_C\ 16:29, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

• We should also consider not having a WP:POVNAME. "Amsterdam attacks" implies one side was doing all the attacking, while we do have RS that point out both sides partook in the clashes. Thus something like "riot" or "clashes" is more neutral. Sources say,
  • "police chief Peter Holla told reporters that Maccabi Tel Aviv fans had attacked a taxi driver and burned a Palestinian flag"
  • "Travelling fans verbally abuse locals and tear down Palestine flags before fights break out with Dutch youth" VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 04:20, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

  What about "race riots"? It's a more accurate descriptor than "football riot". Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 04:46, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Support replacing "attacks" with "riot" or "riots", as well as ditching "November" from the title as no disambiguator is needed. Like VR said above, "attack" implies this was a one-sided attack, which it wasn't, and it could also be conflated with a terrorist attack such as Paris 2015. This was much closer to a football riot with political motives than an "attack", and RS support this. Icantthinkofausernames (talk) 06:06, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Is this a support of adding "football riot", or just the word "riot"? Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 06:28, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I support the name change to "riot" over "attack". If an option I would support "clashes" over both as it's more for the reasons that @Vice regent has said, as well as @Dajasj mention of the dutch 'geweld' directly translating to 'violence' which is more emblematic of clashes

"attacks" as a name, while appropriate in some cases, such as the Paris attacks of January 2015, (as mentioned by @Icantthinkofausernames) has a high risk of being pov-related in other cases. Bejakyo (talk) 06:32, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Support 3skandar (talk) 07:11, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

• Support: The term ‘Riots’ is more neutral, as it wasn’t only Maccabi fans who were attacked. While they may have suffered the most damage, it’s important to remember that they also provoked the incident by chanting anti-Arab slogans, attacking an Arab taxi driver, and disrespecting the Palestinian flag. All of this happened before the main attack on the Maccabi fans. Therefore, this was a riot where both sides were harmed, not just an attack on Maccabi fans alone. GrabUp - Talk 07:23, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Oppose The article describes instances of violence, assault and car ramming by pro-Palestinians in general and not football hooliganism. There are clear differences between attacks and hooliganism. 178.81.55.110 (talk) 07:37, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Oppose "Football", Neutral/Oppose on "riots" over "attacks". The idea that football was The word "football" or "soccer" in the title is necessary as that is the most recognizable aspect of this event is ... well, is anyone seriously claiming that what's notable is that the victims were soccer fans, and not that they were Israelis? That their identification as fans of a football team was key, and their nationality incidental? This suggestion is absurd to the point that it shouldn't need to be addressed. I recognise that it would be inconvenient to the preferred narrative of some editors here to highlight the religious identification of the victims (at least in the minds of the attackers, who gave ample evidence that they were targeting the victims as Jews or Israelis interchangeably). Nonetheless, the gaslighting has to stop somewhere, let's draw a line in the sand here at the very least. Samuelshraga (talk) 08:20, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Oppose sport in title but Support changing attacks to riots. PARAKANYAA (talk) 09:14, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Oppose mention of football and of riots; riots has different implications.

Supporting 2024 Amsterdam violence as there was also attacks by the Israeli soccer fans including their vandalizing of a taxi vehicle, which initiated the violence. Makeandtoss (talk) 09:59, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

In my opinion, the name should be 2024 Amsterdam attacks on Israeli soccer fans. More informative and less ambiguous than any other suggestion so far. יוניון ג'ק (talk) 11:02, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

• Strong oppose to that - it wasn't a one-way attack and such a title is entirely misleading...

The physical attacks were one-way. If there were absolutely no attacks on the Israelis - the remaining events were not be notable enough to sustain a wiki article. יוניון ג'ק (talk) 14:57, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

There were physical attacks by the Israelis as well. Bitspectator ⛩️ 15:15, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. GiantSnowman 11:01, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
• Move to something like 2024 Amsterdam riot or 2024 Amsterdam violence. It went beyond football. GiantSnowman 11:04, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
• Strong support. No "attacks", but hooligans doing hooligan stuff and looking for trouble and finding it. Further, it went beyond football when they started vandalizing property and insulting the 200+ victims of the 2024 Valencia floods. "Riots" define it better. MaeseLeon (talk) 11:31, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Strong Oppose - the maccabi fans didn't help themselves by not behaving well, but they are the ones that were attacked. They were attacked for being Israeli/Jewish. MaskedSinger (talk) 11:34, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

• Support renaming into "Violence" or "Riots", but definetly not atatcks Pusf.smbd (talk) 13:02, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose because, like others said, the violence had little to do with football. I do support removing "November" as it's unnecessary disambiguation. Indifferent about "attacks" vs "riots". ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 16:29, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
• Strong Oppose It is like an attempt to wash the crimes with language. מתיאל (talk) 16:47, 10 November 2024 (UTC)מתיאל

Actions by Maccabi football fans need highlighting

I think this article is really lenient in regards to the actions of the Maccabi football fans, who, let's not forget, instigated this violence in the first place.

The problems I have with this article is that, in my opinion, it doesn't focus enough on the vile actions by the israeli soccer fans that kickstarted the street fighting we are seeing currently. It does mention it, of course, but I think the interruption of a moment of silence for the Spanish flood victims with chants of "there's no schools in Gaza, because all the children are dead" with a proud sense (all because Spain recognized the State of Palestine), or the attacking of Dutch people who might look Arab or the tearing down of palestinian flags, as well as chanting "death to arabs" and "let Israel win, fuck the arabs", deserve more initial attention, at least in the header. By the way, all I mentioned earlier was filmed and posted by media organizations, though western outlets are noticeably shying away from the initial incidents that started this. And about the attacks against Israelis and Jews, of course it is horrible and should be displayed on this page, but I think it is being focused on too much relative to the events that kickstarted these riots, and I see them more as a reaction to the initial violence and attacks by the visitors, which managed to bring out the more violent and antisemtic members of society under the pretext of "hey, they attacked us first, we can beat them up", rather than the main event that happened. My proposal is that the page first mention in the header the actions from the Maccabi hooligans, and then the ensuing protests, violence and attacks following it, so as to place them in chronological order and avoid seeming that this page is displaying the reactionary violence as the main takeaway of these riots. GabMen20 (talk) 21:52, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

 Not done not an actionable edit request. Andre🚐 22:29, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Pre-planned

@Stephan rostie: given that the second sentence is about victim-blaming, it seems important to highlight that (at least according to some sources) the attacks were planned in advance anyway, and not move it down. That creates a very non-neutral lede.

Alternatively we could remove both bits of information from the lede, but the current lede is quite short so I don't see a reason not to include both. — xDanielx /_C\ 00:23, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. Half of the first paragraph is devoted to creating a justification for the attack. The current wording is non-neutral and only presents the view that the Israelis provoked it. Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 00:47, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I agree as well. Andre🚐 00:55, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Should be both: . Bitspectator ⛩️ 02:03, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Well, incidents of Maccabi fans causing a ruckus has been widely reported & covered on video. The details regarding pre-planning of attacks however is still being looked into & while obviously there was some coordination, it's still uncertain as to how much the telegram/snapchat coordination influenced events.

How many of the people who attacked Maccabi fans had any involvement with these online groups & how many in those online groups were just talking crap/being terrible?

We don't know, not yet & we shouldn't give a WP:FALSEBALANCE in the lead acting like we do. Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 02:08, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

You could also argue that we don't "know" (?) if the bad behavior by the Israelis led to the attacks. I'm not sure how we would prove this either way to the level that would satisfy you. Bitspectator ⛩️ 02:14, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm saying we should wait as currently, there's a lot more reliable coverage of Maccabi fan's behavior being discussed then online coordination.

This event is already being scrutinized enough that, if this was a significant factor, there'll be more then enough sources to support its inclusion in the lead in little time. Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 02:33, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Was the line that used to be in the lead not sourced? Bitspectator ⛩️ 02:38, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I didn't say it wasn't sourced, in fact, the statement is still in the article with that source. I just think we should get more coverage before we consider it due for the lead. I'm not contending its accuracy, but its current WP:WEIGHT. Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 02:46, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

There is significant coverage of the planning aspect (or of claims thereof), like

• JPost "a pre-planned attack against Jews"
• The Telegraph "what some said were pre-planned attacks"
• ToI says "apparently pre-planned attack" (albeit in a caption)
• CBS, The Times, and others quoting Netanyahu "premeditated antisemitic attack"
• WSJ, BBC, AP, NYT and many more don't say premediated, but arguably imply it by covering Telegram usage

Even if the coverage was minimal, it would still be an NPOV issue. If a statement is disputed (outside of fringe sources), we wouldn't put it in wikivoice, even if the original statement had more coverage. Here we're using wikivoice statements to imply that the attacks were caused by hooliganism, which is disputed. — xDanielx /_C\ 03:40, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I wouldn't say quoting Netanyahu without further analysis counts as meaningful coverage, but only "covering Telegram usage" without mention of planning or collaboration, definitely doesn't.

I haven't seen a single source reporting on this incident who hasn't brought up hooliganism, but by comparison, few have covered the idea of premeditated attacks & even fewer have confidently validated it in their own voice. So no, I don't think these two factors should be given equal weight in the lead as many reliable sources have yet to do so either & until they do, I don't think it's reasonable to compare the two. Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 04:12, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I have moved things around. It now starts with yhe attacks first in the lede, while giving context later. I have included info about being planned.

But please remove De Telegraaf sentence from the article. "Well in advance" could suggest a day, a week a month, which is vague. But De Telegraaf says with well in advancd it meant that everyone could join from all around the Netherlands. Given it is a small country, even a few hours is enough. The two other sources are more specific on this. Dajasj (talk) 06:47, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I think that as an improvement of sorts, but I think it can be both true that there are videos of instigatory actions by the football fans (some articles note they don't know when those videos were from), and that the attacks were somehow premeditated. These two aren't mutually exclusive. Andre🚐 08:30, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm not ruling out they are premeditated (more than 24 hours). The Mossad appears to think so, while the NCTV and Dutch police don't so far. The issue is that the Mossad isn't really precise and neither is De Telegraaf. What we do have however, are both our sources being very specific on when these calls started. So I think we should discuss them instead of the vague "well in advance". To be clear, if more reporting emerges it was planned before Wednesday, we should it include, but I just don't see enough evidence yet. Dajasj (talk) 08:51, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

The reason i moved it down from the lede is because it was a unique argument made by a low quality source which is undue for the lede. this is not argued or even reported the claim by the WP:BESTSOURCES such as the gaurdian, skynews, associated press, NYT, etc.

Accordingly, i don’t think de telegraph report argument belong to the lede. Stephan rostie (talk) 10:45, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Mairav Zonszein

@Vice regent: I removed Mairav Zonszein's quote from the article and you restored it. I don't believe that quote should be in the article at all.

First of all, Mairav Zonszein isn't confirmed to be Jewish by the source. The source says (translated to English): Mairav Zonszein, an analyst at the Crisis Group, an independent NGO, called it "absurd" to compare the violence in Amsterdam to pogroms. While Crisis Group describes her as being Israeli, that's not evidence of her being Jewish.

Second of all, even if Zonszein is Jewish, it's WP:UNDUE to include her quote. The section is for major Jewish groups that purport to speak on behalf of the Jewish community. Zonszein, at best, is just a random journalist that happens to be Jewish. Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 00:27, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I agree. The opinion is not relevant and should be excluded. Andre🚐 00:56, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I don't see why this opinion is not relevant, as it is a member of an important Institution in Israel "Shalom Hartman Institute" which is Jewish research and education institute based in Jerusalem focused on strengthen Jewish peoplehood and identity. She regularly publish in newspapers like New York Times and Washington Post, but also she write in Israeli news papers actually she is co-founder of an Israeli newspaper. She also publishs regularly in the Jewish Magazine Jewish-Currents. In others words, she is a figure in the Jewish culture. AyubuZimbale (talk) 11:38, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Agree. Bitspectator ⛩️ 01:56, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Zonszein is being quoted in a Dutch newspaper of record. She is also someone who is regularly featured in the New York Times as a member of the International Crisis Group. See e.g. , , , . She is a notable Jewish voice, and I think the inclusion is fair enough. Andreas JN466 09:39, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Zonszein is member of Shalom Hartman Institute which aims is "Our mission is to strengthen Jewish peoplehood, identity, and pluralism". Therefore there is no reason remove it. Also she is a senior analyst living in Israel working in International Crisis Group expert in the topic of this article, she also wrote in Hebrew. She is quoted in Dutch news papers (independent source). AyubuZimbale (talk) 11:21, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I note that there is a mention to "The Foward" an American news organization, so I don't see why Mairav Zonszein has no place here. AyubuZimbale (talk) 11:41, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Maccabi fans "attacked Arab and Muslim residents, and vandalized houses and businesses with Palestinian flags"

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Per Common Dreams and Al Jazeera:

“The violence reportedly started when the far-right Israeli soccer hooligans began chanting racist and violent anti-Arab slogans, attacked Arab and Muslim residents, and vandalized houses and businesses with Palestinian flags.”

Al Jazeera's report includes comments by Amsterdam city council member Jazie Veldhuyzen:

“The Israeli fans instigated the violence after arriving in the city and attacking Palestinian supporters before the match, an Amsterdam city council member said.

‘They began attacking houses of people in Amsterdam with Palestinian flags, so that’s actually where the violence started,’ Councilman Jazie Veldhuyzen told Al Jazeera on Friday.

The Common Dreams article (and a growing number of articles from other outlets) alleges that the details of this current event are not being adequately covered in mainstream news sources. However, I would note that even BBC has already begun describing this event as being fueled primarily by the Maccabi fans' violence, and not by antisemitism.

--ΝΗΜΙΝΥΛΙ 00:43, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Should Hamas response be moved under 'Palestine'?

As hamas' political wing is the government of Gaza, and one of the two Palestinian governments, wouldn't their response better fit under Response>Palestine (subsubsectioned into PA and Hamas, possibly) instead of its current location under Response>Muslim groups and figures? This probably depends on the role of the person who said this (militant wing vs. political body), which is hard to tell based on the content and their wiki page. Thoughts? Mason7512 (talk) 01:22, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Maccabi fans "attacked Arab and Muslim residents, and vandalized houses and businesses with Palestinian flags"

why is this discussion locked with no comment or reply at all? Why is discussion of including the violence committed on both sides not permissible? 173.49.61.70 (talk) 04:40, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Due to several influence campaigns operating in the area, editors must have 500 edits and a 30-day old account to participate in the Israel-Palestine subject area. The exception is to submit an edit request clearly explaining what content to change. Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 04:49, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Merge from section on AFC Ajax?

Before seeing this page, I created a section (which now includes contributions from other users) about this event on the page for AFC Ajax, now in § November 2024 attacks. I think this page includes most of the information that is in there, but there are a couple of key things that are different or missing:

• CNN updated the number of arrests from 62 to 63; this page still has the old number
• There are some sources implicating Uber drivers in the attacks (I cited YWN, Washington Free Beacon, Jerusalem Post, and New York Sun; additional related sources I've now found include Israel Hayom, The Times, JFeed, Ynet, and SOFX); this point does not appear to be mentioned here

What would be the best way of dealing with this? I can help out some more as needed, but I have a finite amount of time in the day and other things to do, and I consider myself to be better at finding sources than making use of them, so if someone else is able and willing to help with this, I would appreciate it.

P.S. I came across Ground News's aggregation of sources about this event; would this be a good link to put in an External Links or Further Reading section?

Solomon Ucko (talk) 04:52, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I checked Dutch sources a few hours ago, still 62 according to the public prosecutor.

I would leave out Uber for now. From what I have read, taxi drivers in general were involved. I don't think it is relevant to highlight one (international) company Dajasj (talk) 06:28, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Got it.

I'm leaving the arrest count alone.

I've added the Uber stuff to the "Jewish groups and figures" subsection of the "Response" section, instead of adding it in the "Events" section, since comments about Uber were part of the response, but as you said, they were not uniquely to blame, and I have also added a caveat accordingly.

I've added an "External links" section with Ground News.

Meanwhile, the section I added to the AFC Ajax page has been, justifiably, deleted.

Solomon Ucko (talk) 10:08, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Spanish floods duplicate

The spanish flood silence is mentioned twice now, but different motivations are given. Can't these paragraphs be merged? Or better yet, integrate the entire Motivation in the other parts Dajasj (talk) 06:55, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I have done this, but feel free to revert it and continue discussion. As far as I can see, everything is duplicate Dajasj (talk) 08:41, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

First paragraph is biased and misleading

The first paragraph of this article says that Maccabi fans were targeted in the attacks. While this may be true, it does not even mention the destruction of property and hate speech that the Maccabi fans were engaging in beforehand (as well as violence). Dutch officials have acknowledged this themselves, many saying that the Maccabi fans instigated the riot. The first paragraph is the first thing that shows up when a Misplaced Pages article shows up in a search result, and it is often the only part that people read. The fact that it is so unbalanced in its reporting of facts goes against Misplaced Pages's mission to be an unbiased source. There must be some kind of mention of the Maccabi fans contributing to instigating the riot, for example, the tearing down of Palestinian flags, and chanting "fuck Arabs" and "fuck Palestine". Otherwise, I believe that this article will be very unbalanced and it is almost cherrypicking information.

Unrefined Gasoline (talk) 07:06, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Except for the recently added second paragraph of the intro, I believe the introduction reflects the sources. The most important thing are the 7 November attacks, discussing the background comes slightly later (now fourth paragraph, before third). Including it in the first leads to other complaints, see above. We can't do justice to these events in one paragraph. Dajasj (talk) 07:18, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Arrested

@Techiya1925, your source doesn't mention the number 63? And neither do the most recent Dutch sources. Could you revert it? Please note that thr same info you added has also been mentioned two paragprahs below. Dajasj (talk) 07:28, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, check this New York post article, which I added as a citation to the article.

https://nypost.com/2024/11/09/world-news/4-anti-israel-amsterdam-pogrom-attackers-remain-in-custody-report/

Here is the number 63 from the Jerusalem Post:

https://m.jpost.com/breaking-news/article-828247 Techiya1925 (talk) 07:31, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

But Dutch sources mention 62, even after the NYPost one. I think we should follow them because they have closer contact Dajasj (talk) 07:32, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

The last update from the prosecutor was:

Vier verdachten nog vast na geweld in Amsterdam, meer arrestaties verwacht - https://nos.nl/l/2543867 Dajasj (talk) 07:35, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I have found another sources which describes the discrepancy. It's 63 now Dajasj (talk) 08:21, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Edit Request: Update on rescue flights

Not 3, as the article currently mentions, but 8 rescue flights have been deployed over the course of Friday and Saturday, repatriating a total of 2000 Israelis. The flights were operated by El Al, and free of charge for those in possession of a flight ticket from Amsterdam to Israel with any airline. No IDF rescue planes were deployed after all.

https://matzav.com/2000-jews-evacuated-from-amsterdam-to-israel-on-el-al-rescue-flights/ WikipediaNummer1 (talk) 07:42, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I don't have the permission, so could someone include the above in the article. Please correct the article, it currently states that 3 El Al rescue flights were deployed, but in the end a total of 8 rescue flights were deployed.

https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/article-828296 WikipediaNummer1 (talk) 13:44, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

It is requested that an edit be made to the extended-confirmed-protected redirect at November 2024 Amsterdam attacks. (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.

Could someone please change all mentions in the article of 3 rescue flights being deployed to it actually being 8 rescue flights that were deployed? See the above WikipediaNummer1 (talk) 16:38, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Coordinated

None of the two used sources uses the word "coordinated". The police explicitly says it is looking into it. There are calls for violence, which can be seen as coordination, but that is more precisely discussed in another paragraph of the lede. Could we remove it (for now)? Dajasj (talk) 07:48, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

done Bejakyo (talk) 07:53, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

@Bejakyo @Techiya1925, please be careful with reverting. You can only revert once per 24 hours and you have reached that already. Please focus on discussion and consensus. Dajasj (talk) 07:57, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

only just saw this, but have started a new topic to prompt discussion as needed, thank you for pointing it out never the less Bejakyo (talk) 08:06, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

disruptive editing

requesting that @Techiya1925 please cease repeatedly editing in a way that is seemingly disruptive and unilateral on an article that is under active arbitration. Bejakyo (talk) 08:02, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

These edits are by no means disruptive; each one is well-sourced. The only reason anyone might want to delete this content is because they disagree with what it conveys, not due to a lack of sourcing. Let the arbitration process continue, but my intent is not to edit disruptively—I am trying to help protect Misplaced Pages’s credibility. Techiya1925 (talk) 08:06, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

The issue is unrelated to what's conveyed by sources, but with the contributions provided lacking in WP:Neutrality, particularly regarding WP:Undue. A key issue to mind is the claim that "many sources say" as opposed to "some sources say". Neutrality is of course a pillar of wikipedia's credibility. As well some of the contributions seem to have unintentionally veered into Misplaced Pages:OR as @Dajasj has pointed out, with cited sources not backing up the added claims. Bejakyo (talk) 08:21, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

You can honestly read this article and say the WP:Undue WP:Neutrality violation is done by me? That is absurd, and confusing.

Why didn’t you switch it from “many” to “some”? Why did you delete the whole paragraph?

Please explain where my edits have veered into Misplaced Pages:OR. Techiya1925 (talk) 08:30, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Regarding the last point, see the section about Coordinated. Dajasj (talk) 08:34, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm sorry if its confusing, but this is why matters such as this are better discussed in an articles talk page and with consensus building among wikipedia contributors.

The paragraph in question had more issues than just "many" or "some" As I mentioned in my message, @Dajasj pointed out issues regarding WP:OR (to which I would also also state the added issue of WP:Verifiability, as the sources you cited with links do not back the claim, and I could not locate the unlinked citations to verify their claims. Likewise the paragraph suffered from WP:Undue and WP:Neutrality Bejakyo (talk) 08:43, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

It’s interesting you’re so eager to lecture on WP:Neutrality and WP:Undue while dismissing fully sourced material from reputable outlets that directly reported on the pogrom targeting Jews. The edits simply reflect what many major media sources have already established about the incident.

It’s odd that, despite such clear evidence, you’re eager to sideline this as though it’s some fringe claim.

Repeating WP:OR and WP:Verifiability doesn’t magically make these valid points.

I am totally fine with waiting for more information, once investigations have been conducted, to add the word coordinated. The reason I chose the reference that I did is because the title is literally, "Revealed: How Pro-Palestinian mob organised via WhatsApp to 'Hunt Jews' across Amsterdam". Key word being ORGANIZED which implies coordination. I will wait for more articles to come out. Techiya1925 (talk) 09:00, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

It's not particularly fringe as you claim. WP:Verifiability, WP:NOR and WP:Neutrality are cornerstones of wikipedia.

To reiterate for a third time, the sources you have provided do not back up your claims.

regarding the sources for the claims of your contribution:

the CNN source mentions nothing of a pogrom or of a coordination targeted attack. The NYT likewise does not describe it as a progrom. The collive.com source, and the Russian source korrespondent.net are not estabshlied relliable sources, with only collive.com calling it a pogrom (and even then, only in the title, not in the body of the text). The other two sources, despite being implied to be online, seem to be unlocatable from my searches, and thus unverifiable. Bejakyo (talk) 10:10, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Let’s run through some of the articles that I cited, yeah?

1. Title: "Massive Jewish Pogroms Occurred in Amsterdam" (Korrespondent)

2. "Dozens of Maccabi Tel Aviv fans attacked in the Netherlands: 'Pogrom.' The IDF to send a rescue mission," (Ynet)

3. "The Pogrom in the Netherlands: Seven Missing - 'Examining Reports of Hostages'," (Maariv)

4. The CNN article you are talking about: "Amsterdam Mayor Femke Halsema said criminals on scooters searched the city in search of Maccabi supporters in “hit-and-run” attacks…" No coordinated targeting?

5. "Pogrom in Amsterdam: Muslim Mob Attacks Israelis After Game" (ColLive)

6. Not only Israeli but Dutch officials also characterized the attack as antisemitic

My edits mentioned two things: the Dutch officials announcing that it was an antisemitic attack, and the articles that discuss it being a pogrom.

I don’t understand what you are trying to get at, that by providing facts about the situation that aren’t convenient for you I’m not being neutral? And you, by sitting here removing things you don’t like, are being neutral? Techiya1925 (talk) 10:42, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

to run through these with you again

• 1 - source states Massive Jewish riots, not pogroms, and beyond that is a rather obscure and unestablished source
• 2 and 3 - currently not verifiable, as previously mentioned, due to them not being url-linked, and my searches for them not coming up with the source articles in question. Feel free to link them.
• 4 - does not state coordination, interprating it as such is WP:OR
• 5 - is not an established reliable source, and is pretty clearly
• 6 - While you've not provided a source for this ("someone said this" isn't a citable source) it's a moot point as 6 does not back up your claims

Even if your claim that you are "only providing the facts" were true, Misplaced Pages is not a place for true information, but verifiable information. It's a subtle but foundational difference. Bejakyo (talk) 11:00, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

1RR violations

I have just noticed that Techiya1925 has seemingly performed no less than ten 1RR violations within 24 hours. Are there any admins editing here? Makeandtoss (talk) 10:46, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

90% of these are my own edits, that had been removed without explanation. And they were done before I was warned about this reversion policy. I understand the way things work here now, and in due time, after discussions, those edits will be back in some form. Because none of it is fringe.

I don’t bother messing with your work, and I make sure my work is cited well.

I will keep editing in good faith. You seem to want to get rid of me badly though! Techiya1925 (talk) 10:58, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

@Techiya1925: please assume good faith when editing alongside other users. Isabelle Belato 11:02, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I am doing my best to assume good faith. Although it isn’t always easy. I will still assume good faith. All of my edits have been done with good intention. Techiya1925 (talk) 11:05, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

That is not true, three of these violations were performed after Techiya1925 was informed by Bejakyo that this article was under active arbitration on 08:02, 10 November 2024 (UTC). Now that you know about this reversion policy, please familiarize yourself Techiya1925 with WP:1RR, which is strictly enforced. Makeandtoss (talk) 11:30, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Templates neutrality disputed

@Techiya1925, could you clarify why you have disputed these sentences? Per template docs: "The editor placing this template in an article should promptly begin a discussion on the article's talk page. In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant, then this tag may be removed by any editor." Dajasj (talk) 08:04, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I added the neutrality tag because the way the edits were written appear as an attempt to shift the focus of the attack to demonize the victims, which is entirely inappropriate. So I disputed the neutrality of the comments. (Obviously, it is clear that the genocide accusations in Gaza are disputed, and anyone who reads that paragraph can see that it is biased.)

Do you disagree with the tag? If so, why? Techiya1925 (talk) 08:15, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

It's still not clear to me why they are disputed. It should not be up to me to guess why you think so or defend the tag without knowing why you dispute it.

Anyway, I am in favor of removing the genocide accusations and the question whether Israel should be included in the League. One can discuss these accusations much better on other pages and they are not really relevant here. The key is that there are tensions related to the war and Israels role in it.

Regarding the far right ultras, this seems at first glance relevant to the incidents and I don't see why it is disputed. Dajasj (talk) 08:27, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. For historical context see:

• When far-right football fans take to the streets in Israel, Deutsche Welle, 8 July 2020

Andreas JN466 08:48, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

@3skandar, semi-related: could we avoid discussing the war in-depth in the article. In particular, I don't think we need to mention how many casualties are women and children. It adds little value to the incidents and people can read about the war on the other pages. The key here is that there is a war which has lead to tensions. Dajasj (talk) 09:01, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Reuters verified video

The video verified by Reuters is included in the paragraph about after the game. However, are we sure the video is from after the game? And even then, it seems a bit weird in the paragraph discussing the attacks itself. I think provocating chants have enough discussion in the article, so could perhaps be left out in that specific paragraph? Dajasj (talk) 09:17, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Unsourced claim

"instances of Jews being thrown into a canal" in the lede is referenced to Reuters, which neither mentions Jews nor canal. What is this sourced to? Makeandtoss (talk) 10:02, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

No, instances of Jews being run over with vehicles is referenced to Reuters. Techiya1925 (talk) 10:06, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

The Jerusalem Post article below it cites the canal events. Techiya1925 (talk) 10:07, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

That JP reference which was added after I opened this discussion reports: "Multiple videos showed Israelis jumping into canals to avoid the protesters." Where does it say being thrown into a canal? Where does it say Jews? Why are we conflating Jews with Israelis? Makeandtoss (talk) 10:28, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Also you just added an inline citation that does not support the material: the Reuters article you just added neither mentions "canal" nor "stabbings"; and the run over is attributed to Israeli embassy. Please reflect sources accurately. Makeandtoss (talk) 10:32, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Pinging @Bejakyo: Makeandtoss (talk) 10:33, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Could you clarify sorry? I've attributed the statement to the Israeli embassy, and seperated the two sources into seperate sentences to avoid misatribution Bejakyo (talk) 10:46, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

There is a difference between "being thrown into a canal" and "jumping into canals". I pinged you since you added the JP attribution, which was good. Makeandtoss (talk) 10:53, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Ah I see, thank you for the clarification. I'll sort that now Bejakyo (talk) 11:05, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

While you do, please ensure avoiding violating 1RR. Makeandtoss (talk) 11:21, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

@Bejakyo This still needs to be fixed right? I am also not sure whether the canal thing took place on Thursday night, given that the most documented case was the day before. JP isn't very clear. Dajasj (talk) 15:37, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 10 November 2024

It is requested that an edit be made to the extended-confirmed-protected redirect at November 2024 Amsterdam attacks. (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.

the attacks were far away from antisemitism,the israeli football fans started everything and chanted songs against arabs while vandalizing the city 156.213.165.161 (talk) 11:10, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Excessive coverage of responses?

Twice as much space is given in the article to responses as to the actual events; this hardly seeems appropriate for an encyclopaedia and suggests that the events and this article are being used for propaganda. Jontel (talk) 11:18, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I think that's always the case with ongoing events. It is easier to write someone's response than trying to write a nuanced description of events. Probably in a few years, we can select what was relevant and what was not. Dajasj (talk) 11:38, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Agreed, there is indeed excessive coverage of responses. Makeandtoss (talk) 11:47, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Well, a lot of people have commented very prominently on this, including top European politicians. That is an aspect of the event. So I would expect an article like this to contain quite a lot of responses. Andreas JN466 11:55, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I think it is usual for Misplaced Pages to do this, but let's be honest: the average future reader won't be interested in most responses. Dajasj (talk) 11:57, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Edit changing order

@Dajasj Could you have another look at this edit of yours? The change in sequence really doesn't make sense. Andreas JN466 11:48, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Fixed, I missed a sentence. Dajasj (talk) 11:52, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, Dajasj. Andreas JN466 13:57, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Edit Request: Remove passive voice in opening sentence

The first sentence of the article should be updated to remove the use of passive voice (which obscures who is doing the attacking). The first sentence currently ends with "Maccabi Tel Aviv fans were targeted in a series of attacks." That should read instedad that "attackers assaulted Israelis" (citing the New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/08/world/europe/amsterdam-israel-soccer-fans-attacks.html) or "according to the mayor of Amsterdam, 'antisemeitc hit-and-run squads' targetted Maccabi Tel Aviv fans" (citing Reuters https://www.reuters.com/world/israels-pm-aware-very-violent-incident-against-israelis-amsterdam-his-office-2024-11-08/). DNL (talk) 13:23, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Your suggestions are invalid. Attackers is redundant and anti-Semitic is disputed. Jontel (talk) 14:25, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

In that case, the closing sentence of the first section ("The attacks on Israeli fans were widely condemned as criminal and antisemitic.") should be moved up to the end of the first paragraph of that section. That would mitigate the problem caused by the use of passive voice. The new paragraph would read "On 7 November 2024, following a UEFA Europa League football match in Amsterdam, Netherlands, between Israeli club Maccabi Tel Aviv and Dutch club AFC Ajax, Maccabi Tel Aviv fans were targeted in a series of attacks. The attacks on Israeli fans were widely condemned as criminal and antisemitic. The behaviour of Israeli fans was criticized as well."

DNL (talk) 14:59, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Edit Request: New incidents on night of 9 November wherby people where requested passport on the street

I don't have the permission, so could someone please add that an Amsterdam police chief reported that new incidents occurred in the night of 9-10 November. People that appeared Jewish were threatened and requested to show their passport in the street.

See: https://www.parool.nl/wereld/israelische-supporters-amsterdam-aangevallen~ba8fedc0/ (live update from 12:42)

And: https://www.telegraaf.nl/nieuws/301550981/demonstraties-in-amsterdam-ook-door-rechter-verboden-pro-palestijnse-protest-mag-niet-doorgaan-op-de-dam WikipediaNummer1 (talk) 13:38, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

See also: https://nos.nl/liveblog/2543687-politie-veegt-dam-leeg-tientallen-pro-palestijnse-demonstranten-opgepakt (update from 13:35) WikipediaNummer1 (talk) 14:52, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

It is requested that an edit be made to the extended-confirmed-protected redirect at November 2024 Amsterdam attacks. (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.

Could someone please include that fact that an Amsterdam police chief reported that on the night of Saturday 9 November new incidents occured in which people that appeared Jewish were threatened on the street and requested to show their passport. See sources above.

WikipediaNummer1 (talk) 16:32, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Edit Request: independent confirmation provided by VRT

Independent confirmation of the video from Wednesday night 6 November where a man is swimming in the canal was requested. ()

Hereby a source that provides this independent confirmation, and provides a detailed context of the versions of the video that have appeared on social media with corresponding narratives. https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2024/11/08/check-rellen-amsterdam/

Could someone please include this source in the article (as I don't have the permission), and that the man was either pushed into the canal or jumped into the canal in fear (which of the two it was cannot be said with certainty). What can be said with certainty, this source confirms, is that the man while in the water was forced to shout "Free Palestine" to be left alone by pro-Palestine people, and that the slur "kankerjood" ("cancer Jew") was shouted towards him while he was in the water. It is also confirmed that the incident happened on Wednesday night November 6. WikipediaNummer1 (talk) 14:23, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Done Dajasj (talk) 15:17, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

References

1. "Spanningen in de stad afgelopen nacht, Palestijnse vlag van gevel gehaald en man in de gracht". At5 (in Dutch). 7 November 2024.

Column Gideon Levy

@Jayen466, why should we include this specific column for a whole paragraph? We run the risk of everyone copying part of columns they like in the article. And there will be a lot of columns about these attacks, I imagine. I think it is better to focus on the facts of the event first, and keep the history writing including its commentary to the future. Dajasj (talk) 15:14, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Gideon Levy is an internationally respected voice, a past winner of Israel's top journalism prize, writing in Israel's newspaper of record (Haaretz). I think a paragraph for someone like that is fair enough; it is as short as I could make it to convey the gist of what he is saying. Regards, Andreas JN466 15:22, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I understand your point, but we already have so many responses, while so much of the facts remain vague. I really think we should limit the commentary at this point. I'm curious how other people think about this? Dajasj (talk) 15:29, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Well, we have many commentaries that kind of duplicate each other. Levy's point is notable, because of who he is, and distinctive. I'd rather shorten some other comments that are basically repeating the same point. Andreas JN466 15:30, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

No mention of antisemitism in the lead

We currently (following this edit by User:Pdhadam) have no mention of "antisemitism" in the lead. I don't think that is tenable, given the number of people that have used the term in connection to this incident (we have over thirty mentions of antisemitism/antisemitic in the body of the article). I wouldn't use it in wikivoice, but I think a mention is due. Thoughts? Andreas JN466 16:04, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Agreed that it is worth mentioning. The aftermath and response sections are a big part of the article but currently not summarised at all in the lead. ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 16:20, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 10 November 2024 (2)

This edit request to November 2024 Amsterdam attacks has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The "Caused by" line in the infobox is kinda a shitshow.. Can we at least put some context or sense of chronology within it to make it make sense??

Like, maybe change it into "Anti-Arab racism and Anti-Palestinianism faced/confronted with Antisemitism and Anti-Zionism"

At least this is expressed by the body of the article — 🧀Cheesedealer 16:08, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Agreed that it's a shitshow in the infobox right now. The article body currently only quotes other people stating what the cause is; it isn't stated in wikivoice what the cause is. So for now I think the cause should just stay out of the infobox entirely, until we can definitively state the cause in wikivoice. ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 16:23, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Suggestion for clean up

I suggest that in the second column for "Parties" in the infobox, Pro-Palestinian groups/football attendees and Amsterdam residents should be separated and put in a bulleted list to make the layout better to read. Internationed (talk) 16:33, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages controversial topics
• Start-Class Crime-related articles
• Low-importance Crime-related articles
• WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography articles
• Start-Class football articles
• Unknown-importance football articles
• WikiProject Football articles
• Start-Class Israel-related articles
• Low-importance Israel-related articles
• WikiProject Israel articles
• WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration articles
• Start-Class Palestine-related articles
• Unknown-importance Palestine-related articles
• WikiProject Palestine articles
• Start-Class Netherlands articles
• Misplaced Pages requested photographs in the Netherlands
• All WikiProject Netherlands pages
• Misplaced Pages requested photographs in Amsterdam
• Requested moves
• Misplaced Pages extended-confirmed-protected edit requests