Misplaced Pages

Talk:2006 Lebanon War

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ScottishFinnishRadish (talk | contribs) at 10:44, 15 March 2022 (→Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 March 2022: Responded to edit request). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 10:44, 15 March 2022 by ScottishFinnishRadish (talk | contribs) (→Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 March 2022: Responded to edit request)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Skip to table of contents
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2006 Lebanon War article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49Auto-archiving period: 3 months 

Template:Vital article

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

  • You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
  • You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic

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.

Further information
The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:
  1. Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
  2. Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.

With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:

  • Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
  • Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.

After being warned, contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topic sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.
Editors may report violations of these restrictions to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!
Former good article2006 Lebanon War was one of the Warfare good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 5, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
May 9, 2007Good article nomineeListed
September 9, 2007Good article reassessmentKept
September 21, 2010Good article reassessmentKept
November 11, 2013Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article
A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on August 14, 2009, August 14, 2010, and August 14, 2013.
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconMilitary history: Middle East / Post-Cold War
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
B checklist
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
  1. Referencing and citation: criterion met
  2. Coverage and accuracy: criterion met
  3. Structure: criterion met
  4. Grammar and style: criterion met
  5. Supporting materials: criterion met
Associated task forces:
/ 
Taskforce icon
Middle Eastern military history task force
Taskforce icon
Post-Cold War task force
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconIsrael High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis 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
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Project Israel To Do:

 Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconLebanon High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Lebanon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lebanon-related 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.LebanonWikipedia:WikiProject LebanonTemplate:WikiProject LebanonLebanon
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 June 2021

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

Commanders in charge 1983kid (talk) 15:36, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:39, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Sources

I don't agree that the anonymous sources themselves, quoted by journalists are treated as credible sources in Misplaced Pages. Especially not with journalists in newspapers like the Telegraph. "Lebanese officials estimate" and "UN officials believe"?! I'm sure one could have interviewed many UN or Lebanese gov't reps saying quite different things at the time.

When Seymour Hersh quotes anonymous sources in the US administration claiming that the Syrian regime is innocent of chemical warfare, its OK to include this in Misplaced Pages. But the source should should be Hersh and not the "White House civil servents". I will therefore reverse Daveout's edits Jokkmokks-Goran (talk) 03:35, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Given the situation in Lebanon we are not likely to see an official estimate by Lebanese official given on-record, so anonymous sources reported by the media is probably the best thing we can get. Do you have any reason to doubt the number? Are there other sources quoting other estimates by "Lebanese officials"? I don't see the first source mentioning UN officials, and the second doesn't seem to be dealing with casualties at all, so it seems not to belong at all. I wouldn't mind "according to Lebanese officials as reported by the Telegraph", but it's too long for infobox and by the same token every other number not sourced from a primary source should also be described as "as reported by <news source name>". Instead, I suggest to trust valid media sources unless it can be demonstrated that other sources contradict them. Assuming that Hezbollah strived to lower the stimates and IDF to inflate them, the estimate seems quite reasonable, so I don't think this is an WP:EXCEPTIONAL claim that requires many high-quality sources. “WarKosign” 08:16, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
With a little hindsight, almost all serious estimates converged on two numbers. According to Lebanese sources and HRW, about 250 Hizbullah combatants were killed in the war. According to Israel government estimates, around 600 were killed. That includes Military Intelligence and Foreign Ministry.
An Israeli newspaper (Yediot) claimed that the main reason for this discrepancy was that Israel included all Hizbullah activists killed but the Lebanese only included combatants.
So delete all the tabloid rubbish and wartime rumours and speculations. We don't need Keegan's 2006 speculations about a 1000 dead (in a less than prophetic article entitled "Why Israel will go to war again – soon"). And we don't need the Telegraph's anonymous sources.
Jokkmokks-Goran (talk) 15:34, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
Do you have sources? Presumably you're quoting the source used to backup hezbolla'h claim "usti.net". It's hard to tell how reliable it is given I can't find it anywhere, but I doubt it's better than the Telegraph. “WarKosign” 19:29, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
You couldn't find it? Strange, I found the original AP article with a simple google:
https://apnews.com/article/82ccc1313d4332f45e2dc09f6bd44989
And if you had checked more carefully, you would have notised that the same information was also found in a Jerusalem Post article referenced in the article.
I have replaced all the references in the article. And you don't have to worry, all the sources, that I introduce, will be totally blameless. Lest I will again be exposed to your disgruntled comments on this talk page.
Jokkmokks-Goran (talk) 22:38, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

And, while at it, I also suggest that we do away with the whole Iranian-soldiers-fighting-and dying-in-Lebanon-story.

Sorry, there is simply no credible evidence for that.

The best refutation is already in the article, the post-war note at the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs homepage. It details Iran’s support for Hizbullah: propaganda, money, weapons, training, etc. But not a word about Iranian soldiers taking part in the fighting or dying.

As far as I have seen, no other serious source mentions Iranians fighting on the front line. OK, Cordesman (2007) mentions Israeli claims of 100 Iranian advisors supporting Hizbullah. But no soldiers, no deaths.

Are we to believe that the NY Sun and complete crack-pot Aaron Klein (who among other things wrote a book about Obama being an agent of Chinese Communists) actually knew something that Israel didn’t?

Jokkmokks-Goran (talk) 01:05, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Translation

In footnote 187 I provide a quote from an orginal Hebrew source as well as my own translation. Since I am not a native Hebrew speaker, any improvemants of the translation is welcome.

במלחמה נהרגו על פי הערכות שונות בין 300 ל-700 לוחמי חיזבאללה ונפצעו כ-1,000 ההבדל בין מקורות ישראלים ללבנוניים ביחס למספר הנפגעים נובע בעיקר מן ההבחנה הלבנונית בין פעילי חיזבאללה "אזרחיים" לבין פעילים "צבאיים"; כאשר רק האחרונים נכללים במניין ההרוגים מקרב הלוחמים.

According to different estimates, between 300 and 700 Hezbollah fighters were killed and about 1,000 wounded. The difference between Israeli and Lebanese sources concerning the number of casualties is mainly due to the Lebanese distinction between "civilian" Hezbollah operatives and "military" operatives, with only the latter being included in the death toll of the fighters.

Jokkmokks-Goran (talk) 18:29, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

This is a fine translation. “WarKosign” 08:31, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
OK, thanks! Jokkmokks-Goran (talk) 18:11, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

NewsMax

Egsan Bacon removed an item from the article, claiming "WP:NEWSMAX is a deprecated source". This may be true from 2020 onward, but hardly in 2006. Newsmax was described by The New York Times as a "potent force" in U.S. politics and by Forbes as a "news powerhouse".

Jokkmokks-Goran (talk) 23:29, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Buidhe's massive removal of sourced, attributed content

Strange that Buidhe didnt remove any of the opinion pieces claiming a Hezbollah victory. He only removed the other side entirely. I don't believe for a second it was a coincidence. Please be alert. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.246.140.56 (talk) 11:34, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 March 2022

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

Somebody needs to restore the Lebanese civilians subsection to the casualties section of this article. It was mass removed while "Israeli civilians" subsection was kept.

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=2006_Lebanon_War&oldid=1064958610#Casualties_and_damage

The link above shows the Lebanese civilians subsection before it was removed. Please take this into account. 2601:85:C101:C9D0:8962:6D1B:7F58:D09 (talk) 04:30, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

@Jokkmokks-Goran: I think the section heading was removed in this edit. The inforomation seems not to be entirely gone, but somewhat reduced. “WarKosign” 06:16, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
OK, I will fix it. Jokkmokks-Goran (talk) 10:04, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
Categories: