Talk:Palestinian political violence

change government involvement to Palestinian Authority involvement

Reasons for this change:

  • 1. Palestine doesn't have a central government, Fatah is charge of the West Bank and Hamas is in charge of Gaza
  • 2. Most of the content is directed towards Fatah/PLO/Palestinian Authority figures
  • 3. This selection is a bit problematic, as seems like accusation of incitement or glorifying people means that they are involved in political violence. Also the timeframe, as whole article mentions events since 1948, while this selection talks about incidents since 2000. Also which government? (there is a mention of Iraq) During the conflict, many countries governments or military groups were involved in Palestinian Political violence at various points in time

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 April 2025

change "In this period, suicide bombings of Israeli buses and crowded spaces as a regular tactic," to "In this period, suicide bombings of Israeli buses and crowded spaces were used as a regular tactic," or something else that fixes the grammar NerdTheBox (talk) 19:08, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, nice catch – AllCatsAreGrey (talk) 23:16, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 May 2025

In the list with "International Attacks", the country where the "Antwerp bombing" took place is not France. Antwerp is a city in Belgium.

So change "France" to "Belgium" for the "Antwerp bombing". 2A02:A03F:8B9F:1700:9DFD:A3FD:3DD:EF9E (talk) 18:13, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done M.Bitton (talk) 18:27, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Split List of Palestinian insurgent attacks from Palestinian Political Violence

Although that section does not have many citations, there are Wikipedia pages on the topics which implies that citations exist but have not been implemented. The section is rather long and so introduces undue weight on that section of the article. If this is not opposed in 2 weeks, then I will implement the split. Thanks, 🇪🇭🇵🇸🇸🇩 Easternsahara 🇪🇭🇵🇸🇸🇩 03:04, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reversion of Copyedit

@Polinova:, please note that I only changed words to make them more neutral. I did not add any information. You will have to point out specific places where I added information to backup your claim of my mistakes. You can't just state a falsehood if you dislike the edit, the only reason my edit increased rather that decreased the size of the article was because I broke up jargon and added maintenance templates. In reverting my edits, you have added back such brilliant uses of the English language such as "known under Palestinians as Palestinian resistance". I don't think you checked the article very closely, if you had then you would've noticed this. In Wikipedia, especially for contentious topics, competence is required. Thanks, 🇪🇭🇵🇸🇸🇩 Easternsahara 🇪🇭🇵🇸🇸🇩 04:28, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Easternsahara, I agree that not everything in your edit was incorrect such as the "known under Palestinians" edit. You also did make some things more NPOV such as removing biased words like "infiltrators" describing Palestinians Fedayeen insurgency era. However, in the same edit you added a lot of non NPOV content, a lot of unsourced claims, some edits that made the article less clear, and some incorrect information. I will briefly review some of the issues.
Replacing "Attacks have taken place both within Israel and the Palestinian territories" with "Attacks have taken place both within Israel and the Palestine" This is grammatically incorrect and less specific. Palestine can refer to the entire region, the state, specific territories, the people, etc. Palestinian territories specifically refers to the West bank (usually including Jerusalem although it is good to specify to avoid POV misreading) and Gaza.
Replacing "In recent decades, violence has also included rocket attacks on Israeli urban centers. The October 7 attacks resulted in massacres and hostage-taking." with "In recent decades, violence has also included rocket attacks on Israel. The October 7 attacks resulted in massacres and hostage-taking from both sides." This is clearly not NPOV and it is an unsourced and incorrect claim that October 7 resulted in Israel taking Palestinian hostages. Hostages are a well defined term in international law. This is frankly an extremely inflammatory and unsourced claim. The way it was phrased "resulted in massacres and hostage-taking." was NPOV and did not assign moral weight or opinion to those actions.
Replacing "In protest against the Balfour Declaration, which proposed Palestine as a homeland for the Jewish people, and its implementation under a League of Nations Mandate for Great Britain, Palestinians, both Muslim and Christian, from November 1918 onwards, began to organize in opposition to Zionism." with "In protest against the Balfour Declaration, which proposed a Jewish nation be established in Palestine, Palestinians began to organize in opposition to Zionism from November 1918 onward. This opposition transcended religion, with both Muslim and Christian Palestinians supporting it." This is replacing a concise and correct phrasing with an incorrect and less concise wording. Balfur explicitly states support for a homeland for the Jewish people, not specifically the establishment of a Jewish nation state in Palestine. These are different things.
Replacing "In the Six-Day War, a further 280,000–360,000 Palestinians became refugees, and the remaining Palestinian territories were also occupied from Jordan and from Egypt," with "In the Six-Day War, a further 280,000–360,000 Palestinians became refugees, and the remaining area of Palestine was also occupied from Jordan and from Egypt." Again this is less specific. Palestine can refer to either the entire region, the state, the people, etc. Palestinian territories refers specifically to the west bank and Gaza outside the green line. I think both phrasings here are not specific enough as it would be more clear to just say "the west bank including Jerusalem" and "Gaza". Both "Palestine" and "Palestinian territories" are very time and POV dependent terms and we should be specific.
There are also several times where you replace the word "Arab" with "Palestinian" where it would be anachronistic or otherwise less specific.
I think the best way to resolve this is to revert the page to the last edit before this discussion became relevant. I retain the sections of your edit which are undeniably NPOV and and make the page more concise and legible. As you say, this is a highly contentious topic and it is important that we don't add factually incorrect, misleading, or non-NPOV material. It is very easy to phrase things in ways that are able to be misconstrued by one or more perspectives. We must avoid this. I appreciate your work here that you put in to make this page better.. Polinova (talk) 16:59, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I also made some additional phrasing and such to make the article more clear. Please let me know your thoughts. Looking forward to discussing and working on this with you to make the article better. Polinova (talk) 17:01, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
After re-reading, I think "Palestine" is just as clear in the first instance I mentioned. I edited the page accordingly. Polinova (talk) 17:23, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the detailed response, the first change that you point out is grammatically incorrect and I thank you for pointing that out. As for the second change, the entire paragraph is unsourced, so we can source it or remove it entirely from the article. Perhaps the "both sides" is incorrect as you state, but the article warrants a mention of Palestinians in Israeli custody as background knowledge or to make sure it doesn't portray Palestinians as the only ones taking people into their custody. As for the third change, both seem to be the same size. To make the second version (the one I wrote) shorter we can change "This opposition transcended religion, with both Muslim and Christian Palestinians supporting it" to "Both muslim and christian Palestinians supported this opposition". As for your argument about a homeland for the Jewish people and a State for the jewish people being different things, the declaration itself states "national home for the Jewish people". If you want, we can change nation to state but homeland is not accurate as a "homeland" is much more broadly defined than a nation or state. "Homeland" has unneeded connotations which both "state" and "nation" do not have.
The specific places I replaced Arab with Palestinian could be changed, we would have to look at the formation of the Palestinian national identity and what the sources say.
You say that Palestinian territories is more appropriate than Palestine but I do not think so. In this article, Palestine clearly refers to the state rather than the region. It is also used alongside Israel, which suggests that we are referring to the states in both cases. Additionally, there has been consensus on Wikipedia that the land of Palestine is not the primary topic, with academia and the layperson both perceiving the state of Palestine when hearing Palestine. I am fine with replacing Palestine with State of Palestine if we also replace Israel with State of Israel as it may be confused with the Land of Israel but this is unnecessary disambiguation in both cases. If you disagree with Palestine referring to the country, do you think we should also move this page to a more suitable title? Palestinian can refer to citizens of the State of Palestine or the inhabitants of the region of Palestine.
I would also like to raise questions about the sourcing. To ensure that we are not arguing over nothing, we should locate an ISBN, ISSN or DOI for citation 18 and 19, as they are currently inaccessible. Right now, we can not judge the reliability of the source or even what it says.
As for dispute resolution, compromise seems to be the way to go and the contentious parts of my edits can be resolved here. Thanks, 🇪🇭🇵🇸🇸🇩 Easternsahara 🇪🇭🇵🇸🇸🇩 17:34, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Polinova:, the Short description should be none per WP:SDNONE the short description majorly duplicates the title already, and the only information it adds is nationalist which isn't enough to warrant a short description. Additionally, the title by itself is clear. Also, I would like to ask you to revert to the last edit by me, while fixing grammatical mistakes. You have added a lot of WP:UNDUE things.
  • "Common objectives of political violence by Palestinian groups include self-determination in, and sovereignty over all of the region of Palestine often seeking to replace the State of Israel),"
    • The bracket here is not closed, which is ungrammatical. Also "sovereignty over all of the region of Palestine " can be rewritten as "sovereignty over the region of Palestine " becoming more concise and staying the same amount of precision.
    • "seeking to replace the State of Israel" well this is implied by seeking sovereignty over the region of Palestine and "replace" is entirely a POV weasel word
  • "which is also referred to as a form of Palestinian resistance"
    • This was already more concisely stated as "also called Palestinian resistance" please also see WP:REFER
  • "Notable attacks"
    • We do not use notable inside articles as that is an unnecessary weasel word.
  • "civilians of many countries"
    • of many countries is unnecessarily broad, and the majority of their targets are Israeli. We are not saying that attacks on non-Israeli civilians have not occurred if we do not include "of many countries" in the lead.
  • changing stop to disrupt
    • disrupt is a POV word, it implies that something meaningful is being done to work towards peace and the Palestinians are uprooting it without reason. Disrupt would be an okay word to use if there were no sources about the reasoning of their attacks but there are explanations, which are that they find the peace process to be unbalanced
Thanks, 🇪🇭🇵🇸🇸🇩 Easternsahara 🇪🇭🇵🇸🇸🇩 18:23, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Re "both sides": Yes Israel holds Palestinian prisoners. There is good sourcing to support claims that they do not always have fair trials and that Israel holds political prisoners. That could potentially be added in this article as motivations for violence. That is very different than saying Israel took hostages on October 7 or putting it in the lede unsourced for this article. I'm glad you have acknowledged this is not correct. Please refrain from adding incorrect information to Wikipedia in the future, especially on protected and contentious pages.
Re Balfour: A "national home for the Jewish People" is not necessarily the same as a "Jewish Nation". I have edited the page to use the same phrasing as Balfour to prevent confusion. I was phrasing it from memory but you are right the phrase should be "national home for the Jewish people."
Re Arab->Palestinian: Many of the times you made this change included times before the 1948 war. At that point Palestinian could also refer to Jews. Using phrases like Arab or Palestinian Arab is more clear depending on the circumstances. Likewise you also changes many instances of "Jews" or "immigrants" to "settlers". In some instances this was not even correct as you made it say that violence increased against settlers in the 1920s. In actuality violence increased against all Jews including the Old Yishuv. "Settler" is also a loaded term and today bears the connotation of illegal settlements in the West Bank.
Re Palestine vs territories: This is context specific. For example, as I have said, in the first instance I noted "Palestine" is clear. However, when you say things like "In the Six-Day War... the remaining area of Palestine was also occupied from Jordan and from Egypt." you are talking about a land area with unclear borders. It is also anachronistic to refer to a state of Palestine in 1967, just as it would have been unclear for example, to refer to Israel in control of the Ottoman Empire. As I've said, "Palestinian territories" is more clear to refer to Gaza and the West Bank, but I think the edit I made referring to them specifically rather than calling them "Palestinian territories" is the most clear.
Re disrupt: I don't really understand the distinction here between disrupt and stop, so stop is fine.
Re civilians of many countries: I don't have a strong preference here but it does seem like removing the phrase does make it less clear that there were non-Israeli civilians involved.
Re other grammatical minutia and words: Suggested resolutions seem fine unless I'm missing something. Polinova (talk) 20:35, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify, I do not think we should revert to your last edit as we agree it has incorrect information. Other editors are now involved and I think the most straightforward solution is to continue from the current version. Polinova (talk) 20:45, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Easternsahara: Re change 2, the lead usually does not need references if it is cited in the body. "Palestinians in Israeli custody" is already mentioned in the last sentence of the first paragraph.
Replace makes more sense here, since "one-state solution" is ambiguous.
Refs fixed. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 20:07, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List move

The list of notable Palestinian attacks has become too long and should be moved to the corresponding list page, possibly List of massacres in Israel, as the {{main}} template recommends. Relspas (talk) 19:49, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

allikas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Palestinian_political_violence