Portal:Current events—more specifically, the portal's complex framework—is fully protected, and has been since August 2010, prior to which it was semi-protected. Changes to this page can only be made by administrators. To request a change be made to the portal, please use {{edit protected}} followed by your request to bring it to the attention of an administrator. Please update a day's current events by clicking on "Edit" in the header for that day.
This page is laid out and designed as part of a set of pages. To discuss the set as a whole, see Wikipedia talk:Contents. For more information on Wikipedia's contents system as a whole, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Contents.
This portal does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This page is a portal. Portals are within the scope of WikiProject Portals, a collaborative effort to improve portals on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PortalsWikipedia:WikiProject PortalsTemplate:WikiProject PortalsPortals articles
This page is part of WikiProject Current events, an attempt to expand and better organize information in articles related to current events. If you would like to participate in the project, visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.Current eventsWikipedia:WikiProject Current eventsTemplate:WikiProject Current eventsCurrent events articles
This page is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Portal:Current events is a reader-facing page intended for viewing by non-editors. Please prioritize their needs when adjusting its design, and move editor-facing elements to other pages.
There should maybe be a consideration if there's enough consensus to just start avoiding the use of "War crimes in the 2023 Israel–Hamas war" header because of how it incentivizes gaming whether or not play-by-play back and forth events if each one is evaluated as being considered a war crime or not by Wikipedia's editors, which seems problematic and against the spirit of the discretionary sanctions on the Israeli-Palestinian and Arab-Israeli conflicts. I've already seen what seems to me to be worrying trends toward arms races of pushing stories in and out of the "War Crimes" grouping to control which events are being called war crimes in this hotly contested and developing scenario... I do think war crimes are being committed but a lot is going on and I don't think we can all keep up with it to the level of very careful accuracy that it should be at this time... but that's just my one opinion so far, not trying to be disruptive or anything. Sumstream (talk) 17:13, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Those events should just be included under the general "2023 Israel-Hamas War" label to avoid passing judgement on if it is a war crime. For many of these, there is not enough info to know if it was a war crime or not, so it should not be definitely stated with a "war crimes" header, which makes it seem like it is known as an undisputed fact that the event was a war crime. Some of these, such as condemnations by NGOs or other governments, should also be in the reactions section instead. Folohsor (talk) 18:24, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Agree get rid of the "War crimes" section entirely, its hilariously/horrifically biased; most of the sources are Al Jazeera (Qatar state-owned media; Qatar is an authoritarian state with no press freedom, and it's a primary Hamas funder, sponsor, and supporter and hosts their leader in Doha among high society) or literal Palestinian groups' statements. The "misinformation" section also seems to be entirely anti-Israel every day from what I've seen. And I know we have WP:NOTRIGHT and most sources are anti-Israel, but its outrageous. TBH maybe it should go to the neutrality noticeboard or get an RFC. JM (talk) 20:17, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I just want to be clear that my statement is not meant as a criticism of the content of any headlines or an attempt to address the content of the headlines involved themselves. Sumstream (talk) 00:53, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well sure, I suppose what started as me agreeing with you developed into a general criticism of the bias underneath the "war crimes" label. I was going to start my own section about the bias, but figured I agreed with you and your topic was related enough for me to sort of branch off with that elaboration. JM (talk) 01:00, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Sumstream@Folohsor@JM2023: just to bring in your notice, the user adding all discussed here has been blocked. All those problematic entries were his own sole additions, followed by disruptive behaviour. Pg 6475TM 20:14, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Appreciate it. Hopefully the current events template looks a lot better going forward. JM (talk) 21:17, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Exactly my same thought. Regards Pg 6475TM 21:27, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree with you! It seems like a good majority of Wikipedia is biased towards Hamas. There needs to be a clear line towards neutrality in this. I support Israel and it just grieves me to see this bias. I always thought that Wikipedia was supposed to be neutral in it's reporting but it's clearly not. Anitarose33511 (talk) 17:23, 15 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The problem is twofold; Wikipedia can be wrong due to systemic bias of reliable sources, and it can also be wrong due to systemic bias of editors. JM (talk) 19:41, 17 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Worth noting the user that had consistently filed news items under war crimes has now been indef blocked, so hopefully that cleans up the issue for now.
I'm no fan of Israel per se, but the avalanche of edits every single day began to feel like sizable anti-Israel POV-pushing, especially when multiple sources used weren't exactly reliable/neutral. TheKip 19:40, 15 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Live blog usage has been normalized for a long time on the Current Events Portal. This includes especially live blogs to CNN, BBC, and yes, Al Jazeera as well. This has frequently included stories that do not get their own dedicated article page. The usage being a live blog and/or without a dedicated article page of its own has been disproportionately used to remove Al Jazeera headlines. Even though Al Jazeera English and the related English-language AlJazeera.com have plenty of editors' voices to express the reasons why it is continuing to be used the way it has been here at WP:RSN, and recent edits continue to use BBC live blog that amusingly "according to the Al Jazeera news network." itself directly is relying on Al Jazeera's reporting, helping to show the enduring secondary source reputability being established. Please, please do not remove headlines purely for the reason that they are headlines sourced from Al Jazeera's live blog, because Al Jazeera English and AlJazeera.com are reliable sources, internationally award-winning for reporting on the exact contentious subject of the Arab-Israeli conflict in disputed Palestine. Sumstream (talk) 03:26, 15 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Please consider that I have viewed for years live blog usage of BBC and CNN without complaint, just as there is years of no issue with Al Jazeera, in between flare-ups of conflict escalation. Their reporting on this exact conflict that you are concerned with has earned them international awards, enough for its own article and these are international awards, the Peabody is not administered by Qatar. Also as described in the referenced discussion a "reliable source" does not need to be a "perfect source" or "proven to be free of any bias whatsoever" what you are describing you are not evenly applying Wikipedia guidelines to all sources (such as having no issue with BBC's live blog, which itself also relies on Al Jazeera, as many secondary sources do, because it's reliable and the best option). Sumstream (talk) 19:36, 15 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
There's a typo next to the Coronal Mass Ejection. It says "Coronal Mass Ejection (CMA)" while it should say "Coronal Mass Ejection (CME)".
Phofers (talk) 15:20, 29 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Done@Phofers: for future reference, only the main page of the portal is fully protected. The subpages for each day are not protected, and you could've edited them yourself by clicking on the "edit" link at the top of each date box. (Non-administrator comment) Liu1126 (talk) 16:20, 29 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
.svg){kind=small}
Done @Phofers: for future reference, only the main page of the portal is fully protected. The subpages for each day are not protected, and you could've edited them yourself by clicking on the "edit" link at the top of each date box. (Non-administrator comment) Liu1126 (talk) 16:20, 29 November 2023 (UTC)