Talk:Allegations of genocide in the October 7 attacks

Title

[edit]

October 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel as genocide might be a more intuitive title. Any objections? FortunateSons (talk) 14:01, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't find that intuitive. —Alalch E. 01:12, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While I'm not opposed to changing the title, this suggestions seems clunky. Do you have a rational for it?
I would point to the Ukraine article, and the former name of the Gaza article as examples of use using the structure "Allegations/Accusations of Genocide in Event". -- Cdjp1 (talk) 09:54, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Largely the same argument that applied to using Gaza genocide instead of the longer title, while trying to avoid the sort of discussion directly below this one :) FortunateSons (talk) 09:53, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 1 June 2025

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. I'm seeing a clear consensus that the article not be moved. Extermination, whilst awful, is not the same as genocide per the ICC. Most commenters agree that the use of "Allegations" is found in the majority reliable sources, and that to move it would be undue and wikivoice per WP:NPOV. (closed by non-admin page mover) CoconutOctopus talk 20:32, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Allegations of genocide in the October 7 attacksGenocide in the October 7 attacks – The ICC has accused Hamas of committing the crime of extermination, implying genocidal intent, and Hamas itself described the attacks as an act of annihilation against a nation. As with Gaza genocide, the weight of evidence suggests "allegations" is an unnecessary qualifier. JJARichardson (talk) 12:16, 1 June 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. Jeffrey34555 (talk) 16:42, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose: This proposal has no chance of being agreed, and should just be closed as an obvious non-starter. Two key words in the nominator's rationale are "accused" and "implying". The word "accusation" is merely a synonym of "allegation", so it supports the current title. We should also not decide on our own that someone is "implying" something that they are not saying directly. None of that is evidence that a consensus of independent reliable sources has agreed to refer to the actions as "genocide". —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 21:47, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per BarrelBroof and TRCRF22, and as noted, the nom's own words which are entirely in line with allegations. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 18:43, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Although I understand the intention here, "allegations" continues to be the correct term. Gaza genocide is backed by more scholarly research and is more accepted by the international community. Genocide against Israel or Ukraine, as two examples, are largely etched in the context of war and have not been confirmed by international bodies. PickleG13 (talk) 20:49, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:NCENPOV, a contentious word such as "genocide" should be generally accepted by reliable sources. According to WP:TITLEWARRIOR#Personal_definitions, the sources themselves should use the term, we can't evaluate sources' descriptions of the event to determine if said event was a genocide. Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 21:41, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above 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.