text:
User talk:211.29.51.126

Welcome!

, welcome to Wikinews! Thank you for your contributions I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews:
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * And of course, stories need writing!

Here are some other hints and tips:

 * I would recommend that you get a username. You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Wikipedia, but creating an account is quick, free and non-intrusive, requires no personal information, and there are many benefits of having a username.  (If you edit without a username, your IP address is used to identify you instead.)

 * When using talk pages, please sign your name at the end of your messages by typing four tildes (~~). This will automatically produce your username (or IP address) and the date.

If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! Doldrums 13:24, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

University_Student_Looks_To_Become_CEO
Hay thanks for creating University_Student_Looks_To_Become_CEO. May I ask if you did any original reporting in it? MyName 21:41, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:211.29.51.126


text:
User talk:Smkmuhibbah

Welcome
, welcome to Wikinews! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! Doldrums 13:36, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * And of course, stories need writing!

Image:Mini-100 0017.JPG
Got deleted per Fair use, as it wasn't sourced corectly. Bawolff ☺☻ 01:44, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: User talk:Smkmuhibbah


text:
User:Gold-Horn on Wheels

This user is NOT Willy on Wheels, but registered to prevent impersonation by Willy!!!

title: User:Gold-Horn on Wheels


text: File:Lebanon 07 13 06.ogg

title: File:Lebanon 07 13 06.ogg


text:
User talk:88.110.244.183

Welcome
, welcome to Wikinews! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --Brian McNeil / talk 19:30, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * And of course, stories need writing!

title: User talk:88.110.244.183


text:
Juventus, Lazio and Fiorentina relegated from Italy's Serie A

July 14, 2006

Italian soccer giants Juventus, Lazio and Fiorentina have all been relegated from Serie A today as the result of the massive Italian football match-fixing scandal, while AC Milan have avoided relegation.

The news came after revelations that Juventus general manager, Luciano Moggi, had telephone conversations with several important figures in Italian football, including Marcello Lippi, the head coach of the Italian national team, during the 2004-05 season which revealed illegal match-fixing, gambling and falsifying financial accounts. The teams were accused of rigging matches by selecting referees, while players, including Italy's World Cup-winning goalkeeper Gianluigi Buffon, have also been charged of illegally gambling on matches.

Punishments
The results were published at around 20:00 local time on July 14, 2006 and shown live on Italian television. The FIGC (Italian Football Federation) had originally called for all four clubs involved, AC Milan, Juventus, Lazio and Fiorentina to be thrown out of Serie A, with Juventus demoted two divisions into Serie C1.

Juventus suffered the biggest punishment. They were demoted into Italy's second division, Serie B and will start the 2006-07 season with a thirty-point deduction. They were also stripped of their league titles, or "Scudettos", they had won in 2004-05 and 2005-06. President Giovanni Cobolli Gigli stated: "This verdict is unheard of. We could have expected relegation to the second division but to be also handed a 30-point deduction is almost like relegation to the third division."

Fiorentina have also been relegated to Serie B, and will have twelve-point deduction. Lazio will join Juventus and Fiorentina in Serie B next season and will have a seven-point deduction.

AC Milan have avoided relegation but will start next season with minus fifteen points. They have also had 44 points deducted from their total in the 2005-06 season to put them out of the Champions League and UEFA Cup qualification places.

Several officials, but no players, from each club has also been suspended from football, including now ex-general manager Luciano Moggi and ex-chief executive Antonio Giraudo, both of Juventus, who have been banned for five years. The other three clubs have also had board members suspended for between one and four years.

All four sides have been barred from playing in European competitions next season and will have up to three days to appeal. UEFA have given the FIGC a deadline of 25 July to finalise their European qualifying teams

Consequences
The results of the match-fixing trial could have huge consequences on football in the whole of Europe, let alone Italy. Thirteen of Italy's squad which had won the World Cup less than a week before play their club football for one of the accused teams and the rulings could spark a massive sell-out. 12 Juventus players went to the World Cup, including five for Italy. AC Milan also had thirteen players at the World Cup.

The suspensions mean that a total rehaul of Italy's European qualifiers has been made. Internazionale and Roma will qualify for the Champions League Group Stages, with Palermo and Chievo going into the Third Qualifying Round. Livorno, Empoli and Parma will all qualify for the UEFA Cup first round.

The original relegated trio of Messina, Lecce and Treviso have all been reprieved and will play in Serie A next season as another consequence of the scandal.


text:
Hezbollah-Israel conflict continues

July 15, 2006

As the conflict in the Middle East goes into its fourth day, Israel launched more air strikes against targets in Lebanon. Israel has also reportedly served Syria with a 72 hour ultimatum to stop the Hezbollah attacks on northern Israel and secure the release of two captured Israeli soldiers.

Israel said Saturday that Hezbollah fired two radar-guided, at an Israeli warship on Friday. Israel earlier said that the ship was hit by an explosives-laden drone. The ship,, was in Lebanese waters near Beirut Friday when it was hit. The first rocket was said to miss and the second hit the helicopter deck. Four Israeli sailors were reported missing, two later confirmed dead, as the ship caught fire. The ship has since been towed back to an Israeli sea port.

The Israeli military said that up to 100 elite had assisted Hezbollah in providing and helping firing C-802 missiles. This was denied by Iran and Hezbollah. Iran called it an attempt "to escape reality with the aim of covering up (Israel's) inability to confront the Lebanese nation and resistance".

An Israeli missile incinerated the people inside a van near the southern port of Tyre, killing eight children and nine adults and also wounding six others. Police said the vehicle the Israelis destroyed was carrying refugees fleeing the village of Marwaheen after Israel told them to flee via a loudspeaker announcement. Some Lebanese civilians sought shelter at a Ghanaian UN position, but were turned away and went back to the village; they were attacked as they fled for the second time.

Early on Saturday, more C-802 missiles were fired toward Israeli warships. According to the Israeli military, the missiles missed their intended target but hit and sank an Egyptian merchant ship.

Israel has given Syria a 72 hour ultimatum to stop Hezbollah's activity, according to London-based Arabic language newspaper Al-Hayat and a senior source in the United States Pentagon or else Israel "would launch an offensive with disastrous consequences.". The ultimatum also included the release of kidnapped IDF troops. Israel stated that if such a situation did not come about, they may attack targets within Syria.

Lebanese PM Fouad Siniora declared Lebanon a "disaster zone" Saturday and called upon the international community for a cease-fire and help to stop the Israeli "war machine". He added; "These are hours for unity, not for division".

Russian PM Vladimir Putin commented early Saturday that he suspected Israel had more on its agenda than rescuing kidnapped soldiers. Putin said at a G-8 press conference in St Petersburg that "it is our impression that aside from seeking to return the abducted soldiers, Israel is pursuing wider goals", without elaborating his statement.

Lebanon
At least 35 Lebanese were killed in Israeli air strikes, including civilians. According to witnesses, Israeli planes fired four rockets at the Masnaa crossing point, on the Beirut-Damascus road near the Lebanon-Syria border.

A building in Beirut where Hezbollah has its main office was hit again Saturday by Israeli warplanes. The Palestinian Hamas organization headquarters in Beirut was also targeted. No casualties were reported.

Israel's campaign against Hezbollah in Lebanon has so far resulted in the deaths of 96 people, most civilians, and at least 229 have been wounded.

The ports in Beirut and Tripoli were hit by Israeli warplanes on Saturday. Radar installations, a lighthouse and grain silos were hit in the raid on Beirut. The coastal cities of Batroun and Juineh were also hit. Two Lebanese soldiers were killed and three wounded in the attacks.

Israeli actions such as blockading Lebanese ports and targeting Beirut's Rafiq Hariri International Airport have also resulted in losses for the latter country's economy. The Israeli army said that it had struck about 150 targets so far, less than 12 of which (according to ) were directly connected with Hezbollah.

Israel
Areas in northern Israel have been under heavy shelling the entire night. Hezbollah fired 12 new rockets, which hit the towns of  and. Twelve people were wounded in Tiberias and over 60 in northern Israel, with heavy damage to property and houses.

The list of civilian locations that have been hit by Hezbollah so far include the city of, , Tiberias, Karmiel, , , , and smaller towns including Ma'alot, Meron, Kabri, Shavi Zion, Horfish, Elkosh, Zuriel, Oshrot, and others. So far, a dozen Israeli soldiers and four civilians were killed, and many dozens wounded.

Israel says it has deployed missile batteries, (which are meant to counter ballistic and cruise missle attacks, rather than small rockets fired by the Hezbollah) but did not state a reason.

Gaza
Israel is continuing its offensive in the Gaza strip against Hamas after a soldier named was kidnapped in a raid, June 2006.

Despite the Israeli offensive, Palestinians fired more rockets from the Gaza Strip into Israel, landing mainly in the town Shderot.

Background

This is the fourth day of violence after July 11 when Hezbollah attacked Israeli army patrols and captured two Israeli soldiers in a mission Hezbollah called "Truthful Promise". Israel later confirmed the soldiers were kidnapped and then began a mission it called "Operation Just Reward". On July 12 Israel set up a blockade of Lebanon and attacked the landing strips at Beirut International Airport as well as a fuel tank and other areas in Lebanon, while Hezbollah fired rockets into northern Israel. The scenes repeated themselves the coming days.

On July 15 Israel commenced air strikes on targets in central Beirut, the Lebanese capital, in an attempt to damage the infrastructure used by Hezbollah.

title: Hezbollah-Israel conflict continues


text:
User talk:BillMcMillan

Welcome
, welcome to Wikinews! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome!MyName 03:23, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * If you're interested in audio recordings, Audio Wikinews could always use more contributers
 * And of course, stories need writing!

title: User talk:BillMcMillan


title: File:15July2006.pdf


title: File:15July2006.sxw


text:
User:Kchase02

I'm the same Kchase02 at en wikipedia. I'm much more likely to respond to messages there, though email is also fine. Cheers!--Kchase02 03:52, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

title: User:Kchase02


text:
Suicide bomber assassinates prominent Shia cleric in Karachi, Pakistan

July 15, 2006

A suicide attacker detonated a bomb near the home of a prominent Pakistani Shia Muslim cleric in Karachi yesterday, killing the cleric and two other people, police said.

The death of Allama Hassan Turabi is likely to raise tensions in Karachi, which is often the scene of violence between Shias and Sunnis. Allama Turabi had narrowly escaped an attempt on his life in April 2006 when a bomb was exploded just after his car crossed the area. He was the leader of a Shia party, Islami Tehreek Pakistan, and a vice provincial chief for Mutahida Majlis-e-Amal Sindh (MMA), an opposition religious coalition.

Manzoor Mughal, a police investigator, said a lone attacker on foot had detonated the bomb at the gate of Allama Turabi's house as he was getting into a car. He died of his injuries at a private hospital in Karachi, and his guard, a cousin, and the attacker, were also killed. It was initially reported that the attacker was in a car. Mr Mughal said police had collected body parts, including the head of the attacker.

About 300 youths gathered near Allama Turabi's house after the blast, weeping and chanting slogans against the US and Israel. Reports said that public buses were damaged and set alight in disturbances following the killing, and one person was reported killed. Hours before the attack, Allama Turabi had addressed an anti-Israel rally organised by the MMA. The MMA is strongly opposed to the US led War on Terror and Pakistan's support of it.


text:
User talk:Ferox~enwikinews

Welcome
, welcome to Wikinews! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome!
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * And of course, stories need writing!

—     05:35, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Ferox. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Ferox~enwikinews that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:17, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 06:31, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ferox~enwikinews


text:
File talk:Flag of Italy.svg

Is it me or does this look more like the flag of Ireland? On my computer at least the 'red' looks orange.

title: File talk:Flag of Italy.svg


text:
Australia thrash South Africa in Tri Nations rugby match

July 15, 2006

Australia has bounced back from their 12-32 loss against the All Blacks a week ago, to defeat the South African Springboks 49-0 in the second round of the 2006 Tri Nations rugby union series. Australia scored six tries, two to inside centre Matt Giteau, as they recorded their largest win over South Africa. It was the first time a team had been held scoreless in the Tri Nations since South Africa's 28-0 loss to the All Blacks in Dunedin in 1999, and the margin was one point shy of the Springboks' worst defeat in their history, a 53-3 rout by England at Twickenham in 2002.

The Wallabies made four changes to their starting lineup that lost to the All Blacks the week before. Hooker Jeremy Paul, No. 8 Scott Fava and inside center Giteau were all moved into the starting lineup, with Rocky Elsom moving to blindside flanker. Queensland prop Rodney Blake was expected to return for the Wallabies, but failed to recover from injury in time. The Springboks, playing their first Tri Nations match of the season, introduced two un-capped players; Bulls winger Akona Ndugane and No. 8 Pierre Spies.

The first points of the match were scored by Stephen Larkham, who landed an early drop goal for Australia. Greg Holmes, Paul and Giteau all scored tries in the first half. Giteau grabbed a double, scoring his second try in the second half, along with fullback Chris Latham, and replacement lock Mark Chisholm. In total, Stirling Mortlock racked up 18 points through conversions of tries and penalty goals. The match was played at Brisbane's Suncorp Stadium, in mostly fine conditions, though the second half was covered in light rain. Next week South Africa will meet the All Blacks.


text:
Talk:Hezbollah-Israel conflict continues

The date has passed: DO NOT REVERT TITLE WITHOUT DISCUSSION
Ealturner 12:42, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

 * There has been much discussion but there is no consensus to leave the most important news event; the threat quote, out of the title. Please do not revert the title again unless there is a clear consensus to leave the quote out of the title. Neutralizer 12:56, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Quote Neutralizer: "to say the offensive is solely against Hamas or solely in response to the capture of 1 soldier. A historical account needs to go back to at least the Israeli bombing of the palestinian beach."

We have already debated this many times and have come to the conclusion that it's ok to say that. see debate on yesterday's article.TiB 13:18, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * TiB, Palestinian beach would be a bad example. Israel say publically they did not attack the Palestinian beach. German newspaper theorised it was a publicity stunt. If it's history anyone wants, we might as well go back to the 1948 Arab-Israeli war Ealturner 13:53, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Quote Neutralizer: "Can't say targets are Hezbollah when most fatalities are civilian" I agree.

Quote Neutralizer: "Can't say targets are civilian when most fatalities are military" Strongly disagree, NO military targets have been hit. NONE. only houses, cars, coffe shops and families.TiB 13:30, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Then how do you explain; "So far, a dozen Israeli soldiers and four civilians were killed"? Also, you can not possibly know that no military targets have been hit; you must be relying upon Israeli reports. Neutralizer 13:38, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I am relying on both Israeli sources and al jazeera to counter POV.

About the soldiers, There are constant gunfights along the border. That's where the soldiers get hit, not by missiles. The Hezbollah missiles have a terrible accuracy and are incapable of hitting military targets unless by accident. See wikipedia articles on Katyusha missiles and Fajr 5 Missiles which are the only ones that have been fired upon Israel as of now.TiB 13:48, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Quote Wikipedia article on Fajr-5 Missiles: "Like the Katyusha rocket and the Scud missile, however, at the limit of its range it is accurate only within a radius of around one kilometer."TiB 13:56, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I really can't grasp the logic. If you say the Hezbollah missles are incapable of hitting military targets how can we have a list of so-called Hezbollah "civilian" targets? I'll take the list out. Neutralizer 13:59, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * The list is not of targets Hezbollah is trying to hit, but of targets they HAVE hit. That is why the list is correct and important.TiB 14:06, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Please check dictionary definition for the word "target"; e.g. U.S. mantra; "we do not target civilians (even though we hit some)" Neutralizer 16:29, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

NPOV; Anglo/American POV

 * In accordance with our policy please see paragraphs 1 and 2. I am right now applying this sentence in paragraph 2; "maybe the best thing is to call attention to the problem publicly, pointing the perpetrators to this page".

 * Please do not see this as being critical, it is only normal,natural for humans to see things from one side or the other depending upon their own personal pov, location and background. However, with these series of articles western media's tendancy has,by far, been pro-Israeli which means we must be extra dilligent in identifying the bias in our articles. Neutralizer 13:45, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Please be more specific about which parts you believe to be POV.TiB 13:48, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Obvious Israeli POV presented in our articles(this article)

 * I think we all agree on 1 thing. Israel has killed many,many,many more civilians in the "Hezbollah-Israel war" than Hezbollah has.

 * Then why, when I got up this morning, did our published article say this; "Israel launches more air strikes against Hezbollah targets in Lebanon." and "The list of civilian locations targeted by Hezbollah include.." ?

This obviously sevices the Israeli propaganda side of the war (message being Israel trys not to kill civilains while Hezbollah tries to kill them) and it really needs to be addressed by more editors,imo. Neutralizer 13:56, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Quote Neutralizer: *I think we all agree on 1 thing. Israel has killed many,many,many more civilians in the "Hezbollah-Israel war" than Hezbollah has."

I agree, but the subtle diffrence is, as you said, Israel is not TRYING to hit innocent civilians while Hezbollah IS trying to target civilians. Its a subtle diffrence but an important one.TiB 14:02, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * TiB, I agree with you 100% but Neutralizer is right we don't need to use the word targetted. I've changed the word to "hit." Ealturner 14:12, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Israel is not TRYING to hit innocent civilians. Sure, they probably just have remarkably bad aim, right? PVJ(Talk) 14:44, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

About as bad as American's, they must use the same technology -- High

 * Please read my response on the next paragraph since it fits here as well.TiB 14:52, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Editors think their own POV is scientific fact

 * Here's the rub. What TiB just said (and Ealturner agreed with)"I agree, but the subtle diffrence is, as you said, Israel is not TRYING to hit innocent civilians while Hezbollah IS trying to target civilians. Its a subtle diffrence but an important one.TiB 14:02, 15 July 2006 (UTC)," shows that their blatant pov(imo) is not seen by them to be pov at all but rather as being 100% established facts to be reported here on Wikinews as facts. That's why so often many of our editors install their own western biased pov into our articles without even realizing it. It's no problem for Fox News or CNN but It's a huge problem for a NPOV publiction like wikinews. Neutralizer 14:10, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Warning an area before an attack and waiting until it is evacuated only to fire at empty buildings is, in my account, enough to merit that they are not trying to hit innocent civilians. If you have any proof otherwise please post it here.TiB 14:14, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Can I just point out this is an academic argument. It has no bearing on the news. Unless there is sufficient proof we need not say Hezbollah is targetting anywhere. Just report the facts what was hit. However we do have a quote where Hezbollah said they would target Haifia Ealturner 14:17, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Etiquette: Rephrase first; remove second

 * Just a heads up to everyone. Sometimes it's better to rephrase something you disagree with than remove it altogether. See example Ealturner 14:11, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

''The list of civilian locations targeted by Hezbollah so far include the city of Haifa, Naharia, Tiberias, Karmiel, Rosh Pina, Safed, Kiryat Shmona, and smaller towns including Ma'alot, Meron, Kabri, Shavi Zion, Horfish, Elkosh, Zuriel, Oshrot, and others. So far, a dozen Israeli soldiers and four civilians were killed, and many dozens wounded.'' Don't like the POV bias with the word "targetted"? Don't remove the whole paragraph.

This is what you do.

''The list of civilian locations hit by Hezbollah so far include the city of Haifa, Naharia, Tiberias, Karmiel, Rosh Pina, Safed, Kiryat Shmona, and smaller towns including Ma'alot, Meron, Kabri, Shavi Zion, Horfish, Elkosh, Zuriel, Oshrot, and others. So far, a dozen Israeli soldiers and four civilians were killed, and many dozens wounded.'' Change the word "targetted" to a word that does not imply the civilian locations were attacked on purpose. That way you need not remove the whole paragraph. Ealturner 14:11, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Good point Ealturner; very good point. Thank you. Neutralizer 14:20, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Good lad. Ealturner 14:37, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Massive news: Escalation of war?
The 72 hour Syria ultimatum is massive. It could spread the war to between Syria and Israel - ie. explicitly rather than by proxy. Were this to happen it could drag in other countries. I've changed the title in light of this information. Ealturner 14:24, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * That is true. Once Israel attacks Syria, Iran is most likely to come for aid since they have a signed mutual protection pact.TiB

 * grammar: should be "Israel gives Syria ultimatum". suggest rename to Israel-Hezbollah conflict continues, Israel ultimatum to Syria". Doldrums 14:28, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * make any suggestions quickly, as there's the correction needs to be made quickly. Doldrums 14:29, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Hezbollah-Israel conflict, you mean - alphabet/Hezbollah started it. Ealturner 14:39, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I think this qualifies as a "threat" according to my dictionary. Can we use this; "Israel-Hezbollah conflict continues, Israel threatens Syria"? Neutralizer 14:41, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * No, If its an ultimatum then its an ultimatum, why call it something else?TiB 14:50, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * No, If its a threat then its a threat, why call it something else? Neutralizer 15:23, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * All sources say its an ultimatum, only you see it as a threat.TiB 15:26, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Maybe you're right about this aspect. Thanks for the discourse. Neutralizer 16:32, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * issues ultimatum was the wording you were looking for. Like issuing a press release, but one that says we'll blow up bits of your country. --Brian McNeil / talk 20:18, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Silkworm: Not Iranian made?
The assertion that the Silworm anti-ship cruise missile is 'Iranian made' may well be false and an inflammatory statement by "a senior IDF officer" reference Ynet source article.

Our own sources and sources such as FAS suggest the Silkworm is made entirely in China and is only exported to the Middle East. Through other sources, it even sounds possible that Lebanon may have been supplied directly by China.

Any further comments? --Pvt Parts 14:26, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Thanks. Feel free to make article edits when you notice something presented as fact which is not corroberated as fact. Neutralizer 14:29, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * On further research, I've discovered that the C802 is the Chinese export version and the HY-2 is an Iranian/Chinese built version but are visually distinct. As the 'senior IDF officer' referred to the C802, I shall remove both the references to Chinese developed and Iranian built and leave the wikipedia link to avoid confusion.

 * Good work. Also, if anyone wants to make reference to future weapons sources be sure to mention all of the American weaponry/equipment that Israel is using in its attacks. Neutralizer 14:35, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * We should put in detail where we know it, including that Israel uses many US weapons. Don't delete detail unless it is not relevant. The fact the missiles are from China is something the reader would like to know. Ealturner 14:41, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I think there is an issue in that except for tenuous evidence we can't really say whether these missiles definitely originated in China or not. My own research points to this but is still inconclusive so it would be irresponsible to give it as fact --Pvt Parts 14:52, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I think it's an almost certainty Hezbollah got the missiles from Iran. Even if they were made in China, China would not have posted those missiles to Sheihk Nashrallah, Hezbollah House, Terrorism Division, Hezbollah, Beruit Of course on the off chance China has become a supporter of Muslim extremists (unlikely given they have their own muslim extremists) we cannot speculate in the news unless we have a quote. Ealturner 14:51, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * This; "I think it's an almost certainty Hezbollah got the missiles from Iran." is the speculation. Neutralizer 15:22, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * It's an educated guess. Wikipedia link says China stopped making the Silkworm missile in the 80's. Anyway, we're allowed to speculate on this discussion page. I would certainly not let you write that in the news piece. Ealturner 16:03, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I would certainly not let you write that in the news piece. And I would certainly not let you get away with being uncivil [[Image:Smile.png|20px]]. The country of origin is irrelevant. PVJ(Talk)[[Image:Flag_of_India.svg|25px]] 18:17, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * The detail is relevant news. Ealturner 21:23, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Article's looking good
It's really becoming a good riveting article now,imo. Let's just watch out for our collective pro-Israel pov and we'll be fine. Neutralizer 14:46, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Please stop spreading baseless acusasions about Israeli POV. You have filled the entire discussion page with them. I think you should read again everything you said on this discussion page before acusing others of POV.TiB 14:49, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Al-Manar TV
Who said this?

''Hezbollah attacks are "in response to Israeli provocation through the brutal attacks against Lebanon and the attacks on the southern suburbs, which Nasrallah warned Israel against attacking," Al-Manar TV said Friday. '' Ealturner 14:55, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * i'm guessing Al Manar itself (thats how its been reported), (presumably) speaking as a mouthpiece for the hezbollah. if u r concerned about it comment it out till we figure out what to do about it. Doldrums 14:57, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Quote from Wikipedia article about Al-Manar: "Al-Manar is surrounded with controversy due to its preceived ties to Hezbollah. In the United States, Al-Manar was categorized as a terrorist organization by a decision [2] made by the U.S. Department of the Treasury pursuant to Executive Order 13224, prohibiting their access to American news outlets. Many European countries have also prohibited Al-Manar broadcasts. In the Arab world, many consider Al-Manar and Hezbollah freedom fighters."

TiB 14:59, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * If we are to use the quote we will need to mention the ties to Hezbollah - or even that Al Manar is catagorised as a terrorist organisation. Otherwise the quote looks like it is from any old media, and we don't quote other media. Ealturner 15:02, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * yes. slipped my mind. do. Doldrums 15:04, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

we also need an israeli quote explaining the rationale for their actions, like this one (wld also be nice if we cld find a hezbollah spokesman comment to include in the place of this one). Doldrums 15:04, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Ealturner, why are you reverting my edits again? PVJ(Talk)[[Image:Flag_of_India.svg|25px]] 15:07, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * That was an edit, not a revert. I kept the same information and rephrased it. Ealturner 15:20, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Now, your rephrasing. //12 of which were directly linked with Hezbollah.// Who said that? Ealturner
 * Reuters. See

They say:''The Israeli army said on Saturday it had struck about 150 targets in Lebanon so far, fewer than a dozen of them linked directly to Hizbollah. Most have hit civilian installations.''

 * Again, I ask, where's the cite? Who said that? Ealturner 15:28, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Also "so far, fewer than a dozen of them linked directly to Hizbollah". Why did you write 12 when it was fewer than 12? Ealturner 15:28, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Lebanese Civilian deaths should not be buried at the end of the article
This reference "An Israeli missile incinerated a van near the southern port of Tire, killing 17 people, among whom eight were children, and wounding six others." needs to be in the lede as I expect it might be if the sentence was "A Hezbollah missile incinerated a van .. killing 17 people, among whom eight were children, and wounding six others." Neutralizer 15:08, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * one possibility is to add the phrase "including eight children" to the sentence in the lead reporting casualties. also need to check for any similar figures on the israeli casualty list. Doldrums 15:13, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * As per my knowledge, no Israeli children were killed by Hizbollah. let us update the lead to reflect the deaths of the Lebanese children for now, and then if any Israeli kids are killed we will add the information as soon as we get it. PVJ(Talk)[[Image:Flag_of_India.svg|25px]] 15:18, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Youre knowledge is incomplete. read the sources.TiB 15:24, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * idf website reports atleast one child killed in katyusha strike on Meron. (see scrolling Updaed Reports section) Doldrums 16:14, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

PVJ's edits

 * Ealturner seems to be reverting my edits about Lebanese casualties, even though they have been sourced from Reuters. PVJ(Talk)[[Image:Flag_of_India.svg|25px]] 15:11, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * That was an edit, not a revert. I kept the same information and rephrased it. Ealturner 15:21, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Now, your rephrasing. //12 of which were directly linked with Hezbollah.// Who said that? Needs a cite. Ealturner

 * I've read the reuters report. It made no mention of that statistic. Where did you get that statistic from? Why did you put it back in the article uncited? Ealturner 15:25, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Also please remain civil. There was no need to start a new headline to whinge at me. This is not a theater of war. Ealturner 15:25, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * note that i created this section, to keep different discussions separate. Doldrums 15:26, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I am being civil. Please check the source I have mentioned (Reuters) before reverting my edits. I have provided a link about the concerned figure above.PVJ(Talk)[[Image:Flag_of_India.svg|25px]] 15:28, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

(carried on from above)
 * Again, I ask, where's the cite? Who said that? Ealturner 15:28, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Also "so far, fewer than a dozen of them linked directly to Hizbollah". Why did you write 12 when it was fewer than 12? Ealturner 15:28, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Where it the cite? Who said it?  Ealturner 15:30, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * cite is listed above. i reproduce it here and conclude with a homily about the advantages of keeping different discussions separate from each other, each in one place. Doldrums 15:32, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * that's not a cite. That's a news report. Who said it. Ealturner 15:34, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

"The Israeli army said on Saturday it had struck about 150 targets in Lebanon so far, fewer than a dozen of them linked directly to Hizbollah. Most have hit civilian installations." (emphasis mine). i dont think reuters is fool enough to mix a quote and a separate statement in one sentence. Doldrums 15:37, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * The question remains: Who? "Israeli Army" is a big tent. Ealturner 15:38, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

The Israeli army said that it had struck about 150 targets so far less than 12 of which (according to Reuters) were directly connected with Hezbollah.

 * We don't quote other news organisations. But to prevent further ado on such a small matter, I'll agree to this. Though I think actually knowing who said it is necessary. Ealturner 15:37, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * i expect reuters uses the expression "israeli army said", when an authorised spokesman fot the army sez. we can check if IDF website has a press room Doldrums 15:46, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I don't want to appear uncivil here but I think it is fairly apparent from this sentence- The Israeli army said on Saturday it had struck about 150 targets in Lebanon so far, fewer than a dozen of them linked directly to Hizbollah. Most have hit civilian installations., that the Israeli Army made that statement. PVJ(Talk)[[Image:Flag_of_India.svg|25px]] 15:40, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I appreciate your taking time with me. I ask again, who said it? The caretaker who does the night shift at HQ? The reason that it matters is the information is POV and might turn out to be incorrect. Ealturner 15:43, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * When a news source quotes an organisation (in this case the Israeli Army), they usually speak to an authorised spokesperson of that organisation. I doubt whether an established agency like Reuters would quote incompetent people in their stories. PVJ(Talk)[[Image:Flag_of_India.svg|25px]] 15:49, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I note in this case Reuters failed to say that they had got the information from a spokesperson. We have no idea who said it. If indeed it was the Israel army that said it. Mistakes happen. Ealturner 15:53, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * so when reuters reports "the white house declined to comment", u think they asked the third gardener? Doldrums 15:55, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Reuters made the mistake. We handled the situation the best we could. Ealturner 16:02, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I'll bite :) "the white house declined to comment" - this means we trust the media organisation phoned up but got no reply. "Declined to comment" doesn't imply anything was said at all. Ealturner 16:02, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Incinerated.
I think using the term 'incinerated' (Context "Incinerated a van") is adopting Reuters own POV.

I would suggest that it is common knowledge that the only weapon that would 'incinerate' a van is an incendiary or flamethrower and that a missile or rocket 'hits' a target and 'destroys' the target by virtue of an explosion. Any other terms tend to become emotive.

I contend that using the term 'incinerated' from Reuters is only suitable if directly quoting their article rather than sourcing from it where we should modify context toward NPOV. --Pvt Parts 15:29, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * not pov i they were, literally,incinerated. Doldrums 15:30, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I am not sure that an international news agency like Reuters would have a POV. I am directly quoting their article. See

Also, as per Doldrums, if the children were literally incinerated as in being burnt till they were destroyed, it is not a POV, just an appropriate adjective. PVJ(Talk) 15:34, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I objected to the "tone" of the word. Incineration is something deliberately done to some corpses. This incident was presumably a tragic accident. At least we don't know the motivation to speculate. Ealturner 15:41, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * in·cin·er·ate
 * Function: transitive verb
 * to cause to burn to ashes
 * Doldrums 15:49, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I am referring to the fact that the van (as per Reuters), as also (presumably) the children's bodies were incinerated (as in burnt till they were completely destroyed), accident or not. PVJ(Talk)[[Image:Flag_of_India.svg|25px]] 15:45, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I don't disagree with the word incinerate on factual grounds. That's what happened. However I objected to the tone. In other words, I would be happy with the word if I was convinced the tone was not that Israel deliberately hit civilians. Ealturner 15:50, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * We are supposed to report facts. See What Wikinews is. PVJ(Talk)[[Image:Flag_of_India.svg|25px]] 15:54, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * From a NPOV - you know the wikilink. I think it's borderline but I'm not going to say anything more. I'd rather hear other's views on this. Ealturner 15:59, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I agree that incinerated implies of intent to incinerate. There is no diffrence between the van being hit and every other attack on both sides, both are meant to hit, incineration happens.TiB 16:03, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * i dont agree. if u target a vehicle with a missile, u're well aware that the likely result is that the vehicle's occupants will die in the blast or burn to death in the aftermath. Doldrums 16:06, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Especially if you were the ones who urged the people in that van to flee their homes. PVJ(Talk)[[Image:Flag_of_India.svg|25px]] 16:28, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * PVJ that is pure unbased speculation, there is no information, aside from lebanese sources, that this is what happened.

And as for the word incineration, you can just as easily put it on the boat attack, houses burned and the cars that were hit by hezbollah missiles. There is no difference.TiB 16:31, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * true. so i guess i'd support incineration if it specifically describes what happened - the victims were burnt to death, as opposed to killed in blast, or that a fire incinerated the bodies. btw, did anyone burn to death in a house, or were any cars hit by hezbollah missiles? as far as the boat attack oes, i know there was a fire on board, did any source indicate that the people killed on board were burnt to death? Doldrums 16:38, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree with PVJ(Talk). We have been reporting lots of events based on 1 sided Israeli cources. Neutralizer 16:36, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * If you can source any news source (which I have done with Reuters) as saying any Israelis were "incinerated", we will put that in the article. As to why Reuters used that word, maybe it had something to do with the condition of the childrens' bodies. I cannot say I have seen what rocket attacks do to kids but I would assume their bodies would have been pretty much destroyed-which would explain why Reuters used that word, probably based on a coroner's report or something. In any case, the point is that the word was sourced from a reliable source. PVJ(Talk)[[Image:Flag_of_India.svg|25px]] 16:43, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * As sorry as I am, There is an example, yesterday a car was hit by a Katyusha rocket, inside was a grandmother and her grandson, both burned to death.TiB 16:42, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * in which case we have to report the two in the same way. Doldrums 16:44, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * What I think TiB is saying is if you define incinerate as "burn to ashes" that could apply to a lot of things. Smoking a cigarette involves incineration. Why use incineration in this context? Ealturner 16:42, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Ealturner proceeded to confirm that the contents of the van (i.e the deceased children) had been incinerated. I proceeded to clarify that the contents of the van were in fact children. The current sentence reads An Israeli missile incinerated the contents (i.e human occupants) of a van near the southern port of Tire, killing 17 people, among whom eight (of those who were incinerated) were children, and wounding six others. . I trust that is okay everyone? Also, as a matter of interest, do news sources generally refer to dead people as "contents" of the vehicle in which they were travelling? For example, could we say "the contents of United Airlines Flight 93 were incinerated on 9/11"? PVJ(Talk)[[Image:Flag_of_India.svg|25px]] 17:26, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Ealturner proceeded to confirm that the contents of the van (i.e the deceased children) had been incinerated. In my note I said that the word incinerate was open to debate and that the discussion was on-going in talk. Ealturner 17:28, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't see why the fuss around the word "incinerated", it describes what happened to the van's occupantes. If they had been shot, then you would say that they had, well...been shot. I don't see why that word should only be used to describe what happened to one cultural group and not another. If someone, or something, burns until is is blackened and/or turned into ashes, then why not use the correct term? -- High 20:44, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I would agree the term "incinerate" is accurate enough. I'm not pushing for change and won't change without agreement, just raising the question about the tone of the word. In that sense alone doesn't seem right to me. Ealturner 19:45, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

terrorists vs militants
Why let a part in the conflict tell us what name to use aganst its opponents. Israel claim that palestinian militants are terrorists. We should not bring in unnecessary pov in articles even if attributed. Retorically, shall we call israel 'Israel, alledged terrorstate in Palestinians view' or something? international 16:05, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Hezbollah Wikipedia article - TiB 16:11, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * "Several international organizations, including the EU, and many governments, including the United States, have designated it a terrorist organization(*)."
 * Annoyingly, the statement that the EU designates Hezbollah as 'terrorist' is not borne out by statements further down the same article. --Pvt Parts 16:15, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * It's a tricky one. More properly, Hezbollah as referred to mainly in this conflict is the Military wing of the Hezbollah political party in Lebanon. The 'terrorist' designation is given by the United States, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Canada, Israel and Australia. (possibly others but it is hard to research). This, obviously does not count as the 'world view' of Hezbollah's status. --Pvt Parts 16:17, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

The word "militants" and terrorist is POV. Therefore I suggest we have three options I suggest solution three for this case. Ealturner 16:13, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) attribute the word. So an so says _____ militant/terrorist
 * 2) write your way around using either word
 * 3) write in both words
 * I dont think calling anyone militants is pov in an conflict like this is now. And its still pov to take Israels definition. If the 'terrorist' stay then we shall use ' by Palestinian called freedomfighters'. Better non of them but we have to write npovich. international 16:24, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * i think 'militant' is neutral, refers to the fact that Hamas is an armed faction, which Hamas acknowledges, and the armed status is not a formally conferred one (i.e. it is not an state's armed force or police, etc). Doldrums 16:18, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I'd agree, I don't think the word 'militant' is particularly 'loaded' but it still gives an accurate description of the military wing of Hezbollah. --Pvt Parts 16:21, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Hezbollah Wikipedia article
 * I disagree, Hezbollah is on the US ,UN and EU list of official terrorist organizations. And they should be treated as such.TiB 16:27, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * "The United Nations has not included Hezbollah on its list of suspected terrorist groups (which is just being drawn up)"
 * Can you give a citation that Hezbollah features on any UN terrorism list? I recall they tried to hash this out in 2004 but I recall Hamas and Hezbollah were not included back then and I am yet to see anything to indicate they are included now. --Pvt Parts 16:42, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * well, its a pov and we are not bound to it. international 16:29, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * it's also on the freedom-fighters list of a dozen arab countries, and not recognised as a terrorist organisation by many others. so we'd have to include all that too, all of which will make for a lenghty description. using 'militant' avoids that. Doldrums 16:30, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * On the same note you can say that Israeli soldiers are not actually soldiers but civilians because Israel is not recognized as a country by many arab countries.TiB

some Palestinians, who Israel call terrorists, and whom Palestinians consider freedom-fighters,

 * Fantastic. This is what wikinews is about. Ealturner 16:36, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * haha... thats a nice one. agreed.TiB 16:39, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Can we have some clarity. Is this intended with sarcasm?--Pvt Parts 19:54, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I think it's a humorous reflection on how obsessed WN is about NPOV ;-) Anyway, I think it makes the sentence to hard to read. "Palestinian militants" is shorter and clarifying without too much detail. --Jambalaya 19:59, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I've moved back to militants as the phrase in use was actually incorrect as it directly implied that all Palestinians consider militants to be freedom fighters which is not the view generally held outside of Hamas. --Pvt Parts 20:57, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

No, Defititely should not use the term terrorists in this instance; Neutralizer 16:38, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Though may I suggest a last little edit...

some people who Israel consider Arab and whom others consider Palestinians, who Israel call terrorists, and whom Palestinians consider freedom-fighters, fired a weapon those who consider themselves Palestinians call the Kassam rocket, that Israel considers missile Not too much to ask? Ealturner 16:39, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I am not sure, maybe I should bring it up on Admin action alerts and see what my fellow Administrators have to say about it? PVJ(Talk)[[Image:Flag_of_India.svg|25px]] 16:49, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * That would be an overreaction Ealturner 16:59, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Several international organizations, including the EU, and many governments, including the United States, have designated it a terrorist organization Various groups such as Al-Qaeda and Hamas prefer to refer to Israel as Zionist invaders. Does that mean that, in the interest of NPOV, we start reffering to the Israeli Army as Crusaders? PVJ(Talk)[[Image:Flag_of_India.svg|25px]] 17:50, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Crusaders are as the name implies, christians, and there have never been any jewsaders, so no. I still don't understand what exactly youre point is.TiB 18:16, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I've been reading the debate avidly, may I suggest the term 'combatant' rather than militant/terrorist/freedom fighter.wikipedia seems to suggest this would be correct--Manc ill kid 01:48, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Van & UN center
Article says Van was "carrying refugees who were fleeing the village of Marwaheen after Israel warned them to do so via a loudspeaker announcement."

This report says the passengers were on their way to a UN center when their vehicle was struck

another The residents said they had first gone to a UN Ghanaian position to take refugee but they were turned down.

another They reportedly went back to the village and were trying to leave again when the attack occurred.

Think we can add this info. Ealturner 16:58, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Van's contents
''An Israeli missile incinerated the contents (i.e human occupants) of a van near the southern port of Tire, killing 17 people, among whom eight (of those who were incinerated) were children, and wounding six others. . I trust that is okay everyone?'' PVJ

The word incinerate is still being discussed. The rest of it - yes. That is fine. Ealturner 17:31, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I do not think human beings are refferd to as "contents". I believe the correct word in this case is "occupants". Will change the phrase accordingly. PVJ(Talk)[[Image:Flag_of_India.svg|25px]] 17:35, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Occupants is fine by me. "Contents" was an improvement on "van" (which was not literally incinerated) however occupants is yet another improvement so I'm pleased with this ammendment. Ealturner 17:37, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Are you sure you do not have any issues with the "tone" associated with the incineration of the Lebanese occupants (among whom 8 were children) of a van by an Israeli missile? PVJ(Talk)[[Image:Flag_of_India.svg|25px]] 17:46, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * If we're carrying on from the debate above, I will refer to TiB's reference to an Israeli car hit by a Hezbollah missile. Incineration is an evocative word. Particularly so for Jews. While it's not racist it's not tactful. But then again on fact alone I have no complaints with the word. It's just the tone. Ealturner 17:53, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Silkworm and C802 confusion
New information has come to light regards the Silkworm and C-802. The confusion was apparently caused by the IDF officer who used "C802 Silkworm" as a term when the Silkworm is an entirely different missile to the C802.

This is the information as is now generally being reported and also as included in Wikipedia. On balance, the use of the early Silkworm design seems unlikely. I will update the story to reflect this. --Pvt Parts 19:17, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, great work. Ealturner 19:46, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

"At least 29 Lebanese civilians were killed in Israeli air strikes"
29 killed yesterday? Or today...? Be more specific :-) --Jambalaya 19:53, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

The names on the Israeli (and Lebanon) towns
Do we have to repeat the names of all the towns that were hit yesterday and the day before? Shouldn't we stick with today's events? --Jambalaya 20:03, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * The Airport was hit yesterday and we include that. I think it's of interest to the reader. We might want to be explicit which were hit when. Expand on the timeline with dates? We could continue to update this one timeline in other articles. It would be a good resource of dates and times of events. Ealturner 21:27, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I beg your pardon for changing the title. I'd be interested in a list of the Lebanon towns hit. I'm a list person. This sort of information makes people come back and read again IMO. Ealturner 21:34, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

A list for towns hit "today" or a list that includes every single town hit since the start of the conflict? --Jambalaya 21:36, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

"Fajr-5"
Where did the rocket ID "Fajr-5" come from? It's a pretty serious accusation that needs to be sourced. --Jambalaya 20:10, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I suspect it came from one of the Ynet articles which was updated. (Note that they also updated from "Silkworm C802" to just "C802") As viewed today, Ynet seems to be a bit of a shakey source to be using. The reference in the Wikipedia crisis article still hold up tho with a source. However, the validity is hard to know --Pvt Parts 20:51, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * The Fajr reference (speculation?) in the Wikipedia article comes from this blogpost(!) which hosts a clip from Fox News Channel saying that Israel said that Hezbollah fired Fajr rockets. --Jambalaya 21:02, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * With correction to myself it's actually in the Fajr-5 wikipedia article the source is Haaretz --Pvt Parts 21:11, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Ultimatum?
Should we really emphasize this "ultimatum" to Syria? CNN doesn't mention it, BBC doesn't mention it and I haven't seen AP and Reuters making much fuzz about it either. The only source we got on this is Ynet News, which I'm afraid to say, looks a bit like Jerusalem's Fox News. How reliable is it? How reliable is the Al-Hayat newspaper? --Jambalaya 20:28, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * As per my comment above, I'm not over enthusiastic now about Ynet's viability as a source for us. --Pvt Parts 20:53, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * The source comes from the Pentagon. Ealturner 21:28, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Neutralizer 3 revert rule violation
The day after the article has been published, against concensus that whatever we thought about his point a quote should not go in the title. Particularly that quote, as Jambalaya put it, without reliable source. Ealturner 13:10, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Headline needs to reflect most important content of the article
This is a quote from a source in te missle of the article; "The London-based Arabic language newspaper Al-Hayat reported Saturday that “Washington has information according to which Israel gave Damascus 72 hours to stop Hizbullah’s activity along the Lebanon-Israel border and bring about the release the two kidnapped IDF soldiers or it would launch an offensive with disastrous consequences.”

The overt threat by Israel is the mandatory headline as we could be heading into WW3. Neutralizer 00:18, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Don't change the title without out a discussion. Ealturner 00:21, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Why did you revert back? Why start a revert war when there has been no discussion?

I object to

 * I'm also objecting to a title change as well, it becomes excessive and almost like an mini editorial --Pvt Parts 00:26, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

"Hezbollah-Israel conflict continues, Israel threatens Syria with "an offensive with disastrous consequences."

Whether you're right or wrong is here nor there; it's not a good title too long, you and don't put a quote in a title. Ealturner 00:23, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I agree with this mainly on the length issue but quotations in titles don't fit with me either --Pvt Parts 00:28, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't see why a a long quote from a dubious source should be included in the headline. --Jambalaya 00:24, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

 * To Eal and Jam; you must have missed this quote; it's by far the most newsworthy aspect of the article. Please find other editors to support your view before reverting. Neutralizer 00:26, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

 * As I wrote in your talkpage, the primary source for the quote from the newspaper article is Pentagon. Speaking of psyops... Anyway, I think the headline with the quote (it's not a quote from Pentagon either, it's a quote from a London-based arabic newspaper) is too long. --Jambalaya 00:30, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Besides, does it REALLY matter? It's Saturday in the Middle East and new attacks have commenced in Beirut. We should really create a new article instead of arguing about the title of the old one :-) --Jambalaya 00:31, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

An ultimatum implies a threat - it's a demand. Ealturner 00:32, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

 * The threat within the ultimatum is the most important news event and I do not understand why a direct quote is not the best way to present the threat? Neutralizer 12:52, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I give up

 * Ok, I give up. If the community wants to sit back and allow our lead stories to be written by editors applying overt pov "Hezbollah started the conflict, they should be mentioned first." then so be it. I'm not continuing with it as it is too close to continual edit warring. Neutralizer 13:09, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Neutralizer 3 revert rule violation
The day after the article has been published, against concensus that whatever we thought about his point a quote should not go in the title. Particularly that quote, as Jambalaya put it, without reliable source. Ealturner 13:10, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Please see above topic; I will not continue as we are too close to edit warring every day on these articles. Here are just some of the other media that are reporting the quote in question and I still say the threat of expanding this war to Syria is extremely newsworthy as Ealturner said yesterday. Neutralizer 13:20, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

 * You changed the title without discussion. You changed it knowing there were objections. While I have yet to comment whether I object to your point - perhaps I don't - I have objected to this particular title. What was the need to break the three revert code for this? Ealturner 14:17, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Disputed?
This has now ended up in disputed.

AFAIK, the text of the article is currently by consensus with 1 dissenter. Does this really constitue an article pull? --Pvt Parts 14:28, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

publishing
am publishing this, with a changed title: Hezbollah-Israel conflict continues. the ultimatum stuff is being removed bcoz there does not appear to be any independent confirmation of the Al Hayat report, and also as per 2006 Israel-Lebanon crisis, tha Hayat report itself does not bear out the headline. "report in Al-Hayat on 15 July mentioned rumours in Washington, D.C. of an Israeli ultimatum to Syria to stop Hezbollah's activity along Israeli border, and force the release of the two captured Israeli soldiers in 72 hours, or it would face serious consequences.[102] Al-Hayat's source refused to confirm or deny the rumours."

Doldrums 14:47, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I accept this compromise. And I would like to thank Doldrums for his effort to resolve. Ealturner 15:12, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

The War is BullShit! Anti-War!


text:
California wildfires continue blazing

July 15, 2006

In Yucca Valley, California, USA, wildfires destroyed nearly 110 square miles of land (285 square km), burning over 45,000 acres (182 square km), as the outcome of two wildfires merging into one. Current conditions could only make it worse.

Over 3,000 firefighters and 36 aircraft were sent to fight the blaze, which some predicted would reach all the way to Big Lear Lake, a popular summer getaway vacation area, about 80 miles east of Los Angeles, California (129 km). Temperatures there reached up to 112°F (44.5°C).

Firefighters fighting the wildfire have successfully stopped it from burning the resort and other communities nearby in its path.

The continuous winds and the intense heat would only mean that the blaze would last even longer and call for more firefighters to overtake the flames.

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has declared a state of emergency for San Bernardino County as a result of the wildfires.

title: California wildfires continue blazing


text:
User talk:Pvt Parts~enwikinews

Welcome
, welcome to Wikinews! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! F e  llow  Wiki  News   (W)  17:11, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * And of course, stories need writing!

Username
Please note that your name is borderline possibly not allowed. See Username. F e  llow  Wiki  News   (W)  19:21, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * This same username hasn't been a problem at Wikipedia. Are the rules concerning names specifically different here? I wouldn't consider my username profane, insulting or in any way offensive and is actually a reference to a old video game for the Commodore Amiga called 'Hunter'.
 * No problem. F  e  llow  Wiki  News   (W)  19:31, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for your help with the article on Beirut. Dessydes 02:53, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

 * You are welcome :) --Pvt Parts 03:20, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Pvt Parts. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Pvt Parts~enwikinews that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:20, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 06:36, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Pvt Parts~enwikinews


text:
All Ferrari front row on 2006 French Grand Prix

July 15, 2006

Ferrari driver Michael Schumacher and his teammate Felipe Massa won the front row on the FIA Formula-1 French Grand Prix on the Circuit de Nevers Magny-Cours.

Renault driver Fernando Alonso third. A very successful qualification for Toyota team drivers Jarno Trulli and Ralf Schumacher, both cars after Alonso.

French fans noted original aerodynamic elements on the Williams-Cosworth cars - the so-called "Petronas towers" owing to the team prime sponsor Petronas.


text:
Talk:All Ferrari front row on 2006 French Grand Prix

Original reporting notes
TV channel - Ren TV, Russia

Date - 15.07.2006

Time - 15:45-17:15 MSK - «Formula 1»: «Qualification: Live from France»

Commentator - Alexey Popov

If there's something more to clarify, just write me...

--Yuriybrisk 17:52, 15 July 2006 (UTC)


text:
Wikinews:Briefs/July 15, 2006

The time is 18:00 (UTC) on July 15th, 2006, and this is Audio Wikinews News Briefs.

Hezbollah-Israel conflict continues, Israel ultimatum to Syria
Lebanon

As the conflict goes into its fourth day, Israel launches more air strikes against targets in Lebanon. Israel has also given Syria a 72 hour ultimatum to stop the Hezbollah attacks that continued to injure civilians in northern Israel and release the soldiers they claim were kidnapped.

Suicide bomber assassinates prominent Shia cleric in Karachi, Pakistan
Pakistan

A suicide attacker detonated a bomb near the home of a prominent Pakistani Shia Muslim cleric in Karachi yesterday, killing the cleric and two other people, police said.

Australia thrash South Africa in Tri Nations rugby match
sports - rugby

Australia has bounced back from their 12-32 loss against the All Blacks a week ago, to defeat the South African Springboks 49-0 in the second round of the 2006 Tri Nations rugby union series.

Closing statements
We invite you to visit wikinews.org for up-to-date news and information. This has been Audio Wikinews Newsbriefs. Thank you for listening, and enjoy the rest of your day. This recording has been released under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License.

title: Wikinews:Briefs/July 15, 2006


text:
User talk:The93owner

Welcome
, welcome to Wikinews! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! F e  llow  Wiki  News   (W)  18:49, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * And of course, stories need writing!

Image without source
Thanks for uploading images on Wikinews, However images without sources will be deleted. (see WN:IUP & WN:FU). Please source: Image:Yuccavalleyfire.jpg Thanks. F e  llow  Wiki  News   (W)  18:49, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * In other words, let us know where you got it from (IE. the website if online), or if it was a personal shot. 68.39.174.238 20:24, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:The93owner


text:
United Nations Security Council imposes sanctions on North Korea

July 15, 2006

The United Nations Security Council has unanimously voted to impose sanctions related to weapons on North Korea.

The resolution demands that North Korea 'suspend all activities related to its ballistic missile program.

The resolution requires all to prevent imports from or exports to North Korea of missiles and missile-related items as well as materials that could be used in

However, in order to keep China from vetoing the resolution, the resolution was not passed under of the, which is used on a legally binding document. However, the resolution is considered mandatory because of the way it is worded.

China and Russia proposed a resolution with weaker language, but later agreed to this tougher resolution.

North Korean ambassador to UN spoke after the vote and criticized some members of the Security Council for attempting to isolate North Korea. He also vowed that North Korea will continue with its missile testings.


text:
Royal Navy sailing for Lebanon

July 15, 2006

The Royal Navy aircraft carrier HMS Illustrious and landing ship HMS Bulwark have been ordered to 'make ready' to sail to Lebanon. It is reported that UK ministers are considering plans to evacuate UK citizens who are trapped there due to the Israeli naval blocade of Lebanese ports and the closure of Beirut airport on 13th July after Israeli airstrikes. It is also reported that they will help any New Zealand citizens as New Zealand does not have an embassy.

HMS Bulwark is currently off the coast of Spain and HMS Illustrious is in Gibraltar.

The UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office has advised UK citizens in Lebanon to "stay put for the time being and keep a low profile". They are advised to keep in touch with the British Embassy and to be ready for 'departure' at short notice as well as to have travel documents ready.

The move comes as the crisis between Israel and Lebanon approaches its fifth day.

title: Royal Navy sailing for Lebanon


text:
Talk:Royal Navy sailing for Lebanon

BBC source headline has changed... --Brian McNeil / talk 21:33, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * BBC article now makes no mention of the navy sailing to evacuate UK nationals. --Brian McNeil / talk 21:36, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Fixed link, now need to fix text --Pvt Parts 21:46, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Lack of information from Embassy
As of 9PM BST the Embassy in the Lebanon had not informed anyone inside Lebanon of the chance of evactuation via sea.

Source: Conversation via VOIP with father in Beirut.

title: Talk:Royal Navy sailing for Lebanon


text:
Talk:United Nations Security Council imposes sanctions on North Korea

Such a quick decision about North Korea, what's taking them so long with Iran?TiB 21:49, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * North Korea is just Communist no real value, no resources, no international firms working, much more simple Jacques Divol 23:21, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Broken already
This story has pretty much 'broken' already and is unlikely to see any further developments at least until Pyongyang have had their breakfast and they are more than likely going to wait for the UN to get back out of bed in NY before they make a statement on their position so this will warrant (probably) a new story.

I shall, therefore, remove the breaking tag. --Pvt Parts 23:44, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * North Korean ambassador to UN has already made a statement strongly protesting this resoulution. 68.229.152.169 00:53, 16 July 2006 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Dessydes~enwikinews

= My Articles =

 * Beirut Sunday 16 July 3:06 AM GMT
 * Civilian casualties increase as Israel continues to attack Beirut

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Dessydes. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Dessydes~enwikinews that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:14, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 06:30, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Dessydes~enwikinews


title: File:16July2006.pdf


title: File:16July2006.sxw


text:
20 fleeing Lebanese villagers killed by Israeli missile

July 16, 2006

Twenty Lebanese civilians from the village of Marwaheen died when the van they were travelling in was hit by an Israeli missile Saturday.

According to medical sources, half of the deceased were children or teenagers who belonged to two families, the Abdallahs and the Ghanems. It was the deadliest single strike since Israel launched a military campaign in response to Hezbollah's alleged kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers.

The people who died were fleeing their village in accordance with an Israeli announcement. Around 100 civilians tried to seek refuge at a nearby base of the U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) seeking shelter, but went home after officials were unable to confirm the warning by Israel, UNIFIL spokesman Milos Strugar told Reuters.

Those trying to leave were killed in the missile strike. When U.N. peacekeepers retrieved the remains of one Lebanese child who died, they could see his two charred hands still holding the bread of a sandwich, which he had apparently been eating when the Israeli missile killed him, to his chest.

Relatives of the victims were angered with U.N. forces over the deaths, pelting peacekeepers with stones when they arrived with the bodies after the missile strike. Mohammed Oqla, who was at the hospital, said, "If they had taken people in to begin with then they would never have died."

Israel fired on the vehicle as part of their widened offensive in Lebanon, responding to Hezbollah's attacks on Israel on Wednesday.

Israel apologizes
Israel has since apologized for the incident.

"Regarding civilian casualties in the area of Tyre, Lebanon, today Saturday 15/07/2006 17:43 The Israel Air Force targeted an area near the city of Tyre, in southern Lebanon, used as launching grounds for missiles fired by Hezbollah terror organization at Israel.

The IDF regrets civilian casualties while targeting the missile launching area.

Responsibility for endangering civilian population rests on the Hezbollah terror organization which operates and launches missiles at Israel from populated civilian areas.

In the last 72 hours the Hezbollah terror organization has launched hundreds of rockets indiscriminately at Israeli cities putting over a million Israeli citizens within the range of missile fire.

The IDF makes every effort to keep civilians out of harm's way as we continue to defend the citizens of the state of Israel."


text:
Talk:20 fleeing Lebanese villagers killed by Israeli missile

New article.
Although there was a mention of this incident in another article, I did not want to correct the published one (as per the style guide) so I went ahead and wrote a new story. PVJ(Talk) 07:55, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

 * If you write a new story you should atleast give all the facts and a comment by the opposite side. and add more sources. Copying the POV of routers is not what wikinews is about.TiB 11:26, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Reuters is a British news agency, what makes you think they are the Hezbollah's propaganda tool? PVJ(Talk)[[Image:Flag_of_India.svg|25px]] 12:23, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Added another non-Reuters source. If you you can find any comments by Israel on this incident, please do add it to the article. 83.161.4.134 13:32, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Anyway the Israelis apparently have nothing to say about the killings. PVJ(Talk) 12:30, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Appartenly they do:

"Regarding civilian casualties in the area of Tyre, Lebanon, today Saturday 15/07/2006 17:43

The Israel Air Force targeted an area near the city of Tyre, in southern Lebanon, used as launching grounds for missiles fired by Hezbollah terror organization at Israel.

The IDF regrets civilian casualties while targeting the missile launching area.

Responsibility for endangering civilian population rests on the Hezbollah terror organization which operates and launches missiles at Israel from populated civilian areas.

In the last 72 hours the Hezbollah terror organization has launched hundreds of rockets indiscriminately at Israeli cities putting over a million Israeli citizens within the range of missile fire.

The IDF makes every effort to keep civilians out of harm's way as we continue to defend the citizens of the state of Israel."

Official IDF websiteTiB 14:36, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Now this is what I call real journalism.TiB 14:43, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Merging (urgent)
Could we settle on just one (1) news article per day on this crisis? There's been created (at least?) four articles on the topic today; this, this, this and this. Could we please merge all four articles into one (1) article. So far, we've written just one article per day on this crisis. Could we please continue doing so? The current situation is VERY confusing. I came in here some minutes ago and I haven't a single clue on what article I should start editing!! --Jambalaya 21:29, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Israeli quote could be formatted better
I'm not sure on Wikinews style guides but with a quote that long it should be indented, the quotation marks get a little lost. When I first read it I thought that the quote finshed on the second line (could just be me).


text:
Wikinews:Print edition/New Zealand

The Wikinews New Zealand Print Edition is a weekly edition of New Zealand stories published on Wikinews designed to offer a different way of reading Wikinews. It is also designed to help bring new users in, by allowing people to print copies and distribute them to those who would never otherwise hear about Wikinews.

If you have any questions, then please don't hesitate to either leave a message on this discussion page or leave a message on the editor's talk page (Nzgabriel).

Other formats
We have two different type of formats, one is the older SXW and the other is the newer ODT. We started using ODT as of September 24, 2006.

The file formats mentioned above are available on request.

title: Wikinews:Print edition/New Zealand


text:
Hezbollah and Israel exchange fire for fifth day

July 16, 2006

Lebanese officials have said that an Israeli air strike on the southern city of Tyre on Sunday killed nine civilians and wounded 42. Additional attacks on Beirut's international airport set a fuel tank ablaze.

On Sunday, seven Canadian citizens were killed in Israeli air strikes on southern Lebanon, according to a spokesperson for Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay. Six others are in critical condition. The victims were not identified.

The Israeli offensive continued after rockets fired by Hezbollah hit a train station in downtown Haifa Sunday morning, killing eight civilians. Israeli officials claim that four of the rockets were made by Iran.

"After the Zionist enemy exceeded all limits killing and destroying ... the Islamic Resistance announces that it bombarded the city of Haifa with dozens of Raad 2 and Raad 3 rockets at 9 a.m. (0600 GMT)," said Hezbollah in a statement.

At 11:10 a.m., another round of five rockets was fired at Haifa, landing in the sea near Bat Galim, Kiryat Haim and Kiryat Motzkin. Four people reportedly suffered from shock in the attack.

Israel and Hezbollah have been trading attacks since Wednesday. The crisis began when Hezbollah militants made an incursion into Israel, capturing two soldiers patrolling the northern border. Israel has ordered over two million civilians to stay in bomb shelters.

Israel has been bombing various military and civilian targets inside Lebanon, while Hezbollah has been firing less accurate missiles of varying length into Israeli cities. Civilian casualties have been high on both sides.

Overall, over 700 rockets were fired by Hezbollah militants at Israel over the past four days.


text:
Talk:Hezbollah and Israel exchange fire for fifth day

NPOV
The extent of this being one-sided is obvious to the extreme. Unpublishable as it is in Wikinews. Neutralizer 13:30, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I disgaree, it states the facts. Ealturner 13:31, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Neutralizer, Please give reason for NPOV, and base you're arguments on sources before you put the POV tag on my articleTiB 13:32, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Restored the NPOV tag. Neutralizer is correct in that this article presents a biased view of events, for example misrepresenting rocket attacks as bombs and providing background of Hesbollah attacks while failing to provide background of Israel incursions. -  Amgine | talk en.WN 13:56, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

 * This article, as per title, does not claim to provide news about anything other than that stated in title. Ealturner 14:21, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

 * That title is "Israeli railroad station bombed. 8 killed, 23 injured." On your grounds we ought to object to the recent "20 fleeing Lebanese villagers killed by Israeli missile" on POV grounds as it does not provide a background of Hebollah attacks. Ealturner 14:22, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
 * As per amgines comments I have removed the word bombed from the title, and added an overview of the conflict.
 * If anyone has any other POV complaints please say so here so I can fix them and remove the npov tag. This article has been laying in the disputed area for too long. Thank you.TiB 16:10, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Should we forbbid news from middle east just because some are not gentle ?
Please Calm down.

I do not understand this edit war each time someone write on the subject. it's a lack of sesitivity and intelligence.

Should we forbbid news from middle east just because some are not gentle ? Jacques Divol 13:39, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

 * The stated aim of wikinews is for a neutral point of view. However many display their point of view openly. This is a conjuction I do not understand. I also do not understand why some users call other users "zionist" or "American" - that they are neither is beside the point. Ealturner 15:48, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I give up

 * Ok, I give up. If the community wants to sit back and allow our lead stories to be written by editors applying overt pov;

 * first example "I agree, but the subtle diffrence is, as you said, Israel is not TRYING to hit innocent civilians while Hezbollah IS trying to target civilians. Its a subtle diffrence but an important one.TiB 14:02, 15 July 2006 (UTC)"
 * second example"TiB, I agree with you 100% but Neutralizer is right we don't need to use the word targetted. I've changed the word to "hit"." Ealturner 14:12, 15 July 2006 (UTC)"

 * then so be it. I'm not continuing with it as it is too close to continual edit warring. Neutralizer 13:08, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I can give you twenty examples of you're own POV from the articles of the past 4 days. Please don't make this personal. The fact is, everyone has their own POV and the discussion should be kept as a discussion and not edit wars.TiB 13:52, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I as well have stopped to discuss with right-wing editors with an agenda(which indeed are always the same people). Instead, when an article is completely obviously POV, i'm just busting it, so that its issues get attention. It is a waste of time to discuss with those propagandists and should be handled by admins, not by editors. The job of editors is to provide constructive ideas and content - not to do useless discussions over and over with the same people guilty of trying to abuse wikinews as a propaganda-platform.--82.141.51.151 22:06, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Shortened title
Stats are still breaking so I've removed the stats from the title for now Ealturner 15:47, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikinews is not a theatre of war
Whilst an agreement could be reached that war was an acceptable term for an earlier article on this, that doesn't mean people need to declare war on each other and over-POV articles. I'd like to see more people justifying what's wrong with an article than assuming that because someone holds an opposing political position they cannot meet NPOV.

Anyway, I'm off to stir some shit by doing an infobox. --Brian McNeil / talk 15:49, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I agree with you, Brianmc. I'm fed up with this. Ealturner 15:50, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Any remaining NPOV objections?
I am considering removing the NPOV tag. Do we have any NPOV objections as the article now stands? Ealturner 16:42, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Any comments? Ealturner 17:49, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

 * As no comments have been forthcoming I will re-published the revised article. This is not to say there is nothing to comment about, rather there have been no comments. Ealturner 19:35, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

 * No, Article is still pov. Please read and address objections and find someone less involved to re-publish. Neutralizer 22:49, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Merging (urgent)
Could we settle on just one (1) news article per day on this crisis? There's been created (at least?) four articles on the topic today; this, this, this and this. Could we please merge all four articles into one (1) article. So far, we've written just one article per day on this crisis. Could we please continue doing so? The current situation is VERY confusing. I came in here some minutes ago and I haven't a single clue on what article I should start editing!! --Jambalaya 21:29, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Good point! Was my first thought.
 * But then, on second thought, when I thought about the situation I experienced, whilst preparing audio-news-briefs (anb) today, there were two articles concerning the crisis: During preparing anb, one article "vanished" from the main-page. Hence I deleted it from anb. Now it is there again.
 * Yes, it is a bit of a garble-warble we are showing to the readers/listeners of wikinews. On the other hand, this turmoil of news is the truth.
 * Even though I´m not envolved in the development of the articles, I do understand very well the difficulties your are all going through to formulate proper articles.
 * Due to the organization of wikinews, I think we have to live with the fact, that we might have several articles concerning one issue, which are just putting the emphazises on different aspects of the conflict. Therefore I think, it´s the best we can do, even though we all have the feeling this might be confusing.
 * Apart from that, other news-"organizations" provide several articles a-day for the conflict aswell.
 * Hence we might have to live with the fact, that we are offering more than one article, covering the same conflict from different angles.
 * I - for my part - can live with that. Gumboyaya 23:33, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Civilian casualties have been high on both sides.
Highly POV as this is suggesting that civilian casulties on both sides are comparable, when in fact they differ by more than a factor 10. --vonbergm 22:23, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

8 Canadains killed should be lead
Since it was in the bottom of the story it was known at time of publishing. Since this is the first G8 victims of the war it should be lede. Neutralizer 22:55, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

 * All right to remove the NPOV tag now? -- Robert (talk) 23:09, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

 * On the other hand, there is already a developing article about the Canadian casualties. The conflict itself is certainly not about Canadian citizens, so I would move it back to something closer to its original title. The newest sources are saying that Lebanese death roll has risen to 23, rockets have hit Nazareth, Afula and Givat E'la, civilians have been killed in Tyre, the G8 is blaming extremists. Since the Candian casualities already have their own article, we should move this one back to something else. -- Robert (talk) 23:17, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I say that the 8 Canadian death story have another article and suggest this article focus on the rest of whats already writen in it. international 23:52, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Warning: Cruel comment
I don't see why eight Canadians deserves their own article. Sorry about the cruelty, but there's horrible stories taking place in Lebanon every day. Just because they got a Canadian citizenship, does that mean they "deserves" their own article? What if it was eight Egyptians, would a _new_ article be written about them just like somebody did with this article? You may think I'm cold blooded, plain stupid and cruel, but my open minded question is; Is this Western biased? --Jambalaya 23:58, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
 * No its not a cruel coment. But its news. Look, more civilians is killed in Lebanon than in Israel. international 00:06, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, on the same token why are we talking about this whole conflict at all? Everyday more than 30,000 people die of preventable dieases. Are the citizens of Egypt or Lebanon more important than those of say Ghana or Zambia? Of course not right? News is news, you can't go off nixing articles just because you think there's an more important issue that's not reported on. This issue is espically important news at the moment since those are the first dead of any G8 nation right before the G8 summit. Also, I do think there would be an article here if expatriots/citizens of another country were killed in this conflict. There is no western bias here any more than there would be by reporting on the World Series of baseball rather than a Football Tournament in Mali for example.--202.153.114.201 06:22, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

title
it shld be "exchange" and not "exchanges". other title suggestions:
 * X reported killed on fifth day of Israel-Hezbollah clash
 * X = 20 + 9 + 8 +...

Doldrums 12:56, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


text:
User:Sobar/sub

This is Sobar's sub page to be used for anything or any subject that relates to Wikinews. This will be maintained later.

title: User:Sobar/sub


text:
User:Sobar/Sub

Sobar's Writing Contest
Some topics to discuss. I raised a few points at the water cooler very recently. One: why isn't there a page that explains how to use the IRC Chat? Two: Why does Wikimania have to sponsor all the writing contests? I propose that Wikinews users can sponsor as many writing contests as they want. Feel free to respond to these under the PROPOSALS at the Wikinews Water Cooler.

I also recently tried to get adminship, but, of course, I failed and was opposed. Thank you for setting me straight, I realize now I would never have been able to succeed in getting adminship. I have too little experience with Wikinews. But I wasn't kidding about being a real newspaper publisher. I'm actually right now in the process of putting a story in my paper about Wikipedia.

title: User:Sobar/Sub