Revision as of 23:38, 12 April 2024 editNovem Linguae (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Interface administrators, Administrators50,965 edits Undid revision 1218647506 by 27.96.195.160 (talk) - WP:ARBECRTag: Undo← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:03, 13 April 2024 edit undoMike Selinker (talk | contribs)Administrators110,813 edits →Requested move 2 April 2024: Closing requested move survey; page movedNext edit → | ||
Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
== Requested move 2 April 2024 == | == Requested move 2 April 2024 == | ||
<div class="boilerplate mw-archivedtalk" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;"><!-- Template:RM top --> | |||
{{requested move/dated|2024 Iranian consulate airstrike in Damascus}} | |||
:''The following is a closed discussion of a ]. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a ] after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.'' | |||
The result of the move request was: '''Move to ].''' The only consensus for a move here is ]. It's possible that "airstrike" is more precise but there isn't consensus to make that change; a second RM might be useful if people want that. ] (]) 01:03, 13 April 2024 (UTC) | |||
---- | |||
] → {{no redirect|2024 Iranian consulate airstrike in Damascus}} – I think the article being retitled to '''2024 Israeli bombing of the Iranian embassy in Damascus''' by ] is not appropriate. I suggest moving it back to 2024 Iranian consulate airstrike in Damascus: | ] → {{no redirect|2024 Iranian consulate airstrike in Damascus}} – I think the article being retitled to '''2024 Israeli bombing of the Iranian embassy in Damascus''' by ] is not appropriate. I suggest moving it back to 2024 Iranian consulate airstrike in Damascus: | ||
Line 185: | Line 189: | ||
*'''Support'''. Assuming that current info on the page is correct (i.e. ''an Israeli airstrike destroyed the Iranian consulate annex building adjacent to the Iranian embassy in Damascus'') the building was not Iranian embassy. Hence the title is misleading and should be changed as suggested or to something else. ] (]) 23:31, 12 April 2024 (UTC) | *'''Support'''. Assuming that current info on the page is correct (i.e. ''an Israeli airstrike destroyed the Iranian consulate annex building adjacent to the Iranian embassy in Damascus'') the building was not Iranian embassy. Hence the title is misleading and should be changed as suggested or to something else. ] (]) 23:31, 12 April 2024 (UTC) | ||
<div style="padding-left: 1.6em; font-style: italic; border-top: 1px solid #a2a9b1; margin: 0.5em 0; padding-top: 0.5em">The discussion above is closed. <b style="color: #FF0000;">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.</div><!-- from ] --> | |||
</div><div style="clear:both;" class=></div> |
Revision as of 01:03, 13 April 2024
Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. Parts of this article relate to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing the parts of the page related to the contentious topic:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. If it is unclear which parts of the page are related to this contentious topic, the content in question should be marked within the wiki text by an invisible comment. If no comment is present, please ask an administrator for assistance. If in doubt it is better to assume that the content is covered. |
A news item involving Israeli airstrike on the Iranian consulate in Damascus was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the In the news section on 5 April 2024. |
This article is rated Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Requested move 2 April 2024
- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: Move to Israeli bombing of the Iranian embassy in Damascus. The only consensus for a move here is WP:NOYEAR. It's possible that "airstrike" is more precise but there isn't consensus to make that change; a second RM might be useful if people want that. Mike Selinker (talk) 01:03, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
2024 Israeli bombing of the Iranian embassy in Damascus → 2024 Iranian consulate airstrike in Damascus – I think the article being retitled to 2024 Israeli bombing of the Iranian embassy in Damascus by User:Dylanvt is not appropriate. I suggest moving it back to 2024 Iranian consulate airstrike in Damascus:
- Is not a concise title (WP:Concise)
- If you look at List of attacks on diplomatic missions you'll see that a good portion of articles are named by a year, mission attacked, bombing, location of mission or year, attack, mission attacked, location of mission format. Very rarely is the assailant named in the title like it is in United States bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade.
- Israel is suspected/accused of the attack. The lede doesn't even mention this like 2023 Damascus airstrike. Currently, it only mentions Iran blaming the United States (and Israel in the infobox). So I fail to see how this is WP:Precise. Huge number of news sources are still running with Iran accuses. I can also see this becoming an issue later down the line and used for justification in future contentious titling arguments. It would be best to avoid that.
I suggest we move it back to the original title of 2024 Iranian consulate airstrike in Damascus or 2024 airstrike of the Iranian consulate in Damascus to maintain a sense of consistency and accuracy. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 15:13, 2 April 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 10:41, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support: As it appears, the perpetrator is not mentioned in the titles of articles regarding attacks on embassies. For the sake of both consistency and conciseness, naming the perpetrator in the title itself is not useful. ―Howard • 🌽 21:07, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- The example of United States bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade was literally presented in the opening statement. It is in fact the case that state on state attacks normally do include the perpetrator. Titles without perpetrators are often a function unclear, non-state origins. Iskandar323 (talk) 21:31, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- That article is the only example which is presented. There is also the 2024 raid on the Mexican embassy in Ecuador which doesn't mention that the perpetrator is Ecuador in the title. In any case, why should specifically state-on-state attacks mention the perpetrator in the title, while those perpetrated by non-state actors aren't mentioned? In addition, when attacks are state-on-state but do not focus on the attack of a diplomatic mission, then the perpetrator isn't usually mentioned (for example: Bombing of Dresden, Attack on Pearl Harbor, Raid on the Medway). ―Howard • 🌽 22:31, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- The example of United States bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade was literally presented in the opening statement. It is in fact the case that state on state attacks normally do include the perpetrator. Titles without perpetrators are often a function unclear, non-state origins. Iskandar323 (talk) 21:31, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:ARBECR –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:57, 12 April 2024 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
- Support per nom. Zinderboff(talk) 18:22, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support per all the reasons provided by nom. --GnocchiFan (talk) 19:35, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- Query, why is this rm even necessary? Surely an admin could move the article back as undoing vandalism? Abductive (reasoning) 20:16, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose I prefer a title that includes the fact that the airstrike was Israeli. It could be moved to 2024 Israeli airstrike on Iranian consulate in Damascus. Current title also seems fine to me. Ecrusized (talk) 20:22, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:ARBECR –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:57, 12 April 2024 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
- Oppose: Looking at the List of attacks on diplomatic missions, most of the perpetrators weren't polities like Israel. I would say that if we were to remove the perpetrator from the name (which I oppose), we should make it clear that Iran wasn't the perpetrator. Perhaps "2024 airstrike on the Iranian consulate in Damascus", which is more consistent with other articles. Again, though, I think including the perpetrator is significant, especially in this case. BappleBusiness 22:13, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: After perusing that list for articles about specific attacks, the only one on the list that was perpetrated by a nation (unless I overlooked one, in which case my apologies) was the United States bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade, whose article title is of the same format as the current title of this article, except for not including the year. There is also 2008 bombing of Indian embassy in Kabul, in which India and the NYT accuse Pakistan of being behind it, but they deny it, unlike here --Gimmethegepgun (talk) 22:06, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. It is widely accepted (and actually undisputed) that the bombing was by Israel. No need to remove or change anything.
- Oppose as per above and because the title '"2024 Iranian consulate airstrike in Damascus"' suggests that it was an Iranian attack against whatever consulate in Damascus instead of an attack against the Iran embassy by Israel, as acknowledged by all major international media and Israel itself. MaeseLeon (talk) 06:10, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per the above. Skitash (talk) 14:37, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose: Title is clear and precise, with no problems + per above. Iskandar323 (talk) 16:19, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:ARBECR –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:57, 12 April 2024 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
- Support Iranian consulate airstrike in Damascus does not imply that Iran carried out the attack. Consulates are buildings, they can't attack anyone. Also the "fact" that Israel carried out the bombing, although widely alleged, is not established by evidence provided by Iran or Syria. The title should not be including an alleged perpetrator.Monopoly31121993(2) (talk) 19:34, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- NYT, Axios, WP, AP - all finger Israel in own voice. Who's denying it? Iskandar323 (talk) 19:50, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
So what? We already know the consulate isn't performing the attack, because that would be a "consular airstrike".Iranian consulate airstrike in Damascus does not imply that Iran carried out the attack. Consulates are buildings, they can't attack anyone.
- The problem is that "consulate Iranian airstrike" is grammatically forbidden, or at least unnatural. Thus "Iranian consulate airstrike" becomes idiomatic for both "an airstrike on an Iranian consulate" and "an Iranian airstrike on a consulate". Context (including that "buildings...can't attack anyone") is insufficient to distinguish between the two.
- Moreover: Iran is famous (in English-language sources, anyways) for attacking a diplomatic facility. Context-dependence here effects the incorrect interpretation. Bernanke's Crossbow (talk) 20:43, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Note: My third bullet point was about the article at that exact time point in time. New information and statements have been made since then. Clearly Israel has made more comments about the strike. Obviously, the article on Misplaced Pages has changed as well.
- My main point was about how it should follow the precedent of other articles as I mentioned in the second bullet point. See 2013 Iranian embassy bombing in Beirut as another use case example. See also, World Central Kitchen drone strikes. That attack happened on the same day as this airstrike (1 April 2024). Note how the title doesn't mean WCK conducted the drone strike. Additionally how the article isn't titled something like Israeli drone strike of World Central Kitchen.
- I just know leaving the current title will led it to be justification in future contentious titling arguments, where things are not as easy to discern. This is why I suggest going with a simple title that follows previous naming examples.
- Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 20:06, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- As noted above, it is exceptionally rare for embassies to be directly targeted by state actors, so the emphasis here is arguably warranted. I believe the last such event was the United States bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade, which does indeed frame it in the same format. Iskandar323 (talk) 20:44, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per the majority of sources listed. Also, while Consular Sections at embassies are often called consulates, the bombed building was still part of the Iranian Embassy complex. The perpetrator has also been named in multiple sources and itself has not denied involvement. Finally, I'm unconvinced that "airstrike" would be better than bombing. — kashmīrī 20:41, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- I'm ok with bombing as well. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 21:26, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose: Title representative of sources. selfworm 02:15, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Reuters calls it an "Israeli strike"
- selfworm 14:29, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per the above. RamHez (talk) 05:16, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support per above, airstrike is better than bombing as not every bombing is an airstrike. FortunateSons (talk) 09:55, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Move to Israeli airstrike on the Iranian embassy in Damascus We should remove the date (per WP:NOYEAR as there is no other Israeli airstrike on the Iranian consulate in Damascus), and should change "bombing" to "airstrike" (as that is actually what happened). As per above, the rest of the article title is fine. Gödel2200 (talk) 12:51, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- This is also ok. The year is non-essential, and airstrike is potentially more precise, though it is not a big deal - a bombing it is; just of the aerial variety. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:18, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I actually think this is better. The year is superfluous per NOYEAR. Dylanvt (talk) 19:43, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- I like it, too. — kashmīrī 19:53, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
I like this too. waddie96 ★ (talk) 13:12, 5 April 2024 (UTC). Crossing out as: I like the WP:NOYEAR suggestion, however prefer Israeli bombing of the Iranian embassy in Damascus as stated below. waddie96 ★ (talk) 13:21, 5 April 2024 (UTC)- Yes, this seems fine. Bernanke's Crossbow (talk) 20:30, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:ARBECR –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:57, 12 April 2024 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
- Support: Should follow the WP:Concise and general pattern. User:Sawerchessread (talk) 02:24, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The suggested title is confusing, which word is described as Iranian, the "airstrike" or the "embassy"? The current title is certainly longer but much clearer in my opinion. Terbofast (talk) 06:24, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose or Move to Israeli bombing of the Iranian embassy in Damascus: Per above reasons, mainly since it shows the reader immediately that the bombing was Israeli, and per WP:NOYEAR suggestion by Gödel2200. waddie96 ★ (talk) 13:06, 5 April 2024 (UTC), edited waddie96 ★ (talk) 13:21, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support: Should follow the WP:Concise and general pattern. Additionally, the airstrike being carried out by Israel is a claim by Iran, and Misplaced Pages is not in place of pushing claims by one side without actual verification, there is a lot of misinformation, propaganda, and misleading information in relation to Israel and Iran. The title cannot make such a claim in wikivoice. PicturePerfect666 (talk) 16:07, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- In CNN ref 1 "Four unnamed Israeli officials acknowledged that Israel carried out the attack” and that "the US’ assessment was that Israel had carried out the airstrike.” Therefore, I’d say it’s more than a 'claim' by just Iran that the bombing was carried out by Israel. waddie96 ★ (talk) 16:25, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- This needs to be looked at in the wider context of reporting on the issues in the area and that not all previously accepted reliable journalism is actually reliable. Also the current sources in the article state "claimed by Iran".
- This is not my OR this is other sources stating the unreliable nature of media reporting Vox, Africa News, NPR
- PicturePerfect666 (talk) 17:08, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- In CNN ref 1 "Four unnamed Israeli officials acknowledged that Israel carried out the attack” and that "the US’ assessment was that Israel had carried out the airstrike.” Therefore, I’d say it’s more than a 'claim' by just Iran that the bombing was carried out by Israel. waddie96 ★ (talk) 16:25, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:ARBECR –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:57, 12 April 2024 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
- Propose alternative 2024 airstrike of Iranian consulate in Damascus. While I do not agree with point 3 of nom, I do find WP:CONCISE a good point. I also agree with LatekVon's question on the nom's clarity. NasssaNser 07:23, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose: in bombings by individuals or small relatively unknown groups, WP:COMMON, referring to the event in a conversation, would be something like “when the embassy got bombed (by a terrorist group)”, but when it’s a well-known actor like Hamas or Israel, we say “when Israel bombed the Iranian Embassy”. Just as we do for the October 7 attacks. The event’s importance is not that the building “got bombed” but rather that Israel bombed an Iranian Embassy.Keizers (talk) 19:08, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose alternative, the building was part of the Iranian Embassy, not a standalone consulate. — kashmīrī 08:52, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose/propose alternative: "2024 Iranian consulate airstrike in Damascus" is misleading, as it suggests that Iran performed the airstrike. "2024 airstrike of the Iranian consulate in Damascus" is insufficiently concise and uses the wrong preposition: a better title would be "2024 airstrike on the Iranian Damascus consulate". Bernanke's Crossbow (talk) 20:27, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose alternative, the building was part of the Iranian Embassy, not a standalone consulate. — kashmīrī 08:52, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: my last here as it looks like oppose/alt is going to be the path forward as of now. Would like to point out 2024 attack on the Mexican embassy in Quito as another contemporary article. Not saying apples to apples here, but still an example of state acting on another state's diplomatic mission. Classicwiki (talk) If you reply here, please ping me. 21:17, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Well, the current title is pretty clear who did the bombing. I think the proposed one is too ambiguous and you don't know if it was Israel or ISIS or the FSA from just the title alone. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 04:32, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support change , I mean guys there is a really big mistake here in understanding! The building is not the embassy building! It's a building next to the embassy building, I mean just look at the pictures, you can see the fence of the embassy does not include the bombed building but encloses the embassy compound, so the building is just next to it but not part of the embassy. Also consulates are always in different cities to the location of the embassy building! If Italy has an embassy in Cairo it would have a consulate in Alexandria but Italy wouldn't have a consulate in Cairo. So this is a big mistake. Titlt should be: 2024 Israeli strike of Iranian building adjacent to the Iranian embassy in Damascus. I know the name sounds bad but it's accurate. ElLuzDelSur (talk) 08:33, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Revert to status quo. It's possible there are better titles than "2024 Iranian consulate airstrike in Damascus", but the most important aspect is whether we refer to it as a consulate or an embassy, as that is the part that could result in us violating WP:NPOV. Reliable sources consistently refer to this as an airstrike on the consulate; searching for "Airstrike Damascus", of the first ten results:
- Sky News; "Embassy" - "suspected Israeli airstrike on Iran’s embassy in Damascus, Syria."
- SBS; "near Iran's Embassy" - "attack near Iran's Embassy in Damascus, assumed to be by Israel"
- Al Jazeera; "consulate" - "Israeli fighter jets fired missiles at the Iranian consulate in Syria’s capital Damascus earlier this week"
- CNN; "consulate" - "The airstrike destroyed the consulate building in the capital Damascus" "The consulate building, which includes the ambassador’s residence and is located next to the Iranian Embassy, is considered sovereign Iranian territory. "
- AP; "consulate" - "An Israeli airstrike that demolished Iran’s consulate in Syria"
- Iran International; "embassy" - "The European Union on Wednesday called for restraint after an airstrike on the Iranian embassy in Damascus killed seven Revolutionary Guards."
- ABC; "consulate" - "after a suspected Israeli air strike on Iran's consulate"
- The Guardian; "consulate" - "Israeli war planes destroyed the Iranian consulate in Damascus"
- Reuters; "consulate" or "embassy compound" - "at its embassy compound in Damascus", "which destroyed a consular building adjacent to the main embassy complex"
- VOA; "consulate" - "that destroyed the Iranian consulate in Damascus, Syria"
- Six sources use "consulate", two use "embassy" including one whose reliability is unclear, and the other two use other terminology; it would be inappropriate for us to do differently. BilledMammal (talk) 08:51, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Consulate is a name traditionally used for the offices occupied by an embassy's consular section; however, those offices are still a part of the embassy. — kashmīrī 08:55, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- It's more complicated than that - but the only thing that is relevant here is that reliable sources consider "consulate" more accurate, and I don't see any bases for us to reject their assessment. BilledMammal (talk) 09:08, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Sources repeat it one after another; usually after agency reports; that doesn't mean we should blindly copy them when incorrect and when we have plenty of correct sources. — kashmīrī 09:13, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Diplomatic and consular premises: UN
- Consular Section: Kazakhstan MFA , South African MFA , Iran MFA (they know best what was located there)
- Embassy: The Atlantic Council , The Telegraph , TRT , RFE (also consulate), Bloomberg , DW and many others. Your claim that only two sources use "embassy" is plainly incorrect. — kashmīrī 09:22, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- My claim is that of a relatively random sample of ten articles about this incident, only two used "embassy". Without knowing your methodology, we have no way of knowing whether your sources are a representative sample - what was your methodology?
- Further, reviewing your sources, they don't say what you claim they say:
- The Atlantic Council - "embassy annex"
- The Telegraph - "consular building" and "embassy"
- TRT - "embassy", but considered unreliable for this topic at WP:RSP
- RFE - "consulate" (only uses "embassy" in the headlines, which are unreliable per WP:HEADLINES)
- Bloomberg - "embassy"
- DE - "consulate" (only uses "embassy" in the headlines, which are unreliable per WP:HEADLINES)
- BilledMammal (talk) 11:59, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- The consular mission in a capital is an embassy. An embassy provides consular services, which means it can have a dedicated consular wing/building that can be referred to as a 'consulate', but is still part of the embassy compound. The efforts by some media outlets to label this as a strike on a 'consulate' instead of the embassy is quite clearly an attempt to diminish what is an egregious violation of the Vienna convention on diplomatic missions, and this sidestepping language is a disservice to their readers, as it would be to ours were it replicated here. Calling this a strike on an embassy is just calling a duck a duck; replacing this with 'consulate' is shenanigans. Iskandar323 (talk) 10:41, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- I couldn't express it better. — kashmīrī 11:34, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- It's not our place to decide that reliable sources are incorrect; we don't WP:RGW. BilledMammal (talk) 11:59, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- This falls into the category of WP:COMMONSENSE. Capitals have embassies; other cities have consulates. That a handful of sources seem to be confused about this is neither here nor there. No need to pander. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:03, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Indeed, that's the rough idea. Granted, sometimes (albeit very rarely) embassies are not located in the capital city, or consular sections are located in another part of the city than the main embassy complex, or there are only honorary consulates but no embassy in the country. But a typical setup, and one in place in the Iran/Syria instance, is the one you described. — kashmīrī 11:51, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- This falls into the category of WP:COMMONSENSE. Capitals have embassies; other cities have consulates. That a handful of sources seem to be confused about this is neither here nor there. No need to pander. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:03, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- It's more complicated than that - but the only thing that is relevant here is that reliable sources consider "consulate" more accurate, and I don't see any bases for us to reject their assessment. BilledMammal (talk) 09:08, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Consulate is a name traditionally used for the offices occupied by an embassy's consular section; however, those offices are still a part of the embassy. — kashmīrī 08:55, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:ARBECR –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:57, 12 April 2024 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
- Oppose It's almost beyond doubt who and what the perpetrators and targets are respectively. --Masssly (talk) 15:49, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:ARBECR –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:57, 12 April 2024 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
- Oppose It was done by Israel so i don't know why we should mention it Braganza (talk) 09:21, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support or support a similar title per nom. I don't like 'bombing' for precision reasons. 🇺🇲JayCubby✡ please edit my user page! Talk 18:15, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:ARBECR –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:57, 12 April 2024 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
- Oppose. I was looking for this article, and didn't know its title, so I searched "2024 Israeli" and it showed up. The current title is much more natural than the opening proposal (or NasssaNser's alternate proposal). Concision shouldn't come at the cost of making the article harder to find. Also, I suggest creating a redirect at "2024 Israeli strike on", so that (equally natural) partial query gets autocompleted too. Also agree with kashmiri's reasoning above on "embassy" > "consulate". DFlhb (talk) 23:06, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose the title is clearly written. I was originally more in favor of "consulate" although I agree with kashmiri as well, and would also note that "bombing" is more WP:CONCISE than "airstrike". Would also agree with waddie96's suggestion to move to "Israeli bombing of the Iranian embassy in Damascus" per WP:NOYEAR. Aquabluetesla (talk) 02:02, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Move to Israeli airstrike on the Iranian embassy in Damascus per Gödel2200 and the others who agreed that this is the correct title. It is WP:BLUE that this was done by Israel, the year is not needed (concise) due to it being a unique and harrowing event, airstrike is more precise than bombing, and consulate is misleading due to it being adjacent to the embassy (itself coming within an inch of being destroyed). "Bombing of the embassy" does not work because only the adjacent building was actually bombed/destroyed, whereas the complex in its entirety can be said to have been struck. Havradim leaf a message 02:24, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
WP:ARBECR –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:57, 12 April 2024 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
- Oppose skarz (talk) 04:23, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Note: WikiProject Military history, WikiProject Israel, WikiProject Palestine, WikiProject Arab world, WikiProject International relations, WikiProject Iran, WikiProject Syria, WikiProject Death, and WikiProject Military history/Post-Cold War task force have been notified of this discussion. RodRabelo7 (talk) 23:42, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose: the proposed title is potentially misleading, as if Iran has bombed itself. The suggested change of "embassy" to "consulate" is a bit of an obfuscation; the consular building was part of the embassy compound, so the present title is correct. See for example: Debris is cleared away after an Israeli attack on the Iranian embassy compound in Damascus, Syria, on Monday. (Ravid, Barak (1 April 2024). "U.S. tells Iran it "had no involvement" in Israel strike". Axios.) The only worthwhile change would be to remove "2024" as no prior strike on the embassy has occurred. --K.e.coffman (talk) 06:07, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. The current title is clear and sound. Cfls (talk) 22:38, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Assuming that current info on the page is correct (i.e. an Israeli airstrike destroyed the Iranian consulate annex building adjacent to the Iranian embassy in Damascus) the building was not Iranian embassy. Hence the title is misleading and should be changed as suggested or to something else. My very best wishes (talk) 23:31, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages In the news articles
- Start-Class Arab world articles
- Unknown-importance Arab world articles
- WikiProject Arab world articles
- Start-Class Death articles
- Low-importance Death articles
- Start-Class International relations articles
- Low-importance International relations articles
- WikiProject International relations articles
- Start-Class Iran articles
- Unknown-importance Iran articles
- WikiProject Iran articles
- Start-Class Israel-related articles
- Unknown-importance Israel-related articles
- WikiProject Israel articles
- Start-Class military history articles
- Start-Class military aviation articles
- Military aviation task force articles
- Start-Class Asian military history articles
- Asian military history task force articles
- Start-Class Middle Eastern military history articles
- Middle Eastern military history task force articles
- Start-Class Post-Cold War articles
- Post-Cold War task force articles
- Start-Class Palestine-related articles
- Low-importance Palestine-related articles
- WikiProject Palestine articles
- Start-Class Syria articles
- Unknown-importance Syria articles
- WikiProject Syria articles