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: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 16:27, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Beit Rima massacre → Beit Rima raid – POV title backed up by none of the RS cited, except one fleeting mention in the Guardian of "Palestinians condemning the raid as a massacre", and no English-language RS, and obvious failure of WP:COMMONNAME and pretty egregious violation of WP:NPOV. Tagging @Homerethegreat and @François Robere who participated above. Longhornsg (talk) 16:16, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Just going by the sources I could read (I am paywalled): 1. Washington Post calls it a raid, and quotes Saeb Erekat as calling it a massacre. 2. Human rights group Al-Haq calls it an attack. 3. Guardian calls it a raid and assault, and quotes Palestinians who called it a massacre and a war. 4. The New York Times calls it a raid and a war zone, and again 6. calls it a storming. For what it's worth, the short description currently calls it an assault. As senseless and tragic as it was for those who were killed, reading this article leaves one with the impression that this event falls short of a bonafide massacre, which is a large number of civilians targeted for death by an armed group, such as in the Farhud or at Sabra and Shatila. If other convincing sources turn up, I would be willing to reconsider, but as of now it looks more like a reprisal raid with a 'shoot first, ask questions later' type of mentality, with the ultimate aim of rounding up suspects and instilling fear, in which a limited number of uniformed personnel and others were killed. Havradim leaf a message 11:43, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• There is a need for consistency here across Israeli-Palestinian conflict articles. There are a number of articles, including this one (but also Nir Yitzhak massacre, Holit massacre etc) where the word "massacre" is used in the title. In each of these cases there are some RS who do indeed use the word "massacre" and some do not, and of course, the word "massacre" is indeed loaded.VR _talk 01:09, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  To be clear, I support moving to a neutral title, whether it is "raid" or "attack" or "incursion" etc. VR _talk 05:39, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• There are many sources who note the events were called a "massacre":The Nation, The Guardian, LA Times, Deseret News, PBS, Washington Post, South Coast Today, VOA etc. VR _talk 01:09, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The consistency is that we go by policy. If there's an issue with other pages take it up on those articles' talk pages, not here.

  In this case, RS overwhelmingly call it a raid. Massacre is a POV term. Indeed, in the sources cited:

  • The Nation calls it a raid. It cites the "World Socialist Web Site, by no means a RS, for the massacre mention.
  • The Guardian calls it a raid. Palestinians call it a massacre.
  • PBS calls it a raid. The Palestinian government calls it a massacre.
  • VoA calls it a raid. The Palestinians call it a massacre.
  • LA Times calls it a raid. The Palestinians call it a massacre.
  • Washington Post calls it a raid. The Palestinians call it a massacre.

  etc

  We go by what RS say. Longhornsg (talk) 02:42, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The Nation indeed calls it a massacre, but it was written by Palestinian activist Mohammed el-Kurd, so I'm afraid this might not be a neutral point-of-view. Havradim leaf a message 04:02, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  As per WP:BIASEDSOURCES, sources aren't required to be neutral. VR _talk 04:13, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  To get the name of this article right, I would try to avoid any partisan source, be it Israeli or Palestinian. I don't think the editorial boards of the above publications could be considered either one, but el-Kurd certainly is. It's not as if we can attribute him either, since this is a title. The majority of these sources are using less charged descriptions than massacre, and I think there's a good reason for that. Havradim leaf a message 06:01, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]