Talk:Zikim attack

Portrayal of Ground Borders

The Battle of Zikim isn’t just restricted to Bahad 4 and Kibbutz, as recent as a few hours ago there were reports of Clashes in Karmia and Ruetenburg Power Plant, how can we verify this Map to be accurate. (I don’t think the lands south of Bahad 4 were taken by Hamas, as it was largely a Naval incursion) A.H.T Videomapping (talk) 13:25, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

The map just shows where Hamas have been/operate. It cannot be 100% accurate unlike the Russo-Ukrainian War map. This is because that war is stable, this war is not. Thanks, Wikieditor019 (Talk to me) 19:55, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

I highlighted on the map that there are clashes in Ruetenburg Power Plant, but I haven't seen any report of Hamas militants fully capturing it. I haven't seen any clashes in Karmia and there aren't any reports that Hamas was in Karmia as of October 11th, but if you can send any sources of Hamas clashing with IDF forces in Karmia please send the link source to me and I'll update the map. The fact that Hamas holds ground south of Bahad 4 can't be confirmed but it can't be disproven either. But this article by Reuters confirms that there was apparently an attack on Bahad 4 by land from the Gaza Strip. MrBLOCKiron (talk) 12:42, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

@MrBLOCKiron, if you can provide the sources that show there was combat at the power plant on the 10th and at the solar park on the 11th, they can be used to improve the body of the article, as we currently don't have anything discussing this. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 22:49, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

@MrBLOCKiron, in response to your assertion that it cannot be disproven that Hamas holds ground south of Bahad 4, I present Al Jazeera indicating Israeli control over an area well south of the base on 10 October. I would also suggest reflecting this in the map you created. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 00:21, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

The battle isn't "ongoing".

Zikim hasnt been contested for over a week now, and Israel has said while it can't rule out any lingering infiltrators remain in the south there isn't a mass incursion anymore and hasn't been for quite some time. All the fighting is currently isolated to Gaza. I'm not sure why this article was locked and then never bothered to be updated. Wordbearer88 (talk) 09:45, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

sources? Abo Yemen✉ 17:01, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

https://israelpalestine.liveuamap.com/en/2023/24-october-suspected-infiltration-alarm-again-sounds-in-zikim

https://israelpalestine.liveuamap.com/en/2023/24-october-israeli-reporter-the-incident-at-zikim-beach-continues

This would disagree, also provides the proof clashes are occurring in Karmia A.H.T Videomapping (talk) 22:22, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

@A.H.T Videomapping Reports of alarms going off in a given town are not "proof" that clashes are occurring in that town. They only prove that alarms went off and no more. Please refrain from reinterpreting information.

Also, today's incident does not indicate a continuous, ongoing battle - quite the opposite. The term "battle" is not at all appropriate to describe the intermittent clashes that take place in the Zikim area every few days. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 00:31, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

There however were reports of 20 or so militants operating in Zikim few hours back, dozens of reinforcements have (by many live ground reports) arrived. Classifying it as an ongoing battle would be accurate A.H.T Videomapping (talk) 00:37, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Kindly provide said many live ground reports to back up your claims. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 00:39, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

the bulk of them were provided in the previous inquiry, regardless there’s enough substantial proof to suggest that Hamas has territory outside the Gaza Israel barrier A.H.T Videomapping (talk) 03:13, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

@A.H.T Videomapping, I've looked closely into this event, well beyond the short-form soundbites you've provided above, and I have not come across any proof, substantial or otherwise, that Hamas has territory outside the barrier. My opinion is that small groups of men running through uninhabited areas trying to escape detection are not capable of holding territory, at least not in any sort of meaningful way. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 13:49, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

In all fairness this war is unusual as it's very unstable, unlike the Russo-Ukraine conflict this war does not have solid factions or ground borders so any attempts to portray it as such is going to leave at least one party disgruntled. We know from previously leaked information on Hamas' attack on Mefalsim that they send "gatherings" of 5-10 men to secure an area. If you need this image I can upload it on the Commons and source it here. My educated guess is that this is similar with what is currently happening in Zikim and (presumably) Karmia and Netiv HaAsara. A.H.T Videomapping (talk) 14:04, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

A terrorist infiltration alert was sounded in Zikim so it is ongoing. Thanks, Wikieditor019 (Talk to me) 15:00, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

@Wikieditor019, the infiltration alarms do not necessarily imply an ongoing battle. These alarms are preventative measures meant to alert civilians to immediately shelter in place for fear of the possibility of an infiltration, but do not prove infiltration outright. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 15:12, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

The IDF did announce there was a raid of Hamas on Zikim beach too. Thanks, Wikieditor019 (Talk to me) 18:27, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Videos have surfaced of flares being used in Zikim and Karmia as well as the kibbutz itself having buildings that caught fire, so yes there was a raid and militant presence is still active A.H.T Videomapping (talk) 00:48, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Suggested improvements to articles

I have located several accounts of the clashes at Zikim and hope that someone will use them for the improvement of the article. My suggestions are as follows (feel free to change any of my language if you don't like how it sounds):

To the Initial assault section, add to the end:

Fighting at Zikim Beach on 7 October is notable for involving the first-ever use of the Eitan AFV in combat. The vehicle was originally scheduled to have been put into operation in 2024. The Nahal Brigade team operating the Eitan reached speeds of 120 km/h on Highway 6, which allowed it to be the first Israeli unit to arrive to the scene of the battle, killing several militants on the beach before moving forward to support other units. The successful use of the vehicle at Zikim Beach prompted Tamir Yada'i, head of IDF Ground Forces Command, to integrate the Eitan into plans for the invasion of the Gaza Strip.

I encourage anybody more fluent in Hebrew to add whatever you can to the above. Correspondingly, add the 933rd "Nahal" Infantry Brigade to the units involved section in the infobox, citing the same article.

Also include the Snapir unit of the Israeli Navy in the same section, citing this article.

In the Clashes section, October 8: Capitalize 916th Patrol Squadron.

In the Clashes section, October 10, add The incident was geolocated by Al Jazeera English to an area about a kilometer southwest of Bahad 4.

Rework the mention of the 17th Battalion in the infobox so it reads "17th Battalion, 828th Bislamach Brigade," citing the France 24 reference in the article. Date of October 10th onward may not be necessary. Citing the same source, include the 52nd Armoured Battalion, 401st Armoured Brigade, and the Sayeret Maglan (Unit 212, 89th Oz Brigade). Include the shields of the units in the infobox.

In the Clashes section, October 11: remove the reference to LiveUAMap - in addition to not being the greatest source it simply redirects to the other reference that we already have here (Al Arabiya on Twitter).

To the Clashes section, add at the end of the existing text (October 13):

Israel National News later reported that a militant had been killed on the beach by the IDF.

On October 16, reports cited by the Institute for the Study of War suggested that two militants from the Gaza Strip infiltrated the coastline west of Zikim, subsequently being killed by an IDF helicopter.

Thank you.

SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 22:59, 19 October 2023 (UTC) SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 22:59, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Additionally, the infobox gives the location of the battle as "Zikim and Kibbutz," which should be addressed. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 23:17, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Including an infobox here so my proposed changes to the units involved section are more clear. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 23:49, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

References

Battle of Zikim
Part of 2023 Israel-Hamas war
Location Zikim, Southern District, Israel
Belligerents
Hamas	Israel
Units involved
Al-Qassam Brigades Nukhba	Israeli Navy 916th Patrol Squadron (Ashdod) Snapir unit Israeli Ground Forces 933rd "Nahal" Infantry Brigade 52nd Armoured Battalion, 401st Armoured Brigade 17th Battalion, 828th Bislamach Brigade Sayeret Maglan (Unit 212) Bahad 4 instructors and recruits Armed civilians

Israeli Victory

All positions that were once infiltrated by hamas were taken back by the IDF. AstroSaturn (talk) 13:16, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Do you have any sources of Bahad 4 being recaptured? I cant find any. MrBLOCKiron (talk) 06:25, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

• https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20231010-israel-pounds-gaza-after-hamas-threatens-hostages
• https://www.foxnews.com/world/israel-recaptures-areas-near-gaza-strip-overrun-hamas
• https://www.indiatoday.in/world/story/israel-gaza-palestine-hamas-war-update-attack-westbank-missile-lebanon-hezbollah-us-army-netanyahu-death-toll-2447267-2023-10-11

AstroSaturn (talk) 12:56, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Note: The word “Bahad 4” does not appear in any of those articles. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 13:32, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Bahad 4 is a location near the gaza border. Everything once taken by hamas was liberated back by the IDF. including "Bahad 4". AstroSaturn (talk) 21:25, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Hamas just launched a new offensive into Zikim,Karmia,Netiv HaAsara and Rutenberg FROM Bahad 4, clashes still ongoing. A.H.T Videomapping (talk) 22:23, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Do reliable sources back up your claim that the new offensive was launched "FROM" Bahad 4? All sources I am aware of (you can find them below) indicate that this attack (which does not appear to have directly involved Karmia or Netiv HaAsara) originated out of tunnels from the Gaza Strip to the Mediterranean Sea. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 22:31, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Hamas

Hamas is a terrorist organization set on murdering Jews and Israelis. The EU and the United States have designsted it a 'terror organization'. Hence, its members are not soldiers or militants , but terrorists. Cynyaron (talk) 21:47, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

absolutely rediculous to call Hamas terrorists "soldiers" 2A02:6680:2104:D843:C991:2571:8228:F4AE (talk) 06:20, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Added Info

According to a Haaretz article, the strength of the Israeli force at Bahad 4 was 14 IDF soldiers whom at least 6 were officers, 90 recruits had taken cover and not engaged in any fighting along with 30 administrative staffers and civilians. The unit at Bahad 4 was the Home Front Command’s search and rescue brigade and the base commander was Lt. Col. Shay. Hamas had about 50 militants. The Israeli casualties for the battle of Bahad 4 were 6 officers and 1 recruit, they also suffered 7 injured. [1] MrBLOCKiron (talk) 09:57, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Please add: new instance of clashes at Zikim Beach, 24 October 2023.

Hello fellow Wikipedians, please update this article to incorporate reports of a clash between the IDF and the al-Qassam Brigades from today, 24 October 2023. Below is what I would have written if I were extended-confirmed, but it could probably benefit from being condensed a bit:

On 24 October, the Israel Defence Forces announced its navy had eliminated a unit of eight Hamas members, which Hamas referred to as its "frogmen," attempting to land on the Zikim Beach from the Mediterranean Sea. Fighter jets and a helicopter gunship bombed what the IDF said was a military installation from which the militants came. According to military spokesman Daniel Hagari, Hamas had used tunnels from the Gaza Strip that emerged in open waters in the Mediteranean.

Alarms sounded in Zikim and the neighboring village of Karmia, both of which had largely been evacuated on the first day of the war, during the evening of the 24th, as the IDF searched for militants whom it believed had escaped the initial encounter.

A second clash took place late into the night of the 24th, as at least an additional ten Hamas fighters were killed in what The Jewish Press described as "another massive attempt to infiltrate Israeli territory." Infiltration alerts were activated in Zikim, Karmia, and nearby Netiv HaAsara, and remaining residents of the three villages were instructed to find shelter immediately and lock all doors and windows. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 20:57, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

References

October 10: dead link, verification failed, irrelevant material

Greetings all, a reference to the article "Resistance reinforces forces in Israel's southern settlements" by The Cradle uses an incorrect URL, directing the reader to a 404 page. The same is true of its Wayback Machine archive. Please use this link: https://new.thecradle.co/articles/resistance-reinforces-forces-in-israels-southern-settlements

Even accounting for this, neither of the citation in the first sentence about the events of October 10th makes reference to the "Trans-Israel pipeline junction." For this reason, I propose that this term be struck from our article. @MrBLOCKiron, you are responsible for this terminology, so I invite you to justify it.

What's more, it is not apparent what the 10 October rocket attack in Ashkelon has to do with the Battle of Zikim. There have been numerous such attacks before and after, none of which would make sense to include here, as it's very difficult to make the case that they are directly related to combat 10+ km to the south.

The mention of combat in the Ashkelon Industrial Park is, at least to me, acceptable to retain for now, as this may be a reference to an area within the same general combat zone, but more research is needed. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 23:10, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Divers incident

So on October 24 there was a group of Hamas diver who tried to land near Zikim. Reportedly all of them were neutralized. I suggest this incident be introduced into the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gorgedweller (talk • contribs) 08:49, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Over?

Zikim hasn't been infiltrated for multiple days now. Personisinsterest (talk) 01:33, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Because of the entrance of Israeli troops into coastal Gaza Strip areas immediately adjacent to Zikim, I find it unreasonable to expect that incursions by Hamas or others will continue in the area either by ground, by sea, or underground.

Therefore, I support assigning an end date to this "battle," that being the final date reliable sources reported clashes, which I personally do not know at this time.

Ideally, if everybody agrees, I'd also support redefining the actual "battle" as only the events that took place on October 7 and considering the rest to be simply the "aftermath." SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 04:29, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

We're approaching almost a month since the last Hamas militant was inside Zikim (October 10th). The October 16th and 24th "clashes" were just foiling infiltration attempts and none of them ever made it inside the town. Right now the Israeli's are deep inside Gaza and have split the strip in half, yet according to wikipedia we're meant to believe Hamas is invading Israel right now. Editors insist to list this battle as ongoing. It's really a ridiculous farce that I've given up on trying to fix.Wordbearer88 (talk) 09:07, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

The Hebrew version of this article gives the end date October 11. I note that eight terrorists were killed in Zikim that day, and subsequent events have been infiltration attempts from the sea or coastline.– St.nerol (talk) 16:37, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Based on the above, I'll change the status of the battle. What reasonable interpretation of policy would force us to retain the absurd claim of an ongoing battle in Zikim? And even if there is such a policy, it's time to ignore it. –St.nerol (talk) 16:45, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 5 November 2023

There is nothing to indicate that there was a « 90 minute warning » given to civilians as written under « subsequent attacks ». Thanks! 2A02:6680:2108:F397:9595:282F:1DC9:9BDF (talk) 09:42, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: I have fixed the broken reference link, which in turn supports the 90-minute advanced warning claim. This request is therefore outdated. Melmann 13:48, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Outcome

@Haskko: You write in your edit summary that Israel only retook Zikim after the battle ended, implying that Hamas seized Zikim, held it for the duration of the battle, and then simply withdrew peacefully after the battle had ended. I don't see how this version of events is supported by the text of the article, nor do I see any mention of this supposed quiet period during which Hamas withdrew. Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 13:02, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

There was an initial battle in which Hamas won, and clashes after it where Israel retook the town from Hamas. I apologize if you couldn't understand my reasoning. Haskko (talk) 13:05, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

I don't get how the post-Hamas takeover fighting is separate from the pre-takeover fighting. The Battle of Stalingrad was also an initial German victory, as they seized parts of the city. If the battle ended with Israel repelling Hamas, the infobox ought to simply state so. Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 13:59, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

The actual battle was a Hamas victory. Clashes occured after the battle and Israel recaptured the city after the battle. Haskko (talk) 16:58, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Beyond the fact that drawing a separation line after the "initial battle" is illogical: The article (and the map) shows that Hamas did not capture the "city" (which is actually a kibbutz), but were repulsed. The story currently on display in the infobox is a work of fiction. Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 17:32, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

"Initial Hamas victory"

It's like saying the yom kippur war was "Initial Egyptian victory". Zikim Was recaptured and Hamas was repelled. That's a full Israeli victory. AstroSaturn (talk) 01:10, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

Not only that, Zikim was never actually captured. This fiction has been exposed in the discussion above. Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 17:51, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

All areas were liberated back. AstroSaturn (talk) 18:46, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

Disputed map

Map in article appears to violate WP:IMAGEOR, the illustration/introduction of unpublished ideas/arguments. In particular, the depiction of the Rutenberg power station as having been "recaptured by the IDF" could not be verified, and there was no source provided in the Commons file. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 16:23, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Accordig to Emanuel Fabian, the Times of Israels military correspondent, there was clashes there on 10 October. Here's the link MrBLOCKiron (talk) 09:41, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

@MrBLOCKiron, thank you for sharing this information. Another question. The map depicts about three-fourths of Bahad 4 as "recaptured by IDF," while the northeastern corner of the base seems to have remained untouched. Could you share the source of this information? SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 18:08, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

It's a complicated battle but according to this article the battle was inside the military base. I've tried to map what was captured by Hamas according to the article but its hard and cannot be very precise, so its really a rough estimate. MrBLOCKiron (talk) 11:15, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@MrBLOCKiron, thanks for your reply, I hope that someone who speaks Hebrew will analyze the video I posted below, it contains maps and diagrams of the different sections of the base where the battles took place and this could probably clarify things. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 11:22, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi SaintPaulOfTarsus and MrBLOCKiron. I have a non-native speakers level 3-4 ability to understand written and spoken Hebrew. I watched the video and agree that the first 60% (say) is similar to the Haaretz article related to the battle on 7/10. and the remainder focuses more than does the article on the mourning of the family and friends of the dead IDF soldiers (I didn’t listen to all of this part). If no native speakers volunteer I can do a detailed translation (at least far enough to see if the video expands on the article) but it will take me several hours, while a native speaker could do it faster.

But before I do that I need to understand whether the issue is with the map or the article body or both. The article body seems a reasonable summary, while I find the map much more difficult to understand. MrBLOCKiron please accept that I’m not being critical of your work on the map at all. I think you took on a difficult task and did a good job. I’m just providing what I hope are constructive suggestions for improvement:

• I don’t have an OR issue. I haven’t read OR recently, but to me all you’re doing is summarizing the battle on a map, just like the battle is summarized in words. As long as nothing is added, I’m fine with that.
• All the clashes marked with crossed rifles seem good.
• So all I’m actually battling with are the overlays. What’s very confusing are the overlay colours. I’m viewing this on an iPad so it might be the way it’s rendering colours, but then any mobile user would have the same problems. The key shows sold grey-blue (Hamas controlled) which I can see being Gaza. The key has a lined blue-white which I can see at the beach and on the east side. But everything else is solid orange or striped orange, which isn’t in the key (maybe meant to be red as retaken?). The only place red-white is on the power station where it overlays orange. The overlay also obscures the base.
• I don’t have the tech skill to do what you can with maps, but I suggest three maps:

1. The usual map used on other articles showing the full map with Zikim marked to orient the user.
2. The map you’ve done without the overlays showing in addition crossed rifles in the base itself for the 7/20 clashes. This would be the high level map of the total battle between 7-24/10 as you’ve marked it.
3. A blown up portion of the map showing the base only, with crossed rifles showing each position attacked and some short wording about what happened there. The video would be helpful here because it clearly shows in 3D where each defense/attack on the base took place, making mapping easier.

3 level maps liked this can be done (I’m not sure whether in the info box but definitely under it - I’ll look).Your thoughts? Ayenaee (talk) 20:36, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

I’ve added the map I referred to in (1) above.

If we were to do (2) and (3) they would need to be combined into one image to fit into the infobox at the top. Ayenaee (talk) 23:07, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Bad citation

"According to an investigation by France 24, the video appeared to show Israeli soldiers killing four Palestinian men who were attempting to surrender, a war crime under international law. France 24 also states that there were no clearly visible weapons in the drone shot of the initial encounter, "though the images are blurry and it is impossible to see whether weapons were on the scene.""

The citation link is https://observers.france24.com/en/middle-east/20231013-israeli-army-tweets-video-that-appears-to-show-soldiers-shooting-palestinians-who-surrendered ExplosivePanda (talk) 06:40, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Dear @ExplosivePanda, thank you for pointing this out. I believe I've addressed the problem. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 02:18, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Call for Hebrew-speaking editors to translate/incorporate source into article

Greetings all, in my quest to improve this Wikipedia article, I've come across a 17-minute video documentary produced by Channel 13 (Israel). It seems to be a retelling of the Ha'aretz piece on the battle at Bahad 4 that has already been very helpful for expanding the page. The video is heavy on drone footage and appears to discuss the combat at various positions on the base, so I'm hopeful that once translated, it will be able to significantly improve our understanding of the tactical battles there.

SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 04:15, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

The video can be found here. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 04:15, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

The elusive Jerusalem Post article

Hi @Reenem, wanted to share that I had located the Jerusalem Post article that came up in two of your edits. The original was in a pretty user-unfriendly format, but here's a direct link to Yonah Jeremy Bob's work on the naval response to the events at Zikim October 7th.

Unfortunately, the problem this presents is that it claims that seven ships crossed from Gaza into Israeli waters, a pretty serious contradiction with the articles we're currently using, which has left me unsure of how to proceed.

Estimates of Hamas naval strength during Battle of Zikim

Source	Total number of boats crossing maritime border	Total number of men on boats	Number of boats destroyed at sea	Number of boats that landed on beach	Total number of men that landed on beach
Yonah Jeremy Bob (11/7)	7	not specified	3	4	11
Amir Bohbot (10/10)	4	30	2	2	not specified
Amir Bohbot (11/27)	4	35	3	1	11

SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 18:53, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

It would be helpful to include this table in the article itself. VR _talk 16:16, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

@Vice regent, I have entered most of this information into the infobox, namely the 2nd, 3rd, and 5th columns. The 1st and 4th columns are so disparate that I am not sure they would be of much use. I will attempt to address the fact that sources disagree on the number of boats somewhere in the body of the article. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 18:22, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

The infobox is fine, although it is confusing. It would be better to explain this in detail in the article itself. Its not like this page is WP:TOOBIG or anything.VR _talk 18:49, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 16 January 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: moved to Zikim attack. Consensus largely indicates a support for a move backed with citations. A consensus exists that support a move without the year title. Since there is only one other article that mentions a conflict involved in Zikim, a hatnote should be sufficient for people who are looking for the other article. (non-admin closure) Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 22:01, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

---

Battle of Zikim → 2023 Zikim attack – Per WP:COMMONNAME in RS Ynet, Guardian, AA, Times of Israel, etc, and in from community consensus to name other events on October 7 that involved Hamas militants launching assaults on Israeli targets (Nahal Oz attack, Nirim attack). Battle is simply inaccurate and should be moved regardless of the target. No RS uses this term and per the events, Hamas launched a barrage of rockets, invaded the base, conducted an attack, then were killed. One-sided offensive. Not really two armies meeting on a battlefield.

Adding the year to differentiate this event from the Zikim Naval Operation, likely to be renamed to 2014 Zikim attack Longhornsg (talk) 07:20, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

• Strongly support per nom, and on the grounds that the "Battle of Zikim" terminology is almost entirely restricted to WP:CIRCULAR sources.

I would also recommend similar moves for the so-called battles of Sufa, Re'im, and Sderot.

SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 08:27, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Military history has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:29, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Israel has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:29, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Palestine has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 08:29, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

• Support per WP:COMMONNAME and evidence of nom. Cinderella157 (talk) 10:54, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Without year There is no title conflict for Zikim attack. Per WP:TITLEDAB and WP:OVERPRECISION, this is unnecessary precision and concision is preferred. Also, searches are made on the primary term (Zikim attack). Placing the date first is less search friendly. Cinderella157 (talk) 23:49, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

There is now a 2014 Zikim attack, but I could support simply Zikim attack for this article per Cinderella157 and on the grounds that the 2014 event is significantly less notable. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 05:39, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose for now. Some RS do indeed use the term "battle": Times of Israel, Haaretz, JNS, Monde, Jewish Journal, Ynet News.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 08:35, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

  There's two events that this article covers -- the attack on the Zikim Base and the subsequent slaughter in the civilian kibbutz. These sources use "battle" to refer to the military engagement component, but still refer to the overarching engagement (when the infiltration of the kibbutz is included) as an attack (actually the Jewish Journal source refers to it as the "Zikim Beach massacre"). Nevermind that referring to an attack on civilians as a "battle" is just channeling Hamas propaganda. Longhornsg (talk) 08:56, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

  While the sources presented do use the word battle as a synonym for fighting, none use the phrase battle of Zikim. Cinderella157 (talk) 00:09, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

• Support per WP:COMMONNAME - reliable sources use primarily the terminology 'invasion' or 'attack'. The sources say there was a 'battle' but this is not how they generally name the incident. Marokwitz (talk) 14:06, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.