Jump to content

Talk:2024 Hezbollah headquarters strike

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Semi-protected edit request

[edit]

In the intro and other casualties, where it mentions the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, please add Iranian (I.e. “the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps”). Since this attack took place in Lebanon, it’s important to note that the IRGC is part of the Iranian Armed Forces. 2600:100C:A218:9A7B:8155:A751:3DBB:848E (talk) 03:18, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is common knowledge, I believe, that IRGC refers to Iranian corps; additionaly the article has been wikilinked, so I don't see any reason to include "Iranian" here. I am not closing this and would let another editor do so. The AP (talk) 19:37, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: per TheAstorPastor. M.Bitton (talk) 11:57, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is not necessarily common knowledge and should be stated in the case of confusion. A lot of people are just now paying attention to this conflict as they are looking into Israel-Palestine.2600:100C:A21D:971A:B1ED:D707:631B:874B (talk) 15:02, 29 December 2024 (UTC) Struck per WP:ARBECR. Lewisguile (talk) 11:26, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 January 2025

[edit]

What about the results of the airstrike Liad1456 (talk) 12:25, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. EvergreenFir (talk) 15:03, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Biased

[edit]

The article contains language that may not adhere to Wikipedia’s neutrality standards. To maintain the article’s objectivity, it should be reviewed and adjusted. A lot of biased phrasing. Ensuring a balanced perspective is crucial.

It reads very one-sided as it emphasizes the destruction caused by Israel without fully contextualizing Hezbollah's provocations leading up to the airstrike. It inaccurately frames the event as an "assassination" rather than an elimination of a key figure actively engaged in orchestrating attacks against Israel for decades. While it briefly mentions Hezbollah’s actions, it doesn’t adequately address the severity of those threats or the strategic rationale for Israel's response. The focus on civilian casualties, paired with phrases like "war of extermination," risks framing Israel as excessively aggressive without balancing it with details about Hezbollah's tactics, such as embedding military assets within civilian areas. A more neutral tone would provide this context for a fuller and more accurate picture.

Mic773 (talk) 10:08, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]