1 day ago
2
Robertsky moved page Talk:Al-Najjar family massacre to Talk:Killing of al-Najjar children Perform requested move, see talk page
New page
{{tph}}
{{Ct/tn|a-i|blp}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|blp=other|collapsed=y|1=
{{WikiProject Military history|Middle-Eastern-task-force=yes|Post-Cold-War-task-force=yes|b1=yes|b2=no|b3=yes|b4=yes|b5=yes}}
{{WikiProject Palestine |importance=Low |needs-image=yes}}
{{WikiProject Human rights |importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Death |importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Israel |importance=Low |image-needed=yes}}
{{WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration}}
}}
{{old move|date=9 June 2025|from=Al-Najjar family massacre|destination=Killing of al-Najjar children|result=moved|link=Special:Permalink/1298410802#Requested move 9 June 2025}}
== Requested move 9 June 2025 ==
<div class="boilerplate mw-archivedtalk" style="background-color: var(--background-color-success-subtle, #efe); color: var(--color-base, inherit); margin: 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted var(--border-color-subtle, #AAAAAA);"><!-- Template:RM top -->
:''The following is a closed discussion of a [[Wikipedia:Requested moves|requested move]]. <span style="color: var(--color-error, 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 [[Wikipedia:move review|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.''' There is a consensus that 'massacre' is not the common name, therefore falling back on a descriptive title. There is an almost equal weight between 'children' and 'family'. no further discussion on which option proposed by VR, after the relist. Per [[WP:BARTENDER]], 'children' is chosen on the basis that it was presented that it had more results than the other in news search. [[User:Robertsky|– robertsky]] ([[User talk:Robertsky|talk]]) 16:12, 4 July 2025 (UTC)
----
[[:Al-Najjar family massacre]] → {{no redirect|Al-Najjar family airstrike}} – None of the sources cited in the article decribe this airstrike as massacre. [[User:Nehushtani|Nehushtani]] ([[User talk:Nehushtani|talk]]) 07:55, 9 June 2025 (UTC) <small>— '''''Relisting.''''' '''<small style="font-family:monospace">'''[[<big>[[User:CanonNi]]</big>]]'''</small>''' ([[User talk:CanonNi|💬]] • [[Special:Contribs/CanonNi|✍️]]) 11:44, 16 June 2025 (UTC)</small> <small>— '''''Relisting.''''' [[User:Alpha3031|Alpha3031]] ([[User talk:Alpha3031|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Alpha3031|c]]) 08:16, 26 June 2025 (UTC)</small>
*'''Support''' if that's the case, we should follow what the sources say.. [[User:Rafi Chazon|Rafi Chazon]] ([[User talk:Rafi Chazon|talk]]) 13:00, 11 June 2025 (UTC)
:This is disinformation. Le Monde calls this a massacre right in the first reference used in the text, which shows up right after the word massacre.[[User:Rafe87|Rafe87]] ([[User talk:Rafe87|talk]]) 13:20, 11 June 2025 (UTC)
::Please don't [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Al-Najjar_family_massacre&diff=prev&oldid=1295064501 strike] other users' comments. <span style="font-family:courier"> -- [[User:Tamzin|<span style="color:#E6007A">Tamzin</span>]]</span><sup class="nowrap">[[[User talk:Tamzin|<i style="color:#E6007A">cetacean needed</i>]]]</sup> <small>([[User:Tamzin/🤷|they|xe|🤷]])</small> 19:46, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
::I'm removing the the request notice from the main page as the request is based on a false premise.[[User:Rafe87|Rafe87]] ([[User talk:Rafe87|talk]]) 19:52, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
:::You're not allowed to do that. If the premise is indeed false, this request will be closed without action in due time. I'm saying this as an admin. <span style="font-family:courier"> -- [[User:Tamzin|<span style="color:#E6007A">Tamzin</span>]]</span><sup class="nowrap">[[[User talk:Tamzin|<i style="color:#E6007A">cetacean needed</i>]]]</sup> <small>([[User:Tamzin/🤷|they|xe|🤷]])</small> 19:59, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' "Al-Najjar family airstrike" as a [[euphemism]] and improper grammar. Support instead '''Killing of Al-Najjar children''' or '''Killing of Al-Najjar family'''. "Killing" is [[WP:CONSISTENT]] with [[WP:KILLINGS]]. I prefer using the word "children" as opposed to "family", as there are more google news results for it ([https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=Al-Najjar%20%22children%22&tbm=nws has 672 results] vs [https://www.google.com/search?q=Al-Najjar%20%22family%22&client=firefox-b-d&tbm=nws&sclient=gws-wiz-news Al-Najjar "family" has 582 results]).'''[[User talk:Vice regent|VR]]''' <sub>(Please [[Template:Ping|ping]] on reply)</sub> 05:32, 13 June 2025 (UTC)
*'''Rename to something''' because massacre obviously isn't supported by [[WP:COMMONNAME]]; one source isn't sufficient for that (and even La Monde, the one source presented for it, doesn't use it prominently.) But more time might be needed to workshop a title, because this doesn't perfectly line up with other articles and there isn't a [[WP:COMMONAME]]; none of the proposed titles seem ideal to me. ''Al-Najjar family attack'' is workable as a quick compromise if nothing else can get agreement just because it lines up with how we've renamed similar articles and because it's definitely supported by the sources in the sense that the virtually all say they were killed in an attack; it'd definitely be an improvement over the current title. However, it seems a bit weird to use it for a family and not a location and may imply they were attacked deliberately. "Airstrike" doesn't strike me as great per the above; it's weird and euphemistic and has the same problems of "attack" in that... the "Al-Najjar family airstrike" isn't really what anyone would actually call it. ''Killing of Al-Najjar family'' or ''Killing of Al-Najjar children'' are workable - "killing" and "children" are emotive in that context so it would require some caution, but unlike "massacre" they're terms that I do think are commonly used in the sources and therefore pass the minimum requirement of {{tq|names and terms that are commonly used by sources}}. Also, I feel that the last one accurately captures how it is covered in basically all sources. --[[User:Aquillion|Aquillion]] ([[User talk:Aquillion|talk]]) 10:33, 13 June 2025 (UTC)
::Agree. Even though technically the father succumbed to his wounds a few days later, the RS coverage was overwhelmingly surrounding the children. The children piece is why this particular killing is more notable than the [https://www.newarab.com/news/israel-wipes-out-over-2200-palestinian-families-gaza 2,200 families wiped out] in the war. '''[[User talk:Vice regent|VR]]''' <sub>(Please [[Template:Ping|ping]] on reply)</sub> 12:12, 13 June 2025 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' OP's argument as it is based on a false premise as stated above: the name massacre does appear in a RS. And to @[[User:Aquillion|Aquillion]]: This particular massacre simply has no common name in the media, so your argument can be used against any name chosen no matter what it is. I was wondering why Common Name is always invoked to rename articles about massacres of Palestinians, but not for replacing other terms. Why should Common Name rule out "massacre" but not "airstrike" or "killing"? ''Massacre'' is simply a better name as, unlike ''airstrike'', it exposes both that this was a mass fatality event and the innocent nature of the victims, and it is also shorter than "mass killing." Why is the longer or the more euphemistic term always the default term for massacres of Palestinian even when it has no RS support? [[User:Rafe87|Rafe87]] ([[User talk:Rafe87|talk]]) 14:50, 13 June 2025 (UTC)
::There are two policies for names. [[WP:COMMONNAME]] is the higher-priority one; when there's a clear common name, we use it no matter what, even if it's POV and emotive and so on. If there is no common name, though, then we have to invent a descriptive one, which requires following [[WP:POVTITLE]], ie. names have to be as neutral as possible and avoid potentially judgmental terms. In a situation like this where no common name exists, the other names I mentioned are all fine (or at least better than "massacre") because they're comparatively neutral. (We can use potentially sharp words in a title we create if most sources do - "killing" is fine because most sources use that term in at least some context.) And people are trying to be more consistent about this; it was something that came up in the recent ArbCom case. Every individual article has its own context, of course, but if you notice that specific people are pushing for or opposing "massacre" in titles inconsistently, it's reasonable to ask them to explain and to take them to [[WP:AE]] if they don't have a good explanation. As a ''general'' rule, though, for recent events where agreement among the sources to call something a massacre is unlikely to have emerged yet, you're probably better off leaning towards avoiding "massacre" in article titles; if you think a bunch of articles are using the term in a way that leads to pro-Israeli POV in titles or somesuch, your energy would probably be better spent suggesting renames for those articles rather than trying to use it as a rationale that we should call everything a massacre. Anyway, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&limit=500&offset=0&ns0=1&search=intitle%3AMassacre+deepcategory%3A%22Israel%E2%80%93Hamas+war%22 take a look]. Note the redirects further down, which generally indicate that a page was moved. Feel free to suggest moves for any of the ones that haven't been moved yet if you don't think they meet [[WP:COMMONNAME]]. --[[User:Aquillion|Aquillion]] ([[User talk:Aquillion|talk]]) 15:37, 13 June 2025 (UTC)
:::Calling this massacre an airstrike, as suggested by the OP, constitutes huge worsening in title quality, not only because the latter term hides what makes this attack notable -- the multiple fatalities, the almost disappearance of an entire family, not the fact that the bombing was carried out from the air -- but also because the title is ambiguous. Someone reading it might get the impression that there is a family called Al Najjar that has carried out an airstrike somewhere in the world. "Family airstrike" is simply not how anyone outside Wikipedia talks or writes. So, I completely disagree that all the names you mentioned above are superior to "massacre". In fact, I know of another naming policy that you didn't mention above, [[WP:NCENPOV]], which says the following: <blockquote>If there is no common name for the event, and there is a generally accepted word used when identifying the event, the title should include the word even if it is a strong one such as "massacre" or "genocide" or "war crime". However, to keep article names short, avoid including more words than are necessary to identify the event.</blockquote> The policy makes no reference to multiple requirements that must be met before adopting the term massacre for an event such as this, which would be called a massacre by common usage of the word. It asks only that there not be a different name that has become common in media reporting. And indeed there is not, and the inclusion of the term massacre here should be made even less controversial by the fact that "massacre" does indeed appear in at least one RS to refer to the wiping-out of the Al Najjar family. And as a bonus, it also fulfills the second suggestion of [[WP:NCENPOV]] quoted above, that the term also needs to be brief. No term conveys the same thing as "massacre" in a briefer way. Other synonyms are more verbose. [[User:Rafe87|Rafe87]] ([[User talk:Rafe87|talk]]) 16:11, 13 June 2025 (UTC)
:<small>Note: [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Palestine|WikiProject Palestine]], [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Israel|WikiProject Israel]], and [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history|WikiProject Military history]] have been notified of this discussion. '''<small style="font-family:monospace">'''[[<big>[[User:CanonNi]]</big>]]'''</small>''' ([[User talk:CanonNi|💬]] • [[Special:Contribs/CanonNi|✍️]]) 11:44, 16 June 2025 (UTC)</small>
*'''Oppose''' the OP's proposal per VR, but I'd support VR's proposal, if necessary, with a lower-case "a" in the "al-" prefix per [[MOS:AR]] <span style="text-shadow:#000 0em 0em 1em">[[Special:Contributions/Abo_Yemen|<span style="color:#000">𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨</span>]] [[User:Abo Yemen|<span style="color:#CD0000">Abo Yemen</span>]] ([[User talk:Abo Yemen|<span style="color:#000">𓃵</span>]])</span> 12:32, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
*'''Support''' the last @[[User:Vice regent|Vice regent]]-proposal (Killing of Al(al)-Najjar family), supporting the move from massacre to airstrike as a secondary option to killing. There is unsufficient sourcing to support massacre a commonname, and a general move from massacre except in cases where there is significant use is appropriate here. [[User:FortunateSons|FortunateSons]] ([[User talk:FortunateSons|talk]]) 09:24, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
:*:On familiy vs. children: we are using a [[Wikipedia:NDESC|descriptive title]] instead of a common name, and familiy includes all victims, while children does not. [[User:FortunateSons|FortunateSons]] ([[User talk:FortunateSons|talk]]) 09:30, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
:*::Regarding the request for elaboration on the question of family vs. children: As mentioned above, this is a descriptive title, which should therefore strive for being as descriptive as possible. One can reasonably argue that a) most of the victims are children and b) much of the coverage predates the death of Hamdi and therefore does not include him (see the VR analyisis). However, there is no strong argument to exclude the father, and more recent neutral and high-quality sources (such as [https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20250611-child-survivor-of-gaza-family-strike-heads-to-italy France24 by AFP]) use family. While the emphasis on the children in the lead is appropriate, the same cannot be said for the exclusion of the father from the title. A title using children would imply that the only victims were children, and would therefore be misleading. Lastly, we cannot rely on coverage that pre-dates the death of the father for due weight in this question. [[User:FortunateSons|FortunateSons]] ([[User talk:FortunateSons|talk]]) 09:23, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' OP's proposal for reasons others have cited and because it is ambiguous, were the family air-struck or did they perform the airstrike? "Killing of..." is passable if we must but I continue to believe that we should call a spade a spade. The family was massacred. [[User:Smallangryplanet|Smallangryplanet]] ([[User talk:Smallangryplanet|talk]]) 11:55, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' per VR. [[User:Skitash|Skitash]] ([[User talk:Skitash|talk]]) 16:20, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
*'''Support''' move. Le Monde variably refers to the attack as an airstrike, bombing and massacre, so no clear common term within the article. Furthermore, airstrike is attributed to Reuters, while massacre is in relation to a doctor's testimony, so airstrike takes precedence. Regardless, it's the only source that uses the term massacre at all, so it doesn't fulfill COMMONNAME to merit a judgemental name per NCENPOV. The arguments in favor of massacre smell exactly like [[WP:TITLEWARRIOR]]. [[User:Closetside|Closetside]] ([[User talk:Closetside|talk]]) 23:12, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' OP's suggestion to rename using the word "airstrike". However I agree that the use of "massacre" is not well supported. In the Le Monde article it's unclear if term is being used in Le Monde's editorial voice or the surgeon's voice. I would agree to rename the article "Killing of al-Najjar children" (because the large number of children is what makes the killing notable).[[User:Brmull|Brmull]] ([[User talk:Brmull|talk]]) 07:03, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' per Rafe87 and [[MOS:EUPHEMISM]]. The title should perhaps reflect the fact that all of the direct victims were children, like [https://www.dropsitenews.com/p/massacre-al-najjar-family-gaza-genocide this article] does. [[User:Paprikaiser|Paprikaiser]] ([[User talk:Paprikaiser|talk]]) 22:22, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
*:This is inaccurate: while delayed, Hamdi is very much a direct fatality, and his death shouldn’t be excluded from the title. [[User:FortunateSons|FortunateSons]] ([[User talk:FortunateSons|talk]]) 22:49, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
*::That's true, but from what I've seen, most news coverage tends to highlight the fact that nine children were killed. I just thought it might make sense for us to do the same. [[User:Paprikaiser|Paprikaiser]] ([[User talk:Paprikaiser|talk]]) 20:34, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
*:::I think a weight of coverage argument (for example, per VR above) is a lot more reasonable, even if I disagree [[User:FortunateSons|FortunateSons]] ([[User talk:FortunateSons|talk]]) 08:12, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
:<small>'''Relisting comment''': There is some consensus towards VR's proposal, but relisting to see if participants could confirm if "children" or "family" is preferred (+reasoning distinguishing the two if any) [[User:Alpha3031|Alpha3031]] ([[User talk:Alpha3031|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Alpha3031|c]]) 08:16, 26 June 2025 (UTC)</small>
*'''Comment''': The proposal was [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Al-Najjar_family_massacre&diff=next&oldid=1294695802 changed] by the nominator from a suggestion to use "attack" to instead use "airstrike", but the {{tl|requested move/dated}} template parameter was not changed, so the listing at [[WP:RM]] has not matched the current proposal. I just updated the {{tl|requested move/dated}} template parameter to fix this problem. — [[User:BarrelProof|BarrelProof]] ([[User talk:BarrelProof|talk]]) 09:48, 26 June 2025 (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: var(--color-error, red);">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 [[Template:Archive bottom]] -->
</div><div style="clear:both;" class=></div>
{{Ct/tn|a-i|blp}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|blp=other|collapsed=y|1=
{{WikiProject Military history|Middle-Eastern-task-force=yes|Post-Cold-War-task-force=yes|b1=yes|b2=no|b3=yes|b4=yes|b5=yes}}
{{WikiProject Palestine |importance=Low |needs-image=yes}}
{{WikiProject Human rights |importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Death |importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Israel |importance=Low |image-needed=yes}}
{{WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration}}
}}
{{old move|date=9 June 2025|from=Al-Najjar family massacre|destination=Killing of al-Najjar children|result=moved|link=Special:Permalink/1298410802#Requested move 9 June 2025}}
== Requested move 9 June 2025 ==
<div class="boilerplate mw-archivedtalk" style="background-color: var(--background-color-success-subtle, #efe); color: var(--color-base, inherit); margin: 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted var(--border-color-subtle, #AAAAAA);"><!-- Template:RM top -->
:''The following is a closed discussion of a [[Wikipedia:Requested moves|requested move]]. <span style="color: var(--color-error, 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 [[Wikipedia:move review|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.''' There is a consensus that 'massacre' is not the common name, therefore falling back on a descriptive title. There is an almost equal weight between 'children' and 'family'. no further discussion on which option proposed by VR, after the relist. Per [[WP:BARTENDER]], 'children' is chosen on the basis that it was presented that it had more results than the other in news search. [[User:Robertsky|– robertsky]] ([[User talk:Robertsky|talk]]) 16:12, 4 July 2025 (UTC)
----
[[:Al-Najjar family massacre]] → {{no redirect|Al-Najjar family airstrike}} – None of the sources cited in the article decribe this airstrike as massacre. [[User:Nehushtani|Nehushtani]] ([[User talk:Nehushtani|talk]]) 07:55, 9 June 2025 (UTC) <small>— '''''Relisting.''''' '''<small style="font-family:monospace">'''[[<big>[[User:CanonNi]]</big>]]'''</small>''' ([[User talk:CanonNi|💬]] • [[Special:Contribs/CanonNi|✍️]]) 11:44, 16 June 2025 (UTC)</small> <small>— '''''Relisting.''''' [[User:Alpha3031|Alpha3031]] ([[User talk:Alpha3031|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Alpha3031|c]]) 08:16, 26 June 2025 (UTC)</small>
*'''Support''' if that's the case, we should follow what the sources say.. [[User:Rafi Chazon|Rafi Chazon]] ([[User talk:Rafi Chazon|talk]]) 13:00, 11 June 2025 (UTC)
:This is disinformation. Le Monde calls this a massacre right in the first reference used in the text, which shows up right after the word massacre.[[User:Rafe87|Rafe87]] ([[User talk:Rafe87|talk]]) 13:20, 11 June 2025 (UTC)
::Please don't [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Al-Najjar_family_massacre&diff=prev&oldid=1295064501 strike] other users' comments. <span style="font-family:courier"> -- [[User:Tamzin|<span style="color:#E6007A">Tamzin</span>]]</span><sup class="nowrap">[[[User talk:Tamzin|<i style="color:#E6007A">cetacean needed</i>]]]</sup> <small>([[User:Tamzin/🤷|they|xe|🤷]])</small> 19:46, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
::I'm removing the the request notice from the main page as the request is based on a false premise.[[User:Rafe87|Rafe87]] ([[User talk:Rafe87|talk]]) 19:52, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
:::You're not allowed to do that. If the premise is indeed false, this request will be closed without action in due time. I'm saying this as an admin. <span style="font-family:courier"> -- [[User:Tamzin|<span style="color:#E6007A">Tamzin</span>]]</span><sup class="nowrap">[[[User talk:Tamzin|<i style="color:#E6007A">cetacean needed</i>]]]</sup> <small>([[User:Tamzin/🤷|they|xe|🤷]])</small> 19:59, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' "Al-Najjar family airstrike" as a [[euphemism]] and improper grammar. Support instead '''Killing of Al-Najjar children''' or '''Killing of Al-Najjar family'''. "Killing" is [[WP:CONSISTENT]] with [[WP:KILLINGS]]. I prefer using the word "children" as opposed to "family", as there are more google news results for it ([https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=Al-Najjar%20%22children%22&tbm=nws has 672 results] vs [https://www.google.com/search?q=Al-Najjar%20%22family%22&client=firefox-b-d&tbm=nws&sclient=gws-wiz-news Al-Najjar "family" has 582 results]).'''[[User talk:Vice regent|VR]]''' <sub>(Please [[Template:Ping|ping]] on reply)</sub> 05:32, 13 June 2025 (UTC)
*'''Rename to something''' because massacre obviously isn't supported by [[WP:COMMONNAME]]; one source isn't sufficient for that (and even La Monde, the one source presented for it, doesn't use it prominently.) But more time might be needed to workshop a title, because this doesn't perfectly line up with other articles and there isn't a [[WP:COMMONAME]]; none of the proposed titles seem ideal to me. ''Al-Najjar family attack'' is workable as a quick compromise if nothing else can get agreement just because it lines up with how we've renamed similar articles and because it's definitely supported by the sources in the sense that the virtually all say they were killed in an attack; it'd definitely be an improvement over the current title. However, it seems a bit weird to use it for a family and not a location and may imply they were attacked deliberately. "Airstrike" doesn't strike me as great per the above; it's weird and euphemistic and has the same problems of "attack" in that... the "Al-Najjar family airstrike" isn't really what anyone would actually call it. ''Killing of Al-Najjar family'' or ''Killing of Al-Najjar children'' are workable - "killing" and "children" are emotive in that context so it would require some caution, but unlike "massacre" they're terms that I do think are commonly used in the sources and therefore pass the minimum requirement of {{tq|names and terms that are commonly used by sources}}. Also, I feel that the last one accurately captures how it is covered in basically all sources. --[[User:Aquillion|Aquillion]] ([[User talk:Aquillion|talk]]) 10:33, 13 June 2025 (UTC)
::Agree. Even though technically the father succumbed to his wounds a few days later, the RS coverage was overwhelmingly surrounding the children. The children piece is why this particular killing is more notable than the [https://www.newarab.com/news/israel-wipes-out-over-2200-palestinian-families-gaza 2,200 families wiped out] in the war. '''[[User talk:Vice regent|VR]]''' <sub>(Please [[Template:Ping|ping]] on reply)</sub> 12:12, 13 June 2025 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' OP's argument as it is based on a false premise as stated above: the name massacre does appear in a RS. And to @[[User:Aquillion|Aquillion]]: This particular massacre simply has no common name in the media, so your argument can be used against any name chosen no matter what it is. I was wondering why Common Name is always invoked to rename articles about massacres of Palestinians, but not for replacing other terms. Why should Common Name rule out "massacre" but not "airstrike" or "killing"? ''Massacre'' is simply a better name as, unlike ''airstrike'', it exposes both that this was a mass fatality event and the innocent nature of the victims, and it is also shorter than "mass killing." Why is the longer or the more euphemistic term always the default term for massacres of Palestinian even when it has no RS support? [[User:Rafe87|Rafe87]] ([[User talk:Rafe87|talk]]) 14:50, 13 June 2025 (UTC)
::There are two policies for names. [[WP:COMMONNAME]] is the higher-priority one; when there's a clear common name, we use it no matter what, even if it's POV and emotive and so on. If there is no common name, though, then we have to invent a descriptive one, which requires following [[WP:POVTITLE]], ie. names have to be as neutral as possible and avoid potentially judgmental terms. In a situation like this where no common name exists, the other names I mentioned are all fine (or at least better than "massacre") because they're comparatively neutral. (We can use potentially sharp words in a title we create if most sources do - "killing" is fine because most sources use that term in at least some context.) And people are trying to be more consistent about this; it was something that came up in the recent ArbCom case. Every individual article has its own context, of course, but if you notice that specific people are pushing for or opposing "massacre" in titles inconsistently, it's reasonable to ask them to explain and to take them to [[WP:AE]] if they don't have a good explanation. As a ''general'' rule, though, for recent events where agreement among the sources to call something a massacre is unlikely to have emerged yet, you're probably better off leaning towards avoiding "massacre" in article titles; if you think a bunch of articles are using the term in a way that leads to pro-Israeli POV in titles or somesuch, your energy would probably be better spent suggesting renames for those articles rather than trying to use it as a rationale that we should call everything a massacre. Anyway, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&limit=500&offset=0&ns0=1&search=intitle%3AMassacre+deepcategory%3A%22Israel%E2%80%93Hamas+war%22 take a look]. Note the redirects further down, which generally indicate that a page was moved. Feel free to suggest moves for any of the ones that haven't been moved yet if you don't think they meet [[WP:COMMONNAME]]. --[[User:Aquillion|Aquillion]] ([[User talk:Aquillion|talk]]) 15:37, 13 June 2025 (UTC)
:::Calling this massacre an airstrike, as suggested by the OP, constitutes huge worsening in title quality, not only because the latter term hides what makes this attack notable -- the multiple fatalities, the almost disappearance of an entire family, not the fact that the bombing was carried out from the air -- but also because the title is ambiguous. Someone reading it might get the impression that there is a family called Al Najjar that has carried out an airstrike somewhere in the world. "Family airstrike" is simply not how anyone outside Wikipedia talks or writes. So, I completely disagree that all the names you mentioned above are superior to "massacre". In fact, I know of another naming policy that you didn't mention above, [[WP:NCENPOV]], which says the following: <blockquote>If there is no common name for the event, and there is a generally accepted word used when identifying the event, the title should include the word even if it is a strong one such as "massacre" or "genocide" or "war crime". However, to keep article names short, avoid including more words than are necessary to identify the event.</blockquote> The policy makes no reference to multiple requirements that must be met before adopting the term massacre for an event such as this, which would be called a massacre by common usage of the word. It asks only that there not be a different name that has become common in media reporting. And indeed there is not, and the inclusion of the term massacre here should be made even less controversial by the fact that "massacre" does indeed appear in at least one RS to refer to the wiping-out of the Al Najjar family. And as a bonus, it also fulfills the second suggestion of [[WP:NCENPOV]] quoted above, that the term also needs to be brief. No term conveys the same thing as "massacre" in a briefer way. Other synonyms are more verbose. [[User:Rafe87|Rafe87]] ([[User talk:Rafe87|talk]]) 16:11, 13 June 2025 (UTC)
:<small>Note: [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Palestine|WikiProject Palestine]], [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Israel|WikiProject Israel]], and [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history|WikiProject Military history]] have been notified of this discussion. '''<small style="font-family:monospace">'''[[<big>[[User:CanonNi]]</big>]]'''</small>''' ([[User talk:CanonNi|💬]] • [[Special:Contribs/CanonNi|✍️]]) 11:44, 16 June 2025 (UTC)</small>
*'''Oppose''' the OP's proposal per VR, but I'd support VR's proposal, if necessary, with a lower-case "a" in the "al-" prefix per [[MOS:AR]] <span style="text-shadow:#000 0em 0em 1em">[[Special:Contributions/Abo_Yemen|<span style="color:#000">𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨</span>]] [[User:Abo Yemen|<span style="color:#CD0000">Abo Yemen</span>]] ([[User talk:Abo Yemen|<span style="color:#000">𓃵</span>]])</span> 12:32, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
*'''Support''' the last @[[User:Vice regent|Vice regent]]-proposal (Killing of Al(al)-Najjar family), supporting the move from massacre to airstrike as a secondary option to killing. There is unsufficient sourcing to support massacre a commonname, and a general move from massacre except in cases where there is significant use is appropriate here. [[User:FortunateSons|FortunateSons]] ([[User talk:FortunateSons|talk]]) 09:24, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
:*:On familiy vs. children: we are using a [[Wikipedia:NDESC|descriptive title]] instead of a common name, and familiy includes all victims, while children does not. [[User:FortunateSons|FortunateSons]] ([[User talk:FortunateSons|talk]]) 09:30, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
:*::Regarding the request for elaboration on the question of family vs. children: As mentioned above, this is a descriptive title, which should therefore strive for being as descriptive as possible. One can reasonably argue that a) most of the victims are children and b) much of the coverage predates the death of Hamdi and therefore does not include him (see the VR analyisis). However, there is no strong argument to exclude the father, and more recent neutral and high-quality sources (such as [https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20250611-child-survivor-of-gaza-family-strike-heads-to-italy France24 by AFP]) use family. While the emphasis on the children in the lead is appropriate, the same cannot be said for the exclusion of the father from the title. A title using children would imply that the only victims were children, and would therefore be misleading. Lastly, we cannot rely on coverage that pre-dates the death of the father for due weight in this question. [[User:FortunateSons|FortunateSons]] ([[User talk:FortunateSons|talk]]) 09:23, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' OP's proposal for reasons others have cited and because it is ambiguous, were the family air-struck or did they perform the airstrike? "Killing of..." is passable if we must but I continue to believe that we should call a spade a spade. The family was massacred. [[User:Smallangryplanet|Smallangryplanet]] ([[User talk:Smallangryplanet|talk]]) 11:55, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' per VR. [[User:Skitash|Skitash]] ([[User talk:Skitash|talk]]) 16:20, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
*'''Support''' move. Le Monde variably refers to the attack as an airstrike, bombing and massacre, so no clear common term within the article. Furthermore, airstrike is attributed to Reuters, while massacre is in relation to a doctor's testimony, so airstrike takes precedence. Regardless, it's the only source that uses the term massacre at all, so it doesn't fulfill COMMONNAME to merit a judgemental name per NCENPOV. The arguments in favor of massacre smell exactly like [[WP:TITLEWARRIOR]]. [[User:Closetside|Closetside]] ([[User talk:Closetside|talk]]) 23:12, 22 June 2025 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' OP's suggestion to rename using the word "airstrike". However I agree that the use of "massacre" is not well supported. In the Le Monde article it's unclear if term is being used in Le Monde's editorial voice or the surgeon's voice. I would agree to rename the article "Killing of al-Najjar children" (because the large number of children is what makes the killing notable).[[User:Brmull|Brmull]] ([[User talk:Brmull|talk]]) 07:03, 23 June 2025 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' per Rafe87 and [[MOS:EUPHEMISM]]. The title should perhaps reflect the fact that all of the direct victims were children, like [https://www.dropsitenews.com/p/massacre-al-najjar-family-gaza-genocide this article] does. [[User:Paprikaiser|Paprikaiser]] ([[User talk:Paprikaiser|talk]]) 22:22, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
*:This is inaccurate: while delayed, Hamdi is very much a direct fatality, and his death shouldn’t be excluded from the title. [[User:FortunateSons|FortunateSons]] ([[User talk:FortunateSons|talk]]) 22:49, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
*::That's true, but from what I've seen, most news coverage tends to highlight the fact that nine children were killed. I just thought it might make sense for us to do the same. [[User:Paprikaiser|Paprikaiser]] ([[User talk:Paprikaiser|talk]]) 20:34, 25 June 2025 (UTC)
*:::I think a weight of coverage argument (for example, per VR above) is a lot more reasonable, even if I disagree [[User:FortunateSons|FortunateSons]] ([[User talk:FortunateSons|talk]]) 08:12, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
:<small>'''Relisting comment''': There is some consensus towards VR's proposal, but relisting to see if participants could confirm if "children" or "family" is preferred (+reasoning distinguishing the two if any) [[User:Alpha3031|Alpha3031]] ([[User talk:Alpha3031|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Alpha3031|c]]) 08:16, 26 June 2025 (UTC)</small>
*'''Comment''': The proposal was [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Al-Najjar_family_massacre&diff=next&oldid=1294695802 changed] by the nominator from a suggestion to use "attack" to instead use "airstrike", but the {{tl|requested move/dated}} template parameter was not changed, so the listing at [[WP:RM]] has not matched the current proposal. I just updated the {{tl|requested move/dated}} template parameter to fix this problem. — [[User:BarrelProof|BarrelProof]] ([[User talk:BarrelProof|talk]]) 09:48, 26 June 2025 (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: var(--color-error, red);">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 [[Template:Archive bottom]] -->
</div><div style="clear:both;" class=></div>
