Template:Did you know nominations/September 2012 Egyptian-Israeli border attack
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by PumpkinSky talk 18:59, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
September 2012 Egyptian-Israeli border attack edit
- ... that soldiers in the mixed-gender Israeli Caracal Battalion successfully thwarted what was described as "a very big terrorist attack" on 21 September 2012?
Created/expanded by Jethro B (talk). Self nom at 03:23, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
- This is a solid article, created quickly in response to the events. (It's new, BTW, DYK.) I'd suggest adding more Arab news sources to improve balance of the article; currently most of the reporting comes from Israeli newspapers. Also, I would recommend changing the term "terrorist", since it typically describes someone who attacks civilians; these attacks were on soldiers. Necessarily, this would involve changing the hook, as well as the article—it would be better to reflect the events that actually took place, which are fairly notable already! groupuscule (talk) 01:59, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
- I'll change the words in the article to militants, but the word terrorist appears in the hook A) as a quote, so I can't change a quote B) to describe an attack, not the people, as militants can perpetrate terrorist attacks. I have some Arab news source in there already, I think the best is to have international outlets (CNN, BBC, Reuters, etc), so I'll try to find either international or more Arab news sources to add, and I'll let you know when I finish with these. --Jethro B 23:35, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
I've gone through the article and fulfilled your suggestions to an extent. A few things to note:
- I've left the wording (terrorists vs militants) in the "background" section as is, because that's taken from the wikilinked articles where the wording was already agreed to be terrorists (or militants or gunment, take your pick, depends which sentence you're looking at). All other use of the word terrorist that I've encountered (using find and replace, for both the word "terrorists" and "terrorist") I've changed.
- I've gone and added some more Arab and international references (see this edit), so hopefully it's good now. All of the Israeli refs used are considered RS, but this is good anyway if someone wants to elevate it to GA status in the future.
- Some international media outlets used include:
- The Associated Press
- Reuters
- BBC
- The Huffington Post
- The Christian Science Monitor
- The Los Angeles Times
- AFP
- CNN
- The Washington Post
- Some Arab outlets used include:
- Egypt Independent
- Al-Masry Al-Youm
- Al Jazeera
- Maan News Agency
- Al Arabiya
- Some international media outlets used include:
What do you think? And thanks. --Jethro B 23:52, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
Solid article, meticulously well-footnoted, and now I think appropriately balanced. I appreciate the "terrorist" -> "militant" change and I can live with keeping "terrorist" in the hook and other specific locations because the word is being quoted. Thank you for your careful work on this, Jethro! groupuscule (talk) 03:54, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
I feel I should point out that I've moved the article to September 2012 Egypt-Israel border attack. It is standard to name the countries sharing a border, not their demonyms. If this creates a problem here, I apologize. InedibleHulk (talk) 12:05, 7 October 2012 (UTC)