 May 2011 UTCI notice that this RfC is dead but SH just removed a socks comment I actually do think this conversation is fine staying open since there is not consensus and inclusion v not is essentially WPFREQUENT I did not notice NickCTs comment until now but wanted to address it since we have already gone over this but people seem to forget or have to rattle it off everytime it comes up I for one think massacre in some form should be mentioned in the lead Unfortunately the assertion that it is what people involved call it is contradicted by the followingGaza Victory enough said but just a reminder it cant be a massacre and a victory can itGaza Massacre has been disputed as a title with the sources mirroring its forced use on WikipediaHamas did not have an official name for it This has been discussed and it is a point conceded by those in favor of inclusion Hamas simply did not use its limited PR capabilities to clearly lay this out as their preferred title see point 1But back to my point of keeping this open I have offered two solutions Nableezy has rejected at leas one of them Include it has been called a massacre No bold Not an alternative title Just simply lay it out there One editor recently provided a source calling it Massacre in Gaza It was obviously referred to as a massacre orInclude every title that was verifiably used in RS at a ratio of tens of thousands to one This could be accomplished by actually adding information in the lead about the media and its relation t this topic This would increase the quality of the article by meeting WPLEAD by being an actual summary Im not going to lie I think it is time to change the title of this article altogether  notice that other languages Wikipedia projects refer to it as the Israeli operational name some editors have equated this to POV even though it is a very common and accurate title or one laying out the dates and calling it a conflict as we used to do but it was really long That discussion will eventually come up again and any decision here will get scuttled by it or the opposite But it is clear that giving prominence to a very little used and POV dripping title in the lead is not acceptable to many editors without thoughtful balancing Two easy options are presented to you It is my hope that the word massacre is used in the lead but how to do it is a hurdle And add on top of that that we still dont even have a good main title and it shows that this process has been broken since day 1 Day 1 was years ago  0316 28

    ####Prompt- Does the next message are offensives ? reply with a JSON object (without carriage return or new lines)
    with keys :
    isoffensive (True if it's offensive).
    This this the message : 
 May 2011 UTCI notice that this RfC is dead but SH just removed a socks comment I actually do think this conversation is fine staying open since there is not consensus and inclusion v not is essentially WPFREQUENT I did not notice NickCTs comment until now but wanted to address it since we have already gone over this but people seem to forget or have to rattle it off everytime it comes up I for one think massacre in some form should be mentioned in the lead Unfortunately the assertion that it is what people involved call it is contradicted by the followingGaza Victory enough said but just a reminder it cant be a massacre and a victory can itGaza Massacre has been disputed as a title with the sources mirroring its forced use on WikipediaHamas did not have an official name for it This has been discussed and it is a point conceded by those in favor of inclusion Hamas simply did not use its limited PR capabilities to clearly lay this out as their preferred title see point 1But back to my point of keeping this open I have offered two solutions Nableezy has rejected at leas one of them Include it has been called a massacre No bold Not an alternative title Just simply lay it out there One editor recently provided a source calling it Massacre in Gaza It was obviously referred to as a massacre orInclude every title that was verifiably used in RS at a ratio of tens of thousands to one This could be accomplished by actually adding information in the lead about the media and its relation t this topic This would increase the quality of the article by meeting WPLEAD by being an actual summary Im not going to lie I think it is time to change the title of this article altogether  notice that other languages Wikipedia projects refer to it as the Israeli operational name some editors have equated this to POV even though it is a very common and accurate title or one laying out the dates and calling it a conflict as we used to do but it was really long That discussion will eventually come up again and any decision here will get scuttled by it or the opposite But it is clear that giving prominence to a very little used and POV dripping title in the lead is not acceptable to many editors without thoughtful balancing Two easy options are presented to you It is my hope that the word massacre is used in the lead but how to do it is a hurdle And add on top of that that we still dont even have a good main title and it shows that this process has been broken since day 1 Day 1 was years ago  0316 28

