# Talk:Destruction of cultural heritage during the Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip

This page is subject to the extended confirmed restriction related to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

https://www.riwaq.org/
https://www.thenation.com/article/world/gaza-cultural-genocide/
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/04/everything-beautiful-has-been-destroyed-palestinians-mourn-a-city-in-tatters
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/1/14/a-cultural-genocide-which-of-gazas-heritage-sites-have-been-destroyed
https://www.npr.org/2024/02/04/1226295081/gaza-iconic-sites-destroyed-in-war
https://www.theguardian.com/world/gallery/2024/jan/11/palestinian-cultural-heritage-gaza-destruction-in-pictures?ref=upstract.com
https://worldcrunch.com/focus-israel-palestine-war/cultural-genocide-israel-gaza
https://carnegieendowment.org/sada/91577
https://www.museumsassociation.org/museums-journal/news/2024/01/widescale-destruction-of-cultural-heritage-in-gaza/
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/1/14/a-cultural-genocide-which-of-gazas-heritage-sites-have-been-destroyed
https://www.aljazeera.com/program/upfront/2023/12/22/israel-gaza-war-why-are-culture-and-society-targets
https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2024/3/25/why-archaeologists-must-speak-up-for-gaza
https://www.aljazeera.com/program/the-bottom-line/2024/1/11/french-historian-israel-destroyed-4000-year-old-culture-in-gaza
John Cummings (talk) 10:20, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Change "The medieval Qasr al-Basha (also known as Pasha's Palace) was left in ruined after Israeli bombardment.[35][34]" to "The medieval Qasr al-Basha (also known as Pasha's Palace) was left in ruins after Israeli bombardment.[35][34]" Thegkz (talk) 12:12, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

 Done Jamedeus (talk) 17:01, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Thank you Thegkz for spotting that and Thegkz for fixing the typo. Richard Nevell (talk) 17:22, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

@BilledMammal: Your edit summary ["Sources generally refuse to attribute blame for the general destruction, though specific instances are attributed"] is factually incorrect as sources that are reliable according to Wikipedia, i.e. Al Jazeera, Middle East Eye, Jacobin and The Nation to cite a few examples, have explicitly cited Israel as the perpetrator as a whole, and not in specific instances. [1], [2], [3], [4]. Adding also EuroMed monitor [5]. Not only that but they have called it a cultural genocide. Waiting for your self-revert of the move given the factually incorrect edit summary. Makeandtoss (talk) 12:09, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

You've listed sources that there is also generally a consensus are biased. Less biased sources, such as the Heritage for Peace, decline to attribute general blame. We should keep the title neutral, and provide the detail in the article where appropriate context can be given.
Further, per WP:PCM, The discussion process is used for potentially controversial moves. It was inappropriate for you to boldly move this article - you should have been aware that such a move would be controversial. BilledMammal (talk) 12:16, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
The sources provided above are all reliable sources according to Wikipedia and neutrality does not mean censorship of what reliable sources are saying. I took the bold move in alignment with RS per BRD, which is within my right, and your revert, which despite also being within your right, was made contrary to RS. There is no need for this to be controversial as RS are clear, and I would expect better good faith editing here. Makeandtoss (talk) 12:26, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

On 7 October 2023, Hamas attacked Israel, killing more than a thousand people including nearly 700 civilians (of which 36 were children). Some 259 hostages we're also taken. we're -> were WeInTheUSA (talk) 18:35, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Done. Richard Nevell (talk) 21:03, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Destruction of cultural heritage during the Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Richard Nevell (talk · contribs)
Reviewer: Personisinsterest (talk · contribs) 11:51, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Just want to say, this is my first GA review. Anyway, the article seems fine, and it's about an important topic. Will review soon. Personisinsterest (talk) 11:51, 25 August 2024 (UTC)


### Comments, suggestions
I made a few minor edits: Took away a redlink, added some commas, and corrected some numbers from October 7th. (Not anyone's fault, new data came out). I also moved a statement from one section to another because I thought it fit better there, but I removed it once I saw it was already there. Kept it removed from the other section because it was in the other. Doesn't matter. Sorry.
Anyway, I would suggest linking Gaza genocide in sentences about the ICJ case. I would say to make a Background section and put "Cultural heritage in Gaza" and "Destruction of cultural heritage" in it, with the exception of the second paragraph of the latter which can go to events. And finish refs 4 and 5. Doesn't matter for the review, just a suggestion.


### Review
1) Well-written

 1a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct
 1b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation - Cultural genocide is a value-laden term.
2) Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check

 2a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline
 2b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose)
 2c) it contains no original research
 2d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism (32.4% on Earwig, only significant thing is a quote.)
3) Broad in its coverage

 3a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic - Yes, except for the lead. The first paragraph is fine, but the lead, which is supposed to address the main aspects of the topic, doesn't here. It dedicates a paragraph to the genocide accusations (which do have a place, just not as a paragraph) which are only mentioned once in the body. I feel the last paragraph should hold the genocide accusations, to tie it into the systemic cultural destruction. Anyway, there should be a paragraph in the middle that talks about some specific cultural destruction, as that is the main part of the article.
 3b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style)
4) Neutral:

 4) Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each - Only thing is that it should be worded "The destruction has been characterized by some as cultural genocide" in the lead. Without this, it gives the false impression that this is a mainstream conclusion, and not just something that many but only some analysts say.
5) Stable:

 5) Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute
6) Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio

 6a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content
 6b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions
Overall:  - Great article, just fix lead. pass @Richard Nevell

Thank you for the helpful feedback, Personisinsterest. Good point about the lead so I'll get onto that. I saw a recent new story about the Great Omari Mosque which may need to be integrated into the article, so I'll look into that at the same time. I should be able to get to that this week. Hopefully sooner rather than later but it's shaping up to be a busy one. Richard Nevell (talk) 20:47, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
No problem, and thanks for bringing this issue to light. Personisinsterest (talk) 06:24, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
@Personisinsterest Here is the additional information I've added, and this diff shows the changes addressing the points raised in the review, primarily adding more detail to the lead and adding qualification around cultural genocide as suggested. Let me know if further changes are needed to fully address your points. Richard Nevell (talk) 22:53, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
You have done all the needed changes, and with the article passing the other criteria, it passes. Personisinsterest (talk) 01:23, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
The destruction of cultural heritage in Gaza is a really important part of what’s happening right now, and it’s kind of overlooked. I’m glad people are doing this. Personisinsterest (talk) 01:25, 30 August 2024 (UTC)


### Follow up discussion
For the sake of keeping a central note of discussions relevant to this page, this article and DYK nom were discussed at Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Archive 202#Destruction of cultural heritage during the Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip 2. Richard Nevell (talk) 19:56, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

@Aoidh, tagging this as more evidence for the upcoming PIA5 case. This shows another type of disruption happening on platforms like GA and DYK. In this case, an article with serious POV issues was given GA status by a very involved reviewer, who also makes his political reasoning behind approving this status very clear. The issues were only noticed only later when it got to DYK (see here: [10] under "Some detailed comments" and @Theleekycauldron comments here [11]). While still being GA the article, written by an experienced editor, included very controversial claims with weak sources, like blogs, and even misrepresents sources. This type of evidence might not have been shared with ArbCom before but seems part of the larger problem. ABHammad (talk) 09:11, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
Talk pages are for discussing articles. Kindly stop misusing talk pages, thank you. nableezy -  16:33, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

@Richard Nevell: thank you for creating this very important article, and in particular for all the hard work to get it to WP:GA status.
I have taken the liberty to add a table of sites, based on the latest UNESCO list. It still needs work to identify all the sites, and importantly, to write articles about each of them. Other columns could be added, such as a thumbnail image, or the date of destruction, or details of the exact current status (i.e. how badly destroyed each one is). Similar to the tables at List of towns and villages depopulated during the 1947–1949 Palestine war or Canaanite and Aramaic inscriptions.
What do you think?
Onceinawhile (talk) 09:21, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

I have written notices inviting help at four wikiprojects ([12], [13], [14], [15]): WP:PALESTINE, WP:ISRAEL, WP:IPCOLL and WP:ARCH. Onceinawhile (talk) 09:34, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for adding the table, Onceinawhile, it's a very useful record. Ultimately, I think that the list may end up having its own article as damage to more sites is confirmed it may simply become too long and a summary could be kept here. The format of List of damaged cultural sites during the Russian invasion of Ukraine works quite well. Having individual articles on the damaged or destroyed sites is an important step. Richard Nevell (talk) 10:20, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
Thank you Richard. That List article is a helpful precedent, and I agree it may well be right – either now or later – to split the UNESCO list out of this article. I am happy with whatever you decide, since you have led the way here. Onceinawhile (talk) 13:33, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Various possible updates here, which I may get around to cross-checking on page at some point, but otherwise, others are welcome to. Iskandar323 (talk) 20:19, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Please link to Shawa Cultural Center.
In the UNSCO list of damaged sites, the Ash-Shawwa House should link to the Rashad Shawl Cultural Center page. 
These are the same buildings, which is clear in the Arabic version of the UNESCO assessment. Line 33 calls it "مركز الشوا الثقافي، مدينة غزة، محافظة غزة" AKA "Shawa Cultural Center, Gaza City, Gaza Governorate."
Thank you. Hours-of-oats (talk) 18:53, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Not done. Ash-Shawwa house was a historical mansion belonging to Sa'id al-Shawwa. It is a different building from the cultural center named after his son Rashad. Rainsage (talk) 06:18, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Radenne, Victoire (2024-11-30). "French researchers draw up an inventory of Gaza's heritage". Le Monde.fr.
Project and current list at: https://gazahistoire.hypotheses.org/211
Onceinawhile (talk) 01:14, 2 December 2024 (UTC)


### Destruction of cultural heritage during the Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip
Description of suggested change: 
In the international response section, this article should contain reference to recent international inquiries. Notably an international report from the UN OHCHR.
"Israel has obliterated Gaza’s education system and destroyed over half of all religious and cultural sites in the Gaza Strip, part of a widespread and relentless assault against the Palestinian people in which Israeli forces have committed war crimes and the crime against humanity of extermination, the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem and Israel, said in a new report today." 

https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/06/israeli-attacks-educational-religious-and-cultural-sites-occupied
Diff:
 Warning Unnamed parameter |1= set to default value. Please change it. Failure to use {{Text diff}} to specify your requested text changes, if not adequately described above, may lead to your request being denied.
Summerhall fire (talk) 13:54, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: If you would like content to be added to the article, please provide the exact text of your proposed addition. (If it is to be based on this press release, you should paraphrase rather than use a direct quotation.) Day Creature (talk) 17:26, 17 September 2025 (UTC)
I think this may be superseded by the September report released a few days ago. I have added a sentence on the conclusion. Richard Nevell (talk) 21:47, 17 September 2025 (UTC)