The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. Parts of this article relate to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing the parts of the page related to the contentious topic:
You must be logged-in to an extended confirmed account (granted automatically to accounts with 500 edits and an age of 30 days)
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on this article (except in limited circumstances)
If it is unclear which parts of the page are related to this contentious topic, the content in question should be marked within the wiki text by an invisible comment. If no comment is present, please ask an administrator for assistance. If in doubt it is better to assume that the content is covered.
Q: Why is the attack not marked as a "Hamas victory" or "Israeli victory"?
A: After a long discussion involving over 40 editors, it was decided that the result of the attack has no consensus. In the discussion, there was a split consensus for the attack being a "Hamas victory" and for the attack's result being "Inconclusive".
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Israel on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IsraelWikipedia:WikiProject IsraelTemplate:WikiProject IsraelIsrael-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jewish history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jewish history on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Jewish historyWikipedia:WikiProject Jewish historyTemplate:WikiProject Jewish historyJewish history-related articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographic Palestine region, the Palestinian people and the State of Palestine on Wikipedia. Join us by visiting the project page, where you can add your name to the list of members where you can contribute to the discussions.PalestineWikipedia:WikiProject PalestineTemplate:WikiProject PalestinePalestine-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Terrorism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles on terrorism, individual terrorists, incidents and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TerrorismWikipedia:WikiProject TerrorismTemplate:WikiProject TerrorismTerrorism articles
A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.
2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel → 7 October Hamas-led attack on Israel – I believe that enough time has passed since the last RM (which proposed the simpler "7 October attacks" name and closed with consensus to retain the current title) to re-propose a title change for this article. I believe that "7 October Hamas-led attack on Israel" is the WP:COMMONNAME for this event, as seen in sources such as:
Al Jazeera: "... counter the October 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel, which saw ..."
Bloomberg: "... trapped in Gaza since the Oct. 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel, which prompted ..."
CBC: "... around the world since the Hamas-led attacks on Israel of Oct. 7 but are now ..."
CNN: "... from the October 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel being held ..."
Euracitiv: "... triggered by the 7 October Hamas-led attack on Israel in which ..."
France24: "Before the October 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel that triggered ..."
ISW: "... spokesperson claimed that the October 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel was retaliation ..."
Middle East Eye: "Following the 7 October Hamas-led attack on Israel and subsequent ..."
NPR: "... Palestinian armed groups since the Oct. 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel that set off the war ..."
NYTimes: "... including some who participated in the Oct. 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel, and that ..."
Reuters: "... were involved in the Oct. 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel that precipitated ..."
Times of Israel: "... during and after the October 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel."
The Conversation: "... participated in the October 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel, which resulted ... "
WaPo: "Since the Oct. 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel, restrictions have ..."
Many sources simply say "7 October" or "October 7 attacks" instead of spelling out the full name, but I believe that while "7 October attacks" could be a more COMMON name, I think that it fails WP:AT#Precision in favor of "7 October Hamas-led attack on Israel." DecafPotato (talk) 00:43, 15 June 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. — Amakuru (talk) 14:09, 9 July 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.FOARP (talk) 07:27, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[]
Support – Despite all the requested move discussions for this article, this proposed name has a key aspect to it: Three-sided support. Both pro-Israeli sources (Times of Israel), pro-Palestine (pro-Hamas) sources (Al Jazeera) and English-based Western sources (all the rest up there) all call it "October 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel". Even the non-news outlet Institute for the Study of War called it "October 7 Hamas-led attack on Israel". So I have to say support on Common-Name reasoning. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page)00:55, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[]
Oppose. We'd need evidence that this is both WP:COMMONNAME currently, and that it will last beyond 7 October 2024. Additionally, we usually pay attention to consistency with other war-related articles, where [year] [event] (or [event] ([years]) is the dominant form. Finally, there has consistently been a consensus not to move.[1][2] — kashmīrīTALK18:58, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[]
There's pretty solid evidence this is the common name. Britannica headlines it as The October 7, 2023, attack. In web searches for hamas attack on israel, the majority of recent sources prominently include the date, sometimes just to set the scene but more often as a descriptive common name. First page of results from this month (october 7 not included as search term):
Yes, three of the above don't use October 7 as a name, instead putting it in prose, but others use the mere date metonymously. Speculating about future names seems less relevant than reflecting the sources we have now. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 19:37, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[]
I have a different suggestion: why not title the article just "October 7th attacks." It seems rather pointless to mention that Hamas carried out the attack. The 9/11 oage isn't title "September 11th Al-Qaeda attacks", after all. So, why should the standard on this page be any different? NesserWiki (talk) 11:44, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[]
Support, virtually all the major RS use the date "October 7" when describing Hamas' attacks, it's pretty weird we are the only ones we don't. Galamore (talk) 18:40, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[]
Support. The quotes and sources provided above confirm what I thought was true for a long time: the words 'October 7' must appear in this article title. I can add to this list a recent report from Human Rights Watch which uses also use it "October 7 assault".[3]
Oppose - Same reasons as those already mentioned. The attack was not just for one day, and it is unclear whether it will receive the same status as September 11 in popular usage as time goes on. Also there has been repeated consensus not to move for this very reason, and nothing has changed since then. Lf8u2 (talk) 18:13, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[]
Go out on the street (assuming you are not Israeli) and ask random people what they think about October 7 (or 7 October), see what happens. Selfstudier (talk) 11:08, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[]
I just checked in with two friends, they say that their other European countries would work too. I’m not sure about other continents, but I’m guessing the odds that October 7 would have comparable or better recognition compared to „2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel“ in North America, large parts of Europe, and large parts of the English-speaking world are pretty good. FortunateSons (talk) 11:32, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[]
More than 20 years after 9/11, the corresponding article gets 5 times the number of page views as this article ([4]). There is no way "October 7 attacks" is recognisable in the same way "September 11 attacks" is. To the average reader October 7 is just a date like any other. Vpab15 (talk) 12:18, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[]
Yes, but „not as recognisable as one of the most recognisable dates ever“ isn’t the measure we use here. Here are a few other singular date uses that exist, with metrics: LinkFortunateSons (talk) 12:37, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[]
The way I know that "October 7" is recognizable by readers is that it's used so often in the headlines/titles of sources. I posted 30 examples of this below. Levivich (talk) 16:37, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[]
World Architecture Day, National Inner Beauty Day, World Habitat Day, Team Margot Stem Cell and Bone Marrow Awareness Day, National LED Light Day etcetera. Selfstudier (talk) 16:49, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[]
WP:BRITANNICA is not an RS :-P I'm not sure that they have any 2023 events in "on this day" -- and I can't tell when was the last time it was updated. I checked and they do have the 2022 invasion of Ukraine [5], but they also have Mueller's 2019 Russian interference report [6], which I think we can all agree is way, way less important than Oct 7, 2023. The only thing that the absence of Oct 7 on Britannica's OTD tells me is that Britannica hasn't updated its OTD yet. Levivich (talk) 16:54, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[]
WP:HEADLINES refers specifically to news headlines, not to the titles of academic works (which is what my 30 examples are). News headlines may not be WP:RS in terms of using them as sources for the content of articles, but the titles of academic works are very good examples to look at when determining WP:RECOGNIZABILITY, WP:COMMONNAME, WP:NATURAL, WP:PRECISION... basically our article titles should follow our sources' titles. Levivich (talk) 17:04, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[]
Don't get me wrong here, I am not objecting to the date inclusion per se, I think the year needs to be there and the rest that was always there, the Hamas led attack on Israel (people will recognize that more than the date), Selfstudier (talk) 17:29, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[]
Support to October 7 Attacks only. Including "Hamas" in the title is already questionable as many sources point to it being a joint operation and one that has received meticulous planning by the wide range of resistance organizations in the Gaza Strip. "Israel" is unnecessary as there's only one attack widely known to have happened on October 7. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 18:50, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[]
@Hameltion as a name it's just English: 7 October, Arabic: 7 أكتوبر (day first, read right to left) and October 7 in American. Other pages add "attack" because 7 October is in use for "on this day". MWQs (talk) 22:39, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[]
Consistency doesn't really apply here in terms of [Year] [Event], because the COMMONNAME has emerged as [Date] [Event] instead, so the consistency would be with articles like September 11 attacks and January 6 United States Capitol attack. And the February and November RMs were five and eight months ago now, respectively, and the intermittent time has only reinforced 7 October as the Hamas attack's COMMONNAME. DecafPotato (talk) 20:04, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[]
@Kashmiri It is definitely the common name, but just 7 October, not the proposed title. I agree with you about consistency, we should do common name OR consistent description, not mix them, the proposed title is a bit of a mess that isn't common or consistent. We can't just call it 7 October but as @DecafPotato points out, adding just "attacks" to be 7 October attacks would be consistent with others. But I very strongly support 7 October not October 7, the others were in the USA, this wasn't, The month first thing is used more often in sources with POV problems (e.g. Eylon Levi), day first is common in a wider range of sources and is more readable to most of the world. MWQs (talk) 20:02, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[]
oppose proposed title but would support the title changing to "7 October attacks" by itself. The long description with a year-less date is weird, and not consistent with other pages. The common name is 7 October, nobody calls it the proposed title. MWQs (talk) 20:32, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[]
Struck input of banned sockpuppet.
Also, putting all those elements in at once (7 October + Hamas + attack on Israel) sounds like the introduction to an Eylon Levy speech (he tended to pile in 3 different slogans before he got to a verb). To me "Hamas" sounds weird, because the attacks were the Qassam Brigades, Hamas is more the name for the political party, it's like saying Sinn Fein did a bombing spree instead of attributing that to the IRA. We can justify "7 October" OR "Hamas" being included as the common name in English, but both sounds like Eylon Levy. MWQs (talk) 20:32, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[]
@DecafPotato I just noticed you did find cases where people had written that combination of words, the Eylon effect is just the effect of saying it out loud. But I agree with @Kashmiri that "7 October Hamas-led attack on Israel" won't be said in the 2030s, because by 8 October 2024 anybody adding that much detail will add the year. But there is a precedent for 7 October attacks by itself persisting as a common name, but not your proposal. MWQs (talk) 22:01, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[]
I prefer "7 October attacks" over the current title, for what it's worth. In the initial comment I conceded that it's likely a more common name than my proposed title but made an argument about WP:PRECISION in favor of including "Hamas-led" and "on Israel." But if editors disagree with that argument my position is very amendable to "7 October attacks." DecafPotato (talk) 18:15, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[]
Also, I was have been considering suggesting a chang from "Hamas-led" to "Hamas-initiated" because some of it was planned but "go that way and do some violence" describes their leadership for about 2/3 of it. Changing it to just 7 October attacks solves the led vs initiated problem as well. MWQs (talk) 20:46, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[]
Oppose per Kashmiri, this attempt to include the 7 October date has already failed a couple times in favor of formulations like the current title. This date is not meaningful to the average English speaking reader or if it is now, it will not be by this time next year.Selfstudier (talk) 17:49, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[]
Oppose for now. "October 7" is the natural way to refer to the most recent October 7. If the yearless form lasts beyond its anniversary like "September 11" did, then it may be time to rename. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 16:41, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[]
I do believe that October 7 is the common name and that it is more recognizable than "2023". I reject the consistency argument and also reject that This date is not meaningful to the average English speaking reader. Especially when "Hamas-led attack on Israel" remains in the title, there should be no concern that readers won't know what we're talking about. However, I am not sure whether the move target should be 7 October or October 7. The local date format is, in fact, "7 October", but the English-language sources provided by the nom above show that reliable sources lean towards "October 7". Toadspike[Talk]11:02, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[]
Oppose on conciseness and long-term significance grounds. "7 October" is noticeably longer than "2023", and the possibility of Hamas launching another attack on another October 7 cannot be ruled out as the Gaza war is a current event. NasssaNser14:43, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[]
The second part of your comment is not only WP:CRYSTALBALL but also contradicts itself — how does the possibility that Hamas attacks Israel on the next October 7 mean that the title is too imprecise when Hamas attacked Israel many times over the course of 2023? DecafPotato (talk) 05:03, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[]
Support October 7 (or 7 October) is generally the most commonly used term by national and international newspapers, to the degree that it would even meet the requirements for a non-neutral title. But it’s not, and therefore the requirements are more than met. It’s also the way the term is colloquially used in political discussions and sometimes on wiki, which is a decent indication that it will remain the commonly used term at least in the near future. While we can’t know the actual future (and therefore any arguments that there might be a different name in the future hold limited weight), one could also argue that events commemorating this attack will likely use the same language that is utilised by Israel and other western countries, which is generally Oct. 7.
Support The vast majority of international media refers to the attack as the 7th October attack (or some variation of the date), therefore, it would appear that this is the WP:CommonName. A lot of weight is given to the date (7th October) when referring to the attack. I don't think I've ever seen anyone described the attack as the 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel; the current title is certainly not the WP:CommonName. IJA (talk) 13:58, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[]
Support but preferOctober 7 attack on Israel or simply October 7 attack for brevity. Not sure why the title was changed back. October 7 attack seems the common name to me and seems uncontroversial and entirely free of POV concerns. My only concern would be what further specification is needed to differentiate it from other events internationally, and I think "on Israel" suffices. Unbandito (talk) 18:20, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[]
Support proposed title; the replacement of “2023” with “7 October” in the title is a prime example of precision. In fact, if 7 October Hamas-led attack and/or 7 October attack on Israel were commonly used in RS, I would support those instead, but they’re not, so the proposed title is as precise and concise as we can get ATM.
Weak oppose proposed title as overly long. But I would support 7 October attack, since it's arguably the WP:COMMONNAME and (2023) can always be appended later on if any DAB is needed. Lewisguile (talk) 15:38, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[]
Original close, overturned to "relist" at move review
The result of the move request was: Moved to 7 October attacks. There was clear consensus to move away from the current title as the date was found to be an important part of the WP:COMMONNAME. The arguments opposing the move largely relied on the idea of another attack on 7 October 2024 which was demmed WP:CRYSTALBALL by the discussion. No prejudice against another discussion between the original proposoed title and 7 October attacks. (non-admin closure) >>> Extorc.talk14:29, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[]
@Amakuru: can you make it so there is a notice at the top of the page? And since this is a recurring problem, would be good if someone found a technical solution to when RM are re-opened.VR(Please ping on reply)16:50, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[]
Sure, I've manually reinsert the template on the article. I don't really know why the bot didn't do this, given that it did put it back in the RM discussions board. @Wbm1058: any ideas? Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 17:11, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[]
Oppose any title that doesn't have 2023 in it. The problem with news media is they operate on a much smaller time scale than wikipedia. In the first week of the attack, they reported it "Saturday's" attacks[7][8][9]. The next week they reported it as "last week's" attack[10][11][12].By November it had become "last month"'s attacks[13][14] or "October's attack"[15][16] So it is natural now for them to call it "October 7" attacks even though this may change yet again. We need to consider Wikipedia:Long-term significance of the name before we use it. It is worth noting that "October 7" is also the date of a Hezbollah attack on Israel and the start of the United States invasion of Afghanistan.VR(Please ping on reply)17:09, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[]
@Vice regent: When you bring up that October 7 is also the date of other attacks, you must also demonstrate that those attacks have been referred to in reliable sources as "the October 7 attack" to refute the WP:COMMONNAME argument. Simply saying that other events could be known as the same name (when they aren't) is not sufficient. DecafPotato (talk) 18:52, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[]
Oppose 7 October attacks or any title that is less WP:RECOGNIZABLE than the current one. It is a very significant event by all means, but it can also be seen as an escalation in a regional conflict that has lasted more than 100 years. In comparison the September 11 attacks were a pivotal moment in world history that make that title instantly recognizable. The same cannot be said about the term "7 October attacks" or similar, even though the event is much more recent. Vpab15 (talk) 22:49, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[]
Oppose - We need a name, not an abstract, 7 October attacks was possibly a bit too non-specific, but 7 October attacks on Israel of 7 October 2023 attacks would be enough to disambigute it. There are other attacks on Israel that happened on the 7 October in other years, but they're not known by date? So it's not genuinely ambiguous. The only case that comes close is the October War, but that started with an attack on 6 October. MWQs (talk) 05:52, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[]
Also, incitement is not leadership, so "Hamas-led" is not very accurate (nb - this as a criticism of them, not an excuse), but the date and the target are indisputable. MWQs (talk) 05:52, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[]
Strong oppose to any name change: opposing 7 October Hamas-led attack as misleading since the attack lasted for 2 days after at least as well; and opposing just 7 October attacks as this is not used in majority of RS. Makeandtoss (talk) 08:26, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[]
Oppose - On reflection, I now oppose this move, having previously offered my support for same. This is because there have been several attacks in the region on the 7th October (2000 Hezbollah cross-border raid and 2004 Sinai bombings) and referring to it as simply the 7 October Attack could lead to confusion. I'm not entirely convinced that "7 October Hamas-led attack on Israel" is the common name for this attack and I'm yet to see sufficient evidence stating that it is. Additionally, the attack lasted two days, not one day, therefore calling it the 7 October Attack is strange when it was still happening on the 8th October. I think the current title name is perfectly fine as it is. IJA (talk) 14:14, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[]
Support at this point it is very safe to say that the term "October 7" is used universally when describing the Hamas attack, not only in Israel but as people have shown here also in the world's leading media channels. I think the title should reflect this fact. Other attacks also happened in the same date, but only in this case, the date is the most common name of the event. PeleYoetz (talk) 16:14, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[]
Oppose. Let's go with the status quo, since there were no other attacks during 2023 initiated by Hamas; the one started in October 2023 constitutes an episode in the still -as of 2024- ongoing conflict. There is simply no additional information imparted by changing the title to what is proposed. Per WP:NC. -The Gnome (talk) 12:06, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[]
Support, better fit for WP:CRITERIA because it's more precise and recognizable. I'd also support just "October 7 attack" or "7 October attack" or any such variation as more concise; I think the date is the WP:COMMONNAME for the event (with or without the year). In addition to the media sources posted above (e.g. by DecafPotato and Hameltion, and I'm sure we could find more), here are some academic sources:
@Levivich agree with you on having "October 7" in the title. But given the sources that you present that have the year in them, shouldn't you oppose removing the year from the title? Likewise, some of the sources you present actually include "Hamas" in the title ([48]) or "Gaza" ([49]) or "Israel" ([50]). Some of the publications are Israel-focused (Israel Studies) where the meaning is obvious. The fact that some of the sources you cite refer to the event as only "October 7" ([51]) – a title we must absolutely reject – should indicate that the lack of qualifiers in a source does not imply we must similarly discard them.VR(Please ping on reply)04:18, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[]
@VR: 18 sources I posted don't have the year in the titles, 10 do (unless I miscounted). I wouldn't oppose a title that had the year in it ("October 7, 2023 attack") but I think we can omit the year as an unnecessary disambiguator, in the name of WP:CONCISE. While the sources use the words "October 7" in a variety of different forms ("October 7 attacks," "10/7," "7 October massacre", etc. etc.), I think when we apply WP:AT to this set of slightly different titles, some variation of "October 7 attacks" is the one that fits WP:AT criteria best. It includes a necessary disambiguator (e.g. "attacks") but omits unnecessary ones (e.g. "2023," "Israel," "Hamas," "Gaza," all of which are used by some sources but none of which are so predominant so as to become part of the common name). It's precise enough, as evidenced by the sources using the same level of precision (month and day) and as concise as possible (can't drop the third word) while still being recognizable (as evidenced by its usage in many sources), natural ("[date] attack"), and consistent (at least with September 11 attacks). Levivich (talk) 05:22, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[]
@Levivich, see my !vote above. In the early days sources referred to the event as "Saturday's" or "last week's" attacks. Then it became "last month". Sources don't use the year now because the event is less a year old. I expect the number of sources using year will only go up, esp after October 7, 2024.VR(Please ping on reply)19:07, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[]
Support a title with "October 7" and no year, per Hameltion and Levivich's common name analysis, with preference to "October 7 attack" (no additional qualifiers). Very clearly the common name. Used by sources no matter where you look. The Britannica article, a tertiary source like Wikipedia, uses just "October 7 attack", for instance. CFA💬04:26, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[]
Above. I have seen no evidence as to why "2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel" is the common name here. As far as I can tell, it was a name invented by Wikipedia editors. CFA💬15:42, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[]
The current name is a descriptive title, not a commonname. It was "invented" because immediately after the Hamas attack, that component was split off from the main war article and at the time, everyone was just referring to that part as the Hamas attack. In the future, no-one (outside of Israel) will remember the year unless we include it. Selfstudier (talk) 15:52, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[]
You stated that the proposed title is "Very clearly the common name". I asked you to provide evidence for this claim and you have avoided doing so. Now please answer the question, where is your evidence that the proposed title is the common name? This shouldn't be difficult for you, as you have claimed that this is "very clearly" the case. So far, you have vaguely listed "sources" and "Britannica". This is hardly sufficient evidence to support your claim. As to your point, I don't think that the current title is the common name, nor have I claimed that it is. I don't think that there is currently a common name for the attack at present. I think that the current title is a descriptive NPOV title for the attack. If someone can provide evidence of a common name, I'll happily support changing the name of the article to that common name. But so far, that has not happened. IJA (talk) 09:39, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[]
Support. Given the overwhelming use of 'October 7 attack' in reliable sources, it makes sense to adopt the same term on Wikipedia for consistency and clarity. Waqar💬19:00, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[]
Support. As supported by the sources, 7 October is as much a concept as 11 September. It's the COMMONNAME. Even more than 11 September, since no alternation with the number dates. This discussion addresses the FAILURE that the date currently isn't included in the title. 7 October attacks or similar would even be better as it is the PRIMARYTOPIC. The rest is not really needed. Yet supporting the proposed also as is, as a real improvement over the current name. gidonb (talk) 16:15, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[]
Heavy Support. This is a notable event in the Near East conflicts/Israel and Palestine conflicts. This might be a bad example, but just like the Six Day War, the Suez Crisis, and the Yom Kippur War don't have the year in their names, this attack doesn't either. Colloquially no one will say the "2023 attack", people just say "October 7th attack" and people know what it is, but this could be because it is a recent event. Either way, I still support. Alexysun (talk) 22:57, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[]
It's also important to note that October 6 has historically referred to the Egyptian (not Hamas) attack on Israeli forces that started the 1973 Yom Kippur war (sometimes called the "October 6th war"[52][53]). So historically significant is the October 6 attack, that we have a city called 6th of October (city), a bridge called 6th October Bridge, a district called 6th of October Governorate etc. I think we need to consider "long-term significance" here and add a qualifier (either "2023" or "Hamas-led" or "on Israel").VR(Please ping on reply)07:02, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[]
Sounds good, though I think it could also be "October 2023 Hamas attack on Israel" (or October 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel). Loymdayddaud (talk) 09:03, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[]
Support any title including October 7 due to inclusion of the date in sources when talking about this event. I do think the proposed title is a bit wordy but is an agreeable next step at the moment. Yeoutie (talk) 21:32, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[]
Support. Not only do I believe that we have the sources which support a move, but from my own personal experience many people, both on the pro-Israeli and pro-Palestinian sides of the conflict, refer to the attacks as October 7th. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 14:57, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[]
"Strong Oppose:" Changing the title to "7 october Hamas-led attak on Israel" is unwarranted and undermines the clarity and long-term recognition of the event. Unlike "September 11," the date "7 October" lacks immediate global resonance and is unlikely to gain the same historical significance. The current title, "2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel," is concise, widely understandable, and accurately situates the event within its broader historical and geopolitical context.
Oppose: it seems perfectly established that the most common reference is indeed "October 7." That said, October 7 happens every year, and while such a reference is absolutely suitable for news media (where the name was established), it is absolutely not suitable for encyclopedia which is supposed to be essentially timeless. For that reason, I am opposed to changing the title. The proposed name is a good name for a redirect that would facilitate finding this article, but not a good name for the article itself. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk•track) 07:05, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[]
Conditional support for 7 October attack, oppose7 October Hamas-led attack on Israel. The support is pending it being accepted as common per WP:COMMONNAME - my opinion is that it is a common name by this point and that "7 October" unqualified is recognisably associated with this attack, but my opinion is not an evidential basis and I'd wait for conclusive analysis of the RS corpus and consensus. However, if "7 October attack" is considered a common name, then it is the common name in its own right. The additional "Hamas-led attack on Israel" formulation is not one used consistently or uncontroversially (some RSs I've seen use the date alone by metonymy, some alternate phrasings such as "Hamas attack" vs. "Hamas-led attack"). If that additional qualifier information is really necessary, then that formulation is not a common name by Wikipedia standards at all in the sense of "the name that is most commonly used". At that point a descriptive title should be used, of which the current title remains the best option. Benjitheijneb (talk) 21:39, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[]
Comment - separate to my above opinion, I would note that "October 7 attacks" would need to justify the date to be in month-day order as part of the common name or established as "Strong national ties to a topic" under MOS:DATETIES. Otherwise, the order should rightly be "7 October attacks" in a day-month format, retaining what is currently used in the article per MOS:DATERET. Benjitheijneb (talk) 21:45, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[]
Support as an improvement over the mediocre current title, but its too long so I actually prefer 7 October attack on Israel as that is shorter and conveys enough info (and doesn't go into which organization actually did what, which that stuff is for the body of the article not the title). For the purpose of getting a consensus, put me down as OK with whichever of those two seems most popular.
See WP:AT; "7 October attack on Israel" best meets the PRECISION criterion ("unambiguously identifies the article's subject and distinguishes it from other subjects") whereas just "7 October attack" is just too short -- we do want CONCISION, yes, but "7 October attack" doesn't make it unequivocally and instantly clear to future readers what the article is about. After all the very famous and important Battle of Lepanto was on October 7, as was the famous and pivotal Second battle of Saratoga and the pivotal Battle of Kings Mountain, as well as other notable battles. And of course all battles are attacks, or anyway include and start with attacks. The famous attack on Matthew Shepard was on the night of October 6-7, possibly after midnight I guess. Inmates at Auschwitz attacked their guards and killed three on October 7 1944. The famous Achille Lauro hijacking (an attack) was on October 7, as were all sorts of other events such as the 1958 Pakistani military coup and so on.
Yeah I know the Gaza war is hot news now, and "October 7 attack" will likely mainly refer to the 2023 attack for maybe forever, but not to the extent that all those other events are nothing and all or almost all readers will always understand that "October 7 attack" can only refer to the 2023 event. We really want to minimize readers having to be like "now wait, what is the article probably about?" But even "October 7 attack" would be preferable to the current poor title. Herostratus (talk) 19:00, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[]
I also noted 7 October attack on Israel, but the main problem with this is that it’s not commonly used in reliable sources as much as the other titles. 𝚈𝚘𝚟𝚝 (𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔𝚟𝚝) 19:04, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[]
But we have absolutely no obligation whatsoever to pay any attention at all to sources for our style choices and that includes titles. For facts we of course must follow sources, but that's way different. For style and wording choices we have our own MOS and article title rules. If every single source said "October 7th" we would still say "7 October" and so forth. I don't give a care about what the title writers at the Los Angeles Times etc. etc. like to do.
(That being said, of course we notice the format used by sources and IF there is a GREAT preponderance of one particular style and it would be a data point and we might consider "why is most everybody using a different wording than we would do, and is it clearer to the reader?" and "is the reader going to be surprised by our title choice>"
I don't think 7 October attack on Israel would be any more confusing or unclear to the reader or more surprising than any of the other choices, and in fact is probably the least so of any other concise title. Herostratus (talk) 00:18, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[]
Support7 October attacks per sources and WP:CONCISE. In contradistinction with some above who don't think this rises to the level of September 11 attacks, 7 October was a watershed event which saw an Arab force invade and occupy Israel proper for a short while, leading to thousands of deaths and the utter devastation of Gaza, triggering proceedings in the ICC and ICJ and a wider conflict with Hezbollah and Houthis. Even if the conflict ended tomorrow, enough has happened already for this date to live forever in infamy. On that last point, December 7 attacks is rightly a redirect to Attack on Pearl Harbor rather than to a disambiguation page including other martial engagements which occurred on that date such as Battle of Montgomery's Tavern, Operation Frankton and Battle of Sylhet. Havradimleaf a message12:52, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[]
Oppose. The current, descriptive title should be preferred; it's appropriately concise and preserves neutrality. It’s also not evident that the proposed change is the WP:COMMONNAME, i.e. a “single, obvious name that is demonstrably the most frequently used”. Attempts to analogize the events of last October to 9/11 are misplaced; it’s simply too early to say whether the 7 October name has the same sort of staying power. The proposed change also raises the question of why “7 October” would be preferred over “October 7”.— Preceding unsigned comment added by WillowCity (talk • contribs)
Oppose - this may be a date that resonates with Israel and Israelis, but I don't think it is a common name across English language sources that we should be using it as a title. The disambiguation of 2023 is more in line with our standard naming conventions, and unless 7 October Attacks were a common name across English language sources we shouldn't deviate from that. nableezy - 15:28, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[]
There seems to be inconsistency in who is included in the "commanders and and leaders" infobox. Why include random mid level commanders like Wissam Farhat and Roi Levy? On the Israeli side you should have the defence minister, prime minister, chief of staff, head of southern command and maybe the commander of the gaza division. On the Palestinian side, you should include Yahya Sinwar and Mohammed Deif (who should be listed as dead according to Israel, to be consistent with main Israel hamas war article) 2A13:54C2:F000:759B:AA58:2F9B:F56B:5084 (talk) 20:56, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[]
This is the October 7 attacks so it is a localised part of the wider war (where the leaders are shown). The commanders listed were those who were present on the battlefield of commanding The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 11:20, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[]
The section covering the reports of sexual violence is messy and poorly organised. Especially jarring is the sentence that Al jazera ‘concluded’ the claims were false. Are they a reputable source? How did they reach this conclusion? I failed to see why this sentence is included at all. 188.211.161.234 (talk) 06:07, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[]
