590:. Citing pages like that are a lazy mental shortcut for not addressing the gravamen of an argument, the essence of which is obvious. There are a substantial number of Israeli victim articles thronging Knowledge (XXG), and no one, least of whom, myself, holds any objection to their existence - they correlate for the reader a notable number of devastating incidents for rapid information on a topic, an encyclopedic topic. On the rare occasions one thinks the weight of material warrants one or two articles on corresponding victim incidents affecting the other side, Palestinians, one gets this hackneyed refrain, that Israelis are one thing, Palestinians are just 'other stuff(ed)/stiffed stuff' for whom there's no space. Any editor who takes to heart WP:NPOV must deal with this tendentious systemic bias in our judgements. This incongruency of approach, large tolerance vs fastidious rejectionism, stands out like dogs' balls.
799:, because the other stuff works out to deal with Israeli victims, and only begs the question: why do editors, in violation of NPOV, think only one side of a story can be documented in this manner? It cannot be merged, because you can't merge an overview article into a list which itself registers 16 articles, none dealing with an overview. Distaste is not a valid objection. Finally, there is a massive amount of high quality RS dealing with this issue, and to object to our representation of the topic is to argue that, well, it's an intensely documented reality, but we don't want it on an encyclopedia, for what reason, no one can explain.
1660:
that at least two thirds of those are civilians One doesn't want to open the endless can of worms of registering every notice of a civilian death from situations of conflict, What is noteworthy is determined by principles of military and international law: the concept of proportionality. Israel can justify the killing of any targeted person, if the targeted person's death does not incur disproportionate 'collateral damage'. The list here aspires to register only those instances (a hundred or so I know of) where substantial civilian deaths occurred with either no 'terrorist' present, or just one or two.
1700:, Meno scrabbles about to find a definition of excellence, only to be shown their inadequacy, and his Socratic interlocutor draws out the underlying principle that must be adequate to all definitions, no doubt Meno could reply:'Oh, you're shifting the goalposts'. That would be a dodge, a refusal to accept the elenchic pursuit of a proper definition, that is intrinsic to the argument he himself raised. Dear me. I guess the next move will be to say that my illustrative analogy discloses a hidden presumption on my part that I am Socrates.
1948:
assumed, through unfamiliarity with the topic area, that what I was doing was unusual, or anomalous, by pointing out that if one objects to this, why is that objection never raised for AfDing or radically excising material from numerous articles on
Israeli casualties which have long exhibited the features I adopted for this new matter. Please don't persist in not grasping the obvious, or confusing several distinct levels of discourse.
1577:. Lastly, what on earth do you mean by the giveaway assertion someone is pressing for 'yet another article on Palestinian deaths due to Israeli action.' Anyone familiar with this wiki area can verify that a large restraint has been exercised by most editors here in not mimicking the 'pro-Israel' practice of registering for article inclusion every civilian death incident (
511:? The norm here is, after all, a dozen wiki articles on terrorist incidents perpetrated by Palestinians, for every article that might document similar behavior by Israeli forces. Why? because editors like myself think it inappropriate to mirror the practice, preferring a single focused overview to endless stand alone
139:
134:
143:
126:
1275:
means no article that lists all elements of category A (here all
Israeli bombing incidents where three or more Gazan civilians have been killed) can be permitted to do so unless there is a source which has defined all the constitutive elements of A (z+z+z..), which would fail a thousand wiki articles
2261:
but rename to something a little more concise. The article itself lists a number of references from reliable sources (note that itās messy right now; the sources should be inline supporting statements in the actual article to avoid original research and unsourced statements in the article) and the
1121:
into 16 articles. The proposal is suggesting, in sum, that there should be, in the
Palestinian instance, no main article, just a fragmentary set of sub articles, a procedure which is erratically unwikipedic. I might suggest to passing eyes, by the way, that almost none of the above articles bears a
410:
For the purposes of these guidelines, a mass casualty incident is defined as an event which generates more patients at one time than locally available resources can manage using routine procedures. It requires exceptional emergency arrangements and additional or extraordinary assistance.It can also
248:
casualties". When I read "mass casualties" I think of thousands at least. This is clearly a tendentious article name. 2. This article is not about any thing or phenomenon, rather a list of essentially unrelated incidents. This is indicated in the title of the article as well, which groups "bombing,
1659:
That would be impractical, not specifying we deal with strikes leading to multiple civilian victims. After all, in the last 19 years, 104,799 Palestinians have been killed or injured by
Israeli forces, almost a tenth of those died in conflict engagements. The general scholarly consensus recognizes
1403:
article). If you go into the philology of the use of 'mass casualties' in I/P reportage, the term is almost exclusively restricted to incidents where
Israelis have been the victims of suicide attacks. The term is, in customary usage, under an ethnic restriction. I note things like that, and don't
1398:
means that every source in a list article must contain the words of that title. You are mounting an objection to the content of a list on the basis of a phrasing which all agree should be phrased, throwing the baby out with the barfwater. Innumerable sources use, for the distinct incidents, words
635:
coverage). These, and many other lists, are "lists of essentially unrelated incidents", shall they be deleted, too? (I have proposed that they should be merged into one. If I was acting like
Debresser, I would have AFDed them) And "6-10, in one case 17 casualties" wrt Palestinians is apparently
502:
of articles? (b) 'mass' is explained in the definition given by
Selfstudier above, but if you prefer 'massacre' (five or over by usual wiki conventions) that might be possible. It would mean only one of the several dozen incidents I can list would go out, but only by ignoring the wounded, who are
377:
Well, editors have problems with the suggestion that it is technically feasible to merge an article with a list composed of 16 articles. How is it done? Can you clarify what on earth a merge means here, because if you cannot show how it is done, your suggestion is pointless. There are no sources
1626:
If one reports upwards of 3 deaths, everyone with a reasonable grasp of
English should know that the descriptor 'multiple' covers that, and you do not, as per above, need a source to validate a descriptor, which is self-explanatory, and instinct in any account of several people being killed in a
748:
It will be expanded. That is all I could manage in a day or two, and my offline duties mean the large volume of documented incidents that fall under this definition must bide their time until I wrest some leisure in the following weeks to transfer them, only after checking the sourcing for each,
1947:
Again, no, and I apologize for having to say this. You are not reading closely. I wrote this article because there is a mass of information in high RS sources dealing with it, yet no wiki article. My point about parallels was not the justification for it. I made it to respond to objections that
1744:
I don't make up things. I have read the relevant literature since 2007, for 12 years, and much of the legal commentary, one of which I mention, is focused on the doctrine of proportionality, i.e., how many civilians die as a collateral effect of targeting one or two or more people classified by
2174:
Nor is it an ad hominem to point out the accuser has done this themselves, and thus there may well be innocent explanations (such as why they have done it). Many users retire and then come back when their pet subjects start to get (for example) vandalized, or if they see POV pushing they find
1889:
deal with bombardments of civilians. I.e. it excludes generally what this article, if permitted to reach its natural length of a few dozen incidents of significant collateral damage from missile strikes in Gaza. is focused on. The Gaza related incidents, mainly shootings, number 17 out of 70.
532:. This article is essentially a list of incidents, so there's no problem merging two lists. Second, while "mass casualty" is defined for specific World Health Organization guidelines, none of the references for the entries mention that term even once as far as I can tell, so it's OR. Finally,
213:
1166:
The above are year by year lists of Gazan militant attacks on
Israelis. The Israeli POV does this. Editors like myself deplore that kind of practice, of making a huge number of articles (down to every single person killed by terrorists) and concentrate on a general overview type of
1585:), not to speak of the huge disparity above regarding year by year articles on Gazan rocket attacks (16), with no parallel article, other than this, for the Palestinian side. The historic kill rate in this area is 1:8. Our article coverage is something like 6:1, i.e. systemic bias.
1543:
At this point we are only discussing delete/keep; if the article should end up being kept then we would likely argue about the title/content. I am only showing that it is not that difficult to back up each incident with suitable RS due to the existence of defined terms like mass
378:
anywhere on the several hundred wiki lists which 'discuss those events together'. That silly argument is a frivolous excuse, with no policy basis, to elide just one list. There is no book or article that incorporates the details we have compiled, from numerous RS, to form the
130:
1349:"In the wake of mass casualties during protests and demonstrations in the context of the āGreat March of Returnā in the Gaza Strip..." Admittedly not a result of bombardment but that would create a worse situation in most cases. If all you want is an RS using the term then
1227:. No real reason for deletion has been provided. This is a very notable topic with a vast supply of reliable sources to draw from. As for the lengthy title, AfD is not the right place to discuss that; think of a better title and start a move discussion on the talk page.
122:
74:
562:(a)You made an error in proposing a merge of this article with a list that itself has 23 articles. So which of those articles do you propose it to be merged with? It makes no sense, indeed it is technically impossible to, as you suggest, merge an article with a
2175:
unacceptable. What is not acceptable is thinly veiled nudge nudge accusations. If people think meat puppetry is going on say so, do not however complain about actions the accuser has themselves engaged in. Now is there an accusation of meat puppetry or not?
207:
1890:
Historically, the 'carnage' as sources call it, on the Gaza Strip began in earnest after the end date of that article's brief, i.e. after 2007. So the article, while forming a precedent in its presentation, has a different focus from this one.
417:
In view of very poor healthcare system, Gaza easily meets this definition. As for trying to argue that attacks on Gaza are not a thing, I cannot agree, it is a regular thing and is discussed at virtually every UNSC Palestine meeting.(Isn't
667:
casualties", not do they read "bombing, shelling and rocket attacks". If this article were called "Civilian casualties of
Israeli attacks on the Gaza Strip", it might come over less POV. That is using an understatement, actually.
1964:
And I pointed out it was invalid as no one has suggest that comparable article to those you cited should be deleted. Whataboutism only works when there is a clear lack of comparability, and even then is not a valid argument at
791:, which no one objects to, let alone the 16 articles that accompany it. The objections (so far) appear spurious. If the title is long, it can be reduced. There is no synthesis involved - lists compile items so the question of
1607:
I'm simply saying we're not there yet as the title may change and the article creator did say he has not finished with the sourcing as yet.(Use cn?) As for "proof" that is just a policy argument and we are having that at the
1880:
Not at all. You evidently haven't analysed it. That article, which by the way radically underlists the relevant incidents, deals with a 5 year period ending 2005 selecting 70 odd incidents, predominantly in the West Bank,
1572:
Please focus. Every incident in this article is sourced, and the antic idea that every such entry requires, to validate it, a key term like 'mass casualties' or 'multiple casualties' is a radically silly interpretation of
173:
1355:"People are suffering and dying because of shortages of medical equipment," said Dr. Mahmoud el-Khazndar, who works at Gaza City's Shifa Hospital. "The hospital is not accustomed to accept mass casualties like this."
1134:. You cannot per NPOV define an attack on a state (Israel) per ethnicity (Palestinians). To make this absolutely clear it is as intolerable as would be renaming Israeli (state) attacks on the Gaza Strip as 'Jewish'.
883:
to List of Israeli attacks on Palestine#Gaza Strip, as this seems to cover the same topic, and much of it is just a list on incidents. It also has a whiff of OR (what sources say this is mass killing?) and a POV
1195:
Certainly not. I am an inclusionist, if with somewhat severe criteria for RS. And I certainly wouldn't work on Knowledge (XXG) to wipe out information that I think has some encyclopedic value, whatever the POV.
963:
to describe as "mass casualty" events which the sources do not describe as such. Anyone wondering about the motivations of the editors creating this article or supporting keeping it, will find this instructive-
787:. This kind of article has a huge number of precedents on Knowledge (XXG): it is a standard practice to make overview articles listing events coming under a single topic definition as here. It mirrors perfectly
2275:
2253:
2218:
2198:
2184:
2169:
2147:
2132:
2113:
2097:
2082:
2063:
2046:
2028:
1974:
1957:
1942:
1927:
1913:
1899:
1875:
1858:
1830:
1792:
1754:
1723:
1709:
1683:
1669:
1654:
1636:
1617:
1594:
1567:
1553:
1520:
1436:
1420:
1383:
1365:
1333:
1311:
1258:
1231:
1205:
1190:
1176:
1157:
1143:
1011:
995:
975:
925:
911:
893:
869:
849:
829:
808:
779:
758:
735:
713:
699:
677:
656:
599:
549:
524:
486:
453:
431:
391:
372:
344:
319:
293:
258:
68:
1932:
The point you made was we have to keep this article for parity with other articles. But we already have an article that parallels those articles you cite as reasons to keep this one. So your point is not
228:
195:
1904:
So let me get this straight, an article (list or whatever) which is about the Second Intifada is not coveingr the same period or conflict as another whose title says it is about the second Intifada?
1045:
1277:
1692:
why mass or perhaps multiple is, or should be, in the title. I'm utterly bewildered by the quality of response in this thread. A serious dialogue aims to elicit assumptions, premises etc., not
1427:
This in no way contradicts the idea that material not about (what the RS) calls mass casualties should be removed. Policy does not dictate we have to have articles on anything mentioned by RS.
704:
I nominated it for what I wanted to nominate it for, for the reasons I explained above. However, if the result of this discussion would be to keep this article, it would need a serious rename.
503:
also casualties (c) If the title upsets you, then try 'Multiple civilian casualties of Israeli bombardments of the Gaza Strip'. We have 16 articles detailing year by year what the main article
1844:
723:
624:
189:
185:
2236:
I disagree with many of the comments made above on both sides of the argument. I donāt think either sideās attacks on the other should be in separate articles. Many of the articles in
583:. It is an essay, not a policy, and, if one reads it, it states that arguments based on such an objection can be valid or invalid. Just citing an essayistic opinion carries no weight.
1558:
And the best way to demonstrate that is to source every incident we have in the article. Nor does this "prove" we need yet another article on Palestinian deaths due to Israeli action.
277:
166:
235:
1110:
1105:
1100:
1095:
1090:
1085:
1080:
1075:
1070:
1065:
1060:
1055:
1050:
1040:
1469:
647:
overdue article, and should be expanded. (alas: better, and shorter article name should be looked for, IMO), (or perhaps we should only make a lot of redirs to the article?),
837:
2123:/policy-based reasonings for and against. Or rather, this all discourages independent outside hands from commenting. We have had our say. Let others express their opinions
1674:
Well now you're moving the goalposts and adding an additional criterion (0-2 terrorists) that isn't in the article, implied by the title or (probably) cited by any source.
304:
This AfD cannot be processed correctly because of an issue with the header. Please make sure the header has only 1 article, and doesn't have any HTML encoded characters.
201:
770:
per Huldra. Also note that a poor article title on its own is NEVER a reason for deletion (but, please, don't change the article title before this AfD has concluded). --
1714:
Nowhere in the article does it mention or even hint at the number of terrorists present as a condition for inclusion. This is entirely something you made up yourself.
1404:
worry about the bias I observe. I am, as always concerned with the obligation of Knowledge (XXG) to cover all sides, and not allow to one POV a dominance of the field.
817:
1122:
neutral title. 99% of them cover rocket attacks by ethnicity, whereas the reality is that ethnicity has nothing to do with it- The rocket attacks are overwhelmingly
857:
1805:- casualties of conflict are properly addressed as part of the article(s) about the conflict and the purpose of creating a separate article and the hodgepodge of
663:
Ot os not a matter of who is "worth" mor ethan others. It is a matter of naming an article. The two articles you mentioned don't use the misleading and POV word "
2237:
1024:, if x ā A, you cannot propose that the masterset (A) be merged into the elements of the subset x, which are part of the constituents of A. Are those proposing
98:
1285:
113:
440:
Even with the poor choices of Gazan authorities, 6-10 people surely can not be enough to disrupt medical services. Not to mention that this definition is
2088:
If, as it appears, he is banned from this area, then either that 'vote' should be struck out or the closing admin/editor should not take it into account.
1738:
Israel regards such cases as either unfortunate 'errors', the consequence of civilians being used to shield militants or as acceptable collateral damage.
1350:
379:
1506:
1035:(A), has 14 sections devoted to the year by year listing of such rocket attacks. So it is an overview of the following list of 16 articles (x):
1032:
956:
948:
788:
563:
504:
466:
419:
360:
53:
1734:
The reason for such operations is purportedly to carry out targeted assassinations of militants from Hamas, Islamic Jihad and other groups
411:
be defined as any event resulting in a number of victims large enough to disrupt the normal course of emergency and health care services
1840:
1289:
986:
To make sense, a merge proposal, as I keep repeating, must explain technically how you merge an article into a list of other articles.
902:
To make sense, a merge proposal, as I keep repeating, must explain technically how you merge an article into a list of other articles.
719:
618:
1817:
excludes Israeli casualties of Palestinian bombing, shelling and rocket attacks; furthermore "mass civilian casualties" are undefined
1293:
1016:
Could editors please actually respond specifically to the technical issues raised. The merge proposal looks technically impossible. A
93:
86:
17:
1409:
1374:). No material can be kept without an RS saying it was a incident of mass casualties, if we start to remove them how many are left?
1017:
477:
to classify most of these incidents as "mass casualty", and there's no need for two lists covering the basically the same subject.
2054:
You yourself have risen from self-imposed retirement upon many occasions, so this is a case of the pot calling the kettle black.
1267:
of the objectors haven't read the discussion so far, and are not familiar with the policies cited. This is not an example of
1809:
in this instance seems only to be to serve the purpose of pushing a particular angle of one side of the conflict; secondly
1582:
1242:
It doesn't look like you read the discussion so far, as multiple reasons have been provided, by multiple editors, including
107:
103:
2240:
are one-sided. This one is too, but the other way round. We would do a much better service to readers if we organized our
1123:
796:
580:
533:
1254:
971:
916:
As I think I said, much of this is already little more then a list. So...the material already list like needs no change.
2292:
40:
1281:
507:
writes. Why do you think there is something unfair about having one page dealing with the obverse, not least to avoid
1117:
How would it, were parity of logic used, be possible, as suggested by analogy here, for the the contents of A to be
508:
1918:
That is incomprehensible. Please don't stir huge threads. The information given is suffioient to grasp the point.
2244:
sub-articles only by time period and not by who the attacker was. In the meantime, this article should be kept.
2241:
2209:
Now thats a different matter altogether, and needs to be reported as it does appear to be a violation of a TBAN.
52:. Sadly, this discussion went mostly along predictable lines. Editors might want to explore whether a merger to
422:
the flipside?) Perhaps "bombardment" could be used as a short form for "bombing, shelling and rocket attacks".
1354:
2022:
2008:
1250:
967:
865:
845:
825:
512:
269:
2249:
2214:
2194:
2180:
2143:
2109:
1970:
1938:
1909:
1871:
1736:
seen to be a threat to Israel, whose Shin Bet data banks monitor thousands of Palestinians for targeting.
1719:
1679:
1622:
While we're here, since the title is a contentious issue, resolve that by offering solutions. I suggested
1563:
1516:
1432:
1379:
1186:
1153:
1007:
921:
889:
718:
Again, the reasons you have given for nominating this article for deletion, can also be used for AfD of
545:
482:
1181:
So nominate the rocket attacks on Israel lists for deletion too. (I'm an equal-opportunity deletionist.)
2288:
1613:
1549:
1416:
1361:
427:
36:
1394:
is, if read, being misread, (and the error is common). 'Mass casualties' is a provisory title. A title
332:
273:
1324:(0000) of these sources use the word "mass casualties". And what does that say about this article...?
2078:
1826:
311:
285:
2001:
per PopularMax. Another Nishidani POV-pushing gem. Unfortunately, this pulled me out of retirement.
1810:
1802:
1645:
would be better as 1. it places no limit on the number 2. "attacks" is broader than "bombardments".
1243:
952:
587:
537:
356:
2128:
2093:
2059:
2042:
1953:
1923:
1895:
1750:
1705:
1665:
1650:
1632:
1590:
1329:
1307:
1201:
1172:
1139:
991:
907:
804:
754:
709:
673:
595:
520:
449:
387:
382:. The only people who have done that, so far, definitive, impeccably sourced list, are wikipedians.
254:
221:
2017:
2003:
1785:
1400:
1002:
Do not use "ahh but this user is biased" arguments. It makes me wonder which side is POV pushing.
861:
841:
821:
1806:
2245:
2210:
2190:
2176:
2139:
2105:
1966:
1934:
1905:
1867:
1715:
1675:
1559:
1512:
1428:
1375:
1346:
1182:
1149:
1021:
1003:
940:
917:
885:
541:
478:
82:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
2287:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
683:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
2271:
2165:
1854:
1696:
clear. When I do that, it is lambasted with the usual 'shifting the goalposts'. When in the
1609:
1545:
1412:
1357:
775:
731:
695:
652:
423:
404:
368:
340:
2263:
1578:
687:
576:. We have a vast abundance of them, and therefore your exception to this one is incoherent.
2074:
1822:
307:
281:
123:
Mass civilian casualties of Israeli bombing, shelling and rocket attacks on the Gaza Strip
75:
Mass civilian casualties of Israeli bombing, shelling and rocket attacks on the Gaza Strip
1818:
1574:
1391:
1371:
1272:
1268:
1247:
960:
792:
631:
thing (while Palestinian civilian casualties in the Second/Al-Aqsa Intifada have exactly
573:
474:
329:
2124:
2089:
2055:
2038:
1949:
1919:
1891:
1746:
1701:
1661:
1646:
1628:
1586:
1325:
1303:
1197:
1168:
1135:
987:
903:
800:
750:
705:
669:
591:
516:
445:
383:
335:
i.e there is no sources that discuss those events together as part of some pattern . --
250:
59:
1228:
1131:
1410:
Despite the waves of mass casualties with multi-injured patients...re Zeitoun
569:(b)Many references use the word 'massacre' for each incident, not 'mass casualties'.
249:
shelling and rocket attacks" together on a rather flimsy and indiscriminate basis.
1847:? Besides the fact that they both are about the same deaths, they "also "'a priori
1470:
It was one of the worst mass-casualty incidents of the three-week war (al Fakhura)
617:
Why are some civilian deaths "worth" more than others? I just found the articles:
160:
2267:
2161:
1850:
771:
727:
691:
648:
364:
336:
2157:
726:. Are you going to vote "delete" for those articles if I put them up for AfD?
2138:
So then why not strike you ad hominem about people coming out of retirement?
1370:
We go with what RS say, not how we things pan out (that is what is meant by
2070:
either way, this particular account appears to be banned from this topic
1624:
Multiple civilian casualties of Israeli bombardments of the Gaza Strip.
1301:
Multiple civilian casualties of Israeli bombardments of the Gaza Strip.
1299:
The title, by the emerging consensus here, will be changed_ I suggest
636:
un-noteworthy, while single Israeli civilian casualties is noteworthy?
1728:
Consult the dictionary on pettifogging or caviling. The lead reads:
1127:
2156:
at all, but rather drawing attention to the likelihood that some
1697:
559:. Arguments must have cogency and clarity to be taken seriously.
2283:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
2119:
Please drop the inveterate ad hominem enmity and focus on the
244:
1. First of all, 6-10, in one case 17 casualties, is not yet "
1544:
casualty(ies)/event/incident used by different organizations.
1297:
No synthesis is made to draw a conclusion not in the sources.
1278:
List of accidents and incidents involving commercial aircraft
1164:
no year by year lists of Israeli bombings of Gazan civilians.
1866:] seems to me to already cover this in term of equivalency.
1845:
List of Israeli civilian casualties in the Al-Aqsa Intifada
1148:
Simple, each section would be added to he year in question.
1028:
familiar with elementary logic? To make the usual analogy.
724:
List of Israeli civilian casualties in the Al-Aqsa Intifada
625:
List of Israeli civilian casualties in the Al-Aqsa Intifada
1351:
Mass casualties as Gaza market area bombed (Shujayea 2014)
278:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Log/2019 November 22
1849:
excludes Palestinian casualties of Israeli belligerence?
1347:
Health conditions in the occupied Palestinian territory..
1046:
List of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel in 2002ā2006
1643:
Civilian casualties of Israeli attacks on the Gaza Strip
682:
Rrrrrrrrright; you wanted to nominate this article for
2071:
2037:
Hmm. Now three inactive accounts suddenly take on life.
1864:
Apart form other stuff not being much a=of an argument
965:
156:
152:
148:
469:. The article title is ridiculously cumbersome, so no
220:
2016:
2002:
1507:
It was the third mass casualty attack at a UN school
1111:
List of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel in 2019
1106:
List of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel in 2018
1101:
List of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel in 2017
1096:
List of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel in 2016
1091:
List of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel in 2015
1086:
List of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel in 2014
1081:
List of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel in 2013
1076:
List of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel in 2012
1071:
List of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel in 2011
1066:
List of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel in 2010
1061:
List of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel in 2009
1056:
List of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel in 2008
1051:
List of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel in 2007
1041:
List of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel in 2001
234:
56:, as proposed several times, might have consensus.
1841:Israeli civilian casualties in the Second Intifada
1839:So then you would want to also delete both, say,
720:Israeli civilian casualties in the Second Intifada
619:Israeli civilian casualties in the Second Intifada
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
2295:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1020:can no more be merged into a sub-article, as in
856:Note: This discussion has been included in the
836:Note: This discussion has been included in the
816:Note: This discussion has been included in the
2104:Their talk (and user) page says they still are.
949:List of Israeli attacks on Palestine#Gaza Strip
564:List of Israeli attacks on Palestine#Gaza Strip
467:List of Israeli attacks on Palestine#Gaza Strip
444:what most people would call "mass casualties".
361:List of Israeli attacks on Palestine#Gaza Strip
54:List of Israeli attacks on Palestine#Gaza Strip
838:list of Palestine-related deletion discussions
2262:topic itself is notable, so it easily passes
2238:Template:Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel
1511:Great, so remove all those not sources to RS.
8:
2189:Also which accounts have been "reactivated"?
114:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
1399:like 'massacre' (Levy), 'carnage' (see the
1286:List of massacres of Indigenous Australians
818:list of Israel-related deletion discussions
403:WHO definition of "mass casualty incident"
1688:I beg your pardon! I did no such thing. I
858:list of Lists-related deletion discussions
855:
835:
815:
1271:, for example, except for those assuming
686:, and by....accident(?) nominated it for
380:List of Shakespeare authorship candidates
1031:The corresponding article this mirrors,
540:apply to the rest of your arguments.
498:. How do you 'merge' an article to a
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
1162:Goodness me. Please focus.There are
1033:Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel
957:List of Israeli attacks on Palestine
789:Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel
505:Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel
420:Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel
1290:List of Palestinian suicide attacks
1124:Gazan rocket attacks against Israel
572:(c) By your premise, all lists are
1627:single strike. Commonsense please.
1294:List of Islamist terrorist attacks
795:is fatuous. It is no use claiming
24:
99:Introduction to deletion process
1583:8 Palestinian individuals here
1320:I just checked, and precisely
1126:, by specific militant groups
1:
2276:06:39, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
2254:21:11, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
2219:16:04, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
2199:14:10, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
2185:14:06, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
2170:14:00, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
2148:13:22, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
2133:13:15, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
2114:13:11, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
2098:16:36, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
2083:15:55, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
2064:13:05, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
2047:22:39, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
2029:18:35, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
2014:22:30, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
1975:12:35, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
1958:12:27, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
1943:09:16, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
1928:17:55, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
1914:15:37, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
1900:14:24, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
1876:14:09, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
1859:20:34, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
1831:04:00, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
1793:13:47, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
1755:22:41, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
1724:20:15, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
1710:11:56, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
1684:10:10, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
1670:19:04, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
1655:18:38, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
1637:14:18, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
1618:12:44, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
1595:14:09, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
1568:12:35, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
1554:12:31, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
1521:12:19, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
1437:12:01, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
1421:11:25, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
1384:10:49, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
1366:10:32, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
1334:01:43, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
1312:14:09, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
1259:02:12, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
1232:00:21, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
1206:20:05, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
1191:19:56, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
1177:19:30, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
1158:19:18, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
1144:18:39, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
1012:16:26, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
996:18:39, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
976:16:20, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
926:19:16, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
912:18:39, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
894:16:16, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
870:13:03, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
850:13:03, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
830:13:03, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
809:16:06, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
780:10:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
759:22:16, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
736:20:38, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
714:19:42, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
700:20:30, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
678:01:41, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
657:22:11, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
600:12:15, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
550:07:31, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
525:22:06, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
509:Knowledge (XXG):Systemic bias
487:20:40, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
454:01:36, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
432:15:16, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
392:14:18, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
373:14:00, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
345:14:58, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
320:13:39, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
294:13:39, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
276:). I have transcluded it to
259:13:24, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
69:09:50, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
627:...both basically about the
1282:List of terrorist incidents
268:This AfD was not correctly
89:(AfD)? Read these primers!
2312:
1579:44 Israeli victim articles
515:single incident reportage.
513:Knowledge (XXG):Notability
1276:dealing with lists, like
2285:Please do not modify it.
1782:- per Huldra and NSH001
32:Please do not modify it.
351:I have no problem with
1745:Israel as terrorists.
1741:
1263:My impression is that
413:
2234:Keep, with reluctance
1731:
408:
87:Articles for deletion
2242:GazaāIsrael conflict
951:. This is a blatant
797:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS
581:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS
534:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS
1883:not the Gaza Strip
1401:Human Rights Watch
1251:Here come the Suns
968:Here come the Suns
302:Automated comment:
266:Automated comment:
2135:
2085:
2066:
2049:
1795:
941:User:Clarityfiend
872:
852:
832:
322:
318:
296:
292:
104:Guide to deletion
94:How to contribute
67:
2303:
2152:No, it's not an
2118:
2069:
2053:
2036:
2027:
2025:
2020:
2013:
2011:
2006:
1788:
1783:
643:This is a long,
579:(d) Please read
314:
313:Talk to my owner
309:
299:
288:
287:Talk to my owner
283:
264:
239:
238:
224:
176:
164:
146:
84:
66:
64:
57:
34:
2311:
2310:
2306:
2305:
2304:
2302:
2301:
2300:
2299:
2293:deletion review
2160:is going on. --
2023:
2018:
2009:
2004:
1786:
355:at is seems as
317:
312:
291:
286:
181:
172:
137:
121:
118:
81:
78:
60:
58:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
2309:
2307:
2298:
2297:
2279:
2278:
2256:
2230:
2229:
2228:
2227:
2226:
2225:
2224:
2223:
2222:
2221:
2207:
2206:
2205:
2204:
2203:
2202:
2201:
2187:
2102:
2101:
2100:
1994:
1993:
1992:
1991:
1990:
1989:
1988:
1987:
1986:
1985:
1984:
1983:
1982:
1981:
1980:
1979:
1978:
1977:
1930:
1834:
1833:
1796:
1776:
1775:
1774:
1773:
1772:
1771:
1770:
1769:
1768:
1767:
1766:
1765:
1764:
1763:
1762:
1761:
1760:
1759:
1758:
1757:
1742:
1729:
1600:
1599:
1598:
1597:
1542:
1541:
1540:
1539:
1538:
1537:
1536:
1535:
1534:
1533:
1532:
1531:
1530:
1529:
1528:
1527:
1526:
1525:
1524:
1523:
1487:
1486:
1485:
1484:
1483:
1482:
1481:
1480:
1479:
1478:
1477:
1476:
1475:
1474:
1473:
1472:
1452:
1451:
1450:
1449:
1448:
1447:
1446:
1445:
1444:
1443:
1442:
1441:
1440:
1439:
1407:
1406:
1405:
1339:
1338:
1337:
1336:
1318:
1317:
1316:
1315:
1314:
1235:
1234:
1221:
1220:
1219:
1218:
1217:
1216:
1215:
1214:
1213:
1212:
1211:
1210:
1209:
1208:
1115:
1114:
1113:
1108:
1103:
1098:
1093:
1088:
1083:
1078:
1073:
1068:
1063:
1058:
1053:
1048:
1043:
1037:
1036:
1000:
999:
998:
979:
978:
933:
932:
931:
930:
929:
928:
897:
896:
874:
873:
853:
833:
812:
811:
782:
764:
763:
762:
761:
746:
745:
744:
743:
742:
741:
740:
739:
738:
641:
638:
637:
611:
610:
609:
608:
607:
606:
605:
604:
603:
602:
584:
577:
570:
567:
560:
490:
489:
459:
458:
457:
456:
435:
434:
407:
406:
397:
396:
395:
394:
348:
347:
323:
310:
297:
284:
242:
241:
178:
117:
116:
111:
101:
96:
79:
77:
72:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2308:
2296:
2294:
2290:
2286:
2281:
2280:
2277:
2273:
2269:
2265:
2260:
2257:
2255:
2251:
2247:
2243:
2239:
2235:
2232:
2231:
2220:
2216:
2212:
2208:
2200:
2196:
2192:
2188:
2186:
2182:
2178:
2173:
2172:
2171:
2167:
2163:
2159:
2158:meatpuppettry
2155:
2151:
2150:
2149:
2145:
2141:
2137:
2136:
2134:
2130:
2126:
2122:
2117:
2116:
2115:
2111:
2107:
2103:
2099:
2095:
2091:
2087:
2086:
2084:
2080:
2076:
2072:
2068:
2067:
2065:
2061:
2057:
2052:
2051:
2048:
2044:
2040:
2035:
2034:
2033:
2032:
2031:
2030:
2026:
2021:
2015:
2012:
2007:
2000:
1976:
1972:
1968:
1963:
1962:
1961:
1960:
1959:
1955:
1951:
1946:
1945:
1944:
1940:
1936:
1931:
1929:
1925:
1921:
1917:
1916:
1915:
1911:
1907:
1903:
1902:
1901:
1897:
1893:
1888:
1884:
1879:
1878:
1877:
1873:
1869:
1865:
1863:
1862:
1861:
1860:
1856:
1852:
1846:
1842:
1838:
1837:
1836:
1835:
1832:
1828:
1824:
1820:
1816:
1812:
1808:
1804:
1800:
1797:
1794:
1790:
1789:
1781:
1778:
1777:
1756:
1752:
1748:
1743:
1740:
1739:
1735:
1730:
1727:
1726:
1725:
1721:
1717:
1713:
1712:
1711:
1707:
1703:
1699:
1695:
1691:
1687:
1686:
1685:
1681:
1677:
1673:
1672:
1671:
1667:
1663:
1658:
1657:
1656:
1652:
1648:
1644:
1640:
1639:
1638:
1634:
1630:
1625:
1621:
1620:
1619:
1615:
1611:
1606:
1605:
1604:
1603:
1602:
1601:
1596:
1592:
1588:
1584:
1580:
1576:
1571:
1570:
1569:
1565:
1561:
1557:
1556:
1555:
1551:
1547:
1522:
1518:
1514:
1510:
1509:
1508:
1505:
1504:
1503:
1502:
1501:
1500:
1499:
1498:
1497:
1496:
1495:
1494:
1493:
1492:
1491:
1490:
1489:
1488:
1471:
1468:
1467:
1466:
1465:
1464:
1463:
1462:
1461:
1460:
1459:
1458:
1457:
1456:
1455:
1454:
1453:
1438:
1434:
1430:
1426:
1425:
1424:
1423:
1422:
1418:
1414:
1411:
1408:
1402:
1397:
1393:
1389:
1388:
1387:
1386:
1385:
1381:
1377:
1373:
1369:
1368:
1367:
1363:
1359:
1356:
1352:
1348:
1345:
1344:
1343:
1342:
1341:
1340:
1335:
1331:
1327:
1323:
1319:
1313:
1309:
1305:
1302:
1298:
1295:
1291:
1287:
1283:
1279:
1274:
1270:
1266:
1262:
1261:
1260:
1256:
1252:
1249:
1245:
1241:
1240:
1239:
1238:
1237:
1236:
1233:
1230:
1226:
1223:
1222:
1207:
1203:
1199:
1194:
1193:
1192:
1188:
1184:
1180:
1179:
1178:
1174:
1170:
1165:
1161:
1160:
1159:
1155:
1151:
1147:
1146:
1145:
1141:
1137:
1133:
1132:Islamic Jihad
1129:
1125:
1120:
1116:
1112:
1109:
1107:
1104:
1102:
1099:
1097:
1094:
1092:
1089:
1087:
1084:
1082:
1079:
1077:
1074:
1072:
1069:
1067:
1064:
1062:
1059:
1057:
1054:
1052:
1049:
1047:
1044:
1042:
1039:
1038:
1034:
1030:
1029:
1027:
1023:
1019:
1015:
1014:
1013:
1009:
1005:
1001:
997:
993:
989:
985:
984:
983:
982:
981:
980:
977:
973:
969:
966:
962:
959:, which uses
958:
954:
950:
946:
942:
938:
935:
934:
927:
923:
919:
915:
914:
913:
909:
905:
901:
900:
899:
898:
895:
891:
887:
882:
880:
876:
875:
871:
867:
863:
862:Coolabahapple
859:
854:
851:
847:
843:
842:Coolabahapple
839:
834:
831:
827:
823:
822:Coolabahapple
819:
814:
813:
810:
806:
802:
798:
794:
790:
786:
783:
781:
777:
773:
769:
766:
765:
760:
756:
752:
747:
737:
733:
729:
725:
721:
717:
716:
715:
711:
707:
703:
702:
701:
697:
693:
689:
685:
681:
680:
679:
675:
671:
666:
662:
661:
660:
659:
658:
654:
650:
646:
642:
640:
639:
634:
630:
626:
623:
620:
616:
613:
612:
601:
597:
593:
589:
585:
582:
578:
575:
571:
568:
565:
561:
558:
555:
554:
553:
552:
551:
547:
543:
539:
535:
531:
528:
527:
526:
522:
518:
514:
510:
506:
501:
497:
494:
493:
492:
491:
488:
484:
480:
476:
472:
468:
464:
461:
460:
455:
451:
447:
443:
439:
438:
437:
436:
433:
429:
425:
421:
416:
415:
412:
405:
402:
399:
398:
393:
389:
385:
381:
376:
375:
374:
370:
366:
362:
358:
354:
350:
349:
346:
342:
338:
334:
331:
327:
324:
321:
315:
308:
305:
303:
298:
295:
289:
282:
279:
275:
271:
267:
263:
262:
261:
260:
256:
252:
247:
237:
233:
230:
227:
223:
219:
215:
212:
209:
206:
203:
200:
197:
194:
191:
187:
184:
183:Find sources:
179:
175:
171:
168:
162:
158:
154:
150:
145:
141:
136:
132:
128:
124:
120:
119:
115:
112:
109:
105:
102:
100:
97:
95:
92:
91:
90:
88:
83:
76:
73:
71:
70:
65:
63:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
2284:
2282:
2258:
2246:Onceinawhile
2233:
2211:Slatersteven
2191:Slatersteven
2177:Slatersteven
2153:
2140:Slatersteven
2120:
2106:Slatersteven
1998:
1996:
1995:
1967:Slatersteven
1935:Slatersteven
1906:Slatersteven
1886:
1885:, of which
1882:
1868:Slatersteven
1848:
1814:
1798:
1784:
1779:
1737:
1733:
1732:
1716:Clarityfiend
1693:
1689:
1676:Clarityfiend
1642:
1623:
1560:Slatersteven
1513:Slatersteven
1429:Slatersteven
1395:
1376:Slatersteven
1321:
1300:
1296:
1264:
1224:
1183:Clarityfiend
1163:
1150:Slatersteven
1118:
1025:
1018:main article
1004:Slatersteven
944:
936:
918:Slatersteven
886:Slatersteven
878:
877:
784:
767:
664:
644:
632:
628:
621:
614:
556:
542:Clarityfiend
529:
499:
495:
479:Clarityfiend
470:
462:
441:
409:
400:
352:
325:
301:
300:
272:to the log (
265:
245:
243:
231:
225:
217:
210:
204:
198:
192:
182:
169:
80:
61:
50:no consensus
49:
47:
31:
28:
1610:Selfstudier
1546:Selfstudier
1413:Selfstudier
1358:Selfstudier
424:Selfstudier
270:transcluded
208:free images
2154:ad hominem
2075:Dan Murphy
1823:PopularMax
1811:WP:POVPUSH
1803:WP:POVFORK
1244:WP:POVFORK
1022:set theory
953:WP:POVFORK
588:WP:SOAPBOX
538:WP:SOAPBOX
357:WP:POVFORK
62:Sandstein
2289:talk page
2125:Nishidani
2090:Nishidani
2056:Debresser
2039:Nishidani
1950:Nishidani
1920:Nishidani
1892:Nishidani
1747:Nishidani
1702:Nishidani
1690:clarified
1662:Nishidani
1647:Debresser
1629:Nishidani
1587:Nishidani
1326:Debresser
1304:Nishidani
1198:Nishidani
1169:Nishidani
1136:Nishidani
988:Nishidani
939:, as per
904:Nishidani
801:Nishidani
751:Nishidani
706:Debresser
690:instead?
670:Debresser
592:Nishidani
517:Nishidani
446:Debresser
384:Nishidani
251:Debresser
37:talk page
2291:or in a
1843:and the
1815:a priori
1807:WP:SYNTH
1787:nableezy
1641:I think
1167:article.
722:and the
471:redirect
167:View log
108:glossary
39:or in a
2121:logical
2024:Tebaast
2010:Tebaast
1694:overtly
1608:moment.
684:WP:MOVE
557:Respond
496:Comment
473:. It's
316::Online
290::Online
214:WPĀ refs
202:scholar
140:protect
135:history
85:New to
2268:Samboy
2264:WP:GNG
2162:NSH001
1999:Delete
1965:AFD's.
1933:valid.
1887:only 3
1851:Huldra
1799:Delete
1119:merged
937:Delete
881:Delete
772:NSH001
728:Huldra
692:Huldra
688:WP:AfD
649:Huldra
365:Shrike
353:merge
337:Shrike
326:Delete
274:step 3
186:Google
144:delete
2019:Kamel
2005:Kamel
1819:WP:OR
1575:WP:OR
1396:never
1392:WP:OR
1372:wp:or
1273:WP:OR
1269:WP:OR
1248:WP:OR
1128:Hamas
1026:merge
961:WP:OR
955:from
945:Merge
943:, or
884:fork.
879:Merge
793:WP:OR
749:here.
574:WP:OR
530:Reply
475:WP:OR
463:Merge
333:essay
330:WP:OR
229:JSTOR
190:books
174:Stats
161:views
153:watch
149:links
16:<
2272:talk
2259:Keep
2250:talk
2215:talk
2195:talk
2181:talk
2166:talk
2144:talk
2129:talk
2110:talk
2094:talk
2079:talk
2060:talk
2043:talk
1971:talk
1954:talk
1939:talk
1924:talk
1910:talk
1896:talk
1872:talk
1855:talk
1827:talk
1821:. --
1780:Keep
1751:talk
1720:talk
1706:talk
1698:Meno
1680:talk
1666:talk
1651:talk
1633:talk
1614:talk
1591:talk
1581:vs
1564:talk
1550:talk
1517:talk
1433:talk
1417:talk
1390:No.
1380:talk
1362:talk
1330:talk
1322:zero
1308:talk
1265:most
1255:talk
1246:and
1229:Zero
1225:Keep
1202:talk
1187:talk
1173:talk
1154:talk
1140:talk
1008:talk
992:talk
972:talk
922:talk
908:talk
890:talk
866:talk
846:talk
826:talk
805:talk
785:Keep
776:talk
768:Keep
755:talk
732:talk
710:talk
696:talk
674:talk
665:mass
653:talk
645:long
633:zero
629:same
615:Keep
596:talk
586:(e)
546:talk
536:and
521:talk
500:list
483:talk
450:talk
428:talk
401:Keep
388:talk
369:talk
359:of
341:talk
280:. ā
255:talk
246:mass
222:FENS
196:news
157:logs
131:talk
127:edit
2266:.
1813:-
1353:or
1292:or
1130:or
947:to
622:and
465:to
442:not
328:As
236:TWL
165:ā (
2274:)
2252:)
2217:)
2197:)
2183:)
2168:)
2146:)
2131:)
2112:)
2096:)
2081:)
2062:)
2050:.
2045:)
1973:)
1956:)
1941:)
1926:)
1912:)
1898:)
1874:)
1857:)
1829:)
1801:-
1791:-
1753:)
1722:)
1708:)
1682:)
1668:)
1653:)
1635:)
1616:)
1593:)
1566:)
1552:)
1519:)
1435:)
1419:)
1382:)
1364:)
1332:)
1310:)
1288:,
1284:,
1280:,
1257:)
1204:)
1189:)
1175:)
1156:)
1142:)
1010:)
994:)
974:)
924:)
910:)
892:)
868:)
860:.
848:)
840:.
828:)
820:.
807:)
778:)
757:)
734:)
712:)
698:)
676:)
655:)
598:)
548:)
523:)
485:)
452:)
430:)
414:.
390:)
371:)
363:--
343:)
257:)
216:)
159:|
155:|
151:|
147:|
142:|
138:|
133:|
129:|
2270:(
2248:(
2213:(
2193:(
2179:(
2164:(
2142:(
2127:(
2108:(
2092:(
2077:(
2073:.
2058:(
2041:(
1997:*
1969:(
1952:(
1937:(
1922:(
1908:(
1894:(
1870:(
1853:(
1825:(
1749:(
1718:(
1704:(
1678:(
1664:(
1649:(
1631:(
1612:(
1589:(
1562:(
1548:(
1515:(
1431:(
1415:(
1378:(
1360:(
1328:(
1306:(
1253:(
1200:(
1185:(
1171:(
1152:(
1138:(
1006:(
990:(
970:(
920:(
906:(
888:(
864:(
844:(
824:(
803:(
774:(
753:(
730:(
708:(
694:(
672:(
651:(
594:(
566:.
544:(
519:(
481:(
448:(
426:(
386:(
367:(
339:(
306:ā
253:(
240:)
232:Ā·
226:Ā·
218:Ā·
211:Ā·
205:Ā·
199:Ā·
193:Ā·
188:(
180:(
177:)
170:Ā·
163:)
125:(
110:)
106:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.