Talk:Deir Yassin massacre

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Deir Yassin massacre article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9: 7 days

Stop: You may only use this page to create an edit request

This page is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a restricted topic. You are not an extended-confirmed user, so you must not edit or discuss this topic anywhere on Wikipedia except to make an edit request. (Additional details are in the message box just below this one.)

Administrators may disregard the above message.
You are seeing this because of the limitations of {{If extended confirmed}} and {{If administrator}}. You can hide this message box by adding the following to a new line of your common.css page: .ECR-edit-request-warning { display: none; }

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic
All participants in formal discussions (RfCs, RMs, etc) within the area of conflict are urged to keep their comments concise, and are limited to 1,000 words per discussion. Citations and quotations (whether from sources, Wikipedia articles, Wikipedia discussions, or elsewhere) do not count toward the word limit.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Further information

The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:

Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.

With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:

Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.

After being warned, contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topic sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.
Editors may report violations of these restrictions to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
May 19, 2005	Articles for deletion	Kept
April 14, 2008	Peer review	Reviewed

Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on April 9, 2011, April 9, 2016, April 9, 2018, and April 9, 2021.

British Empire Mid‑importance

	British Empire portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject British Empire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of British Empire 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.British EmpireWikipedia:WikiProject British EmpireTemplate:WikiProject British EmpireBritish Empire
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Crime and Criminal Biography: Serial, mass, and spree killers / Terrorism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Serial Killer task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Terrorism task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Death Mid‑importance

	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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Middle East

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

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Middle Eastern military history task force

Palestine High‑importance

	Palestine portal 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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Human rights Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights 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.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

Joey Kurtzman (2006-11-16). "Wiki Wars". Jewcy. Retrieved 2019-03-24.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

Archives by topic:
Massacre-battle discussions

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by when more than 20 sections are present.

Casualties have been reported as 240 Palestinians killed

"The Assassignation of James Forrestal" second addition by David Martin 181.73.83.103 (talk) 14:08, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes this is mentioned in the article in the casualties section. That is an estimate which was widely believed in the past but estimates today are closer to 100. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 14:27, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why is eliezer tauber's book not cited?

I saw the discussions in the archive. However, none of them mentioned how this book has been praised by respectable historians for the data collection and had respectable historians (such as [[Benny Morris]]) participating in the data collection. Those who praised Tauber for the data collection do not agree with his conclusions. Nevertheless, we can draw information from the book despite its controversial conclusion, given that the data (specifically, names and causes of death) is generally not considered inaccurate Someonefighter (talk) 20:25, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source/examples to support that it was/is "praised by respectable historians"? IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 23:30, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

gadi 7itman https://campuscore.ariel.ac.il/wp/jimes/wp-content/uploads/sites/147/2019/01/Jimes-Vol1_GadiHitman_2017-11-16.pdf pages 57-59

3ude bashrat (israeli arab historian) https://www.haaretz.co.il/literature/study/2017-11-29/ty-article-review/.premium/0000017f-dbf6-d3ff-a7ff-fbf6e7750000 Someonefighter (talk) 23:49, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

English sources are preferrable. I don't speak Hebrew. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 00:08, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

these works and articles don't appear to have been translated to english. additional sources would require extensive research by me. could you get away with machiene translation? Someonefighter (talk) 00:16, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If "extensive research" is required to find positive reviews of Tauber's work, wouldn't that suggest it is rather fringe and/or undue to cite here? IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 00:28, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

no, actually. I just overestimated the time. a quick google search finds this https://campuscore.ariel.ac.il/wp/jimes/wp-content/uploads/sites/147/2025/01/04-JIMES-10-2-Rinehart-Review.pdf Someonefighter (talk) 05:44, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

heres another one https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/eliezer-tauber-massacre-never-myth-deir-yassin-creation-alex-grobman (writer is an American historian) Someonefighter (talk) 06:49, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This was published in The Jewish Press, I don't think that's a very good source for this topic, certainly not a scholarly/academic source.

And am I missing something or is that article not immediately racist when it begins with "When it comes to propaganda, the Arabs have become masters of deceit." IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 14:50, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bro 💀 wtf I didn't notice. It's written by a historian but yea the racism is questionable. Either way all the sources I added other than that one are valid academic sources and shouldn't be disregarded Someonefighter (talk) 14:54, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

653-Reflections-on-Deir-Yassin-Groiss-final.pdf (begin saadat center)

Three Case Studies of the War in Palestine in 1948 - Tel Aviv Review of Books (Tel Aviv University) Someonefighter (talk) 15:30, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here's how the second article begins (translation agreed by two different machine translators):

"Deir Yassin: The End of the Myth": A Book Suggesting Ben-Gurion Was Responsible for the 1948 Massacre
In the narrative presented by Eliezer Tauber in his book on the massacre in Deir Yassin, there are so many errors, misunderstandings, and such an excessive desire to avoid harm to civilians, that the reader ultimately feels compelled to scold the village residents who were murdered and thus tarnished the reputation of the Irgun and Lehi fighters.

The author's thesis in this piece is that the attack was a Haganah operation probably supported by Ben-Gurion, and that the Irgun/Lehi attackers were essentially engaged to do the dirty work. Zero^talk 03:21, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

later in the article:

ספרו של טאובר גדוש בעובדות, שנטוו בסדר כרונולוגי מרשים, והן חשובות ביותר לכל מי שמתעניין במה שהתרחש בדיר יאסין באותו יום נורא. למרות כוונותיו של הכותב לטהר את שמם של הפורשים, זה ספר זורם שנצמד לעובדות. זה סוד כוחו וסוד משיכתו, ומנגד גם סוד חולשתו — שכן אין בו ההקשר הכללי. איני מתכוון לערער על העובדות המובאות בספר, אך על בסיס אותן עובדות מצאתי נרטיב אחר מזה של טאובר לאירועים.

Translation (agreed upon by multiple machine translations):

Tauber’s book is packed with facts, woven together in an impressive chronological order, and they are extremely important for anyone interested in what happened in Deir Yassin on that dreadful day. Despite the author’s intentions to clear the names of the Irgun and Lehi fighters, it’s a compelling :book that sticks to the facts. That’s the source of its power and appeal — but also the source of its weakness, as it lacks broader context. I don’t intend to dispute the facts presented in the book, but based on those same facts, I arrived at a different narrative than Tauber’s regarding the events Someonefighter (talk) 06:00, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this discussion is going to get anywhere. This has been discussed before and I believe there is a consensus that Tauber's work is fringe/unreliable.

You yoursef have said "Those who praised Tauber for the data collection do not agree with his conclusions. Nevertheless, we can draw information from the book despite its controversial conclusion". How are we to decide what in the book is accurate/reliable and what is not? It seems to me to be simply not a reliable source. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 14:53, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@IOHANNVSVERVS all the sources I sent agree that the facts (raw facts, like who went where when, what happened to that specific guy, when did the attackers arrive etc) are true. where they disagree is the analysis. we can draw the raw facts from the book. specifically what I had in mind when I made this discussion, is his table for who died, where and when. these are things that are not something an opinion can influence, and are what the academics talked about when they say the facts are reliable. As far I'm concerned, by my search in the archives, none of the discussions making up the consensus have quoted as many scholars as I have. (in fact, I couldn't find anyone criticizing the raw data collected, which as I said, had respectable historians like Benny Morris participating in). I've provided multiple sources the predecessors who tried to discuss this didn't. so far you've disregarded all of my sources despite them being from scholars. Someonefighter (talk) 15:10, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the fuss about Tauber's book revolves around the question of "whether a massacre occurred". While Tauber says that it didn't, his book mentions many instances of killing of civilians. The first review that Someonefighter listed summarizes it like this:

The question of whether a massacre occurred is naturally subjective, depending on the author's (and readers') perspective. The treatment of this issue in the book seems to lack a comprehensive theoretical discussion regarding the definition of the concept "massacre." Tauber himself briefly addresses this when quoting Muhammad Radwan: "When we say massacre, we mean that Jews fired indiscriminately at anyone fleeing" (p. 133). According to this research and based on this definition, there was no massacre at Deir Yassin. Additionally, the fact that the attackers operated a public address system urging residents to surrender reinforces this claim. However, the author's description that "the three-stage attack—placing explosives, throwing grenades, and storming with gunfire—left the Arabs with little chance" (the author's words, p. 82) alone suffices to argue that fighting house-to-house and blowing up houses with people inside constitutes a massacre by any reasonable definition. This historical question will likely remain open even after the publication of Professor Tauber’s research, simply because researchers (and even non-researchers) do not have an agreed-upon definition of the term "massacre."

Zero^talk 02:34, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yea that's why I think we should be able to quote the raw facts from the book. It's not controversial whether he was right about the sequence of events, and the events themselves Someonefighter (talk) 06:44, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]