Talk:Gaza Humanitarian Foundation

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

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 May 2025

There is a lot to add to this, many details have emerged Chcoo8 (talk) 14:07, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 16:53, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

Can someone add info about how the GHF would collect and use biometrics to vet who gets aid. The Washington Post article that is already cited makes some mention of this. Lord Arugula (talk) 03:53, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

52,700 Killed By Israel is inaccurate

This Wikipedia Page quotes the number 52,700 killed by Israel from a Reuters article.

The actual quote is 52,700 have died since the war started.

We know that many Palestinian rockets have misfired and landed inside Gaza, so saying that every single death in Gaza was "by Israel" is disinformation, and an inaccurate quote of the cited article.

If you're going to use this number, it is incorrect to append "by Israel" in the Wiki page. It's not what the article says and it's also just simply wrong since we know that Israel has not killed every single person that's died in the Gaza Strip since October 7. Zholmes73 (talk) 11:47, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi Zholmes73 . The sentence is now: "Since the start of the war, over 52,700 Palestinians have been killed, according to Gaza health authorities." which is what the source says. The source does not say "died". Friendly, Lova Falk (talk) 15:28, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. I believe it would be pertinent to look into who made that addition to the quote when writing the Wikipedia article, as they may potentially have a propagandistic intent. Zholmes73 (talk) 17:57, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

Yes, that could be so. Or, a clumsy way of paraphrasing. Or just a simple misunderstanding, that killed in Gaza is the same as killed by Israel. Lova Falk (talk) 05:41, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

Propagandistic intent? As everything you, Hasbara bot, write? You are despicable. 186.48.245.223 (talk) 12:57, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

Add the results of the distribution in the operation section

This article should mention the number of boxes/meals distributed by the foundation (14500 boxes or 840.000 meals ) since it is a fact verified. Otherwise, this article would not be neutral since it only mmention incriminating elements without balance. Aboubidou72 (talk) 09:08, 29 May 2025

 Done Friendly, Lova Falk (talk) 15:25, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

Untitled

BBC did a deep dive into the GHF and found it's a Delaware registered corp with no known address. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.79.60.107 (talk) 03:50, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 June 2025

The text “Since the start of the war, over 52,700 Palestinians have been killed” should be changed. The claim is without context and does not have a reference.

It should read “While some have claimed that, since the start of the war, over 52,700 Palestinians have been killed, researchers have disputed the total number, based on an analysis of the Hamas-run Gaza Health Authority's own numbers . It should also be noted that, according to the IDF, half of the number were Hamas and PIJ combatants killed in action. At least another 10,000 would have been natural deaths, based on the pre-war natural mortality rate .” Sdmorris (talk) 07:55, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi Sdmorris. I added "according to Gaza health authorities" to the sentence, because that is what the source says. Your first source is not a reliable source. It is an analysis by Gabriel Epstein. In order to question these numbers, we need better sources. About your second argument, comparing natural mortality rate with numbers of people killed in Gaza without further sources, would constitute WP:original research and is not allowed. IDF in this case is not a reliable source either. I'll keep your edit request unanswered, so other editors will see it and maybe have a different opinion than I do. Friendly, Lova Falk (talk) 15:17, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

Change "over 52,700 Palestinians have been killed, according to Gaza health authorities." to "over 52,700 Palestinians have been killed, according to Gaza health authorities. This number includes the deaths of Hamas and PIJ combatants and deaths by natural causes"

And, while you say that my sources are unreliable, you quote a Hamas source which has reliably lied. Sdmorris (talk) 15:54, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

The text "Since the start of the war, over 52,700 Palestinians have been killed, according to Gaza health authorities." should be removed, since you do not have a source for it and it is irrelevant to the work of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation Sdmorris (talk) 16:06, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

Sdmorris, there is no point in creating three edit requests for the same thing, one is enough. Your edit request is still unanswered, so other editors can see it, and maybe decide differently than I do. Lova Falk (talk) 05:37, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

IN fact , I don't think non-ECP editors should be discussing their edit requests, the only right they have is to make one. Otherwise they could make one and then go ahead and post whatever they want.. Doug Weller talk 06:58, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Partially seconding @Lova Falk here, I don't agree with the edit, but I agree the claim might need to be changed. GalStar (talk) 19:15, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

References

Operations

There's a link to the page listing the killings at the GHF sites, but very few info on the massacres. There's too many to list them all at this point, but now the article makes it seem like there was only one incident with no casualties. This section should be heavily expanded. --Peephole (talk) 07:49, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

Health ministry qualifier

@Adflatuss, the topic-level consensus on the Gaza Health Ministry is that its casualty figures do not need a qualifier. You can see this demonstrated at the Gaza war article and read more at the most recent RFC (that I'm aware of) on the matter.

You should self-revert your edit as on top of ignoring consensus, you are in violation of WP:1RR. There are also a number of other aspects in your revert unrelated to this topic. If you want to continue to pursue the inclusion of a qualifier here, you should edit more narrowly to avoid reverting other parts of the article for which you have made no justification. Monk of Monk Hall (talk) 01:19, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

Gaza Health Ministry has more details about how they have been deemed reliable in the past. The qualifier has been the consensus for this article and is how it is stated in the adjacent citation. Since they are the only source, it is appropriate to mention. (The New York Times is a reliable source but similarly it is mentioned.) I accidentally reverted all the edits and have restored majority of the overall edits so further discussion can continue here. 〜 Adflatuss • talk 01:41, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

I'm not seeing anything on this talk page which would suggest there is a consensus specific to this page to include a qualifier. Moreover, like I said, much larger discussions in the topic area and the status quo on Gaza war have determined that attribution is not necessary. It's tiresome and unhelpful to re-litigate the casualty count and write convoluted, equivocating phrases on every minor article about the conflict.

You should also not confuse journalistic conventions for Wikipedia editing guidelines. We don't have to attribute something just because a source does. The point of the background section is to provide the minimum context necessary to prepare a reader for the rest of the article. I have updated it accordingly, with better sources. Monk of Monk Hall (talk) 01:09, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Edit request 7 June 2025

Change the background so that it follows Wikipedia policy of being neutral - the section states that there were 57,200 deaths in gaza without stating that these figures come from Hamas, a proscribed terrorist organisation. Either remove this statement completely (as it is not relevant to the article about the GHF) or provide evidence without relying completely on Hamas sources. The statement does not make it clear that the figure of 52,700 does not distinguish between civilians, terrorist combatants, deaths from misguided rockets fired from Gaza or deaths from natural causes

In the Operations section, change the disgraceful claim that hundreds of Palestinians were killed by Israeli fire as they approached the distribution center. This is completely without evidence apart from the claim from the antisemitic Al Jazeera propaganda machine. This claim needs to be balanced with the counter-claims made by the GHF and IDF that there were no deaths from Israeli gunfire. The GHF also produced video evidence of masked gunmen (likely to have been Hamas) firing at Gazan civilians as they approached a distribution centre. Once again, your article demonstrates a clear bias towards reports from terrorist sources

Diff:

−

ORIGINAL_TEXT

+

CHANGED_TEXT

2A00:23C5:F03B:A001:6CA2:756B:859C:A82C (talk) 14:58, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

CNN investigation confirms it was israeli military that targeted civilians https://www.cnn.com/2025/06/04/middleeast/israel-military-gaza-aid-shooting-intl-invs?cid=ios_app Lord Arugula (talk) 06:37, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: Please have a look at the advice for making edit requests, this cannot be answered in its current form. Smallangryplanet (talk) 10:23, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Disgraceful claim? I am sorry for you, Hasbara Nazi acolyte, but the blatant murder of hundreds of aid seekers by the israeli military has been completely proven. Even your own soldiers, the 4 or 5 that may have some sort of integrity, have indicated that they were told to SHOOT at the starving crowds. 186.48.245.223 (talk) 13:01, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

New Source

If someone with editing privileges would like to supplement the responses section, this is a good five point summary from a fairly reputable source: https://www.fcnl.org/updates/2025-06/gaza-humanitarian-foundation-ghf-and-weaponization-aid Icemonstersoccer (talk) 04:46, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Early scholarly-ish work

https://www.ejiltalk.org/privatizing-aid-the-gaza-humanitarian-foundation-affair/ might be useful FortunateSons (talk) 09:48, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 June 2025

On June 11, 2025, Hamas killed five GHF staff and wounded multiple others in an attack on a bus en route to a food distribution centre. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/6/12/us-backed-gaza-humanitarian-foundation-says-5-aid-workers-killed-by-hamas JMU53211 (talk) 03:45, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

I'm seeing at least 8 of the more than 2 dozen on the bus killed, with GHF fearing Hamas may have taken hostages. Hamas seeking to prevent aid being distributed in Gaza seems noteworthy to me! 121.45.138.60 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 05:47, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. —Fortuna, imperatrix 11:26, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

Deaths during aid operation

Given that al Jazeera is now attributing the June 11 attack to Hamas, I think it calls into question the accuracy of the below statement. Although sourced to the Guardian, the whole statement, or at minimum, the phrase, "by Israeli forces," should be deleted. Hamas has an incentive to kill people at GHF aid stations; Israel has an incentive to keep GHF aid stations safe. What is more likely - that Hamas killed these people or Israel?

As of June 10, 2025, more than 130 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli forces while journeying to GHF sites or during "aid distribution."[4] Survivors of the repeated mass killings perpetrated at the distribution sites have begun to refer to the Israeli-backed operation as traps or death traps rather than aid.[5][6] JMU53211 (talk) 03:53, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi @JMU53211, as far as I understand, the Al Jazeera article says that GHF claims that Hamas attacked GHF workers, not that the previous attacks on civilians are attributed to Hamas. Can you clarify what change you intended? ^📻NuclearSpuds_🎙️ 08:02, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

The paragraph I pasted above (starting "As of June 10 ...") is sole sourced to the Guardian. Assuming "the simplest explanation is usually the correct one," this paragraph doesn't seem accurate. Hamas has an incentive to disrupt GHF and (even) Al-Jazeera acknowledges that Hamas attacked GHF. I think the paragraph should be taken down unless some independent source confirms it was Israel, and not Hamas, that caused earlier violence. JMU53211 (talk) 20:46, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Request for change (if the main editors are okay with it):

In the header it says

“ As of 27 June 2025, at least 613 Palestinians have been killed and over 4,200 have been wounded by contractors hired by GHF, armed gangs and Israeli forces, while seeking aid, mostly from GHF sites, since the start of GHF operations. “

However I would argue, that this is somewhat misleading, as the sources clearly indicate that 509 people were killed in the vicinity of the GHF site.

see for example: (although I follow the news around the war quite closely, I was surprised that there were additional killings at other aid sites. At least in the news sources I consume that wasn’t reported)

Additionally I think that it is highly likely that not only the GHF Mercenaries, criminals and the IDF killed aid seekers, but also fractions of the ‘official’ Gaza security apparatus. So I would plead for something like this:

According to the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) there have been 509 people killed in the vicinity of the GHF site, as of 27 June 2025.

Similar in the body under Killings and other access incidents:

” According to the United Nations' Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, as of 27 June 2025, at least 613 Palestinian aid seekers had been killed (509 of whom near GHF's distribution sites). “

I would argue that it should just be the 509 and if others think it’d necessary put the 613 in brackets. So exactly the other way around. Because whatever one thinks about GHF, they are probably not responsible for the other 104 deaths. And maybe add the thousands of wounded here. (The links to the sources 59-61 are somehow not working correctly. It gives an error: “ The named reference 2025 Gaza Strip aid distribution killings Reuters-20250704 was invoked but never defined (see the help page). “ I don’t know how to change that)

Thank you for your attention to this matter! Nibi3 (talk) 15:33, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Nibi3, thanks for bringing this up. I do think it would be best to present only figures for GHF casualties because we want to leave as little to assumption as possible. The reason why this has not been done until this point is because there have not been consistent reports about GHF aid site deaths, and the most certain conclusion based on sources was that most of the aid incident deaths were attributable to GHF sites. The 509 figure is new, literally appearing for the first time today. I think the best approach here is to break figures down by sources and date, which I will try to do. The broken links are a result of that paragraph being excerpted from the 2025 Gaza Strip aid distribution killings article. The links work on the article they are sourced from, so it is a technical issue arising from that article's citation format. I primarily use the visual editor, not the source editor, so I lack the familiarity with wikitext to sort out a solution there. I'll drop an edit request on their article. ^📻NuclearSpuds_🎙️ 19:20, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

Just spent an hour gathering research and rewriting the lead with comprehensive detail on casualty attribution. Pressed publish and ran into a glitch while resolving edit conflicts-- everything I wrote got wiped, nothing saved. Going to take a break and finish this later today. ^📻NuclearSpuds_🎙️ 22:24, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

That sucks! Highly recommend writing a draft in a doc… Nibi3 (talk) 16:42, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

Are you also rewriting the “killings” section? Otherwise I could give it a try.

because in the current state it is somewhat convoluted. And reads more like blogpost. This is not ment to be offensive. As a trained historian I know how hard it’s to write a good article!

” As of 28 June 2025, more than 500 Palestinians have been killed while seeking food since the GHF began distributing aid. Witnesses say Israeli troops have opened fire on crowds as they head toward the aid distribution sites. The Israeli military has said that it fires only warning shots and that it was investigating cases of civilians being harmed while approaching the sites. “

This is the end of that paragraph, which contradicts the beginning. For example I would just say aid seekers instead of Palestinian and scratch the food, because we don’t know what they are searching specifically. Also I think it’s important to state that the people were killed mostly in the vicinity, not directly at the GHF site. Nibi3 (talk) 17:29, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

IMHO the attacks on GHF personnel should be added as well. Where would you prefer that? Same section or somewhere else? Nibi3 (talk) 17:33, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

I think same section would make sense. I almost suggested creating a subsection under 'killings' for attacks on GHF workers, but that comes at the risk of distinguishing those attacks from attacks on aid seekers, which are not certainly unrelated events. ^📻NuclearSpuds_🎙️ 09:08, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

I started out rewriting the lead, but I pulled together a lot of new info so it will likely make its way into the 'killings' section first when I finish writing it. You are right to point out that the section is a little weird; part of that has to do with the first paragraph being excerpted from the other article on distribution killings, where they are doing research of their own, likely without this one in mind. So the solution there might be to remove the excerpt and put in original writing. Time for editing has been a little harder for me to carve out than I expected, so if you have ideas on rewriting the section please feel free and I'll contribute where and when I can. Also, it is nice to have a trained historian editing here since expertise is so very much valued on such sensitive subjects. ^📻NuclearSpuds_🎙️ 09:03, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

See here: Talk:Gaza Humanitarian Foundation#c-Nibi3-20250706124400-Nibi3-20250706105200 Nibi3 (talk) 12:45, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

Background intro sentence: Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 June 2025

Currently the introductory sentence for the background subheading is: "Since the start of the Gaza war, at least 52,700 Palestinians have been killed." This is a good sentence, but as a page with ongoing updates news will be continually released and the death toll will continue to change. Signposting to the reader what date that death toll was recorded in text is key and will help future editors when updating. For example paragraph two of the Gaza Genocide wiki page states: "A study in The Lancet estimated 64,260 deaths due to traumatic injuries by June 2024..."

Therefore I suggest the following as a new version of the sentence: "As of April 2025 the number of Palestinians killed in the Gaza war was at least 52,700." This sentence shows the month the data comes from and will allow increased ease for future editors if updated figures need to be placed here. Flarehayr (talk) 13:20, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Already done Szmenderowiecki (talk) 17:20, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 June 2025 (2)

The article should be edited in two ways: 1) In the operations section it should say:

GHF has increased their distribution of aid to above 2 million meals a day. On June 12, 2025, GHF handed out 2.6 million meals despite an attack by Hamas militants on local Palestinian GHF workers.link

2) The sentence "8 Palestinian aid workers were also killed by Hamas on June 11" should be removed from the paragraph about aid seekers killed. It should be given its own paragraph and Changed to say: On June 11, 2025, the GHF reported that a bus carrying local Palestinian GHF workers was attacked by Hamas on its way to an aid centre. At least eight GHF workers were killed and more were injured.Link

Thanks Conceptualinertia (talk) 15:31, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

 Done Added both edits ^📻NuclearSpuds_🎙️ 23:18, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Gaza Humanitarian Foundation.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:51, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 June 2025 - Total death toll clarification

Can the first sentence in the second paragraph be changed to:

Since May 27, 2025, nearly 400 Palestinians have been killed by Israel while seeking aid, including from GHF sites.

It needs to clarified that not all the massacres/killings were directly related to the GHF sites. The latest and largest killing on June 17 wasn't related. As it states in the sources, the total death toll is for all attacks on aid seekers and not just those at GHF sites.

Source on page for latest total death toll: https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israeli-tank-shelling-kills-45-people-awaiting-aid-trucks-gaza-ministry-says-2025-06-17/

This source says "The health ministry said 397 Palestinians, among those trying to get food aid, had been killed and more than 3,000 were wounded since late May" and " Israeli tanks had launched at least two shells at a crowd of thousands who had gathered on the main eastern road through Khan Younis in the hope of obtaining food from aid trucks that use the route."

As this source notes, the death toll isn't just for GHF sites and the largest attack wasn't related.

Other sources: https://apnews.com/article/israel-palestinians-hamas-war-news-gaza-aid-06-17-2025-7af5503ea7d2176674fba26d34f6ef74

The source states that "The shooting did not appear to be related to a new Israeli- and U.S.-supported aid delivery network that rolled out last month"

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c74zj9kv2xjo.amp

This source says "where thousands of Palestinians had been gathering in the hope of getting flour from a World Food Programme (WFP) site, which also includes a community kitchen nearby." 102.17.118.220 (talk) 13:35, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

 Done Thanks for the fact check. I’ll see if I can find a figure for just the deaths at GHF sites since the inclusion of the current figure in the article suggests that GHF is a significant part of the number, which I’m not sure is true. ^📻NuclearSpuds_🎙️ 08:01, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

@NuclearSpuds: thank you for implementing the edit request however someone changed it back and added a source from Middle East Eye. The Middle East Eye claims that all 549 people were killed at GHF sites but this number is the total for all aid killing at the time since May 27. The UN source next to it frames it differently stating that "hundreds have been killed and many more wounded near four distribution points or while waiting to pick up aid" and also mentions the deadliest incident so far which was unrelated to GHF sites: "Israeli military reportedly shelled a crowd waiting for UN food trucks in southern Gaza on 17 June, killing at least 51 people". The Middle East Eye's figure is from the Gaza Health Ministry and includes this incident and numerous other killings of aid seekers away from GHF sites. Here are a few other sources which discuss the same figure of 549.

UNWRA Source: "According OCHA, mass casualties continue being reported among people attempting to access food in the Gaza Strip, including as they approach or gather at militarized distribution points in Rafah and Deir al-Balah or wait for trucks carrying aid supplies. According to OCHA, as of 25 June, the Gaza Ministry of Health reported that 549 people were killed and at least 4,066 injured trying to access food supplies." They also quote the head of OCHA who states that "The majority of the casualties have been shot or shelled trying to reach US-Israeli distribution sites"

Haaretz source: "549 people have been killed near aid centers and in areas where residents were waiting for UN food trucks since May 27."

CBC source: "As of Wednesday, 549 people have been killed and more than 4,000 have been injured while attempting to reach GHF sites or waiting for other aid trucks to arrive since the new system began operating on May 27"

None of these sources support how it's currently worded that over 500 have been killed seeking aid from GHF sites. The Middle East Eye incorrectly claims all killings occured in relation to GHF sites. The reliable sources I reference above make it clear that's not the case. The UNWRA source even quotes OCHA head who says a "majority" so it should be changed back.102.17.120.130 (talk) 10:01, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

@Yung Doohickey This is the entry I referenced in my edit summary, which shows that the MEE description is not backed by reliable sources. From what I could find on the reliable source noticeboards, editors generally find Middle East Eye's reliability questionable and recommend finding corroborating reliable sources for contentious claims ([1], [2], [3]). ^📻NuclearSpuds_🎙️ 11:17, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

Ok, I'll cite the CBC instead. Thanks, Yung Doohickey (talk) 17:47, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

The CBC source also did not attribute the 549 to GHF in whole. I just added some citations saying that a majority of the casualties occurred while seeking aid from GHF sites. ^📻NuclearSpuds_🎙️ 20:43, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

@NuclearSpuds: thanks again but it seems you accidentally removed "including" from your latest edit but I would recommend changing it to "majority" and using the UNWRA source I listed above. 102.17.120.130 (talk) 11:28, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

My bad. I added in a 'mostly' and cited to a few sources. I opted for the source that the UNRWA cited rather than the UNRWA themselves though, because the OCHA is surrounded by less skepticism/controversy than the UNRWA. ^📻NuclearSpuds_🎙️ 20:46, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

Edit request 24 June 2025

Description of suggested change: Moved Jake Wood's opinions to immediately after the text describing his resignation, to improve context relevance and avoid implying the Jake Wood believes that Israel has genocidal aims.

Reworded the text describing the opinions of humanitarian groups to avoid factually asserting that Israel has genocidal aims.

Diff:

−

Formerly led by executive director Jake Wood until his resignation on May 25, 2025, it has the backing of the Trump administration and the Israeli government. It has been criticised by the United Nations and humanitarian groups for politicizing aid distribution, with well-established humanitarian groups saying the GHF is giving cover for Israel to pursue its aims to depopulate Palestinians from Gaza, and its former head questioning the group's impartiality and neutrality upon his resignation.

+

Formerly led by executive director Jake Wood until his resignation on May 25, 2025, citing a lack of impartiality. It has the backing of the Trump administration and the Israeli government. It has been criticised by the United Nations and humanitarian groups for politicizing aid distribution, with well-established humanitarian groups saying the GHF is giving cover for Israel to depopulate Palestinians from Gaza.

94.44.226.83 (talk) 10:54, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: this is neither an uncontroversial improvement, nor one that is already supported by consensus. Please read WP:EDITXY. M.Bitton (talk) 13:13, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

@M.Bitton I don't see why this edit would be controversial or should require consensus; it is rearranging existing article content to improve readability and clarity by consolidating separated descriptions of a single event. There are some minor grammar issues that would arise if the proposed edit were to be implemented verbatim, but those can easily be remedied without scrapping the substance of their edit. ^📻NuclearSpuds_🎙️ 10:33, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

As the original poster, I would also like to add that it avoids WP:BLP-related issues, since with the current layout, an inattentive reader might be lead to believe that Jake Wood and the "well-established humanitarian groups" are on the same page on the question of whether Israel is pursuing genocide. 94.44.247.119 (talk) 11:52, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 July 2025

Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia,

This articles uses the following sources: 11 sources or mentions from BBC 8 sources or mentions from Al Jazeera 4 sources or mentions from the UN 4 sources or mentions from the Middle East Eye 11 sources or mentions from The Guardian 4 sources or mentions from France24 4 sources or mentions from CNN 9 sources or mentions from Reuters 6 sources or mentions from the Washington Post 4 sources or mentions from The New York Times 2 sources or mentions from AP 3 sources or mentions from CBS 4 sources or mentions from Financial Times 1 sources or mentions from CBC 1 sources or mentions from PBS 1 sources or mentions from Die Nachrichten 1 sources or mentions from the Wall Street Journal 1 sources or mentions from Tageschau 1 sources or mentions from Le Monde 1 sources or mentions from The Independent 1 sources or mentions from the Center For Constitutional Rights 1 sources or mentions from Newswire

Althougether : 83 sources or mentions

1 sources or mentions from i24news 3 sources or mentions from Kan News 1 sources or mentions from inn.co.il 7 sources or mentions from Time of Israel 1 sources or mentions from HAaretz 1 sources or mentions from Jews News Syndicate 1 sources or mentions from Jerusalem Post

Althougether  : 15 sources or mentions

This article discuss the subject of the newly by the US and Israeli government raised distribution centers and humanitarian aid organization, the subject of the GHF. The articles use 83 pro Hamas sources versus 15 pro Israeli sources. I know and feel worldwide that HAmas has powerful friends throughout the Universities worldwide until the international newslets (CNN, THE Guardian, BBC, the French and German Statemedia etc), and organizations (UN,EU) but this is not a reason why the Wikipedia should follow this trends. Please add 65 more sources or mentions from the Israeli media to this article and I will say, this article is balanced. Thank you 46.107.54.46 (talk) 17:56, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Dahawk04 (talk) 19:19, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

I don't dare the work to make Wikipedia a balanced source. It's the job who already work within. This is the responsibility of those who made this article and those who allowed to appear. If this is not clear what changes I'm talking about in my message I don't think this is because you don't understand my English, but rather because you don't want to understand. Showing just one side of the events is propaganda. Showing two sides of the events is balance. The peolpe who made this article are not made their job. They used one side of the sources and didn't go on the other side. I don't have to feel shame instead of them. Neither work instead of them. This is also the responsibility who made this article to appear. Search them and ask them to make their work again. You don't have to sort out what the truth of is, you are not God, but show how different peoples differents truths exist at the same time. I hope this helps. 46.107.54.46 (talk) 09:14, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

I suggest you read Wikipedia:FALSEBALANCE. Mason7512 (talk) 22:03, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

I don't have to read a professionaly made word blabla to know what balance is. The sources I mentioned above are pro-Hamas. (While I must say PBS is pro American governemental so pro Trump so I must correct my initial work to 82 pro Hamas source or mentions and to 16 pro Israeli source or mentions.) This is just huge. Also just showing one interpretation of the reality is a sectarian dogma. Showing the paralel interpretations are freedom.

Do I need to say which category is Wikipedia? But man, you can change this any time if you want. 46.107.54.46 (talk) 09:25, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

I agree with you that this article - as many in Wikipedia are - is not good enough. But your idea of balance is unfortunately fundamentally wrong. Firstly, it doesn’t matter we’re a source is from, as long as the information is helpful and based on good quality sources. Secondly, are most news organisations relying on news agencies like AP, Reuters etc. meaning that the Jerusalem Post, Times of Israel, as well as the BBC or DW have the exact same source, and often even the same text. Thirdly, is it not balanced if we just use PR from an Organisation on the one side, and PR from their critics.

I only discovered the article recently, and am willing to help to revise it, but like all contributors here I am doing this in my free time. So please be patient and help making the article better by contributing yourself!

please don’t take this personally and have a pleasant day! Nibi3 (talk) 11:08, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

Edit request 5 July 2025

Description of suggested change: The purpose of the GHF is to distribute food. If you read this article w/o knowing that purpose, you would think it was a political organization that occassionally shot people! https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/gaza-humanitarian-foundation-says-two-its-us-aid-workers-injured-gaza-2025-07-05/

Diff:

−

The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) is an American organization, based in Delaware, established in February 2025 to distribute humanitarian aid during the ongoing Gaza humanitarian crisis.[2] Formerly led by executive director Jake Wood until his resignation on 25 May 2025, it has the backing of the Trump administration and the Israeli government.

+

The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) is an American organization, based in Delaware, established in February 2025 to distribute humanitarian aid during the ongoing Gaza humanitarian crisis.[2] As of July 1, GHF said it has delivered the equivalent of more than 62 million meals. GHF distributes boxes of food staples such as lentils and rice, saying one box holds the equivalent of more than 50 meals. Formerly led by executive director Jake Wood until his resignation on 25 May 2025, it has the backing of the Trump administration and the Israeli government.

JMU53211 (talk) 18:23, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

I concur. The article is less than optimal.

however I think that the GHF claims about distributed meals is misleading as well. The definition of meal is unclear. And when looking at the contents of the aid packages, one has to conclude that this hardly fulfils the criteria for a meal. That doesn’t mean that I am against GHF or your contribution to the article! Nibi3 (talk) 10:52, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

What do you think about this for a start? It’s only a rough draft.

The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) is an American organization, based in Delaware, established in February 2025 to distribute humanitarian aid during the ongoing Gaza humanitarian crisis. It was chosen by the Israeli government to take over the distribution of humanitarian aid in the Gaza Strip, replacing the UN aid mechanism and UNRWA, and to prevent stealing aid by HAMAS and others. GHF is led by executive director John Acree, a former USAID manager, and executive chairman Johnnie Moore, an American evangelical leader and businessman. While heavily criticized by different governments, the UN, and humanitarian groups, it has the backing of the American and Israeli governments.

Instead of distributing aid decentralized, GHF with help from the IDF opened several distribution sites in the South of the Gaza Strip on 27 May 2025. This has been criticized by the United Nations and humanitarian groups for politicizing aid distribution, with well-established humanitarian groups saying the GHF is giving cover for Israel to pursue its aims to depopulate Palestinians from the Gaza Strip, and its former head Jake Wood questioning the group's impartiality and neutrality upon his resignation. GHF hands out boxes of staples such as lentils and rice, saying one carton holds food for 5.5 people for 3.5 days. While GHF claims that this is the equivalent of more than 50 meals, many find them to be inequitant. On this basis GHF states that they have delivered roughly 62 million meals, as of July 1. The distribution points are guarded by private mercenaries from the US, and are located in territory under IDF control. Additionally GHF relies on Palestinian workers and, local armed groups opposing HAMAS, including the Popular Forces led by Yasser Abu Shabab.

As of 27 June 2025, there have at least 509 people been killed and several thousand been injured in the vicinity of the GHF sites, according to the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), since the start of GHF operations. Survivors and witnesses have referred to the Israeli-backed operation as traps or death traps rather than aid, while Doctors Without Borders has described it as "slaughter masquerading as aid." The Center for Constitutional Rights has sent a legal notice to the GHF of potential liability for complicity in war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide against Palestinians. Amnesty International gathers evidence and suggests that the GHF's purpose was "to placate international concerns while constituting another tool of Israel’s genocide". The United Nations and over 170 charities and NGOs, including Save the Children and Oxfam, accuse the GHF of failing to uphold and even violating humanitarian norms, and demand that the scheme be immediately closed. Nibi3 (talk) 12:44, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

How's this: Going for neutral Wiki tone.

The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), an American organization based in Delaware, was established in February 2025 to address the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza. It was selected by the Israeli government to manage the distribution of humanitarian aid in the Gaza Strip, a role previously held by the UN aid mechanism and UNRWA. GHF's stated aim is ensuring aid reaches those in need and preventing diversion by groups such as Hamas.

The GHF is led by executive director John Acree, a former USAID manager, and executive chairman Johnnie Moore, an American evangelical leader and businessman. The organization operates with the backing of both the American and Israeli governments.

Departing from a decentralized aid model, GHF opened several distribution sites in the southern Gaza Strip on May 27, 2025. These sites are situated in territory under IDF control and are guarded by private security personnel from the US. The GHF also engages Palestinian workers and local armed groups, including the Popular Forces led by Yasser Abu Shabab, in its operations.

The GHF distributes boxes of staple foods like lentils and rice, stating that each carton provides food for 5.5 people for 3.5 days. The organization calculates this as the equivalent of over 50 meals per carton, and as of July 1, approximately 62 million meals have reportedly been distributed based on this calculation.

The GHF's operational model and impact have drawn significant scrutiny and concern from various international bodies and humanitarian organizations. The United Nations and numerous humanitarian groups, including Save the Children and Oxfam, have raised concerns about the approach to aid distribution, suggesting it politicizes humanitarian assistance and does not align with established humanitarian norms. Former GHF head Jake Wood resigned, reportedly questioning the group's impartiality and neutrality.

Furthermore, concerns have been raised by humanitarian organizations regarding incidents in the vicinity of GHF distribution sites. The UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) reported that as of June 27, 2025, at least 509 people have been killed and several thousand injured near these sites since operations began. Organizations like Doctors Without Borders have described the conditions around these distributions as extremely dangerous, while others, including the Center for Constitutional Rights and Amnesty International, have raised legal and ethical questions about the GHF's role and potential implications under international law. Over 170 charities and NGOs have called for the scheme to be reconsidered. JMU53211 (talk) 23:33, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

I am okay with it. Although I think that this is an important point:

”accuse the GHF of failing to uphold and even violating humanitarian norms“

Normally humanitarian aid is brought to the people, and more strictly differentiated from the parties involved in the conflict.

maybe we should strive to shorten the introduction. Nibi3 (talk) 10:06, 7 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to write this up @Nibi3. This looks pretty good and I will make changes in the article based on these suggestions. Some things to note for the future:

1. For virtually all claims in controversial/challengeable articles we want to include citations to reliable sources (see Wikipedia:Verifiability).

2. Article intros (leads) should, for the most part, not introduce new information but rather summarize information that is discussed in the body. I think the info you included in your draft is important for the lead though, so the fact that it's missing from the body is more indicative of a poor body than a poor lead.

3. In most articles, putting citations in the lead isn't a big deal since the information it talks about is cited in the body. However, in contentious articles, there is a stronger obligation to verifiability, so a well-cited lead is important, even if it comes with redundancy (see MOS:LEADCITE).

I'll take care of finding sources for these claims + integrating them into the article. ^📻NuclearSpuds_🎙️ 22:34, 7 July 2025 (UTC)

I'll have sources for all the claims. I'll tried to keep as much of the original as possible and the rest I have myself. I wrote it in a Google document and it didn't copy. I didn't continue as @JMU53211Made a Version as well. If I have time today I can add them. I just didn't want to revise the article alone, as I am not sure about the Wiki consensus about Israel related topics. If the news are to be trusted GHF is on the way out anyway 😅 Nibi3 (talk) 09:00, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

@Nibi3 I bring up the sources because, as this article requires extended confirmed permissions, an extended-confirmed user (such as myself) would need to make the actual edits implementing your proposed changes. As you are a new user, you do not have EC perms yet and so the only input that Wikipedia allows you on this article is on the talk page. This is the case for all articles related to Israel-Palestine (see Wikipedia:CT/ARBPIA). So unfortunately you won't be able to make direct revisions to this article until you rack up 500 edits. That being said, there are ways you can contribute content to the article without having the perms. Writing drafts on the talk page can be tedious since it isn't designed to facilitate article editing, so if you want to rewrite large sections with proper citations, I would suggest making a page in your userspace to place drafted content. Userspace pages are easier to draft on because they let you use the same tools that you would use when editing an article. Once you have something that is article-ready, feel free to @ me and I will gladly look it over and add it into the article. ^📻NuclearSpuds_🎙️ 08:51, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the point is of the talk page.  What you wrote is not an improvement.  I'm sort of giving up, but just 2 points:

1. This is basically the first "fact" in your write-up: "Formerly led by executive director Jake Wood until his resignation on 25 May 2025."  Why is this important?  Jake Wood is not an internationally known figure.  This doesn't need to be in the lead.

2. Your next fact is that people are killed / died getting aid.  As I said earlier, "The purpose of the GHF is to distribute food. If you read this article w/o knowing that purpose, you would think it was a political organization that occassionally shot people!" JMU53211 (talk) 15:51, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi @JMU53211, I don’t know if you intended to reply to me, but I am a relatively recent editor on this article and have written a very small portion of the article. I have not made my intended changes yet due to time constraints. I’ve read many of the issues that people have raised on the talk page and I would like to work on fixing them; unfortunately, besides myself, there are very few editors (with extended perms) that I can see who have expressed interest in addressing the most substantial issues. The editing time I can afford will be spent on this article, but that time is irregular and sparse and far below that which would be required to make significant changes within the timeframes of your expectations. ^📻NuclearSpuds_🎙️ 04:06, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

Yes. I meant it for you. The lead reads like a politicized news channel article; not like a Wiki. Nibi3, who I don't know, and I did a lot of work to improve the lead. Here's a simple, neutral version:

The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), an American organization based in Delaware, was established in February 2025 to distribute humanitarian aid during the ongoing conflict in Gaza. The Israeli government selected GHF to replace a UN / UNRWA aid mechanism.

GHF's stated aim is ensuring aid reaches those in need and preventing diversion by groups such as Hamas. The GHF distributes boxes of staple foods like lentils and rice, stating that each carton provides food for 5.5 people for 3.5 days. The organization calculates this as the equivalent of over 50 meals per carton, and as of July 1, approximately 62 million meals have reportedly been distributed based on this calculation.

The GHF's operational model and impact have drawn significant scrutiny and concern from various international bodies and humanitarian organizations. The United Nations and numerous humanitarian groups, including Save the Children and Oxfam, have raised concerns about the approach to aid distribution, suggesting it politicizes humanitarian assistance and does not align with established humanitarian norms. Former GHF head Jake Wood resigned, reportedly questioning the group's impartiality and neutrality.

Furthermore, concerns have been raised by humanitarian organizations regarding incidents in the vicinity of GHF distribution sites. The UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) reported that as of June 27, 2025, at least 509 people have been killed and several thousand injured near these sites since operations began. Organizations like Doctors Without Borders have described the conditions around these distributions as extremely dangerous, while others, including the Center for Constitutional Rights and Amnesty International, have raised legal and ethical questions about the GHF's role and potential implications under international law. Over 170 charities and NGOs have called for the scheme to be reconsidered. JMU53211 (talk) 21:04, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

I made some changes to the lead based on your suggestions. Review it and let me know how it works. Keep in mind that article content should be backed by reliable sources. ^📻NuclearSpuds_🎙️ 10:39, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

@Rafe87 Could you shed some light on why you don’t think a lead section about claimed meal distribution is warranted? I’m pinging you here because you recently removed the section that I added based on this discussion. Pinging other editors involved in this discussion: @Nibi3 @JMU53211. ^📻NuclearSpuds_🎙️ 06:41, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

I removed that paragraph for several reasons. First, it used the Jerusalem Post as a source, which Wikipedia does not consider a reliable source on Palestinian issues. Second, the figures for the number of meals distributed come from GHF itself and have not been confirmed by independent sources. The entire behavior of the GHF, which fantastically denies that a single Palestinian death occurred on its sites, indicates that the group's claims should not be taken at face value. And finally, the intro is already too long, and that paragraph was ideal for removal. Its presence deemphasized the scandal surrounding its method of operation, which is illegal under international law, and moved the mention of the repeated mass killings that occur at its bases, which by far attract more attention than its very modest distribution work, to a lower position in the text. The scandal of the killings of Palestinians and GHF's illegal method of operation should come first; GHF's likely self-serving statements about its work should come later, if at all, and appropriate sources should be used. Rafe87 (talk) 13:50, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

There are other sources than the Jerusalem post, and the figures are plainly attributed to the GHF. I think a complete picture of the competing narratives should be given in the lead. If a description of the organization’s presentation of itself is included as the last paragraph of the lead, I do not think readers will be under any misapprehension about the trust that is generally bestowed upon the GHF. I think that this information merits inclusion in the lead because GHF coverage in reliable sources will often make reference to the GHF’s response to accusations of wrongdoing. Would you support the inclusion of a few sentences at the end of the lead adding that GHF has given wholesale denial to violent incidents at its sites and other common claims they have given media? Each claim I add for this would be supported by 2 or more reliable sources. ^📻NuclearSpuds_🎙️ 07:07, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

The entry should reflect what reliable sources say, and not force balance where there is none. The coverage GHF receives in the more neutral press (which doesn't include the Jerusalem Post and its ilk) focuses on the illegality of GHF's operations and the mass killings of Palestinians that have occurred at its distribution centers. And there is simply no balance between the UN, Doctors Without Borders, and so on, and an Evangelical "charity" run by armed contractors that was created not even three months ago and whose most notable achievement is participating in the near daily slaughter of Palestinians and lying about it. As I said before, the introduction is already a bit too long, and all the information contained therein is more important and appears more prominently in reliable media than what GHF says about the meals it distributes. If divulging the latter is so important, it can be inserted in the Program characteristics section, with appropriate sources. Rafe87 (talk) 13:22, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

I also see that coverage overwhelmingly focuses on aid attacks and GHF illegality. However, if you look through the sources we use in this article, virtually all include, in some form, GHF's response to allegations. As you said, their "most notable achievement is participating in the near daily slaughter of Palestinians and lying about it." Their consistent denial of association with attacks at their aid sites is part of their representation in reliable sources that should not be neglected in the lead. Their comments on the specifics of their meals are more sparse and could be left to the body. ^📻NuclearSpuds_🎙️ 08:28, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

I don't believe I've removed anything regarding any denials issued by GHF regarding these killings. In any case, it's probably bad form to mention such denials every time a new killing occurs. Placing something like "GHF denies the mass killings have taken place in its distribution sites or at the hands of its staffers" one time in the corpus of the text should suffice for this purpose. Rafe87 (talk) 22:37, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

No I don't think you have either, I just wanted to know to what extent of coverage of the GHF response you would be on board with. I'll make an edit to the lead and you can revert and @ if you disagree with its content. ^📻NuclearSpuds_🎙️ 09:18, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 July 2025

Please change the name of this GHF to Gaza Holocaust Front. It is more fitting to the role that they play. 173.206.126.79 (talk) 18:16, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Day Creature (talk) 18:42, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

This just shows that you have no idea of the scope of the Holocaust. See for example: Operation Harvest Festival and then reconsider, if a badly implemented aid distribution mechanism in a war zone is similar. Nibi3 (talk) 21:30, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 July 2025

Change

• Official website (currently inactive)

To

• Official website

As the website is currently active. BruceSchaff (talk) 03:16, 7 July 2025 (UTC)

Also maybe in should be addded or moved to the info box BruceSchaff (talk) 03:18, 7 July 2025 (UTC)

 Done Made both changes. ^📻NuclearSpuds_🎙️ 05:50, 7 July 2025 (UTC)

GHF box contents

Under Program Characteristics, there's a sentence about the GHF boxes that says "The assistance primarily includes food packages, drinking water, medicine, and tents." The sentence cites this source (https://www.kan.org.il/content/kan-news/defense/912018/). Somebody else added a verification needed tag, but I took a look at the article with google translate (I don't know Hebrew) and I didn't see any details on the content of the boxes, other than mentioning food. I don't see any mention of water, medicine, or tents. Other articles about GHF boxes, like this one from the BBC (https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd787er1qz4o) don't mention anything other than food either. Can somebody provide a source for this claim, or can I just remove it? Truthnope (talk) 00:29, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

I agree that the source used there only says "food packages". The MEE source titled "What's inside the boxes of aid being distributed in Gaza?" says "While each box is different, most contained the following food items ..." and "None of the Palestinians MEE spoke to received bottled water, cooking fuel, medicines, blankets, soap, washing powder or menstrual pads. Additionally, none have reported receiving baby formula, baby food, nappies and essential supplies for babies and children to survive". So that sentence needs to be corrected. Burrobert (talk) 07:29, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

I removed the claim about "drinking water, medicine, and tents" and rewrote a bit from that section. There was also a claim that "GHF has pledged not to share any personally identifiable information about aid recipients with Israeli authorities" that referenced the above source, but that also doesn't appear anywhere in it, so I removed it. There was one BBC source that said that Israeli authorities said that the aid would include flour, baby food, and medicine, so I included it, though most other sources don't mention baby food or medicine. I also incorporated the other BBC article mentioned earlier. Truthnope (talk) 08:39, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

More evidence of war crimes emerges

A retired US special forces officer has revealed to the BBC why he resigned from his work with US- and Israel-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) aid distribution centres. "I witnessed the Israeli Defense Forces shooting at the crowds of Palestinians," Anthony Aguilar told the BBC. He added that in his entire career he has never witnessed such a level of "brutality and use of indiscriminate and unnecessary force against a civilian population, an unarmed, starving population". This can be included in the article. 188.58.100.224 (talk) 11:03, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Its a video But sure, its a testemony by name. Guys like him earn 1100 USD per day, and several sources claim, that it were actually the Safe Reach Solutions PMCs (like that guy) who shoot at Palestinans at the food centers ... so there is that. Alexpl (talk) 12:04, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

New edits not shoeing up?

User:Truthnope and I made a few changes to this article, but they're not showing up in the text, though our edits are acknowledged in the article history. Rafe87 (talk) 13:38, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

I think you may have inadvertently undone some changes while reverting an earlier edit. See your most recent edit diff. ^📻NuclearSpuds_🎙️ 13:45, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

There is a typo in the 2nd paragraph of the article, where it says "in" instead of "is"

"and delivering it in a manner that in unsafe for the Palestinian people" — Preceding unsigned comment added by FloellaBird (talk • contribs) 13:20, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Already done The error has been corrected, thank you. Mason7512 (talk) 20:09, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 August 2025

Add original sources to GHF response to former US military Tony’s public testimonies. I read articles on cited newspaper but that also don’t have original sources and I expected them to be here but it cites the newspaper article itself. Please add original sources of GHF response and not another article without source. 90.203.60.5 (talk) 07:12, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

If you want specific sources, find&add them yourself. We only have to meet WP:RS, nothing else. Alexpl (talk) 12:23, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Charliehdb (talk) 13:51, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Death update 31 July

The deaths in paragraph 3 should be updated to 859 deaths as of 31 July. The sentence after that about 60% should go or have more context because it’s just confusing and a longer way to say the precise number. 72.159.224.55 (talk) 05:04, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Done, it now reads "As of 31 July 2025, the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) reports that of the 1,373 Palestinians killed since 27 May while seeking food, 859 were killed in the vicinity of GHF sites." I included your source and this article (https://news.un.org/en/story/2025/08/1165552) from UN news. Truthnope (talk) 06:37, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

Much appreciated. 71.182.194.130 (talk) 05:12, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Map

I made a map of the sites based on information on the group's Facebook page. The maps they posted in June and July show red no travel regions that don't line up with other information I've seen about where the IDF has ordered evacuations, which I showed with the dashed blue line copied from the main map on the Gaza War page (and which lines up with the Displacement Orders map from https://gazamaps.com/).

Sites operated by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation

Geobica (talk) 16:00, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Death toll update

I replaced the Jul 31 numbers from here and here with the Aug 15 numbers from here. This article, dated Aug 19, is more recent still but doesn't date its figures. It only says they're the "latest data." Should the article use these newer, but undated, figures instead? --Kizor 22:55, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Edit request 5 September 2025

Description of suggested change: Anthony Aguilar lied according to this report: https://www.kan.org.il/content/kan-news/defense/948264/

Diff:

−

noneORIGINAL_WIKITEXT

+

It was later announced that the child was alive and had left the Strip.CHANGED_WIKITEXT

176.229.31.93 (talk) 11:07, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. It isn't clear where in the article you would like this to be added or what child is being referred to. Day Creature (talk) 16:29, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Whistleblower allegations and neutrality concerns in general

I know some/most of this has already been discussed previously, but I found the need to summarize, reiterate and raise new concern regarding this page.

I have just revised the “Whistleblower allegations and reporting controversies” section to ensure it complies with core Wikipedia policies, especially WP:NPOV and WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV. The changes clarify that:

• The widely reported child-death allegation was later disproven when the boy, Abdul Rahim Muhammad Hamden, was found alive.

• GHF’s investigation and corrective role are included.

• The second whistleblower’s claims remain uncorroborated and rely on single-source testimony.

• All strong statements are attributed to reliable sources rather than stated in Wikipedia’s own voice.

This edit is narrowly focused on one section, but I want to highlight broader concerns with the article as a whole. At present, the page risks violating several policies:

• **WP:NPOV / WP:UNDUE** – the article gives overwhelming weight to controversies while offering little on history, mission, or activities.  

• **WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV** – allegations are often stated in Wikipedia’s voice instead of attributed.  

• **WP:BLP** – living individuals are named in connection with allegations without careful balance.  

• **WP:NOTNEWS** – the article reads like a running news chronicle rather than an encyclopedic summary.  

• **WP:COATRACK** – the focus is almost exclusively on controversies, sidelining encyclopedic context.  

• **WP:TONE** – strong/emotive language from sources is sometimes repeated without balance.

The overall impression is closer to a hit piece than a balanced encyclopedic entry. My intention is to proceed incrementally: starting with sections where the record is clear (in this case, a central allegation that was later significantly refuted), and then gradually addressing other neutrality issues. Feedback is welcome on how best to approach broader improvements while keeping within policy. Sablc4747 (talk) 02:20, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

see WP:RSP, but as per WP:FOXNEWSPOLITICS, we dont use fox news for political claims anymore. WP:TIMESOFISRAEL is considered biased for israel related content. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 02:24, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Following the comment on the use of Fox News, I re-added the “Disputed allegations and reporting controversies” section using Reuters, NDTV, ABC, BBC, and CJR to replace previously challenged Fox News citations. The content reflects verifiable corrections and maintains WP:NPOV, WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV, and WP:RS standards. Sablc4747 (talk) 15:53, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

those links go to 404 or are a lot of places that seem arbitrary.

why NDTV? If there are no other reliable sources that are reporting on it, it seems undue to use an Indian TV network source that has been accused of being biased for the BJP party to report on a middle eastern conflict. User:Bluethricecreamman (Talk·Contribs) 17:08, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

I agree with @Bluethricecreamman. I will also note that a 404 isn't necessarily disqualifying if archived versions are available, which were not. Additionally, if the first allegation were to be disproved in reliable sources, the second allegation should not automatically be branded as a 'disputed allegation'; this would be synthesis and the allegation would remain an 'allegation'. It is not enough to call an allegation 'disputed' if a separate allegation is disproved, and it is also not enough to call an allegation 'disputed' on the basis that relying on single-source testimony is poor journalistic practice--- that is why it is an 'allegation' rather than reported fact. ^📻NuclearSpuds_🎙️ 21:55, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 September 2025

Change Palestinans to Palestinians WannabePale (talk) 18:15, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

 Done Nubzor [T][C] 20:17, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

Edit request 27 October 2025

Description of suggested change: Adding sourced map of GHF distribution sites, July 2025. See file's commons page for details: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:GHFinGaza2025-07en.svg.

Diff:

−

===== Operations ==== Three GHF distribution sites are in Rafah, ORIGINAL_WIKITEXT

+

===== Operations ==== [[File:GHFinGaza2025-07en.svg|thumb|GHF distribution sites in Gaza as of July 2025]] Three GHF distribution sites are in Rafah, CHANGED_WIKITEXT

Willi P (talk) 11:39, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

 Done Day Creature (talk) 16:15, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

"Gaza's hunger games" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Gaza's hunger games has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 19 § Gaza's hunger games until a consensus is reached. Star Mississippi 03:02, 19 November 2025 (UTC)