Talk:Khamis Gaddafi

Dead?

Twitter is saying that he has died from burns. --68.209.227.3 (talk) 00:14, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

We must wait for reliable sources to confirm he is dead.--Smart30 (talk) 01:30, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Al Arabiya seems to confirm it http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2011/03/25/142907.html My Arabic is very basic. So can an Arabic speaker analyse this article? --Youssef (talk) 20:33, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Sooner or later his death will be corroborated or not. They(Goverment) cant hide him forever.If he doesnt appear, well try to guess what hapened to him.--190.118.9.11 (talk) 03:41, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

yeah, we are an encyclopedia. As long as there isn't credible confirmation on his death, it won't hurt us to say there isn't credible confirmation on his death. If he's dead, he's still dead even if his Wikipedia article isn't positive on the fact. --dab (𒁳) 10:18, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Until confirmed, this remains a WP:BLP. Is he dead? I suspect he is and (if true) I certainly won't miss him, but it really doesn't matter what I or any other wiki editor thinks. What matters is WP:V. RN1970 (talk) 22:43, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

That's what I'm thinking too. -- 92.4.107.56 (talk) 18:52, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

It appears it now has been confirmed (by Muammar himself in a tv-speech), but I won't add it until I find a secondary source, which should be available soon. If too late, I presume someone else will deal with it and update the article as needed. Muammar was apparently speaking about his grandfather, also named Khamis!? That certainly makes much more sense in terms of the "Italians killed him 100 years ago" or whatever Muammar said. RN1970 (talk) 00:54, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

This guy should be in the Guinness Book of World Records for dying and rising again. Guy must be a cat with all the lives. I agree with Smart30 (Kennvido (talk) 23:47, 21 October 2012 (UTC))

Moussa Ibrahim said in the audio clip that he and Khamis were out of Libya. They never showed the body. He is alive IMO.--Andres arg (talk) 04:29, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Seventh and youngest son

How can Khamis be the "seventh and youngest son" when all media today report that Saif al-Arab was the youngest son? noclador (talk) 05:29, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Following the claimed death of Saif al-Arab, some media outlets got it wrong initially. Saif al-Arab was born in 1982 and second youngest. Khamis, born in 1983, is younger. RN1970 (talk) 14:45, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the latest claims of Khamis' death

Okay, so I noticed that some of us have already jumped the gun over the recent rebel claims of Khamis' death in which, as far as I could tell, has not been independently verified by any other sources outside the rebel ranks. At the moment, most sources are only relaying the claim without actually confirming it, as shown in entries like these: [1] [2] Also, let us not forget that throughout the conflict the rebels, like the Jamahiriya, have a tendency to exaggerate far too many claims that turned out to be contradictory and/or unreliable. So until more sources emerge actually confirming his death, I strongly suggests that we continue to have this article treat the subject in hand as a (at least possibly) living person. FineHourglass (talk) 11:46, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Khamis is probably alive. Even Al Jazeera is very skeptical with this claim and say that all point to show that it is not a valid claim. Rebels are probably trying to hide their last defeat in Zlitan. This is not the first time that the rebels do this kind of things. When Saif el Arab was killed the governement was the first to announce it. The rumor of Khamis death has to be treated as only what it is, a simple rumor.--FreemanSA (talk) 12:14, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

I saw his dead body this morning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.10.137.184 (talk) 14:49, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

If there are no confirmed reports of his death, why does this article states that he's dead? He was presumed to be dead in March too. Don't kill someone before he's actually dead. That's embarrassing. Astronomyinertia (talk) 17:25, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't know who to believe here. Guess we just have to wait.--Objectively (talk) 18:33, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

On the page, it should say "claimed dead by rebel forces, but denied by regime officials", until it's verified 100 percent he's either dead or alive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.187.185.194 (talk) 21:07, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

He is alive until proof of the contrary. Claims by rebels deserve a mention as a rumor but not more than that.--FreemanSA (talk) 22:14, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Khamis is alive. [3] 70.187.185.194 (talk) 00:00, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

That wasn't him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.7.22.151 (talk) 12:56, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

It probably was, but there's so much doubt surrounding this story, that I don't think this article can say for certain if he is alive or not. Both sides have lied and abused the media in the past for their own reasons, and I don't see reliable sources stating 100% that he is alive. I've tried to keep the page neutral, but phrases "he is proven to be alive", "Libyan TV showed substantial evidence" and similar break with this neutrality. We don't need to be certain, and its better if we just state the facts, as reported by reliable sources, in the format of "on this date, this happened according to this source" rather than try to make definitive statements, which are likely to be POV.--Objectively (talk) 18:12, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Sky News news just reported that Khamis Gaddafi is claimed to have been killed by the rebels, showing footage of a burnt out land rover. Luconst

What? Again!? -Kudzu1 (talk) 17:44, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

It was reported by Stuart Ramsay not long ago, and also mentioned on twitter by Sky News journalists Luconst

Recent death?

Can we please hold off on reporting this guy dead until it's been 100% confirmed by reliable sources? This has to be like the fourth time Wikipedia has declared Khamis dead, and each of the times before now, it's turned out to have been premature. -Kudzu1 (talk) 19:25, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Given the repeated claims of his death (not four times as suggested in the above, but three: 20 March, 5 August, and now 29 August), we do need a confirmation before we declare him dead. For people not aware of the rules, I suggest they read WP:RS and WP:BLP. 62.107.220.188 (talk) 19:52, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Seems like we went through this a week ago, too, when those burnt bodies were found in Tripoli and somebody started the rumor it was Khamis and Abdullah Senussi, but I could be misremembering. Point stands either way. -Kudzu1 (talk) 20:00, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

It seems that rebels have a crush on Khamis Gaddafi and can't live without inventing his death. We should not give more credibility to this report than the others.--ChronicalUsual (talk) 11:44, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

As a preponderance of WP:RS seem to be reporting that Khamis Gaddafi is apparently dead (with The Daily Mail seeming especially convinced), with corroboration coming from captured loyalist soldiers, and no denial issued by the Gaddafi government, I'm withdrawing my objection to Khamis being classified as a recent death. No one seems to be saying he's still alive, and in the absence of denial... -Kudzu1 (talk) 23:55, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

I reverted back because the death of Khamis is only a rumor. Not only the loyalists have denied his death, http://www.vanguardngr.com/2011/08/final-battle-imminent-says-libya-rebel-leader/ http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/10202013-libyan-television-denies-death-of-muammar-gaddafis-military-son, but the rebels have declared him dead wrongly 5 times, and it's clear at this point they are engaged in a propaganda battle on Khamis. No other son of Gaddafi have been claimed dead by the rebels, just Khamis. And they already lied about "confirmed reports" too many times to be taken seriously. The rebels have not 1% of credibility on Khamis and they can't even agree on one version, contradicting themselves each day. Khamis death is just a rumor created by the rebels at this point. --ChronicalUsual (talk) 18:29, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Lets wait till Beni Walid falls, shall we? If he is buried there rebels wont have any problems with identifying his grave and confirming once and for all his death. --EllsworthSK (talk) 22:32, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Added a report from the Guardian today that said he was in Bani Walid, but had left the town. So....no comment. XD He must be a cat with nine lives. He still has five more to go. Lol. EkoGraf (talk) 17:31, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Rebels are a joke of a source regarding Khamis, and even other Gaddafi sons. They should not even be taken seriously with them caught up lying 5 times on the death of Khamis. But still, rebels sympathizer still try to push rebels views in the page of Khamis, making it less reliable.--ChronicalUsual (talk) 19:53, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

To be fair, both sides (pro-Gaddafi and anti-Gaddafi) have repeatedly been shown to be unreliable in this conflict, which is why any statement based on one of the sides should be clearly identified as such ("according to rebels", "according to spokesman for Gaddafi", "rumored", and alike). The problem in your edit and the reason I reverted it is that you have to provide a source → WP:V. Although I suspect the most recent (29 August) claimed death is wrong, I have yet to see a source from the pro-Gaddafi that has denied it. Considering the changes on the ground during the last few weeks they might be busy with other things, but we still need a source that clearly shows the pro-Gaddafi side denying it. In any case the sentence was largely a repeat of the section just above it; the major difference is that only three times are mentioned there. I do invite you to add a sentence on the missing fourth time which is already mentioned in the main "Rumors of death" section, but please do remember to use NPOV wording. If you are able to locate a source that confirms the denial by the pro-Gaddafi of his most recent claimed death you can easily add it to the already existing intro, e.g.

"Most recently the rebels claimed that he died on 29 August 2011 when a NATO helicopter destroyed the car he was travelling in, but this was denied by [whoever denied it+your reference] and later reports suggested that he was still alive." RN1970 (talk) 23:25, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Is opening your eyes already too hard for you? it's just two message above yours.--ChronicalUsual (talk) 12:33, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Do consider reading WP:CIVIL. You evidently haven't. And in the future, do consider adding the citation to the article if you know of one. It is not my job to check if there are citations on the talk page or elsewhere on the net that are valid for sentences you put in the article. Only citations in the article count. If you put a sentence in the article, it is you who should provide the citation in the article → WP:V. Furthermore, you have entirely disregarded the fact that it essentially represents a repeat – as I mentioned above. WP:Lead does not leave room for repeats. RN1970 (talk) 13:38, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

A Source has been added. Might want to look for more, but apparently he did infact die. I fixed some things regarding this Jeancey (talk) 21:07, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Confirmed?

We have several sources, both pro and anti gaddafi that are now saying that he is dead, including progaddafi tv mourning his death. also, nothing has been heard of him SINCE his death. Can we call him dead now? lol. Jeancey (talk) 16:30, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Death is unconfirmed. Check Ak-Jazeera: http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/10/2011101713437351911.html "In another development, a US official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told the Reuters news agency that Washington could not yet independently confirm reports that the deposed Libyan leader's son Khamis had died in fighting southeast of the capital Tripoli on August 29.". -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:44, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

If you continue and finish that same sentence " but said similar information was being received in Washington from "reliable sources". Essentially, no one is saying he is still alive, and lots are saying now that he is dead. Wait until a report says he is still alive before we change anything. Jeancey (talk) 15:28, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Oh! And the BBC has a line specifically confirming. "Khamis Gaddafi has now been confirmed dead" Jeancey (talk) 15:32, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Since the tag is only to discourage people from writing hate messages in the article I don't understand the rush to remove it. We keep the BLP tag for possibly living people, person who have disappeared, etc. We remove the tag only for people who are 100% dead. -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:31, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Xinhua

Xinhua is reporting that an unnamed source in the NTC claims Saif al-Islam Gaddafi said Khamis Gaddafi is still alive, and for some reason, they believe him. For what it's worth, the article also claims the NTC has pinpointed his location and is readying a mission to capture him. I have no idea if this is credible or not, but Xinhua is generally considered WP:RS. The thing is, it appears to be the only agency reporting this, it quotes no named sources, and all other sources say he's dead. Thoughts? -Kudzu1 (talk) 18:35, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Kudzu1 I have also read this article and I am confused. I am very skeptical about Khamis death in Tarhuna 29th August. Why? Go to youtube, and find a SkyNews video in what a young man, who said that he was personal bodyguard of Khamis, said that Khamis was killed by NATO airstrike AND that Muammar Gaddafi left Bani Walid to Sabha. Now we know, that Muammar was never in Bani Walid that time, so the credibility of this bodyguard is below zero. And the second argument, why they didnt show the place where they buried Khamis? I — Preceding unsigned comment added by DoctorKynes (talk • contribs) 18:52, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I read the article provided from UPI. The information doesn't seem reliable. An anonymous government official told Xinhua that saif claimed khamis was alive and near tarhuna, and area controlled by NTC forces for weeks, and he's been there since the fall of tripoli. The fact that no one has heard ANYTHING from him in months, and that apparently he's been sitting on his hands for months while his brothers and father have been actively directing forces seems suspicious. He was the most involved with the military prior to and during the war, and now is just twiddling his thumbs? Not very likely. It also seems suspicious that this source ONLY told Xinhua, and no one else. All things considered, this doesn't seem to be a very reliable piece of information. Jeancey (talk) 00:12, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

What was his rank?

I know he was obviously the commander of the Khamis Brigade, but what was his nominal rank within the army? Jetpower45 (talk) 06:38, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

I think all of the Gaddafi sons received the honorary rank of general during the war. But I could be wrong. -Kudzu1 (talk) 06:41, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Only thing is that I believe the highest rank in the Libyan army prior to Gaddafi's overthrow was Colonel. At least that's what this page [4] says. Although this is somewhat ambiguous given the prevalence of officers identified as "Generals" (i.e. Major General Abdul Fatah Younis or Major General Abu-Bakr Yunis Jabr). Jetpower45 (talk) 17:57, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Now that I've bothered to look, these are the insignia for the Libyan army [5]. Based on this and the last public photo of him alive or dead, I'd say he is wearing the insignia of a major [6] (third pic). That would be consistent with this earlier file photo, which has him seemingly wearing the insignia of a captain (one rank down) [7]. Does that sound about right? Jetpower45 (talk) 23:58, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

His official rank was captain. As for promotion, it may have happened, it may have not but since we have no reports about it, it remains just speculation. And as for generals, only his sister was general. Probably because she is hot. Even Mutassim was just a major. EllsworthSK (talk) 00:46, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

She is hot , particulary her feet — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.212.10.140 (talk) 14:30, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Khamis rumorology again

Something had to be done with the issue of Khamis supossed death. If WP want to be a serious encyclopedia and not loose credibility, it cannot kill or resurrect Khamis everytime the so-called ex-"rebels" claim his death, arrest, etc..., as it seems to be a distraction technique. Only when there are real proofs we can assure it. Regards.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 21:19, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Category

He should have category Possibly Living People, it's unknown did he is dead (sorry for bad English). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.28.251.241 (talk) 14:01, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Again - No proofs for being dead or alive

Sorry for bad English. Most wikipedias not listed him as deceased, he should have category "missing people" or "possible living people". 37.152.18.170 (talk) 15:47, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Khamis Gaddafi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121124025315/http://www.boston.com:80/news/world/middle-east/2012/10/21/libyan-turmoil-persists-year-after-gadhafi-death/FVo38xuWBp6DgD2aS06jRI/story.html to http://www.boston.com/news/world/middle-east/2012/10/21/libyan-turmoil-persists-year-after-gadhafi-death/FVo38xuWBp6DgD2aS06jRI/story.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:01, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 March 2016

In the infobox, in alma mater, IE Business School should be removed, as Gaddafi was expelled from this institution and never graduated, as explained in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khamis_Gaddafi#cite_ref-Bloomberg4March_5-0.

In the "Soviet military academies" line, there is also a link to a El Pais article that has nothing to do with the "Soviet military academies" and should be removed.

So alma mater should be changed from this:

|alma_mater = Frunze Military Academy
General Staff Academy
IE Business School

To the following:

|alma_mater = Frunze Military Academy
General Staff Academy 193.29.202.4 (talk) 17:34, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

 Not done I can't find any specific advice on almer mata lists, but as stated at WP:ALUMNI - all notable alumni "are to be included on an alumni list, regardless of how much time they have spent on a school roll, from one day to several years, and whether or not they graduated." so the fact that he was "expelled from this institution and never graduated" appears to be irrelevant. The reference supports his attendance at IE Business School so I have moved it to the right place. - Arjayay (talk) 17:56, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Khamis Gaddafi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/02/18/998374/gadhafi-rallies-supporters-amid.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110323105338/http://blogs.aljazeera.net/live/africa/libya-live-blog-march-23 to http://blogs.aljazeera.net/live/africa/libya-live-blog-march-23
• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5xJ4lwmv0?url=http://blogs.aljazeera.net/live/africa/libya-live-blog-march-19 to http://blogs.aljazeera.net/live/africa/libya-live-blog-march-19
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120301071432/http://www.stratfor.com/situation-report/libya-gadhafi-son-captured to http://stratfor.com/situation-report/libya-gadhafi-son-captured

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:34, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Khamis Gaddafi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121021221309/http://www.algeria-isp.com/actualites/politique-libye/201210-A12416/libye-declaration-docteur-moussa-ibrahim-octobre-2012.html to http://www.algeria-isp.com/actualites/politique-libye/201210-A12416/libye-declaration-docteur-moussa-ibrahim-octobre-2012.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:06, 30 November 2017 (UTC)