Wikipedia

Talk:Protests against the 2011 military intervention in Libya

Latest comment: 7 months ago by Nancy2291 in topic Wiki Education assignment: Gender and Culture
Learn more about this page

Merging this article with a more general article one? edit

Latest comment: 13 years ago12 comments4 people in discussion

I have no problem with this article documenting the protests against military intervention in Libya, but there are also protests around the world that support the military intervention as well. Instead of another page entitled "Protests for the 2011 military intervention in libya" perhaps we should merge this page and the hypothetical one together under a more general one of "Protests surrounding the 2011 military intervention in Libya"? And if you all do agree to do this, then perhaps this article should be deleted and its content moved to the newly created article?82.35.242.87 (talk) 19:25, 24 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

  • I removed your addition of the AFD tag because I don't see a reason for deletion provided here. If you could provide enough references, perhaps we should move this to something like Protests related to the 2011 military intervention in Libya, with support/opposed sections but I don't think there is enough here for that yet. Either way, I don't think you have provided a reason to start an AFD. Monty845 19:42, 24 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
Point taken, but i'm not an expert on Wikipedia's template policies (hence the inappropriate tag). Perhaps you (or somebody that you know who is familiar with Wikipedia's template policies) could take the lead with the merger proposal?82.35.242.87 (talk) 20:14, 24 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
To be clear, is there an existing article you want to merge this one in to? Or are you saying this should just have its topic expanded to include protests both in favor of and opposed to the intervention? Monty845 20:20, 24 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
Also, I did a quick look, and didn't see much in the way of protests demanding or supporting intervention, we would need to have at least a few examples to justify such a change. If you have any sources on them it would be helpful. Monty845 20:24, 24 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
Yes, there is the content of this one could be merged with the other article under the reactions section of the main article (2011 military intervention in libya) entitled "International reactions to the 2011 military intervention in Libya." We could move all of the content of this article and put it in that one (the "international reactions..." article not the 2011 military intervention... article) as a sub-section under the section of "public reaction." I understand that my initial reaction was to merge the content of this article into another one entitled "protests surrounding the 2011 military intervention in Libya" but on further reflection I think it'll be better (for time-consumption and conceptualization purposes) to just put the content of this article into one entitled "International reactions to the 2011 military intervention in libya." My problem with having a wikipedia having this page dedicated solely to documenting protests against the no-fly zone is three-fold: 1) the protests is really no more than the form of a particular type (public reaction) of international reaction and should be classified as such; 2) seems to detract from the importance of other forms of public reactions, like polls; 3) seems to bias the reaction to the no-fly zone towards a particular reaction (a negative one) to the no-fly zone.
As for your comments about whether there are protests for the Libya no-fly zone, there is: http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/03/09/libya.civil.war/; http://www.webcitation.org/5x8el68bX; http://www.webcitation.org/5x9MvC97t
As for the person below, yes the criticisms by the African union and Arab league are documented under the "International reactions to the 2011 military intervention in libya" page. 82.35.242.87 (talk) 23:31, 24 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
Someone is deleting sourced criticism from the main article, so it is good that it at least can be presented here. I suggest a section on African union criticism, and one on Arab league worries.Mange01 (talk) 22:13, 24 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

There are multiple source on protests in multiple countries against the military intervention. So an article about these protests is necessary. And please don't be so quick to suggest AfD, the protests are ongoing and more references will come as time passes on. For example, Sri Lankans staged protests yesterday [1] I'm no fan of Gaddafi, just I'm no fan of communism. Wikipedia has multiple anti-war articles that include Protests against the Vietnam War, a war that was started to save Vietnam from communist takeover. There is no POV issue or RS issues in this article. --Reference Desker (talk) 02:31, 25 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

And please don't make unnecessary change like this. Reader will know about Xinhua by simple clicking the link. --Reference Desker (talk) 02:34, 25 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
Well i find it hard to believe you don't like Gaddafi when a vast majority of your last 50 most recent edits are about states and protests criticizing the military intervention. Surely if you don't like Gaddafi, you would have also created an article documenting the protests in support of the no-fly zone, if not out of personal dislike for him then at least out of basic encyclopedic objectivity? But alas, I'm speculating here.
As for the creation of the protests against the military involvement, I don't think it's entirely right to use the Vietnam War as an analogy here. The number of protests against the Vietnam War documented on the "Protests agains the Vietnam War page" is much larger than the number of protests here. But like you said, there might be more protests in the coming future so we shall see. I also do hope for objectivity's sake that you create a page that documents the Protests for the Libyan military intervention.
And as for the Xinhua tag, on this point I emphatically disagree, it's entirely appropriate that it's organizational structure as a state-run agency be made explicitly clear. This kind of stuff happens all over wikipedia under the foreign relations section of Russia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia#Foreign_relations), the criticism of Freedom House of Russia being "not free" is qualified by the mention as an organizational recipient of US-funding. I don't see why that same principle shouldn't apply here.82.35.242.87 (talk) 04:08, 25 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
An organization describing a country "not free" is a different from reporting there is a demonstration in a city against the intervention. If Xinhua described the US "unfree", we should have mentioned the nature of Xinhua, but that is not the case here. --Reference Desker (talk) 04:19, 25 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
Sir, you can't have your cake and eat it too. At this point you're splitting hairs here the fact that Xinhua is a state-run media institution means that even its news reportage (let alone analysis) reflects a political agenda. Here's another example of such labels being used in another article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Wisconsin_protests#Political_associations)82.35.242.87 (talk) 12:42, 25 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Pro-Gadaffi Leanings edit

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Being as Gadaffi supposedly runs a Socialist government wouldn't this be another reason why many of the Far-left Socialist protesters would be against intervention? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.232.40.90 (talk) 19:25, 25 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Yep. 66.183.11.233 (talk) 20:26, 25 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Overly long? edit

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This article reads more like a conjunction of current event news articles chosen with a specific purpose. The content is fine, but the article should perhaps be condensed?Editfromwithout (talk) 05:30, 15 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 14 external links on Protests against the 2011 military intervention in Libya. 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:

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) 17:08, 4 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Wiki Education assignment: Gender and Culture edit

Latest comment: 7 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

  This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 August 2023 and 18 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Nancy2291 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Nancy2291 (talk) 00:18, 2 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Protests_against_the_2011_military_intervention_in_Libya&oldid=1209888207"