Jump to content

Talk:USS Liberty incident

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Former featured article candidateUSS Liberty incident is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 21, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
On this day...Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on June 8, 2004, June 8, 2007, June 8, 2019, and June 8, 2023.

this needs to be edited by the survivors of the ship who heard President Johnson say “He didn’t care about some sailors.We have to save Israel. It was a deliberate attack on the ship and the President knew this! He wanted a war!listen to the actual survivors!

Survivors of The USS Liberty dispute Naval investigation

[edit]

BBC has produced an alternative story to what really happened in regards to the Israei attack on The USS Liberty. "USS Liberty:Dead in the Water" 2002 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjOH1XMAwZA Along with the BBC the vertrans of The USS Liberty has a website dedicated to the events that took place on that fateful day. http://www.gtr5.com/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevoconnor16 (talkcontribs)

[edit]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 October 2024

[edit]

Make the language of this article, at least the first few paragraphs where most viewers will skim, more neutral. "Israel apologized, saying they thought it was an Egyptian ship" > "Israel issued an apology, claiming they thought it was an Egyptian ship" etc. The facts are not clear cut enough to present the article the biased way it is being presented now. Jester6482 (talk) 12:08, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Wikipedia tries to avoid using the word "claim" because it creates an implication that we're taking a side in the dispute and risks violating the neutral point of view policy. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 19:09, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alright that is pretty selective reasoning, anybody can do "ctrl-F" on any wikipedia page and see that in other scenarios, there is no such concern to avoid using the word "claim" when it fits the reality of what happened.
From "The Raven" article: "Poe, however, claimed the poem was a combination of octameter acatalectic, heptameter catalectic, and tetrameter catalectic."
From "Ku Klux Klan" article: "A 2016 report by the Anti-Defamation League claims an estimate of just over 30 active Klan groups existing in the United States"
From "Soviet Union" article: "A 1986 study published in the American Journal of Public Health claimed that, citing World Bank data, the Soviet model provided a better quality of life and human development than market economies at the same level of economic development in most cases."
From "French Revolution" article: "Historian Reynald Secher claims that as many as 117,000 died between 1793 and 1796. Although those numbers have been challenged"
From "Henry Ford" article: "Ford "insisted that war was the product of greedy financiers who sought profit in human destruction". In 1939, he went so far as to claim that the torpedoing of U.S. merchant ships by German submarines was the result of conspiratorial activities undertaken by financier war-makers."
From "Smedley Butler" article: "Butler also claimed that the plotters of the alleged coup intended on using Butler, at the head of a group of veterans, to place the federal government under arrest."
So much for that excuse. Jester6482 (talk) 03:28, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
...which is why we reference our style guidelines rather than other articles. VQuakr (talk) 05:42, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Great defense for the inconsistency. Jester6482 (talk) 20:07, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is a volunteer-created project; it is not and never will be perfect. Therefore, pointing out examples from other articles that appear at odds with the style guide is a poor argument for not following the style guide. WP:OTHERSTUFF is a famously fallacious argument here, so yeah in general don't expect it to get much traction. VQuakr (talk) 22:51, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That appears to be about whether other articles exist at all. All I did was check whether or not articles typically followed the style guide you were enforcing. No point in referencing the style guide at all if we can just say "someone else wrote that article, so we don't have to enforce the style guide there" when it's convenient, and this is an edit request, not a deletion discussion right? But whatever you say I will leave this article alone. Jester6482 (talk) 23:26, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have to agree that the introduction of this article sounds really biased. "Israel apologized, saying they thought it was an Egyptian ship." The verb "said" implies that Israel is simply relaying what they, in fact, observed. But we don't really know what happened here! We don't know who is telling the truth here because there are conflicting accounts about what happened. So the verb "claim" keeps it neutral. Here is how I would write it: "Israel apologized, claiming that they mistook it for an Egyptian ship." The poster above provides ample evidence that the verb "to claim" is used throughout Wikipedia.Myatrrcc (talk) 06:21, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

edit request on 13 December 2024

[edit]

Please at least include a link to usslibertyveterans.org 87.62.101.92 (talk) 20:20, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done for now: would like some evidence of notability, otherwise we're just promoting a specific organization. Note that USS Liberty Veterans Association was deleted in 2019 Cannolis (talk) 07:18, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Correct the title of Yitzhak Rabin

[edit]

Yitzhak Rabin was the chief of staff of the IDF, not the IAF Guyru (talk) 19:31, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]