Talk:Battle of Brega–Ajdabiya road

Africa: Libya Start‑class

	Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	Libya portal This article is supported by WikiProject Libya.

Military history: African / Middle East Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

Associated task forces:
/
	African military history task force
	Middle Eastern military history task force

Politics Unassessed

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Destroyed Helicopters

This should be cleaned up. The Reports are confusing and contradicting. Only McClatchy states that a helicopter was shot down on Saturday. The Libyan government claims that two Chinook helicopters were destroyed on Sunday, but they dont claim that a Hind was destroyed. Is there any other Source that reports a Hind (or any other heli) was downed on Saturday? 62.178.177.37 (talk) 18:46, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing confusing or contradicting. Everything is properly sourced.
Source 6 - confirmed a Hind was spotted over Ajdabiya Saturday coming from Benghazi, only helicopter seen over Ajdabiya
Source 7 - confirmed by the rebels themselves they had a helicopter shot down on Saturday, only Hind seen during the day, so no confusion
Source 30 - confirmed by the rebels themselves they sent another two helicopters from Tobruk in the evening
Source 8 - claimed by government that they shot down two helicopters on Sunday, see source 30 (about two helicopters), again no confusion
The only attack helicopters the rebels have are Hinds, there are no other attack helicopters in the rebel arsenal. EkoGraf (talk) 19:45, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay: 1.) Shows a Hind over Ajdabiya on Saturday, thats right. The same source doesnt mention anything about the heli being destroyed. 2.) So, the rebels (primary source, dont forget that) are now credible? You said several times that we cannot trust the rebels. You're right about that. 3.) Thats right. 4.) Its a claim by the government (primary source), so scratch that. 62.178.177.37 (talk) 19:57, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I said the rebels cann't be trusted when claiming success for themselves or trying to downplay their losses, just like the government. However, this time they are admitting to have lost a helicopter. Isn't the logical thing to do in a propaganda war to deny you lost a helicopter, not confirm it? :) As far as for point 4, we noted that it is a government claim and not independently verified. EkoGraf (talk) 20:03, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the first source that shows the Hind, which you say doesn't confirm the shot down, is hours before the news of the downing of the heli. The source is from about the time the Hind was seen. Also, pointing out once again, the only attack helicopters the rebels have of being able to attack ground targets are three Hinds. That's it. EkoGraf (talk) 20:07, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds logical, but you're missing my point (again): Anything you wrote about the Hind is a conclusion, okay? You're citing two sources: Source 1 reports that a helicopter was downed; Source 2 shows a picture of a Hind over the city. I dont say, that you're writing something wrong, but its doesnt right either. My proposal: We write that it was "possibly" or "very likely" a Hind. Your last point is simply wrong: The Rebels have Mi-2s that can be used as gunships. 62.178.177.37 (talk) 20:22, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT: Note that the first source is a blog. Its constantly updated. Point proven again. 62.178.177.37 (talk) 21:22, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Added another source confirming that the helicopter was shot down. Confirmation from the rebels themselves again. And they said it was "Russian-made". Only "Russian-made" helicopter seen that day was the Hind. Point proven again. :) EkoGraf (talk) 04:52, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are not willing (or able) to understand my point: There is still no confirmation that a Hind was shot down. Mi-2s are "Russian-made" too. Your new Source just says that a helicopter was shot down. I NEVER said, that this was wrong. But still, there is no source speaking of or showing a destroyed Hind on Saturday. So, you're wrong again. In fact, nothing has changed on that topic since yesterday. So, please stop editing this page. We had a good solution yesterday... 62.178.177.37 (talk) 10:07, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT: Just that something sounds logical does not mean its sourced! Contact an admin if you dont believe me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.178.177.37 (talk) 10:17, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Only one helicopter seen, and it was the Hind. EkoGraf (talk) 14:22, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have to assume, that you know I'm right and you're just ignoring facts. I'm fed up on your stupid edits and you are clearly not willing to cooperate with others or pay attention to my words. Last change now, next time I have to report you to an admin. 62.178.177.37 (talk) 15:51, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT: I'll try it one last time: You can write that 2 chinooks were shot down, because even it is only a claim, it is explicitly stated, that helis of the Chinook type were shot down. No, absolutly no source reports or shows a downed Hind, so you cant write it, okay? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.178.177.37 (talk) 16:14, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quoting the source [1] Rebels said government forces shot down a Russian-made helicopter sent to the fight by revolutionaries only two days before. Rebels confirmed they sent one helicopter into battle and they lost it, and news reporters confirmed that they saw a Hind. Also, you clearly violated the civility rule by calling me stupid. For removal of sourced information, 6 cancelations of my edit and insulting a fellow editor you have been reported. EkoGraf (talk) 18:44, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, you still dont understand it. For the personal stuff, please refer to my talkpage. 62.178.177.37 (talk) 20:21, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ongoing

Just made an edit to the article and looked at history, seen I've joined in an edit war. Two things, firstly....that was the first edit I've ever made to this article (or any of the 'battle' articles I think), secondly....stop the edit war. In a dispute like this, you go with the sources....all sources have this as an ongoing conflict, the ceasefire idea was thrown out. It is ridiculous that people have been arguing over this.92.21.195.147 (talk) 11:05, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I do not appreciate the use of obvious sockpuppets to revert my edits. 92.21.195.147 (talk) 17:17, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have certainly made your point by not signing in and accusing a long-term contributor on top of that. This article is about a specific BATTLE, it is NOT about the whole coastal campaign. Several sources have confirm the fighting is, for several days, sporadically continuing in the desert halfway to Brega. Thus the second battle for the town is over..Ihosama (talk) 22:37, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, not signing in to my account which I totally have...not like I've been an IP editor for ~5 years, and 'long term' as in one editor who only became active to edit islamic conflicts and another editor whose only contributions of any kind have been to join in with a vote with the first editor and join in with an edit war with the first editor, signing up just after the first editor was warned about 3RR in his frequent edit wars. It is a ridiculously obvious sock, you should look into such things before commenting rather than making a fool of yourself by assuming the username is innocent and the IP is troll. 92.21.195.147 (talk) 09:40, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Guys, stop fighting, assume good faith and talk about the article, stop making personal attacks on each other.

Frontline

On a more constructive issue...the rebels say the fighting is 40km east of brega....isn't that closer to ajdab than brega? They want a positive spin ofc, but point being....people've been putting notes saying this or that hasn't been confirmed, neither Gad or rebels are reliable....we could probably do with a coeopnsistent ad hoc policy towards either always putting such a note for non 3rd party claims, or always just leaving it as 'Gadd/rebels said "blah"'

Just seen on the timeline rebels saying the position is '40km west of Ajdab', so probably looking at rebel checkpoint at the 3-roads t-junction thing half way between. 92.21.195.147 (talk) 10:19, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]