Talk:Mahmoud Jibril

Education at Pitt

The records at the University of Pittsburgh indicated that a Ali Fadil Jibril received a Masters in Education at Pitt in 1980. This is confirmed in both alumni records and commencement publications. Did Mahmood Jibril change his name or use as a different one? Information on the Libyan Republic website indicated that he obtained a Master's in masters’ degree in Political Science, which seems to be incorrect. It also indicates he received his doctorate from Pitt, but he apparently did not according to Pitt's records. Any help on this clarification would be helpful. CrazyPaco (talk) 00:49, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

You have the wrong person. See this at the U of Pittsburgh website: MAHMOUD GEBRIL I ELWARFALLY, B.S., Cairo University, 1975. Major: Political Science.
He's listed under August 1981. Flatterworld (talk) 19:18, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Ah, name change, and I just saw that in an article today in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review and returned to clear that up. Thank you for noting that. BTW, Pitt's official records (open only to alumni) officially have him listed as having a Master's in Arts in Political Science in 1980 and a PhD in Political Science in 1985. CrazyPaco (talk) 17:30, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Not a prime minister

Mahmoud Jibril is not a prime minister, although he is refereed to as such in some media reporting and elsewhere. I think that the best source of information about the National Transitional Council is their own website [1] first and foremost and after that the most recent reputable sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Albert humbert (talk • contribs) 14:24, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, my edit was promptly reverted by User:Kintetsubuffalo. I find this unhelpful. I will correct "the Interim Prime Minister of the Libyan Republic" to "the Chairman & Head of International Affairs of the Executive Board of the Lybian National Transitional Council". This is the information on their own website! Also, please see this Statement by Commissioner Štefan Füle following his meeting with Dr Mahmoud Jibril, Chairman of the Executive Board of the Libyan Transitional National Council albert_humbert 14:44, 25 July 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Albert humbert (talk • contribs)

Dr. Jibril is not a head of the government of Libyan Republic - the existence of that entity is questionable. So I believe the infobox information and references should be changed. albert_humbert 15:43, 25 July 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Albert humbert (talk • contribs)

You don't have consensus to make that change, and you should not delete references. Rolling back to previous version. -Kudzu1 (talk) 23:10, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't need you permission for every single change, that is not how Wikipedia works. I have opened a discussion here and provided evidence and arguments. So you should have argued your point here first if you think the change I made is wrong, not simply reverted all the contribution I made to the article! You seem to have completely ignored all the points and evidence I gave above and are basing your claim on a single news item in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. It is now obvious (judging from your other comments and arguments regarding Libya) that you are pushing some sort of political agenda and your own point of view. You have invented a country named 'Libyan Republic' and than you have proceeded to give that country a government, a prime minister etc. The article as it stands now is incorrect so please undo your action and let's see how can we make the page better. albert humbert (talk) 01:37, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

I looked at the article once again and checked the Wikipedia policies. I'm now undoing your rollback as it was unwarranted. If you want to say that some people refereed to Dr. Jibril as a 'prime minister' please do go ahead and let's see whether that will improve the article. But Dr. Jibril is NOT a prime minister of the NTC or some country you have invented. albert humbert (talk) 01:59, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Dear Kudzu1, please read this [Wikipedia:Rollback] and this [Wikipedia:TW] before you use the rollback feature again! The fact that you clearly violated Wikipedia behavioral guideline only goes to show that you are compensating your lack of argument with violence! albert humbert (talk) 02:13, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

DO NOT remove referenced material. You have no right to delete verifiable information from an article just because you don't like it. -Kudzu1 (talk) 02:39, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Also, I notice I'm not the first editor to undo your changes here. You don't have consensus to delete this information, nor WP:RS supporting your position, and I believe Wikipedia policy on reverts and rollbacks justifies Kintetsubuffalo and me on this. I did not "invent" any country - you can even check the list of references at the bottom of the page for proof of that (hint: there's an official NTC website with "Libyan Republic" in the title) - nor did I "invent" the title attributed to Jibril by, among others, a United States congressman in an official letter. Please get your facts straight - and start by not deleting them from an article on this user-generated encyclopedia. Regards. -Kudzu1 (talk) 02:47, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

This page may be useful to enhancing your understanding of how editing on Wikipedia works. -Kudzu1 (talk) 02:54, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

You have used rollback tool against Wikipedia policy which clearly states: Use of standard rollback for any other purposes – such as reverting good-faith changes which you happen to disagree with – is likely to be considered misuse of the tool. When in doubt, use another method of reversion and supply an edit summary to explain your reasoning.' I would like to let you know that I am considering reporting your disruptive behaviour.

BTW you have removed the reference I provided and that reference is the official NTC website which is the verifiable information I use. The NTC is not a government (they say this themselves) and, according to the official NTC website Dr. Jibril is not a prime minister. I will edit to this effect. A letter and a news item are not an argument against 99% of other sources and references. Sorry but you are simply wrong and are using rollbacks to compensate for the lack of argument. albert humbert (talk) 03:37, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

And I consider said rollback in compliance with the proviso that it can be used to revert good-faith edits by misguided editors who haven't obtained consensus, especially considering you ignored another user's revert and went right ahead with your changes. As for the deleted reference, I'm sorry for removing that and I agree it should be returned to the intro. Fact of the matter is that several reliable sources call Jibril the prime minister, and the fact that he's been referred to by media and foreign officials as both seemingly interchangeably should be noted in the article. -Kudzu1 (talk) 04:04, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Dragging another editor into this only shows that you are on thin ice. I've no idea why Kintetsubuffalo reverted my edits (he certanly didn't offer any explanation and he should have), but - as you can see - I did not simply revert his action but instead I rewrote my edits, included references etc. In that sense I see Kintetsubuffalo's revert as useful since it made my contribution better.

You, on the other hand, decided to ignore that I have opened a discussion on the subject here and went and rolled back 5 edits of mine! I see that as ignorant behaviour and certainly not an action of someone who wants to reach consensus, although you use that term a lot. And after I elaborated my arguments once more you reverted my edits again! Silly waste of everyone's energy and time.

A prime minister is a governmental position. One does not become a prime minister because someone calls them as such but by holding the office of the prime minister. The fact that some congressman or journalist referred to Dr. Jibril as 'prime minister' does not make him one. He needs to be appointed as one. Appointed! Now if you can provide evidence to that effect or not? albert humbert (talk) 04:25, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

You may have elaborated your edits, but I still don't agree with them and you still don't have consensus to delete that information. Jibril was appointed as prime minister per [2] which is a reference included in the article proper. I have no objection to noting that he is more frequently referred to as simply "interim head of government" or "leader of the Executive Board", or that "Interim Prime Minister" and "Chairman of the Executive Board" may be interchangeable titles, but I definitely think he's been referred to as the interim PM enough times by WP:RS that this information bears including in the article. -Kudzu1 (talk) 04:33, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

You obviously like to use word consensus a lot, yet you fail to understand what consensus is. You engaged in edit warring and used rollback rather than arguments. That is really sad.

The prime ministers are not appointed by news articles or private letters - they are appointed by a due process of which there is no evidence. Whether someone is a prime minister is not matter of opinion but facts. He is not a prime minister, your evidence is lacking and you are doing readers disservice by presenting false information. He is the Chairman & Head of International Affairs of The NTC Executive Board, the information which I contributed and you erased, information taken from the NTC official website - the fact I mentioned numerous times yet you conveniently never addressed.

I'am kindly asking you once again to correct the erroneous information. And if you really wanted to be helpful to the cause, you would have updated the outdated links. I would do it myself but you seem to be engaged in reverting my contribution. albert humbert (talk) 05:09, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Reference is needed to support the claim that Dr. Jibril was appointed as a prime minister on 23 March 2011. So I will include a tag. albert humbert (talk) 05:17, 28 July 2011 (UTC)