Talk:First Battle of Benghazi

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

Rename[edit]

Battle for Benghazi → Battle of Benghazi — The current title is fairly POV and goes against the normal convention of battle articles. Guerillero | My Talk 20:32, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I'm all for it, I created the article initialy named as Battle of Benghazi, however another user moved it to Battle for Benghazi. I didn't mind because I didn't want to argue, however as far as I know when battles are named they are named Battle of...etc..EkoGraf (talk) 22:35, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, article should be moved. I don't think this is controversial in any way and the EkoGraf, the one who started the article, supports the move. That being said, it should be moved immediately. --Al Ameer son (talk) 04:30, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Done. —Nightstallion 16:41, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Second Battle of Benghazi[edit]

I think instead of having the 'second phase' here on this article, it should be a separate one, muc as with the first and second battles of Brega — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swalgal (talk • contribs) 09:41, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support I support this, if this event comes, but by all accounts it will in the next two days or three days. Since, this article right here is about a battle that is separate from the battle that everyone is predicting will happen.EkoGraf (talk) 03:11, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support It's been a few weeks since the first round of fighting in the city, and both battles are pretty much separate events within the general revolution. Both will be significant in their own right for the Libyan Uprising, so two separate articles will make sense.Dtnoip28 (talk) 05:54, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The only information we have regarding a so called second battle is something regarding a siege from a Greek Warship (perhaps this was not meant to be written this way in the article) and a few shells being fired. There is no citation. One sentence that is uncited hardly constitutes an article, and a few shells hardly constitutes a second-phase, let alone a battle. Perhaps discussion of a second phase or a battle should be curtailed or ceased until a second battle actually happens. It is an opinion that it will happen, and while I do hold that opinion, I do not know if it will happen, and until it does, we should not be making predictions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.106.32.150 (talk) 08:52, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are reports of jets bombing Benghazi airport and some houses,and others reports of gaddafi jets being shoot down too. i humbly support this claim, despite i dont have a wikipedia account. See http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/03/2011317645549498.html. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.118.9.11 (talk) 16:32, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rename 2[edit]

The title should by Liberation of Cyrenaica (2011) or 2011 Cyrenaica uprising because it covers several cities--93.137.23.194 (talk) 15:09, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Has anyone in the media used this name? --Guerillero | My Talk 16:51, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
["The rebellion began in Cyrenaica,..." http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-02-25/libya-s-eastern-rebels-long-time-qaddafi-foes-driving-country-s-revolt.html ]--78.3.216.116 (talk) 13:38, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Nobody has used the name Liberation of Cyrenaica or Cyrenaica uprising, most media called it the Battle for Benghazi, Battle of Benghazi, Struglle for Benghazi or something like that. But, to stay in line with Wikipedia's practice on battle names, since this was a military battle in the second part of the event (protestors used tanks and guns in the last 48 hours of the fight), it has been named Battle of Benghazi.EkoGraf (talk) 03:10, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

no media outlet is caliing the simultaneous events in Bengazi, Tobruk and Derna February 17 as the battle of Benghazi--78.3.216.116 (talk) 13:35, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tobruk isn't mentioned here, Derna and Al Baida are. They are connected since all of the fighting over those three days were fought exclusivly in those three cities. Rebels reinforcements with weapons seized in Baida and Derna were sent to Benghazi for the final push into the Gaddafi compound. In any case this was already discussed, just check the earlier part of this discussion page. Also, no media called it the Cyrenaica uprising. Except a few reports they barely mentioned the term Cyrenaica (eastern Libya) during that time. EkoGraf (talk) 16:28, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Derna is 250km away from Benghazi, do you understand that? It's not a suburb of Benghazi. Thus it cannot be a battle just in Benghazi. The earlier disc. doesn't address that--78.3.216.116 (talk) 17:30, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In any case, while there are a few reports calling the fighting in Benghazi the Battle for Benghazi, there is not one report calling it the Cyrenaica uprising. EkoGraf (talk) 18:22, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
there are no reports calling the simultaneous fighting in Derna, Benghazi and Al Beida as the Battle of Benghazi, too idiot--78.3.216.0 (talk) 20:58, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A few things. (1) we only can publish what other sources are saying and can not publish original thought. Unless there is a preponderance of sources calling this the Liberation of Cyrenaica there is no way that this can ever be named that under the current wikipedia guidelines. (2) The term liberation is a weasel word and can not be used because it violates our neutral point of view. (3) Can you please be civil. personal attacks are a block-able offense. --Guerillero | My Talk 22:45, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
User Guerillero has said what I was going to say. While the term Battle of Benghazi has been used in the media, the term Cyrenaica uprising or liberation has not and constitutes original research or a non-neutral POV. Also, you calling me an idiot is a serious violation of the Wikipedia rule on being civil and could be grounds for being reported and blocked when also looking at the possible OR and POV violations. EkoGraf (talk) 00:21, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
again on deaf ears: there are no reports calling the simultaneous fighting in Derna, Benghazi and Al Beida as the Battle of Benghazi, too--93.137.21.190 (talk) 14:36, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And yet again with the insults and violation of the civility rule. No respect. To quote Bruce Willis. :) EkoGraf (talk) 20:33, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The title should be renamed to something as there are no reports calling the simultaneous early fighting in Derna, Benghazi and Al Beida as the Battle of Benghazi--78.3.217.86 (talk) 17:02, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ok[edit]

City of Al Bayda, not a suburb of Benghazi, in order to be part of a battle of Benghazi. City of Al Bayda, a distance of 200 km from Benghazi. You must enter a battle of Al Bayda and not alone in the battle of Benghazi, which I did and was removed after that ..--ليبي صح (talk) 21:44, 18 April 2011 (UTC) This page does not contain a single city, but contains many cities, Benghazi, Al Bayda,Derna . Name is supposed to be (the battle of Cyrenaica)--ليبي صح (talk) 22:04, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody calling it the battle of Cyrenaica. Most are calling it the Battle for Benghazi or Battle of Benghazi. EkoGraf (talk) 02:59, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

what, the events in Tobruk too?

There are many calls as the Battle of Bayda. Please separate the Bayda from the battle of the Battle of Benghazi, there are many events occurred in Bayda, such as the military battalion and the airport. Bayda City is not a suburb of Benghazi, the city of Benghazi for Bayda lies 200 kilometers and a population of 250 thousand. Here are many of those who call the battle of Bayda, such as [[1]] [[2]] and more ....--ليبي صح (talk) 12:26, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Eko Graf is an idiot. It's because of people like him that wikipedia sucks and this paradox is a good example.--93.137.178.88 (talk) 16:09, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on First Battle of Benghazi. 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) 10:22, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:First_Battle_of_Benghazi&oldid=1207233263"