This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
2005 Sharm El Sheikh bombings article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I wonder why there hasn't been much reporting of this on the cable news networks yet. Compared to the London bombings, this is already quite large.
Oh, forgot to say -- that was me with the opening comment. Anyway, it *is* a shame that this is probably going to get less coverage due to how it recently happened in London, but I can't help feeling that it's also going to get less coverage since Egypt seems "farther away" (whether geographically or ideologically, from US-mainstream perspective) than London did. I don't know. It seems quite likely that the number of casualties in this one will be twice as much as those in the UK, even though it's still less as it stands than the number of Iraqi civillians who died in a single truck bomb last week. Of course, that received almost *zero* coverage in our media. The whole thing's a shame, but the selectivity of these so-called "news" networks is even worse. I hear about Brad Pitt more these days than I do about Baghdad. LokiCT 12:18, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
The New York Times coverage today demonstrated the same systemic bias: this incident got one column on the front page and a couple of inches after the jump, while events in London received most of the front page (including four color photos) and at least a full page inside. Something about this ought to go in the article. — Charles P. (Mirv) 14:41, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
Sorry, just wanted to say that. -- Kizor 08:31, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
On what basis would anyone make the name of the article less specific? The emerging Wikipedia standard is to use the full date, localized for the format preferred where the attacks took place. Thus, September 11, 2001 attacks and 7 July 2005 London bombings. Now, I made a change, but then I responsibly went around fixing all the redirects I could. Now it's been changed again, and people are not only changing the name for unknown, and probably not very good, reasons, they're not cleaning up after themselves. This kind of help, we don't need. -- Dhartung | Talk 15:22, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
I originally removed the map of Egypt because I felt a map that didn't spêcifically show the location of Sharm el-Sheikh didn't add much to the article. Circeus 16:29, July 23, 2005 (UTC)
Maybe the title of the article should be changed to exact date, not simply the year. and, maybe I am wrong, but wouldnt it be better to name the title "terrorist bombings" or something else rather than "attacks"? because it is not exactly clear who whom attacked except that it was terrorists and civilians.
I notice this article is in Category: Suicide bombing ... should there be a Category:Car bombing? Looks like the 2002 Bali bombing had a lot in common with this incident, a car bomb aimed at a tourist place. AlMac| (talk) 00:00, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
Template:Campaignbox al-Qaeda attacks has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. -- Aude ( talk) 16:11, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
The 2005 Sharm el-Sheikh attacks were obvious Mossad attacks according to independent sources. The trucks had numberplates / identification needed for Israeli vehicles to cross the border FROM Israel to Egypt. These had been forgot to be removed by the perpetrators. source: Ian Crane , http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7193024010983572797# This could be verified by egyptian Newspapers. Only UK and US Newspapers reported the incident as "Al Qaida" attacks. The attacks were identified as Israeli revenge for the Egyptian government signing deals with Gaza to extract natural gas, from what would be Gaza terretory if Gaza and Palestine were not occupied, according to sources.
It appears that Gamal Mubarak motivation for the attacks was damaging the property owned by Hussein Salem because Salem had reduced Mubarak's commission for the Israeli gas deal from 10% to 5%. And I'm sure he didn't mind drumming up more anti-terrorism money form the Americans and persecuting the Bedouins too. Israeli was not involved in the attacks, only Egyptian state security. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.204.158.146 ( talk) 20:45, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 02:41, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 02:41, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 02:41, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
I got a virus warning on source 10, Aljarida. Alexmcfire ( talk) 09:39, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on 2005 Sharm el-Sheikh bombings. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:50, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
2005 Sharm El Sheikh bombings article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I wonder why there hasn't been much reporting of this on the cable news networks yet. Compared to the London bombings, this is already quite large.
Oh, forgot to say -- that was me with the opening comment. Anyway, it *is* a shame that this is probably going to get less coverage due to how it recently happened in London, but I can't help feeling that it's also going to get less coverage since Egypt seems "farther away" (whether geographically or ideologically, from US-mainstream perspective) than London did. I don't know. It seems quite likely that the number of casualties in this one will be twice as much as those in the UK, even though it's still less as it stands than the number of Iraqi civillians who died in a single truck bomb last week. Of course, that received almost *zero* coverage in our media. The whole thing's a shame, but the selectivity of these so-called "news" networks is even worse. I hear about Brad Pitt more these days than I do about Baghdad. LokiCT 12:18, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
The New York Times coverage today demonstrated the same systemic bias: this incident got one column on the front page and a couple of inches after the jump, while events in London received most of the front page (including four color photos) and at least a full page inside. Something about this ought to go in the article. — Charles P. (Mirv) 14:41, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
Sorry, just wanted to say that. -- Kizor 08:31, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
On what basis would anyone make the name of the article less specific? The emerging Wikipedia standard is to use the full date, localized for the format preferred where the attacks took place. Thus, September 11, 2001 attacks and 7 July 2005 London bombings. Now, I made a change, but then I responsibly went around fixing all the redirects I could. Now it's been changed again, and people are not only changing the name for unknown, and probably not very good, reasons, they're not cleaning up after themselves. This kind of help, we don't need. -- Dhartung | Talk 15:22, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
I originally removed the map of Egypt because I felt a map that didn't spêcifically show the location of Sharm el-Sheikh didn't add much to the article. Circeus 16:29, July 23, 2005 (UTC)
Maybe the title of the article should be changed to exact date, not simply the year. and, maybe I am wrong, but wouldnt it be better to name the title "terrorist bombings" or something else rather than "attacks"? because it is not exactly clear who whom attacked except that it was terrorists and civilians.
I notice this article is in Category: Suicide bombing ... should there be a Category:Car bombing? Looks like the 2002 Bali bombing had a lot in common with this incident, a car bomb aimed at a tourist place. AlMac| (talk) 00:00, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
Template:Campaignbox al-Qaeda attacks has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. -- Aude ( talk) 16:11, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
The 2005 Sharm el-Sheikh attacks were obvious Mossad attacks according to independent sources. The trucks had numberplates / identification needed for Israeli vehicles to cross the border FROM Israel to Egypt. These had been forgot to be removed by the perpetrators. source: Ian Crane , http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7193024010983572797# This could be verified by egyptian Newspapers. Only UK and US Newspapers reported the incident as "Al Qaida" attacks. The attacks were identified as Israeli revenge for the Egyptian government signing deals with Gaza to extract natural gas, from what would be Gaza terretory if Gaza and Palestine were not occupied, according to sources.
It appears that Gamal Mubarak motivation for the attacks was damaging the property owned by Hussein Salem because Salem had reduced Mubarak's commission for the Israeli gas deal from 10% to 5%. And I'm sure he didn't mind drumming up more anti-terrorism money form the Americans and persecuting the Bedouins too. Israeli was not involved in the attacks, only Egyptian state security. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.204.158.146 ( talk) 20:45, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 02:41, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 02:41, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 02:41, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
I got a virus warning on source 10, Aljarida. Alexmcfire ( talk) 09:39, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on 2005 Sharm el-Sheikh bombings. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:50, 18 September 2016 (UTC)