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
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
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
Probably yes, however the current consensus in naming the Libyan campaign articles was (so far) on "battle of City" nomenclature. Essentially ALL the other battles were just a bunch of mostly independent skirmishes ... I would prefer to preserve the current consensus and leave the merger-rearrangement for the future when it is more clear what/how/when happened.
Ihosama (
talk) 17:37, 29 March 2011 (UTC)reply
The difference I think was that the other skirmishes were very clearly around a single city, or relatively so at least, whereas in this one, they're spread out across two cities that have already had battles described and a few other towns as well. My worry would be that other articles could be started on the events in each individual city here despite it being a single 'action' per se. These skirmishes, this action, are all happening in the
Sirte District, so maybe in this case because of the geographic spread it might be viable to rename it to
Battle of Sirte District?
140.247.146.102 (
talk) 18:19, 29 March 2011 (UTC)reply
Not really. As far as the eastern fighting goes (except Ajdabiya and Benghazi) there was not a single major "fighting for/around some town". This is a mostly uninhabited desert terrain so all fighting was very fluid from the beginning. If anything, I would call it: "Libyan coastal campaign" with only well-documented battles (now only Ras Lanuf #1, Ajdabiya and Benghazi) getting separate articles. But that would contradict 99% of the current media coverage making the prudence pointless...
I split the original "Battle of Bin Jawad" article according to previously used technique to avoid persistent vandalism and mix-ups. However, if you feel up to is making a useful general article about the campaign, feel free. Just be warned that you would not be able to use any pre-existing template as a base and will eventually end up with a summary pointing to individual battles and already included in the Timeline article.
Ihosama (
talk) 20:32, 29 March 2011 (UTC)reply
Pro-Gadhafi victory?
The fighting isn't over. Calling this a Pro-Gadhafi victory now would be like calling the Battle of the Bulge an Axis victory halfway through the fighting. This could end either way; the late March offensive really only ends if the rebels lose all of their gains. --
Delta1989 (
talk/
contributions) 23:24, 30 March 2011 (UTC)reply
They lost them, as Ajdabiya itself wasn't controlled by Libyan army before the retreat.
95.32.61.182 (
talk) 11:58, 31 March 2011 (UTC)reply
The rebels have lost all of the territory gained during the first two days. They started out from Ajdabiya, and now they are back at Ajdabiya.
EkoGraf (
talk) 16:45, 31 March 2011 (UTC)reply
Breaga nearly falls, but the rebels hang on 13.49, April 1
Brega IS NOT (unfortunately )in rebels hands as for today, but fights are ongoing, please update the color on the map.
User:MaXiMiLiAnO 08:07, 1 April 2011 (UTC)reply
Brega has just come back again under rebels' hands.
180.183.48.198 (
talk) 12:34, 1 April 2011 (UTC)reply
I would recommend that 3rd Brega and 2nd Ajdabiya be rolled into this article, with a possible name change of this to reflect that it is a single battle. In order for it to be a "campaign" there must be numerous engagement unrelated to each other to be in accordance with proper military and historical terminology. All of the fighting has been related directly for control of the highway between Sirt and Ajdabiya. This is a single engagement, not a disparate amount of them. If we keep writing a new page for every single fight that pops up along this road, Wikipedia is going to be spammed with constant new articles that will make it increasingly difficult to access the information. This is mechanized warfare people, every town and village between Sirt and Benghazi is going to be contested, often at the same time.
ArcherMan86 (
talk) 17:50, 10 April 2011 (UTC)reply
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
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
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
Probably yes, however the current consensus in naming the Libyan campaign articles was (so far) on "battle of City" nomenclature. Essentially ALL the other battles were just a bunch of mostly independent skirmishes ... I would prefer to preserve the current consensus and leave the merger-rearrangement for the future when it is more clear what/how/when happened.
Ihosama (
talk) 17:37, 29 March 2011 (UTC)reply
The difference I think was that the other skirmishes were very clearly around a single city, or relatively so at least, whereas in this one, they're spread out across two cities that have already had battles described and a few other towns as well. My worry would be that other articles could be started on the events in each individual city here despite it being a single 'action' per se. These skirmishes, this action, are all happening in the
Sirte District, so maybe in this case because of the geographic spread it might be viable to rename it to
Battle of Sirte District?
140.247.146.102 (
talk) 18:19, 29 March 2011 (UTC)reply
Not really. As far as the eastern fighting goes (except Ajdabiya and Benghazi) there was not a single major "fighting for/around some town". This is a mostly uninhabited desert terrain so all fighting was very fluid from the beginning. If anything, I would call it: "Libyan coastal campaign" with only well-documented battles (now only Ras Lanuf #1, Ajdabiya and Benghazi) getting separate articles. But that would contradict 99% of the current media coverage making the prudence pointless...
I split the original "Battle of Bin Jawad" article according to previously used technique to avoid persistent vandalism and mix-ups. However, if you feel up to is making a useful general article about the campaign, feel free. Just be warned that you would not be able to use any pre-existing template as a base and will eventually end up with a summary pointing to individual battles and already included in the Timeline article.
Ihosama (
talk) 20:32, 29 March 2011 (UTC)reply
Pro-Gadhafi victory?
The fighting isn't over. Calling this a Pro-Gadhafi victory now would be like calling the Battle of the Bulge an Axis victory halfway through the fighting. This could end either way; the late March offensive really only ends if the rebels lose all of their gains. --
Delta1989 (
talk/
contributions) 23:24, 30 March 2011 (UTC)reply
They lost them, as Ajdabiya itself wasn't controlled by Libyan army before the retreat.
95.32.61.182 (
talk) 11:58, 31 March 2011 (UTC)reply
The rebels have lost all of the territory gained during the first two days. They started out from Ajdabiya, and now they are back at Ajdabiya.
EkoGraf (
talk) 16:45, 31 March 2011 (UTC)reply
Breaga nearly falls, but the rebels hang on 13.49, April 1
Brega IS NOT (unfortunately )in rebels hands as for today, but fights are ongoing, please update the color on the map.
User:MaXiMiLiAnO 08:07, 1 April 2011 (UTC)reply
Brega has just come back again under rebels' hands.
180.183.48.198 (
talk) 12:34, 1 April 2011 (UTC)reply
I would recommend that 3rd Brega and 2nd Ajdabiya be rolled into this article, with a possible name change of this to reflect that it is a single battle. In order for it to be a "campaign" there must be numerous engagement unrelated to each other to be in accordance with proper military and historical terminology. All of the fighting has been related directly for control of the highway between Sirt and Ajdabiya. This is a single engagement, not a disparate amount of them. If we keep writing a new page for every single fight that pops up along this road, Wikipedia is going to be spammed with constant new articles that will make it increasingly difficult to access the information. This is mechanized warfare people, every town and village between Sirt and Benghazi is going to be contested, often at the same time.
ArcherMan86 (
talk) 17:50, 10 April 2011 (UTC)reply