![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | It is requested that an image or photograph of Saif al-Arab Gaddafi be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
So it wouldn't become an edit war: no source, not a defector, even if it makes sense. Zakhalesh ( talk) 14:51, 1 April 2011 (UTC) EDIT: Whoops. I see there were sources. Zakhalesh ( talk) 14:55, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
The BBC claims Saif-al Arab was killed in a recent NATO strike. 81.97.4.35 ( talk) 23:12, 30 April 2011 (UTC) CNN reports that Saif al-Arab al-Gaddafi was killed during a NATO airstrike per Libyan government spokesman. 18:20, 30 April 2011 (CDT) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.64.200.150 ( talk)
Libyan propaganda? Do you watch Libyan state television? Do you read Libyan newspapers? Can you speak/read Arabic? We've all seen it? On what do you base any of this on? Fox news, wikipedia, BBC, Reuters - now this is spectacular propaganda my friend, propaganda that you fail to recognise in your own native language. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.159.128.127 ( talk) 11:48, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
sided with the protesters against dad = dad used the bombing as an excuse for infanticide?-- 70.162.171.210 ( talk) 04:29, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
The skepticism has no place at the top of the article. He is dead, it is reported by his family. When rebels report casualties in their side, they are taken to the word. This is not similar to Khamis because Khamis death was only an internet rumor without any basis and has been debunked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Geromasis ( talk • contribs) 09:48, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
I don't see any serious reason to doubt that he is dead. Even Gaddafi would hardly be stupid enough th run the risk that he might turn up alive some time soon. PatGallacher ( talk) 10:09, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
There won't be any risk if he goes into hiding. Tripoli is controlled by security forces. There is no risk of publicity. Considering the "house" was a building with almost no furniture, no wall paint or wall paper, and largely built of reinforced concrete and steel, I would have to say it was not a residential house. There has been no pictures of the body, and the names of the grandchildren were not released. This is a ruse, remember Musa Ibrahim is the same person who claims the entire rebellion was sparked by drugged nescafe. Zenithfel ( talk) 10:21, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
-Indeed... Gaddafi originally put his interior minister under house arrest with intention to kill him, a sacrifice made to keep any defections. That failed. In March they reported on "live TV" that Younis rejoined Gaddafi put video of him shaking hand with him, but of course we know that wasn't true. Some of the loyalist soldiers burn alive other soldiers who refuse to fire on civilians, another huge length to go to in order to prevent failure. Gaddafi's forces will go to any length to achieve anything, and we cannot be certain what is what, especially with any reports from Saif Gaddafi and Musa Ibrahim. The fact that Ban Ki Moon and the UN has declared that Gaddafi's government lost legitimacy means we shouldn't regard the Libyan government as a legitimate source of true information. Sopher99 ( talk) 13:47, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
A targeted airstrike resulting in death is a murder. 'Killed' implys that this was some sort of accident. No reason given for reverting my edits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.159.128.127 ( talk) 11:43, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
This report: http://www.neontommy.com/news/2011/05/gaddafis-youngest-son-killed-why-may-not-be-case points out that photos of Saif al-Arab's older brother Al-Saadi al-Gaddafi are being widely used in online sources with Saif al-Arab's name under them.
Here http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/04/30/saif-al-arab-son-of-gaddafi-believed-killed/ is a website apparently from US military veterans who claim that some of them had been in contact with Saif al-Arab in order to try negotiations with Hillary Clinton. This includes a photo claimed to be correct.
Here is a Thomson Reuters photo: http://www.daylife.com/photo/0aXi9yI2O32y0?__site=daylife&q=Tripoli%2C+Libya, and an Associated Press photo that's nearly the same.
The Veterans Today and Thomson Reuters/AP photos look consistent (my subjective impression) with each other as photos of the same guy without and with a beard, and inconsistent with the many photos of al-Saadi. IMHO Neon Tommy is right about the photo error.
Can we use any of this? Fair use of a photo under exceptional grounds is possible, but the exceptional grounds have to be justified (including no chance for getting a freely licensed photo). Boud ( talk) 21:59, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
That some opposition groups have cast doubts on the reported death is fair enough to note in the article, but not in the lead. This is not a news paper recording the latest stuff, it is a biography of Saif al-Arab al-Gaddafi, the lead records the most pertinent facts bout him. The fact that he's being reported dead is one of them. The fact that his opponents are casting doubt on the reliability of the Libyan government (and I note no neutral source or sovereign government is doing so) is not among the most notable facts about Saif al-Arab al-Gaddafi. "Reported" carries that inference that it is not confirmed, and that's enough for the lead. The fact that Zakhalesh is edit-waring to keep this in because "they tell lies" is not neutral editing.-- Scott Mac 10:11, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
It could be a bit contradictory that everybody is accepting the American claim that bin Laden is dead, even though they have no body to produce. I expect they are both dead, but beware of double standards. PatGallacher ( talk) 10:15, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
BBC news has shown film of his funeral, I doubt if this was an elaborate hoax. PatGallacher ( talk) 22:14, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Al-Mu'tasim-Billah al-Gaddafi which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RM bot 09:46, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
I don't think the personal box should mention an "Alma mater", since he is not known for any academic achievement, nor is there any indication that he ever got a university degree or visited any classes whatsoever. In fact his enrollment may have served as another justification for his residence permit, see (in German): http://www.focus.de/panorama/reportage/tyrannenssohn-in-muenchen-der-hochqualifizierte-gaddafi-jr-_aid_605739.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.74.135.60 ( talk) 07:29, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Saif al-Arab Gaddafi. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:12, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | It is requested that an image or photograph of Saif al-Arab Gaddafi be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
So it wouldn't become an edit war: no source, not a defector, even if it makes sense. Zakhalesh ( talk) 14:51, 1 April 2011 (UTC) EDIT: Whoops. I see there were sources. Zakhalesh ( talk) 14:55, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
The BBC claims Saif-al Arab was killed in a recent NATO strike. 81.97.4.35 ( talk) 23:12, 30 April 2011 (UTC) CNN reports that Saif al-Arab al-Gaddafi was killed during a NATO airstrike per Libyan government spokesman. 18:20, 30 April 2011 (CDT) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.64.200.150 ( talk)
Libyan propaganda? Do you watch Libyan state television? Do you read Libyan newspapers? Can you speak/read Arabic? We've all seen it? On what do you base any of this on? Fox news, wikipedia, BBC, Reuters - now this is spectacular propaganda my friend, propaganda that you fail to recognise in your own native language. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.159.128.127 ( talk) 11:48, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
sided with the protesters against dad = dad used the bombing as an excuse for infanticide?-- 70.162.171.210 ( talk) 04:29, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
The skepticism has no place at the top of the article. He is dead, it is reported by his family. When rebels report casualties in their side, they are taken to the word. This is not similar to Khamis because Khamis death was only an internet rumor without any basis and has been debunked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Geromasis ( talk • contribs) 09:48, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
I don't see any serious reason to doubt that he is dead. Even Gaddafi would hardly be stupid enough th run the risk that he might turn up alive some time soon. PatGallacher ( talk) 10:09, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
There won't be any risk if he goes into hiding. Tripoli is controlled by security forces. There is no risk of publicity. Considering the "house" was a building with almost no furniture, no wall paint or wall paper, and largely built of reinforced concrete and steel, I would have to say it was not a residential house. There has been no pictures of the body, and the names of the grandchildren were not released. This is a ruse, remember Musa Ibrahim is the same person who claims the entire rebellion was sparked by drugged nescafe. Zenithfel ( talk) 10:21, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
-Indeed... Gaddafi originally put his interior minister under house arrest with intention to kill him, a sacrifice made to keep any defections. That failed. In March they reported on "live TV" that Younis rejoined Gaddafi put video of him shaking hand with him, but of course we know that wasn't true. Some of the loyalist soldiers burn alive other soldiers who refuse to fire on civilians, another huge length to go to in order to prevent failure. Gaddafi's forces will go to any length to achieve anything, and we cannot be certain what is what, especially with any reports from Saif Gaddafi and Musa Ibrahim. The fact that Ban Ki Moon and the UN has declared that Gaddafi's government lost legitimacy means we shouldn't regard the Libyan government as a legitimate source of true information. Sopher99 ( talk) 13:47, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
A targeted airstrike resulting in death is a murder. 'Killed' implys that this was some sort of accident. No reason given for reverting my edits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.159.128.127 ( talk) 11:43, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
This report: http://www.neontommy.com/news/2011/05/gaddafis-youngest-son-killed-why-may-not-be-case points out that photos of Saif al-Arab's older brother Al-Saadi al-Gaddafi are being widely used in online sources with Saif al-Arab's name under them.
Here http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/04/30/saif-al-arab-son-of-gaddafi-believed-killed/ is a website apparently from US military veterans who claim that some of them had been in contact with Saif al-Arab in order to try negotiations with Hillary Clinton. This includes a photo claimed to be correct.
Here is a Thomson Reuters photo: http://www.daylife.com/photo/0aXi9yI2O32y0?__site=daylife&q=Tripoli%2C+Libya, and an Associated Press photo that's nearly the same.
The Veterans Today and Thomson Reuters/AP photos look consistent (my subjective impression) with each other as photos of the same guy without and with a beard, and inconsistent with the many photos of al-Saadi. IMHO Neon Tommy is right about the photo error.
Can we use any of this? Fair use of a photo under exceptional grounds is possible, but the exceptional grounds have to be justified (including no chance for getting a freely licensed photo). Boud ( talk) 21:59, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
That some opposition groups have cast doubts on the reported death is fair enough to note in the article, but not in the lead. This is not a news paper recording the latest stuff, it is a biography of Saif al-Arab al-Gaddafi, the lead records the most pertinent facts bout him. The fact that he's being reported dead is one of them. The fact that his opponents are casting doubt on the reliability of the Libyan government (and I note no neutral source or sovereign government is doing so) is not among the most notable facts about Saif al-Arab al-Gaddafi. "Reported" carries that inference that it is not confirmed, and that's enough for the lead. The fact that Zakhalesh is edit-waring to keep this in because "they tell lies" is not neutral editing.-- Scott Mac 10:11, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
It could be a bit contradictory that everybody is accepting the American claim that bin Laden is dead, even though they have no body to produce. I expect they are both dead, but beware of double standards. PatGallacher ( talk) 10:15, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
BBC news has shown film of his funeral, I doubt if this was an elaborate hoax. PatGallacher ( talk) 22:14, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Al-Mu'tasim-Billah al-Gaddafi which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RM bot 09:46, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
I don't think the personal box should mention an "Alma mater", since he is not known for any academic achievement, nor is there any indication that he ever got a university degree or visited any classes whatsoever. In fact his enrollment may have served as another justification for his residence permit, see (in German): http://www.focus.de/panorama/reportage/tyrannenssohn-in-muenchen-der-hochqualifizierte-gaddafi-jr-_aid_605739.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.74.135.60 ( talk) 07:29, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Saif al-Arab Gaddafi. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:12, 30 November 2017 (UTC)