This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
2011 Alexandria bombing 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 |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about 2011 Alexandria bombing. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about 2011 Alexandria bombing at the Reference desk. |
A news item involving 2011 Alexandria bombing was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 1 January 2011. |
It is requested that an image or photograph be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
Wikipedians in Egypt may be able to help! The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
To-do list for 2011 Alexandria bombing:
|
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on January 1, 2015, January 1, 2019, and January 1, 2021. |
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
the sentence "at least 23 people died in the attacks, all of them Coptic Christians" isn't accurate at all. Even the references to it, cite that some of them are Coptic Christans and some are Muslims. Would you correct this sentence, please? Besides, the first reference isn't authenticated at all. Regard 41.239.140.48 ( talk) 16:51, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
I don't understand why this is dubbed Alexandria Massacre wouldn't 2011 Alexandria car bombing be more in league with other article names involving suicide bombings? -- Kuzwa ( talk) 20:45, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
This is obviously an emotional issue for Coptic Christians in Egypt, so I would ask all editors to keep cool. I guess for now we can just keep the "massacre" article title rather than have an Edit war; the important thing is that there be just one article rather than the two separate articles there were a few minutes ago. I see a lot of well-intentioned stuff in this article (mainly the categories) that will nonetheless need to be removed by a dispassionate editor. Heroeswithmetaphors ( talk) 20:55, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
The top cleric in Alexandria, Archbishop Arweis -- who is he, and in what way is he the city's "top cleric"? 201.137.214.59 ( talk) 21:10, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
I am awaiting explanation regarding the removal of some categories from the article because I disagree with the removal of many of them. -- Coptic101 ( talk) 22:13, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
In the future, the following categories may be appropriate as well:
-- Khips ( talk) 02:38, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
I suggest something like:
Other things:
For example:
A bombing occurred shortly after midnight on 1 January 2011 in Alexandria, Egypt. An explosive device detonated outside the Al-Qiddissine church (Saint Mark and Saint Pope Peter Church aka The Saints Church) where Coptic Orthodox worshippers had gathered to celebrate Mass on New Year's Eve
The first sentence is redundant. I recommend something along the lines of..."The Al-Qiddissine bombing was a suicide attack in Alexandria on 1 January 2011 that killed 21 people and injured over 70. It was the deadliest attack on Coptic Christians since the 2009 shooting of seven Christians." Wikifan12345 ( talk) 23:29, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Specifying a descriptive (Al-Qiddissene) in the title (but not the body) would be unwise. The average person with modest geographic knowledge may know the name Alexandria (and form a quick mental picture of its location in Egypt). I doubt most Egyptians have heard of Al-Qiddissene. The second reason is that you have used the names of specific buildings in your 2 examples and by your logic this attack should be named by the proper name of the church and not its informal name. Babaneal ( talk) 18:07, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
What is this piece of crap: http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/12/two-missing-coptic-women-abused-by-priest-husbands-what-if-they-were-muslim/ - which is filled with unproven allegations - that two priest wives (because a priest's wife will obviously not be religiously influenced by her husband's Christian job) converted to Islam, that they were abused, that they wanted a divorce?
If it's going to be like that, then for wikipedia to remain unbiased, the other side of the story should be presented:
It's only fair, since the first link attempts to critique the second link. 98.176.12.43 ( talk) 00:46, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
Totally biased article with complete nonesense. Since when do Muslims even the extremest of them defy dead bodies?
No I guess being Muslim automatically makes you perfect and innocent from the possibility of such a crime. Give me a break from the politically correct crap. Your actions define you, not the religious ideas a person falsely states; don't give any generalizations that all people of a certain religious group are above any evil.
98.176.12.43 (
talk) 21:36, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
The article on Jihad Watch does not in anyway refute that which came from Loonwatch it just provides examples of horrible acts committed by Muslims. The article links to an internet newspaper ,so it is not in anyway bias. Also the what if they were Muslim series on the website is not meant to defame any religious group but simply to expose double standards used by those who bash Islam. -- User talk:Yster76) 17:13, 4 January 2011 (CCT)
The current title is very ambiguous and slightly biased. Many sources are already calling this a massacre:
Arabic sources are also calling it a mssacre:
Other less bloody attacks on the Coptic community have been already acknowledged as massacres including:
Also, the term "massacre" has been employed in other similar incidences such as:
For those reasons, I am proposing to move the name of the article to 2011 Alexandria massacre. -- Khips ( talk) 01:53, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
Going through the history of the page (quite confusing indeed), I see that a lot of well written statements were removed. Some of them have been already restored by User:Plot Spoiler. I will continue doing the same. If someone has a problem with that, please let me know. -- Khips ( talk) 01:57, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
<ref name="Reuters Alex bombing">
{{cite news
| last=
| first=
| url=
| title=
| publisher=
| date=
| accessdate=
}}
</ref>
... later <ref name="Reuters Alex bombing" />
User:Lihaas has recently performed a massive reversion on the article, deleting much of the work that has been done over the past few hours. I herein invite him/her to explain this massive removal of content. I also invite other users to contribute to this discussion. -- Khips ( talk) 03:07, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
I uploaded some of my personal photos of the attack. The page is protected though, so someone can add them on the article page if you want. Jimmy
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimmydunn2010 ( talk • contribs) 06:16, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
The article says 21 coptic christians when this number is the total deaths Christians and Muslims this is a reference from Masrawy news (in Arabic) with the known names of victims. http://www.masrawy.com/News/Egypt/Politics/2011/january/1/masrawy_alex.aspx -- Hexacoder ( talk) 11:27, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
>> Egypt arrests church blast suspects + the WP:EL needs to go.( Lihaas ( talk) 01:06, 3 January 2011 (UTC)).
I understand that you were very upset by the unacceptable bombings in your country. Indeed, the word "unacceptable" does not express the wrongness of taking human life. However, you need to realize that wikipedia is not a medium for condemnation. It is a medium for reporting factual information. I do not know whether the information you have written is true, and that is why I have deleted it. Yes, you DID cite it, to the source freecopts.net however this source does not meet Wikipedia's very high WP:RS standard. Furthermore, words such as "rounded up", and "massacered" express emotion as well as meaning. Your emotion as an editor is not supposed to show on wikipedia, so I strongly recomend you use more "bland" words... This is not merely a cultural taboo in expressing yourself. It is one of wikipedia's core principles WP:NPOV. Tim.thelion ( talk) 01:13, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
I've reverted the claim " "The scattered body parts were covered with newspapers until they were brought inside the church after some Muslims started stepping on them and chanting Jihadi chants." This is a very inflammatory claim. Please do not revert until the discussion at the RS noticeboard is concluded. Ericoides ( talk) 22:58, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
"separate condemnations came from the Eastern Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch and the Orient Ignatius IV Hazim"....the Patriarchate of Antioch is based in Damascus, Syria, not the Lebanon. Eugene-elgato ( talk) 15:40, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
What is Wikipedia's policy on including the names of the martyrs in the article? Anything against it? Because the list recently got published. -- Coptic101 ( talk) 06:01, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Just an added point, the Nanking massacre doesn't so much produce martyrs as does being killed by another for your belief. 128.54.29.73 ( talk) 20:02, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
This article uses
bare URLs in its references. Please use
proper citations containing each referenced work's title, author, date, and source, so that the article remains
verifiable in the future.
Several templates are available for formatting. |
I fixed most of them, but new bare URL refs keep popping up. Heroeswithmetaphors ( talk) 19:12, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
This usage of "shortly" is ambiguous as it also means "in a short while" refering to a point in the near future. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.151.101.250 ( talk) 20:30, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
-- Yster76 17:31
I noticed that in the main article the reaction of the Muslim Brotherhood was missing in the domestic reaction and think it should be included. --Yster76 17:29(CCT) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yster76 ( talk • contribs) 22:29, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Here is link http://www.ikhwanweb.com/article.php?id=27729 -- Yster76 17:38
I propose the page Mohammad Salim Al-Awa be merged into this one since it seems he is only famous for his comments regarding Kamilia Shehata, and his allegations of the Coptic church having weapons... Tim.thelion ( talk) 01:14, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
I agree. The Al-Awa page needs to be merged to this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Copticnews ( talk • contribs) 00:49, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
I think you have missunderstood the article Coptic101. The article clearly states that the list is of Coptic christians living abroad... Furthermore, the article does not say when the list was published. It states it was published BEFORE December 21... Tim.thelion ( talk) 04:08, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Egyptian and Lebanese newspapers are already calling the crime the Massacre of Alexandria:
-- Coptic101 ( talk) 05:04, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
lately this page is filled with vandalism edits, i think it should be locked down and will reccomend as such. 1 ip claimed "major copy edit" when all he did was revert everything without a reason.( Lihaas ( talk) 18:01, 5 January 2011 (UTC)).
User:Lihaas, what exactly is this edit [8]? Are you kidding? I am changing most of this edit back to the way the article was yesterday -- Coptic101 ( talk) 00:46, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
I received this message from User:Lihaas on my talk page:
i think you need work on your consensus.
Based on this message:
I am here asking all the users who helped write this page to comment on this. I am also addressing User:Lihaas when I say that I request that you apologize to me about your insults and your accusations. If you don't, I will report this incident to higher admin and ask for a reprimanding action. -- Coptic101 ( talk) 01:43, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Editors who engage in blanket reverts may eventually be sanctioned. Please break down your edits into reasonable chunks and be sure that what you are doing is either harmless or has WP:Consensus. Adding citations to reliable sources is usually harmless. If you make a change and it is reverted, don't make it again without discussing first on the talk page. Thank you, EdJohnston ( talk) 03:17, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Where is the evidence that Fouad Twal is an Israeli? -- Supreme Deliciousness ( talk) 00:44, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
At least 4 Coptic Orthodox churches in Sydney Australia had bomb threats made against them for the Christmas Eve service. According to a news report on the Channel 9 website there is an article in The Weekend Australian (7-8/1/2011 issue) there were threats made to 60 churches worldwide. As an attendee at the service at St Michael & Archangel Bishoi Church (Mt Druitt, Sydney, Australia)I can attest to the unprecedented police security that is mentioned in several online news articles. (As a wikipedia total novice I ask for the old hands to fix what needs to be fixed in what info I enclosed. I noticed that The Wikipedia entry for the bombing only mentioned Canada and the UK and failed to mention Australia. If anyone has further knowledge about the other churches that make up the 60 then that may also be useful to post). (A serious lapse in the Wikipedia entry is that it mentions that the security officials were withdrawn, yet also mentions that several police were at their post AND also that all the dead were Copts. Something is wrong with this as if several police remained it is highly unlikely in my personal experience in Egypt that these police were not mostly muslim). (A second serious lapse at the top of the wikipedia entry is that the (only)suspect is al qaeda Iraq. Surely the Salafist demonstration that is mentioned was carried out by Egyptians AND most importantly the diaspora (from my speaking to other Copts) has a strong belief that the Egyptian government at some level is involved as evidenced by the pulling back of security. I have heard unconfirmed rumours that threats had been made against this church prior to the attack (can anyone substantiate this?)So why was security pulled off and who authorised the security lapse? Babaneal ( talk) 17:47, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
The phrase : "At least 32 people died in the attacks, all of them Coptic Christians"
"At least 23 people died in the attacks, coptic christians and muslims as well"
Gassarian (
talk) 01:18, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
Considering that a number of the cited sources claim 23 dead then shouldn't that 32 figure be double checked? 121.210.131.200 ( talk) 11:45, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
"One hour before the bombing, the Egyptian security forces guarding the church withdrew, leaving only four policemen and one officer guarding the church." This section was removed because this claim is not supported by any credible source. As far as I know 'Copts United' and 'Free Copts' are not news agencies. The FOX video, just states that it was 'said' that the security withdrew shortly before the attack. This, at best, would be classified as hearsay. Both those sources report that 100 kg of explosives were used. 100 KG of explosive would leave a huge crater in the street. Official reports estimates that 10-15 kg of explosives were used. Now, to restore this section back, there has to be an objective credible news source to support that. Thank you. A elalaily ( talk) 18:44, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
The '10 shooting had some expansion on it. [15] At first I thought it was SYNTHy in a way that since it might be leading the reader to condone the shooting. I noticed that the aticle kind of has the tone of "well, the Copts deserve it". Then I second guessed that and thought it was SYNTHy since it might be attempting to lead the reader to believe that Muslim extremists are nuts since killing 7 people unrelated to the accused is hardly a healthy reaction to accusations that a guy who happens to adhere to one religion. But overall I don't know if it matters which one it is because leading the reader to draw a conclusion is bad and since the source used does not even mention this subject (unlike the source used to discuss the shooting as background) we really don't need it. Now f there is an article for that shooting it would be great to wikilink to. By the way, I am not saying that it was intentional one way or the other. Just how I believe it reads to a reader who is unfamiliar with the subject. Cptnono ( talk) 06:39, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
It is not going to stay in simply because you disagree, Al-Andalusi. That is not how BRD works ad since there is a policy based reason for removal you need to refute it. It has been spelled out to you twice why it is problematic. So address it, find another source, open an RfC or whatever but simply reverting without using this talk page is unacceptable. It was a concern when you firt included it and it is a concern now. Cptnono ( talk) 02:10, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
About your Third Opinion request: Your request has been removed from the Third Opinion project page since you also have a request pending at WP:NORN, which is a higher form of dispute resolution; if you get no response there, feel free to bring it back to Third Opinion. Best regards, TRANSPORTERMAN ( TALK) 15:37, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
There is some controversy about whether the bombing was a false flag operation instigated by the internal ministry in Egypt.
The main source of the allegations seems to be the arabic news organization al-arabyia, more specifically the article [16]. The allegations are also mentioned in the article on the protests 2011_Egyptian_protests.
Until the contoversy is resolved, one way or another, we should at least mention it in the section on Responsibility. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.188.191.38 ( talk) 20:24, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
The media at that time said that 3 of the people died were muslims. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahmedyasserhamdy ( talk • contribs) 02:34, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
I see that my additions of dates in the Coptic calendar were reverted, with the edit summary saying, simply, "non-standard". This is an article concerning a bombing of a Coptic Orthodox Church in Alexandria, so, in this context, of course it is standard to use the official calendar used by the Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria. Not only is the Coptic calendar still used by the Coptic Church, but numerous other people still use it to this day in Egypt, including farmers, whom find its structure useful for determining the timing of the annual harvest seasons. I see no reason not to use Coptic calendar dates, as well as Gregorian calendar dates, in this article. 68.225.173.217 ( talk) 23:40, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on 2011 Alexandria bombing. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:24, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
2011 Alexandria bombing 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 |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about 2011 Alexandria bombing. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about 2011 Alexandria bombing at the Reference desk. |
A news item involving 2011 Alexandria bombing was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 1 January 2011. |
It is requested that an image or photograph be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
Wikipedians in Egypt may be able to help! The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
To-do list for 2011 Alexandria bombing:
|
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on January 1, 2015, January 1, 2019, and January 1, 2021. |
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
the sentence "at least 23 people died in the attacks, all of them Coptic Christians" isn't accurate at all. Even the references to it, cite that some of them are Coptic Christans and some are Muslims. Would you correct this sentence, please? Besides, the first reference isn't authenticated at all. Regard 41.239.140.48 ( talk) 16:51, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
I don't understand why this is dubbed Alexandria Massacre wouldn't 2011 Alexandria car bombing be more in league with other article names involving suicide bombings? -- Kuzwa ( talk) 20:45, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
This is obviously an emotional issue for Coptic Christians in Egypt, so I would ask all editors to keep cool. I guess for now we can just keep the "massacre" article title rather than have an Edit war; the important thing is that there be just one article rather than the two separate articles there were a few minutes ago. I see a lot of well-intentioned stuff in this article (mainly the categories) that will nonetheless need to be removed by a dispassionate editor. Heroeswithmetaphors ( talk) 20:55, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
The top cleric in Alexandria, Archbishop Arweis -- who is he, and in what way is he the city's "top cleric"? 201.137.214.59 ( talk) 21:10, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
I am awaiting explanation regarding the removal of some categories from the article because I disagree with the removal of many of them. -- Coptic101 ( talk) 22:13, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
In the future, the following categories may be appropriate as well:
-- Khips ( talk) 02:38, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
I suggest something like:
Other things:
For example:
A bombing occurred shortly after midnight on 1 January 2011 in Alexandria, Egypt. An explosive device detonated outside the Al-Qiddissine church (Saint Mark and Saint Pope Peter Church aka The Saints Church) where Coptic Orthodox worshippers had gathered to celebrate Mass on New Year's Eve
The first sentence is redundant. I recommend something along the lines of..."The Al-Qiddissine bombing was a suicide attack in Alexandria on 1 January 2011 that killed 21 people and injured over 70. It was the deadliest attack on Coptic Christians since the 2009 shooting of seven Christians." Wikifan12345 ( talk) 23:29, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Specifying a descriptive (Al-Qiddissene) in the title (but not the body) would be unwise. The average person with modest geographic knowledge may know the name Alexandria (and form a quick mental picture of its location in Egypt). I doubt most Egyptians have heard of Al-Qiddissene. The second reason is that you have used the names of specific buildings in your 2 examples and by your logic this attack should be named by the proper name of the church and not its informal name. Babaneal ( talk) 18:07, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
What is this piece of crap: http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/12/two-missing-coptic-women-abused-by-priest-husbands-what-if-they-were-muslim/ - which is filled with unproven allegations - that two priest wives (because a priest's wife will obviously not be religiously influenced by her husband's Christian job) converted to Islam, that they were abused, that they wanted a divorce?
If it's going to be like that, then for wikipedia to remain unbiased, the other side of the story should be presented:
It's only fair, since the first link attempts to critique the second link. 98.176.12.43 ( talk) 00:46, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
Totally biased article with complete nonesense. Since when do Muslims even the extremest of them defy dead bodies?
No I guess being Muslim automatically makes you perfect and innocent from the possibility of such a crime. Give me a break from the politically correct crap. Your actions define you, not the religious ideas a person falsely states; don't give any generalizations that all people of a certain religious group are above any evil.
98.176.12.43 (
talk) 21:36, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
The article on Jihad Watch does not in anyway refute that which came from Loonwatch it just provides examples of horrible acts committed by Muslims. The article links to an internet newspaper ,so it is not in anyway bias. Also the what if they were Muslim series on the website is not meant to defame any religious group but simply to expose double standards used by those who bash Islam. -- User talk:Yster76) 17:13, 4 January 2011 (CCT)
The current title is very ambiguous and slightly biased. Many sources are already calling this a massacre:
Arabic sources are also calling it a mssacre:
Other less bloody attacks on the Coptic community have been already acknowledged as massacres including:
Also, the term "massacre" has been employed in other similar incidences such as:
For those reasons, I am proposing to move the name of the article to 2011 Alexandria massacre. -- Khips ( talk) 01:53, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
Going through the history of the page (quite confusing indeed), I see that a lot of well written statements were removed. Some of them have been already restored by User:Plot Spoiler. I will continue doing the same. If someone has a problem with that, please let me know. -- Khips ( talk) 01:57, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
<ref name="Reuters Alex bombing">
{{cite news
| last=
| first=
| url=
| title=
| publisher=
| date=
| accessdate=
}}
</ref>
... later <ref name="Reuters Alex bombing" />
User:Lihaas has recently performed a massive reversion on the article, deleting much of the work that has been done over the past few hours. I herein invite him/her to explain this massive removal of content. I also invite other users to contribute to this discussion. -- Khips ( talk) 03:07, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
I uploaded some of my personal photos of the attack. The page is protected though, so someone can add them on the article page if you want. Jimmy
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimmydunn2010 ( talk • contribs) 06:16, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
The article says 21 coptic christians when this number is the total deaths Christians and Muslims this is a reference from Masrawy news (in Arabic) with the known names of victims. http://www.masrawy.com/News/Egypt/Politics/2011/january/1/masrawy_alex.aspx -- Hexacoder ( talk) 11:27, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
>> Egypt arrests church blast suspects + the WP:EL needs to go.( Lihaas ( talk) 01:06, 3 January 2011 (UTC)).
I understand that you were very upset by the unacceptable bombings in your country. Indeed, the word "unacceptable" does not express the wrongness of taking human life. However, you need to realize that wikipedia is not a medium for condemnation. It is a medium for reporting factual information. I do not know whether the information you have written is true, and that is why I have deleted it. Yes, you DID cite it, to the source freecopts.net however this source does not meet Wikipedia's very high WP:RS standard. Furthermore, words such as "rounded up", and "massacered" express emotion as well as meaning. Your emotion as an editor is not supposed to show on wikipedia, so I strongly recomend you use more "bland" words... This is not merely a cultural taboo in expressing yourself. It is one of wikipedia's core principles WP:NPOV. Tim.thelion ( talk) 01:13, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
I've reverted the claim " "The scattered body parts were covered with newspapers until they were brought inside the church after some Muslims started stepping on them and chanting Jihadi chants." This is a very inflammatory claim. Please do not revert until the discussion at the RS noticeboard is concluded. Ericoides ( talk) 22:58, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
"separate condemnations came from the Eastern Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch and the Orient Ignatius IV Hazim"....the Patriarchate of Antioch is based in Damascus, Syria, not the Lebanon. Eugene-elgato ( talk) 15:40, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
What is Wikipedia's policy on including the names of the martyrs in the article? Anything against it? Because the list recently got published. -- Coptic101 ( talk) 06:01, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Just an added point, the Nanking massacre doesn't so much produce martyrs as does being killed by another for your belief. 128.54.29.73 ( talk) 20:02, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
This article uses
bare URLs in its references. Please use
proper citations containing each referenced work's title, author, date, and source, so that the article remains
verifiable in the future.
Several templates are available for formatting. |
I fixed most of them, but new bare URL refs keep popping up. Heroeswithmetaphors ( talk) 19:12, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
This usage of "shortly" is ambiguous as it also means "in a short while" refering to a point in the near future. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.151.101.250 ( talk) 20:30, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
-- Yster76 17:31
I noticed that in the main article the reaction of the Muslim Brotherhood was missing in the domestic reaction and think it should be included. --Yster76 17:29(CCT) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yster76 ( talk • contribs) 22:29, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Here is link http://www.ikhwanweb.com/article.php?id=27729 -- Yster76 17:38
I propose the page Mohammad Salim Al-Awa be merged into this one since it seems he is only famous for his comments regarding Kamilia Shehata, and his allegations of the Coptic church having weapons... Tim.thelion ( talk) 01:14, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
I agree. The Al-Awa page needs to be merged to this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Copticnews ( talk • contribs) 00:49, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
I think you have missunderstood the article Coptic101. The article clearly states that the list is of Coptic christians living abroad... Furthermore, the article does not say when the list was published. It states it was published BEFORE December 21... Tim.thelion ( talk) 04:08, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Egyptian and Lebanese newspapers are already calling the crime the Massacre of Alexandria:
-- Coptic101 ( talk) 05:04, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
lately this page is filled with vandalism edits, i think it should be locked down and will reccomend as such. 1 ip claimed "major copy edit" when all he did was revert everything without a reason.( Lihaas ( talk) 18:01, 5 January 2011 (UTC)).
User:Lihaas, what exactly is this edit [8]? Are you kidding? I am changing most of this edit back to the way the article was yesterday -- Coptic101 ( talk) 00:46, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
I received this message from User:Lihaas on my talk page:
i think you need work on your consensus.
Based on this message:
I am here asking all the users who helped write this page to comment on this. I am also addressing User:Lihaas when I say that I request that you apologize to me about your insults and your accusations. If you don't, I will report this incident to higher admin and ask for a reprimanding action. -- Coptic101 ( talk) 01:43, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Editors who engage in blanket reverts may eventually be sanctioned. Please break down your edits into reasonable chunks and be sure that what you are doing is either harmless or has WP:Consensus. Adding citations to reliable sources is usually harmless. If you make a change and it is reverted, don't make it again without discussing first on the talk page. Thank you, EdJohnston ( talk) 03:17, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Where is the evidence that Fouad Twal is an Israeli? -- Supreme Deliciousness ( talk) 00:44, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
At least 4 Coptic Orthodox churches in Sydney Australia had bomb threats made against them for the Christmas Eve service. According to a news report on the Channel 9 website there is an article in The Weekend Australian (7-8/1/2011 issue) there were threats made to 60 churches worldwide. As an attendee at the service at St Michael & Archangel Bishoi Church (Mt Druitt, Sydney, Australia)I can attest to the unprecedented police security that is mentioned in several online news articles. (As a wikipedia total novice I ask for the old hands to fix what needs to be fixed in what info I enclosed. I noticed that The Wikipedia entry for the bombing only mentioned Canada and the UK and failed to mention Australia. If anyone has further knowledge about the other churches that make up the 60 then that may also be useful to post). (A serious lapse in the Wikipedia entry is that it mentions that the security officials were withdrawn, yet also mentions that several police were at their post AND also that all the dead were Copts. Something is wrong with this as if several police remained it is highly unlikely in my personal experience in Egypt that these police were not mostly muslim). (A second serious lapse at the top of the wikipedia entry is that the (only)suspect is al qaeda Iraq. Surely the Salafist demonstration that is mentioned was carried out by Egyptians AND most importantly the diaspora (from my speaking to other Copts) has a strong belief that the Egyptian government at some level is involved as evidenced by the pulling back of security. I have heard unconfirmed rumours that threats had been made against this church prior to the attack (can anyone substantiate this?)So why was security pulled off and who authorised the security lapse? Babaneal ( talk) 17:47, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
The phrase : "At least 32 people died in the attacks, all of them Coptic Christians"
"At least 23 people died in the attacks, coptic christians and muslims as well"
Gassarian (
talk) 01:18, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
Considering that a number of the cited sources claim 23 dead then shouldn't that 32 figure be double checked? 121.210.131.200 ( talk) 11:45, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
"One hour before the bombing, the Egyptian security forces guarding the church withdrew, leaving only four policemen and one officer guarding the church." This section was removed because this claim is not supported by any credible source. As far as I know 'Copts United' and 'Free Copts' are not news agencies. The FOX video, just states that it was 'said' that the security withdrew shortly before the attack. This, at best, would be classified as hearsay. Both those sources report that 100 kg of explosives were used. 100 KG of explosive would leave a huge crater in the street. Official reports estimates that 10-15 kg of explosives were used. Now, to restore this section back, there has to be an objective credible news source to support that. Thank you. A elalaily ( talk) 18:44, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
The '10 shooting had some expansion on it. [15] At first I thought it was SYNTHy in a way that since it might be leading the reader to condone the shooting. I noticed that the aticle kind of has the tone of "well, the Copts deserve it". Then I second guessed that and thought it was SYNTHy since it might be attempting to lead the reader to believe that Muslim extremists are nuts since killing 7 people unrelated to the accused is hardly a healthy reaction to accusations that a guy who happens to adhere to one religion. But overall I don't know if it matters which one it is because leading the reader to draw a conclusion is bad and since the source used does not even mention this subject (unlike the source used to discuss the shooting as background) we really don't need it. Now f there is an article for that shooting it would be great to wikilink to. By the way, I am not saying that it was intentional one way or the other. Just how I believe it reads to a reader who is unfamiliar with the subject. Cptnono ( talk) 06:39, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
It is not going to stay in simply because you disagree, Al-Andalusi. That is not how BRD works ad since there is a policy based reason for removal you need to refute it. It has been spelled out to you twice why it is problematic. So address it, find another source, open an RfC or whatever but simply reverting without using this talk page is unacceptable. It was a concern when you firt included it and it is a concern now. Cptnono ( talk) 02:10, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
About your Third Opinion request: Your request has been removed from the Third Opinion project page since you also have a request pending at WP:NORN, which is a higher form of dispute resolution; if you get no response there, feel free to bring it back to Third Opinion. Best regards, TRANSPORTERMAN ( TALK) 15:37, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
There is some controversy about whether the bombing was a false flag operation instigated by the internal ministry in Egypt.
The main source of the allegations seems to be the arabic news organization al-arabyia, more specifically the article [16]. The allegations are also mentioned in the article on the protests 2011_Egyptian_protests.
Until the contoversy is resolved, one way or another, we should at least mention it in the section on Responsibility. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.188.191.38 ( talk) 20:24, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
The media at that time said that 3 of the people died were muslims. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahmedyasserhamdy ( talk • contribs) 02:34, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
I see that my additions of dates in the Coptic calendar were reverted, with the edit summary saying, simply, "non-standard". This is an article concerning a bombing of a Coptic Orthodox Church in Alexandria, so, in this context, of course it is standard to use the official calendar used by the Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria. Not only is the Coptic calendar still used by the Coptic Church, but numerous other people still use it to this day in Egypt, including farmers, whom find its structure useful for determining the timing of the annual harvest seasons. I see no reason not to use Coptic calendar dates, as well as Gregorian calendar dates, in this article. 68.225.173.217 ( talk) 23:40, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on 2011 Alexandria bombing. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:24, 19 June 2017 (UTC)