Talk:Battle of Tripoli Airport

Talk page for the Battle of Tripoli international Airport.

Extreme Vandalisation of the Article

Important information, such as destruction of the Entire facility, Oil Storage areas, Who did it, why they did it, when they did, How they did it, All documented information has been omitted by a few pathetic trolls who playing around politics. Information is available online. Your pathetic attempts to sweep warcrimes under the rug will NOT succeed. Every Wikipedia user should be take the initiative to repair the damage done unto the Article. I will revert all the information Vandalization and attempt to lock this article. Biomax20 (talk) 04:43, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Is this what wikipedia's Editors consider as "citing sources" or do these so called wikipedia editors pull up the "No citing source" card just to delete your information from here. Half the article was completely destroyed with information added by users that are completely true and factual. Biomax20 (talk) 06:47, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Constant editing and removal of important information

With regards to " The Aftermath ". Dear Editors, please note, your edits, while related to having better grammer, does not constitute removal of important information. Example such damaging removal information are: "The immediate aftermath of the battle of Tripoli was the destruction of Fuel storage tanks by the Airfield, causing a large fires and plumes of smoke coming from 4 Large Kerosene fuel containers due to artillery" Edited to : "In the immediate aftermath of the battle, large fires and plumes of smoke rose from 4 large kerosene fuel containers."

These Fuel containers were specifically targeted with mortar and tank rounds. Please do not remove such information any further. Thanks. Biomax20 (talk) 09:28, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Request for page protection

Note - moved from WP:RFPP to the article talk page. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:54, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

• Battle of Tripoli Airport (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Note: May i please request some help from this one editor, MarkH21, He keeps incessantly editing the page. Im not sure what to do. Thanks. Is there some way to block him? I think his editing is politically motivated. Biomax20 (talk) 18:30, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Besides not notifying me about this discussion as required, Biomax20 has repeatedly added unreferenced content, was formally warned on their talk page four times over the last 10 days (1, 2, 3, 4), summarily dismissed those warnings, removed unreferenced section tags without adding the requested citations after those warnings, accused me of political motivation for requesting citations, and now declared that nobody can edit Battle of Tripoli Airport because they are not finished with it yet in a display of ownership behavior.

Not to mention that their attempt at semi-protecting the page would prevent them from editing it themselves.

Can someone else please explain WP:BURDEN to Biomax20? Both Boud and I have failed to get through on both Biomax20’s talk page and mine (which was just followed up by this). — MarkH₂₁^talk 18:41, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Declined – Content dispute. Please use the article's talk page or other forms of dispute resolution. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:44, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

@Muboshgu: While I agree that this is partially a content dispute and this is not the right place, I do think that an administrator (or at least another editor besides Boud and myself) needs to give a quick word on WP:V and WP:OWNERSHIP to Biomax20, since they have summarily dismissed all four previous warnings and additional explanations. — MarkH₂₁^talk 18:49, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

MarkH21, it sure does need attention, but not page protection. Up until now, I don't see you engaging in the article's talk page, though I see you just responded on your user talk page. Hopefully you can resolve it in that way. If not, there's other noticeboards, like dispute resolution or WP:AN/I. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:55, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

@Muboshgu: I didn’t use the article talk because my edits that were previously contested by Biomax20 were removals of their unreferenced content; this was already being discussed on their talk page and mine (to the tune of them accusing me of harassing them by informing them of WP:CHALLENGE). My subsequent edits were copy editing and placing cn/unreferenced section tags in the article, not content removal and did not seem controversial or contradictory to Biomax20’s post on the article talk of With regards to " The Aftermath ". Dear Editors, please note, your edits, while related to having better grammer, does not constitute removal of important information.

Biomax20 only just objected to the copy editing immediately before posting here, while simultaneously continuing to dismiss WP:V on my talk page.

I can certainly post at ANI if Biomax20 continues further, but I honestly think that a quick word from an admin would solve this much more quickly and without risking an avoidable block on a good-faith but misguided editor. — MarkH₂₁^talk 19:08, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

I also just noticed the possible misinterpretation here due to the small one-line initial request by Biomax20; I did not request protection here and I agree that protection would be wholly inappropriate. — MarkH₂₁^talk 20:23, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

@Muboshgu: Markh21 has latched on to my articles and keeps deleting information without even bothering to help fix, add, or reading the previous provided references or sources. He just simply deletes vital information from the events that need to be publicly available and then claims that my editing is unsourced and unreferenced. What he expects is to have every word accompanied with a reference with the excuse that the Editing is "Uncyclopedic" and then proceeds with just removing an entire section. His edits are not productive, and rather destructive, and then issued threats that i would be blocked! I've asked him to talk to me first before making any edits, and hasnt done so, simply deletes the information without adding notes and adds a tag when he subjectively considers a sentence as "Unsatisfactory according to his referential requirements". Biomax20 (talk) 19:08, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

There are no accompanying references to read in edits like this or this. But this is not the right venue for this. Can someone please just explain WP:CHALLENGE and WP:OWNERSHIP to Biomax20 one more time. They’re here in good faith but haven’t heeded the previous warnings. — MarkH₂₁^talk 19:15, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

@MarkH21: I'll just give off advice, Heed or not, Deleting information and acting as censor police, rather than contributing information, On a number of articles and not even discussing it on the talk page will start disputes. In years of using wikipedia, i have never seen someone so ardent about policies while not bothering to improve the article. I will be adding sources and references, but, i will ask you to stop watching every article i edit. I translate this as Harassment. Biomax20 (talk) 19:32, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

@Biomax20, MarkH21, and Muboshgu: Biomax20 - I think now you see that the present standard in Wikipedia for referencing is not just my policy alone. The fact that you feel that there is vital information from the events that need to be publicly available does not justify publishing it on Wikipedia; it needs to be sourced, NPOVed, put in context, written in an encyclopedic style. Just as Libyans have to come to consensus - "There is no military solution!" - a huge number of Wikipedians have (mostly) come to consensus on policies, but also have to come to consensus on implementing the policies and modifying them when necessary. WP:AGF means that you have to assume that MarkH21 is well-intentioned in his edits, and assume that he's doing his best to follow standard Wikipedia policies. You're welcome to propose a change to the Wikipedia policy on verifiability. It seems to me that Wikipedia_talk:Verifiability would be the place to propose a change in policy to allow the adding of unsourced material, with the responsibility of adding references left to other editors. Until you have convinced the Wikipedia community to modify WP:V this way, you will need to respect the edits of MarkH21, myself and others in which we do our best to follow the policy. If you convince the community to change (which means edits of the WP:V page to reflect the new policy), then I expect that MarkH21, myself and others will leave your future unsourced edits in place. Please note the word If. Boud (talk) 20:25, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

@MarkH21, Muboshgu, and Boud: I am not arguing the "Present standard of editing in Wikipedia", i am arguing that Editors, You, and Mark have deleted information from articles, without discussing in the Talk pages, without contributing much to the article, and policing policies without actually being constructive, and on the contrary, destructive. Your arguments are "Dont add information to wikipedia without citation and references", this is odd, because the article in question already contains references and citation supporting the added information. Reading the references already contain information added to articles. What MarkH21, and perhaps Boud, consider as 'encyclopedic' standard, as far as i've understood, is apparently citation for every single word, because they have a personal subjective requirement for said information to be satisfactory. This is more of a nuisance that, i will have to contend with and accept to provide references as i did with the Battle of Tripoli article. Moreover, i asked for a page to be semi protected from Trolls who would damage the article Battle of Tripoli Airport further, as they did since the first edit. Important information such as perpetrators of this warcrime, their names, and details to damages were removed. Yes, i accused people of political motives, because its shocking that such an article wasnt filled with information after years since the event in 2014. Information ommitted and removed, because someone thought it was incited or unreferenced on such a massive event, and a crime against civilians, damaged article with information missing because people bring nonsensical personal opinions and excuses to have bits of information removed rendering the article as basic and uninformative. This is my stance. Biomax20 (talk) 20:52, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

@Muboshgu: Hi, May i please ask you for your honest opinion on the matter, thank you! Biomax20 (talk) 21:03, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

@Biomax20: We're not discussing a standard of editing; we're discussing a policy. Please read WP:V again, because what you say shows that you disagree with what is in WP:V. Please start with what is written in the lead (summary/introduction) at the top: any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation that directly supports the material. Any material that needs a source but does not have one may be removed. See WP:INLINECITE. On the issue of WP:AGF: the fact that material is missing is neither MarkH21's fault nor mine: we are volunteers, just as you are. Violating WP:AGF is not justified. For publishing vital unsourced information, you can post that to a blog or the Fediverse (decentralised online social network), and those people who find that information credible can discuss it with you and ask for more details there. If you disagree with the lead of WP:V, then propose a change in policy (that text) at Wikipedia_talk:Verifiability. This is nothing to do with MarkH21 or me in particular. Boud (talk) 21:07, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Tripoli airport 2.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:07, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Tripoli airport 2.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:07, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Regarding the Background section detailing the battle

Someone with a higher level of intelligence needs to fill this section to mention factual information. Also "Fajr Libya" needs an article on its own because of the Controversial nature of the entire operation - Which was basically a large scale Coup Detat. Suspected to be led by Foreign powers. Because i cant. I know bits of information and dont know them chronologically. I know, that the Rixos Hotel where politicians were, was attacked in a very vicious gun battle. There was heavy fighting at the Airport. Police stations and institutions were also attacked, and the Supreme court was hijacked by armed Militias ( 100% islamist ) as part of Fajr Libya. I cant give accurate information because the entire thing was a radio silence well planned operation. I know that the motive was to expel all secular / moderates from the GNC, i know that Kidnappings and disappearances happened, i know that they were accused as being ex gaddafi loyalists, however, i cant tell anything in Detail. All ive seen is the Aftermath of Fajr libya, being the total destruction of Airport, and Rixos Hotel, The area near it. Etc.

Mahmoud Jibril who was apparently leading the moderate "National Forces Alliance" that won 2012 Libyan parliamentary election, has apparently died last month : http://en.alwasat.ly/news/libya/279080 , according to this article on Sun 05 Apr 2020. If this isnt controversial, then i dont know what is. Need Help with the article to shed light on this very, very deep conspiracy.Biomax20 (talk) 03:30, 24 May 2020 (UTC)