Talk:Muammar al-Gaddafi

Article dispute

Right now there is a slow change war regarding this article. Screwball23 favors this version of the article. I, and others, prefer a version like this one. Rather than continuing our reverting, let us discuss the issues here. In my opinion, the version I favor has sources (the other offers none), is wikified like an article should be, and is a decent simplification of the En. article (some work could still be done, for sure). I do not see the benefit of the version Screwball23 is calling for. I also agree with Courcelles's assessment that Screwball23's version is not as neutral as my preferred version. What are thoughts on this topic so we can stop this changing back and forth. Either way (talk) 03:59, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

I view in deference to the version with sources and neutrality. Jon@talk:~$ 05:47, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

The page as it stands could do with some work... but it is certainly more neutral, and that is what is important especially when dealing with biographies. sonia♫ 09:07, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

I think as there will probably some attention given to this ruler, a version where the statements we make can be sourced is actually preferable to one where they "hang in the air". Yes, the article definitely needs work (in the sense: expanding past the intro copied/simplified from enwp); some of his children/family may also merit an article. Originally, I reverted the screwball version because of exactly issues regarding neutrality/sourcing. --Eptalon (talk) 11:47, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

• I'm in favor of the more-sourced one; but am wary of making a decision at this time owing to the fact that Gaddafi is missing and his regime is likely done for. Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 16:44, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure I understand what that has to do with the article we have up at the moment. Should we just blank the article until he's found and the regime change is implemented (if it is, in fact, implemented)? We still need to have something up in the meantime. Either way (talk) 17:09, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Uh, E.W., I agreed with you...but it's very likely that this article will be inundated with new information in the very near future Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 20:05, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
I think given the media attention this is getting at the moment, if anyone has the time/interest an extension of the article should be considered. --Eptalon (talk) 12:12, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Muammar Gaddafi

As the EN WP says, may I please change the article title to Muammar Gaddafi? Spidey665 (talk) 22:33, 24 October 2011 (UTC)