Talk:Muammar Gaddafi
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 | A user has requested that the Good article community check whether this article's GA status is in need of reassessment. The reason given for this request was: length tag has not been addressed for a year (nominated by 100cellsman). |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Muammar Gaddafi article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
Archives (index): 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8Auto-archiving period: 2 months  |
 | Muammar Gaddafi has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
 | Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on September 1, 2010, September 1, 2012, September 1, 2015, September 1, 2017, September 1, 2019, and September 1, 2022. | ||||||||||||
| Current status: Good article | |||||||||||||
| This  level-4 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small}
 | 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, use 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. |
 | Gaddafi's date of birth cannot be reliably determined due to conflicting sources. A specific birth date should not be used without further consensus. See discussions: <A6>#Gaddafi's date of birth, <A5>#Date of birth |
Skitash
@Skitash can you please tell me what's wrong with my edits? Kpop777 (talk) 03:24, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
- @Skitash you say the note says "Please do not change unless a final consensus has been established", an administrator didn't add that, some editor who liked that photo added that and their was no discussion on the image in the first place so I don't know what he means by "Final consensus." You say your "reverting undiscussed edits" but haven't gone to the talk page when I opened a discussion. Kpop777 (talk) 14:42, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
- And that image is used twice in this article Kpop777 (talk) 14:43, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
- Hi. Hidden comments don't need to be placed by an admin to be respected; they're there to prevent disruption. The photo you're removing has been stable in the article for several years, so there's no reason to change it without consensus. I've already removed the duplicate, so that issue is solved. As for removing "politician" and "revolutionary" from the lede, those descriptions are constantly used across RS and should remain there. Skitash (talk) 15:10, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
- That's not true, the photo hasn't been on the page for several years, it was added in 2024 I checked the wayback machine. He wasn't a revolutionary, he caim to power during a coup not a revolution, and he was more of a ruler than a politician. He was never actually elected. Calling him a politician is like calling the king of England a politician. Gaddafi wasn't a monarch but he was the closest thing to being a monarch without being one. The page literally says "He ruled Libya". Kpop777 (talk) 15:18, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
- From what I can see, the 1970 photo had been in the infobox intermittently since at least 2019, even though editors kept attempting to change it without consensus.
- As for everything else you said, that's your own POV. Gaddafi is constantly described as a revolutionary in major RS because he led the 1969 Libyan revolution that overthrew the monarchy. Gaddafi's formal title for much of his rule was literally the Brotherly Leader and Guide of the Revolution.
- The comparison with the king of England is absurd. The definition of a politician is "a member of a government or law-making organization" or "a person who is active in politics," which is exactly what Gaddafi was. Kim Jong Un and Fidel Castro were never elected either yet are both described as politicians in their ledes without issue. Skitash (talk) 15:55, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
- That's not true, the photo hasn't been on the page for several years, it was added in 2024 I checked the wayback machine. He wasn't a revolutionary, he caim to power during a coup not a revolution, and he was more of a ruler than a politician. He was never actually elected. Calling him a politician is like calling the king of England a politician. Gaddafi wasn't a monarch but he was the closest thing to being a monarch without being one. The page literally says "He ruled Libya". Kpop777 (talk) 15:18, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
- Hi. Hidden comments don't need to be placed by an admin to be respected; they're there to prevent disruption. The photo you're removing has been stable in the article for several years, so there's no reason to change it without consensus. I've already removed the duplicate, so that issue is solved. As for removing "politician" and "revolutionary" from the lede, those descriptions are constantly used across RS and should remain there. Skitash (talk) 15:10, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
- And that image is used twice in this article Kpop777 (talk) 14:43, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
Introduction part sounds like euphemism
"revolutionary"??
How about dictator and mass murderer? ~2025-35661-10 (talk) 02:47, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Two wrongs don't make a right. Tbhotch™ (CC BY-SA 4.0) 03:58, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
Omissions
I'm a little confused on why this page doesn't make mention (or only a brief mention) of several alleged crimes against humanity committed during Gaddafi's tenure despite being classified as a "good article", such as the Abu Salim Prison massacre, cooperation of torture between the US and Tripoli, or the alleged ethnic cleansing and cultural genocide against Berbers. With the numerous accounts of torture in Libya at that time, I think Gaddafi would be fit for the torturers category, as well. JPHC2003 (talk) 23:02, 3 December 2025 (UTC)
- A claim of "Linguistic Genocide" by Genocide Watch would obviously get no coverage anywhere on Wikipedia. Abu Salim prison massacre is disputed with no independent investigation ever confirming anything. You are citing "the documents, found by Human Rights Watch workers, have not been seen by the BBC or independently verified." They also need no mention on the article. Zalaraz (talk) 02:51, 5 December 2025 (UTC)
- Human Rights Watch is considered a perennial source on Wikipedia. It could at least be attributed, correct? Also, why did you get rid of the page on the massacre? It was a fairly large event regarding the deaths of 1000 people. Amnesty International met with Gaddafi in 2004, (page 54) and he admitted the killings happened, but claimed both sides had done an equal amount of killing. You could've at least began some sort of arbitration on whether or not it was warranted. JPHC2003 (talk) 05:55, 5 December 2025 (UTC)
- I don't think it is needed at all, not even with attribution because if we present it neutrally then it would look unnecessary. Your Amnesty International source presents a very different view from Gaddafi, which has nothing in similar compared to the alleged massacre. Zalaraz (talk) 11:18, 5 December 2025 (UTC)
- Human Rights Watch is considered a perennial source on Wikipedia. It could at least be attributed, correct? Also, why did you get rid of the page on the massacre? It was a fairly large event regarding the deaths of 1000 people. Amnesty International met with Gaddafi in 2004, (page 54) and he admitted the killings happened, but claimed both sides had done an equal amount of killing. You could've at least began some sort of arbitration on whether or not it was warranted. JPHC2003 (talk) 05:55, 5 December 2025 (UTC)
Omissions again
Anyone else who's an editor on this page want to respond to what I wrote above without deleting pages? JPHC2003 (talk) 22:19, 14 December 2025 (UTC)
- Could warrant a place but this article needs to be split into sub-article. You could throw it in before it starts being split though (no opinion on the proposal, you could try to form consensus though). Sahib-e-Qiran, He Who is Otherwise Known as EasternShah 06:38, 10 February 2026 (UTC)
Article review
It has been a while since this article was reviewed, so I took a look and noticed that the article was quite long, with over 15,000 words. I think lots of this information can be spun out into new or existing articles, and information here can be summarised more effectively. @100cellsman: you asked for this article to be reviewed: do you have any additional concerns? Should this article go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 03:23, 19 March 2026 (UTC)