This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
This article is within the scope of the
Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of
open tasks and
task forces. To use this banner, please see the
full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a
list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the
full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
It doesnt make sense to have separate articles for US, UK and French operations in Libya, simply because they each have different code names. They are coordinated coalition operations against a single enemy. The articles should be unified under a new title, perhaps
Coalition operations in Libya. -
67.161.54.63 (
talk)
00:46, 20 March 2011 (UTC)reply
Disagree, these are 4 separate operations at the moment. i.e. the French Ground Strikes around Benghazi on March 19th were done without the coalitions command structure. Also until a central command is set up each nation operates a national operation, based on the requirements of the strategic command (US African Command) and then in the theater of operations are conducted under the tactical command of US Naval Forces Europe.
noclador (
talk)
12:55, 20 March 2011 (UTC)reply
Disagree, Each can stand on their own at this time, as the stories are emerging and individual country's efforts are not yet being merged into a cohesive action.
Bzuk (
talk)
13:09, 20 March 2011 (UTC)reply
Agree, all four operations fall within the rubric of an allied military assault against the government of, or supporters of the government of, Muammar al-Qaddafi. There is not a single reason that the details of each country's operations cannot be included as subsections of a single article, outline the roles of each individual country in the coalition. It might still be unnecessarily disjointed, but at least readers won't have to open four different tabs to collect information about the conflict as it unfolds. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Joshuare5768 (
talk •
contribs)
21:20, 20 March 2011 (UTC)reply
Agree with merge. It is confusing having separate articles for each operation. It's a combined effort by these nations against a single opponent, so they should be combined into a single article.
Cla68 (
talk)
03:01, 21 March 2011 (UTC)reply
The articles give a full explanation about each country's involvment, what they did, and how effective strikes are/were. To the contrary, merging them will make this less clear. You'd have to be a pretty simple person to get confused by all this as it stands.
Dapi89 (
talk)
10:29, 21 March 2011 (UTC)reply
Please, do not add at this point (about 3pm GMT, March 24) the news about Libyan Galeb being shot down over Misrata. See BBC News live blog - France has actively declined to confirm those reports. I'm not saying it didn't happen, but this information is neither officially confirmed nor referenced by multiple sources - in fact, all of the news about this seem to be copies of original ABC news. Please, do wait for confirmation.
Peasantwarrior (
talk)
15:08, 24 March 2011 (UTC)reply
Perhaps if I wrote this a couple of minutes later... According to AP (with Guardian forwarding the news), "US official: French jet has attacked and destroyed a Libyan airplane". However, it still may be a bit too soon to include this, considering the curious fact that Paris declined to confirm the report.
Peasantwarrior (
talk)
15:15, 24 March 2011 (UTC)reply
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
If the image is
non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no
fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
In the list of French Navy ships in Task Force 473, The ship identified as "Anti-air Destroyer
Jean Bart (D615) is actually a frigate according to its Wikipedia entry in spite of the D, rather than an F, in her hull number. ☺Dick Kimball (
talk)
12:44, 19 March 2015 (UTC)reply