Talk:Saif al-Arab Gaddafi

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles Arab world Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arab world, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Arab world 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.Arab worldWikipedia:WikiProject Arab worldTemplate:WikiProject Arab worldArab world articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Africa: Libya Low‑importance 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Libya (assessed as Mid-importance).

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. The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

So it wouldn't become an edit war:

that's BS. He did not defect. Every other defector is paraded around by the rebels and widely reported in the foreign press, but this as of now closest "defection" to Gaddafi himself is never reported anywhere but on a Singaporean and a Iranian site... originally the claim came from Libya Alhurra TV. and he was put on the Interpol Wanted list on March 4th, as a member of the regime because he is "Subject to UN sanctions" [1]. In short: defection, never happened. EOD. noclador (talk) 18:21, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I find that hard to believe too, but as long as even remotely reliable seeming sources can be provided, it's worth at least a glance. Zakhalesh (talk) 18:24, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

agreed, but if such a big story is not picked up by any major news outlet,... especially Al-Jazeera with its live blog would report such an event. But they never did... noclador (talk) 19:27, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The BBC claims Saif-al Arab was killed in a recent NATO strike. 81.97.4.35 (talk) 23:12, 30 April 2011 (UTC) CNN reports that Saif al-Arab al-Gaddafi was killed during a NATO airstrike per Libyan government spokesman. 18:20, 30 April 2011 (CDT) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.64.200.150 (talk) [reply]

Well, he is either a defector to the rebels OR was killed in Tripoli-but not both which is how the article currently reads. 72.221.82.139 (talk) 23:45, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

At this point he is reported dead by Libyan officials, this alone means we should take the report with a grain of salt. They may very well be staging this as propaganda, he may not actually be dead... --156.34.70.89 (talk) 01:38, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We shouldn't mark this as a confirmed death. We've all seen how spectacular Libyan propaganda can be. I am a violinist ♫ talk to me here! 04:16, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Libyan propaganda? Do you watch Libyan state television? Do you read Libyan newspapers? Can you speak/read Arabic? We've all seen it? On what do you base any of this on? Fox news, wikipedia, BBC, Reuters - now this is spectacular propaganda my friend, propaganda that you fail to recognise in your own native language. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.159.128.127 (talk) 11:48, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

sided with the protesters against dad = dad used the bombing as an excuse for infanticide?--70.162.171.210 (talk) 04:29, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't about taking any side. This is about reliable sources (

RN1970 (talk) 07:40, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

The skepticism has no place at the top of the article. He is dead, it is reported by his family. When rebels report casualties in their side, they are taken to the word. This is not similar to Khamis because Khamis death was only an internet rumor without any basis and has been debunked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Geromasis (talk • contribs) 09:48, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@Geromasis – in terms of reliability of the source (→

RN1970 (talk) 23:13, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

I don't see any serious reason to doubt that he is dead. Even Gaddafi would hardly be stupid enough th run the risk that he might turn up alive some time soon. PatGallacher (talk) 10:09, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There won't be any risk if he goes into hiding. Tripoli is controlled by security forces. There is no risk of publicity. Considering the "house" was a building with almost no furniture, no wall paint or wall paper, and largely built of reinforced concrete and steel, I would have to say it was not a residential house. There has been no pictures of the body, and the names of the grandchildren were not released. This is a ruse, remember Musa Ibrahim is the same person who claims the entire rebellion was sparked by drugged nescafe. Zenithfel (talk) 10:21, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the short term, he might get away with it. However, presumably Gaddafi and his family expect to win this civil war. Does a man in his late 30s then spend the rest of his life in hiding? PatGallacher (talk) 10:29, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We don't know what this is and we don't take a stance on it. We report what the newspapers report, which is that Saif is dead according to Libyan officials and opposition members suspect it's a ploy. That said, I don't think common sense applies here; Gaddafi is under extreme stress and pressure and might be willing to make very risky gambles. It's also possible to stay hidden for quite some time. Ocaasi ^c 10:30, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

-Indeed... Gaddafi originally put his interior minister under house arrest with intention to kill him, a sacrifice made to keep any defections. That failed. In March they reported on "live TV" that Younis rejoined Gaddafi put video of him shaking hand with him, but of course we know that wasn't true. Some of the loyalist soldiers burn alive other soldiers who refuse to fire on civilians, another huge length to go to in order to prevent failure. Gaddafi's forces will go to any length to achieve anything, and we cannot be certain what is what, especially with any reports from Saif Gaddafi and Musa Ibrahim. The fact that Ban Ki Moon and the UN has declared that Gaddafi's government lost legitimacy means we shouldn't regard the Libyan government as a legitimate source of true information. Sopher99 (talk) 13:47, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A targeted airstrike resulting in death is a murder. 'Killed' implys that this was some sort of accident. No reason given for reverting my edits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.159.128.127 (talk) 11:43, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The targeted airstrike was intentional. The deaths were not, so it is not murder.--Dalaru (talk) 00:04, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This report: http://www.neontommy.com/news/2011/05/gaddafis-youngest-son-killed-why-may-not-be-case points out that photos of Saif al-Arab's older brother

Here http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/04/30/saif-al-arab-son-of-gaddafi-believed-killed/ is a website apparently from US military veterans who claim that some of them had been in contact with Saif al-Arab in order to try negotiations with Hillary Clinton. This includes a photo claimed to be correct.

Here is a Thomson Reuters photo: http://www.daylife.com/photo/0aXi9yI2O32y0?__site=daylife&q=Tripoli%2C+Libya, and an Associated Press photo that's nearly the same.

The Veterans Today and Thomson Reuters/AP photos look consistent (my subjective impression) with each other as photos of the same guy without and with a beard, and inconsistent with the many photos of al-Saadi. IMHO Neon Tommy is right about the photo error.

Can we use any of this? Fair use of a photo under exceptional grounds is possible, but the exceptional grounds have to be justified (including no chance for getting a freely licensed photo). Boud (talk) 21:59, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I looked for copyright compatible photos at Google Images and Flickr and came up empty. Images of individuals rarely meet our

fair-use criteria, unless the picture is essential for understanding the subject or that image is the subject or reliably sourced commentary mentioned in the article itself. So neither of those are met. We could possible angle for a very low quality image which showed Saif, and if it was not from a press agency (which have commercial interests) it would have a chance. But not a great one. Ocaasi ^c 22:46, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Note, this image http://www.ironmill.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/saif-al-arab-gaddafi.jpg seems to be the ubiquitous one. Ideally, we'd need to find it as close to the original source as possible, and with a clear caption from an RS that it is who we think it is. Then again, I tried this with Cheng Jianping whose twitter profile picture was all over the news after her imprisonment in China, and it was deleted. Ocaasi ^c 23:02, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since Saadi seems to have spent quite a bit of time in Italy playing football, the number of people with cameras who might have photographed him and might decide to publish their photo under a free licence might be greater than for Saif al-Arab, who spent a few years in Germany, but not as a football player. Alternatively, if the wrong photo issue becomes notable enough, then that could go into the article, in which case understanding the subject would be easier if the photos were in the article. The question then would be: would having the non-free photos be essential to understanding this one point of the article? My own guess is that the case for "essential" would be weak. In any case, free photos would be best. Boud (talk) 23:36, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Free photos would be best. I surprised there are so few of him, even licensed photos. "essential" is actually a bit strong; it's more like "significantly improves the readers understanding", but since the image is not especially important to the article, it's better if you can find some commentary-related need, such as a case of mistaken identity. still, it's a stretch. search for free images, commence. Ocaasi ^c 23:47, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That some opposition groups have cast doubts on the reported death is fair enough to note in the article, but not in the lead. This is not a news paper recording the latest stuff, it is a biography of Saif al-Arab al-Gaddafi, the lead records the most pertinent facts bout him. The fact that he's being reported dead is one of them. The fact that his opponents are casting doubt on the reliability of the Libyan government (and I note no neutral source or sovereign government is doing so) is not among the most notable facts about Saif al-Arab al-Gaddafi. "Reported" carries that inference that it is not confirmed, and that's enough for the lead. The fact that Zakhalesh is edit-waring to keep this in because "they tell lies" is not neutral editing.--Scott Mac 10:11, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It could be a bit contradictory that everybody is accepting the American claim that bin Laden is dead, even though they have no body to produce. I expect they are both dead, but beware of double standards. PatGallacher (talk) 10:15, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

BBC news has shown film of his funeral, I doubt if this was an elaborate hoax. PatGallacher (talk) 22:14, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is a move discussion in progress on

I don't think the personal box should mention an "Alma mater", since he is not known for any academic achievement, nor is there any indication that he ever got a university degree or visited any classes whatsoever. In fact his enrollment may have served as another justification for his residence permit, see (in German): http://www.focus.de/panorama/reportage/tyrannenssohn-in-muenchen-der-hochqualifizierte-gaddafi-jr-_aid_605739.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.74.135.60 (talk) 07:29, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Saif al-Arab Gaddafi. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110308073400/http://aspenclassifieds.net/the-eight-children-of-gaddafi/ to http://aspenclassifieds.net/the-eight-children-of-gaddafi

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.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:12, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]