Talk:2015 kidnapping and beheading of Copts in Libya

Proposed merge with 2015 Egyptian military intervention in Libya

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Doesn't appear to be notable independently of the ISIS execution, and should probably redirect to 2015 kidnapping and execution of Copts in Libya#Aftermath. I redirected it to this page myself but that was undone by an IP. Everymorning talk 16:42, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

• Support At this moment it looks like a WP:RECENTISM and the kidnapping and execution article has plenty of room to accommodate this. If the intervention proves to be prolonged, warranting split because of article's size, then probably yes, but not now. Brandmeister^talk 18:27, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
• Comment - Parts of the article may also be relevant in ISIL takeover of Derna. Hello32020 (talk) 20:29, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose Egyptian military intervention may yet be extensive and prolonged, it's early days. I think it should be treated separately, and that this article should refer to 'killing' not 'execution' as they were not charged or tried, --Flexdream (talk) 21:32, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose - should be treated as a separate incident in these early days. Period.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:06, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
• Support At this moment, intervention not yet notable enough to warrant separate article (all information is a subset of this article). WP should not create articles on assumption of future notability. Magedq (talk) 01:38, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
• Support, WP:RECENTISM as Everymorning pointed. Time will tell how far the intervention will go but for now let's keep it within the reactions.--Kathovo talk 09:01, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
• Strongly Oppose - They are not the same events. The kidnapping preceded the military intervention. Also, the military intervention will probably last for several months at least, unless ISIL somehow loses its presence in Libya, while the kidnapping and beheading events took place over the span of 1 month. LightandDark2000 (talk) 02:03, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose It is an event which is isolated to the 2015 Egyptian military intervention in Libya--Coekon (talk) 22:44, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose. The beheading of Christians has nothing to do with military intervention. They're two separate events. --Biblioworm 19:56, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Suggestion

The airstrikes are clearly notable enough to warrant a separate article, even if they didn't last too long. They made headlines everywhere around the world and seem to meet the WP:GNG criteria. How about moving the military intervention article's title to February 2015 Egyptian airstrikes in Libya, and when Egypt's involvement in the conflict takes a lengthier turn, we might as well create something like Egyptian military intervention in Libya (2014–present) to summarize all the relevant incidents, from last year's UAE-coordinated airstrikes and beyond. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 20:14, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

There is a move discussion here if anyone's interested. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 20:24, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Unless the airstrikes end this month, I highly discourage any changes in the article title. There's nothing to suggest that ISIL's Libyan presence will be eradicated by the end of this month, and it is quite likely that unless the said outcome happens, Egypt will continue intervening in Libya for at least several more months. But the Egyptian intervention is highly notable, and since the 2 topics are not directly related, both articles should remain the way they are, in my opinion. LightandDark2000 (talk) 20:26, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

There were no Egyptian airstrikes this day or yesterday as far as I can think of. If anything it should at least be renamed to something like 2015 Egyptian airstrikes in Libya, in case the raids live up to next month. But this "intervention" began last year, while the current title makes it seem as if Egypt's involvement in the conflict started in 2015, which isn't true.

it is quite likely that unless the said outcome happens, Egypt will continue intervening in Libya for at least several more months - This may be true, but kind of WP:CRYSTAL-ish as well, and this also takes me back to my last point, which is that the intervention isn't limited to 2015 only, whereas the article in question deals with the airstrikes of February 16. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 20:46, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Canonized Saints

The 21 victims were declared martyr saints by the Coptic Church yesterday (21 Feb). I have added this to the article. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:11, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2015 kidnapping and beheading of Copts in Libya. 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/20150215224401/http://www.dailynewsegypt.com:80/2015/02/14/libyan-parliament-confirms-death-21-kidnapped-coptic-egyptians/ to http://www.dailynewsegypt.com/2015/02/14/libyan-parliament-confirms-death-21-kidnapped-coptic-egyptians/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 02:02, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Return of the Remains

This section is very, very wordy. It reads pretty dense. I'm inclined to begin editing and cleaning it up. Before I do so, I'll await to see if any editors, who have been more involved with this article, are willing to step in.Kerdooskis (talk) 22:00, 1 October 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:

• Coptic Icon of 21 Holy Martyrs of Libya.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:42, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Video

"On 15 February 2015, a five-minute video was published" Published where? where did they upload? who spread it? Who was the first organization to report it? Sjcjn (talk) 16:59, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

MOS during addition of Catholic content

@136.158.82.22: Please remember to follow the Manual of Style and sourcing standards when editing this article. Material without sources and MOS-breaking changes will be removed unless reason for retaining them is given. ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:05, 11 May 2023 (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:

• 21 Coptic Martyrs of Libya Icon.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:53, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Should be linked to the equivalent page in french "Martyrs coptes de Libye"

These two articles recount the same events, and thus should be linked to one another. Ertyloide (talk) 19:24, 24 July 2023 (UTC)