Talk:National Salvation Government
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 28 August 2014 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
 | This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Discussions:
|
Article name change edit
Are there any name change suggestions? Contributorzero (talk) 13:12, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
- User:Dannis243 has moved the article to New General National Congress without any prior discussion. I do not support this change. I thought General National Congress (2014) as suggested by User:Spinningspark was better. "New General National Congress" is not used anywhere else and leaves the false impression that it is an official name.--Anders Feder (talk) 17:51, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
- They both involve 2014. I think this name is okay, although there should have been more discussion before a move. Contributorzero (talk) 18:13, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
- There was only one body inaugurated in 2014 calling itself General National Congress, and that's this one. We have to go by WP:COMMONNAME, and "New General National Congress" is not common by any measure, since it was invented solely for naming this article.--Anders Feder (talk) 04:32, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
- They both involve 2014. I think this name is okay, although there should have been more discussion before a move. Contributorzero (talk) 18:13, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
The name the government calls itself is "Government of National Salvation"; perhaps we can go with that.[1] David O. Johnson (talk) 21:01, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
- First I think this article should be merged to General National Congress since, even a self-proclaimed, it is the same congress with some of the same old representatives. Second, since the expression (حكومة الإنقاذ الوطني) is also referred Omar al-Hasi and men with him, I think the correct translation is "Cabinet of National Salvation".--Maher27777 (talk) 20:32, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
External links modified edit
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on General National Congress (2014). 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/20140808054849/http://www.turkishweekly.net/news/169449/-libya-publishes-parliamentary-election-results.html to http://www.turkishweekly.net/news/169449/-libya-publishes-parliamentary-election-results.html
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160415152054/https://nz.news.yahoo.com/world/a/31277753/tripoli-authorities-cede-power-to-libyan-unity-government-statement/ to https://nz.news.yahoo.com/world/a/31277753/tripoli-authorities-cede-power-to-libyan-unity-government-statement/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
- 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) 14:43, 12 October 2017 (UTC) – Paine Ellsworth put'r there 01:59, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
Requested move 18 March 2018 edit
- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: Page moved. (closed by page mover) -- Dane talk 02:43, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
General National Congress (2014) → National Salvation Government (Libya) – The Tripoli administration, calling itself the “National Salvation Government” [2] [3], the General National Congress never ceased to exist. [4] 152.254.147.228 (talk) 12:30, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Requested move 26 March 2018 edit
- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: moved. Per the consensus below on this elapsed RM debate, this page needs no qualifier at the present time. Have a Great Day and Happy Publishing! (closed by page mover) Paine Ellsworth put'r there 04:47, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
National Salvation Government (Libya) → National Salvation Government – I don’t see why a disambiguation is necessary for this page and National Salvation Government already redirects here. Charles Essie (talk) 16:47, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose looks like Sudan and several other countries have also had govts of this name In ictu oculi (talk) 19:04, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
- Support There are no other articles with this title, so nothing to disambiguate from exists. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 03:11, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
- @Pppery: for better or worse that isn't how titling works on Wikipedia, please see WP:DAB. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:02, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
- To editor In ictu oculi: please explain. If one writes an article about a notable John Publix, even though there may be a thousand other people with that name, if this one John Publix is the only notable person by that name, we do not qualify his article title with John Publix (astronaut) or whatever. Seems to me it doesn't matter that there are other orgs by this name unless 1) they are notable and have articles, or 2) there is a dab page with the base name for a title that has a lot of red links and only one notable blue link. Neither of those appear to be the case here. Please point to a passage at WP:DAB that supports your position. Paine Ellsworth put'r there 15:21, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
- Support per Charles Essie. --Panam2014 (talk) 00:37, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
- Support until such time as there is an actual conflict with another possible target. Dekimasuよ! 00:57, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
- To editor In ictu oculi: understood, and if the NSG Sudan is notable so that an article is created about it, then the titling of this article can be revisited, isn't that so? Another alternative would be to create a dab page with all the red-linked NSGs and this one notable NSG grouped together. As long as it can be shown that this notable NSG is not the primary topic, then this base name would have to be used to title the dab page. Of course, each red-linked entry would require one blue-linked article in which that entry is mentioned. Paine Ellsworth put'r there 23:38, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
- The problem is the real world exists whether we write articles or not. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:34, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
- Not sure what you mean, because I think this project is more worldly than all other encyclopedia projects combined. And per the guideline (community consensus), I am inclined to agree that it just doesn't make sense to add confusing qualifiers unless they're absolutely needed. Paine Ellsworth put'r there 19:12, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
- The problem is the real world exists whether we write articles or not. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:34, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
- To editor In ictu oculi: understood, and if the NSG Sudan is notable so that an article is created about it, then the titling of this article can be revisited, isn't that so? Another alternative would be to create a dab page with all the red-linked NSGs and this one notable NSG grouped together. As long as it can be shown that this notable NSG is not the primary topic, then this base name would have to be used to title the dab page. Of course, each red-linked entry would require one blue-linked article in which that entry is mentioned. Paine Ellsworth put'r there 23:38, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
Dubious edit
One user has recently edited this page and the page Libyan Civil War (2014–present) that the National Salvation Government has ceased existing as of 16 March 2017. One article cited on the main civil war page is this Reuters article from April 2016: https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-libya-security-politics/libyas-self-declared-national-salvation-government-stepping-down-idUKKCN0X22MD - It seems unlikely that Reuters would know of this 11 months ahead of time.
Another article cited is this libyan express article: http://www.libyanexpress.com/ceasefire-reached-in-tripoli-after-three-days-of-bloody-fighting/. This article makes no mention of the NSG stepping down.
Another thing to note is this BBC Article from a few days ago that makes mention of there being 3 libyan governments - This would not make sense if the National Salvation Government had stepped down: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-43977697
Koopinator (talk) 12:54, 6 May 2018 (UTC)