Jump to content

Talk:2000–2006 Shebaa Farms conflict

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

This page seems a little one-sided. Did the IDF ever react to these attacks? Not that I know much about the area, but it seems unlikely that any military would not react to kidnappings and deaths. -Edgesmash 15:29, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 06:49, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 06:49, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hezbollah flag.jpg Nominated for Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:Hezbollah flag.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests November 2011
What should I do?

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.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 09:22, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Non neutral change

[edit]

Sheilub, Israels annexation and application of civilian laws to the Golan heights has not been recognized by the international community, therefor the occupied land is not in any way "Israel". --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 13:33, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

The original link to the Gazette article which I removed is not showing up for me in the Wayback machine archive - what comes up is a blank page, which is why I removed it. If Someone can post a better link, or perhaps a screenshot of what it looks like when archived, it would be helpful.Here come the Suns (talk) 14:25, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Update - seems to be working fine now. Here come the Suns (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:48, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You errased a part of the article calling it "dead link". The link at the url was not broken the content at the edit was outdated. Avoid errasing content as a whole because of dead link. Try to be more constructive, ask before errasing.Mr.User200 (talk) 18:01, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The archived link was not working for me when I tried to access it, as explained above. Here come the Suns (talk) 18:28, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 June 2022

[edit]

The outcome of the conflict was not clear, as the conflict mutated into a war. The war was a draw and the conflict was only a precursor to war. I ask that the outcome be changed to "inconclusive". QPY66 (talk) 21:58, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: This is actually a controversial edit, so you'll need to discuss first with other editors. Please open a new section here and start a discussion. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:04, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

The current link 4 which connects to a human rights watch document is broken. This is the text in the article currently: # "Human Rights Watch - Defending Human Rights Worldwide". Archived from the original on 6 February 2015. Retrieved 6 February 2015. Droytenberg (talk) 19:49, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]