Talk:USS Liberty incident

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the USS Liberty incident article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8Auto-archiving period: 60 days

Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article: You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive) You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. Further information The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are: Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive. Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required. With respect to the WP:1RR restriction: Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring. Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence. After being warned, contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topic sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions. Editors may report violations of these restrictions to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard. If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!

	USS Liberty incident is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones Date Process Result August 21, 2005 Featured article candidate Not promoted
	Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on June 8, 2004, June 8, 2007, June 8, 2019, and June 8, 2023.

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

Military history: Aviation / Intelligence / Maritime / Middle East / North America / United States C‑class 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. C This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale. This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  Military aviation task force Intelligence task force Maritime warfare task force Middle Eastern military history task force North American military history task force United States military history task force Ships This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions. Israel Mid‑importance Israel portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Israel 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. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Project Israel To Do: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Assess : Rate the Unassessed Israel-related articles and Unknown-importance Israel-related articles. Cleanup : Cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category and the tool's wiki page. Collaborate : Participate in WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration. Copyedit : Timeline of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict in 2005 Deletion sorting : Participate in discussions at WikiProject Deletion sorting/Israel. Expand : Ayala Procaccia, Diamond industry in Israel, Edna Arbel, Levin Kipnis, Rami Kleinstein, Sephardic Haredim, Zman Tel Aviv, Nachum Heiman, Public Defence (Israel), Prisoner of Zion, Trial of Benjamin Netanyahu, Day to Mark the Departure and Expulsion of Jews from the Arab Countries and Iran, Pre-Modern Aliyah See also Articles needing translation from Hebrew Wikipedia. Geographical coordinates : Add geographic coordinates to Israel articles missing geocoordinate data. Infobox : Add infoboxes to Israel articles needing infoboxes. Maintain : See Israel articles needing attention. Map : See discussion at Module:Location map/data/Israel. Add maps to articles in Wikipedia requested maps in Israel. NPOV : Jewish exodus from Arab and Muslim countries Photo : Add pictures to articles in Wikipedia requested photographs in Israel. Stubs : See Israel stubs. Update : Basic Law proposal: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People Other : Translate to Hebrew : David Bar-Hayim, Guy Bavli, and Guy Oseary. Palestine Mid‑importance Palestine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographic Palestine region, the Palestinian people and the State of Palestine on Wikipedia. Join us by visiting the project page, where you can add your name to the list of members where you can contribute to the discussions. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. United States: Military history Low‑importance United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Military history - U.S. military history task force.

On 12 February 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved to Attack on the USS Liberty. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

Archives

Index Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8

This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view. Jmeadors (talk · contribs) This user has contributed to the article. This user has declared a connection. (,)

Survivors of The USS Liberty dispute Naval investigation

BBC has produced an alternative story to what really happened in regards to the Israei attack on The USS Liberty. "USS Liberty:Dead in the Water" 2002 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjOH1XMAwZA Along with the BBC the vertrans of The USS Liberty has a website dedicated to the events that took place on that fateful day. http://www.gtr5.com/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevoconnor16 (talk • contribs)

Please add wikiquotes link for new WQ page

Is the equivocal definition of "deliberate" a problem that could use some clarification?

The word "deliberate" seems to be used here as some sort of negation of "accident" or "mistake". There is a problem in that "deliberate" means, "the result of deliberation," which does not necessarily imply that the deliberations are correct; yet the word "deliberate" could be taken to mean that the end result considering all of the eventual facts was intended. There is a substantial difference between a deliberation with mistaken facts/assumptions and one with no errors. IOW, Israel, as the result of a deliberations in an information deficit due to the fog of war, came to the mistaken conclusion that the USS Liberty was a hostile Egyptian ship and as a result made the positive decision to attack it, as they were at war with Egypt. This is not the same as having positively identified it as an American vessel and positively decided to attack the United States -- a nation they were not at war with. That something was done after deliberation does not mean that the results are intended, since deliberation is just the process of thinking things over and does not mean you know everything, or even anything at all. Something can be done after deliberation which is still a mistake/unintended/an accident of information at hand. 2601:19E:4280:5853:2C01:795B:F90E:4D52 (talk) 02:25, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

All 11 times we use the word "deliberate" in the article prose, it is as part of a direct or indirect, attributed quote. MW also includes the relevant definition: characterized by awareness of the consequences. In context "done after deliberation" is not the definition being used here, and even it was, we would not use our own original synthesis as editors to arrive at a conclusion different than those attributed to relevant sources. VQuakr (talk) 03:38, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

There was no abandon ship order

The current page says "Israeli ships' actions after the torpedo hit: Officers and men of Liberty say that after the torpedo attack and the abandon ship order". The citation only claims that there was an order to "prepare to abandon ship". 2603:3023:106:1800:C210:7C2E:83FF:6ECE (talk) 00:05, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 October 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Make the language of this article, at least the first few paragraphs where most viewers will skim, more neutral. "Israel apologized, saying they thought it was an Egyptian ship" > "Israel issued an apology, claiming they thought it was an Egyptian ship" etc. The facts are not clear cut enough to present the article the biased way it is being presented now. Jester6482 (talk) 12:08, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

 Not done Wikipedia tries to avoid using the word "claim" because it creates an implication that we're taking a side in the dispute and risks violating the neutral point of view policy. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 19:09, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Alright that is pretty selective reasoning, anybody can do "ctrl-F" on any wikipedia page and see that in other scenarios, there is no such concern to avoid using the word "claim" when it fits the reality of what happened.

From "The Raven" article: "Poe, however, claimed the poem was a combination of octameter acatalectic, heptameter catalectic, and tetrameter catalectic."

From "Ku Klux Klan" article: "A 2016 report by the Anti-Defamation League claims an estimate of just over 30 active Klan groups existing in the United States"

From "Soviet Union" article: "A 1986 study published in the American Journal of Public Health claimed that, citing World Bank data, the Soviet model provided a better quality of life and human development than market economies at the same level of economic development in most cases."

From "French Revolution" article: "Historian Reynald Secher claims that as many as 117,000 died between 1793 and 1796. Although those numbers have been challenged"

From "Henry Ford" article: "Ford "insisted that war was the product of greedy financiers who sought profit in human destruction". In 1939, he went so far as to claim that the torpedoing of U.S. merchant ships by German submarines was the result of conspiratorial activities undertaken by financier war-makers."

From "Smedley Butler" article: "Butler also claimed that the plotters of the alleged coup intended on using Butler, at the head of a group of veterans, to place the federal government under arrest."

So much for that excuse. Jester6482 (talk) 03:28, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

...which is why we reference our style guidelines rather than other articles. VQuakr (talk) 05:42, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Great defense for the inconsistency. Jester6482 (talk) 20:07, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

This is a volunteer-created project; it is not and never will be perfect. Therefore, pointing out examples from other articles that appear at odds with the style guide is a poor argument for not following the style guide. WP:OTHERSTUFF is a famously fallacious argument here, so yeah in general don't expect it to get much traction. VQuakr (talk) 22:51, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

That appears to be about whether other articles exist at all. All I did was check whether or not articles typically followed the style guide you were enforcing. No point in referencing the style guide at all if we can just say "someone else wrote that article, so we don't have to enforce the style guide there" when it's convenient, and this is an edit request, not a deletion discussion right? But whatever you say I will leave this article alone. Jester6482 (talk) 23:26, 31 October 2024 (UTC)