# Talk:Muammar Gaddafi

In the personal life section talking about the Amazonian Guard, in the same paragraph it includes an error as it contains two hads; " the French journalist Annick Cojean published a book alleging that Gaddafi *had had* sexual relations with women " Lungerism (talk) 15:52, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: "Had had" is perfectly correct there; it is simply the past perfect of "to have." Day Creature (talk) 16:30, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi, i wanna add a link for Italian Libya in the statrt ILikeWhaleWatching (talk) 23:26, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. LizardJr8 (talk) 18:17, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
 Done Thepharoah17 (talk) 19:13, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

The description of his picture at the top reads "Gaddafi in 1910", which obviously isn't correct. FrankFurtRhein (talk) 04:30, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

I propose we replace the current image in the lead to [1]. This image is much more recent, and colored as well. It also depicts Gaddafi as he is mostly been seen. Shubhsamant09 (talk) 00:02, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

@Skitash can you please tell me what's wrong with my edits? Kpop777 (talk) 03:24, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

@Skitash you say the note says "Please do not change unless a final consensus has been established", an administrator didn't add that, some editor who liked that photo added that and their was no discussion on the image in the first place so I don't know what he means by "Final consensus." You say your "reverting undiscussed edits" but haven't gone to the talk page when I opened a discussion. Kpop777 (talk) 14:42, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
And that image is used twice in this article Kpop777 (talk) 14:43, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
Hi. Hidden comments don't need to be placed by an admin to be respected; they're there to prevent disruption. The photo you're removing has been stable in the article for several years, so there's no reason to change it without consensus. I've already removed the duplicate, so that issue is solved. As for removing "politician" and "revolutionary" from the lede, those descriptions are constantly used across RS and should remain there. Skitash (talk) 15:10, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
That's not true, the photo hasn't been on the page for several years, it was added in 2024 I checked the wayback machine. He wasn't a revolutionary, he caim to power during a coup not a revolution, and he was more of a ruler than a politician. He was never actually elected. Calling him a politician is like calling the king of England a politician. Gaddafi wasn't a monarch but he was the closest thing to being a monarch without being one. The page literally says "He ruled Libya". Kpop777 (talk) 15:18, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
From what I can see, the 1970 photo had been in the infobox intermittently since at least 2019,[2] even though editors kept attempting to change it without consensus.
As for everything else you said, that's your own POV. Gaddafi is constantly described as a revolutionary in major RS because he led the 1969 Libyan revolution that overthrew the monarchy. Gaddafi's formal title for much of his rule was literally the Brotherly Leader and Guide of the Revolution.
The comparison with the king of England is absurd. The definition of a politician[3] is "a member of a government or law-making organization" or "a person who is active in politics," which is exactly what Gaddafi was. Kim Jong Un and Fidel Castro were never elected either yet are both described as politicians in their ledes without issue. Skitash (talk) 15:55, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
ok yeah your right, you win. I'm stupid Kpop777 (talk) 16:19, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
No worries. Skitash (talk) 16:52, 23 November 2025 (UTC)