Talk:Amiriyah shelter bombing

message: Is the picture Amariyah B.jpg (labled "An Iraqi Girl") a victim of the atack?  The description does not say; if she is it should probably be labled as such (or labled with her relation to the bombing).  --Hansnesse 07:27, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Image

message: I put on the top of the page not an image, but a human face, as the true story of Amariyah can hardly be told by reporting the number of children killed without also saying what could have been. David Cruise 15:59, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Human face

message: Thank you Hansnesse for reverting the 207.233.110.65. I visited his homepage and looked at his recent contributions:
*Amiriyah shelter
*Terminator 2: Judgment day
*King Kong
*Doom (film)
*Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (Support for use of atomic bombs)
The 207.233.110.65 was looking for a way to discredit the article and, as you correctly predicted, the Iraqi's girl's picture appears to be the weak point. I'll try to add a footnote explaining the intended point. Let's keep our options open and see what happens. David Cruise 04:24, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We should definitely not let vandals determine what gets put into Wikipedia.  Thanks, --Hansnesse 04:38, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The Top Picture

message: Shouldn't this be entitled the Amiriyah Massacre? ·ΚέκρωΨ· (talk) 07:35, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be a good idea. Almost the entire article is about the event. Nethency (talk) 11:21, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Massacre 

message: I read (in only one source) that in 2004, American forces closed down the site, which was being used as a memorial. Anyone knows more about that? Nethency (talk) 11:24, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Closure

message: "Coverage" appears near-complete. The References look good, but there is a request for citation in the lead. An infobox would fulfill "Supporting Materials". Maybe a photo of the memorial? Or the woman who's a guide there? Boneyard90 (talk) 01:42, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  MH Assessment Comments 

message: After 25 Years of U.S. Role in Iraq, Scars Are Too Stubborn to Fade
This article includes a quote from a book calling the bombing an intelligence failure. I'm posting the link to this article because another Wikipedian may find it useful for this Wikipedia article. 71.183.129.191 (talk) 06:07, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent article in ''The New York Times'' 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Amiriyah shelter bombing. 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/20080128175408/http://naeemjeenah.shams.za.org/amariyah.htm to http://naeemjeenah.shams.za.org/amariyah.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.uruknet.de/?p=m30603&hd=&size=1&l=e
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.foxnews.com/story/0%2C2933%2C98289%2C00.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:56, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I removed this section:
In 2002 it appeared that the place was still radioactive, a consequence from the use of uranium in the missiles.
The ref said: as explained in the French-language documentary "Irak, d'une guerre à l'autre", produced in 2002. The documentary features a Geiger counter being brought in the building and the counter detects a significant amount of radioactivity inside the destroyed bunker
The used bomb type is not known to contain Uranium, and environmental radiation in a bunker has other, more plausible explanations (such as Radon). A Geiger counter doesn't tell you the source of radiation. This would require extensive testing in a laboratory. The source is speculative at best and thus not suitable for an encyclopedia. --2A02:8070:89C0:7800:8CFC:3131:9A4D:F3C5 (talk) 04:16, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Adding to this, the author of this section has been blocked from editing several times over similar additions. User_talk:FlorentPirot --2A02:8070:89C0:7800:8CFC:3131:9A4D:F3C5 (talk) 04:21, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Radioactivity" 

message: Aside from the glaring NPOV issues I found while editing this article (we get it, we get it, they incinerated innocent women and children, please yell it into my other ear as well), one thing caught my eye: the photo of Sally Ahmad Salman.
Now, not even an hour before editing this, I was reading the talk page for "Qassam rocket", in which there are multiple discussions (the most prominent linked there) about the article's (now long removed) usage of a photo of Osher Twito, an Israeli boy who lost a leg to a Qassam rocket. Several messages cite (also removed) images from other articles about the Israeli–Palestinian conflict that were only added to silently push POVs through emotional responses, including photos of victims. And, correct me if I'm wrong, but we've got one of those images right here.
My condolences to Sally and the 400+ who perished. Not trying to hide her existence or the bombing's victims or legacy in any way. But is her image actually needed here? Yes, she's a victim of this awful bombing, but isn't this also one of those aforementioned victim photos used to push POVs? If it is, it'd be good if it was removed, I think. AdoTang (talk) 03:39, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sally Ahmad Salman's photograph