Talk:Libyan Arab Airlines Flight 114

message: I changed the last paragraph to reflect a neutral POV-Julian Diamond 07:31, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: PoV

message: The intro needs to be fleshed out.  It's basically not even an intro.  I'm feeling lazy though :) --Jaysweet 22:36, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Disagree. Firstly the Sinai had been used to launch attacks against Israel and Egypt refused to discuss peace terms. Israel keeping the territory is at least understandable. Secondly at the time the Arabs were staging frequent raids into Israeli territory, so Israeli pilots would beleive they were acting in self defence against an act of terrorism. The plane got lost, flew into a high tension airspace, did not comunicate to any airtraffic controller and ignored clear signals. Finally if the Israeli planes were close enough for hand signals the aircrew should have realised that they were F-4 Phantoms ( which look very different to MIGS ) and seen the Star of David on the aircrft. And please sign your posts. David.j.james 16:14, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intro 

message: The article says under the "Airliner perspective" section that Cairo East (CE) is the airport and Cairo West (CW) the airbase. It also says the pilots thought they had overflown CE and the Egyptian Migs (IAF F-4s) were escorting them back to CW. Finally it says that when the pilots noticed it was an airbase they thought there was a mistake so they flew west...presumably AWAY from CE. This makes no sense. Anynobody 09:30, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cairo East/Cairo West contradiction

message: 84.36.2.70 added the following paragraph that seems to be at least in need of sourcing:
Celebrations erupted in the city of Haifa by several Israelis who shouted "Death to the Arabs" while spontaneously dancing.
--SLi 22:57, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I strongly agree. Anynobody 08:26, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rming statement that needs to be sourced 

message: Theres no mention about the Israeli pilots trying to commincate with the aircraft using radio. Did they not try, or not have the right radios or did the aircrew not check the right frequenices? Or what? David.j.james 16:20, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't know for sure but I think you're right, I'd assumed it was attempted but the fact that neither side knew what freq to transmit/receive on probably kept them from being able to establish contact. It's the same basic issue with Korean Airlines Flight 902 and Korean Airlines Flight 007, radio contact wasn't established. Anynobody 05:37, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Radio contact 

message: Is there really a need for an obvious attempt to rationalize shooting down a civilian airliner?  Lacking any citations, coupled with an absolute ridiculous explanation, it reeks of propaganda.  You'd seriously have to be an idiot to buy that for a second.
: This whole article is undercited as a whole. WP:NPOV demands that all sides of an issue be covered and simple wisdom should tell you that "You'd seriously have to be an idiot to buy that" on an article about Israel or any other hotly disputed topic isn't the most helpful way to discuss things.--Prosfilaes 12:20, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed the wording slightly to reflect that the justifications are Israels opinion. Previously it sounded like the article itself was making excuses. --220.253.90.196 06:14, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not simply Israel's opinion that commercial planes could be used for military purposes. The same assumption drove the Soviet Union to shoot down KAL 902 a few years later. Anynobody 01:02, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Israel perspective? 

message: Hello, i read in one german newspaper that Israel accepted to pay compensation! Is anyone able to confirm that? --85.180.172.203 (talk) 22:15, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Referenced and added to the article. --John (talk) 16:30, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

text: Which was contradicted by the co-pilot, as stated in the article and referenced. This is why there is a no Original Research policy at Wikipedia.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.190.104 (talk) 14:56, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question about compensation 

message: After just reading the terrible events that befell Korean Air Lines Flight 007 I came across this event. I must say the two articles could be more diametrically different. This article almost, and without any sense of shame, blames the pilots of the civilian airliner for being shot down. An unarmed plane is shot out of the sky by Israeli jets and it almost passes for acceptable based on the circumstances.
Now compare that to the tone of the article concerning the shooting down of the non-military Korean Airliner by the Soviets (boo hiss) and it's quite obvious that this article is written by Jewish apologists. Quite frankly why this article has not been queried more is just another example how wrong Wikipedia as a reliable source truly is. The only people I can see who actually bother to do all this free work here must surely be those with the most pressing agendas!!!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.163.108.0 (talk) 13:38, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Ranting has no place on the TP's - suggest Reliable Sources to improve an article.50.111.9.62 (talk) 18:08, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparison in tone.... 

message: This article references "a similar incident a month earlier, in which an Ethiopian plane was shot down", and then procedes to provide no citation for it.   This list of airline shootdown incidents makes a similar uncited reference.   This page of accidents and incidents of Ethiopian Airlines has no reference to any incident whatsoever in 1973 (January, or otherwise).  In fact the only shootdown is from 10 Apr, 1969.  That's far more than a month earlier.  Is there some other mystery incident not referenced in these pages or is the original quote off by multiple years?  --CumbiaDude (talk) 23:31, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ethiopian shootdown? 

message: Is it true that the co-pilot's own account is contradictory to the Libyan government stating that the attack occurred without warning? The attack was without warning, that is not to say that the crew were unaware of the Israeli jets. Also, how was ignoring the jets, and turning west, "erratic behavior" making it prudent to shoot down a civilian aircraft?Royalcourtier (talk) 06:47, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The Talk Pages are not about discussing the subject, but discussing Reliable Source material for the improvement of the articles. Since this is what the RS stated in the cite, that's how it is stated in the article. 98.67.190.104 (talk) 14:50, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradictions 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Libyan Arab Airlines Flight 114. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20110514142456/http://www.airsafe.com/events/models/b727.htm to http://www.airsafe.com/events/models/b727.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:16, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello!
Could you please add that the Incident is 2nd deadliest aviation accident in Egyptian History?
Thanks Derna in East Libya (talk) 08:10, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Actualcpscm (talk) 08:30, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 June 2023 

message: In the third paragraph of the Timeline section, MIGs should be MiGs. For the benefit of readers who aren't familiar with the term, I suggest changing it to MiG warplanes or wikilinking MiGs to List of Mikoyan and MiG aircraft. —71.105.243.101 (talk) 04:41, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Source #6 says ″MIG″, not ″MiG″ but the wikilink was added.--Jetstreamer  12:20, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 February 2024 

message: In the first paragraph, "then under Israeli-occupation" should be "then under Israeli occupation". The current sentence is grammatically incorrect. AvrahamHerschel (talk) 15:16, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Jamedeus (talk) 17:58, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 March 2024