Jump to content

Talk:Suez Crisis

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


Suggestion for one of the missing citations

[edit]

I would suggest using the following citation for the aftermath section of this article: Yaqub, Salim. Containing Arab Nationalism: The Eisenhower Doctrine and the Middle East. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2004.

ATTN: Someone with editing priveledges.

User:DrSangChi (talk) 12:14PM, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Please add another link...

[edit]

There is no link for People's Republic of China. [I can not do this, although i have hundreds of edits to various Wikipedia pages.]

Already added Bunnypranav (talk) 13:40, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Role of intelligence

[edit]

Considering the size of the article, it's strange that it doesn't have a section discussing the aforementioned topic. There's only an explanatory note by Miles Copeland detailing how CIA's unpreparedness for Nasser's action caught both the U.S. and U.K. unaware (of its resultant chaos/conflict), and explained U.K.'s unilateral -and unorganized- reaction towards Suez's nationalization. Do the editors agree to move this note into a separate section? Thank you Grandia01 (talk) 08:28, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 September 2024

[edit]

Remove the sentence in the 'Aftermath' section, paragraph 2, stating "Some argued that the imposed ending to the Crisis led to over-hasty decolonization in Africa, increasing the chance of civil wars and military dictatorships in newly independent countries." Citation 241.

There is no academic argument to support this opinion, besides the author of the opinion piece that serves as this sentence's citation. The citation is a 2006 opinion piece from the BBC by Aaron Roberts. DavidHIWI (talk) 14:50, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: the sentence clear states some argued, meaning it was an opinion Bunnypranav (talk) 13:38, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]