Talk:Libya blocks access to Internet

Review of revision 1182893 [Passed]

 * I was told to combine an article I had written with this one. Therefore I added the following:

"The increasing violence in Libya has prompted the 27 European Union ministers to issue a statement protesting Libyan governmental violence toward protesters, saying it "condemns the ongoing repression against demonstrators in Libya and deplores the violence and death of civilians." Two Libyan pilots have defected to Malta and asked for asylum, saying that they were ordered to fire on protesters, according to Maltese officials.

The violence has spread to Tripoli. Witnesses have reported that a "massacre" occurred today in suburbs of the Libyan capital with the indiscriminate shooting of women and children. According to, hundreds have died over the last four days.

The escalating violence is causing turbulence in the world energy markets. The International Monetary Fund says that energy exports accounts for approximately 95% of Libya's export earning."


 * This does not really directly relate to the title "Libya blocks access to Internet". The part I added has nothing to do with the Internet. It has to do with violence. Therefore, the subject changes in the middle of the article, making it disjointed. None of the part I added is covered in the lede. My article Violence esculates in Libya,  was deleted because I was told to merge it with this one.  Mattisse (talk) 00:39, 24 February 2011 (UTC)


 * The lede isn't a summary. It's a short paragraph that succinctly answers as many as reasonably possible of the basic questions about the news event that is the central focus of the article.  And that's all it does.  Subsequent paragraphs can provide further detail, and it is expected that the further down one goes, the more in-depth things get; cf. inverted pyramid.  The additional stuff you added here comes across as background, which is not out of place further down in the article.  --Pi zero (talk) 03:43, 24 February 2011 (UTC)