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)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 February 2025

[edit]

Making the result a political victory for Egypt XhxguyxfuzffzzfuiD (talk) 07:40, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit extended-protected}} template. Cannolis (talk) 07:47, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No per WP:RESULT. We don't add qualifiers such as political victory. Cinderella157 (talk) 01:26, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request 5 March 2025

[edit]

Description of suggested change:

The page says this:

"The British denied the Russian Baltic Fleet use of the canal after the Dogger Bank incident and forced it to steam around the Cape of Good Hope in Africa, giving the Imperial Japanese Armed Forces time to consolidate their position."

But the actual Dogger Bank incident page first doesn't list anything about a denial, secondly, part of the Russian fleet did go through the Suez canal, so there couldn't have been a denial, because if there was, then how did part of the fleet use the Suez canal anyway?

Diff:

ORIGINAL_TEXT
+
CHANGED_TEXT

Killerdark (talk) 05:36, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 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. Aydoh8[contribs] 14:12, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New article Suez Emergency

[edit]

Just a heads-up: editors may want to have a look at the recently-created Suez Emergency article. Not my area of interest necessarily, but this looks like a potentially inappropriate or confusing WP:CONTENTFORK. R Prazeres (talk) 00:06, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]