Langbahn Team – Weltmeisterschaft

Talk:List of friendly fire incidents

We're No. 1

Shouldn't there be rankings for different categories. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.255.232.208 (talk) 17:10, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are a lot of omissions in regards to the War is Afghanistan. There have been at least a dozen incidents of members of the Afghan Army and Police opening fire on ISAF forces. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.24.34.202 (talk) 00:16, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima/Nagasaki - Friendly Fire Elements?

As the page has mentioned incidents in which Allied civilian or military prisoners were killed by their own side in WWII, might aspects of the bombings of Hiroshima/Nagasaki (the latter not the initial intended target - Kotura was) be pertinent to list? Going by information from Wikipedia pages alone, 8 US POWs were killed outright at Chokugu Military Police HQ at Hiroshima (with four survivors put to death by their captors) while at Nagasaki, at least one British (RAF) and 7 Dutch POWs were known to have been killed. Both bombings also killed some 2,000 Korean conscript workers doing forced labour in the areas.Cloptonson (talk) 22:08, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't think that's pertinent. Chris Troutman (talk) 23:37, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Executed by their own side

Shouldn't this list also make some sort of mention of the numbers shot for cowardice, desertion, etc. especially during World War I? Both sides did it, numbers are high, and in our times formal apologies are being made. -- Unbuttered parsnip (talk) mytime= Mon 07:40, wikitime= 23:40, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

They do not fit in with the criteria for classing incidents as friendly fire. The executions were intentional (with or without trial), the identity of those who were shot was undisputed, and they were not deaths resulting from tactical or communication error.Cloptonson (talk) 12:47, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I would also refer you to the page on friendly fire, which clarifies that, among other circumstances, "deliberate firing on one's own troops for disciplinary reasons is not friendly fire."Cloptonson (talk) 20:58, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sinking of the O10 (Dutch submarine) - does it qualify?

I question the technical correctness of classing the O10 as an Allied friendly fire victim. At the time of her sinking by French or British aircraft, the Netherlands was still neutral, as Nazi Germany did not invade the country until 10 May 1940.Cloptonson (talk) 21:04, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I furthermore agree with the citation need placed against the more recently added alternative suggestion American dive bombers attacked the ship. Until late 1941 the US was itself neutral and would be unlikely to be deploying or exercising its military aircraft anywhere in Europe - only from 1945 did the US air forces have permanent bases in Europe. I find this so unbelievable I would have deleted it but I will give benefit of the doubt first.Cloptonson (talk) 09:46, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Preponderance of British incidents

I find it striking that there is a preponderance of British incidents and so few from other countries, perhaps there should be a section added that discusses the openness and accountability of other countries in dealing with military mistakes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.199.128.181 (talk) 11:45, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cyberbot II has detected links on List of friendly fire incidents which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • http://www.robertankony.com/lurps/
    Triggered by \brobertankony\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:26, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cyberbot II has detected links on List of friendly fire incidents which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • http://www.robertankony.com/lurps/
    Triggered by \brobertankony\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:09, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cyberbot II has detected links on List of friendly fire incidents which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • http://www.robertankony.com/lurps/
    Triggered by \brobertankony\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:45, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 7 external links on List of friendly fire incidents. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:47, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Karánsebes

List_of_friendly_fire_incidents#Austro-Turkish_War_(1787–91): this section is much disputed, see main article Battle of Karánsebes. – Zsalya (talk · contribs) 10:38, 27 October 2014

I have no opinion on the matter but belatedly opened this discussion based on this edit. – Fayenatic London 21:16, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
For th record, the section was deleted by user:Mdw0, see [1]. – Fayenatic London 21:40, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for reminding me of this poor addition. As I said before; This single incident is WAAAAY to long for its relevance. This is a list, and this needs to be a list entry. It also needs at least one reference. Try again.

Lost Battalion

From the Lost Battalion (World War I) wiki page: "In an infamous incident on 4 October, inaccurate coordinates were delivered by one of the pigeons and the unit was subjected to "friendly fire"." - I don't see any mention of this incident under the World War I section. I believe it's one of the most known cases of friendly fire in history, which is why I'm wondering if the editors knew of this incident, but it didn't meet the criteria of the page for some reason. Just thought I'd mention this here in case it should be added. Thanks! --104.148.178.88 (talk) 20:01, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of friendly fire incidents. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:05, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

General's death in New Fourth Army Incident not friendly fire

The death of Communist Chinese general Xiang Ying, the account of which is uncited and gives no precise date beyond it being in January 1941, cannot surely fit the definition of friendly fire. What is described in his wiki biography and the article on the incident was, considered with unpartisan POV, basically a treacherous murder to facilitate a robbery by a soldier who defected to the Nationalist Government side as the latter's troops overran the Communists in an internecine ambush. I therefore propose removal, unless someone can come up with evidence the killing was not deliberate or was erroneous. A soldier shooting his own commander in order to steal what the latter was looking after could not be imagined as 'friendly'!Cloptonson (talk) 20:05, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12 Sep 44

"The Japanese transport ship Rakuyō Maru, carrying 1,317 Australian and British prisoners-of-war in convoy from Singapore to Formosa (Taiwan), was sunk in the Luzon Strait by the submarine USS Sealion, whose commanders were unaware until after the sinking that allied prisoners had been on board. Ultimately 1,159 POWs died,[98] only 50 rescued by the 'Sealion and sister submarines in her pack lived to make landfall." Kachidoki Maru, carrying 950 POWs, was part of the same convoy, and was sunk by USS Pampanito; 431 of the POWs were killed. See SS Kachidoki Maru and SS Rakuyo Maru. 104.153.40.58 (talk) 17:16, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Chastise (1943)

I have deleted an uncited estimate of "1,519 Allied prisoners-of-war" being lost in flooding caused by the RAF's Operation Chastise bombings of the Ruhr Dams and superseded it with a more considered analysis copied from the article on the Operation. Calling all the dead prisoners of war may be inaccurate as most of them were civilian citizens of Allied nations used for forced labour rather than captured uniformed service prisoners (though Soviet military prisoners were often worked to death in such gangs in disregard of Geneva Convention by Nazi Germany).Cloptonson (talk) 10:06, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Russian Boomerang Incident to be added?

The surface to air missile launched and returned to hit the launcher. Around June 22, 2022 during Russian invasion of Ukraine. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/18988815/russian-missile-fail-launch-ukraine-war/ 2603:7000:86F0:85B0:3001:50FB:C083:1943 (talk) 04:44, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If there are any other sources that discuss about this return-to-sender missile we can definitely add it to the list.
~ MateoFrayo (talk) 18:20, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Will we include redirects with every topic? There are some subject headings, such as the First Lebanon War, that have a redirect link to their respective page––but the majority of them do not.

Most "list" pages usually don't have heading redirects, but if it were to be added I'm sure it'll be fine.

MateoFrayo (talk) 18:18, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Friendly Fire Family Notification

There are more. What is the policy for reporting them, and is family notification consider? 2601:901:4400:E420:85B1:CD31:EDE0:A6E9 (talk) 00:20, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quelle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_friendly_fire_incidents