Talk:List of ongoing armed conflicts/Archive 11

Archive 5

←

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Philippines should be colour-coded Orange

There were 471 conflict-related deaths in the Philippines in 2018, based on the 'List of ongoing conflicts' article. Therefore, the colour code should be Orange, and not Red. Request that this map be updated. Thankyou. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agila81 (talk • contribs)

"Deaths by country" table links Afghanistan's football team page instead of country

The "Deaths by country" table, in the 2020 column, links the Afghanistan national football team instead of the country's page

Change to list criteria

I propose that we amend the following criterion in the list as i believe that some of these are similar to questions like the 'Philippine Drug War' or 'Islamic terrorism in Europe' or that they are merely minor scuffles.

• Listed conflicts are at least 100 cumulative deaths in total and at least 1 death in current or past calendar year.

to

• Listed conflicts are at least 1000 cumulative deaths in total and at least 100 deaths in the current or past calendar year.

IMHO this would be a great way to limit the number of updates needed to be made, combined with the difficulty in finding sources and the limited 'area of effect' of these conflicts, in addition it would likely hone efforts on a few entries and increase the quality and veracity of said entries. Nonetheless i am welcome to all opinion. - || RuleTheWiki || (talk) 12:04, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

I think it's enough to raise the threshold from 1 death in current or past calendar year to somewhere between 20 and 40. That will still eliminate the vast majority of skirmishes and clashes. Mikael Häggström (talk) 16:11, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

I oppose this change entirely, this is supposed to be a "list of ongoing armed conflicts", not "a list of armed conflicts in which an arbitrary number of people have died". Some conflicts which are extremely notable have very few deaths in any given calendar year, for example the Papua Conflict has been ongoing for over 40 years and is a major issue in Oceania, and yet it rarely ever produces more than 100 casualties in a year.XavierGreen (talk) 18:47, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

@ XavierGreen I will cede that given that the leader of the West Papuan independence leader has delivered signatures to the United Nations this does meet notability, but if given this media spotlight, it is reasonable to assume that the conflict will escalate in the coming year, at which point the conflict would become extremely notable. It also would be more sensible to call it a foreign policy quandry until that occurs. - || RuleTheWiki || (talk) 12:44, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

The conflict has already escaled, the OPM captured and openly held territory in late 2017 and in 2018 provoking a major Indonesian offensive against the rebels. Such a thing had not happened in decades. However, even with those events only a couple dozen casualties had occurred. By your criteria, it wouldn't be included on the list, which is preposterous.XavierGreen (talk) 19:49, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

@ XavierGreen You make a good point, but the fact of the matter is that it is being made out on the same level as the Dissident IRA campaign, The (Nagorno-Karabakh) and (Georgia-Ossetia) conflicts which are technically more described as Frozen conflicts than as active combat scenarios. Conflicts between nomads in Sudan and the Lebanon spillover of the Syrian Civil War only serve to deepen the misclassification and misattribution of many list items. Therefore it seems right to make some adjustments in order to keep the article compact and just like this article doesn't report on things like alt-right terrorism or other such terror related disputes more accurately classified as Lists of active separatist movements. Also source for that land occupation? - || RuleTheWiki || (talk) 15:29, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose - this would cancel about half of the list, most very notable conflicts.GreyShark (dibra) 21:44, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

@GreyShark Only 1/4 of the list due to the last subheading being removed. - || RuleTheWiki || (talk) 12:44, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

• Compromise - I agree that if a conflict only has 1 casualty in either the current or previous year, it is hardly a significant armed conflict, yet 100 might be too high a threshold. User:Mikael Häggström's proposal of 20-40 seems reasonable, or a more moderate threshold of 10 would be more inclusive; if there were not 10 fatalities either last year or this year, is the conflict noteworthy? (I would not increase the cumulative figure, as recent conflicts should also be included.) Clean Copy^talk 15:55, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

@Clean Copy What about this as a compromise, Replace (At least 1 death in current or past calendar year.) with (At least 10 deaths in the current or past calendar year.) i think we could all agree on that. - || RuleTheWiki || (talk) 10:19, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

That seems eminently sensible. Clean Copy^talk 17:30, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

No, i oppose that as well, any number value is arbitrary and would potentially exclude conflicts that are ongoing and notable.XavierGreen (talk) 19:15, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

References

@ XavierGreen "any number value is arbitrary"? why not 0 in past calendar year, that would include many conflicts which don't kill anyone in any given year yet they're still relevant. Also most notable conflicts have 'at least 10 deaths' per year. - || RuleTheWiki || (talk) 06:01, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Sort problem

In the "Wars (1,000-9,999)" section, the table is not properly sorting by cumulative fatalities: The value 383,000 is not in sequence. I cannot figure out why this would be. Clean Copy^talk 15:41, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

The problem is the use of { { ntsh | } } module. For example, { { ntsh | 800000 } } 1,240,000–2,000,000 sorts refering to 800000, not 1240000 (which may have been changed using a visual editor for example when somebody updated the old value (800000) only in one place. My suggestion is to remove all the { { ntsh | } } modules in the article). The sorting is then done perfectly, and is more practical for the constant number changes that need to be done. At least this is what I did in the greek translation of the page and works fine.

note: in greek character encoding we use (.) instead of (,) to show a thousand for example (1.000) i don't know what happens if you have to sort for example 1,240,000 in english (with two ,) in greek 1.240.000 still does fine

Gomoloko (talk) 02:18, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

If you remove the ntsh template, the wikitables will sort by the first integer. For example, given 4, 67 and 150,000, the wikitable will sort from the lowest to highest first integer, and return the values in this order: 150,000, 4 and 67. The ntsh template avoids this issue by keeping the real value and ignoring commas/periods. The value in the ntsh template should always be updated every time the value outside it is; when given a range, the lower value should be included inside. CentreLeftRight ✉ 05:55, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Yes, but how does it work in this page ? greek You can also see the source code Gomoloko (talk) 18:44, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Northern Ireland

The United Kingdom is not mentioned in the article, but in the map is colored yellow. This seems like an oversight - Perhaps Northern Ireland will flare up again but I don't think it has yet.

It was in in the List because there is only a ceasefire since 1998 sand not peace. One Person was killed in 2017 and another in Last night. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissident_Irish_Republican_campaign --217.24.224.55 (talk) 09:06, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

No news articles as source for Mexican Drug War

Criteria for this article include that "This is not a list of countries by intentional homicide rate". I've updated the Mexican Drug War to the latest edition of the JusticeinMexico report from University of San Diego, which spans through 2018. It clearly shows that the numbers given in news articles keep reporting absurdly exaggerated numbers, which clearly refer to total homicide rates rather than the actual Mexican Drug War. Thus, I think we should refrain from using news articles completely as sources for the Mexican Drug War, and I made a wikicode note in its box for this purpose. I definitely think we should wait with any entry in the 2019 box until we have a reliable report, rather than using inaccurate sources. Mikael Häggström (talk) 06:11, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

May

Venezuelan conflict

Almost a year ago I asked or the Crisis in Venezuela is escalated into an armed conflict. Here and there were little minor armed incidents like the Caracas helicopter incident, the Attack on Fort Paramacay and the 2017 Venezuelan National Assembly attack all of them were in 2017. In 2018 the crisis escalated more with more armed incidents like the El Junquito raid in January that year, and the Caracas drone attack in August. After the drone attack there weren't really armed incidents until the Venezuelan presidential crisis in January this year. On 17 January 2019 a group of ex-army and police officers in Peru announced their support for Guaidó and wouldn't support Moduro [1] On 22 January, The Guardian reported that an attempted military insurrection happed on that day.[2] The day after The Redes Foundation claimed that Colombian left-wing groups like EPL and FARC dissidents supported the Bolivarian National Police against the protest. [3] This can be decribed as a spillover of the Colombian Conflict. On 1 March al-Jazeera claims that 400 soldiers left Venezuela and some of them want to fight back. [4] Since 30 April a Venezuelan uprising is ongoing which pro-Guaidó forces and protesters against the government. So there are a lot of new armed incidents between May 2018 and May 2019. The question is. Is this an armed conflict or is it a protest movement with a couple of minor armed incidents? Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 10:00, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

How many cumulative casualties already? I think the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Incubator/Ongoing_conflicts is not updated.GreyShark (dibra) 18:52, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

• Comment I'm inclined to the thought that this is a low-level conflict, but would be happy to hear opinions.GreyShark (dibra) 18:52, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

It seems as though a low level armed conflict may be on the precipice of starting, but i don't think its here yet. The earlier minuscule rebel groups from the incidents in 2017 appear to have been completely liquidated by the Maduro government. The incidents ongoing now are clearly separated from those earlier ones where a nascent insurgency was forming. Now you have a situation where Guaido is rallying some military personnel to his cause, and purportedly some of these defectors are starting to organize. Whether the Guaidoists utilize these defecting military elements to carry on an armed conflict remains to be seen. As of right now, it still seems to be a largely civil conflict with some minor armed incidents interspersed with it, but that could change rapidly at any point.XavierGreen (talk) 19:25, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Remove this please

I made an reading error on something that I failed to notice, this can be removed. Redactedfox (talk) 04:03, 9 May 2019 (UTC) Redactedfox (talk) 04:04, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Ridiculous Notes Section

The notes section on this article has a ridiculous number of reference all overlapping with one another making it hard to read other notes and hard to click on the references wanted, is there anything formatting we could do to clean up the look of the mess? --Bluecrab2 (talk) 05:56, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Lebanese conflict

Still active [5], but someone removed it, contrary to page policy (at least one casualty in current or previous year). Reinstalling it, please refrain from "guessing" the ends of conflicts.GreyShark (dibra) 07:26, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

@RuleTheWiki: for your attention. Next time i shall revert your entire edit.GreyShark (dibra) 07:31, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

War in Catatumbo

I have added War in Catatumbo to the minor conflicts list in a separate row to the Colombian conflict, because it is not clear if the Colombian conflict figures, which are calculated from many sources, already include some or all or none of the fatalities attributed by HRW to Catatumbo. I have also titled the article "War in Catatumbo" because this is what the HRW has designated it, and media reports have followed suit. Kingsif (talk) 16:47, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Missing conflicts?

Both the Xinjiang conflict and the Communist rebellion in the Philippines pages state that each respective conflict is ongoing, but isn't on this list. There were a few others that I happened to noticed, but those are two that I noticed.

192.81.45.83 (talk) 23:29, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Dear 192.81.45.83, even if a conflict is ongoing, unless it produces deaths in the current or/and past year, it is not included. For more information on these types of conflicts, check out Frozen conflict and List of wars extended by diplomatic irregularity. Graymatter501 (talk) 18:06, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Why does the Philippine Drug War fail the inclusion criteria?

Dear XavierGreen, why does the Philippine Drug War fail the inclusion criteria? Graymatter501 (talk) 18:21, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

If you look back through the archives, there is no organized conflict between two paramilitary groups. While the Philippine government is indeed cracking down on drug dealers and users, there are no sources which we have seen so far which indicate that the drug dealers are organizing along paramilitary lines to actively combat the government in the manner that the cartels have in Mexico for instance.XavierGreen (talk) 21:27, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Okay, thank you XavierGreen. Graymatter501 (talk) 09:12, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Dear XavierGreen, in that regard, doesn't the 2018–19 Sudanese protests fail the inclusion criteria too? Graymatter501 (talk) 13:06, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Yes, that should be removed as well.XavierGreen (talk) 13:57, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Change to "at least 10 fatalities"

There has been no consensus to change from 1 to 10 fatalities in current or past year. Change reverted.GreyShark (dibra) 19:45, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Wars ended

The Kamwina Nsapu Insurgency ended January 2019. I don't think any fatalities have occurred since several insurgent commanders and hundreds of rebels laid down their arms after elections that month. The war should be removed from the bottom of the ongoing list.

In addition the Moro Conflict in the Philippines seemed to have ended January 22 2019. according to the chart, there are 35 deaths in 2019, but no citations. That might need to be removed as well.

Actually, there are more wars that need to be removed from this list. Somebody needs to go through the whole thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.221.136.220 (talk) 23:32, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

The Moro conflict is ongoing, there have been at least 10 fatalities in the past 30 days alone. See https://www.benarnews.org/english/news/philippine/Abu-Sayyaf-bombers-11052019143732.html and https://warisboring.com/seven-suspected-islamist-militants-killed-in-firefight-in-philippines/ XavierGreen (talk) 18:07, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Fair enough. In that case, someone's got to change the Moro Conflict infobox to ongoing. 98.221.136.220 (talk) 02:44, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

utility of the page

I came to find a singular list of active wars and the number of casualties.

Is there anywhere with a simple list like:

Yemen 20,000 killed in 2019

Lybia 10000 killed 2019

like just something simple?

not trying to be rude, but like the libtards I am trying to explain this to are so dumb that they don't think there are any wars at all going on because they can't comprehend even wiki page

So therefore I need a list so simple a libtard can understand it— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:199:c203:bfe0:4d2b:fdaf:ee54:a7e9 (talk) 02:27, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

If you "need a list so simple a libtard can understand it" then you might want to create the article "List of ongoing armed conflicts" at the Simple English Wikipedia Tradedia^talk 18:32, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

Mexican Drug War deaths in 2018

Concerning the "Mexican Drug War", there are two different sources used for "deaths" in 2018 in two different tables. One is 22,500, the other is 33,341. It might be good for someone who knows this conflict to synthesize the two numbers... Tradedia^talk 18:32, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

Map Update

Map hasn't been updated since at least the summer months of 2019 so someone should make changes according to the death count in 2019 and 2020 of the ongoing armed conflicts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:587:201D:9A00:17E:D11E:A90C:B4E7 (talk) 01:38, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

2019-20 Persian Gulf Crisis

I believe it's time that somebody put this in the page because there are already at least 35 casualties (Iranian side) and it's actually an armed conflict at this point and not just a crisis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:587:201D:9A00:17E:D11E:A90C:B4E7 (talk) 01:33, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

The guideline is minimum 100 casualties.GreyShark (dibra) 12:54, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Insurgency in the Magreb

The topic should be changed to conflicts between 1000 and 9999 deaths, considering its 2019 stats. Jolkesky editor (talk) 02:56, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

It does say that but I can't find any other sources with numbers anywhere near as high as the ones shown in this article. Flalf (talk) 17:27, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Are these sources reliable? They are presented by the UN but I am not exactly sure that the total number of deaths in 2019 are 4,000.. if you sum up all the deaths by every reported attack in these countries the number cannot possibly be higher than let's say 2,000 maximum in 2019.. but if we take it as an official update then I think it's time to change it and move the conflict to the War section (1,000-9,999 deaths). Here are the sources. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/01/envoy-devastating-surge-attacks-sahel-west-africa-200109011431355.html and https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/01/1054981. date of this post is 18/1/2020.

Flagcruft

I don't see any problems with the placement of the flags, but before I remove the banner I would like to hear the reasoning behind putting it up. Thanks! Flalf (talk) 17:21, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

I didn't put the banner up, but maybe there are too many flags in the LAST table... Tradedia^talk 20:38, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Yeah that's reasonable. I guess I'll do that. Flalf (talk) 15:39, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Someone undid my edit, and no, the flags are overwhelming on the last table. You can't ignore that there is a problem and someone has to have a solution. I apologize for undoing your undoing and I believe that you did it in the best interest of the article, but I still believe that is an incorrect decision. Flalf (talk) 15:15, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Mexican Drug War

Are we sure that the Mexican Drug War fulfills the war definitions listed on the page, or just the ones listed by Fox News? If Fox News is determined to be authoritative in this regard, I stand corrected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Llameadrpc (talk • contribs) 23:58, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

It was already answered in Archive. Wykx (talk) 21:02, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Mass shootings in USA

This has killed 517 people in the country in 2019. Similar to Mexican war on drugs, it is an internal conflict. Crashed greek (talk) 03:46, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

It was already answered in Archive. Wykx (talk) 21:02, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Random acts of violence do not meet the inclusion criteria, only organized paramilitary bodies engaged in armed conflict with each other meet the definition.XavierGreen (talk) 16:32, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Crashed_greek -- in Mexico, there are opposed sides (drug cartels vs. government crackdown attempts), even if accompanied by much violence affecting ordinary people. In U.S. shootings there aren't usually definable "sides" as such, just individual criminals with various grievances. AnonMoos (talk) 11:09, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Two map versions, with and without skirmishes (conflicts with <100 direct casualties/year)?

See File talk:Ongoing conflicts around the world.pngTomastvivlaren (talk) 10:56, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Insurgency in the Maghreb

The "Insurgency in the Maghreb" entry lists only 351 fatalities in 2019, and is followed by an awkwardly long string of footnotes. Shouldn't it be classified as a "minor conflict"? Or was the death toll greater than listed here? Also, is there a less cumbersome way to cite relevant sources for the number of fatalities? Darkpool (talk) 05:06, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

This is a really vague defined conflict. I'm not sure which countries are counted as location and who are the belligerents.GreyShark (dibra) 13:07, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

On further review, the death toll should have been "4000+" and not "351", but it wasn't showing up properly. I fixed the footnotes and moved it back where it belongs. Darkpool (talk) 07:24, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Accuracy of casualty figures, particularly in the case of Cameroon

This article claims that only 234 people died in Cameroon in 2019 because of armed conflicts. This is obviously wrong and should be changed; for reference, see Timeline of the Anglophone Crisis (2019). Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 12:16, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Map needs updating

The world map classifies the Mexican Drug War as a major war (i.e. a conflict with more than 10,000 battle-related deaths in the current or previous year). However, data within the article itself proves this is not the case and that it should only be categorized as a regular war. Please update the map to more accurately reflect this. Thanks! Karlgustavsson (talk) 12:37, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Too many Refs and links.

Insurgency in Magreb. Casualties in 2020. Mr.User200 (talk) 21:57, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

North Caucasus

I have just recently removed the conflict from the template Template:Ongoing military conflicts based on the fact that the article Insurgency in the North Caucasus states that the conflict ended in 2017 with a Russian victory, which is apparently supported with numerous sources in Russian. I decided to remove the conflict from this article too, however, I have noticed quite a few sources stating that the conflict is still ongoing. Personally I don't have an opinion one way or the other regarding the status of the conflict, but it seems obvious that we should try to keep Wikipedia itself internally consistent - the reader's knowledge on whether the conflict is ongoing or not should not depend on which article thay happen to visit, it should either be over or ongoing in all related articles. I'm not sure how to proceed or how to resolve this, does anyone have a suggestion? AnalogIgor (talk) 05:47, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

I think since there are attacks still happening and no peace treaty was signed it is still ongoing Garmin21 (talk) 09:29, 3 June 2020

US civil unrest

117.20.70.172 (talk) 11:54, 2 June 2020 (UTC) With the death tally increasing in what seems to have become the next civil war in the USA, shouldn't it be included in this list? See link for example of summary, but quickly outdated as death toll increases. https://www.insider.com/multiple-people-shot-dead-kentucky-iowa-nebraska-indiana-blm-protests-2020-6

It is already in this list where it falls: Ongoing protests

Data for 2019 from UCDP

New data is avialable at https://ucdp.uu.se/ since June 15. Mexico should once again change category to "major war". Libya and Syria should only be Wars. Some of the numbers in this article differ a lot from ucdp - but ucdp is reliable.Tomastvivlaren (talk) 16:28, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Merger of 2 conflicts Insurgency in the Maghreb and Northern Mali conflict

I believe we should merge these two conflicts and basically move Northern Mali conflict up as a subcategory of Insurgency in the Maghreb due to the fact that Northern Mali conflict is part of the Insurgency so it's the same conflict with the same number of casualties. The casualties in the Northern Mali conflict are also counted in the Insurgency in the same region so it's the same. --Whitesin21 (talk) 01:35, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Combining the kivu and Ituri DRC conflicts

I think that the Kivu and Ituri conflicts should be combined into one big conflict after all we don't split the Syria civil war into multiple conflict so why do that for the Congo. Many of the groups in the conflicts operate in all three provinces Ituri, north Kivu, and south Kivu so I say we combine the 2 conflict into the East Democratic republic of the Congo Conflict. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garmin21 (talk • contribs) 00:33, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

In regards to current Nagorno-Karabakh conflict

Azerbaijan and or Armenia should be color coded orange due to the death count exceeding 100 for the Armenian casualties. AS to weather or not both nations should be coloured orange I leave that up to the map editor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2407:7000:9A0C:5A77:5EC:E25E:96A9:2F2A (talk) 09:55, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Philippines drug war?

I think it is not an example to organized violence, but rather a sporadic crime categorization. Unlike Mexico where major paramilitary cartels are fighting the government. Does it stand up to the definitions of this page? What do you think?GreyShark (dibra) 05:24, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

The Philippines drug war does involve major groups including the Mexican cartels and even terrorist groups like Abu Sayyaf. The Philippine government also employs the help the right wing groups and death squads, so I think it Qualifies.- Garmin21 —Preceding undated comment added 17:57, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Do we have it listed in war/conflict lists such as Uppsala, ACLED or Systemic Peace?GreyShark (dibra) 12:04, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Human right watch counts it as a conflict https://www.hrw.org/tag/philippines-war-drugs and Systemic Peace counts it http://www.systemicpeace.org/warlist/warlist.htm -Garmin21

IP conflict again

Technically, the conflict between Israel and the PLO started in 1965 - first in Jordan & West Bank and then South Lebanon, finally Intifadas (1987-2005). Since 2005, PLO and Israel are in relative peace. Only the dissident factions continue sporadic attacks - mostly Gaza-Israel conflict. Is there is a fatality source on IP conflict prior to that - please bring here and discuss (and I do not mean historic violence between Jews and Arabs, this is something else).GreyShark (dibra) 16:16, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

There are other groups in the west bank that carry out attacks relatively frequently. Mostly stabbing, vehicle attacks, and small bombings ,but still attacks nonetheless. Garmin21 —Preceding undated comment added 18:02, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Ongoing conflict is not necessarily between the same two political organizations over a period of many years. Instead, as is evidenced by the wars listed at the top of the page in Afghanistan, the issue at hand is an ongoing conflict being waged by the same populations across many years. The Soviets are no longer in Afghanistan yet the start date begins with that conflict because the population which is currently fighting a civil war was also fighting (or their parents or grandparents) were also fighting on the same terrain many years before. The same is true for the Jews and Palestinians fighting within the same plot of land across many years, even though the organizations have changed. If we are only talking about PLO then yes the start date is 1965, but if we are being honest about the same population fighting on the same plot of land across time then the real start date should be 1920 as that was the first time neighbors began violent conflict against neighbors. But again to avoid an edit war instead of 1920 I think 1948 is a compromise that everyone can agree on.Wikifan925 —Preceding undated comment added 23:39, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

First, when you say Jews and Palestinians - Palestinian Jews (now Israelis) are technically Palestinians in historic sense; you should say Palestinian Jews and Palestinian Arabs or Israelis and Palestinians. Secondly, withdrawal of PLO from violence, now still sporadically continued by dissident Palestinian factions has multiple parallels, and changing this into "continuous conflict from ancient times" would require a massive restructure of the page. We have parallel The Troubles conflict in northern Ireland as "over" (not listed here), but Dissident Irish republican campaign by Dissident republicans ongoing. Moreover, parallel Kurdish rebellions in Turkey are ongoing since early 20th century, but we list here only the latest 1979-present stage by PKK. Don't change the rules for this page without discussion. Please revert to stable sourced version, thank you!GreyShark (dibra) 12:48, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

the Kurdish rebellions in turkey stopped in 1938 then began in 1978 so, two different conflicts not one. For it to be one conflict it has to be constant war. For example the Kurdish conflict started with a different group was defeated then stopped for 40 years. Then under different circumstances, in a different year with, a different group, a new rebellion started. Different conflicts not the same conflict. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garmin21 (talk • contribs) 13:34, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Exactly, so we agree, the conflict since 1965 with PLO and other factions is one thing (this is specifically said by source in the list [6]), but preceding events are much earlier and non-continuous. Wikifan, trying to "link" 1965 conflict with previous events of 1948 war (Arab Army of the Holy War) and sectarian conflict between Jews and Arabs in Mandatory Palestine is not helpful.GreyShark (dibra) 14:37, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

the Palestine conflict today is the same conflict as the one the PLO and Israel started in the 60s right?

If you can provide the necessary proof/sources to substantiate the argument that the conflict started in 1965 then please do so. No Israeli or Palestinian academic would ever say that 1965 was the beginning of this current conflict. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikifan925 (talk • contribs) 06:54, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Are you joking?? The source Systemic Peace says 1965 and counts the casualties since (27,000 killed since 1965). Unless you bring another good source counting casualties from another date, that should stay. You cannot change established things, sourced to WP:RS with no discussion - read WP:BRD. There are also some authors counting only the Gaza-Israel conflict casualties, as this is the main arena of violence in past two decades involving Israel and Palestinians, but 1965 start date is fine with me. Not earlier.GreyShark (dibra) 12:07, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

The IP conflict today is not the same as Israel-PLO conflict (because PLO is not fighting Israel any more), but it has been continuous to some degree due to still ongoing militancy of Palestinian Islamist factions (such as Hamas and PIJ) and some rejectionist groups from within the PLO (al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades). So it is not exactly the same conflict since 1965, but i agree that it has been continuous, as the Systemic Peace list says.GreyShark (dibra) 12:10, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Systemic Peace is not an expert within the field of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. For the benefit of all the readers of this article, the utmost of academic rigor should be demanded and not a single source. Dates cannot be provided based on one source alone, especially if that source is not an expert on the specific topic in question. I will state again that no Israeli or Palestinian academic would say that 1965 is the beginning of this ongoing armed conflict. Doing a simple search on Google Books or Google Scholar and you will see that there is not one article by Systemic Peace's Dr Monty Marshall articulating the merits behind his chosen 1965 as the start date for this ongoing conflict. Finally, going back to your original point that the conflict between Israel and the PLO began in 1965 pivots this entire debate around the issue of the PLO. But as I said to your original claim that if you look to other sections on this very page, the Afghanistan conflict, for example, you will notice that the issue at hand is not about the same two organizations continuously fighting but rather the same population engaged in armed conflict. If it was about political organizations then the current war in Afghanistan has nothing to do with the Soviet war, yet that section and many other sections on this page do not link the conflicts to organizations but rather to locations and populations.

Here List of attacks against Israeli civilians before 1967 The Palestine conflict has escalated and deescalated but this article show the conflict began before 1965 and has remained and ever present threat to Israel. Though between 1950 and 1968 it was nearly non-existent with only 3-4 attacks each year and most of these attacks were done by Arab gunmen from Jordan, Egypt, and Syria. Only a small percentage of them were Palestinians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garmin21 (talk • contribs) 15:59, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for sharing this article. This further demonstrates that the armed conflict does indeed pre-date the chosen date of 1965 by Dr Monty Marshall (again not an expert that specializes in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict). Another helpful article to show that many believe that 1920 is the more nuanced and realistic start date of the ongoing violent/armed conflict between the local populations within this plot of land is: Palestinian political violence in the 'History and Context' section as it indicates the first attack was in April 1920.

Palestinian political violence is multi-faceted, with Israeli-Palestinian conflict only some part of it. Black September in Jordan, Lebanese Civil War, Fatah-Hamas conflict and most recently participation of some Palestinian organizations in the Syrian Civil War are vast topics. In 1920s Palestinian Arab leaders took part in the Franco-Syrian War, which partially spilled in OETA South (later Mandatory Palestine) this has indirect link to later sectarian conflict in Mandatory Palestine between Palestinian Jews and Arabs, but again indirect.GreyShark (dibra) 21:02, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

There are several ethnic conflicts going back for century or more, such as Kurdish-Iraqi, Kurdish-Iranian, Russian-Chechen, Irish-British etc. Will we also move back the start time of those conflicts prior to their recent modern phase?GreyShark (dibra) 21:02, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

No because those conflict have not been constant their has been dozens of years of no conflict or attacks in all of those.- User:Garmn21

Irish conflict is continuous since 1960s. Kurdish-Iranian conflict had a short lull of violence between 1946 to early 1960s, about the same as the break between 1948 War and the PLO insurgency which initiated in late 1960s.GreyShark (dibra) 16:00, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Update the page's image

The official death count of the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh conflict has gone beyond 1000 deaths, this means its now in the category of war so Armenia and Azerbaijan should be in colour red in the image of the page, can someone edit it?--186.11.61.91 (talk) 02:58, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

I successfully corrected the svg file, but I have absolutely no clue on how to upload it. FBKong (talk) 12:31, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Please update the map agian

The map needs to be updated once again because of the additional conflicts added and countries being shown with only their deaths in the current year. Wowzers122 (talk) 01:34, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

• Syria - Dark red 10,000+ killed in the past year
• Egypt - Red 1,000+ killed in the past year
• Iran - Orange 100+ killed in the past year
• Peru - Yellow 3+ killed in the past year
• The United Kingdom - Yellow At least 3 people died in the past year

• Sudan - Orange 100+ in both current and past year
• Tunisia - Yellow - 13+ people died in the current year
• Tanzania - Yellow 20+ people died in the current year
• Western Shara - Yellow at least one person has died in the current year (Morocco denies lives lost)

Syria

Listed as a major war, not major in the map. --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 14:33, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

I came here to say this. Syria seems to be miscategorized and should be a major war.

Also, Saudi Arabia is listed as a war. Is that correct? I don't think they have a civil war or any major terrorism going on, although I could be wrong. I think all of their casualties are taking place in Yemen, so geographically I wonder if it should not be colored. –Novem Linguae (talk) 15:53, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

ExperiencedArticleFixer,  Done. I uploaded a fixed SVG to Commons. Just the Syria fix for now.

The PNG thumbnail doesn't reflect the change yet, I wonder if there's anything I need to do to force that to refresh. I tried Ctrl-F5, and "Purge". –Novem Linguae (talk) 22:55, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Dissident Irish republican campaign

Since a certain IP editor doesn't understand the figures, I'll explain. There's a graph at the top of the page of the claimed reference for 184 deaths. The legend on the graph shows it goes from 1989 to 2019, and by hovering you see the deaths for each year (it's quite simple to tell which years have 0 deaths by the flat line). As the Dissident Irish republican campaign article states, the dissident campaign began in 1998 (although it could be debated as early as 1994, but the dissidents didn't verifiably kill anyone before 1998). The graph lists 29 deaths in 1998, 2 in 2009, 1 in 2011 and 1 in 2019. 29+2+1+1 does not equal 184. There's not even any point adding the claimed total of 33 deaths, as it excludes 2 deaths that are indisputably part of the campaign (David Caldwell in 2002, Stephen Carroll in 2009), one that should be almost certainly classed as part of the campaign (Real IRA volunteer Ronan MacLochlainn, killed by the Garda during a RIRA organised armed robbery) and various other killings that are open to debate. Also there is no reference saying the Hutch-Kinahan feud, Coolock feud, and Drogheda feud are *part* of the campaign, they are not mentioned in the main article. FDW777 (talk) 19:26, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

I have removed the claims, again. I have also again removed the claim that three people were killed during the dissident Irish republican campaign in 2019. If you do not understand this subject, please listen to people that do such as myself. This reference does not say three people were killed during the dissident Irish republican campaign in 2019, it says The report found that three people had been killed and 81 injured in attacks linked to paramilitary groups in the 12 months ending in September (and in addition, the "12 months ending in September" runs from October 2018 to September 2019, so does not even prove the three people were killed in 2019 itself). As well as republican paramilitary groups, there are loyalist paramilitary groups. One of the people killed in 2019 was Ian Ogle, a loyalist killed by fellow loyalists. That is not part of the dissident Irish republican campaign. The Dissident Irish republican campaign contains no information about three deaths in 2019, only one. Please stop restoring information about conflicts you apparently do not understand. FDW777 (talk) 14:20, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Not that's there's really any need at this point, but here is the original report talked about in the New York Times reference. Page 19 (the numbered page at the bottom, curiously it's called page 18 by Chrome) details incidents by "Dissident Republicans", which include the killing of Lyra McKee (which is the "1" currently in this article). Immediately below that, it details incidents by "Loyalist Paramilitaries", which include the killing of Ian Ogle (mentioned in my post above). So the killing of Ian Ogle was, as previously stated, nothing to do with dissident republicans. I will confess to not having read the entire 132 page document only searched for certain terms, but it does not appear to give any specific details about the third killing. It does mention it in a footnote at the bottom of page 18 (again, page 17 on Chrome), which says There were 3 deaths and 81 casualties of paramilitary style attacks linked to paramilitary organisations between 1 October 2018 and 30 September 2019. This underlines my point that the third killing didn't verifiably happen in 2019 (the other two did, but as documented only one was by dissident republicans). FDW777 (talk) 10:45, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Mexico should be colour-coded Red

The chart states that Mexico had less than 10,000 deaths last year, but it is still coded Burgundy. The East African conflict is also inconsistent between the chart and the map. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qelmasri (talk • contribs) 00:09, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Tigray Deaths

The deaths for the Tigray War in 2021 is 7,689

300 1,950 150 173 64 49 3 5,000 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wowzers122 (talk • contribs) 04:13, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Tigray deaths are more than 52,000 And include deaths in oromia, sidama and the Afar-somali conflict Ethiopia should be Dark red Euphrosine14 (talk) 15:46, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Map

This map needs an update or being deleted. DerKarthager (talk) 23:23, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Which edit? Wykx (talk) 18:03, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Why is Tigray War in the major war section?

Whasn't a major war any war which has more than 10.000 deaths? But Tigray war had 2,835 deaths in the last year?

It's indicated as more than 10,000 this year 2021. Wykx (talk) 20:51, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

North Caucasus

Insurgency in the North Caucasus should be added to the Skirmishes and clashes section.--Kober^Talk 06:45, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

The up and down arrows are affect the sorting of the data in Deaths by country

In the Section "Deaths by country" the arrows used to indicate an increase or decrease from the previous year are affecting the sorting of the numbers. The sorting should be done on the number first, and the arrow should be an indicator if it was up or down from the previous year. I'm not sure if moving the arrow after the number will fix this or not. This is just something that I noticed that makes the data not presentable, because it moves some large numbers below smaller numbers...since it is sorting on the type of arrow (up or down) first. Thoughts? Thanks, Rmwigdnal (talk) 19:43, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Should Central America be included?

The guidelines are to not publish info about gang wars without military involvement, but the Salvadoran president declared usage of lethal forces against gangs and called them 'terrorists', which is pretty warlike, when also factoring in the USA's drug policy and war on drugs in which it helped Mexico and Colombia fight cartels, why is Central America not included as the USA is helping these countries fight cocaine trafficking and gang violence, too. Furthermore, 8861 homicides were recorded in 2020 Central America.

Sourcing: https://insightcrime.org/news/analysis/2020-homicide-round-up

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/28/americas/el-salvador-gangs-president-orders-lethal-force/index.html

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-centam-gangs-usa-idUSN1833949420070719

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-gangs-idUSKBN1AD0GK

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/americas/central-america-asks-us-for-help-with-drug- cartels/2011/06/22/AG3DVQgH_story.html

https://news.yahoo.com/us-mexico-host-talks-reboot-drugs-war-170306405.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by ReaIdiot (talk • contribs) 07:50, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

I suggest we follow the https://www.ucdp.uu.se/ database. Homicides that are not carried out by a clearly identified organization or state are not included, but only deaths in battles between known parties. Many but not all Mexican deaths are therefor included.Tomastvivlaren (talk) 12:12, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Map

@ThatMapGuy: What makes your map so much better than the other one that you need to change it so bad? Wowzers122 (talk) 16:49, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

@Wowzers122: Its more simplistic, and still gets the message across. The other map, while very well made, was a little more detailed. What about having both maps on the page? ThatMapGuy (talk) 14:08, 22 August 2021 (EST)

I'm fine with that. Wowzers122 (talk) 18:56, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Comment: Just chiming in as a third party uninvolved in this dispute, having not edited this article myself. I don't understand what ThatMapGuy's map actually adds to the article that wasn't already conveyed in the existing map, less so why two maps representing the same dataset need to both be included in the article. It seems like a fairly redundant addition considering the other image has more detail, is more accurate to the information presented in the article and is of a higher quality resolution (as an SVG image). Furthermore, per the manual of style:

Lead images should be natural and appropriate representations of the topic; they should not only illustrate the topic specifically, but also be the type of image used for similar purposes in high-quality reference works, and therefore what our readers will expect to see.

To avoid this turning into an all-out edit war, I would like to suggest that if the involved parties cannot reach a consensus they request dispute resolution. --Grnrchst (talk) 10:17, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

November 2021

@BenJosejose: Why do you keep adding a map that is clearly based on fictitious data? M.Bitton (talk) 18:10, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

@BenJosejose: where are the sources that justify that map? M.Bitton (talk) 18:13, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 November 2021

JoseGullermo (talk) 03:32, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Deaths in The mexican drug war homicides from organized crime 12,082 in 2021 source:

 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. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 09:11, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 December 2021

Remove the Kamwina Nsapu rebellion, per the wiki article it ended in ~2019. Most articles refer to the rebellion in the past tense. 2601:85:C101:C9D0:9811:8FFF:E775:8BA8 (talk) 18:53, 15 December 2021 (UTC) 2601:85:C101:C9D0:9811:8FFF:E775:8BA8 (talk) 18:53, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:58, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Kamwina Nsapu rebellion

People should not rely on news articles with a claimed publication date of 03/28/2021, to claim there were two deaths in 2021. The article refers to one of the dead as Zaida Catalan, as that article makes clear she was killed in 2017. FDW777 (talk) 18:06, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Should the Kazakh Uprising be added to the list in Orange?

Already 182 people have died — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:3D09:1F80:CA00:E182:7DAA:C6FA:DD06 (talk) 22:24, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Mistake in Major Wars section- says 2 conflicts but there's 3 listed.

"The 2 conflicts in the following list have caused at least 10,000 direct, violent deaths"

However, three are listed (Afghanistan, Yemen, Tigray). BetweenCupsOfTea (talk) 06:55, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

What will we do with Ukraine?

As we all know, [Russia] has invaded the [Ukraine]. I believe very soon this could be classified as a "War" instead of a "Minor war". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gabbobler (talk • contribs) 18:10, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

it's currently under Russo-Ukrainian war, so should we consider the invasion another war, or consider it part of the ongoing undeclared war between Ukraine and Russia?

Missing entries

Didn't find Myanmar (civil war) or Philippines (drug war). 27.147.204.189 (talk) 22:39, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Ukraine

Ukraine needs to be shaded red, it is now a full scale war. Hgh1985 (talk) 22:35, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Russia and Belarus should also be shaded dark red, as this is an interstate war and they are all co-belligerents

see title — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.174.216.170 (talk) 19:42, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Map is based on number of victims inside the country borders. Borysk5 (talk) 20:45, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Where do Brazil, Guatemala etc fit into this? They should be included

So according to https://acleddata.com/dashboard/#/dashboard, which provides the data used here, there are several other countries that need to be labeled as conflicts and colored on File:Ongoing conflicts around the world.svg. If you filter the list to only include battles (i.e. "armed clash/gov't regains territory/non-state gains territory"), i.e. not for example simple riots or protests, you'd see that there are several countries that also have conflict to an extent (i.e. over 10 deaths). Here are the ones I picked up:

• Honduras, Jamaica, and Uganda all have these with between 10 to 99 deaths, so should be included as a "minor skirmish".
• Guatemala, El Salvador, Haiti, Venezuela, Madagascar all have these with between 100 to 999 deaths, so should be included as "minor conflicts".
• Brazil has in excess of 1000 deaths so should be labeled as a "war".

Even if we'd filter further to only include "military versus rebels/militias" these countries still qualify. They are definitely conflicts as a result and should be included in my opinion. --WR 15:16, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Mapuche conflict, as Clashes with <100 deaths in the past year

I don't know why some people insists in quit the Mapuche conflict in the list of "Skirmishes and clashes (fewer than 100 deaths in current or past year)", when according to the information in the article and the sources I put in cites, meets all requirements for their inclusion, specially in 2010–present (Matias Catrileo, Luchsinger family, and other issues). Don't play a "war of concepts", please. Xarucoponce (talk) 14:25, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

P.S. I had to put the information back in the respective table. Someone keeps insisting on deleting the part of the Mapuche Conflict in the section "Skirmishes and clashes (fewer than 100 deaths in current or past year)".

Although the map shown does not show Chile in yellow, the truth is that it cannot be ignored that there is an insurgency in Araucanía, of an independence or vindictive nature for some, or a terrorist guerrilla action according to others. But the truth is that compared to other conflicts, the one in Araucanía (or Wallmapu) has even more deaths and has lasted longer.

And I am oblivious to the opposing sides. One can be for or against the sides, support the demands of each one or answer them. But the armed conflict exists, limited to the area of ​​Arauco and Malleco, and removing it from this article is not going to make it disappear.

So I'm going to put it back, with information, with citations, every time I come back and see that they've taken it out.

Sincerely,

--Xarucoponce (talk) 15:32, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

---------------------------------------------------------------

He tenido que volver a colocar en la tabla respectiva el asunto. Alguien sigue insistiendo en borrar la parte del Conflicto Mapuche en la sección "Skirmishes and clashes (fewer than 100 deaths in current or past year)".

Aunque el mapa mostrado no aparezca Chile con el color amarillo, lo cierto es que no se puede obviar que hay una insurgencia en la Araucanía, de carácter independentista o reivindicatoria para algunos, o una acción guerrillera terrorista según otros. Pero lo cierto es que comparando con otros conflictos, el de la Araucanía (o Wallmapu) tiene incluso más muertos y mayor tiempo de duración.

Y soy ajeno a los bandos enfrentados. Uno puede estar a favor o en contra de los bandos, apoyar las demandas de cada uno o contestarlas. Pero el conflicto armado existe, circunscrito a la zona de Arauco y Malleco, y sacarlo de este artículo no va a hace que desaparezca.

Así que volveré a colocarlo, con fundamentos, con citas, cada vez que vuelva y vea que lo han sacado.

Atentamente, Xarucoponce Xarucoponce (talk) 15:32, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Vandalism, please protect the page

Someone is vandalizing this page from an IP address. We need to protect the page with a silver lock. Stidmatt (talk) 17:17, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Belarus and Russia should both be yellow

Both have had more then 10 deaths each from partisan attacks and Ukrainian Drone attacks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:3D09:1F80:CA00:35C1:78A1:6097:C508 (talk) 03:26, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Better Citations needed for Ukraine Fatalities

The Number of fatalities is a huge range and has citations from March. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luclag1 (talk • contribs) 02:48, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

remove these three

1-bangladesh drug war: the drug dealers doesnt even fight back these are literal killings now 2-corsican conflict: there is one casualty, but according to the criteria it must be conflict related, and the person didnt die from the conflict, instead he died in a prison fight 3-arabian sepratism in khuzestan: the conflict was normally ended according to the page but an vandal changed it and said swear words 31.210.37.65 (talk) 18:24, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Mapuche Conflict. Someone insists in deleting it of the table Skirmishes and clashes (<100 deaths/yr.)

I had to put the information about Mapuche conflict back in the respective table. Someone keeps insisting on deleting the part of the Mapuche Conflict in the section "Skirmishes and clashes (fewer than 100 deaths in current or past year)".

Although the map shown does not show Chile in yellow, the truth is, it cannot be ignored that there is an insurgency in Araucanía, of an independence or vindictive nature for some, or a terrorist guerrilla action according to others. But the truth is that compared to other conflicts, the one in Araucanía (or Wallmapu) has even more deaths and has lasted longer.

And I am oblivious to the opposing sides. One can be for or against the sides, support the demands of each one or answer them. But the armed conflict exists, limited to the area of ​​Arauco and Malleco, and removing it from this article is not going to make it disappear.

So I'm going to put it back, with information and citations, every time I come back and see that they've taken it out.

Sincerely, --Xarucoponce (talk) 15:37, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

---

He tenido que volver a colocar en la tabla respectiva el asunto del Conflicto Mapuche. Alguien sigue insistiendo en borrar la parte respectiva en la sección "Skirmishes and clashes (fewer than 100 deaths in current or past year)".

Aunque el mapa mostrado no aparezca Chile con el color amarillo, lo cierto es que no se puede obviar que hay una insurgencia en la Araucanía, de carácter independentista o reivindicatoria para algunos, o una acción guerrillera terrorista según otros. Pero lo cierto es que comparando con otros conflictos, el de la Araucanía (o Wallmapu) tiene incluso más muertos y mayor tiempo de duración.

Y soy ajeno a los bandos enfrentados. Uno puede estar a favor o en contra de los bandos, apoyar las demandas de cada uno o contestarlas. Pero el conflicto armado existe, circunscrito a la zona de Arauco y Malleco, y sacarlo de este artículo no va a hace que desaparezca.

Así que volveré a colocarlo, con fundamentos y citas, cada vez que vuelva y vea que lo han sacado.

Atentamente, --Xarucoponce (talk) 15:37, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

The article does not include conflicts with less than 100 deaths total Peanut funi xd (talk) 13:46, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Edit war, in editing about wars

 Administrator note: @MorteBiancaFan, Whitesin21, and Peanut funi xd, the three of you are in a protracted edit war here. That is not acceptable. You should be communicating on this talkpage, not reverting back and forth. It is disruptive for both your fellow editors and for our readers. If you continue to edit-war, the next step is either partial blocks or a full page protection. I wouldn't like to do either, so please, instead, discuss with one another on this page. The same goes for Kleuske and PutItOnAMap, who have not quite edit-warred here, but whom I ping since they have been part of the dispute.

Also, @Peanut, I understand that your logged-out edits as 31.210.37.65 after creating this account were unintentional, but please be more careful in the future. If you continue editing logged out on pages you have also edited logged-in, I will have to "softblock" your IP (make it so you can only edit logged-in). -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 22:23, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

İll be more careful, also theres another ip user which isnt me this time Peanut funi xd (talk) 07:20, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Ethiopia may not be dark red anymore.

Can someone look up the recent casualties in Ethiopia. Idk when the casualties occurred, but it doesn’t look like they’re a major conflict with over 10,000+ In the last 365 days anymore since we are so far into the new year. Although, I don’t know when the deaths occurred. Can someone check?? Thanks 108.5.136.47 (talk) 20:22, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Ethiopia may no longer be dark red

The numbers, if evenly distributed among June 19,2021-2022, would no longer be 10,000+ deaths. Of course, this depends on when they happened. Can someone double check?? 108.5.136.47 (talk) 20:24, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

russia painted on the map

i think russia should be painted on the map because of the russian-ukrainian conflict Matias Taboadaxx (talk) 19:33, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Add ukraine to the first list

. 109.98.142.14 (talk) 11:34, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Ukraine is already in the first list and has been for a while now. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 18:38, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Stop adding the Corsican conflict!

The death of Yvan Colonna has nothing to do with the conflict and does not count as a fatality. The conflict has zero fatalities in 2021 as well as zero in 2022. 2.249.150.61 (talk) 16:56, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Yvan Colonna's death was not caused by the conflict, he was killed in a prison fight that had nothing to do with it. Please respond to this @MorteBiancaFan before re-adding the conflict. 2.249.150.61 (talk) 17:35, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

@2.249.150.61: this prison fight caused an unrest in the island with lot of bomb attempts. And some factions of the FLNC attacked foreign communities on the island before Colonna's death and in 2016 the FLNC warned ISIS to don't do terrorist attacks on the island. He's death is part of the conflict, it is also inserect in the article corsican conflict. MorteBiancaFan (talk) 17:02, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

No, you're wrong. In the parameters section it says "Fatality figures include battle-related deaths (military and civilian) as well as civilians intentionally targeted by the parties to an armed conflict. Only direct deaths resulting from violence are included for the current and past year". Unless you want to argue that the prison fight was connected to the conflict (Which it seems like you don't), the conflict should not be re-added. Just because it caused new violence doesn't mean that the death itself is directly connected to the conflict. 2.249.150.61 (talk) 19:41, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

@2.249.150.61: can I reundo your edit now? MorteBiancaFan (talk) 17:06, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Please wait until this is cleared up before you re-add it, thank you. 2.249.150.61 (talk) 19:45, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

In the Corsican conflict page there is a section about the murder of Yvan Colonna and the riots that took place after this event. FLNC is also an active armed group and it was linked to the riots since it supported them, this probably means that the death is part of the conflict, surely there will be additional information in the future regarding the conflict. Whitesin21 (talk) 23:25, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Russia should be Orange and Belarus should be Yellow

Because it is 2001:56A:FC09:A800:317D:D8E8:F43F:665A (talk) 21:10, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

I suppose they are classifying it by the location of the war, rather than by the belligerents. But yes, Russia and Belarus have indeed suffered deaths in this war, obviously (by that definition, Russia should be red as well). Jargo Nautilus (talk) 07:53, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Korean conflict

I check on List of border incidents between North and South Korea and only in 2020 there was a death linked in the conflict. I check on Acled data and in the whole North Korea there were those 21 deaths, but it is also said in the site that those are violence on civilians perpetred by the government and not in the border territories of the country, same to South Korea. I think we're gonna deleat Korean conflict 'cause not caused any casualties after 2020. MorteBiancaFan (talk) 15:33, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Violence against civilians is part of the conflict since these civilians are taking action against the government for political reasons regarding the conflict. Whitesin21 (talk) 18:39, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Relief aid to Pakistan and many many other areas in need.

I believe the U.N. , the WHO, Canada, the U.S., Russia, China, Korea, Japan, U.K. and more need to hold a meeting to consider a moratorium on all wars around the world to help relief efforts due to flooding or any type of natural disasters. To help poverty, illnesses in countries like no other time before. This has been going on far too long and it's time to start using the trillions of dollars being used on wars to help the worlds most devastated areas. Fighting over land instead of fixing climate change caused by pollution, building dams, re-routing waterways, etc. If we were building on land not so close to these waters, there would be no need to build the dams, reservoirs, reroute and sometimes downright remove them. The earth is going to put things back to normal whether we like it or not. Now we need to decide if we are going to watch all these people die or are we going to help move them? Same goes for earthquakes, volcano's and mudslides. Mining too close to where people live will eventually cause these. We already have firsthand information and facts about this. All towns, villages and cities too close to the all the things I mentioned will be effected. You either move or be moved by force or stop mining or building too close to people or water. This is absolutely the place to mention this. List of ongoing wars and how much money is being wasted killing people instead of trying to save and help people. Whenever there is conflict people show more interest so posting this here will begin more attention to this. 2605:B100:B05:232B:4593:6F16:D619:40D2 (talk) 23:53, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

It's unlikely to happen, and this talk page is not really the place to discuss it... AnonMoos (talk) 07:58, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Corsican Conflict?

I see that the Corsican Conflict has been added to this list, personally I believe that it doesn't fit the parameters. I also see that @MorteBiancaFan and another user came to an agreement that the conflict should stay removed but it has now be re-added. Any thoughts on this?

@MorteBiancaFan Why'd you re-add it? Nordtman (talk) 12:51, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

@Nordtman: I re-added it 'cause the killing is part of the conflict 'cause caused other violence and the return of the attempts perpetred by FLNC. It is part of the conflict, it is like (obviously not same, similar) the killin of Francesco Ferdinando, it is not perpetred by an actor of the conflict but caused the conflict, in that case Yvan Colonna killing wasn't perpetred by an actor of the conflict but caused other violence. MorteBiancaFan (talk) 20:40, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

@MorteBiancaFan I agree with you that it is a significant event to the conflict, but you just admitted that his death does not fit the parameters for the fatality figures of 2022.

The parameters state: "Only direct deaths resulting from violence are included for the current and past year.." and you seem to agree that the killing is not a direct death since the killing wasn't perpetrated by an actor of the conflict and the motive for the killing was also disconnected from the conflict. Nordtman (talk) 12:13, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

@Nordtman: Yes, I write this, but the killing is a significant event that caused violence so I think that this can be a direct death to the conflict. MorteBiancaFan (talk) 18:08, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

@MorteBiancaFan Whether it caused violence or not afterwards is irrelevant, a death should only be counted if it was a direct result of the conflict. Since his killer was disconnected from the conflict, and the motive was also disconnected from the conflict, it is not a direct death. Nordtman (talk) 11:04, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

@MorteBiancaFan So, will it be removed? Nordtman (talk) 14:33, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

@MorteBiancaFan I can ask for a third opinion if you do not answer. Nordtman (talk) 16:55, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

@Nordtman: sorry for not answering, anymay you can remove it, I explained the reasons for inserect it, so if you want deleat it. MorteBiancaFan (talk) 12:52, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Kyrgyzstan–Tajikistan conflict

User:MorteBiancaFan, how come you moved this entry from 2021 to 2014 in this edit? - Indefensible (talk) 23:25, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

@Indefensible: simply I inserect the UCDP source in which from 2014 there were 8 deaths before the two clashes in 2021 and 2022. MorteBiancaFan (talk) 13:22, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Paraguay

Why Paraguay is colored and not Brazil??? 170.51.50.224 (talk) 16:25, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Can whoever controls the map make Russia Orange and Belarus Yellow?

They've had that many deaths as a result of the war on their territory TheBrodsterBoy (talk) 22:23, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Adding a New Color to the Scale

Should 100,000+ deaths be a darker shade of red / black than 10,000+? A morbid ask, to be sure, but the list seems to increase logarithmically and there are presently two conflicts with upwards of 100,000 deaths in the last calendar year. Whyohwhycanti (talk) 03:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Support This is true. It should be black. What should the name be though? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:3D09:1F80:CA00:1075:E2A4:B71E:9A60 (talk) 19:17, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Where did the current naming convention originate? Unless its from an original source, maybe we can do something like:

Black -- Major Wars

Dark Red -- Wars

Red -- Major Conflicts

Orange -- Minor Conflicts

Yellow -- Skirmishes and clashes Whyohwhycanti (talk) 23:45, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Support I'd like to see this happen, as the severity of a conflict like the ones in Ukraine or Ethiopia are way larger than something like the Mexican drug war. Julianstout (talk) 16:53, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Ethiopian civil conflict 2022 deaths

Does anyone else find the source for 100k fatalities for the Ethiopian civil conflict dubious? The man who who made that estimate seems to be a “political analyst” who provided absolutely no evidence for his claim for 100k deaths in the “third phase” of the conflict. All the other figures he also cited also seem to be ridiculously high with zero evidence provided whatsoever. I believed that the source shouldn’t have been cited and the estimate should be removed. 136.159.213.63 (talk) 00:11, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

I was the user who made this post by the way. I forgot to login محرر البوق (talk) 00:13, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

bare in mind, that guy wasn’t the only one who cited the 100,000 figure. Tronvoll also mentioned 100,000 “slaughtered” (which fits the criteria of them being violent deaths). Alex de Waal (who’s not mentioned here) claimed there were roughly 90,000 casualties (both killed and injured) in September alone. EU rep Josep Borrell cited the 100,000 figure, too. Ghent University also updated their estimates to include 85,000–100,000 more overall deaths in late October, and a number of mainstream news orgs have said that “hundreds of thousands” have died because of the war.

I’ll admit, I also think Sayed is probably overestimating here, but the broad consensus from reliable sources seem to be that the war has, at the very least, killed hundreds of thousands either directly or indirectly. XTheBedrockX (talk) 01:48, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Corsican conflict

In the other wiki articles I read that the killing of Yvan Colonna is part of the conflict, like in the Deutch page of the conflict and also in the French page. I know that the killing is not perpetred by a side of the conflict but it caused more violence, so I think it should be included. MorteBiancaFan (talk) 16:12, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Map needs updated

The map needs to have Brazil colored yellow as the conflicts had over 10 deaths this year. Also, Russia could be included, but its December and would probably be reverted in a few weeks. Julianstout (talk) 02:35, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Shouldn"t Haiti be included

And congratulations for the good work 213.162.73.177 (talk) 20:29, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Adding relative numbers would be good

Because, it’s a big difference if 20k people are killed in a country with 1 billion citizens, or in a country with 1 million citizens.

Let’s take 100k citizens as relative base.

Example:

• first country: “2 per 100k” == 0.002%
• second country: “2k per 100k” == 2% — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juwens (talk • contribs) 06:42, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Edit requests regarding the Iraq conflict

Semi-protected edit request on 2 January 2023

The ISIL insurgency in Iraq should be in minor conflicts section not in the wars section. 37.224.118.27 (talk) 19:28, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 January 2023

Iraq conflict is a minor conflict not a war 5.42.245.182 (talk) 16:04, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

 Not done for now: This article classifies the conflicts based on the number of fatalities, and "conflicts causing at least 1,000 deaths in one calendar year are considered wars by the Uppsala Conflict Data Program". So "Cabinda War" appears as "skirmishes", but at the same time some insurgencies appear as "wars". ISIL insurgency has more than 4,000 deaths in 2022, so it is a "war" using the definitions in this article. So if you want to change it, you need either to provide another source that there were less than 1,000 deaths in 2022 or to initiate a major discussion about the principles of categorization and to establish a new consensus. --Oloddin (talk) 23:15, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Mexico needs to be updated to Major war.

Per Mexican government data, the war on drugs (organized crime) has taken the life of ~31,000 civilians just in 2022. ~121,000 deaths since 2019. Source: Mexican government, executive secretary of public national security (SESNSP) 99.215.229.96 (talk) 19:13, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Ooh, really? if you say that, then Brazil would also have to be in "major war". Its homicide rate per year is very high, more than 60,000 murders per year, did you know that? And then why isn't Brazil that color? If Brazil is not, then Mexico should not be considered a "major war" either. You need to think better, the war on drugs is not a serious war compared to the one in Colombia, Africa or the Middle East. You need to reason and think more. 201.164.12.124 (talk) 09:21, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Exactly my friend, you are absolutely right. The drug war in Mexico is not a strong war. It's more of a fight against the mafia. Mexico should not be in any color according to the wrong map presented in this Wikipedia article. JesúsCalintanek (talk) 09:24, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Mexico murder numbers for 2022 need updating

Currently listed at 7000 but government figures list it at around 31000, much closer to previous years 2601:281:8000:4400:39B7:B948:5CEA:328E (talk) 14:45, 22 February 2023 (UTC)