Talk:Las Anod conflict (2023–present)

RfC about belligerents and referencing in the lede and infobox

Based on the many news sources in this talk page (CTRL+F and search http to see all these links), we need help resolving the previous edit war and fixing this page which contains unverified (likely false/unverifiable) information:

• Las Anod being under Somali Federal Government jurisdiction in the infobox
• the organizational presence of Al-Shabaab

RfC:

• Should this information be removed from the infobox or qualified?
• Should it also be removed from the lede or qualified with "(claimed by Somaliland)"?
• Should it be moved to the Clashes section?

MathAfrique (talk) 12:39, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Las Anod at night, c. 2021. A nice picture to break up some of the text 😁

Hello @MathAfrique, I said a few days ago on the talk page of WikiProject Somaliland that I would respond to your message about this article later in the day, but with the talk page now over 30,000 bytes, it's quite the daunting read: for me, and for other editors, so I wouldn't expect many to any others opinion on the debate. But I did read it all, and my opinion is that:

1: There theoretically should be some sort of mention in the article that the situation on the ground is unclear, and that there is likely not as clean-cut answers (i.e. a specific country or army) to the question 'who is supporting/a belligerent in the conflict', because there seems to be mixed motives and opinions by the people in those countries or armies. Even if they do not come from the most reliable sources, the existence of multiple of these sources claiming multiple things shows some truth to this claim.

2: Solely going off the article Las Anod, the city is cited as being under the control of Somaliland since 2007. If this is untrue, they being under Somali Federal Government jurisdiction in the infobox should not be kept, unless this can be proven and changed on both pages.

3: As for the presence of Al-Shabaab, I really do not have a good answer. I guess I would say that this loops back to my first answer, that there likely is also not a clean-cut yes or no answer to whether they are a presence in the conflict or not. There likely are some militants who claim association with the militia operating in the fog of the conflict, without backing from Al-Shabaab themselves. I think they should be put into the infobox as:

• Al-Shabaab (claimed)

... or something along those lines to at least give due weight to the claim.

That's about all I have to say. I hope this response was helpful, and I'm sorry that I can't give a more in-depth response, I'm not as caught up on recent Somaliland politics since I stopped keeping up with the article 2022 in Somaliland last year. Cheers! Johnson524 (Talk!) 14:06, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

IMHO we should put "Al-Shabaab fighters (claimed)" because all the sources agree that it's individuals linked (now or previously-unclear!) to the militant group.

This is also the format we'd use for to add belligerent counts later AFAIK. MathAfrique (talk) 13:58, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

@MathAfrique: Sounds good to me 👍 Johnson524 (Talk!) 14:44, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

@Johnson524 @MathAfrique I think that the claim that Al Shabaab was involved in the fighting is extremely ridiculous and shouldn't be addressed. There is absolutely no evidence that they were involved in the fighting and they don't even have a presence in this region. محرر البوق (talk) 17:41, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

@محرر البوق: I put this claim in the infobox going solely off of the links provided in the discussion above. There was basically no consensus being reached, so putting "(claimed)[cite][cite] (disputed)[cite][cite]" seemed to me to be the best way to resolve the conflict by giving both arguments their due weight, while definitively confirming neither, because both arguments don't have the most reliable sources backing them. Cheers! Johnson524 (Talk!) 17:58, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Happy with this, also proposing that the mention in the lede is removed entirely. There is no "Al-Shabaab (militant group) militia" or organised effort in Las Anod, a fact that all sources agree on. Nobody believes Al-Shabaab is organizationally active there except a small cadre of hawks on Twitter.

The ELINT report is entirely unsubstantiated. The individual was prompted to provide sources but never did. It is possible they may be a pen-for-hire on behalf of their thinktank on Twitter, serving SLMFA interests.

— MathAfrique (talk) 18:14, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

@محرر البوق, Johnson524, Jacob300, Matteknik, Hawkers994, and UncleBourbon:

I have done work on the page, just to try weave in content from the news sources and press releases posted here.

You can see this edit at difference ID 1149094613.

— MathAfrique (talk) 05:13, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

@MathAfrique The number of belligerents seems too excessive. Do you think that all these militias have to be individually mentioned? محرر البوق (talk) 18:24, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Its not excessive, as they are an actual part of the conflict. Hawkers994 (talk) 18:51, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

I moved the subclans of Majaarteen to the conflict section. Just to keep the infobox neat! MathAfrique (talk) 22:06, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

That makes sense, even though they’re all different sub clan militias. Hawkers994 (talk) 23:43, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

NB: Looping in some people - MathAfrique 05:18, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Las anod conflict 2023

President Muse Bixi led second phase of war, but no body know that's fact or fiction 41.79.198.23 (talk) 18:20, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Crimes against humanity category removal

Crimes against humanity is a specific legal concept. In order to be included in the category, the event (s) must have been prosecuted as a crime against humanity, or at a bare minimum be described as such by most reliable sources. Most of the articles that were formerly in this category did not mention crimes against humanity at all, and the inclusion of the category was purely original research. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:49, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Marking conflict de facto finished per Khaatumo State 2023 content

Based on the content on the article and the cited facts in Khaatumo State#Recognition, I can't envision a reason to mark this conflict as ongoing. Clashes have been raging in the region since the turn of the century, and aren't enough to justify marking this conflict as (2023-present). There appear to be no verifiable sources about new Somaliland weaponry or forces after the "strategic retreat", and the Habr Je'lo mobilisation hasn't really occured either. MathAfrique (talk) 16:59, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 July 2024

I recommend the headline to be changed to ssc-khatumo - somaliland conflict, due to the coflict being fought in places far from Laascaanood too, for example buqdharkayn, maskax-buqle & meygaagle. 78.162.234.228 (talk) 21:26, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: You need to provide a citation that supports this change. ⸺(Random)staplers 22:57, 18 August 2024 (UTC)