Talk:List of ongoing armed conflicts/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

Archive 10

Bangladesh and others

There is currently a Maoist insurgency in Bangladesh. It is not as big as the one in India but the BBC reports in a recent article that 70 people died last year. 3 cops were killed yestoday. It certainly should be added to the list and map.

There are also small Maoist insurgencies still active in Turkey and Peru (2 turkish guerillas died a few weeks ago). And the situation in Nepal is has the occasional violent spillage too.

There are many conflicts, some very low intensity, that should not be ignored. Perhaps differant shades of blue should be added to the map, rather than just 2 ? Conflicts like northern Ireland, Peru, Greece, etc could be a pale blue. I think this would be a good idea, as such small conflicts need to be mentioned, but not alongside the more active wars —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.16.226.199 (talk) 21:15, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Might be interesting; do we have sources or Wikipedia articles for this though? -- 92.117.118.80 (talk) 20:52, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Category:Conflicts in 2010

Should this category be set? Sarcelles (talk) 19:43, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Some Changes Needing to be made

Columbian Armed Conflict fatalities should say 2000+ in 2010, not +2000 Afghan Civil War should have civil war capitalized, and a link to the War In Afghanistan 2001-present Somali Civil War should have a link to the War In Somalia 2009-present Iraq War should be removed Sudanese Nomadic Conflict should have an accurate date and casualty count, NOT including the Darfur War Korean War should have fatality count Insurgency in the North Caucasus should have date of 2007

Would somebody please make these changes since I'm not allowed to?

Thanks,

174.5.11.131 (talk) 18:16, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

And remove Basque Country. A terrorist group don´t make a war. Basque Country it´s a political/policial problem. Not military units of both countries involving in military operations.

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.41.225.222 (talk) 19:10, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

And 3,000,000+ Dead from the War in Afghanistan, with no source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.32.36.28 (talk) 23:38, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Afghanistan war since 1978? - but Iraq since 2011 ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.38.8.115 (talk) 02:01, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Korea -- post Korean War section

Searching wikipedia for "Korean Conflict" gives us results related to the 19th century. See General Sherman incident and others. (Indeed, see {Campaignbox Ganghwa Island War} .) With this in mind, Korean War should remain as Korean War. As far as the dates go, we do not have any WP:RS that says there was fighting between the North and South pre-1950. Unless, of course, you go back into Korean history where you will find lots of fighting. (There is good reason for Taekwondo to be the national sport of Korea!) By keeping post-Korean War as it is (e.g., Korean War) we have it properly referenced.--S. Rich (talk) 18:15, 20 December 2010 (UTC)18:16, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Please note XavierGreen asserts "The fighting between the north and south started before the war and continued on afterword, there was a communist insurgency in south korea that started in 1946." However, this statement is without RS. Moreover, Xavier does not resolve the disambig issue with 19th century Korean Conflict topics. --S. Rich (talk) 18:27, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

When i originally posted i put the wrong date down, it should have been 1948. Regardless there are dozens of sources which state that the conflict began in 1948, and i have linked one as a source on this page. As for the name, the issue of confusion is not really that valid when the date is included. It is a common wikipedia milhist naming convention to include the date at the end of a title of a conflict that has a name similar to others.XavierGreen (talk) 20:46, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Let's do this: We have 3 different activities going on. 1. Insurgency pre-Korean War. 2. The Korean War. 3. Post Korean War skirmishes, attacks, tunnel digging, etc. To lump them all together ignores the 531 books listed by the Library of Congress which gives us the 1950-1953 Korean War dates. With this in mind, I've added the 1948-1950 insurgency stuff to a pre-Korean War section in List_of_wars_1945–1989#1945.E2.80.931949. That keeps the insurgency available as a distinct activity leading up to the major war. For your part, I ask that the "Korean Conflict" term be dropped. It is distasteful to those who fought in The War. It disambigs with the 18th century stuff. And the term "conflict" is to strong to accurately describe the off-and-on relations between the two sides. Sooner or later the North is going to drop the Juche stuff and re-unite with the South. (Although I understand the South is wary about the cost of rehabbing the North.) When that occurs, the need for a "peace treaty" between the two sides will be gone and future historians/wikipedians can decide if "Korean Civil War" or some other title will work. But for now, please, something other than "Conflict" is needed for the post-Korean War aftermath. How about an article titled "Aftermath of the Korean War"? Then the conflict, Olympics, trade stuff, family re-unifications, tourism, border tunnels, etc. can ALL be discussed in context. And this article can be referenced in our "on-going" conflict table as an article which meets [Wikipedia:Policies_and_guidelines#Content Content, etc.] guidelines. E.g., it will cover the dates 1953 to 2xxx/present. It will not be a POV entry that improperly extends the Korean War beyond the 1953 date which hundreds of published historians agree is the actual end date. Thanks.--S. Rich (talk) 21:43, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

I dont see how the term Korean Conflict is distasteful, many major texts use it as a discriptor and many others simply refer to the Entire period from 1948 to the present as the korean war. The library of congress bit is quite irrelevant as they often classify wide subjects under narrow terms. I guarentee that many of the works listed refer to the korean war as still ongoing within their texts, or that it began before 1950. If you refer to the discussion on the Korean War talk page as well as to discussions on the milhist talk page, the term Korean Conflict was seen as acceptable by most editors, ( most of those that objected, including myself, wanted the conflict as a whole to be refered to as the korean war. A page titled Korean Conflict (1946-present) would have a sourcable title and follow established naming conventions, for example Arab Isreali Conflict. The only other commonly used title to refer to the entire conflict Korean War (1946-present) was rejected by the majority of editors.XavierGreen (talk) 23:09, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

I might also add that the Korean Conflict box including campaings from the 1800's should probly be renamed or deleted, no reliable source would link all of those incidents together and they are all unrelated except for the fact that the Koreans kept an isolationist policy at the time.XavierGreen (talk) 04:13, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Ongoing conflicts at Current events sidebar

This page could be cross-checked with Portal:Current_events/Sidebar section "Ongoing conflicts". I have done some digging in expanding the list lately. --Kslotte (talk) 19:24, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Checking from this list into sidebar done. Checking in the other direction still undone. --Kslotte (talk) 19:38, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Global Security list

Should any of the entries from Global Security's Current Conflicts list be included? Such as the Nigerian/Uzbek Civil Disturbances, or the Cabinda fighting in Angola. Teh Bomb Sophist (talk) 22:03, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

More

I can think of still more conflicts: Casamance conflict in Senegal, the activities of the Front for the Liberation of the Enclave of Cabinda in Angola, and the activities of the Shining Path in Peru. I think the Naxalites are also active in Bangladesh, not just India. If you can add these, please update the map, too. Metaknowledge (talk) 16:25, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

I added them. The Naxalites activity in Bangladesh is very low, so I left only India as the territory on which the conflict is ongoing. HeadlessMaster (talk) 20:08, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

You can also add the Nagorno-Karabaj conflict, in fact, both countries are in war. And what´s happen with Peru and Shining Path? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.26.5.183 (talk) 23:15, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Laos???

And why is Laos listed on the map when it does not appear in the text at all? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.220.59.108 (talk) 14:04, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

same can be said for ethiopia, while syria is not on the map. it could use an update--70.253.87.27 (talk) 03:24, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

lords resistance army

has the lords resistance army done anything in uganda during 2011? i might be wrong, but i think all bases in northern uganda, as well as southern sudan, have been destroyed. the conflict should stay as the DRC, and the central africa republic have some fighting in them. --75.55.117.180 (talk) 04:15, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

South Sudan Clashes

Were the 2011 South Sudan clashes an isolated incident, or is it an ongoing event. I haven't taken it down in case I'm wrong, but can anyone clarify this? Ug (talk) 02:20, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

there is an ongoing mix of several (proxy) conflicts. See Sudanese nomadic conflicts, Sudan–SPLM-N conflict (2011), 2011 South Sudan clashes, and Renegade General Athor's campaign encopassing both North and South. I believe we need a single article talking about the situation in global. I need help in that --93.137.139.211 (talk) 13:32, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Ogaden

Hi Wikipedia!!! There is a problem in the article of Ogaden War. If you click in the article, it´s appear as a ongoing war but in the description it´s appear as a finish conflict. Please, give me an answer because I´m interested in the XXI Century wars — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.58.101.232 (talk) 15:27, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

The infobox there says it's ongoing as of 2008, but the intro says it ended in 2010. We need a reference to confirm that.

Map

Can someone update the map so that sub-sections/states in countries are removed. Or at least make the lines easier to see. It is hard for me to tell which lines are countries and which lines are sub-divisions. - User:1morey March 23, 2012 10:44 AM (EST)

A more specific page for discussing issues relating to the map is located at: File talk:Ongoing Conflicts (1).png. I'll bring it up there. Mikael Häggström (talk) 13:05, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Text of the legend assigning colors should be harmonized. -ie 'Major wars, 1,000+ deaths per year' to 'Major wars and conflicts, 1,000+ deaths per year'. None of these would historically be considered "major wars" (except maybe Syria). Only 3 of the bloodiest conflicts meet the classic definition of war (clear combatants competing to govern), while many of the less bloody conflicts are technically wars. The change sounds minor but these facts say something significant about the modern state of war, and should not be downplayed. Jvol (talk) 22:54, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

No, the major war definition of +1k per year is recognized by the UN.-- FutureTrillionaire (talk) 23:00, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

2011–2012 Yemeni revolution

Listening to a report on NPR; sounds like the 2011–2012 Yemeni revolution may have stopped producing violent deaths? -- Beland (talk) 00:57, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

List of Israeli assassinations

We have List of Israeli assassinations and listening to the news it seems like there may be some attempts on the part of Iran to kill Israelis. A lot of this is unconfirmed, but I'm wondering if this should be listed here, or if it's part of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which is already listed. -- Beland (talk) 23:56, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

My opinion, and that's all it is, would be that shadow clandestine ops don't qualify as military conflicts. Doyna Yar (talk) 03:33, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

It is a part of the Iran-Israel proxy conflict, but it doesn't really qualify for a "military conflict".Greyshark09 (talk) 17:05, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Unnamed DR Congo conflict underway

How to classify this: http://www.aljazeera.com/video/africa/2012/05/20125181131799659.html ?

2012 East DR Congo conflict? --Reader1987 (talk) 16:10, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Yemen-AQAP conflict at major war status

Looking at various casualty reports, the war against AQAP has definately topped over 1000 deaths this year so far though i can find no source that gives a total so far for the year.XavierGreen (talk) 16:43, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Reorganize and Rename.

Let's reorganize this page based on how old each war is and rename the page List of ongoing wars. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charles Essie (talk • contribs) 20:40, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Why? most of the conflicts do not hold "war" status.Greyshark09 (talk) 17:06, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Is Burma is over?

Is Burma conflict over??? I see that and there is a ceasefire between the parts — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.37.83.123 (talk) 09:56, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Syrian Uprising has more than 10k deaths update? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.216.120.25 (talk) 16:42, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Criteria for inclusion

It says in the introduction that "Conflicts listed here are 100+ mortal casualties", but should this be in the sense of cumulative casualties or casualties per year? I think it may be hard to go by the former, because there is a vast amount of conflicts that have 100+ cumulative casualties but with some trace of still being active, so I favor having it per year. Still, the optimal solution would be to find a widely recognized cutoff for minor military conflicts. Mikael Häggström (talk) 12:52, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

I moved the following statement to here, because I think it needs further explanation of what distinguishes a low intensity conflict from a high intensity conflict in order to have any use of it in this article, or having referenced usage of it for included references, but the link of the statement is currently dead: Mikael Häggström (talk) 19:54, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

"The UN also use the term "[[low intensity conflict]]," which can overlap with the 1,000 violent deaths per year categorisation.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.startribune.com/nation/43815017.html?elr=KArks:DCiUMEaPc:UiacyKUUr |title=UN peacekeeping chief says Darfur `a low-intensity conflict' with 150 deaths a month |accessdate=2009-05-07}} {{Dead link|date=October 2010|bot=H3llBot}}</ref>"

To my best knowledge it is 1,000 deaths per year for high intensity conflict. Regarding 100+ casualties, this relates to cumulative count, since some long-running conflicts (like Kurdish insurgency in Iran) are way above 1,000+ in total, but only 4 killed this year. If we go for 100+ per year, then we would remove many conflicts, so i'm not sure it will help wikipedians who seek those. I don't believe we can find a clear threshold in the sources, but for certain we cannot count all minor conflicts with several of few dozens of casualties.Greyshark09 (talk) 06:13, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Operation Eagle

Actually there is a military operation in the Sinaí conducted by the Egyptian army, please put in the list

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Eagle — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.37.83.123 (talk) 12:22, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

part of Sinai insurgency.Greyshark09 (talk) 17:07, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

peru internal conflict?

to my knowledge the shining path insurgency has not ended, in fact I just read a report on the BBC about some government soldiers being killed recently by rebels. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-19291520 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.67.116 (talk) 18:34, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

You are correct, some ip user removed several conflicts without any reasoning. I readd those.Greyshark09 (talk) 05:56, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

There isn´t news about Peru Internal Conflict since the capture of Comrade Artemio??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.37.83.123 (talk) 19:12, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

missing conflicts

someone has removed the ogaden and baluchistan insurgencies from the low intensity conflict table, I do not think this is justified as these conflicts are still ongoing, albeit at a low level — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.67.116 (talk) 16:28, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Northern Ireland?

I'm questioning the inclusion of the UK and Ireland on this list. It looks like they are on here for post-1998 Real IRA activities, but the actual article for the Real IRA campaign says that at most some 40 people have been killed in that violence (not 140 somethimg, as the uncited figure in the list says). Also, the one person killed in the past year appears to be a Real IRA member shot by drug dealers in Dublin. This doesn't seem particularly well-linked to political conflict.

I would at the very least argue for consistency. The Real IRA campaign doesn't seem to be any more or less of an ongoing "war" than the ETA campaign in Basque Country, or the FLNC campaign in Corsica. So either those latter conflicts should be included, or the Northern Ireland entry deleted.Konchevnik81 (talk) 13:53, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

I agree the current conflict is rather insignificant compared to the other conflicts listed.-- FutureTrillionaire (talk) 13:59, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

I think 100+ total casualties threshold should be applied here; hence the IRA campaign is too low level.Greyshark09 (talk) 17:09, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Central African Republic

There's a new civil war going on in Central African Republic. [1][2] I haven't heard anything about the death toll yet, but something to keep an eye on. Evzob (talk) 17:35, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Not sure if this is a new war, or just resumption of old fighting. But anyways, thanks for the info. I'll update the map. -- FutureTrillionaire (talk) 02:37, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

It's all a matter of definition, I suppose. Evzob (talk) 18:54, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

harmonizing nomenclature

Particularly in the over-1000 deaths list, I think it would be helpful to try for more consistency in naming in the list. (rather than "---ian Civil War" in one entry and "internal conflict in ---" in another) Not every war is a unique snowflake. Jvol (talk) 23:15, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

A lot of these conflicts don't have official names, so we use descriptive ones. Is there any specific names you want to change? -- FutureTrillionaire (talk) 23:30, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Sudanese nomadic conflicts among 1000+ deaths?

The last timeline entry on the Sudanese nomadic conflicts is from March 2012, so I doubt it still belongs to the 1000+ deaths category. Therefore, I suggest moving it to the "other conflicts" section. Mikael Häggström (talk) 17:14, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Hold on, I'm not sure what's the standard here. Do we only include conflicts with 1000+ deaths in the past 1 year? -- FutureTrillionaire (talk) 17:16, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

In a perfect world, the inclusion criterium for the section would be "conflicts that has a current rate of casualties corresponding to 1000+ deaths per year". In reality, however, it appears to be decided retrospectively by looking at deaths in the past year (or current year for new conflicts that reach 1000+ deaths). I can agree to keep this conflict in this section for a while, in case a source will emerge that confirms 1000+ deaths in 2012. Mikael Häggström (talk) 18:05, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for that explanation. I had wondered how things are done here. Though I must differ on one point - "in a perfect world," there would be no need for this list at all. ;-) Evzob (talk) 17:11, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Agree Unfortunately, it seems now there were far more than 1000 deaths in 2012, so I guess this conflict will remain in that list. Mikael Häggström (talk) 19:42, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Mali Conflict in 1000+ section

Given that the estimated death counts for the Mali conflict are now at approximately 1000-1500+, and the conflict has been going on for less than a year, shouldn't it be moved up to the 1000/year section? 202.0.40.220 (talk) 12:47, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Citations are needed.--15:00, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Korean War

I understand that the Korean War is listed because there is still tension between the Koreas, but it should be reworded. That, or it should link to the Division of Korea (1954-present) subsection, if anything. The violence differs from the actual Korean War (which is over, by the way). It is mostly occasional armed border conflicts, but to call it the Korean War would be nonfactual. I would like to hear the public's opinion on this. Thanks. DrAndrewWinters (talk) 21:56, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

I removed it, because it's not considered an ongoing military conflict.--Futuretrillionaire (talk) 14:30, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Korean dispute or Division of Korea has been going on since 1945 (Korean War is part of it 1950-53).Greyshark09 (talk) 17:11, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Yemen shenanigans

Since the conflict is no longer proven to be "high intensity", the map needs to be reverted to its previous edition. 209.92.200.98 (talk) 22:08, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

The column on "Cumulative fatalities by January 2014 (Statistical Trend)"

For continued presence in the "1,000+ deaths per year" table, I think this column needs references that actually support the predicted numbers. Currently, all the references merely give past or current death tolls, and give no estimates of January 2014 death tolls. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, so if we don't find such references then this column should be removed. Mikael Häggström (talk) 17:14, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree; I removed the column. -- Beland (talk) 22:00, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Couple of active conflicts missing

There are a couple of lower intensity conflicts missing. There is an active Insurgency in Corsica fought between the National_Liberation_Front_of_Corsica and the French government. At least several hundred if not several thousand people have been killed since the insurgency started in 1976. There is also an Insurgency in Paraguay Being fought between the Paraguayan People's Army and the government there, a couple dozen people have died in that conflict since it began in 2005.XavierGreen (talk) 21:43, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Some incident occurred in Corsica in 1975, but is it ongoing? any sources?Greyshark09 (talk) 17:20, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Regarding Paragway issue, please bring sources as well (if a "couple of people" were killed from 2005 -> it is not really ongoing).Greyshark09 (talk) 17:20, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Formal state of war

There is a handful of wars which have ended but a formal state of war still exists. Korea, Japan-Russia and Greece-Albania are the ones I know. Should there a third table to include these? --Arianit (talk) 09:02, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

I believe that the purpose of the table is to show conflicts that actually involve fighting. The examples you are listing are more along the lines of political irregularities or tensions rather than any measurable conflict. --Blackbird_4 00:23, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Some of those are at List of wars extended by diplomatic irregularity.Greyshark09 (talk) 17:16, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Columbian conflict

The conflict in Colombia is shown on the map as being a high-intensity conflict, but the more recent bit of data on the page is the 2012 fatalities, which numbered only 211 or so. That seems to me to indicate that the Colombian conflict needs to be shown in orange, not red. If I'm missing something, please let me know. I would change the map myself, but I don't really know how, so I figured I've leave it to others to handle. --Blackbird_4 00:26, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

 Done -- There was also no evidence that the death toll for Burma exceeded 1,000 in 2012.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 14:03, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Blackbird said Colombia, not Burma.Greyshark09 (talk) 17:17, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Mozambique

There's been a new outbreak of rebel violence in Mozambique, with at least seven fatalities (seems like probably more). [3] GeoEvan (talk) 22:30, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

More information here [4] GeoEvan (talk) 22:46, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

you are talking on RENAMO insurgency; is this a single new incident, or they returned to arms some time ago?Greyshark09 (talk) 19:42, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Seems like they returned to arms just last month. Whether there will be continued violence is of course hard to say. GeoEvan (talk) 11:59, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Let's keep and eye, and if the number of casualties continues to climb, there is first of all a need for a new article about this new conflict and we may later include it here (if climbs above 100 killed).Greyshark09 (talk) 20:09, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Definition of War

Ive noticed some of the nations on the map that are in red aren't really in "war" like it says they are at least not War in the treditionl idea like iraq is in and insurgency not really a war.

This is a list of conflicts, thus they are not obligated to be defined as 'wars'.Greyshark09 (talk) 19:25, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

ADF insurgency in Congo flared again

The Allied Democratic Forces violence in Congo flared again, according to multiple sources (like [5]). Apparently, there is not even an article on the conflict; should be created and added here. The conflict has been ongoing on/off since 1996.Greyshark09 (talk) 19:25, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Turkey ?

i dont see turkeys conflict anywhere on here yet its orange on the map ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bleach143 (talk • contribs) 01:24, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Some editors decided that beginning of the peace process means the conflict is over; i agree this is too early to say so.Greyshark09 (talk) 19:27, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Guinea

Communal violence in Guinea this week has killed over 50 people [6] GeoEvan (talk) 02:38, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

You mean the 2013 Guinea clashes. I think this is yet too small to mention in the article. Is this violence a part of the longer going conflict or a separate incident?Greyshark09 (talk) 19:37, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

This seems to be a separate conflict, and has killed a lot more people than the election-related clashes. Here's another source. [7] GeoEvan (talk) 12:02, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

I see that FutureTrillionaire has already added it. So done.Greyshark09 (talk) 20:02, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Nigerian Conflict

I have noticed that AdamFromTheVillage constantly updates the fatality numbers for the Nigerian conflict, but that's all he does, he never updates the link that is supposed to be evidence of that number. He just keeps increasing the number with no justification. One person moved it to the minor conflicts and changed the information to be 'Unknown', owing to the link that doesn't back up the number. AFTV just moves it back, no justification, no new link, no nothing. This bothers me. I'm hesitant to do anything about it myself, but I wanted to bring it up because this seems to fly in the face of what WP is supposed to be about. Obviously AFTV feels strongly that this is something he should be keeping up with, but the lack of any sources makes me question the motivation. Blackbird_4 12:57, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Just revert him. Numbers need to be backed up by sources.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 03:08, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Well, i quickly reviewed news sources on Boko Haram insurgency and got a figure of almost 700 killed this year; i guess the true number is well over 1,000 - making it a major conflict. Can anyone find a good summary on 2013 casualties, or shall we continue to count up separate incidents?Greyshark09 (talk) 22:05, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Map: Laos, Ethiopia, and Turkey

The conflicts in Laos, Ethiopia,and Turkey have been removed from the list but not from the map. From reading the posts on the talk page, I gather there is some consensus that these conflicts are in fact over. Now, could someone please update the map appropriately? Prepster (talk) 23:00, 1 August 2013 (UTC)Prepster

Conflict in Turkey is not over. The cease fire is on the brink of collapse and there are already casualties in 2013.Greyshark09 (talk) 14:50, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Okay, but can you please update the map for Laos and Ethiopia. Those conflicts have been substantially quelled. Prepster (talk) 20:08, 3 August 2013 (UTC)Prepster

@FutureTrillionaire: Above request to your consideration (Laos and Ethiopia).Greyshark09 (talk) 10:22, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

 Done I can't find any recent deaths from the Insurgency in Ogaden and Insurgency in Laos. If violence in those regions comes back, we can add them back to the map.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 13:48, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Jammu and Kashmir insurgency

The insurgency in Jammu in Kashmir is part of the wider Kashmir conflict, lasting from 1947. In turn the Kashmir conflict is part of the Indo-Pakistani Wars (from 1947 as well). Considering the current clashes between India and Pakistan, i think we can fully consider putting the wider Indo-Pakistani Wars perspective in the table, instead of just last round of Jammu and Kashmir insurgency.Greyshark09 (talk) 20:04, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Definition of "war and "armed conflict"

I think we need a definition of "war" and "armed conflict" and use that as a criteria for inclusion in the article. For example, I don't think the Mexican Drug War is even a real war. It's just gang violence and the Mexican government's attempt to stop it. An "armed conflict" should be political in nature. The post-coup crackdowns in Egypt is also not an "armed conflict" imo. Although it is political in nature, the violence is mostly one-sided.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 19:45, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

I think this is a helpful quote from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:

War should be understood as an actual, intentional and widespread armed conflict between political communities. Thus, fisticuffs between individual persons do not count as a war, nor does a gang fight, nor does a feud on the order of the Hatfields versus the McCoys. War is a phenomenon which occurs only between political communities, defined as those entities which either are states or intend to become states (in order to allow for civil war).

--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 19:59, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

There are problems in defining a military conflict - but if Mexican Drug War is not a war, then Colombian insurgency is not a war either, and probably the Taliban involved war in Afghanistan may not be defined as war as well. I agree that protests should not belong here, but events including armed organizations on one side and a state/s on the other, or only military organizations, or only states - all are military conflicts. With Egyptian political violence it is not clear yet, but one things is certain - the Egyptian Army is using a military force to subdue protests, and Islamist-oriented organizations in Sinai are waging war on the army as well.Greyshark09 (talk) 18:05, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

casualties in the new Lebanon war are a clear underestimate

how can only four people have been killed this year when the article on the Tripoli bombing says 47 people were killed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.87.69.229 (talk) 23:17, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Indeed should be updated - it is around 200 killed i guess this year.Greyshark09 (talk) 17:59, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Conflicts removed: Cabinda conflict and Bahraini uprising

Cabinda conflict was removed since it's level of violence in unknown (no reports on casualties). Bahraini uprising (2011-present) was removed as well since it is a very low-level conflict recently and it is rather civil conflict than military.GreyShark (dibra) 16:55, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Cabinda conflict was removed. You could update the map? MauriManya (talk) 23:21, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

@FutureTrillionaire: may you make the update requested above?GreyShark (dibra) 07:11, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

No. Otherwise I wouldn't be asking you. MauriManya (talk) 14:40, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

 Done - Angola removed.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 15:12, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Mali and CAR wars should be put back on the list

I'm reading lots of news reports about recent fighting between village militias and renegade seleka who didn't demobilize and in Mali the MNLA pulled out of the peace deal and there have been some clashes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.168.201.189 (talk) 18:22, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Reference please?GreyShark (dibra) 18:25, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

http://allafrica.com/stories/201310180153.html http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/07/us-mali-attack-idUSBRE9960A320131007 http://www.voanews.com/content/separatist-rebels-to-return-to-mali-peace-talks/1763840.html it looks like the tuareg nationalists returned to the ceasefire but there are still jihadi attacks going on — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.168.201.189 (talk) 20:36, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

By Seleka you mean the Central African Republic conflict (2012–13)?GreyShark (dibra) 16:41, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Well after reading this, i'm adding the conflict in Central African. It looks a major bloodbath.GreyShark (dibra) 16:54, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

The claim of Mali conflict re-emerging is not so much supported (one isolated incident without casualties).GreyShark (dibra) 16:44, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

I disagree http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-24658349 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.168.201.189 (talk) 19:02, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Ok, that looks a more serious report. @FutureTrillionaire: What do you think?GreyShark (dibra) 21:46, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

It looks like the Islamist rebels are continuing a guerrilla campaign. I guess that means the Mali conflict is ongoing. Someone needs to change the Mali conflict article. There seems to be a lot of chaos in CAR, but I'm not sure what the nature of the violence is (insurgency? sectarian?). Anyways, I've updated the map.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 23:02, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Restored the Mali conflict. DoneGreyShark (dibra) 18:10, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Nigerian conflict now a major war

Just scouting the news reports through the last months shows almost 1,000 fatalities. It seems the numbers are well beyond that, and the uprising of Islamists in Borno state has become a major war.GreyShark (dibra) 21:45, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

I've added some more deaths from early 2013 to the footnote. The result is clearly at least 1,000 deaths. I think it's safe to move this to the +1,000 category.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 23:25, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Moved to major conflicts. Done

M23 rebellion

The rebellion is part of the Kivu conflict, thus we should list the latter.GreyShark (dibra) 17:44, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Is it? I'd like to see a source to support that. I'm pretty sure that M23 is the only active rebel group in that area.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 19:44, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

For some reason the M23 rebellion article says that it is the second part of Kivu conflict; what do you think?GreyShark (dibra) 11:58, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Well, now that the war is over, I guess we don't need to worry about this anymore.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 02:11, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

I think you act too fast here to close the case; PJAK rebellion was also announced "defeated" in 2011. In any case, i think we should set a policy not to delete conflicts too fast according to media announcements. I propose to make the cleanup when the new year comes and not delete a conflict when one side announces victory (especially when those "victories" are very hard to verify).GreyShark (dibra) 20:02, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Policy on adding/removing conflicts

I would like us to set standard rules for adding and removing conflicts since every one understands "ongoing" differently. Well, adding is relatively easy - as soon as we see casualties in a sizeable conflict (lets say above 100 casualties total), we are adding it here. However, many hurry to remove conflicts, which are not sufficiently updated with casualties, or which are claimed as "over" (even though often such announcements prove wrong). I would propose to make the cleanup only by the end of the year, while adding/removing during the year would require discussion for each addition/removal.GreyShark (dibra) 22:35, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

I agree. I also think that before a conflict should be removed from here, the article on the conflict should say that the war has ended (and have a source). DylanLacey (talk) 02:56, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

@FutureTrillionaire: - what do you think of this, considering the removal of M23 rebellion; perhaps you are rushing too much?GreyShark (dibra) 19:20, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

I suggest we follow WP:BRD. If somebody adds/removes a conflict and he is reverted by another editor, then a discussion needs to take place before it can be added/removed again.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 21:04, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Following WP:BRD is natural. What i would like is to set some guide-rule: for example that we keep major conflicts if the casualty rate topped 1,000 this year or the previous year. See proposal below.GreyShark (dibra) 20:42, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Concrete guiding rules for the page

I propose the following guiding rules for the page in order to decrease the number of additions/removals and decrease disagreements on the definition of "ongoing" and "military":

• 1. Listed conflicts are armed - meaning the belligerent parties are either states or militant organizations. Civil demonstrations do not belong to this list, even if the number of casualties is large.
• 2. A conflict will be listed here if the number of casualties in the entire conflict exceeds 100 deaths (minor events should not be included). It doesn't matter how many casualties are this year (if zero, then see #5).
• 3. Conflict is listed on this page (as "ongoing") if there were casualties during the current year or the previous year (2013 or/and 2012).
• 4. Conflict is listed as "major" if during this year or during the previous year the number of casualties topped 1,000.
• 5. Conflict clean-up (removing those not ongoing any more) will be done only at the end of 2013, when it is clear there were no casualties through entire 2013.

Please write whether you agree and remarks.GreyShark (dibra) 20:42, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

2013 updates

Chad

Chad is not included on the list and yet it is shaded on the map. Can we please remove it from the map? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prepster (talk • contribs) 22:36, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Chad is listed in Insurgency in the Maghreb (2002–present), but I'm not very knowledgeable of this conflict.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 17:59, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Chad should be removed. I recently made some order at the Insurgency in the Maghreb (2002–present), and apparently Chad has only limited involvement in that conflict, with none (or marginal) happening on its soil.GreyShark (dibra) 21:38, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

 Done - Chad removed from map.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 15:19, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Western Sahara conflict removed

An IP removed the Western Sahara conflict, indicating that the military phase of the conflict ended in 1991. I tend to agree in accordance with the above proposed set of guidelines (civil protests do not belong to this list, even if they result in multiple casualties).GreyShark (dibra) 23:02, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

 Done - Map updated: Western Sahara removed.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 15:20, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

CAR conflict - major

Seems like the CAR conflict is clearly a major one - almost 400 killed in last 3 days. Any source on full 2013 casualties?GreyShark (dibra) 17:33, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Clearly over 1,000 killed by now. so -  Done.GreyShark (dibra) 20:00, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

@FutureTrillionaire: please update CAR conflict as major in the map.GreyShark (dibra) 20:00, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

 Done Nice job with the research and calculations.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 20:08, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you as well, your contributions here are vital and finally those tables and maps are reasonably arranged and sourced.GreyShark (dibra) 21:24, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Morocco

For some reason it is on the map; should be removed (perhaps it is on the map due to Western Sahara conflict, which is not an armed conflict any more).GreyShark (dibra) 21:27, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

According to the Insurgency in the Maghreb (2002–present) article, Morocco is involved in that conflict, or some of the insurgency is taking place in Morocco.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 21:45, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Not really, Morocco may be involved there, but except arresting some "al-Qaeda suspects" on their territory, nothing has happened in Morocco so far. The main activity of this conflict is in Algeria and Niger. The article on insurgency is pretty bad - nothing is sourced.GreyShark (dibra) 18:13, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Y Removed from map.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 16:18, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Xinjiang conflict

I think Xinjiang conflict should be removed from this article. The term "Xinjiang conflict" seems to be used to describe various protests and terrorist attacks that have occurred in Xinjiang. This doesn't seem to be an "armed conflict". The United States occasionally experiences protests and terrorist attacks. Does that mean that there is an armed conflict in America? --FutureTrillionaire (talk) 14:22, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

I disagree - Xinjiang conflict refers to East Turkestan Independence Movement insurgency and associated events. In comparison, also in Turkey not all events are linked directly with PKK conflict, but are put within the context of the armed struggle; same in Iran with PJAK and in Iraq with Iraqi insurgents.GreyShark (dibra) 18:06, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Do you have any sources that state that there is an insurgency in Xinjiang? There is a big difference between insurgency and terrorism.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 16:20, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Terrorism by a militant group is generally a form of insurgency. The reason attacks don't follow the pattern of what might be considered a traditional insurgency is that it is extremely difficult for militant groups to acquire arms in china. Most attacks by the ETIM in china are low tech often militants are only armed with knives, homemade weaponry, and simple crude explosives.XavierGreen (talk) 03:01, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Here you go - "China believes the East Turkestan Islamic Movement aims to establish an independent East Turkestan in Xinjiang, and blames the group for the low-intensity insurgency in the region." [8]. If that satisfies you, please add China to the map.GreyShark (dibra) 21:27, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Egypt

Initially i thought there is some armed aspect to the political conflict, but it seems that except Sinai insurgency (a separate case), nothing serious has happened in Egypt in terms of armed struggle so far. I'm in favor to remove it as a non-armed conflict.GreyShark (dibra) 18:14, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Agree. The Morsi-supporters have not taken up arms.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 16:22, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

There has been a huge uptick in the conflict in the sinai this year and that is a military conflict but i dont think the protests in Egypt constitute an armed conflict though.XavierGreen (talk) 03:02, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Disagree - Many Morsi supporters HAVE taken up arms (even if minimal) and carried out several attacks and assassinations in many places in Egypt other than the Sinai. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 22:00, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

I know that, this is why i initially thought that the conflict belongs here. Can you bring some good sources?GreyShark (dibra) 22:12, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

July 24 - Mansoura bombing: (1) (2) (3)
August 14 - Kerdasa massacre: (video) (1) (2) (3)
September 19 - General shot dead in Kerdasa: (1) (2) (3)
November 18 - Assassination of Mohamed Mabrouk: (1) (2) (3)
December 12 - Ismailia bombing: (1) (2) (3)
And many others.. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 11:07, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

I understand, but there is the Muslim Brotherhood political wing claim that they have nothing to do with it. Bortherhood do have arms, but i'm not sure this is a military conflict yet.GreyShark (dibra) 10:11, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

But there are armed groups involved whether the MB says it's behind the attacks or not. They're just players in all of this and they're not the only Islamists in the country.

Also, even if some those armed groups come from the Sinai, they still perform their attacks in other parts of the country. Lebanon's spillover conflict from Syria is already mentioned in the list and i find mentioning the post-coup violence in Egypt a bit similar but of course that's not the only reason i believe it should be listed. I also believe time will explain things much further in the coming days in Egypt.. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 04:25, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Update: The article's name became Islamist unrest in Egypt (2013–present) now, in case the word "protests" bothered anyone. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm still tending to agree with @FTrillionaire that the conflict is still "civil". I welcome other users to comment. I guess the situation may change any day however.GreyShark (dibra) 09:05, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Somalia

Does anyone have a source for Somalia casualties this year? The current source is just about the Kenyan mall shootings. Just looking at 2013 timeline of the War in Somalia I count at least 255 addition casualties, but someone must have a better source. Empire3131 (talk) 20:41, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

@Empire3131: See below (response by Xavier).GreyShark (dibra) 05:37, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

South Sudanese internal violence

I see Lihaas added South Sudan's recent crisis. Let's hope it will not deteriorate into a major conflict.GreyShark (dibra) 21:30, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

The Christian Science Monitor is reporting 1,000 dead in South Sudan as of today, so it could categorize as a major conflict. 50.186.215.232 (talk) 17:14, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Yep, should go to majors.GreyShark (dibra) 10:09, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Now i'm suddenly puzzled with the claim that the 2013 South Sudanese political crisis is a part of the ongoing South Sudan internal conflict (2011–present). Thoughts?GreyShark (dibra) 10:18, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Citation overkill

I'm seeing some major citation overkill. Although it is important to make sure information is properly sourced, too many citations can impede readability. Would it be possible to delete some citations, or better yet, merge them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by B14709 (talk • contribs) 18:21, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

I have temporarily addressed this issue by collapsing any 3 or more citations. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 19:36, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

shading for the US

I've changed the shading for the US to red, because, on average, more than 1,000 people per year have been killed in the ongoing war in Afghanistan and the US continues to participate in that war. Sources:

• http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/04/world/asia/afghan-cabinet-releases-data-on-deaths-of-security-personnel.html?_r=0
• http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/the-last-casualties-as-a-long-war-ends-risks-still-prove-real/2014/03/04/55905998-8a90-11e3-a5bd-844629433ba3_story.html
• http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/22/gop-kelly-ayotte-obama-afghanistan-troop-future-plan
• http://tribune.com.pk/story/678845/13700-afghan-security-personnel-killed-in-10-years/ —rybec 09:22, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

It means that all the nations involved in major conflicts must be shaded in red? Helliko (talk) 01:36, 25 March 2014 (UTC).

Only territories of countries with conflicts should be marked, not those sending forces.GreyShark (dibra) 19:52, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

I've indicated that decision in the image's description and in the caption in the Wikipedia article (I linked to [9] which I hope matches the criteria that were used), and reverted my change. Is there an image which shows the warring parties in the Afghanistan war? —rybec 05:26, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Good work, thanks. What do you mean regarding Afghanistan? A map or a list of participants?GreyShark (dibra) 16:42, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

More 2014 changes

addition Nagorno Karabakh

Shouldn't the Nagorno Karabakh conflict be added to the list of minor conflicts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.85.98.210 (talk) 19:48, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Any casualties recently?GreyShark (dibra) 16:50, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Yes there a a significant number of deaths on the front every year. For example, [[10]], [[11]], [[12]]. Heavy fighting regularly erupts without a moments notice along the front, and sniper attacks are a frequent occurance.74.105.130.90 (talk) 21:40, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

 Done Also Nagorno-Karabakh conflict article created for this purpose.GreyShark (dibra) 16:30, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

I've tinted Armenia and Azerbaijan in orange on the map. —rybec 12:55, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

War in Darfur and Sudan-SRF conflict

Both conflicts are said to be ongoing, but we list only the Sudan-SRF conflict here. There also seems to be much overlap. Can anyone enlighten us on the situation in Sudan? Does the Sudan-SRF conflict makes an aftermath of the War in Darfur or is it a part of it?GreyShark (dibra) 20:33, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Paraguayan People's Army campaign

I noticed there has been Paraguayan People's Army campaign listed here in the past. Is there any evidence for it to resurge recently?GreyShark (dibra) 16:41, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Apparently ongoing - Guerrillas Step Up Campaign in Paraguay (November 2013 - 5 killed). Adding to the list.GreyShark (dibra) 06:03, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Moro insurgency

There has recently been an announcement by Moro on putting down arms, however i must remind you that only if no casualties are indeed recorded until the end of this year, we may remove it. Correct for today, it is just another conflict which is ongoing despite peace efforts, like Kurdish insurgency in Iran, Kurdish-Turkish conflict, Nagorno-Karabach conflict and others.GreyShark (dibra) 06:02, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Iraqi insurgency 2014 death toll

The 2014 figure of 2,074 deaths seems too low. According to Iraq Body Count,there have been 3,015 deaths during the first three months of the year. Fatalities currently average about 30 each day. Since it has been 110 days so far this year, a better figure would be 3,300. As of April 20, the 2014 death toll is 3,660. Zee money (talk) 11:26, 21 April 2014 (UTC)Zee money

"1,000= deaths per year" - should this be "1,000+ deaths per year" ?

Re "1,000=" - this use of the equals symbol doesn't make much sense to me. If the section is for "more than 1000" then should it be a '1,000+' or '>1,000' or something? Or we could say "More than 1,000".

Balaenoptera musculus (talk) 16:15, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Some vandal user created this  Fixed.GreyShark (dibra) 16:32, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Kenya in the Somali Civil War

Can we consider the recent significant attacks in Kenya as a part of Somalia's spillover conflict? Kenya is more than just 'involved' now. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 16:29, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Map changes

Changes required for the ongoing conflicts map:

• China
• North and South Korea
• Ukraine
• Paraguay
• Uganda (part of the Lord's Resistance Army insurgency)
• Morocco (part of the Insurgency in the Maghreb (2002–present))
• Egypt (to be shaded in red)

If anyone can help it would be highly appreciated, because in its current form the map is very misleading to readers. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 16:51, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Some of these requested changes are questionable. Violence between North and South Korea has been minimal over the years. It has been agreed that Morocco should be removed (see 2013 updates thread). I don't think casualties from a major crackdown on protests (Egypt, August 2013) should be included in this article, which is about wars. Shading these countries would be more misleading than not shading them. Also, Uganda is already on the map.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 12:12, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Colouring of Russia

My general feeling is that Russia is such a tremendously large country that it looks a bit wrong to colour in the entire country on the map. The actual location of the insurgency in Russia, namely, the North Caucasian Federal District itself has an area of 170,000km², that's larger than most countries, and even then, the NCFD is the second smallest of the nine federal districts of Russian.

As such, my argument would be that:

• The Russian federal districts are so huge that they exceed most countries in size.
• The North Caucasian Federal District, at 170,000km² is large enough that it could easily be seen on a map if coloured in
• However, it is still the second smallest of nine enormous districts, and thus it seems a bit wrong to allow that to be representative of the entire country, whose landmass covers a monumental 17,098,242km², roughly the size of South America and almost 100 times the size of the NCFD.

I'm not too certain of what the opinion is on this issue, but I think it's worth bringing up all the same. Uranium grenade (talk) 23:06, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Its not a practicle solution, colouring only first order political divisions was tried in the past and was virtually impossible to keep current and accurate. The sourcing alone for such a detailed project is virtually impossible with the limited resources available to editors hear.XavierGreen (talk) 00:02, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Additionally your assertion that the conflict is restricted to the NCFD is not exactly accurate, as there have been bombings and other insurgent attacks in other federal districts including in Moscow itself.XavierGreen (talk) 00:04, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Democratic Republic of the Congo

Why is this not listed? Am I missing something?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Republic_of_the_Congo#Civil_wars — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.50.142.132 (talk) 07:56, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

• What is there to list? All the wars listed in that section are described in their articles as concluded. 75.131.42.151 (talk) 04:47, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Yemen

Does Yemen enjoy some kind of special status that allows it to continually be mapped as the location of a high-intensity conflict when there has been no evidence of such a conflict in years? 75.131.42.151 (talk) 04:56, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Combined between the three ongoing conflicts in yemen there are over 1000 casualties this year. There are well over 700 casualties in the al qaeda conflict and over 300 in the houthi conflict.XavierGreen (talk) 02:00, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Shouldn't that information be cited in the article then? The present totals for this year (and last year) are less than 500. Also, by the logic applied above, (northern) Sudan should also be labeled a high-intensity nation, due to the sum of its multiple conflicts exceeding 1000 last year. 209.92.200.98 (talk) 15:04, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

It should be yes, the numbers cited on the page for vitually all conflicts are woefully incomplete and outdated. For example here is a source stating that at least 540 combatants had been killed between april 1st and june 5th in the al-qaeda conflict in yemen alone.XavierGreen (talk) 16:15, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Nigeria

I have noticed that the Islamist insurgency by book harem in Nigeria is no longer on the list of major wars, even though the death toll continues to climb??Leo33675 (talk)

@Leo33675: Apparently, the issue has already been fixed (it is certainly a major conflict).GreyShark (dibra) 19:01, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Ukraine/Crimea threshold?

There is no doubt this is an armed conflict, though the casualties have been curbed by the players. Clearly the Russian military occupies and annexed Crimea. Where does the line get drawn with regard to such 21st century tactics in conflicts? Are casualties the only metric of an armed conflict? Doyna Yar (talk) 04:18, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

We use 25 deaths as the threshold, since it is the threshold used by many organizations (such as Upsella) in determining whether or to list a conflict as active. As for Crimea, that conflict is no longer active and never reached the 25 deaths threshold, however the insurgency in eastern Ukraine will probably reach it soon and be listed.74.105.130.90 (talk) 17:06, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

I understand the measure the article uses based on death toll. That is what I question. That would usually make sense. My reason for bringing this up is this situation is not the norm for such situations. I am at a loss for a historic example of comparison. Can Crimea be dismissed as not an 'armed conflict' because the Russian forces weren't opposed and the casualties were minimized? Can the reality on the ground in Crimea be divorced from the eastern Ukrainian strife given the international denial of Russian autonomy there. Given, by design, this conflict is murky and difficult to define. However a state's sovereignty being violated, and subjugated, by another states armed forces. In defining the article does this imply that when one armed force imposes itself belligerently and faces no credible opposition or resistance, and in the process absorbs assets of that nation's forces, in military terms it is not defined as an armed conflict? Then what else is it, passive subjugation? Perhaps the article should be 'Ongoing hot armed conflicts'? Doyna Yar (talk) 04:35, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

You are describing a political conflict; as long as there are no significant deaths - this is not a notable armed conflict, otherwise, practically anything could be listed here. Armed is equivalent to violent, meaning multiple deaths.GreyShark (dibra) 17:53, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

The threshold is 100 deaths total, and 1+ per last year. Some sources also use 25 deaths per year, but this is too high in my opinion, so we implement the first one.GreyShark (dibra) 17:53, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Support adding Ukraine - Making 100 deaths a threshold is completely arbitrary. There is obviously an insurgency going on in eastern Ukraine. What constitutes a war is not dependent on the number of causalities. See the dictionary definition: "a situation in which people or groups compete with or fight against each other".--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 15:33, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

disagree, without putting a threshold also the 2000 Cochabamba protests, California Water Wars and Water wars in Florida could have made it to be here. The sources which list conflicts rely on deaths alone. period. In case of Ukraine, however, it is highly possible 100 deaths are not far away, but not yet.GreyShark (dibra) 16:23, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

I originally moved this page to its current location to resolve an issue ongoing at the time where various things were being added such as riots, mobs attacks, and other sorts of sustained unorganized violance as well as so called wars against social concepts like the war on drugs and poverty. Those types of incidents were clearly not intended to be listed on this page when While the criteria are somewhat ambiguous, i think it is quite clear that in order for an outbreak of violence to be listed here the a conflict must be of at least a quasi military like nature: ie it must consist of two organized armed forces engaged in combat with one another. Another thing that i believe should be required is that the conflict be one of a sustained nature. For example a one off border clash like 2010 Israel–Lebanon border clash would not be listed here.

So while Euromaiden itself i don't think would be listed here, the Donetsk People's Republic insurgency likely would qualify without a overall casualty threshold.

I do think that the overall casualty threshold minimum is somewhat arbitrary, but that at least one death should have occurred within the current or past year for a conflict to be listed here.XavierGreen (talk) 18:43, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Ask and you shall receive, I guess. The 2014 Russian military intervention in Ukraine article says that there have been 25 deaths. It also doesn't appear to include the casualties of May 2, 2014 in that total. I'd recommend adding it to the list of ongoing conflicts. Konchevnik81 (talk) 20:09, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

With the events of the past weekend, it seems the argument is pointless - the number of deaths has reached around 100. Now it is clearly in the list.GreyShark (dibra) 16:34, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Would someone please qualify how long a 'conflict' needs to have been going in order for it to be 'ongoing'? Two days? Two months? Two years. There's a notable absence of criteria (even a criterion) for the definition in this article. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 03:22, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

There is no rule for that, but it is custom to look at this differently: in case there were deaths during this or past year, then the conflict is ongoing. If calendar year passes with no casualties, then the conflict is technically over (most declarations on cease-fire or peace do not reflect reality for this matter, unless deaths stop piling up).GreyShark (dibra) 19:19, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Ukraine has become a major conflict

Official estimates range between 423 (UN) to 1,250 (Ukrainian government). This is then a major conflict. Sadly.GreyShark (dibra) 19:19, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

2014 changes

Well, there has been some major copy-editing recently, attributed to 2013-14 transition of dates. There were however few changes, as listed below.GreyShark (dibra) 09:09, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Mexican drug war

Excuse me, I just want to ask a question. Why is Mexico listed in the 1000+ casualties/year list, if the same list says there have been 66+ casualties in 2014?LJ-38M (talk) 09:52, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Somali civil war

Moved to minor conflicts since there are no sources for major casualties in 2013.GreyShark (dibra) 09:09, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm 99% sure the casualties are well in excess of 1,000. If one did a search through news archives, i'm sure they would be able to find in excess of 1000 casualties.74.105.130.90 (talk) 05:36, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

January-March only, 600-700+: http://www.acleddata.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/ACLED-Country-Report_Somalia_April-2013.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.110.158.9 (talk) 18:34, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

I see that the table lists around 300 casualties in January-March, but there is no exact number.GreyShark (dibra) 20:42, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Colombian conflict

moved to minor conflicts since there is no info on casualties for 2013 and indeed it seems the conflict is less violent now.GreyShark (dibra) 09:09, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

South China Sea tensions

Not yet relevant since we are talking on occasional incidents with few casualties overall. Once it reaches 100 deaths, we may consider inclusion (see clarification notes at the top of the article).GreyShark (dibra) 09:09, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Civil conflict in the Philippines

The Civil conflict in the Philippines refers to the ongoing civil war in the country with the New People's Army and the Moro people against the government that began in 1969. The two conflicts may not be the same ideologically but the fact that they are occurring simultaneously and cover pretty much the same area (Mindanao), they should be grouped together. This is similar to the Somali Civil War or the Internal conflict in Burma where different factions not aligned with each other are fighting the government. The previous conflict the Hukbalahap Rebellion ended 15 years before the present one began so there was a period of peace albeit briefly.--Theparties (talk) 23:56, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

• also I'm adding Malaysia because of the Lahad Datu standoff last year.--Theparties (talk) 00:00, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
• I think it would be better if they were seperated. The NPA and the various Moro Nationalist / islamist groups do not fight together. Additionally the NPA has forces scattered all over the Philippines such as in Luzon, while the Moro/Islamist conflict is restricted to the souther philippines.XavierGreen (talk) 00:17, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
  • I don;t disagree that the two should have their own articles. I just think that there should be a single one that ties the together. While the NPA have forces elsewhere, most of them are in Mindanao and the Islamists still have the capacity to strike Luzon with the Rizal Day bombings and the 2004 SuperFerry 14 bombing. Also it is a lesser known fact that this conflict was hatched in the University of the Philippines: Nur Misuari and Jose Maria Sison were associates.--Theparties (talk) 00:23, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
• I agree with Xavier; per WP:GF i would ask Theparties to self-revert.GreyShark (dibra) 18:04, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
• The two conflicts are not related. It's possible for a country to experience two conflicts at the same time, for example the Taliban insurgency in NW Pakistan and Baloch insurgency in the SW.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 03:06, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
  • • They are see below.--Theparties (talk) 06:14, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
• Here's the source why they are related:

"The Fruit of Misuari's Capitulation", Bulatlat. Quezon City, Philippines. December 2 - 8, 2001.:

"Among those who found the agreement spurious was Jose Maria Sison, the founding chairman of the Communist Party of the Philippines and once a comrade of Misuari’s in the underground Kabataang Makabayan."

The Founding leaders were in cahoots with each other in order to start the conflict. I could find other sources from Google but I think this will suffice.--Theparties (talk) 21:16, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

They are surely related, and so are Arab League conflicts, but there are reasons to keep them apart.GreyShark (dibra) 18:58, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

What are those reasons?--Theparties (talk) 06:14, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Generally it seems there is a geographic and political separation between those conflicts in the Philippines, so we should treat them as separate. Same in Iran - there have been several insurgencies ongoing through the last decade, but not related with each others (MEK, KDPI, Jundallah, Akhwaz separatists).GreyShark (dibra) 20:39, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

• Comment - per majority opinion, the Philippines conflicts are restored into 2 separate sections (Moro insurgency and NPA conflict) Done.GreyShark (dibra) 18:58, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Comment -First of all, there is a lot of inconsistencies with the table; the Internal conflict in Burma is a series of unrelated conflicts but they are grouped together. Second, the "Communist insurgency" is in fact two unrelated conflicts, one of them (The Hukbalahap Rebellion) ended in 1954. You did not even consider my arguments. Polling is not a substitute for discussion. I'm not re-merging them because doing so is Sisyphian labor. We are never going to get a consensus. Although, I am putting the correct title and the correct date.--Theparties (talk) 05:51, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

No problem, i agree with you - it should be separated from the Hukbalahap Rebellion.GreyShark (dibra) 18:28, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

CAR conflict

An ip is trying to remove it over and over again, claiming the Central African conflict is over, which is not accepted for two reasons - first, it is too early to determine the conflict is over (since it is a major conflict, it should actually anyway stay on the list until the end of the year); secondly, i just saw news that more people are killed [13], so nothing is over until it is really over.GreyShark (dibra) 18:31, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Northern Mali

The table here lists just 9 fatalities in 2013, but I count about 275 in 2013 on Northern Mali conflict. Junuxx (talk) 09:30, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Clearly it is much more than 9, please add more with sources.GreyShark (dibra) 20:36, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Egypt

Considering this, this and this, i'm now tending to the idea to add Egyptian crisis as a (low-level) military conflict.GreyShark (dibra) 20:00, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

About time, and there's a lot more than this. But kindly give us your opinion on the recent developments in the article's discussion because it's a lot more than a "civil" conflict. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 08:59, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Probably however we should simply expand Sinai insurgency (already in the list) to the whole Egyptian political crisis (2011-present).GreyShark (dibra) 05:36, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

I disagree because Timeline of the 2011–present Egyptian civil unrest is a poorly developed article and it's still in a very bad shape. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 12:48, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

So what do you propose?GreyShark (dibra) 18:17, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

I think it would be best if we added Islamist unrest in Egypt (2013–present) for now then wait to see if there is a chance to improve the parent article. Also, not all events in the civil unrest are armed conflicts (the notable ones at least), they are mostly "civil" like you said before. Thoughts? Fitzcarmalan (talk) 19:07, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Not all the events in Syrian civil war are armed, but once there is a significant armed element it becomes an "armed conflict". It is clear that Sinai insurgency and current Islamist unrest are armed (at least partially) and they are both clearly a part of the general political crisis in Egypt. I supported your merge of the aftermath article - it can be a good basis for complete crisis description.GreyShark (dibra) 19:17, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

I just noticed your support now, sorry. Maybe we have consensus on the other issue now. But please note that the non-armed events of the Syrian Civil War have a special article → Civil uprising phase of the Syrian Civil War. And there is also a recent proposal i made in the Islamist unrest's talk page of whether to create a separate article for the non-civil conflict events and to keep the original article for protests only. I'll appreciate it if you gave us your opinion there too. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 19:38, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Note, that civil uprising in Syria also included armed clashes in June 2011; the civil uprising phase is a general definition for first phase of the Syrian civil war. You cannot separate Islamic unrest in Egypt to "armed" and "non-armed" if it occurs in the same place and in the same time (in case of Sinai it is at least separate location). It seems there is an armed element in the Islamic unrest in my opinion, so it is still unrest (not uprising per WP:COMMONNAME) but is already armed conflict.GreyShark (dibra) 22:41, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm sort of confused sorry. Do you want to add the Islamist unrest or the 2011–present civil unrest as a whole? Fitzcarmalan (talk) 16:51, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

@Fitzcarmalan: I suggest to exchange Sinai insurgency (already listed and part of the 2011-present Egyptian political crisis), with the 2011-present Egyptian crisis. I don't think it is a good idea to have both Sinai insurgency and the Islamist uprising here because they are both clearly interconnected. Do you agree?GreyShark (dibra) 11:10, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

How can the Sinai insurgency be part of the unrest when the latter is still called civil unrest? The Sinai conflict is an impact and is not part of the core events. I also do maintain that a bigger part of the 2011-present civil unrest is not considered an armed conflict.

I agree with you however, that it's not necessary to add both the Sinai insurgency and the Islamist unrest separately in this article. But in my opinion, the 2011-present civil unrest article has to be moved first to be mentioned here. Maybe if we called it civil uprising it would be better? Thoughts? Fitzcarmalan (talk) 17:50, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

I would go for "Egyptian political conflict (2011-present)", thus not using the word civil, which complicates things.GreyShark (dibra) 18:47, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

I have no problem with civil to be honest. It's just confusing when associated with unrest. Egypt was always in a "political conflict" and the date tag wouldn't do much difference. You can go ahead with your proposal for now, but we should also agree on a proper title to make a RM because in its current form it would complicate things later like you said. I prefer civil uprising since the 2011 revolt is also called an "uprising" and the Muslim Brotherhood also called for an uprising after the coup. I could go for crisis too as it is the most neutral and is used by numerous sources. The Islamist unrest is also called an "insurgency" by many sources [14] [15] [16] [17] [18], and thus can't be encompassed under "political conflict". Fitzcarmalan (talk) 07:37, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

"Crisis" sounds good to me, you are welcome to nominate rename to "Egyptian crisis (2011-present)" or similar. I would support.GreyShark (dibra) 18:46, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

 DoneGreyShark (dibra) 16:45, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Addition of Ukraine

I think Ukraine should be added to minor conflicts, giving the fact that the Russian invasion of Crimea is technically an undeclared act of war, as of March 2, 2014.

Not yet, we only include it if there are cumulative 100+ casualties (hopefully not), otherwise it is not notable as an "armed" conflict, but rather political.GreyShark (dibra) 09:00, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

I don't think it should be added yet, because there are no fatalities reported yet attributable to the conflict, but i disagree with the 100+ limit. Various other reputable organizations use 25 as a bottom limit for notability.XavierGreen (talk) 18:42, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Somalia Casualty Figures

I finally was able to find a report on casualty figures for 2013 in somalia. acleddata reports that there were an estimated 3150 casualties in Somalia during 2013 down from an estimated 3300 in 2012. The source information can be found here [[19]].XavierGreen (talk) 18:50, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Please add it and relocate Somalia war to major conflict.GreyShark (dibra) 05:20, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

 Done.GreyShark (dibra) 18:47, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

General questions

Since the standard appears to be a minimum of 100 deaths to qualify as a conflict for the wikipedia page, it makes sense to remove all the conflicts that did not eclipse 100 deaths in 2013. That would include:

Kurdish separatism in Iran

Korean Conflict

Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Papua Conflict

Communist insurgency in the Philippines

Internal conflict in Peru

Casamance conflict

Kurdish-Turkish Conflict

LRA insurgency

Xinjiang conflict

Insurgency in the MAghreb (at a minimum the "countries need to be updated since conflicts have only been in Algeria and Nigeria in 2013)

South Yemen insurgency

Sudan-SPLM-N conflict

I would like input to see what people think, but I think it would be consistent to remove those from the ongoing conflicts section. (71.206.111.234 (talk) 22:55, 9 March 2014 (UTC))

The threshold rule is 100 casualties TOTAL (not per year), in order to exclude single incidents which do not develop into prolonging conflicts (such as the Crimean crisis).GreyShark (dibra) 20:24, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Colouring Ukraine

According to both, government and rebels, the death toll has surpassed the 1,000 mark needed to blur Ukraine in red. What do you think?Helliko (talk) 20:47, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

The source in the table is for a BBC article which has no mention of 1,250 people killed. I've tagged that reference as such. Further, the EN wiki article on the conflict as a whole has: Killed: 237–348 militants (indep. estimates);650 militants (gov't claim);800[24]–1,000[43] militants (separatist claim);. I prefer independent estimates to the highly POV claims of the combatants. In this regard would someone please:

1. Fix get the Ukraine conflict out of the 1000+ list (for the second time in a week now) and
2. Fix the map?

Thanks. --Robert.Labrie (talk) 02:51, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

The BBC article DOES mention that number. There's a section "Human cost of conflict" below the pictures, just add the numbers together. 37.72.122.52 (talk) 11:39, 13 July 2014 (UTC)