In the news nomination

edit

I believe we should rename this article.

edit

In short, I believe we should rename this article to the "Third Sudanese civil war" As, this war was the third. (The first 2 were South Sudan independence wars" This was also suggested by 2604:3D09:1F80:CA00:D501:1090:B90D:9241. 172.250.239.208 (talk) 15:55, 22 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

I agree. Although this war has different characteristics from the first two, it's still a major war between armed Sudanese factions.--Zarateman (talk) 11:05, 28 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
Support: It sounds as if this article is talking about all of the civil wars in general, instead of just the specific escalation of hostilities. Internationed (talk) 03:37, 10 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
Was already discussed that three times! Please read the previous move discussions before attempting to suggest a new name. FuzzyMagma (talk) 12:09, 10 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Separate page for the recent SAF Offensive

edit

While most of the focus on the recent offensive by the SAF is on their gains in Khartoum Bahri, there are also reports of heavy fighting in other areas like Jebel Moya, as well as fighting between the Darfur Joint Protection Force and RSF in the North Darfur region. Since the Darfur Joint Protection Force is allied to the SAF, it seems appropriate that a separate page is made for the fighting currently going on and for any other developments during this offensive. Tornadoboy7 (talk) 00:54, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

why? it is still the same civil war. You can make a separate article about the offensive so you can provide more details although there are plenty articles like this already, see List of engagements during the Sudanese civil war (2023–present). But this article should still summarise the war FuzzyMagma (talk) 12:11, 10 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Why on earth does the *entire page* have italicized font?

edit

What has happened here? Why has it been up for MONTHS without being brought up? How do we fix it? Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 22:12, 14 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

where, I do not see it FuzzyMagma (talk) 07:30, 15 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Proposal to remove "supported by" parameter from infobox per RFC recommendation

edit

Given that including parties under "Support" in situations like this is deprecated we should consider removing the "Support" countries from the infobox, especially since there's ambiguity to be had about how to include Russia and by extension Ukraine. If the "Support" field were removed, it would probably make sense to talk about foreign support in the lead (I'm not sure why it's not mentioned there already). Placeholderer (talk) 17:30, 22 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Done FuzzyMagma (talk) 12:21, 10 November 2024 (UTC)Reply