Talk:War in Sudan (2023–present)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by DitorWiki (talk | contribs) at 13:16, 25 April 2023 (→‎Requested move 25 April 2023: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

map

the map should be improved + it shows Sudan's claimed borders and does not reflect the disputes Braganza (talk) 20:08, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well you can edit it of you want. Borysk5 (talk) 20:46, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It really looks like the same from the day it was added. Are the contents inside the mao even being changed? 420atgm (talk) 08:45, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Map* 420atgm (talk) 08:45, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

People with red-green weakness cannot use the map, all provinces look the same. I cannot edit it. --2A00:20:C00F:32A:E597:8837:977C:744C (talk) 23:58, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will second this, I am colorblind and the map is almost useless to me. 174.54.170.218 (talk) 15:14, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merowe

Just to clarify, is it Merowe, Merwi, Marwi or Marawi? And there should be a standard name for that throughout the article. Borgenland (talk) 04:24, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Haven't heard of any other source calling it anything other then Merowe. محرر البوق (talk) 16:42, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There were Arabic language sources (including an RSF pub) calling it Marawi/Marwi and I do get confused because when I listen to Arab broadcasts it does sound differentBorgenland (talk) 18:37, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Probably because of the romanization of Arabic as the English script doesn’t have as many letters as the Arabic script, so it can get messy and confusing real quick. But from what I’m seeing most sources address it as Merowe, I guess you can add “also known as Marawi or Marwi” into its article if you have the links to those sources. محرر البوق (talk) 20:46, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Borgenland
It's currently Merowe, but changed in the Arabic languages to Marawi or Marwi and romanized as Merwi and Merowe, but the official name is Merowe.
NYMan6 (talk) 19:21, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for all your clarifications! Borgenland (talk) 14:43, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To confuse you a little bit more: there are two locations of this name in the Sudan: (1)-https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mero%C3%AB مرواه or مروي (2)-https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merowe,_Sudan مروي number (1) is 200 km north-east of Khartoum number (2) is 220 km north of Khartoum at the Merowe dam and has an airport called Merowe airport Both are close to the river Nile. If the Egyptian soldiers would have been taken captive in (1), it would be of interest in regard of Ethiopia. If in (2), there is a direct train connection to Wadi Halfa and Egypt. The Arabic name of both locations is the same, so it would be important to make clear which one is meant. --2A00:20:C00F:32A:19C3:8F6C:4E5C:EF56 (talk) 23:33, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

you're gonna make the guy lost LOL balladsone 04:02, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 19 April 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Described as a conflict by RS. Overwhelming support in discussion, moved . (non-admin closure) Ecrusized (talk) 08:17, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2023 Sudan clashes → 2023 Sudan conflict – Reliable sources have little consensus on what to call the ongoing situation in Sudan, but it is clear at this point that it is more advanced than merely "clashes"; the RSF have taken over large swaths of Sudan. I think it is reasonable to use 2023 Sudan conflict, as it describes the conflict more intensely, but does not label it as a "war" or "civil war," as neither have enough consensus. GLORIOUSEXISTENCE (talk) 23:12, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is lack of evidence that RFS have fully controlled Nyala city in Darfur 37.40.150.151 (talk) 23:58, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: CNN is still calling it clashes as of today, so I disagree that "it is clear at this point that it is more advanced". I also do not believe that word implies a lack of seriousness. 25stargeneral (talk) 23:59, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Clearly most sources call it a conflict now, as there is territorial control involved now. Doesn’t need much explanation. 88.240.249.213 (talk) 00:21, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: not neccesary, still not enough RS calling it a conflict, and I also do not belive that "clashes" is any less serious than "conflict". Based on the sources, images and videos from the ground, it does indeed look like it's clashes. On top of that, "conflict" is a more general term. We should wait on more RS to call it a war, and then move it. C4rstv0 (talk) 00:23, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Maybe Oppose: If these really were clashes, they would have lasted a few days, with minimal civilian deaths and not large battles as we have seen here, NBC, BBC, The Wall Street Journal and The Guardian are all reported this as the "Sudan conflict" these are very reliable sources that can help us rename the article, I think we can rename these "clashes" at least a "war" currently. Adding on: A clash like the Kyrgyzstan-Tajikistan ones usually lasted only one day or a few hours, clashes are very small and not something that is in only one region but across most, all or part of the country
Links:
  1. Sudan conflict: Residents flee capital Khartoum as fighting continues
  2. Sudan conflict: No water, no light as fighting rages on
  3. Sudan conflict: why is there fighting and what is at stake in the region?
  4. Sudan conflict: 'We're expecting to get shot at any time,' doctor says
  5. Sudan conflict: US conducts 'prudent planning' as violence escalates
  6. Sudan Conflict Continues Despite Ceasefire Announcement
  7. Sudan conflict pitches military leaders into struggle for control
NYMan6 (talk) 01:08, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: As per above, 'clashes' indicate short but intense fighting usually localized to only a few regions close to each other. Since this has erupted both sides have used sustained heavy weaponry, including fighter aircraft and has been on-going in several regions throughout the country. I wouldn't change it immediately, but I would give it a week, two weeks tops before changing it. If the fighting fizzles out in the coming days keep it as clashes, but if it it goes any longer than 2-weeks definitely change to 'conflict' and potentially a new civil war. Nath1991 (talk) 02:57, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Sources now name the crisis as a conflict. 82.76.85.110 (talk) 04:06, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
FuzzyMagma (talk) 07:08, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: By definition, clash refers to a brief period of hostilities where as conflict is a prolonged one. However due to the intensity of clashes and nearly a week of fighting, this resembles a conflict more than a clash. Ecrusized (talk) 07:59, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per NYMan6. 〜 Festucalex • talk 08:14, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Let's call a spade a spade. This is has lasted for a quite a while and is now undoubtedly a major conflict, not some brief clashes. محرر البوق (talk) 09:08, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Support We may call it “conflict” before sources call it a “civil war”. TankDude2000 (talk) 10:10, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Several sources describes these events as a "conflict". Axl ¤ [Talk] 10:54, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - "Conflict" would be more appropriate given the majority of sources refer to the situation as such. --TheInsatiableOne (talk) 13:57, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support conflict has definitely gone far enough and quite a few sources refer to it as a conflict however, my weak support is that most people still refer to it as clashes due to it being so new still. FusionSub (talk) 13:59, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support the map in the infobox makes it abundantly clear that "clashes" is now an understatement. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 14:59, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Sadly, This is clearly becoming a conflict if it isn't already a conflict. This isn't a handful of clashes. There was a six-day war between the Jews and Arabs and even shorter wars than that. If they are a war, this has to be a war too. I don't know what to call this war though. IGotAPHD (talk) 15:38, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support The reason clashes isn't sufficient is because it's not just fighting with the goal of small territorial gains, like the 2022 Kyrgyzstan Tajikistan clashes, but instead the consequences of one side winning is the destruction of the other side, as the RSF is going to be dissolved if they lose and the military will lose control of the country if they lose. I think this checks all the boxes to be called a civil war, but until more sources say so it should be conflict. SuperDuperBoy (talk) 18:56, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support: At this point clashes is becoming a lighter term. This is an armed and organized conflict, so it should be named as such. Channel719 (talk) 13:40, 20 April 2023 (EST)
Support: This has lasted way too long to be considered a "clash" anymore. Venezuelaisthenewrome — Preceding unsigned comment added by Venezeualeisthenewrome (talk • contribs) 19:26, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I am obviously not allowed to move the page considering that I started the request, but I do believe that there is now consensus GLORIOUSEXISTENCE (talk) 20:05, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Question If it's moved, should it be titled 2023 Sudan conflict or 2023 Sudanese conflict? Blaylockjam10 (talk) 20:58, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Stong Support - Definitely not "clashes". - L'Mainerque - (Disturb my slumber) - 21:06, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Support this is a sustained military conflict, it is not intermittent skirmishing, most reliable sources are referring to it as a "conflict".XavierGreen (talk) 21:30, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support most sources call it a "conflict" rather than just clashes, and since it is too early to deem it a full-scale civil war as of now, conflict is the best term to use Presidentofyes12 (talk) 21:35, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: I'm betting that sooner or later this will turn into a civil war, sources such as the BBC are calling it a conflict - so I believe it's best to move the page from clashes to conflict right now. There's probably gonna be a discussion sooner or later to debate moving this from conflict to civil war if that happens, hopefully not but we'll see. Ballads2110 (talk) 22:37, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Merowe airport

Add it, man. 46.188.173.25 (talk) 10:30, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Need more information. FusionSub (talk) 14:01, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It has a section on the article. Oddballslover (talk) 14:44, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ethiopian involvement

The source indicating that Ethiopia is supporting the RSF is just an accusation and has little to no evidence. Alleging someone is supporting someone isn't enough to be accurate. It should be removed or replaced with better sources at least. I do expect Ethiopia and especially Eritrea to lean towards the RSF because of their tensions with Sudan and Egypt.

In a nutshell, remove Ethiopia on RSF's side or keep it and replace it with better sources. IGotAPHD (talk) 15:41, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'll remove it, Ethiopia has only made claims to support the RSF, no actual evidence is preset. Channel719 (talk) 17:34, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Scratch that, sources say Ethiopians are now actually invading Sudan to provide support, so Ethiopian Support is confirmed. Channel719 (talk) 17:36, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Channel719 what are these sources? I'd like to read up on them. - L'Mainerque - (Disturb my slumber) - 21:03, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Channel719@L'Mainerque Have you found addition sources about their involvement yet? محرر البوق (talk) 02:39, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I used the current link that's provided next to Ethiopia which states that Sudanese Armed Forces repelled Ethiopian incursions, while Ethiopia denies the claims. In my opinion I'd like to put Russian and Ethiopian Interference as (alleged) since there is still information coming in that is not yet confirmed. Channel719 (talk) 14:21, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. There just isn’t enough sources to justify its conclusion. The claim does not seem to have any evidence at the moment. محرر البوق (talk) 02:38, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I removed Ethiopia from the Infobox due to a lack of evidence and one side's claim. (WP:NPOV) - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:45, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Statements from warring generals

Burhan and Dagalo have been making statements regarding the political situation. Hope someone can find a way to integrate them properly in this article since I'm not sure where to put them and I don't think the Reaction section is a good place to put them. Borgenland (talk) 09:02, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Flag

The rapid support forces and the Sudanese armed forces have there own flag which should be inserted other than the Sudanese flag DitorWiki (talk) 14:52, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Clyde H. Mapping (talk) 09:06, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 21 April 2023

 :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This move request was closed as not moved by editor Oddballslover at 00:29 on 25 April 2023 (UTC). P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 01:21, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2023 Sudan conflict → 2023 Sudanese conflict – I propose to change the article title from 2023 Sudan conflict to 2023 Sudanese conflict DitorWiki (talk) 14:59, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak Support: I find that Sudanese fits more, more complex conflicts usually have the actual nationality/denonym of the country, I support this claim. NYMan6 (talk) 19:55, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lightly Support: However, @L'Mainerque and @25stargeneral have already had a discussion about this above. Maybe they can weigh in on this again. Ballads2110 (talk) 21:15, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: @Ballads2110 Yes, when we were discussing to change the name we discussed the same topic, I think this time it'll work let's see if they come! NYMan6 (talk) 21:22, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: @Ballads2110 & @NYMan6 I have thought about this already, and I do support adding the demonym Sudanese. It feels like I and @25stargeneral misunderstood each other in our previous discussion; I understand I used an example of a war of independence instead of something like the American Civil War, which more closely resembles the conflict we're discussing. 25stargeneral, I am sorry if I ever came off as unclear, and I'm sorry for not bringing up any concerns sooner. Going back to adding the demonym Sudanese, it really does make more sense in my opinion, but comparing reliable sources could help us out here. - L'Mainerque - (Disturb my slumber) - 21:30, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, I'll go searching for several like I did last time NYMan6 (talk) 21:34, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
LINKS:
https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/04/21/foreign-policy-news-quiz-sudan-conflict-china-ukraine-spring-offensive/
https://news.yahoo.com/1-american-killed-ongoing-sudanese-164513031.html
https://www.kff.org/news-summary/doctors-in-sudanese-conflict-zone-criticize-unicef-for-lack-of-vaccine-supply-guardian-reports/
I don't see much yet, this is all I could find as of right now NYMan6 (talk) 21:41, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Should we put the Template:Requested move on this discussion? I don't know how to do it without potentially compromising the message of the proposer, and furthermore, is it needed? - L'Mainerque - (Disturb my slumber) - 21:52, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Already done. I initially thought that it was forgotten, but now I do not know if I should revert. Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 03:46, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose: Already been discussed and rebuked above #Move reversion.. Cherry picking of sources should be avoided. Find me a BBC, CNN, and AlJazeera source and then let's have a discussion about this. FuzzyMagma (talk) 13:09, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Currently none of the sources that you have listed report this as the 'Sudanese conflict' mainly 'Sudan conflict' just like they use 'Ukraine war' NYMan6 (talk) 14:18, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Its Sudan Conflict like it Vietnam War and Ukraine War Hind242 (talk) 13:48, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It is not Ukraine war but Russian invasion of Ukraine DitorWiki (talk) 14:54, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per FuzzyMagma. FusionSub (talk) 14:03, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose imho the title should be something like "third sudanese civil war" but as now it's better to leave the title as it is--Luix710 (talk) 17:34, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Semi-protected edit request on 21 April 2023

Grammatical error in the Disinformation tab. Change "On 14 April, the official SAF page published a video it said was for operations carried out by the Sudanese Air Force against the RSF." to "On 14 April, the official SAF page published a video it said was of operations carried out by the Sudanese Air Force against the RSF.". TextbookRPHS (talk) 16:48, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - FlightTime (open channel) 17:02, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wagner or Russia?

I'm on the opinion that Russia should be used in the belligerents sections of the infobox instead of Wagner. Wagner group is an arm of the Russian government that masquerades as being an independent entity. Ecrusized (talk) 17:15, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Belligerents are the military or a paramilitary not a country, Wagner should be used instead NYMan6 (talk) 18:11, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: User:NYMan6 is a 6 month old account spreading Russian propaganda related to Ukraine. [1], [2]. 19:26, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Noting that the note authored above was by @Ecrusized. - L'Mainerque - (Disturb my slumber) - 21:01, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I was never spreading Russian propaganda @Ecrusized, those were reliable sources never Russian propaganda NYMan6 (talk) 01:07, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
that's a strong accusation, why is your signature not fully there if you're making such claim? @L'Mainerque had to ping you noting that you were the author - but cool ig. balladsone 03:59, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Ballads2110 I am having a hard time understanding what you mean by "but cool ig." May you elaborate? - L'Mainerque - (Disturb my slumber) - 04:22, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ah, i meant it's okay! the ig stands for i guess. balladsone 04:44, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@L'Mainerque it stands for 'I guess' NYMan6 (talk) 13:10, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@NYMan6 & @Ballads2110 thank you! - L'Mainerque - (Disturb my slumber) - 15:33, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree. If they are any sources stating that the Russian government is involved, feel free to add it. But as of right now the sources only state Wagner is involved, and they don't mention anything other then that. محرر البوق (talk) 19:50, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It really shouldn't be, it can be called a PMC or a "network of mercenaries" but not a direct arm of the Russian government Presidentofyes12 (talk) 22:00, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Intro

Given the way this conflict has developed since April 15, should the claims of control on April 15 still be in the intro? Blaylockjam10 (talk) 21:25, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Blaylockjam10 it shouldn’t. I think the lead need some work. Please give it a try FuzzyMagma (talk) 10:31, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Map

Does anyone familiar with the situation know how accurate is the map presented in the infobox or if it's covered by RS? Elserbio00 (talk) 09:24, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Like other conflict maps, reliable sources support edits to its module (formerly the Commons file itself before one was created) from which a template composed of icons representing population centers/infrastructure is used to determine territorial control. If you find the map's reliability questionable, verifiable edits should be made to that module or proposed on the map's talk page. Clyde H. Mapping (talk) 10:22, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sources for analysis section

Here are some good sources for an analysis section - some parts to improve the background based on what has already happened prior to 15 April; and some for a separate analysis section towards the end, after Disinformation and before the Reactions section, for understanding of the sociological structures in Sudan (military and civilian) and what possibilities are seen (by named sources, either the newspaper or a named individual, not by unnamed "analysts") for how this may evolve or resolve:

Boud (talk) 12:01, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Boud, these sources are more likely to be used on Battle of Khartoum (2023) as this articles, background already has a small good summary. NYMan6 (talk) 13:33, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wagner and Libyan Support

The Libyan general Haftar denied supporting the RSF, as has Wagner. As is said in the article in the section about foreign involvement. Shouldn't the wikibox reflect this? Genabab (talk) 12:19, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Casualties

Please don’t forget the casualties section when you update the death toll on the Introbox. Borgenland (talk) 13:03, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

United States evacuate embassy

President Biden of USA posted on Twitter at 11:10 PM EST on 22/4/2023 that U.S. military forces conducted operations to extract government personnel from Khartoum. Backed up by multiple international news sources. [1] Spacetaters (talk) 17:58, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: NY Times reporting EU diplomats and citizens have started to be evacuated Sunday.[2] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spacetaters (talk • contribs) 18:03, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://twitter.com/POTUS/status/1649974105385361408?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet
  2. ^ https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/04/23/world/sudan-khartoum-fighting-news

New article?

I think we should make a article about a refugee crisis, I've seen evidence of thousands of Khartoum residents and thousands of other people from all across the story fleeing to Chad and Egypt, the last reports reported the number at at least 20,000 for Chad but nothing for Egypt this number has probably rised as the conflict intensified even more after the ceasefire. I think there is enough info and enough intensity to make another article related to this, I'll also try and find sources to support this possibly.

NYMan6 (talk) 20:39, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reactions section

It's too big and not formatted in the Wikipedia way. We've reached the point where it's not that informative just putting every single country's and organization's reactions. Not even the Reactions section in the Russian invasion of Ukraine article is that big. Yes, there's a separate article for that, but the main one is clear and concise. There's no need for the article to have "X country: X stated that Sudan is not safe to visit" times hundred. C4rstv0 (talk) 21:23, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 24 April 2023

2023 Sudan conflict → Third Sudanese Civil War

According to Fox News and Washington post this as a civil war:

https://www.foxnews.com/world/president-biden-calls-civil-war-sudan-unconscionable-us-embassy-personnel-evacuate https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/04/23/sudan-civil-war-violence-future/ Oddballslover (talk) 23:48, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oddballslover: Firstly, Fox News is not a very reliable source when it comes to politics. Secondly, it's much too early. We still have time. We can wait until most reliable sources refer to this conflict as a civil war and then change its title. For now, though, we should wait. — Nythar (💬-🍀) 23:59, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Oddballslover, may you please explain why you close discussions in the future? You closed the previous move discussion without a reason. - L'Mainerque - (Disturb my slumber) - 00:01, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have a view on whether the title should be changed, I just wanted to add some context as I researched this a bit. It's much more than Fox News and Washington Post who refer to it as a civil war. I was able to find at least five others in a quick search of Google News and many, many more when searching Google proper. Of varying degrees of reliability. Notably: The Associated Press, The Economist and The Independent all referred to it as a civil war in at least one article/headline. However -- the consensus term does appear to be 'conflict'. Dwarfed by the amount calling it a civil war were those calling it a conflict. Google even seems aware of this as it shows lots of people calling it a conflict when you search for a civil war, thinking that's what you mean. JaHolo (talk) 00:29, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is 12 articles that the site has found of this being called a "civil war". Oddballslover (talk) 01:05, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure that is accurate. But there are probably literally hundreds who call it a conflict, not a civil war. If and when those numbers reverse themselves, you'd have a stronger case here. JaHolo (talk) 04:23, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Here's another civil war source https://www.crisisgroup.org/africa/horn-africa/sudan/stopping-sudans-descent-full-blown-civil-war and https://www.economist.com/middle-east-and-africa/2023/04/20/sudan-is-sliding-towards-civil-war and https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/04/23/sudan-civil-war-violence-future/ and https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/04/19/sudan-conflict-generals-burhan-hamdan-hemeti-rsf/ and https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/4/22/sudan-crisis-whats-next-after-one-week-of-deadly-fighting
Is this enough? PalauanReich🗣️ 00:33, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for finding more sources @PalauanReich. Oddballslover (talk) 00:37, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
heres even more. this one https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/sudan-war-american-trapped-trillian-clifford-b2325334.html and this one https://m.timesofindia.com/videos/international/explained-what-led-to-the-civil-war-in-sudan-and-who-is-general-dagalo/videoshow/99685007.cms and this one https://nypost.com/2023/04/22/sudan-to-evacuate-foreigners/ and this one https://www.cbsnews.com/news/sudan-war-fighting-2023-crisis/
the hills tag for the sudan conflict article is sudan-civil-war source PalauanReich🗣️ 00:39, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support if the news isn't explicitly calling it a civil war, they are saying it is turning into one. Clearly enough sources for the move. We can also move it back anyway is they stop calling it that or if it comes to an end PalauanReich🗣️ 00:41, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Should I do something about the last RM? We got two in this article and it is getting messy. Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 01:23, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should close this one as opened while another was going on? - L'Mainerque - (Disturb my slumber) - 01:30, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This should still be open incase it actually turns into a civil war. Oddballslover (talk) 02:23, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For now, let us have both RMs open, and have all of us discuss this in a separate section. - L'Mainerque - (Woo, /talk/!) - 02:25, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Oppose: I really do not get this obsession of Cherry picking sources to solicit one narrow view. let's start with Support sources:
    • Washington post is citing Crisis Group so putting them as seperate sources is a little dishonest as the aricle does not mention Civil War until it quote the Crisis Group.
    • Crisis group: Even if the army eventually does secure the capital, and Hemedti retreats to Darfur, a civil war could well follow
    • The Economist: Sudan is sliding towards civil war it is not yet! and it is only mentioned in the title
    • Foreign Policy Sudanese analysts warn that the country is now heading toward an all-out civil war., again toward!
    • Fox news: Bidden did not call it a civil war!
    • CBS does not mention the word, not sure why the support used this as evidence!
    • Al Jazeera: in the section of Civil war', says If the conflict drags on, more people in the extremely fragmented Sudanese society might take up arms, says analyst Alex de Waal., this is a speculation although it is true if it happens that this will be a Civil war, not a armed conflict as defined by International committee of the red cross, Amnesty international and Geneva Academy or even in Wikipedia
Al Jazeera itself has its take on this which can be found in How close is Sudan to civil war? ... I am happy to change my mind but I do not see the sources consensus here, let's give it a week maybe ... FuzzyMagma (talk) 13:39, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly Oppose 1. Fox news has a known bias and as such may be an unreliable source. 2. We have had the discussion before and the outcome ends up with it being to not move the page. FusionSub (talk) 14:08, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@FudionSub there is a lot of other sources calling it a civil war like Washington post, Foreign policy, New York Post, Aljazeera, CBS news, Independent, Economist, Crisis Group, and more. Oddballslover (talk) 14:29, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
CBS link does not even mention the word Civil war! FuzzyMagma (talk) 00:43, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I did not know that @PalauanReich🗣️ found the links. Oddballslover (talk) 01:00, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@FuzzyMagma That was because it was had the civil war tag PalauanReich🗣️ 01:11, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. For sequential events, it is always better to date the title. Only years later can one be sure that the COMMONNAME is undated. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:21, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @SmokeyJoe there is tons of sources up above it, so calling it a "civil war" is probably a common name for the conflict. Oddballslover (talk) 02:52, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Probably WP:UCRN compliant? My focus is on whether the year is in the title, and I think it should be. I agree on “civil”. SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:25, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    There were two other civil wars in Sudan so it should be the Third Sudanese Civil War if this change would happen or not.  Oddballslover (talk) 03:32, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    In title case? No. I don’t see any reliable sources calling it that. This history of the redirect shows it point to something different. You are trying to get ahead of sources. For current title serves better. SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:16, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The best quality sources linked by Oddballslover say that Sudan is "sliding towards a civil war," not that this armed conflict is the third Sudanese civil war. The current title is preferable.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 04:17, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Adding on to that: I'm not so sure that it's even appropriate to have the title "Third Sudanese Civil War" redirect here. There's just no sources saying this is the third Sudanese civil war, and as I've already mentioned (and as was explained in more detail by FuzzyMagma), no sources say that this is an ongoing civil war; the one exception to this is Fox, which per WP:RS/P shouldn't be cited for these sorts of topics. But on top of that, the disambiguation page explains that this wouldn't even be the third conflict which could potentially be described as a Sudanese Civil War:
    The term Sudanese Civil War refers to at least three separate conflicts: First Sudanese Civil War (1955–1972), Second Sudanese Civil War (1983–2005), South Sudanese Civil War (2013–2020). It could also refer to other internal conflicts in Sudan and South Sudan: Lord's Resistance Army insurgency (1987–present), Ethnic violence in South Sudan, Sudanese nomadic conflicts, War in Darfur (2003–2020), Sudanese conflict in South Kordofan and Blue Nile (2011–2020), 2023 Sudan conflict. As well as conflicts between Sudan and South Sudan after the breakup: Heglig Crisis (2012)
    The War in Darfur was sometimes described as a civil war, more than this present-day conflict has been described as such (at least as of right now). But the War in Darfur article didn't get renamed to the Third Sudanese Civil War, and there's (currently) weaker reasons to name this one as such. What makes this one the third Sudanese civil war and not all the others on that list? As of right now, it's unsourced WP:OR. Personally, I think Third Sudanese Civil War should be a redirect to the Sudanese Civil War disambiguation page.
    Good faith, but it's just too soon to use that name.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 04:32, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wait- while it's definitely gearing up to be a lengthly civil war, so far we are only a week in, premeture at least for now, maybe we can come back in 2 weeks and say it's a civil war but for now, no.
Garmin21 (talk) 12:29, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now. I think it's too soon to establish this title, this being a "conflict" is something everyone here can agree on. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 12:50, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Civil war?

Should we change the Article to "2023 Sudanese civil war"? Since the rebels took some parts of the country, there are tanks in the streets, air force is active and etc Lucasmota0975 (talk) 15:40, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have not heard any sources calling it that. 25stargeneral (talk) 15:55, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.aljazeera.com/program/inside-story/2023/4/14/could-standoff-in-sudan-turn-into-a-civil-war Lucasmota0975 (talk) 16:20, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That source asks "could it turn into a civil war"? That's not the same as saying it is a civil war. 25stargeneral (talk) 16:22, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, tbh lets wait more, if the clashes intensify, we consider it as a civil war Lucasmota0975 (talk) 16:57, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There's clashes across the country and I think it's intense enough to be considered a Civil War. It's more about how long something has to last before it becomes a war instead of clashes. The Austrian Civil War only lasted 5 days and it's called such on Wikipedia. SuperDuperBoy (talk) 03:01, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's up to secondary sources on interpreting the conflict as a civil war or not. We simply report what the secondary source says- we are a tertiary source. Bremps! 05:11, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:NOR. Cheers, Bremps! 05:13, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Are primary sources not taken into account? Jimmy Jimbo Johnson the V (talk) 05:35, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm under the impression that we prefer secondary sources. For instance, if someone posted firsthand photos of a massacre in Sudan on Facebook, we would rather cite a BBCreport that covers it rather than the Facebook photos themselves. Take my word with a grain of salt, though. Bremps! 16:13, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Secondary sources are preferred on Wikipedia and usually primary sources aren't to be used other than for specific purposes and with secondary sources as well. I believe it is because primary sources often have more bias and muddied detail while secondary sources usually have things more worked out. Not sure if that's the real reason why or not, just what I thought of.
Anyways as others have said it is not Wikipedia's place to name events, until a common name comes into use we should keep it with the current title which is just a short description of what it is, not even a name. GramCanMineAway (talk) 04:28, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Too soon to tell, I recommend waiting a short while (around a few months or so) to see if the majority of secondary sources refer to it as such. As the main person updating the Simple English page for the 2023 Sudan clashes this is very important. FusionSub (talk) 10:07, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have to make a quick change, this is not just skirmishes, it is at the national level. the title should be civil war or rebellion in sudan 2023. Matias Taboadaxx (talk) 11:02, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Uprising might be a better description. It's too soon to say if this will become a civil war. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 11:21, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We can't call it a Civil War until it is recognized as a Civil War. There are numerous examples of week long civil wars and decades long "unrest periods" in history that were not called civil wars. I agree on your stance that at this point it should be considered a Civil War, we cannot say so until it is recognized by secondary sources. Channel719 (talk) 15:28, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think that yes, we need to wait until secondary sources call it that. I personally think it is one already, but it will heavily depend on how long this will last for, and who will become the victor in this struggle. It may end tomorrow, it may end in a year, too early to tell. For now, I guess conflict is a neutral-enough term. --Dynamo128 (talk) 13:56, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Change the title to "Third Sudanese Civil war"

Sources are starting to call it a civil war: https://www.newsdrum.in/international/sudans-civil-war-enters-its-fourth-day-with-no-sight-of-any-relief

Also i think the clashes got intense enough to consider it as a civil war Lucasoliveira653 (talk) 14:27, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Lucasoliveira653 does CNN, BBC, AlJazeera and the majority of the new outlets called it that? I think if we have that consensus then it is easier to move the page to 2023 Sudan or Sudanese civil war FuzzyMagma (talk) 14:44, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Still no, but if the fighting intensify, they gonna probabaly call it civil war Lucasoliveira653 (talk) 15:01, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think the title "Third Sudanese Civil War" will be eventually used in historical literature regarding this conflict, but until that happens or the media starts naming it as such, the current name is the only name that can be used- see WP:NEO. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 23:11, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If there is a civil war...

Considering that Sudan has been involved in civil war twice, in case of Civil war, should we write it 2023 Sudan Civil War or the Third Sudanese Civil War or something else? Parham wiki (talk) 22:46, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Has been discussed already with a consensus to not add the phrase "civil war" in the title of the article until RSes begin describing it as such. It's been ongoing for only a week, so it'll be some time prior to such a move. Once RSes describe it as such, however, I would be more in support of "2023 Sudanese Civil War" or "Sudanese Civil War (2023–present)", or something similar Presidentofyes12 (talk) 22:59, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This hasn’t been described as a civil war yet, but I think it’d be best to call it the Third Sudanese Civil War if it becomes something that’s called a civil war. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 00:23, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, balladsone 02:30, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Per @Blaylockjam10, Agreed. NYMan6 (talk) 13:31, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Two RMs open.

The problem has been resolved. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 12:51, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Me and @Wikiexplorationandhelping are having a disagreement with @Oddballslover over which RM to keep open. For now, I'm keeping both open until we have input by the community over what we should all do. Input is of course appreciated down below. Thanks, - L'Mainerque - (Woo, /talk/!) - 02:30, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Normally, the earliest RM is the only open RM until it is closed. Here we'll need to decide if the 2023 Sudan conflict → 2023 Sudanese conflict RM should be closed. — Nythar (💬-🍀) 02:47, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I feel like a TNT might be necessary here. Getting a bit too messy. Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 02:48, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Wikiexplorationandhelping, please clarify? - L'Mainerque - (Woo, /talk/!) - 03:07, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking to clear everything and start an RM, anew. Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 03:35, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
no, TNT is not required just because you did not get the result you wanted. Just wait for somone to close it as it is clear that the article won't be moved. FuzzyMagma (talk) 13:44, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I never wanted any result. It is just messy and I am trying to clean it up. I just thought of that as an idea. Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 14:13, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If the conflict ends soon we should close the 2023 Sudan conflict → Third Sudanese Civil War RM but if the conflict get worse we should close the 2023 Sudan conflict → 2023 Sudanese conflict RM. Oddballslover (talk) 03:10, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"ends soon" or "get worse" is not a criteria to define a conflict as a "Civil war" FuzzyMagma (talk) 13:48, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Criteria you labelled to keep the civil war RM is not how it works, we have had much worse civil conflicts and they aren't labelled as a civil war, while the Austrian Civil War definitely was less severe yet we do call it a civil war. It depends on what the majority of sources call it. FusionSub (talk) 14:00, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@FusionSub look at Talk:2023 Sudan conflict#Requested move 24 April 2023 there is a lot of links. Oddballslobver (talk) 14:13, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Oddballslover Do you mean under FuzzyMagma's comment or your original opener FusionSub (talk) 16:37, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Change the title to 3rd Sudanese Civil War

Closing... see Talk:2023 Sudan conflict#Requested move 24 April 2023 for a centralized discussion on the matter. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 12:52, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

It's a civil war now sadly 95.148.25.109 (talk) 16:02, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There already is a move request above, just in case you're interested. — Nythar (💬-🍀) 16:05, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Already had this discussion before FusionSub (talk) 16:35, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wait CNN and BCC call it a civil war Lucasoliveira653 (talk) 22:29, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Lucasoliveira653 could you show sources? NYMan6 (talk) 22:46, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@NYMan6 Look at Talk:2023 Sudan conflict#Requested move 24 April 2023. Oddballslover (talk) 00:33, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Oddballslover Most sources listed in that discussion are saying it could become a civil war. FusionSub (talk) 10:07, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Lucasoliveira653 Why CNN and BBC? Oddly specific news sources PalauanReich🗣️ 01:03, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 25 April 2023

 :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I propose to change the article title from 2023 Sudan conflict to 2023 Sudan crisis. Just like the 1958 Lebanon crisis and the Congo Crisis DitorWiki (talk) 01:01, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: Slow down a bit, wait for the RM to finish before proposing a new title. – MaterialWorks (contribs) 01:24, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@DitorWiki this are not political crisis, this is a large conflict a political crisis would be a short-term controversial event NYMan6 (talk) 01:34, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
the 1958 Lebanese crisis was almost like a civil war DitorWiki (talk) 13:16, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is already another RM open. And this is not a crisis. Oddballslover (talk) 02:12, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Will there be any other battles added

As we can see Khartoum is not only area of battle and Sudan is a pretty large country and there are battles happening in other areas when will thouse battles have their own page 2600:6C50:1B00:3B6B:2542:282B:5FEB:7683 (talk) 05:41, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I take it by 'page' you mean 'article'. In order for other battles to qualify for an article. We need quite a bit of info about the battle, of which we currently don't have from reliable sources. FusionSub (talk) 10:01, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Only 'Battle of Khartoum' fits the category of battle as of right now NYMan6 (talk) 10:44, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:War_in_Sudan_(2023–present)&oldid=1151666399"