Talk:Middle Eastern crisis (2023–present)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Moved to Draft

I've moved this article to draftspace as it's not ready for the mainspace and can't be worked on by the creator due to a contentious topics restriction. CoconutOctopus talk 22:32, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Title?

I am not enamored with the title of this article. Perhaps something a bit more encyclopedic like Middle East Crisis of 2023-2024? Suggestions welcome. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:34, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Agree. Using the word Spillover would be an obvious propaganda, overtly politcal, OR, and bias magnet par excellence. It would open the article up to anyone's published opinions about cause and effect.

It reminds me of the name options when the China–United States trade war article was started. There were fewer non-tabloid stories that referred to it as a "war." In fact, most U.S. political leaders, including then President Trump, Peter Navarro, Jamie Dimon or China's President Xi Jinping, said it was not a war, but a dispute. For the same reason, I question the purpose of WP prematurely promoting it as a "Crisis," for the entire Middle East.

It's worth noting that soon after N. Korea started testing missiles in 2017, UK tabloids (i.e., Express, The Sun, Daily Star, Mirror, Independent, etc.) published multiple news stories about it with "World War 3" in their headlines. Light show (talk) 21:59, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

I agree with Light show in saying that, if we consider "spillover" to be too presumptive or unsubstantiated, than we would reach that same conclusion for replacing spillover with "crisis". I might support something more along the lines of "Middle East conflicts of 2023-2024". 2G0o2De0l (talk) 02:56, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

• Strong Oppose. This presents what's going on in the Middle East as if it is one singular issue rather then multiple interconnected ones. This article itself is problematic because what defines if something is "spillover" is highly debatable and diminishing a conflict (say, the Red Sea Crisis) to effectively an ancillary conflict related to the Israel Palestine war is dubious. DarkSide830 (talk) 04:18, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

  Hi DarkSide830. Could you clarify for me? I'm not sure what it is that you are opposing. 2G0o2De0l agrees that the current title is suboptimal. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:57, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

  I don't think "crisis" as a title is appropriate because we aren't talking about one particular event. I get the desire to move from the "spillover" term on for the reason I listed above, but truth be told I'm not sure what purpose this article serves otherwise seeing as it more or less is currently written to connect related but clearly distinct conflicts in the Middle East. DarkSide830 (talk) 05:09, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

  I'm not over attached to the crisis title. That was just something I was tossing out off the top of my head. But I really think the current title is far too vague and frankly it sounds unencyclopedic. I'll ponder it and come back tomorrow. It's getting late here, and I need a little sleep. -Ad Orientem (talk) 05:21, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

  Oppose: As the creator of the article, I dont believe that it should be changed at all, it is after all a spillover, no? Also the article is standard with other spillover titles so we shouldn’t break standard even if it is “propaganda”. 136.52.11.187 (talk) 02:51, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Splitting proposal

Today I created the article 2023-2024 Middle Eastern Crisis. I WP:BOLDly moved the conflicts section of the body here to that article so that it could be used as a base for the article (that would be substantially changed later). There is concerns over this, since it would dramatically shrink the size of this article, so under that circumstance consensus over the matter seems to be needed. Fantastic Mr. Fox (talk) 21:01, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

I strongly oppose a split. The article already isn't that long, and yes if this were split there would be almost nothing left here [1]. I just can't see any possible reason why a split would be warranted, it's not warranted based on the article's size and the content here versus in the proposed article are essentially the same. Any split would result in an inevitable WP:CFORK. estar8806 (talk) ★ 01:26, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Support a split. DeadlyRampage26 (talk) 13:17, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

Rather than a split, I believe a move may be a better idea since the draft page at Draft:2023–2024 Middle Eastern crisis is essentially a modified fork of this page with the scope expanded to include the Israel–Hamas war. Once the draft page is ready, moving that page to mainspace and redirecting this page there can be considered. VoicefulBread66 (talk) 12:52, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Support this idea instead of a split. DeadlyRampage26 (talk) 04:45, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

@Fantastic Mr. Fox: @Estar8806: Do you support the new proposal? If so I believe the move can be done since there isn't much else I can add to the draft page. VoicefulBread66 (talk) 14:05, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

I'm comfortable with that being presented as an alternative, but I'd have to read a proper RM proposal before I could make a judgement. estar8806 (talk) ★ 21:56, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

It definitely could work. Support Fantastic Mr. Fox (talk) 14:40, 23 October 2024 (UTC)