The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep.. – Will (message me!) 09:11, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

2006 Arab-Israeli War[edit]

This article is highly speculative right now, attempting to turn two current military operations into a new full-blown war between nation states, and at the same time just providing links to the two articles already dealing with the two operations. I think it should be deleted until the world's media regard this to be a proper war between Israel and its neighbours. Thomas Blomberg 16:37, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Important notice: The article has since been moved to 2006 Arab-Israeli conflict.

It is speculative - let's not delete it, let's work to make it accurate. Let's try to create a clear picture of the situation. That's the purpose of an Encyclopedias, no? Jeanmariesimpson 18:17, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, the situation has not yet been considered a war; nor have Syria and Iran's involvement been confirmed. -Keer Gondeh

Delete, there's no all-out war yet, Syria is not yet involved. Robin Hood 1212 16:43, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete for now without prejudice against recreation if war occurs. There isn't currently a war, even Lebanon are not calling it a war at this time. Until the weight of external commentators call it a war, it isn't one. This article adds no value and it's existence is contentious at best and POV at worst. There was some discussion of this on Talk:2006_Israel-Lebanon-Hezbollah_conflict but that was somewhat aborted when this article was created. MLA 16:43, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - agree, too early for labeling it a war. If the media are not, Wikipedia should not. -- 203.124.2.18 16:45, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect-Redirect this to the Arab-Isreali Confilct article untill the media sees this as a full blown war. Storm05 16:47, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge/Rename/Hold

[1] This is a semantical issue: something is happening that will either validate or make moot any of this. The Lebanse are calling in the UN; Abbas says a regional war is developing. Cwolfsheep 16:48, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - all hell has pretty much broken out. There are hundreds of rockets going in both directions. --aishel 16:49, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - It is not claiming that it is against every Arab nation, any more than 1948 Arab-Israeli War is claiming it was against every Arab nation. This article is about the conflict for which Operation Summer Rains and Operation Just Reward is a part. Something doesnt need to be an all out war for us to consider it a war. At most, you should be calling for it to be moved to a different location if you disagree with calling it a war, not deleting.. Rangeley 16:51, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - the Media IS labelling it as a war--TheFEARgod 16:53, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • +Haifa has been hit, wait for the response--TheFEARgod 17:16, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: This is one of the reasons why I suggested on the article's talk page that the AfD (like the article itself) is premature. Events are going to keep happening, and people are going to vote based on the events as they stand when they vote; and then they may or may not go back and change their vote based on later events. One more reason to "park" this article under a less controversial name until events develop further. 6SJ7 17:21, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename - perhaps to something more wishy-washy for now, and to whatever name the world media settle on when they do. We definitely need an overview article about the recent escalation in Middle East. Zocky | picture popups 17:01, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  Has been renamed to 2006 Arab-Israeli conflict. Keep the renamed article and expand as appropriate. Zocky | picture popups 23:38, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename to "2006 Arab-Israeli hostilities" or something similar, and then put all delete/move/merge discussions on hold for one week while we see what this actually turns into, and if a common way of referring to it develops among the governments and media. The creation of the article was probably premature, but a standstill (under a less official-sounding title) would be appropriate. 6SJ7 17:05, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename The topic needs an overview article; the title just isn't appropriate (yet?). --Philosophus ^T 17:08, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Hold IMO this article is grouping certain conflicts that should logically be grouped, and they will probably be remembered as a single event in history. Keep it there for a few days and see how the issue is treated. Consider renaming it in the meantime. --Pifactorial 18:23, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I voted "Hold", assuming that means "leave it as is for now, then decide in a few days." --Pifactorial 19:25, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• delete the term is unreferenced. The incidents itself (Operation Summer rain) are listed and explained somewhere else. The term itself is POV and factually wrong. -- 194.94.81.54 18:33, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete No concensus regarding status of the conflict, making predictions about future events. If things go badly it can be recreated later when it's more clear what's going on. Emax0 18:36, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename to 2006 Palestinian-Israeli Conflict, which names the primary combatants at this time, but doesn't go so far as calling it a war, yet. StuRat 18:37, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • the existing article 2006_Israel-Lebanon-Hezbollah_conflict better describes the situation imo Emax0 18:43, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • The idea is to group that with Operation Summer Rains and any future related operations, I believe. --Pifactorial 18:51, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Actually word is coming across now that the IDF has given the Lebanon op a different name "Just Reward" (translation still being argued over) and there is a mini-edit war going on now for the name of the article. In any case at this point it seems like it can't be merged with summer rains. Emax0 19:03, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • looks like you said "group" with not "merge". doh. in any case its too early into the situation. for all we know israel could just bypass lebanon and go into syria. Emax0 19:09, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep dcandeto 18:55, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 18:57, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge/Rename/Hold but don't delete. There is a common thread through this latest round of one-upsmanship between the sparring parties involved. We may want to call the article "Israeli responses to Hezbollah kidnappings in 2006" or something like that. It's a little cumbersome, but maybe more specific. --Jon 18:59, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as is. Wait a week. Then decide whether to rename. It's still too early to tell. Besides, even a two-day war is still a war. --User:nafisto 19:11, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep/Rename Even the israeli ambassador to the United States calls it a war [2]. --Cattus 19:45, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or Rename Premature labeling. Even if the media calls it a war now, there isn't much justification and if things calm down, it will probably be labeled a 'conflict', as it probably should be now. It's still too small-scale to be considered a war, even the "war on terror" wasn't really called that until the US had engaged significant armed conflict in Afghanistan. So far the Israeli and Lebanese armed forces have had minimal contact. --Keflavich 19:55, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep/Rename - It's a little too soon for Wikipedia to call it a war. Many people are using the word, but we need to keep our distance until it becomes more clear. 2006 Arab-Israeli Conflict sounds better. ♠ SG →Talk 21:32, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Premature. It won't cost anything to recreate it if this should happen to be called a war by the general media. Certain outlets refer to the GWOT as the fourth world war, doesn't mean Wikipedia calls it that. Joffeloff 20:07, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• I already voted above for keep but wanted to point out that foxnews front page is calling it war. http://www.foxnews.com --aishel 20:16, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but FoxNews are one of those outlets known to coin their own words for things, like calling what is normally known as a suicide bomber a 'homicide bomber'. It's what I was talking about with the WWIV and all that. Joffeloff 21:18, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Call it a war, call it a conflict - whatever it is, it certainly is something. It makes sense to keep, because two operations are clearly a part of something. Someone decided to name this something the 2006 Arab-Israeli War, because it seemed appropriate to them. If you disagree, we can settle on something like 2006 Arab-Israeli Conflict. But to delete it is to prevent us from covering an obvious event. Rangeley 20:18, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete for now as premature. Better off in Wikinews at the moment. --cholmes75 ^{(chit chat)} 20:28, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above for now. Little or no documented usage of the name, though the concept has been discussed. (forgot to sign) Tewfik^Talk 00:43, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Premature for now. We've seen this type of conflict before. It's not a war, yet. Fan-1967 20:37, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Premature, currently the only ones claiming connection between the events in the Gaza Strip and the Events in Lebanon are Hezbulla, using the connection as justification for their attack. That is not the least bit NPOV. --darkskyz 20:44, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - premature. Also, no need to duplicate 2006 Israel-Lebanon crisis. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 20:46, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The argument is that the 2006 Israel-Lebanon crisis is part of a larger conflict, and that's what the 2006 Arab-Israeli War article is about. --Pifactorial 20:48, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly... this isnt a duplicate of the Lebanon thing. It is for the conflict for which the lebanon thing and the gaza operation are a part. If you disagree with the name, rename it, dont delete it. Rangeley 21:11, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is a POV to link the Operation Summer Rains in Gaza with 2006 Israel-Lebanon crisis and on top of it, another POV is to call it a war. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 21:49, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I feel that it should be kept, and if and when the 2006 Israel-Lebanon crisis spills over into other states the article should be redirected to 2006 Arab-Israeli WarHello32020 20:55, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • (change of position) Merge because of arguments i've seen and a large amount of news orgs stating it as a warHello32020 21:11, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge with 2006 Israel-Lebanon crisis. It's a war, all right, and it's definitely worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia, but we're beginning to get scattered info across two (probably more) articles. -- SwissCelt 21:08, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh! This article isnt only about the Lebanon Crisis! It is for the conflict for which the Lebanon Crisis, and the operation is Gaza (Operation Summer Rains} is a part. Rangeley 21:11, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh! Two separate conflicts. Obviously related, but at this point I don't think you can say they're the same. Fan-1967 21:29, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Rename It is not yet a war but it can be like "Israeli-arab conflci to 2006.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Arigont (talk • contribs)

On its talk page I posted a suggestion to rename to 2006 Arab-Israeli Conflict. This is a better solution to deleting. Rangeley 21:15, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge with 2006 Israel-Lebanon crisis and redirect for now, with the possibility of renaming 2006 Israel-Lebanon crisis to 2006 Arab-Israeli War or whatever the conflict becomes known as if it grows bigger and/or becomes generally recognized as a war. - RPIRED 22:23, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect for now. There's not enough perspective yet to all this a "War" (quotation mark and capitalization optional) already. zafiroblue05 | Talk 23:27, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. There's hardly anything added by the existence of this article except a political frame. --Dhartung | Talk 00:49, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. As I said on the article's talk page, much of the article is speculation. We are dubbing this a war before anyone else. That violates "No original work." If Iran and Syria get directly involved, THEN we can make the article. --Crucible Guardian 02:06, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Its already been moved to 2006 Arab-Israeli Conflict. Whether you think its a war or not doesnt matter, its obviously a conflict. Rangeley 02:24, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is a POV that it is a conflict. There are separate conflicts in different places. Fan-1967 03:34, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. -- Wikipedical 02:43, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Rename as has already been done. Keep in it's current incarnation. --Iorek85 08:14, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I haven't seen any sources that connect the Hamas and Hezbollah actions as a single conflict, and there article doesn't seem to have any information that isn't already in the articles linked within in. --DavidK93 13:07, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep with the new name. It is very early days yet, this page will almost certainly completely change in the next few weeks, but it is an escalating crisis and a current event and as such does deserve a page--Jackyd101 13:29, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per DavidK93 — Yet another minor skirmish in a decades-long conflict. Now the Darfur conflict, that's a war. — RJH (talk) 14:58, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to 2006 Israel-Lebanon crisis everything here is already covered there. It is also a less POV topic to cover(even if the article is not). Falphin 15:27, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Jackyd101. --Silver2195 16:10, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep possibly rename, its not fair to say its an arab conflict simply because it involved 2 arab nations, possibly 3 even if you count the fly by in Syria. It is however evident something happened here and its alraedy been renamed to conflict, so the arguement against calling it a war is moot. --zero faults ^{|sockpuppets|} 16:18, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per above, but monitor for potential vandalism. Also, refrain from referring it to as a war in the article, as no nations have officially declared war. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 16:24, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - A mer redirect to 2 articles (Operation Summer Rains and 2006 Israel-Lebanon crisis) plus a clamzy and unsucsesspull attemt ot merg both articles info boxes into one. P.S. both articles already point to each other. It's redundant. --TheYmode 16:43, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thats not much of a reason to delete it, thats a reason to improve it. But its funny how hard it is to improve things when all the discussion is about deleting it. The article is about a day old, and its obvious that the conflict for which it describes is real, and worthy of a good article. This isnt an attempt to merge two articles together, its an attempt to have an overview article over the conflict for which Operation Summer Rains and the Lebanon crisis are a part. It needs more work, noone is denying this, so lets be productive and work on it, shall we? Deleting this will solve nothing. ~Rangeley (talk) 17:33, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That’s my whole point, It can't be improved now because we lack the proper perspective to try and describe this phase of the Arab-Israeli conflict other then what’s already been done in the two respective articles (which are more of a news articles then an encyclopedic articles but that can not be helped because its an on-going current event). Any attempt to write an overview now will resolute in an original research and POV article. --TheYmode 07:09, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, but closely monitor for aboslutely unavoidable vandalism, and huge POV problems. This is should be a short article pointing to recent actions that are clearly related, in part to assist disambiguation in sorting out conflict with Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in the north. They are clearly related as having been triggered and extended by hostage-taking of Israeli personnel, couple with rocket attacks. Israel has escalated the conflict on both ends with dramatic force. Hezbollah is widening the conflict, and the page should stay as it is with content updates until this does move to a broader conflict (rather than skirmishing and attacks from a distance like Kashmir between Pakistan / India).
• Rewrite. Minimial context. SYSS Mouse 20:34, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Wait and See. It would be premature to delete what is already here, but hasty to start declaring that anything is certain. The event is unfolding and nothing should be written until it has played out. The wikipedia is a source, not news. Also, to keep article vandalism to a minimum, I would suggest locking it and allow those trained in historical practices to write it eventually.
• Keep j did just update it--88.192.59.26 11:00, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Jackyd101. --Shizane 15:07, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge/Hold I think the article 2006 Israel-Lebanon crisis, linked on the front page is currently doing a good job of keeping up with the situation. Some of the information in this article can be salvaged and added to the other article, however. --74.131.67.167 18:43, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The VfD was initiated because the article name contained the term War. This is no longer the case, why is the VfD still going? For the record I believe VfD is too easy to initiate on WP 70.31.184.153 17:13, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, Wikipedia is not Wikinews. Stifle (talk) 19:31, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep the move from war to conflict is suitable. Furthermore, the article is already part of an extensive series, is not really a news article, and would not fit Wikinews as is. --Jay(Reply) 23:54, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as per Master Jay's argument. -- WGee 04:37, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete this is an Encyclopedia, not a military/political speculation forum, currently there is no "war", what exist si a military conflict that not between soverien states. believe me that if the situation will change - the diffrance will be most noted. if you want opinions go to a forum, not here -- TheDM 01:19, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Updated news[edit]

• Yahoo News, 7-14-2006
• Christian Science Monitor article, 7-14-2006

The Yahoo articles are linking the events, and the CSM article has people calling the situation a "war." Cwolfsheep 04:48, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Disclaimer: I'm not trying to say the article should be renamed or kept as "war:" rather that people stay on top of things before deciding on what to do. I want people to arrive at a consensus on how to treat this situation. Cwolfsheep 04:53, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment From the Yahoo article cited above: "The military offensive coincided with a major Israeli incursion into the Gaza Strip to retrieve another captured soldier and halt Palestinian rocket fire." (emphasis added). That doesn't sound to me like they're regarding these events as a single conflict. It's obvious that the events are related. That is not the same thing as saying it's a single conflict. The CSM article is calling the Lebanon situation a war, but refers to the Gaza events beginning with the words "At the same time..." Fan-1967 13:32, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Transwiki to Wikinews. Folks, we should not be trying to cover current events here. This is Wikipedia, the encyclopedia. Wikinews is the appropriate place for coverage of news events. Beware the problems that Wikipedia:Recentism creates. GRBerry 01:50, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  Doesnt the change of this to 2006 Arab-Israeli Conflict solve that problem? The debate seemed to be whether or not this would be considered a war, that is no longer an issue, because there is no debate there is an obvious conflict going on. ~Rangeley (talk) 02:38, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  I totally agree with GRBerry. Those who like to cover ongoing news should devote their energy to contribute to Wikinews instead of attempting to turn Wikipedia into a news agency copycat. Also, the fact that the page has changed name doesn't change the fact that it attempts to claim that there is one conflict instead of two. Until independent historians afterwards can establish that Hamas and the Hezbollah planned their attacks together, or that Syria or Iran instructed both to do it at the same time, Wikipedia shouldn't claim that this is one conflict instead of two. Thomas Blomberg 18:29, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  We can't transwiki to Wikinews. Wikinews uses Creative Commons license, which is not GFDL-compatible. Stifle (talk) 19:31, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  Striking that suggestion per Stifle. No opinion at the moment. I don't know what to do with this. The Recentism problem means that we need to tread carefully. This is clearly at least as significant as Operation Accountability, and if this does wind down soon, we'll probably end up with about that level of content, meaning that a whole lot of stuff will be jettisoned over time. GRBerry 22:34, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: There is a clear debate (which Rangeley repeatedly chooses to ignore) as to whether the events constitute a single conflict. Related, clearly, but not one single event. Fan-1967 15:00, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Duplicates another, much more expansive article. If the situation grows further then the other article should be renamed and extended. StuffOfInterest 11:21, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep some nice info in here.--Infolabza 16:32, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete/merge. Redundant to 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict. Yeah, it covers Hamas in the south, but everything that's been going on in the last few weeks should be covered in one article (or one article branching outwards, using summary style).

• Weak keep. It's not hurting anyone being there and includes some valuable information. OSU80 23:51, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The so called "conflict" are interlinked. There is no other articel covering the "big picture". (This article as it stands is IDF pov.) -- Petri Krohn 02:08, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete OR term gren グレン 06:37, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep The article will need reworking throughout time but: 1) We have many articles regarding ongoing events. 2) We have many articles covering each event on the ongoing Israeli-Arab affairs through history. nihil 17:09, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge with 2006_Israel-Lebanon_conflict nihil 17:16, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge information and delete neologism. The original point is correct in that there's no name, but it's moot in that we gave it a name and linked from the main page. There are two different issues being voted on, the original research vs relevant info, and the duplicity, which was not in the nomination rationale. Therefore, as a matter of fairness and neutrality, it goes without saying that this should be deleted once any relevant info is merged. Moulder 22:56, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge with 2006_Israel-Lebanon_conflict Zenosparadox 23:10, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Future of article[edit]

I just counted the votes, and after 5 days, there are presently more keeps than deletes: the fact being that calling the situation a "conflict" instead of a "war" resolved general objections. Furthermore, there have been some work on timelines for events before and during this conflict: I feel content from those lists should be used to expand the article. Links to all articles relevant to the current situation should be posted in a "See Also" section. Updated references should continue to be posted. Cwolfsheep 04:13, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.