![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 |
I changed polity to sovereign state. Using the term polity in that first sentence is awful. The whole intro may be undergoing a rewording, but sovereign state is so much more accurate and clear. I also note there are quite a few wars missing, even obvious ones.. like Lebanon vs Israel the other year and Georgia vs Russia. Both need adding. BritishWatcher ( talk) 21:34, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Getting back to the question, could someone educate me on the relative merits of "sovereign state" and " state" to introduce the list? Cynwolfe ( talk) 11:32, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
The lede states this is a list of "wars between entities that have a constitutionally democratic form of government." Does that mean we can include the Korean war, because North korea definitely fits this criteria. According to the North Korean constitution, the legislative Supreme People's Assembly (SPA) is the highest organ of state power. Under its constitution, all citizens 17 and older, regardless of party affiliation, political views, or religion, are eligible to be elected to the parliament and vote in elections. -- Martin ( talk) 01:08, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
(ec)(od) While sovereign states sounds reasonable, it is unworkable because the concept is a modern one. Clearly, with modern definitions of nations, states, and democracy, many of the early entries will not qualify for inclusion because they were neither nations in the modern sense nor were the democratic as is commonly understood today. Using the commonly understood notion of democracy, only those modern nation-states that have constitutions and meaningful universal suffrage would qualify. But then, we would be forced to consider modern western states as being democracies only after the property and income requirements for voting were removed, after women got the right to vote, and, in the case of the US, after the civil rights act. Obviously we can't do that because that would be original research. I think that we should stop arguing about the list, let reliable sources determine whether or not a state is a 'democracy' and whether or not a squabble is a 'war' and list everything that qualifies under those two criteria. The only reason, IMO, to restrict the list to modern notions of democracies or states would be if this were a list that had a connection with the DPT, which, apparently, everyone agrees (or chooses to agree, since this discussion seems to have many layers of complexity!) is not the case. Meanwhile, arguing that North Korea is a democracy is stretching the limits of reality (or WP:POINT). -- RegentsPark ( talk) 15:38, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
I am curious as to why the Fourth Anglo-Dutch War is included, but none of the other, earlier Anglo-Dutch Wars? Blueboar ( talk) 12:40, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
In 1982 Israel bombed the Iraqi nuclear facility at Osirak. French technicians were present at the facility. There were also covert operations on French soil. Can proxy conflicts between democracies be included? 71.178.178.40 ( talk) 04:33, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
The EZLN, a democratic socialist movement, has been under military attack and harassment since declaring independence from the Mexican government in 1994. Can this be added to the list? 71.178.196.158 ( talk) 01:38, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
But that's an arbitrary limitation. It's also inconsistent because you've included the Israeli war of independence etc. 72.83.141.47 ( talk) 17:18, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
The EZLN is for all purposes a sovereign state with a government administration, there's no reason to exclude it. 71.178.178.40 ( talk) 04:35, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
Was Britain really a democracy in 1812?-- RM ( Be my friend) 20:08, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
@ Hidemyip123: I've declined this because it doesn't really fit under G11 since it's not exactly invented per se. I have no opinion on the content as a whole as far as notability or other content-related issues go, but this doesn't really fit well under the various speedy deletion criteria since it's not exactly something that someone came up with one day and since it's a list page it doesn't really fit under A7 or any of the other criteria. Hidemyip123, if you want to pursue further deletion, this will have to be via AfD. I'll also alert Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history to the article and let them look it over as well. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 10:14, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
I think this article can be made cleaner and more NPOV, if we first convert it into a table, listing the name of the war, the supposed involved democratic parties, and how democratic they were, and how many died (because that's relevant if it fits a definition of war or not). However, I'm not going to do that work if other editors oppose it, so please comment here. -- OpenFuture ( talk) 13:31, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
I had seen bad articles, but this is one of the worst definitely. Implying that pre 19 century governments could be democratic in anyway that resembles the meaning of the word today is just laughable. Guidaw ( talk) 03:24, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
How about the Jew-controlled UK's invasion of Iceland? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
213.185.247.147 (
talk) 15:14, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
I suggest that the incendiary language that I have put in scratch-out format be deleted or amended. For "ZOG (Zionist Occupation Government)", a commonplace smear by neo-Nazis, I suggest "British occupation of Iceland and the Faeroe Islands, WWII".
Iceland was not independent, the UK was at war with Nazi Germany; Denmark had just been conquered by Nazi Germany and was in no condition to defend Iceland, but the UK was; the British kept Icelandic institutions intact; there is no reason to believe that Icelanders would have preferred (Nazi) German administration. British occupation was remarkably gentle and did not constitute any effort to dissolve the relationship between Iceland and Denmark. I can say much the same of the Faeroe Islands, also a Danish territory. Pbrower2a ( talk) 16:02, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
There is no question it was an invasion, but there is a question as to whether it was a war between them. It was never declared, but maybe it's still open to debate. The Icelandic government acquiesced peacefully and almost immediately to being occupied (not that they were necessarily very happy about it in principle, many of them were quite aware of the possibility and implications of an alternative German occupation). Harsimaja ( talk) 02:32, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
The paragraph about the Paquisha War says that it saw up to 200 deaths in battle, but the main article Paquisha War seems to say that there were "only" 17 killed. Both are ostensibly sourced, so probably the sources here don't refer to this figure (it's an offline source). Can anyone with knowledge about the war correct this? — Ynhockey ( Talk) 07:49, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
What about the 2006 war, when Israel attacked Lebanon? Though Israel's status as a democracy can be called into question (since Arabs in the illegally Occupied Palestinian Territories don't have voting rights, only Jews have), it is still regarded as such by most, and other instances of war between Israel and Lebanon are also named in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:C6:3700:6600:D134:67E3:77DD:882 ( talk) 21:36, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 |
I changed polity to sovereign state. Using the term polity in that first sentence is awful. The whole intro may be undergoing a rewording, but sovereign state is so much more accurate and clear. I also note there are quite a few wars missing, even obvious ones.. like Lebanon vs Israel the other year and Georgia vs Russia. Both need adding. BritishWatcher ( talk) 21:34, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Getting back to the question, could someone educate me on the relative merits of "sovereign state" and " state" to introduce the list? Cynwolfe ( talk) 11:32, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
The lede states this is a list of "wars between entities that have a constitutionally democratic form of government." Does that mean we can include the Korean war, because North korea definitely fits this criteria. According to the North Korean constitution, the legislative Supreme People's Assembly (SPA) is the highest organ of state power. Under its constitution, all citizens 17 and older, regardless of party affiliation, political views, or religion, are eligible to be elected to the parliament and vote in elections. -- Martin ( talk) 01:08, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
(ec)(od) While sovereign states sounds reasonable, it is unworkable because the concept is a modern one. Clearly, with modern definitions of nations, states, and democracy, many of the early entries will not qualify for inclusion because they were neither nations in the modern sense nor were the democratic as is commonly understood today. Using the commonly understood notion of democracy, only those modern nation-states that have constitutions and meaningful universal suffrage would qualify. But then, we would be forced to consider modern western states as being democracies only after the property and income requirements for voting were removed, after women got the right to vote, and, in the case of the US, after the civil rights act. Obviously we can't do that because that would be original research. I think that we should stop arguing about the list, let reliable sources determine whether or not a state is a 'democracy' and whether or not a squabble is a 'war' and list everything that qualifies under those two criteria. The only reason, IMO, to restrict the list to modern notions of democracies or states would be if this were a list that had a connection with the DPT, which, apparently, everyone agrees (or chooses to agree, since this discussion seems to have many layers of complexity!) is not the case. Meanwhile, arguing that North Korea is a democracy is stretching the limits of reality (or WP:POINT). -- RegentsPark ( talk) 15:38, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
I am curious as to why the Fourth Anglo-Dutch War is included, but none of the other, earlier Anglo-Dutch Wars? Blueboar ( talk) 12:40, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
In 1982 Israel bombed the Iraqi nuclear facility at Osirak. French technicians were present at the facility. There were also covert operations on French soil. Can proxy conflicts between democracies be included? 71.178.178.40 ( talk) 04:33, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
The EZLN, a democratic socialist movement, has been under military attack and harassment since declaring independence from the Mexican government in 1994. Can this be added to the list? 71.178.196.158 ( talk) 01:38, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
But that's an arbitrary limitation. It's also inconsistent because you've included the Israeli war of independence etc. 72.83.141.47 ( talk) 17:18, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
The EZLN is for all purposes a sovereign state with a government administration, there's no reason to exclude it. 71.178.178.40 ( talk) 04:35, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
Was Britain really a democracy in 1812?-- RM ( Be my friend) 20:08, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
@ Hidemyip123: I've declined this because it doesn't really fit under G11 since it's not exactly invented per se. I have no opinion on the content as a whole as far as notability or other content-related issues go, but this doesn't really fit well under the various speedy deletion criteria since it's not exactly something that someone came up with one day and since it's a list page it doesn't really fit under A7 or any of the other criteria. Hidemyip123, if you want to pursue further deletion, this will have to be via AfD. I'll also alert Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history to the article and let them look it over as well. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 10:14, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
I think this article can be made cleaner and more NPOV, if we first convert it into a table, listing the name of the war, the supposed involved democratic parties, and how democratic they were, and how many died (because that's relevant if it fits a definition of war or not). However, I'm not going to do that work if other editors oppose it, so please comment here. -- OpenFuture ( talk) 13:31, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
I had seen bad articles, but this is one of the worst definitely. Implying that pre 19 century governments could be democratic in anyway that resembles the meaning of the word today is just laughable. Guidaw ( talk) 03:24, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
How about the Jew-controlled UK's invasion of Iceland? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
213.185.247.147 (
talk) 15:14, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
I suggest that the incendiary language that I have put in scratch-out format be deleted or amended. For "ZOG (Zionist Occupation Government)", a commonplace smear by neo-Nazis, I suggest "British occupation of Iceland and the Faeroe Islands, WWII".
Iceland was not independent, the UK was at war with Nazi Germany; Denmark had just been conquered by Nazi Germany and was in no condition to defend Iceland, but the UK was; the British kept Icelandic institutions intact; there is no reason to believe that Icelanders would have preferred (Nazi) German administration. British occupation was remarkably gentle and did not constitute any effort to dissolve the relationship between Iceland and Denmark. I can say much the same of the Faeroe Islands, also a Danish territory. Pbrower2a ( talk) 16:02, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
There is no question it was an invasion, but there is a question as to whether it was a war between them. It was never declared, but maybe it's still open to debate. The Icelandic government acquiesced peacefully and almost immediately to being occupied (not that they were necessarily very happy about it in principle, many of them were quite aware of the possibility and implications of an alternative German occupation). Harsimaja ( talk) 02:32, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
The paragraph about the Paquisha War says that it saw up to 200 deaths in battle, but the main article Paquisha War seems to say that there were "only" 17 killed. Both are ostensibly sourced, so probably the sources here don't refer to this figure (it's an offline source). Can anyone with knowledge about the war correct this? — Ynhockey ( Talk) 07:49, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
What about the 2006 war, when Israel attacked Lebanon? Though Israel's status as a democracy can be called into question (since Arabs in the illegally Occupied Palestinian Territories don't have voting rights, only Jews have), it is still regarded as such by most, and other instances of war between Israel and Lebanon are also named in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:C6:3700:6600:D134:67E3:77DD:882 ( talk) 21:36, 24 April 2019 (UTC)