Talk:War on terror
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the War on terror article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11Auto-archiving period: 4 months ![]() |
![]() | War on terror received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
![]() | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on September 20, 2009, September 20, 2010, September 20, 2013, and September 20, 2016. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination. Discussions:
|
![]() |
|
Cats
editHello @Aocloyalist: Why remove these? Invasive Spices (talk) 21 December 2022 (UTC)
Edit links
editThe infobox is hard to edit from the pages it's on. Can we add {{navbar}}
or the like please? Hairy Dude (talk) 00:50, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
About the Inclusion of the Islamic Emirate of Aghanistan (Taliban) and Hussein Era Iraq
editIncluding those two makes no sense. Iraq had no proven connections to 9/11 or the Taliban, only alleged. Meanwhile, the Taliban signed a Peace Deal with the US under the First Trump Administration to no longer harbor terrorism and has recently expressed desire to work with the Second Trump Administration. Please remove them. 2601:589:517E:1DB0:7DBB:C708:B50A:7FBB (talk) 16:55, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- 9/11 is a separate article. Slatersteven (talk) 16:58, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- Still doesn't explain why Hussein Era Iraq is included as a belligerent. 2601:589:517E:1DB0:7DBB:C708:B50A:7FBB (talk) 17:12, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- Because RS make the link. Slatersteven (talk) 17:19, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- Wait hold on, I checked, and the Afghanistan shown isn't the same entity that's existed sine 2021. It's referring to the older entity that existed in the 90s - 2001. TheFloridaTyper (talk) 17:04, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
- Still doesn't explain why Hussein Era Iraq is included as a belligerent. 2601:589:517E:1DB0:7DBB:C708:B50A:7FBB (talk) 17:12, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- 9/11 is a separate article. Slatersteven (talk) 16:58, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- Including Iraq does make sense as it was later invaded by a coalition and had its regime overthrown, but including Taliban led Afghanistan (2021-Present) isn't right as the Taliban have signed a peace deal with the US. TheFloridaTyper (talk) 17:00, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
No mention of ISIS leaders or Presidents Donald Trump and Joe Biden
editHow come in the leaders section, only Bush and Obama are mentioned? It was the First Trump Administration that approved the US-Taliban Agreement and ISIS' territorial defeat along with Al Baghdadi's death. The Biden Administration completed the US withdrawal from Afghanistan and killed Ibrahim. Please add Trump, Biden, Baghdadi, and Ibarahim. 2601:589:517E:1DB0:7DBB:C708:B50A:7FBB (talk) 17:08, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- While we're at it, Gaddafi and Assad as well. TheFloridaTyper (talk) 17:02, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
- Donald Trump still needs to be added to the US ‘Commander and Leaders’ section. 137.28.231.163 (talk) 03:22, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- If you can find reliable sources that name Donald Trump as a leader in the war on terror, then just add it yourself. The problem has been sourcing. Yr Enw (talk) 09:11, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Per MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE, entries in the infobox need to be supported by the body of the article. Cinderella157 (talk) 00:35, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- LJF2019, you reinstated Trump to the infobox on the basis of Biden only having one mention. In this discussion I stated:
I have no objection to removing Biden from the infobox. While his inclusion is supported (per WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE because he is mentioned in the body of the article, I am not convinced that the single mention rises to the threshold that he should be included - ie the article does support him as being a commander/leader but does not evidence that he was/is key or significant to the subject of the article.
The addition of Trump has been discussed many times (including here) and MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE has been acknowledged as the prevailing guidance representing the consensus of the broader community and that the body of the article must evidence that a commander has been key or significant to the subject of the article. Cinderella157 (talk) 02:12, 13 February 2025 (UTC)- I understand the argument that the infobox should only list commanders or leaders that the article’s body clearly supports, as per MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE. However, even though Trump isn’t mentioned in the current text, his role as Commander-in-Chief during a critical part of the War on Terror is a well-established, verifiable fact. His leadership, especially during key events like the operation that resulted in al-Baghdadi’s death, is documented by reliable sources and is common knowledge.
- If the article’s body doesn’t yet fully reflect Trump’s significance, that’s an issue we should fix by expanding and improving the text, not by removing him from the infobox. The infobox exists to provide a concise summary of important facts, and omitting Trump because the article is incomplete creates a circular problem: he isn’t mentioned because he’s not included, and he isn’t included because he isn’t mentioned.
- We already have Bush, Obama, and even Biden (despite his single mention) listed as key figures. To maintain consistency and accurately reflect the historical record, Trump should be included as well. Let’s work on updating the article to better document his contributions rather than leaving the infobox skewed. LJF2019 talk 02:27, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
- Write the article, then write the lead and infobox. As it stands, there is nothing in the article to tell us why Trump of al-Baghdadi would be there. Furthermore, a passing mention just to satisfy the letter of the guidance does not satisfy the spirit and intent. As for Biden, I have indicated my position. I don't think that he should be there because he has just a passing mention. Cinderella157 (talk) 02:40, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
Global military campaign or US-led military campaign?
editOpening sentence states "a global military campaign initiated by the United States", but it appears that the offensives have mostly been performed by the United States. Kenneth Kho (talk) 11:25, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- True, but many other nations were involved. Slatersteven (talk) 11:32, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- I agree, it appears upon closer look the lede does not adequately provide a summary of the body for a worldwide view, such as the current insurgency in trans sahara, and many others. Kenneth Kho (talk) 18:21, 17 January 2025 (UTC)