Talk:War

Semi-protected edit request on 12 November 2024

I want to edit this page because, I found some miss errors, on one of the information links. Amunada (talk) 07:25, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 12:52, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

No mention of level of war

As these three article suggest that there are three level of war: strategy, tactics and operational. There is no mention of that in this article, why?

Even this { {war} } template suggest the same.

I suggest to add another section titled "level of war". Dark1618 (talk) 01:16, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

This is a general overview article. There is an outline for all that kind of stuff and many more. That what is mentioned above is covered in other articles too, with links in this article. Nubia86 (talk) 05:54, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

"Enemy fire" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Enemy fire has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 December 18 § Enemy fire until a consensus is reached. consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 11:51, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

.

@Lazarokardenjas can you please tell me why you reverted my edit Kpop777 (talk) 04:21, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

I restored the long-standing lead wording that was sourced and was changed without explanation or any previous discussion. In my view, the change is not an improvement at all. You should read Wikipedia policies about sources, the lead section, and discussing changes. This is not a blog so also to read WP:NOT. Lazarokardenjas (talk) 04:27, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

you reverted my edits on country and war. With the page country I just reworded a few sentences to make the page look a little more neat in my eyes. You don't have to revert me for no reason or your personal opinion that "its not an improvement" but can't actually tell me what's wrong with my edit that's kind of frustrating. I hate going to the talk page because usually I try to convince people of my edits and usually they already have their mind made up so I know this is a waste of time, that's usually what happens. Can you just tell me specifically what's wrong with my edits. "Not an improvement" or "the other wording is sourced" are flawed arguments. Wikipedia doesn't have to match the wording of a source word for word that just becomes plagiarism. I added how war can be between "groups or nations" not just armed forces of states which is more accurate. Just look at the United States vs Al-Qaeda, wars involving ISIS and terrorist organizations or different conflicts between militant organizations which aren't armed forces of states. Look at tribal wars which are wars, those are conflicts between nations. My edit basically gives a more accurate description of war. It isn't always armed forces of States. and i put "regular or irregular" military forces to clarify that in first paragraph to clarify that once again . If you still disagree with this edit let me know, I probably can't convince you and I'm not sure wasting my time is a good idea Kpop777 (talk) 04:41, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

I also put how wars happen "typically to achieve political, economic, or territorial goals" so I'm also putting why most wars happen. How is this "not an improvement". If you still disagree let me know Kpop777 (talk) 04:47, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Read more careful, and it is sourced: "between the armed forces of states, or between governmental forces and armed groups that are organized under a certain command structure and have the capacity to sustain military operations, or between such organized groups". Lazarokardenjas (talk) 04:48, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

oh I skipped over that part I didn't read the part where it already said "armed groups". I guess I was wrong. Can you at least restore "typically to achieve political, economic, or territorial goals" explaining why wars happen? Kpop777 (talk) 04:50, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

im proposing the page look like this "War is an armed conflict[a] between the armed forces of states, typically to achieve political, economic, or territorial goals, or between governmental forces and armed groups that are organized under a certain command structure and have the capacity to sustain military operations, or between such organized groups.[1]" Kpop777 (talk) 05:00, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Other groups, separatists, insurgents etc. also could wish to archive that. After sourced definition to add maybe as I found something similar in the aims section, and to sound more for wikipedia, something as "War aims typically involve the pursuit of political, economic, or territorial objectives."? Lazarokardenjas (talk) 05:08, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

That also sounds good Kpop777 (talk) 05:13, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

:) Lazarokardenjas (talk) 05:18, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

ok now the page looks good again. Thanks Kpop777 (talk) 05:20, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Sourcing and literature survey methods for paleolithic speculation

Presently, this article contains a section which includes mention of scholar speculation on the frequency/nature of paleolithic warfare. The sourcing is limited and at times simply references a source referencing a source, without mention of where the authority actually mentions the statistic/finding. Bluefish213 (talk) 02:20, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

It appears that the current version for overview article is OK in how it presents the topic. Both perspectives are represented fairly, with claims clearly attributed, and sources and links included. Lazarokardenjas (talk) 11:01, 2 May 2026 (UTC)