Talk:2026 Iran war/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

Requested move 2 March 2026

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. There is a very strong consensus to call this a "war," as most sources provided are doing. A substantial majority of editors preferred "Iran" over "Middle East," which also seems to be consistent with the sourcing. (closed by non-admin page mover) —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 19:26, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

---

2026 Iran conflict → 2026 Iran war – Widely described as a war by WP:RS and officials WP:COMMONNAME

• AP War widens as Israeli and US planes pound Iran and Tehran and its proxies hit back
• CNN War spirals in Middle East as explosions heard across region
• NYT Trump Says War Could Last Weeks and Offers Contradictory Visions of New Regime
• Reuters Trump presses ahead with Iran war despite warnings of political risk for midterms
• The Guardian "We didn’t start this war but under president Trump, we’re finishing it," says Pete Hegseth

Ecrusized (talk) 13:42, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

• BBC US Congress receives classified briefing on war with Iran
• NPR The U.S. sinks Iran's ships and slams its missile launchers as the war enters Day 5

Moonreach (talk) 18:42, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Survey

• Prefer 2026 Middle East war. Best to broaden scope, considering the Israel–Hezbollah strikes. There is now a new front in a war that is spreading across the Middle East, per the BBC. 9ninety (talk) 14:05, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

  I prefer calling it the "Third Gulf War" as it mainly involves the Gulf States

  The (First) Gulf War - Desert Strom

  The Second Gulf War - Iraqi Freedom/Iraq War

  The Third Gulf War - Epic Fury/Iran War

  It fits perfect into a "Trilogy" format of US major interventions in the Persian Gulf and IF it causes a regime change in Iran it could be a fitting conclusion to a "Trilogy"

  I would agree changing the name to this might be premature but for me it fits perfectly as a conclusion ONLY if the regime falls as it concludes the "Crisis and Aftermath of the 1979 Iranian Revolution" Lil Zadeh (talk) 14:59, 2 March 2026 (UTC) Striking non-XC comment 9ninety (talk) 19:30, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

  Third Gulf War? Really? No source has referred to the conflict as that. LocalF15 (talk) 15:13, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

  Third Gulf War is not a popular name right now, but I can definitely see it in the future like the Twelve Day War. JaxsonR (talk) 16:22, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

  Yes, @JaxsonR honestly if Trump invents a term for it (as he did with the "Twelve Day War"), then it is likely to catch on quickly. Or if other commentators or public figures or media do that. Avishai11 (talk) 22:09, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

  That may be true but we are not a crystal ball. UserMemer (chat) Tribs 23:48, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

  As poetic as that might be, I haven't seen it anywhere. Spjag (talk) 18:01, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

  I like the name, though I think it's waaaay too early to consider it a third gulf war, IMO the conflict has to go on for a little longer before we consider it a successor war. For now, for sure change it to at least some sort of "war" rather than conflict. ScottPilgrimTakesOff (talk) 19:31, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

  The conflict is between US-Israel and Iran, gulf countries are not central members of the conflict, nor have engaged in any retaliatory strike. Ku423winz1 (talk) 09:21, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

  Strong support everyone I know is calling it this, and so is the news. Missiles are being launched, people are being killed, It's a war, no matter what congress calls it. (Talk) PHLOGISTON ENTHUSIAST 19:37, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

  @Phlogiston Enthusiast, is that a vote for "Iran War" or for "Middle East War"? – Asarlaí ^(talk) 10:10, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

  Iran war. (Talk) PHLOGISTON ENTHUSIAST 15:55, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

  Strong support for Middle East War. Nearly every media outlet has referred to it as a war, and it encompasses the entire Middle Eastern region. MagnesiumCube (talk) 22:52, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

  Strongly oppose a move to 'Middle East War'. We shouldn't capitalize "war" here as it hasn't been jumped on by many reliable sources, which usually keep it lowercase. Additionally, the broad name 'Middle East War' would fail WP:SPECIFIC as there have been dozens of Middle Eastern conflicts, with many involving a large number of nations. It would also be counterproductive to conciseness because 'Middle East' is both overbroad and longer than other proposed names. Sources are only calling it a 'Middle East war' because it is a current event that is the most prominent of the type, but it should not be used as a lasting title in an encyclopedic entry. The naming convention on events says that events need to be "immediately identifiable" to omit the timing. Many viewers would be confused and not be sent to the correct article they are looking for. UserMemer (chat) Tribs 23:30, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

  Why are you replying to me? I didn't propose 'Middle East War'. 9ninety (talk) 03:29, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

  @Asarlaí, I noticed you edited my comment without asking or informing me. You should never do this — see WP:TPO. 9ninety (talk) 09:31, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

  Apologies, you're right. I thought it was necessary to add the word "prefer" to avoid further confusion. Because yours is the very first comment, other editors had started voting for/against your proposal (Middle East War) rather than for/against the actual proposed title (Iran War). Feel free to undo my change. – Asarlaí ^(talk) 10:08, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

  I understand. No worries. 9ninety (talk) 17:06, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

  Comment Now that an Iranian ship has been sunk near Sri Lanka, I'd say it now isn't confined to the Middle East. Also depends if Cyprus is considered part of the ME. Abudefduf221 (talk) 12:33, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

  Cyprus is, geographically VitoxxMass (talk) 15:24, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

  Support as per above PLMandarynka (talk) 14:57, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

  Strong support for Iran War or something to that affect. Multiple sources/governments describe this as war. Plus planes and ships are being sunk as of 4 March, this is more than just a few missiles being fired as seen in the 12-day war. ThePaganUK (talk) 16:10, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

  Snowball Support and it’s pretty clear why. NotJamestack (✉️|📝) 16:21, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

  Comment What happens if the conflict spreads to mainland Europe? (Such as in Greece) would the name be affected in the case we choose "Middle Eastern War"? VitoxxMass (talk) 17:23, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

  Support, 2026 Iran War, "2026 Middle East war" is too broad and may cover other conflicts in Gaza or in Afghanistan. Eva The Lefty (talk) 18:45, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

• Support as most news organizations have labeled it a war. Trump has directly used the term war. I get the semantics that might arise for various reasons (No War Declaration from US Congress, Iran hasn't declared war, etc). Much in the same way I can understand the semantics in calling it a third Gulf War. But in a practical sense: Most Americans will refer to this as "The War With Iran" or "The Iran War". So it makes the most sense to have that be the title of the article. Liberaltarian12345 (talk) 07:31, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support An overwhelmingly large number of sources are calling this the "Iran war", so changing to 2026 Iran war follows WP:COMMONNAME. Yes, other countries may be involved in the war, but we go based off what sources say, which largely call this the "Iran war". BootsED (talk) 12:48, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support As per stated above by various users VitoxxMass (talk) 16:08, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Call it the Gulf war (2026). shane (talk to me if you want!) 16:49, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Disagree

  per the arguements below Robloxguest3 (talk) 18:43, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

• Strong oppose "2026 Middle East war" as being not WP:PRECISE. In 2026, we still have Gaza war, Syrian conflict (2024–present), Israeli invasion of Syria (2024–present) etc. VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 20:13, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

  Middle East-Persian War Since it looks like majority of Middle East countries might join the war against Iran and its axis... Similarly if Iranian missiles make it to a NATO territory, and assuming NATO gets involved, it would be Appropriate to name it The Great Gulf War. V. Rhonda (talk) 20:54, 2 March 2026 (UTC) Striking non-XC comment — Raihanur (talk) 21:32, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

• Support 2026 Iran War Great Mercian (talk) 23:48, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support Trump himself has called it a war. Lightnightx3x (talk) 18:19, 2 March 2026 (UTC) Striking non-XC comment — Raihanur (talk) 21:32, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support Pete Hegseth gave a press conference today referring to the US waging war. There is no ambiguity. JJARichardson (talk) 14:06, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support per nom. I will repeat what I said on this page on February 28: "the scale of the confrontation has already clearly exceeded the Twelve-Day War, and there is no obvious ceasefire in sight anytime soon to call it strikes or a conflict." In addition, I was right in pointing out that gradually more and more news publications will call it a war.  PLATEL  (talk) 14:07, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Move to 2026 Middle East war per 9ninety. Has grown beyond Iran. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 14:08, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support But I think better title is Iran War, similar to Iraq War. This war may or may not become a prolonged conflict. Pachu Kannan (talk) 14:44, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

  Comment The title 'Iran War' may get confused with the previous war 'Twelve-Day War', which was also previously named as 'Iran-Israel war'. CastleFort1 (talk) 14:46, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

• Support. I prefer the title Iran War, but the 2026 Middle East war, or possibly the Third Gulf War would be a better title if other countries like Saudi Arabia, the UK or the UAEs were to militarily intervene a lot more and outright help out Israel and America. Quake1234 (talk) 14:50, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

  Since war is spreading to the Mediterranean and Red Sea by means of the Houthis, Hezbollah, and the attacks on Cyprus, limiting it to just the Gulf would be inaccurate. Dark Energy9 (talk) 15:04, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

• Support I prefer using Iran in the title, but Middle East works just fine as well. ⚠︎ ArkadenBoden ⚠︎ (talk) 14:57, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support move to either 2026 Iran war or US–Iran war; at a glance, "Iran war" & "US–Iran war" appear to be the names currently being used in the majority of reliable news sources. — Jamie Eilat (talk) 14:54, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Comment. We just had a discussion, and it was closed without consensus for this particular change. The closer said they "recommend a hiatus of at least 72 hours before starting any new move requests." While I do think that the last request got a bit messy with people both using 'support' and 'oppose' to move to the title "2026 Iran war", and that consensus here would be nice, I agree that we should wait a little longer before starting a new request so that the sources can establish a common name without conflicting terminology and another inevitable request for a move. UserMemer (chat) Tribs 14:58, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support, with comment Per nom, the listed sources above have described the situation in Iran as a war. I also note that AP chose to describe the fighting as a war due to the joint Israeli-American strikes on Iran and the response from Iran. I also observed that the question that's appearing to be asked is whether the front in Lebanon counts as a spillover of the current war in Iran or as a part of a broader Middle East war as a whole. There's also the matter of how reputable news sources describe the broadness of the war. CastleFort1 (talk) 15:00, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support move to 2026 Middle East War. Israel has already referred to the Hezbollah attacks as a declaration of war by Hezbollah + Houthi resuming attacks on ships in the Red Sea show that this has already extended into a regional and factional war. Dark Energy9 (talk) 15:02, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Strong Support There's no confusion in the fact that this is a full blown regional war and multiple sources have classified it as a war. So the most accurate Title might be 2026 Iran War. Legion of Liberty (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 15:06, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support per nom. This is both a more accurate descriptor and the most commonly used name. Skitash (talk) 15:08, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support If this is not war, then I don't know what is. Dasomm (talk) 15:15, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support 2026 Iran war Ahammed Saad (talk) 15:18, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support conflict was just the first step in the right direction. Braganza (talk) 15:21, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

  I am fine with most potential names like 2026 Middle East war, Third Gulf War, Iran-Israel-US War ect. Braganza (talk) 17:21, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

• Ask me again tomorrow. The diverging opinions in this RM for the new title (current count: 5) indicate that waiting to see how the scope of conflict develops is the wisest course of action. I'd caution against editorializing with a title like Third Gulf War or Iran War (with a capital W, lowercase is fine) that doesn't appear in reliable sources. mdm.bla 15:34, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

  Also noting that Iran War is a redirect that points to List of wars involving Iran, but it is completely unused in mainspace so not an issue. mdm.bla 15:35, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

• Support either Iran war (2026) or 2026 Iran war per Wikipedia:Use commonly recognizable names and Wikipedia:Disambiguation. "Iran" is taking precedence over "Middle East" in the sources as well as in Google Trends (I am aware that Trends is not entirely reliable but it helps as a starting point). The existence of many other wars involving Iran means that the title should be disambiguated for now. Noting again that "war" should absolutely not be capitalized, as that is editorializing (the Associated Press agrees: "AP capitalizes the word 'war' only as part of a formal name, which as of now does not exist"). mdm.bla 17:38, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

  Final note: Iran War and Iran war are both redirects that should point towards the same target. mdm.bla 17:41, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

• Support As I already wrote in the previous discussion, the conflict does agree with Wikipedia's own definition of war, and this move should be carried out hastily, as it is unambiguous. For the post hoc discussion on whether to move to 2026 Middle East war (currently linking to the Prelude to the 2026 Iran conflict), sources are currently split, with The New York Times headlining the entire Middle East, with other sources either emphasizing just Iran, which with the exception of its ally Hezbollah in Lebanon is the current theater and driver of conflict in its vicinity, or mostly absconding from naming the conflict in any way entirely, in which case the naming of the article is unfortunately on us and the name we ought to default to would indeed be 2026 Iran war. BasicWriting (talk) 15:43, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

• Support If the Twelve-Day War is considered a war, then this absolutely also needs to be considered a war as well. Qbox673 (talk) 15:43, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support per nom. It may not be the final title, considering what else is happening in the region, but everything is centered around Iran and it's proxies. Raskuly (talk) 15:59, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Strong Support - This is the literal definition of the war, and will fundamentally reshape the middle east for the next decade at least. I am not opposed to any of the proposed titles, but we should change it to 2026 Iran war first and then agree upon a title later Nkulasingham (talk) 16:04, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support with comment Reputable sources are increasingly calling it a war (been seeing it on BBC and Sky News all day on the TV), and it's clearly of a scale to merit it, as are the stated strategic aims of its initiators (the US and Israel). There is no 'formal' legal declaration of war, but that is not really the defining characteristic of a 'war' these days when formal declarations are rare, if not unheard of, in the 21st Century. It is still openly regarded that there is a large-scale--existential for Iran--conflict among both sides of the war. If this isn't a war, it's hard to see what is, though I don't think it's a huge deal if it stayed as 'conflict' and the conceptual difference between a 'conflict' and a 'war' isn't very clear, nor has anyone made it clear in the discussions here or in the Pakistan-Afghanistan page. I don't know it myself.

My comment is that I'm not sure 'Iran War' is the best descriptor, nor the one that is widely used, as it removes the perpetrators from the framing of the conflict (that is: the US and Israel). I'm not sure how to resolve this as US-Israeli War Against Iran is a bit cumbersome, and US/Israeli-Iran War is awkward. But it should be taken into consideration unless 'Iran War' becomes the widely used term like 'Iraq War' did related to the 2003 conflict. LevatorScapulaeSyndrome (talk) 16:12, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

• Support for either 2026 Iran war or 2026 Middle East war. I think both would be supported by RS at the moment, with "Middle East" comprising the territorial scope of the conflict, and "Iran" comprising the military and political focus of the conflict. In any case, there is little doubt that this meets the definition of "war" as a full-blown military conflict between two belligerent sides, and that it greatly exceeds the scope of the previous Twelve-Day War in 2025. "Third Gulf War" (as suggested above) could be eventually used if sources do use it, but that is not the case as of currently. "Iran War" could be another option, but I do not think this is precise enough as of now as much of the action is taking place elsewhere (unlike the Iraq War, which unambiguously took place in Iraq). Impru20^talk 16:33, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Also, as a matter of clarification and while I would support any of the two names above, my slight preference would be for "2026 Iran war", as I think that would be the name that most unambiguously identifies the article's subject. "Middle East", while could be used as well, is not as precise as it would suggest it is a multy-party conflict between several countries in the Middle East (when, in practice, it is Iran vs. everyone else). Impru20^talk 12:24, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

• Support 2026 Middle East war. The war has already involved several countries in the Middle East. Cfls (talk) 16:38, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support 2026 Middle East war or maybe War in Middle East like War in Donbas. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 16:55, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Speedy support to 2026 Iran war, 2026 Middle East war, or 2026 Middle Eastern war, the latter for consistency with Middle Eastern crisis (2023–present). The current title is already outdated despite being an improvement to the previous. CNC (talk) 17:00, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• This article should definitely have "war" in its title. --MZMcBride (talk) 17:21, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support. I think 2026 Iran War is a perfectly succinct and accurate name. The scale here is big enough -- high-profile air strikes, back-and-forth attacks involving almost every country in the region, the assassination of a head of state, the stated intention by the United States of forcing a regime change in Iran -- that it's more than earned the title of "war", especially compared to the Twelve Days War last year. If you want to broaden it to include things like the Hezbollah strikes, 2026 Middle East war also works. Either way, this absolutely qualifies as a war. Gore2000 (talk) 18:07, 2 March 2026 (UTC) Striking non-XC comment — Raihanur (talk) 21:32, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Oppose 2026 Iran war. Oppose the status quo. Oppose Iran War. Support only 2026 Middle East war. Both the current title ("2026 Iran conflict") and "2026 Iran war" fail our guideline on naming conventions for events (WP:NCWWW).
  In "2026 Iran conflict/war", the "when" part is answered by "2026". Fine. The "where" part is answered by "Iran". This is wrong because the location is not Iran. It is also Iran, but not nearly exclusively Iran. Immediate fail.
  In "2026 Middle East war", the "when" part is answered by "2026". Fine. The "where" part is answered by "Middle East". Fine. The "what" part is answered by "war". Fine. This is the correct option, and the other option is incorrect. This is mathematically clear.
  About "Iran War", that is not a descriptive title and is a WP:COMMONNAME candidate. As it is too soon to speak of an exact single, obvious name that is demonstrably the most frequently used for the topic by a significant majority of independent, reliable, English-language sources, we need to come up with a descriptive name for now, and need to discard the COMMONNAME rationales from decision-making for the time being.—Alalch E. 18:21, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

  The war is mostly focused on Iran. BTW, parts of the war are being conducted outside the Middle East: Cyprus, Chagos islands etc.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 20:16, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

  It isn't meaningful to say "mostly focused on Iran". It simply isn't accurate. When Iran shoots rockets into places outside of Iran, the war is very much in all of those places and no longer in Iran. If anything, the war is mostly in the Middle East. Sufficiently mostly in the Middle East for "2026 Middle East war". —Alalch E. 22:42, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

  Cyprus is in the Middle East. 9ninety (talk) 03:29, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

• Support I believe that 2026 Iran War is the most concise and accurate name for this war, as the war was in started in and mainly occurs in Iran. PrimalMustelid (talk) 18:31, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support only 2026 Middle East war as the most accurate description for the war, as this no longer just involves Iran but the whole Middle East, as well as being in line with the escalation of the Middle Eastern crisis (2023–present). Finlayy (talk) 18:38, 2 March 2026 (UTC) Striking non-XC comment — Raihanur (talk) 21:32, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Procedural Oppose. The close of the previous request to move recommended a 72 hour hiatus before any new move requests. It has not even been 24 hours yet so I oppose the request for move on too soon grounds. GothicGolem29 (Talk) 19:06, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

It is true than that was a recommendation of the previous RM (though, I should note, not an obligation if a clear consensus in any other way arises). It is also true that the "2026 Iran war" name rose in prominence mid-RM as the scope of the conflict, and its coverage by sources, evolved since that discussion started. The amount of support !votes shown thus far would suggest this request is not ill-advised. Impru20^talk 19:13, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

It did rise to prominence mid RM but this was noted by the closer when they said there was not consensus and then recommended a hiatus. Personally I would say it is ill advised as we should have waited till the hiatus had ended not start one the same day of the close. GothicGolem29 (Talk) 22:14, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

• Support per nom for 2026 Middle East war. Bailmoney27 ^talk 19:29, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Strong support for 2026 Middle East war, weak support for 2026 Iran war; war involves geographically disparate coalitions. Doeze (talk) 19:58, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support 2026 Iran war. I strongly oppose 2026 Middle East war as problematic given that a war is raging in Sudan, Israel still continues to bomb Gaza and Israel was bombing Lebanon even before the Iran war started.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 20:08, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

  Sudan is not in the Middle East, and the Gaza war is over, and has reduced to low-intensity conflict; same for the Hezbollah–Israel conflict until the recent strikes. 9ninety (talk) 03:22, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

  Sudan is sometimes included in definitions of Middle East Placeholderer (talk) 16:53, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

• Support Iran War only I have not seen any sourcing to suggest "Middle East War" is in any way the common name for the conflict, certainly not compared to "Iran War" or "War with Iran" (this is seems to be the preferred configuration of most governments). Just because there is regional spillover does not make "Iran War" an inaccurate title, the war is still about them. BSMRD (talk) 20:25, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Comment Associated Press explicitly covering why they've called it "war" here. Re: capitalization they say AP capitalizes the word “war” only as part of a formal name, which as of now does not exist. (emphasis added). Doesn't address "Iran war" vs "Middle East war", but this would directly address a handful of the oppose !votes from the last RM Placeholderer (talk) 21:21, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

  From misc news sources convenient to me: clear preference for war, uncapitalized, over conflict. More news sources refer to Iran war or something to that effect than do to Middle East war, though plenty don't bother distinguishing between the two. (Giving my best summary for each in the —dashes— below:)

  Associated Press (US)—"Iran war"—now saying Iran war, with a piece explicitly explaining their use this is, like, the most beautiful possible format when looking for "what are different RS calling this?", so thank you AP

  New York Times (US)—"war"—while their "What to Know" page from 2 March uses "conflict" more, a 3 March "News Analysis" definitely goes with "war"

  Wall Street Journal (US)—unclear—editorial refers to war against Iran, but in context isn't talking about Hezbollah front. Their live updates say fourth day of the Middle East conflict as of now.

  BBC (UK)—"war—describes new war between the United States, Israel and Iran; this piece by their International Editor doesn't specify "Iran" or "Middle East" war but does say It is already a regional war

  The Economist (UK)—"Iran war", "war in Iran"—headline calls it The Iran war; text starts with THE WAR in Iran (caps original)

  Financial Times (UK)—"war" maybe? inconsistent—they have a tab for Middle East war, but not consistently used. Where they refer to the war it's descriptively: Middle Eastern war (that's Eastern) appears, as does pushing its neighbours to support the US-Israeli war here; the conflict in the Middle East too

  France 24 (France)—"war"—uses the war in Iran there and War in the Middle East in this headline

  Reuters (Canada)—"Iran war"—live updates titled Iran war live; article uses air war against Iran with Beirut strikes within scope here

  Deutsche Welle (Germany)—"Iran war"—clearly calls it Iran war; they have a tab for it and it's called such in plenty of articles

  Al Jazeera (Qatar)—"war"—does use war but isn't clearly one way or another on ME/Iran; when talking about the US POV does say the Iran war but other phrases are US-Israeli war, Israeli-US war on Iran (Hezbollah not in scope)

  In retrospect I should've gone through some Israeli/Iranian news, but now I'm tired and I leave that to someone else. Same with think tanks, though I will quickly throw in that Brookings talks about war Placeholderer (talk) 16:52, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

• Support renaming it the Iran War only. No other war has been called the Iran War so 2026 Iran War is redundant. Calling it the Middle East Conflict or anything like that is already covered by Middle Eastern crisis (2023–present) PaulRKil (talk) 16:23, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support for 2026 Middle East war per 9ninety. — Raihanur (talk) 21:35, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Oppose sources are mixed--at least right now. Agnieszka653 (talk) 21:51, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

  This !Vote might be better placed in the survey section GothicGolem29 (Talk) 22:12, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

• Comment: It seems like there are two issues here. 1 - Whether it should be called a "war" or a "conflict" and 2 - Whether the title should include "Iran" or "Middle East" (or maybe something else). Should we split this move request into two processes? BappleBusiness^[talk] 22:07, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

  No, we should not split this RM into two "processes", and such processes do not exist. The process is RM and this is it. —Alalch E. 22:32, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

  @Alalch E. I'm not talking about having two simultaneous RMs. We can and should split this into two sections within the move request. There might be no consensus on one name, but we might have consensus against the status quo. By splitting up these issues, we can see whether a Condorcet winner exists. BappleBusiness^[talk] 02:31, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

• Support 2026 Iran war – the scope of this article is only the conflict in Iran (which RS have described as a war per above) and retaliatory/directly related conflicts. "Middle East war" implies a total war exists across the Middle East, which is not the case. --estar8806 (talk) ★ 22:52, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support 2026 Middle east conflict - No one has formally declared war; despite exhibiting nearly all aspects of such wars. ^NeoSyria\Freedoxm (talk · contribs) 23:37, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

  The Iraq War is commonly referred to as a 'war' and such the title reflects that. I don't see why we should diverge here. UserMemer (chat) Tribs 23:48, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

  From what I've read, the last time that the U.S. made a formal declaration of war, was WWII. The informal word for an extended armed conflict is a war. The more formal international term is "Armed conflict" for just about anything longer than a short border skirmish.  • Bobsd •  (talk) 07:47, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

• Support 2026 Iran war per nomination. I also believe it should be 2026 Middle Eastern war instead of 2026 Middle East war, if that is this discussion's outcome. Newbzy (talk) 23:41, 2 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support - It is more than a conflict and has become a regional war and all relevant sources say so, it is only appropriate to change it. BUT I think we should retitle it to "Iran War" rather than "2026 Iran War." There have not been previous articles titled Iran War nor have there been articles or events involving regional conflicts based around Iran. I recommending dropping the "2026" and calling it "Iran War" similar to how we say "Afghanistan war" or "Iraq war." Yes WP:RS and WP:COMMONNAME are factors.

HarvardJock (talk) 00:27, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Iran has been involved in countless wars throughout history, which is why Iran War redirects to List of wars involving Iran; the perception that this war is the primary topic for "Iran War" is influenced by WP:Recentism. Afghanistan war is a disambiguation page linking to many wars involving Afghanistan; Iraq War is a formal, established name, which as of now does not exist for the current war as per reliable sources. 9ninety (talk) 10:46, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose It creates confusion with Middle Eastern crisis (2023–present). And as stated by VR, there are at least three other wars taking place in the Middle East at the same time. Thunderforge (talk) 00:58, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support in the following order: Iran war, 2026 Iran war, 2026 Middle Eastern war, or 2026 Middle East war: The first, as this is the first war with Iran; the second, for disambiguation purposes later; third, as the culmination of the Middle Eastern Crisis, which I argue it is; and the final, for being grammatically correct. Anyway, it is a war per nomination and various sources (especially the New York Times). — Javert2113 (Siarad.|¤) 01:41, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
• Strong Support is covered by reliable sources, and is broad enough to cover the entire situation. Also per the reasonings of the other editors. Also, WP:SNOW close as speedy move if possible. Wikieditor662 (talk) 03:06, 3 March 2026 (UTC).

I'm disabling notifications for this channel due to the large amount of messages. If you need me in this channel, please ping me. Wikieditor662 (talk) 02:07, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

• Support 2026 Iran war It is too soon to proclaim it as the Iran War, but the focus is very clearly on Iran and not the Middle East as a whole yet, regardless of the spillover, which has almost exclusively involved Iran directly thus far. I would, however, keep an eye on developments between Israel and Hezbollah, as well as a potential flareup between Saudi and the Houthis. Given there is not another notable Iran War, I am not strictly opposed to that title, but it has only been three days so has not yet met WP:PRIMARYTOPIC over other Iranian wars. Sources are clearly leaning towards "war" over "conflict" without mincing their words. MB2437 03:50, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support, reliable sources are now describing it as a war. Further changes to the title can be discussed when reliable sources converge on a common name. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 03:56, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support for 2026 Iran war.Veritasphere (talk) 04:10, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
• Strong support per nom Evaporation123 (talk) 04:16, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
• Oppose on the grounds that this is a bad RM. There are too many people trying different titles. We need a new RM with clear options. Guz13 (talk) 05:02, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

  The options are clear; it's those presented in the RM. Whether one !votes to support or oppose is based on whether to retain the original title or not, a bartender close can handle the details of that support. CNC (talk) 12:12, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

• Support for 2026 Iran War. It is what the sources say, and a war should be called a war, not a conflict. Lova Falk (talk) 07:16, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support: It has been called a war by many reliable sources. It’s more than just a conflict now. CountyCountry (talk) 07:28, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
• @Ecrusized Support "2026 Iran War" based on WP:RS and WP:COMMONNAME. FPTI (talk) 07:41, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support 2026 Middle East war per nom. --WellThisIsTheReaper ^Grim 08:08, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support 2026 Iran War. Is totally the WP:COMMONNAME now, and also the common sense name for a conflict with three countries involved on day 1, and ~10 countries under attack back by Iran by day 4, with aerial and navy battles now in the books. N2e (talk) 09:14, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support 2026 Iran War, calling this a conflict is underselling it and everyone is referring to it as a war now Claire 26 (talk) 10:55, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support Per the nom. I don't see any referential evidence for the Middle East and Gulf war, titles should definitely not be synthesized. It is Iran (much like Iraq/Vietnam) which is being targeted and the primary location of the action, casualties and destruction. This is supported by references including the proposed title. Gotitbro (talk) 11:05, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
• Oppose (my preference) although also possible Support (shown in 11:21 last sentence) my raw investigative search:

"in international law what is the policy which determines if a nation if officially in a ststus (sic) of war - wha are the necessary official stateements or filings" ("status" version) (publisher: iaskai; indicates sources):

"Under Common Article 2 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions - Any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them - international law now distinguishes between a "declaration of war" (the formal statement) and a "state of war" (the factual reality). " - "The United Nations Charter fundamentally altered the policy for determining a status of war by prohibiting the "threat or use of force" in international relations under Article 2(4).[6=Charter of the United Nations. Article 2(4). 1945].

Because the Charter generally outlaws war, states have become reluctant to issue formal declarations, as doing so might be construed as an admission of an illegal act of aggression.[2=Brownlie, Ian. International Law and the Use of Force by States. Oxford University Press, 1963] [7=Fazal, Tanisha M. "Why States No Longer Declare War." Security Studies, vol. 21, no. 4, 2012, pp. 557–593.]"

consequently:

"pursuant to the "Common Article 2 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions" what is the necessary definition of war":

"Common Article 2 was drafted to close this loophole. As noted in the authoritative commentaries by Jean Pictet, any difference arising between two states leading to the intervention of members of the armed forces is considered an international armed conflict.[1=Pictet, Jean. Commentary on the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949: Volume I. International Committee of the Red Cross, 1952.] [8=Korinek, K., et al. Introduction: Demography and War—Research on Population and Health in Contexts of Armed Conflct.

I think this indicates the description should be 2026 international armed conflict & with or not: (Iran) - this version really is the more intelligent option; this is at least provable simply only by the comparison "war" (is one word) "i. a. c." is 3 words - more to think about (right from the bat) so more civilization in the choice (so a progression).

(publisher: Forbes) reporters question "are there any US boots on Iranian soil" (47:46-) to SD Hegseth: "no" (a war but no soldiers). An alternative could be 2026 US/International military operations in Iran is the contemporary term "49:06" "49:14": "troops sent to the region - how many troops are involved in this operation" DC reply is direct (doesn't contradict: is a war not an operation) though 49:39 "tactical aviation flowing into theatre" is in wikipedia theatre (warfare). Cattenion (talk) 11:21, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

war is raw backwards (and a hospital has wards); "raw" as back in the hospital warred the soldier is raw (like a raw piece of meat - injured) or in the field parts of bodies scattered - flesh, pieces of offal - alternatively, a surgeon (viz Surgeon General) operates (an operation) and does so in a theater. Raw war is the problem better to focus on the solution to the problem or the possibility of a solution than the problem. Cattenion (talk) 11:47, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

"2026 Iran conflict" there isn't much difference of "Eagle, M. N. (2017) Inner conflict in Freudian theory": modern Freudian therapy -

Patient name: blaha blah blah (redacted)

History:

2026 Iran conflict.

2025 w/e

2024 w/e

etc

(Is a real file entry: which is happening, right now, somewhere in an internal world near you) Cattenion (talk) 12:29, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

• Support I believe that 2026 Iran War sounds like a much more descriptive and accurate title than the current one. ARandomShyGuy (talk) 14:15, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
• Strong support for "2026 Iran War" : the war is mainly concentrated on Iran itself and per above discussion + sources. Oppose 2026 Middle East War as the majority Middle east countries are participating self defense only, they aren't deploying their troops or raiding airstrikes against Iran or something similar to that (so far)... Alternative to that, I support Iran war too (but I'd prefer that after the war ends, to create consistency with Iraq war, etc). WinKyaw (talk) 15:47, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support for 2026 Iran War or 2026 Middle Eastern War as an alternative. Clearly beyond just a conflict anymore. The Account 2 (talk) 16:14, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support for 2026 Iran War, as it is the most common name in reliable sources. – Asarlaí ^(talk) 16:43, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support It's clearly not just a conflict anymore, but a full-fledged war.--3E1I5S8B9RF7 (talk) 17:17, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
• Oppose Bad RM. Too soon following prior RM, evidenced by the swirling contradictory and unsourced ideas here. WP is not a crystal ball: it is still TOOSOON for a real COMMONNAME to have emerged, and the discussion here frequently conflates sources referring to the conflict in context with sources referring to it by a name. Conflict is now in widespread usage alongside war, and conflict includes the non-belligerent states that are party to the conflict, in a way that is more precise and accurate than either Iran War or Middle East war (which is not supported by sourcing and speculative). Current title is entirely adequate and there's no urgency to change it (though dropping the other belligerent states is NPOV and reflects BIAS of western sources). —BrechtBro (talk) 17:22, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Exactly, I want to do a RM but this RM is not correct at this time. Guz13 (talk) 17:37, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

• I can see myself support a RM like this after some time has passed since the previous RM. Until then, I'm with GothicGolem29 -- procedurally opposing this one. Renerpho (talk) 18:15, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support either 2026 Iran war or (less preferred) Iran war per sources above. "war" (uncapitalized) used much more regularly than "conflict" in what I've seen; "War" (capitalized) not used at all. "Iran" more regularly used than "Middle East" in what I've seen, and is also the status quo for this title. Keeping the 2026 makes the title more clearly a descriptive one, so I prefer with 2026. Some sympathy to procedural opposes, but that ship seems to have sailed; while I see no rush to speedily close this RM, imo we clearly shouldn't e.g throw it out and start again in 24 hours Placeholderer (talk) 18:23, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

  This war is certainly not the primary topic for Iran war. Ukraine war and Afghanistan war also point to lists of wars rather than the current or most recent notable war involving those countries. 9ninety (talk) 03:50, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

  That seems like a good reason for the 2026 Placeholderer (talk) 04:17, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

• Support using the term "war", but I'm not sure I agree with "Iran war" - after all, it takes two sides to war, and Iran isn't the instigator here (at least not the immediate instigator). But maybe that's for later. Guettarda (talk) 18:27, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support for 2026 Iran War Mtonna257 (talk) 19:33, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

  Support the use of 2026 Iran War or 2026 Middle Eastern War Doremon764 (talk) 20:19, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

• Support "2026 Iran war", more sources use "war" and "Iran" as above. DankJae 20:41, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support for "2026 Middle East war". The war has clearly spread beyond a single border and now involves multiple countries. Using 2026 Middle East War or simply Middle East War better reflects the current scale of the conflict. WinstonSmith22 (talk) 21:54, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support for 2026 Iran War - seems to be common reference to it now in reporting/wider coverage AlbusWulfricDumbledore (talk) 21:57, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

  I genuinely haven't found a source that uses capitalized "War", except e.g in headlines where Each Word Including War Gets Capitalized Placeholderer (talk) 04:19, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

• Support for 2026 Iran War as that appears to have the greatest backing in reliable sources at this time. That can change, just as the title changed just within the past day or so. The Israeli ground assault indicates that the war has gone beyond Iran. But the main thing is that it is more than just a "conflict." Coretheapple (talk) 22:36, 3 March 2026 (UTC)
• Oppose – A new COMMONNAME for this subject is quickly developing:

  "Day 3 of the US-Israeli war with Iran" – CNN

  "Visualizing the US-Israeli war with Iran and retaliation in maps and charts" – also CNN

  "The US-Israeli war on Iran could rewrite Gulf security calculations" – Al Jazeera

  "The third day of the US-Israeli war with Iran" – BBC

  "Pentagon Update on Iran, US Israeli War With Iran, Gulf Countries Bear The Brunt" – NPR

  "US-Israeli war on Iran causes major oil, gas disruptions" – Reuters

  "Experts react: How the world is responding to the US-Israeli war with Iran"

  "The US-Israeli war with Iran in maps, graphics and images" – Associated Press

It would appear this pattern has solidified since the Associated Press began practicing it. The Guardian has gone as far as renaming the section of their website: "US-Israel war on Iran". --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 23:27, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

If we do decide on this style, how should we choose between "US-Israeli war on Iran" and "US-Israeli war with Iran"? Also, some sources use both "US-Israeli" and "US-Israel" (see this Reuters article), so that's another question. UserMemer (chat) Tribs 23:34, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Fortunately, this is not a new question. Differentials in prepositions is oft-encountered issue with WP:AT. I believe we just choose which ever we find more natural by consensus. As for Israel vs Israeli, I personally believe Israel is the MOS answer, but that does not matter when we have a clear favorite in COMMONNAME and that appears to be Israeli.--- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 23:42, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

"Iran war" still generally seems to more widely be the COMMONNAME across news sources though:

• Al Jazeera: "How much could the Iran war cost the US? Here's what we know"
• BBC: "Asia stocks fall for third day, oil steadies as investors watch Iran war"
• Reuters: "Iran war live: Israel strikes Tehran and Beirut; drones hit US embassy in Riyadh"
• Associated Press: "Tensions flare as lawmakers question Iran war's costs, risks and strategy"
• CBS: "U.S. death toll in Iran war rises to 6 as Trump says campaign could last 5 weeks"
• PBS News "U.S. stocks rebound from sharp losses, while oil prices leap on worries about Iran war"
• NBC: "What we know about the U.S. service members killed in the Iran war"
• Bloomberg: What the Iran War Means for Your Money"
• Deutsche Welle: "Iran war: Israel hits Beirut, Tehran with fresh strikes"
• The Atlantic: "The Big Story: The Iran War"
• Politico: "GOP has the votes to crush Iran war rebuke, Johnson predicts"
• New York Times: Global Markets Tumble as Iran War Intensifies"
• USA Today: "US promises 'next phase will be even more punishing.' Iran war updates"
• The Economist: "The Iran war is rapidly engulfing the region"
• Vox: "How does the Iran war end?"
• The Guardian: "Iran war live updates: Trump says US may escort tankers through Strait of Hormuz; IDF launches strikes on Iran"

— Jamie Eilat (talk) 02:06, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Many of these headlines are shorthand or in context and not names and do not contribute to COMMONNAME. Sources in belligerent states may have a POV where "US" or "Israel" is implicit. Some are directly contradicted: The Guardian refers to it, in the header of the same link as the "US-Israel war on Iran." NYT headers are "U.S. and Israel Attack Iran" and "Mideast conflict." BBC is using US-Israel war with Iran.

Where some other major sources are at:

• News18: US-Iran-Israel War LIVE
• Hindustan Times: US-Iran strikes/war/etc.
• Haaretz: Israel-U.S War With Iran
• Irish Times: US-Israel war on Iran
• The Independent: Iran-US war
• Washington Post and London Times are among those still using "conflict"
• Financial Times headings are "US-Iran tensions" and "Middle East war"

A number of sources between several terms, as the FT, reflecting lack of established name at those outlets. —BrechtBro (talk) 05:53, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

• Strong support with other alternative titles for redirect. Daddynnoob (talk) 4:40, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

• Support the move to "2026 Iran war" for now per reliable sources. We can discuss other names when they become WP:COMMONNAME. Tashmetu (talk) 07:46, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

  •  Strong support the move. Other alternative names are great. As per many reputable news putlets they refer to "The Iran War" or "2026 Iran War". As per Tashmetu, we can always discuss

  RAPTOR7762^{Whats up?} 10:37, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

• Support move to 2026 Iran war. This is undeniably consistently called a war even by the main protagonists. It is likely that the name retained by historiography is not yet known, e.g. Twelve-Day War, so a further renaming is likely. However, naming it a war is already an improvement. Place Clichy (talk) 11:06, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support moving article title as a "2026 Iran war" at the very least, per overwhelming mainstream media consensus. harukaamaranth 11:40, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support for 2026 Iran war, partial for 2026 Middle East war Mainstream media refer to it as a war, so I see it fit. I lean slightly towards the former due to the way the media is currently portraying the situation. ben-fpyt (talk) 12:37, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support for both 2026 Iran war and 2026 Middle East war. There looks to be sufficient sourcing for war, and I think that both proposed titles fit. The war is centered on Iran, so but it does involve many countries in the Middle East, so I would say both work, though I would suggest using "Iran war" as an interim title for now if nceessary, and having the discussion on whether to call it war in the Middle East a bit later. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 17:01, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support for "2026 Iran war", but oppose "2026 Middle East war" at this point, at least for now, as its scope is not yet clear. --Mindaur (talk) 17:05, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support per nom, it's definitely a war. RealKnockout (talk) 17:31, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support per nom for "2026 Iran war". Also would support "2026 Middle East war". Each country attacked represents an "Armed conflict" so the scope of this event is growing rapidly.  • Bobsd •  (talk) 17:47, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support; I've added additional citations to the header. The common name for this is now "war". Moonreach (talk) 18:45, 4 March 2026 (UTC)
• Support and WP:SNOW move to some variation of the title with "war". Preference at this time is the proposed 2026 Iran War per evidence in sourcing, but prefer a speedy move to reflect the current nature of the conflict above any one specific title. 🌸⁠wasianpower⁠🌸 (talk • contribs) 19:15, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Background: NPOV

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

The background section (and lead) simply omit the explaination why Iran turned anti-American. In fact, it gives the impression that the sole reason for this was the ideology of the new political system. Z 16:22, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Agree. Informations of US support for the authoritarian Shah regime and US-UK backed regime changes should be included. Ahammed Saad (talk) 17:36, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Strongly agree. The 1953 Iranian coup d'état is a glaring omission to the background section which if included would provide proper historical context for the current state of affairs. It’s currently presented as if the history of the relationship between the US and Iran started in 1979.--C.J. Griffin (talk) 17:19, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Iran claims "650 U.S. soldiers killed"

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This should be removed from the infobox. It's an obvious domestic propaganda narrative from a collapsing regime, that sounds like a Baghdad Bob statement. Ecrusized (talk) 19:41, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Sidebar

I think a sidebar should be made for this conflict/war where people can access all the related articles more easily. Is this a good idea? Should I go ahead and do it? Wikieditor662 (talk) 18:22, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

How would this not duplicate the scopes of {{2026 Iran–United States war}} and {{Campaignbox 2026 Iran conflict}}? IsCat (talk) 19:20, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Oh, you're right, the latter seems to be an already existing sidebar. I wonder why it wasn't in the article already, but I'll be sure to add it. Wikieditor662 (talk) 19:37, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

It is already in the article, directly under the infobox. IsCat (talk) 19:44, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I believe that would be because I just added it there, haha. Wikieditor662 (talk) 20:01, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

You actually added it to the "status" portion of the infobox, probably by mistake. I reverted that edit as the sidebar was already included below the infobox. IsCat (talk) 20:04, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Oh, my apologies. Strange enough though, I didn't see it before I made the change. Wikieditor662 (talk) 20:11, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Qatar in defensive only?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Several reliable reports report that Qatar launched an active strike in Iran. Should Qatar now be moved to the active belligerents against Iran? VidanaliK (talk to me) (contributions) 22:11, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

@VidanaliK This was already discussed, see this. Effectively, until either a non-Israeli source confirms it or Qatar does (or Iran confirms), I don't think we can put it there. But idk. That's my view. It evolves quickly (my view and also the news, lol). @Placeholderer thoughts on this? Seriously there was some possible edit warring earlier involving this. FYI: it is not in the infobox right now, but it is in the main article in a relaitvely short section that we should certainly expand. Avishai11 (talk) 22:23, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Oh, OK, sorry. I'm new to the talk page and there are way too many discussions to check. VidanaliK (talk to me) (contributions) 22:48, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Request to remove political commentators section

This section does not seem appropriate for this article. Not sure why we have a paragraph dedicated to what is being said by specifically American right wing internet personalities. There are endless people who are political commentators globally, listing all their reactions sees unnecessary. McCIrishman (talk) 18:22, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

I agree. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, nor is it a directory. UserMemer (chat) Tribs 18:40, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

It can be spun off into its own article, but doesn't really belong here. Monk of Monk Hall (talk) 20:34, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Involvement of a minor Iraqi group.

Per this source a group known as the "Iraqi Guardians of Blood Brigades" carried out attacks on the US. JaxsonR (talk) 03:33, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

Do you have evidence that this source is reliable? Wikieditor662 (talk) 04:52, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

But the attacks were against American bases in Iraq , predominantly Erbil , not in Saudi Arabia Legion of Liberty (talk) 04:19, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Statement about Iran shooting down drones - any importance

According to Al Jazeera, Iran have shot down 29 UAVs; is there any importance and relevance for the article? - Just MRT (talk) 19:59, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

editors are biased and only adding claims by US and Israel as factual while dismissing any Iranian claims when when Iranian media has footage RealFactChecker101 (talk) 20:14, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Yeah I also realized, as Iranians have also had multiple claims which ar at least partially true...not very good to see so much bias Just MRT (talk) 20:19, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

I don't think UAVs are significant enough to count for the Infobox "losses" section (for either side), as they are meant to be cheap, disposable and explode anyway on impact (I believe?), but it seems fine to add as "Iran claims..." to the relevant Hostilities section for the day on which it occurred. MolecularPilot^Talk 02:34, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

USA to have destroyed all 11 ships of Iran

According to Al Jazeera, the us made following statement: “Two days ago, the Iranian regime had 11 ships in the Gulf of Oman, today they have ZERO.” Just MRT (talk) 20:01, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Isaac Herzog

In the list of leaders and commanders, Charles III is listed with Keir Starmer, presumably because now the UK is involved, the head of state must be listed as a leader. Well, with the Israelis listed as leaders, the president of Israel, Isaac Herzog, head of state, is not listed as a leader and commander. This seems to be inconsistent as other heads of states have been mentioned. So as president he'd be ranked above PM Bibi so his name would be above. TLDR: Isaac Herzog should be included as a leader. Isaac Field (talk) 20:04, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

In the UK, the monarch is the Commander-in-Chief/Head of the Armed Forces. That's not the case with Israel. In Israel, the cabinet holds that power and the head is in the military itself. That's why Israeli President doesn't have even a ceremonial role. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 04:56, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

I can't edit

According to the red crescent 555 people were killed in the article but please the 555 of them would be written as non military because the red crescent announced the death of civilians. And also please change gulf countries to persian gulf countries Wqxjgp (talk) 20:21, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

You can't edit because you dont have 500 total edits and extended confirmed, this page falls under PIA/A-I contentious topic sanctions. shane (talk to me if you want!) 15:33, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

How do we handles information from live update sources being removed from those pages?

How do we handles information from live update sources being removed from those pages? The sources don't match the text. Mercer17 (talk) 08:56, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

@Mercer17 Find another source. And if a claim is not also reported separately by a reliable source it's likely not relevant enough to be included in the article. Lamoebas (talk) 10:00, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

The Wayback_Machine may have information about changes in sources. There are also some other sites that archive webpages as well. Other Cody (talk) 00:17, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Undue?

@Wikieditor662: What is your criteria for "undue" reactions when you remove support for the US & Israel but leave condemnation when they are from the same continent? Especifically, Argentina and Brazil. Both are G20 members, by the way. What criteria are you applying for "undue". Please explain yourself or otherwise I will restore some of your removals. CoryGlee 02:31, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

I understand removal of uninvolved nations from far away places which do not belong to any major international body. I've re-added Argentina as a G20 members in similarity with Brazil and South Africa entries. CoryGlee 02:35, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

@CoryGlee My criteria was not based on the side they supported. It was based on the influence of the countries over the strikes. Argentina and Brazil are all the way in South America, which is far and has little to do with the middle east. I've already brought this up before doing this, and numerous people agreed. Wikieditor662 (talk) 02:55, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Wikieditor662, well I can understand your point on the Philippines, whose history rarely intermingled with Iran. But some "far away" countries, making a special emphasis on Argentina, have so much to do with Iran. I recommend you read about the 1992 Buenos Aires Israeli embassy bombing and 1994 AMIA bombing. Being far from Iran does not mean lack of common history. In fact, you left Poland... Far away from Iran and little to nothing in common history. CoryGlee 03:04, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the extra information on Argentina, I didn't know about it. As for Poland, it is much closer than south America to the middle east, but you're still right, so I removed it. As I said in the edit summary, I was just doing only the bare minimum, and encouraged other editors with their opinions to participate in deciding what other countries to remove. Since you seem to know about this, I'd appreciate any other suggestions for other countries on there. It may also help to mention the 1992 Buenos Aires Israeli embassy bombing and 1994 AMIA bombing if it's relevant, what do you think? Wikieditor662 (talk) 03:11, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Sure, I have two sources on that. Thanks for the input. CoryGlee 03:20, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

U.S./US redux

@Jogosoccer: please do not change "US" to "U.S." without a prior consensus on this Talk page. Please see the previous discussion of this at Talk:2026 Iran conflict/Archive 2#U.S./US. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 05:50, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Change auto-archiving to 3 days

Currently, this talk page has over 100 topics, is at almost 225,000 bytes, and is the 11th longest talk page at Wikipedia:Database reports/Long pages/Talk (no subpages). Should the auto-archiving period (how long a thread must be inactive for before it is archived by Lowercase sigmabot III) be reduced from 5 days to 3? mdm.bla 22:44, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

I think part of the problem is that there's been a rush over the weekend, and all the attention was on the main article. Plus it hasn't even been 5 days since the Talk page was created so there's been no time for the bot to even start archiving anything. I've been archiving things that have already been dealt with and discussions that have been closed, and the situation is already much better.

3 days is really short. Things are likely to get somewhat less busy now that many more articles relating to aspects of the conflict/war have now been created, allowing the activity to diffuse and spread out across multiple pages. It's also no longer a weekend, which probably helps. I'd say wait until after the bot has made its first run, before we decide whether to shorten it further. (It was already shortened down to 5 recently.) – Scyrme (talk) 00:11, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I generally favor longer rather than shorter auto-archiving periods. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 01:40, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Maybe we should adjust the archive size too?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Speaking of archives, why was the max archive size shortened to just 50k? The default is 400k. (I was wondering why one click archival kept making new pages. Only now just noticed the size limit.) If the default is too large for conveniently navigating old archives, maybe it should be set to 200k? That seems more reasonable while still being much lower than the default. – Scyrme (talk) 02:04, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

200k would be fine for the archive pages. My concerns about this page's size are also alleviated by the fact that it's been EC protected. mdm.bla 02:49, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and set it to 200k. With it being set to 50k on a fairly busy page, we'd quickly end up with a large number of short archive subpages. I don't see a good reason for it. – Scyrme (talk) 03:23, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

@Scyrme, should we move the contents from Archive 2 to Archive 1? The archive 1 is 52,510 and archive 2 is 75,558. Combined size would be 128k well below 200k. And then move connect from Archive 3 and 4 to 2 Shaan Sengupta^Talk 03:32, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

That would leave 3 and 4 empty, and I suspect the bot will start filling from 4, so 3 would remain empty. While we could ask for a speedy deletion, that seems like more work than its worth. I've consolidated 2 into 1, moved 3 into 2, and 4 into 3. If the bots start filling at 4, it'll only be 3 which is underfilled, but it won't be empty. Should be fine. – Scyrme (talk) 03:47, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I've set counter for auto-archive at 3. Now the bot will fill 3 until the designated space will be used to the mentioned extent. Then the bot will itself update the counter here to 4 and start filling 4. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 03:53, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Hadn't thought of that. Sounds obvious now you mention it. Good idea. – Scyrme (talk) 03:57, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I've further moved contents from 3 to 2. Even after that 2 is still 78k. I think we can get it to 100k and change counter (above) accordingly or maybe just let it be at 78k. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 04:03, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I moved more from 3 to 2 and it's now over 100k, so problem solved now I think. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 22:14, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 4 March 2026

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved per WP:SNOW. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:40, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

---

2026 Iran war → Iran warIran war – Please place your rationale for the proposed move here. FCBWanderer (talk) 20:42, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

• Speedy close – the previous RM closed less than 2 hours ago. This is disruptive. mdm.bla 20:55, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Support The conflict has already escalated into a major, sustained war with significant global and regional impact and would be recognized without a year in the title. Ecrusized (talk) 21:03, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Oppose I don't think this is disruptive procedurally because the prior RM appears to have been about the orthogonal issue of what noun to use but "Iran war" is massively ambiguous and adding that ambiguity to the title serves no purpose. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:24, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Support it's a war from where I'm standing. As soon as you sink an enemy ship in international waters it can no longer be considered an "operation" or "conflict". Stevo1000 (talk) 21:49, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Oppose Iran warIran war but Support moving to 2026 Middle East war2026 Middle East war given the wider scale of the conflict. Dokateoo (talk) 22:05, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

I don't think many outlets are calling this "the Middle East war". 90% of actions are by Iran or targeting Iran anyways Colin dm (talk) 22:34, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Oppose, removing the "2026" from the title makes it needlessly ambiguous and serves no purpose, especially when it's only the 3rd month of the year and we don't know how long the war will last. Lancer-lot-X (talk) 22:07, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Oppose and speedy close (hey, that rhymes!) per mdm.bla and since there have been previous Iran wars. VidanaliK (talk to me) (contributions) 22:08, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Strong oppose No rationale given by proposer, needlessly adds ambiguity, no obvious benefit over current title, and the previous RM has only just closed. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 22:10, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Oppose BUT review later for now... if this becomes much messier in the coming days/weeks/months, maybe. We have Gaza war, so Iran war is reasonable but not quite yet. @FCBWanderer your thoughts? Also we closed this 2 hours ago as @Mdm.Bla said... so this is wayyy too soon. Avishai11 (talk) 22:11, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

There has been many wars in current Iran territory, but any of them is just known as “Iran war”. I am sure that in a few years everybody will call this conflict the Iran war FCBWanderer (talk) 22:39, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Oppose: per mdm.bla and Chessrat. Proposer forgot to say why. Second support does not seem to have read what the requested move was about either. Raskuly (talk) 22:14, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Oppose (for now): I think this should be reviewed later on, but if the war ended tomorrow I don't think the scale of the war warrants that name. If it were to drag on and become more significant then I think that name change would be appropriate. Colin dm (talk) 22:38, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Oppose and speedy close per Chessrat. Disruptive RM. Cutlass^Ciera 22:41, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Oppose per Pppery: by no means an unreasonable discussion, but the proposal would only add ambiguity. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:07, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Oppose because the nature of the war is likely to become clearer soon. In a month or a few months, we could be looking at an Invasion of Iran, a Middle East War, or an x-Day War, all of which would better differentiate it from similar topics. No sense making a hasty move. Monk of Monk Hall (talk) 01:40, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

Opppose. The ambiguity isn't an issue if this is the primary topic (WP:PTOPIC); we could also make Iran War (disambiguation) and hatnote to it to deal with that, as with all other primary topic articles. However, it's too far soon to tell whether this will ultimately become the primary topic, particularly when considering recency bias (WP:RECENTISM). I also agree with Monk of Monk Hall; as events unfold, this could go in a range of directions which could settle at a range of other plausible titles. It's too soon to tell whether this will ultimately be known as simply the "Iran War", as opposed to "Invasion of Iran", etc. On a minor point, even if this is or becomes the primary topic for this title, the correct title would be Iran War, as with Iraq War, etc. not Iran war (lowercase). – Scyrme (talk) 02:03, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

---

No need for a new discussion right now. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:37, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose - This is not the only war that Iran has gone through. Wisher08 (talk) 02:18, 5 March 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Role of UK and Turkey

Resolved

• Turkey:
• UK:

Should these belong to the list of belligerents, given their logistical role? There is a bit of a disagreement among editors. CapeVerdeWave (talk) 10:05, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

I don't think they should be used. Besides, logistical role is much larger than these two, US has been using Rota Base in Spain, Lajes Field in Portugal, also, bases in Germany, and Greece to move aircraft and ships to the Middle East. The source for Turkey is also dated 24 February, before this campaign began. Ecrusized (talk) 10:23, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

The UK has been involved with defensive runs to protect UK personel stationed in the region. There should be a separate column for countries which are acting in self-defence. If they are put on the same side as the belligerants in US and Israel this infers that they are in agreement with the strikes but this does not seem to be case at all - they are just caught up in it. Stevo1000 (talk) 11:04, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

The UK has been involved in protecting Cyprus the British bases, but I don’t think Turkey is involved based on my news outlet RAPTOR7762^{Whats up?} 10:24, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

@9ninety: Any comments here, since you reverted me? Ecrusized (talk) 11:08, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

I don't have a strong opinion on whether they should be included; I reverted you because your reason for removing it didn't make much sense to me; if the only problem is that it's incomplete, surely the logical solution would be to add to it? You didn't cite an actual objection.

Based on Stevo1000's comment, we could consider moving the UK under the defensive only list. 9ninety (talk) 11:26, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

@Elazığ Ahmet: Can you explain your edit for inclusion of Turkey here? The source is dated 24 February, before this conflict began, so its quite unusual you've decided to use it in this article. Ecrusized (talk) 12:23, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

Relevant: Turkey denies claims of use of its territory, airspace for US, Israeli strikes on Iran reported by Turkish Minute. 9ninety (talk) 12:45, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

Although, I'd say the source is relevant, as its less than a week before the event, and the US was already threatening to strike. So logistical support (like surveillance) seems plausible. 9ninety (talk) 12:49, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

I don't think countries should be added to the infobox section based on synthesis. Turkey also appears to have denied it. Ecrusized (talk) 13:03, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

@Ecrusized: I mean U.S. Air Force currently operating in İncirlik Air Base Elazığ Ahmet (talk) 19:25, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

Do you have a source for that? The source you cited does not mention that, as far as I can tell. 9ninety (talk) 19:31, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

@Elazığ Ahmet: U.S. Air Force has been operating Incirlik Air Base since 1955. That doesn't mean Turkey (or other countries hosting US bases) are involved in every war U.S. is fighting. Unless you mean U.S. aircraft taking off from Incirlik are striking Iran, or are refueling strike aircraft, what you're saying is WP:SYNTHESIS, which is a form of original research. Ecrusized (talk) 19:51, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

More images

There should be more images of drone attacks or explosions to better illustrate the article Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:39, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

There are penalties in many countries for sharing such media. jolielover♥talk 14:30, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Fair enough. Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 12:47, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Rewording casualties

Can the terminology for the infobox be standardized? 6 “service members” for US vs. “1500 military personnel” for Iran.

Some sources list the US deaths as troops. Perhaps calling them all military personnel or troops. KD0710 (talk) 22:27, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Uniformly using "military personnel" seems reasonable. Military personnel treats it as synonym with "service members", and infoboxes (like on United States Armed Forces) default to "personnel". – Scyrme (talk) 22:42, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

On "Casualties by Nationality" section

It includes 3 dead for the UAE, but as far as I'm aware one of the deaths was a Pakistani (or some other Asian) person in the UAE. It seems that what counts is not always consistent. Perhaps we make it so that it just counts how many dead/injured IN the country? Abudefduf221 (talk) 05:44, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Huge number of edit requests

There are a huge number of edit requests about this article at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Edit. They mostly look reasonable. Some may be out of date. This is what happens when a talk page gets protected, the edit request traffic gets shunted over there. Would some of the regulars here please go to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Edit and dispense with the requests? ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 20:32, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Qatari status in the conflict as of 17:40 CET, 2 March 2026

Resolved

Is Qatar pre-emptively downing Iranian aircrafts to be considered an offensive action? And if so, should they be moved from within their current location in the infobox? VitoxxMass (talk) 16:48, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

I question the listing label of defensive entirely. Parties to conflict can be listed as is. Gotitbro (talk) 18:16, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

 No my take is that, Iran was attcking qatar. Qatar had to down the aircraft purely for defense since they didn)t attack iran voluntarily RAPTOR7762^{Whats up?} 10:46, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Add strike on Turkiye and Turkiye to infobox

Add to the map and infobox as per sources: https://cyprus-mail.com/2026/03/04/turkey-intercepts-ballistic-missile-in-eastern-mediterranean VitoxxMass (talk) 12:13, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

6 or 12 US soldiers killed?

We might need to update the US casualties:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4gq33ynl07o?xtor=AL-71-%5Bpartner%5D-%5Bbbc.news.twitter%5D-%5Bheadline%5D-%5Bnews%5D-%5Bbizdev%5D-%5Bisapi%5D&at_campaign_type=owned&at_format=link&at_link_id=CF4BEA9A-16E7-11F1-A48F-9F0EFDE4C5DF&at_link_type=web_link&at_campaign=Social_Flow&at_medium=social&at_bbc_team=editorial&at_link_origin=BBCWorld&at_ptr_name=twitter

Im trying to make sense of this news page. Is it saying that on monday six US soldiers were killed in one blast, thereby making the total death toll 12? Or is it just saying 6 US soldiers have died over all. Genabab (talk) 14:55, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Six total. The six deaths are the only fatalities confirmed by the US military since it launched a new war against Iran… —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 15:19, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Inclusion of the Houthis

The Houthis have not launched an attack on Israel, the United States or any of its other allies. The Houthis should be removed until they do. JaxsonR (talk) 17:03, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and cut a section which unverifiably said Houthi Red Sea attacks restarted and went on into clear WP:CRYSTAL territory. I do expect WP:BRD Placeholderer (talk) 17:15, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Agreed, Houthis should be removed. Ecrusized (talk) 17:29, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Remove Houthis from the Infobox Ahammed Saad (talk) 18:17, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Unexplained removal of information

@Gotitbro why did you remove this edit among others?

</ref> The United States Department of State announced it is actively working on bringing Americans in the middle east home, and stated they are in contact with more than 3,000 Americans there.

References

You provided no edit summary.

Wikieditor662 (talk) 19:27, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

@Wikieditor662: That was due to an "edit conflict" (technical error when editors publish edits at the same time). Restored. Gotitbro (talk) 19:36, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you! If you don't mind me asking, how did the edit conflict lead to that removal? Wikieditor662 (talk) 19:41, 3 March 2026 (UTC)