Talk:List of ongoing armed conflicts

The table links to a source that includes in its casualty list deaths from the Israel Palestine conflict, but to get the final number the editors added those to the previous number thus double counting them. What's more, the source itself already double counts casualties because it includes dead from the 1947-1949 war twice.

But, on top of this, the source is confusing but is incorrectly cited. It lists conflicts with parties to them, not the casualties caused by them. Comparing the source to the pages for each of the conflicts in question produces much smaller estimates. For example, read incorrectly, the linked source suggests that some ~58,000 (60,000 across conflicts) people have died in wars between Israel and Lebanon, when even the highest Lebanese estimates are 20,000. Estimates range from 13,000-15,000 at the lower end, and 18,000-34,000 at the higher end (and that's with double counting in civilian and combatant casualties as it is !). This means that EVEN WITH THE SOURCES IN QUESTION, THE CASUALTY RATE OF THE CONFLICT IS AT MINIMUM 24,000 SMALLER, and up to 45,000!.

When we account for the double counting, this results in a reduction of 14,000-27,000--so the numbers are 38,000-72,000 smaller.

Adding up the casualty estimates provided on the wikipedia pages for each conflict, before adding the Israel-Palestine numbers gets us a range of 57-115. The Israel Palestine conflict page lists 53-65. Except, more than half of these are already included in the previous estimate. HOWEVER, even if we do not account for this we get a range of 110-168,000. Now if we add the recent Gaza war-which, again would be double counting in part--we would add 43,000.

This means that even if we triple count Palestinian casualties listed on the wikipedia pages, our total rises to 153,--210,000--and EVEN THAT includes deaths not caused by Israel, double counts many victims, counts missing as dead, and so on.

Even if we add Israelis killed in terrorism and riots (5-15,000 depending on how we count), Palestinians killed in intra-Palestinian violence (2000), The war of the camps between Lebanon and the PLO (4500--6500) and deaths in Black September between Jordan and Palestine (4000 in official estimates, but Arafat claims 15,000 Palestinians killed by Jordan, which would put the total at 16,000) we would get 15-40,000 more deaths and that would put our total at 168-250,000.

While the latter estimate is larger than the one listed on the page, this one includes 25,000 Palestinians killed by Lebanese, Jordanian, and Palestinian forces, it double counts a portion of Israeli terror victims (soldiers who died in terror attacks are listed in both war and civilian casualty estimates, and thus over state the estimates), while taking the higher estimate of those dead--thus increasing the estimate by up to 30,000.

It double counts the dead prior to 1948, it double counts the dead in the 47-49 war, it triple counts Palestinian casualties in wars since the first intifada, it counts all those who have died in Lebanese wars, even those who were not killed by Israel (indeed including even those who died in wars before Israel even got involved!), it takes the higher estimates of dead in every conflict, even where US, & Israel estimates VASTLY lower, UN estimates are much lower, and independent Arab state & Human Rights organization estimates are somewhat lower.

The double and triple counting adds 35,000-80,000 deaths. Taking the highest estimates adds 57,000.

Notably, adding together the total casualties from more reliable sources gets us 122,000 before the recent war, and then 43,000 for the recent war, bringing us to 165,000!

Notice, this brings us a very similar estimate to taking the lower estimate from all the respective wikipedia pages for each of the episodes of the Israel Palestine conflict.

Since independent sourcing leads to a similar estimate to the one produced by using other wikipedia sources at the lower end, this is a good indicator it is of reliability, especially since getting the higher estimates requires that up to 14% (35/250) - 40% (80/193) of the casualties attributed are Palestinians, Lebanese, Syrians and Jordanians killed by other Palestinians, Lebanese, Syrians, and Jordanians, and it requires taking the higher estimate in every case, which accounts for 23% (57/250) -- 50% (58/115) of the deaths. If 55% of a casualty estimate ((57+80)/250) depends on attributing deaths of people killed by other states, and taking the higher estimate of casualties in every single case, chances are the estimate is off!

Thus, the page here: 1. incorrectly cites a source 2. misrepresents that sources claims 3. cites a source which itself engages in double counting and unclear attribution 4. does not line up with the other wikipedia pages' conflict estimates or those of their sources *EVEN AT THEIR HIGHER END* 5. to be true requires an estimate that requires 14-40% of the deaths be those caused by other states, and 23-50% of the casualty estimates are due to taking the higher range of each estimate, with a combined effect that 55% of casualties are tendentiously attributed 6. does not line up with independent sourcing

Meanwhile, another estimate (165,000), which: 1. Uses independent sources 2. Minimizes double counting 3. Only attributes deaths caused by Israel 4. Lines up with the lower estimates of the relevant wikipedia pages and their sources 5. Is self consistent 6. Strikes a moderate balance between the estimates of US, Israel, UN, Arab League, Hamas, PLO, Hezbollah, Jordan, Egypt, Syria, academics and so on 7. Lines up with the cited source for this wikipedia page *IF* considerations are taken to interpret it correctly (which would give us a base of 114-159,000, to which we would add the 43,000 of the recent war, giving us 157,000--210,000

Thus, the estimate of 165,000 lines up with the: 1. Other wikipedia pages 2. Their sources 3. Independent sources 4. The *VERY SOURCE USED FOR THIS PAGE* if properly interpreted

THUS EVEN BY THE STANDARDS OF THE SOURCES CITED THE ESTIMATE GIVEN ON THE PAGE IS INFLATED BY 50%! A FULL THIRD OF THE CASUALTIES LISTED ARE IMPROPERLY ATTRIBUTED OR COMPLETELY FABRICATED !

This does not require using Israeli or US estimates (which are *lower* than the 165,000 estimate!). In fact, it holds even if we use the estimates of Arab states (the highest ones--which would produce at the highest 210,000 as above), human rights organizations (the second highest), or scholarly academic sources (those in the median range).

US and Israeli sources would give us a total estimate somewhere near 100-120,000

UN, Human Rights organization and Academic sources give us our middle range of 165,000.

The highest estimates give us a total of 210,000.

Notice further that the middle range estimate of 165,000 is roughly the mean of the lower, medium, and high estimates. This is further indication of its validity since it balances opposed viewpoints and expertises.

Thus, the casualty range for the Israel Palestine conflict should--to be charitable to all the different perspectives and viewpoints--read something like:

Deaths:

165,000 (110,000--210,000)

Not the current 230-241,000 which is false even on its own terms!

Source used by article ^[1]

Other sources: ^[2]

^[3]

^[4]

^[5]

^{[6] [7] [8]}

^[9]

I made a table of the estimates given in the source linked for this page, and added below it the estimates given by other wikipedia pages:

^[10] -- 20:14, 24 September 2024 38.130.70.73

At the moment, according to the minimally recorded obituaries on both sides, the number of deaths should exceed 120 thousand people; the information in the article is outdated: 1) 54,000+ dead on the Russian side https://en.zona.media/article/2022/05/11/casualties_eng 2) 46,000+ dead on the Ukrainian side https://ualosses.org/ 3) 10,000+ civilian deaths https://ukraine.un.org/en/253322-civilian-deaths-ukraine-war-top-10000-un-says 4) there is no point in proving the number of deaths before a full-scale war, I think these numbers are already in the public domain: approximately 14,000 people

You have some 100,000 victims listed, it can no longer be such a low estimate, I ask you to remove this

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I suggest updating the Sudan entry in the section 'Conflict deaths in the 2020s'. Currently the section'Deaths in the 2020s' lists 30,078 deaths for Sudan, this is allegedly based on ACLED data but their own website confirms this is false. My calculations of their data get the number 45,700, but the large majority of other researchers estimate much higher. Therefore I suggest changing 30,078 to a minimum of 45,700+.

In this article published on 12 December 2024, ACLED estimates the total fatalities from the start of the conflict in 2023 to November 2024 as 28,700: ^[1]https://acleddata.com/report/foreign-meddling-and-fragmentation-fuel-war-sudan

"ACLED records over 28,700 reported fatalities by the end of November 2024". In the same article they acknowledge that some researchers estimated 150,000 dead already back then.

In the ACLED article published 11 December 2025 they state: 'From 1 January to 28 November 2025: Conflict-related violence resulted in the deaths of over 17,000 people across Sudan."

^[2]'https://acleddata.com/report/fighting-moves-kordofan-sudans-east-west-divide-solidifies'

Therefore to find the total death toll, we can add those two numbers together: 28,700 + 17,000= 45,700. Furthermore, ACLED reports excluded the deaths that occurred in the month of December 2024 and from December 11, 2025 onwards to present. Thus we can conclude that even 45,700 is surely an underestimate.

Even this is highly likely to be an extreme undercount and is much lower than stated on multiple Wikipedia pages; for example the page ^[3]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Fasher_massacre estimates 60-68,000 dead just from this one aspect of the larger Sudanese Civil War. The same page says "Kholood Khair of the Khartoum-based Confluence Advisory think-tank estimated that 100,000 people were killed but noted that there were no official figures due to the lack of governance in the region.[62]"

^[4]https://www.humanitarianactionsudan.org/what-is-happening-in-sudan estimates 200,000 dead.

^[5]https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cjel2nn22z9o Estimates more than 150,000 dead. Hybaphile2000 (talk) 19:36, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before posting an edit request.

Ultimately this is WP:OR or WP:SYNTH, although ACLED admits their number to be an underestimate, no single source can verify your purported death toll. I would recommend establishing a consensus for this change. Pr0m37h3u$ 10:12, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Uptade Conflict deaths in the 2020s LtPsyche (talk) 06:27, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please detail the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Pr0m37h3u$ 10:35, 30 January 2026 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please detail the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.
— Urro^{[talk][edits]} ⋮ 17:46, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

I've noticed that the "deaths by country" table doesn't have any data for 2025, why's that? Can somebody update it?

On a semi-related note, I think the "deadliest conflicts in the 2020s" table should be transferred to the Military history of the 2020s page, as the table contains conflicts that are already over, such as the Tigray War. PortugueseWikiMan (talk) 08:41, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

FIXED VERSION:

I've noticed that the "deaths by country" table doesn't have any data for 2025, why's that? Can somebody update it?

On a semi-related note, I think the "deadliest conflicts in the 2020s" table should be transferred to the 2020s in military history page, as the table contains conflicts that are already over, therefore not ongoing, such as the Syrian Civil War or the Tigray War. PortugueseWikiMan (talk) 08:44, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

Why isnt the Korean Conflict in here? Christianhatley527 (talk) 00:51, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

I believe there isn't any known reported death in current or past year. Whitesin21 (talk) 13:39, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Following the closure at ##Rfc: Use of ACLED data, please provide specific instructions as to how the precise figure is obtained for each and every use of the ACLED Explorer and Dashboard. Note that continuing to stonewall by refusing to provide this information (which has occurred repeatedly before and during the Rfc) will simply result in the removal of the reference(s). Further note that any update of any entries using ACLED Explorer and Dashboard in the article without providing the requested information will be treated as stonewalling. FDW777 (talk) 15:16, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I am not sure if you're referring to me and I'm in no way stonewalling. I've already provided information as to how ACLED is being used in this page, ACLED methodology is available to everyone. Every incident is recorded as a separate event and it has specific date, location, actors, type and fatality count, these are not estimates or projections, they are the sum of individual events that match the reports of the website, they come from a structured filtering process of the Explorer and the aggregated data, all selected events match the criteria, the Explorer and the data provide the number of events and sums the fatalities for these events. So, event count is the total number of events that match the criteria and fatalities is the sum of reported deaths for these events, it is a direct aggregation of coded events, not a modeled estimate. It is a real time calculation and numbers change weekly, monthly and even yearly, after 1 year there are still changes to the recorded events. ACLED provides the disaggregated event database for these figures and it counts all individual coded events that match the criteria and sums their reported fatalities. Again, some events may go unreported and numbers change by the hour, especially in ongoing conflicts, the numbers are precise within this database, when we are talking about this reference. Basically, the figure is a structured count of reported incidents, transparent and reproducible and based on documented sourcing, it isn't an estimate or a claim about the absolute total number for every conflict, there is no such source or reference available, especially one that is updated weekly like ACLED. I hope I was as helpful as possible. Whitesin21 (talk) 13:56, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

I'm referring to anyone who updates the article. As requested above, please provide the specific steps needed to obtain casualty figures for every conflict ACLED is used as a reference for. I see no conflict breakdown in ACLED data, only country breakdown. FDW777 (talk) 14:01, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

I've already provided the specific steps needed to obtain these figures for every conflict ACLED is used as a reference. ACLED data obtain casualty figures by revealing events belonging to each conflict and then summing the fatalities column. That's why ACLED has filters such as which are the actors in the conflicts, government or armed groups and this is how you separate one conflict from other violence occurring in the same country, you can separate battles from other political violence for example and the fatality number across all filtered events give the precise figure for that operationalised conflict definition. It does not prevent conflict level breakdowns, conflicts are extracted analytically by actor combinations, geographic boundaries and timeframes and this is standard in event-data conflict research. Even if multiple conflicts occur inside one country at the same time, you can use actor filters to isolate each dyad or restrict specific subnational regions, this is what ACLED is doing in the reports. Again, to obtain casualty figures for a specific conflict, operationalize filters such as, geographic scope, time range and relevant actors and the sum will be available and reproducible figure for the defined conflict, conflict level figures are obtained through structured filtering, hope this helps, it does not get any clearer than this. Whitesin21 (talk) 14:12, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

That's a general answer. I want the specific, individual steps for each conflict. FDW777 (talk) 14:14, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

No, this isn't a general answer actually, there is one standardized method, applied differently depending on how the conflict is operationalized, the steps are identical every time, only the filters change. ACLED provides event-level data. To obtain casualty figures for any conflict, the same structured method is being used each time, define the conflict geographically and temporally, filter by relevant actors, optionally filter by event type and then sum the fatalities for the events. Identical steps, not hard to understand, that is why ACLED has actor filtering, conflict level figures are derived through structured filtering of the event dataset. Whitesin21 (talk) 14:22, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

I note that my question Could someone please give me a simple, precise answer as to how the 2024 and 2025 casualties for the "Insurgencies in Pakistan" (860 and 985 respectively) and the "Cameroonian conflicts" (2,228 and 1,628 respectively) are obtained from the ACLED Explorer which is the sole reference cited for both conflicts? asked at 09:19, 22 December 2025 remains unsatisfactorily answered to this day, except for the reply by Miguel.lima in a totally different section at 22:51, 10 December 2025 which makes it explicitly clear original research is taking place to obtain figures for Pakistan. FDW777 (talk) 14:07, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Like I said, conflicts like the ones in Pakistan, are extremely difficult to keep track of, since there is not any useful or trustworthy sources available there, numbers change frequently, feel free to add any reliable sources for these conflicts. Whitesin21 (talk) 14:14, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Sorry I'm confused. First you're claiming you've provided the instructions, now you're saying you can't provide the instructions because it's "difficult to keep track of". How many more conflicts are "difficult to keep track of"? FDW777 (talk) 14:20, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

I already did provide them, yes, I only said it's a difficult conflict, for obvious reasons. Whitesin21 (talk) 14:22, 4 March 2026 (UTC)

Where? Please provide an exact link to diffs where you say you've provided specific instructions for each individual conflict listed on this page. I require you to provide the specific steps for each conflict, including detailing the figures you obtain at each step and how you are using those figures. FDW777 (talk) 18:39, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

In fact let's just keep this simple with the first entry in the article. Please provide the exact steps you use, including any figures obtained and calculations made, to obtain the 2025 casualties of 15,695 and the 2026 casualties of 2,028 from the ACLED Explorer for the Myanmar conflict. FDW777 (talk) 18:45, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

You do know I already answered to the way ACLED is working and that the steps are identical for each conflict right? It's right there, in this same conversation that we're having? Is it too hard to understand how ACLED is working and the methodology behind it? Whitesin21 (talk) 09:19, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

I explained the steps, I will do it again, but you're not anyone to demand anything, show respect and behave properly. Whitesin21 (talk) 09:32, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

For the Myanmar conflict and for every conflict, you want access to the whole dataset? ACLED database contains thousands of individual events per conflict per year, it is realistically impossible to list everything here, you really expect me to list every event row and its fatalities value? this is exactly what ACLED is for, the steps are identical and the example is reproducible with actual calculation logic, through the events row from the dataset, which contains every conflict event, that is why ACLED provides aggregated totals and downloadable CSV files instead of displaying each addition and every calculation step. ACLED stores individual events with a fatalities variable to obtain these numbers, you filter the dataset by country, time, violent event types and actors involved, government vs rebel groups, rebel groups vs rebel groups, it is not a crime related dataset. The figure is simply the sum of the fatalities across these events of the dataset. Whitesin21 (talk) 14:21, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

This whole process I just explained clearly points to what I already said, the procedure is identical every single time, there are no separate steps per conflict, only the filters defining the conflict change and the aggregation is performed from the event level data collection. Whitesin21 (talk) 14:29, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please add the Usa air strikes on Iran to this article and update it to the current time ~2026-14410-28 (talk) 02:10, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Already done The 2026 Iran war is already included, its in the second entry on the list. ScrubbedFalcon (talk) 19:59, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Template:Ongoing military conflicts have some conflicts that isn't on here (e.g.: Korean conflict). This article have some conflicts that isn't on Template:Ongoing military conflicts (e.g.: 2026 Iran war). Phudeptrai47540370870 (talk) 06:07, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

this happens because there aren't any deaths, at least officially reported, in the current or past year, therefore it cannot be included in this page, there are other ongoing conflicts that aren't present here as well. Whitesin21 (talk) 23:34, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

ddd ~2026-19794-12 (talk) 01:48, 12 April 2026 (UTC)