Jump to content

Talk:Myanmar civil war (2021–present)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Map Updates (February)

[edit]

Nitpicks, Suggestions, and Maps:

Indisputable Edits:

Disputable Edits:

IdioticAnarchist (talk) 20:05, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CBA and CC I will leave separate for now.
All updated with following notes:
  • PDF/PNLA already in Nyaungshwe Township, no change made
  • Bagan Kwe and Nyaung Kyoe as well as the four bases in narinjara article are all in the same area, implemented
  • "Kim Poon Kyar"-> Kinmunchin Mountain is in a strange area, I attempted to verify since it would be a massive jump in the AA front through undeveloped mountains. The other villages mentioned in the article as having increased junta presence just doesn't make sense for AA to be suddenly in the middle of the lowlands. Have instead marked it as increased PDF presence near Thephyu, Thabaung Township. Also reduced presnece of PDF in the area due to lack of information I could find, especially east of Pathein river or on the Chaungtha road.
  • Areas around Sittwe -> Wabo village area, implemented
  • "Pinnaigone" Peinnegon in Kyaikhto Township already KNLA controlled, no change made
  • Taungkatoon already KA controlled, no change made
  • Kann Parr Ni/Yay Taw etc area already controlled by PDF, as it says anti-regime groups, no change made
  • Kyauk Khet already controlled by KNA. no change made.
Disputable Edits:
  • Sar Ou San added, it's very close to where AA already was a month ago (source says 5 miles from 344 not 344 itself)
  • KIA already in Manton Township, no changes made
  • Area near Point 1248 as described in article is already KNLA territory on map (Mae U Su, Thailand border)
EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 15:48, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

United monarchy Thai protest don’t want Myanmar refugees

[edit]

https://today.line.me/th/v2/article/LX9qjR2 Victory’s monarchy for Ultranationalist policy fight against Moving forward party about refugees 103.5.25.4 (talk) 10:18, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Only Terrorist religious who don’t want Myanmar refugees 2001:FB1:18D:1562:3168:68E6:6F33:C5FE (talk) 05:05, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Only Terrorist religious same religion who don’t want Rohingya refugees. 1.46.148.249 (talk) 11:56, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 27 March 2025

[edit]
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. (non-admin closure) Jeffrey34555 (talk) 05:16, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Myanmar civil war (2021–present) → Myanmar civil war – When people refer to the civil war in Myanmar, they 99.9% of the time refer to this one. We don't need to specify the date, same with the Gaza war which is just Gaza war even though there were about 17 other Gaza wars. Its just implied that you are talking about the most recent one. DotesConks (talk) 00:03, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Opposed. The conflict has gone on for decades and this article already very big. Context matters. This is just the latest phase in that civil war and it's significant enough to merit it's own article. Just look at the size of it. What people refer to somewhere and what is practical for wikipedia are imo different things. What ppl think probably say more about those ppls level of contextual knowledge rather than anything else. Which solution imo should be to better explain that context. A rename to something else than just plain Myanmar civil war would've imo been better and a date qualifier isn't an big enough confusing factor to prevent ppl finding this article with the Myanmar Civil War as an search word. Kennet Mattfolk (talk) 01:10, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Gaza war is a war within the gaza strip between Hamas and Israel, not a civil war within one country.. Pretty much every "ongoing" civil war article has the timeline date, for example Sudanese civil war (2023–present), Yemeni civil war (2014–present), Somali Civil War (2009–present). We can change the article title depending on the result after the civil war ends. Although in some terms you are right for the proposal, I think we should redirect Myanmar civil war into this page rather than the Myanmar conflict one. Imwin567 (talk) 02:57, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Myanmar civil war (2021–present) covers the current phase of the conflict. The wider conflict has been described as a civil war long before the 2021 coup. Yue🌙 05:29, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – As others said above, in order to keep the article coherent, it is important to limit its scope. If we broaden the scope, then the pertinent information that a would be reader is seeking would become buried in too much additional information. Sir Ross ★▀▀ (talk) 13:58, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose — Changing the title of the article will lead to confusion with the broader decades long conflict in the country. Kalpesh Manna 2002 (talk) 19:18, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Per Yue. Schweinchen (talk) 18:09, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Yue. Zinderboff (talk) 00:35, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: each article has its own scope (Wider coverage and specific coverage after 2021). Ninja✮Strikers «☎» 03:26, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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.

Simplify map in infobox

[edit]

The map in the infobox for this article is very detailed and well produced. However I think it has too much detail.

As a new reader of this page, the map has so many colours and labels that it is difficult to understand. Currently there are 22 different colours and groups represented on the map. Containing so much information reduces the value of the map as an illustrative tool.

I commend the care and attention that has gone into producing this map, but I think it is necessary to simplify it. Some changes could include:

  • Combining some groups together.
  • Changing colours so they align with high-level groupings. For example State Administrative Council forces could be shades of red and orange, National Unity Government could be blue and green, and noncombatant ethic groups could be pink and purple.

These are just suggestions but I’m interested to hear if anybody else has thoughts. Mr IKEA Shark (talk) 01:27, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I actually like the current map tbh, could be more detailed. That said it could use some embedded, like you see here, for all the acronyms. Thus the user could click the confusing parts and get clarity from the relevant wiki article. Kennet Mattfolk (talk) 01:43, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think the embedded links would be useful.
The issue is more that at a general glance it’s hard to understand what areas each high-level grouping controls. If you want to understand what area the National Unity Government controls then you have to keep track of 11 colours simultaneously on the map.
Maybe for the infobox a simplified map can be used then a more detailed map later in the article? Mr IKEA Shark (talk) 03:44, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I tried at one point but trying to get 18 shades of green that are all distinct is hard especially since pdf is all over the map and a lot of territories are noncontiguous and isolated towns controlled by a different group in the middle of other colours. I think there's a version that just colours all of them the same and simplifying all the infighting/distinct groups if I remember. EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 01:44, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Rn I'm focused on the earthquake article but I think when I update for March changes next week, I can make a version with colours so we can discuss in here. EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 01:45, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thats a fair point about the colours. That’s why I think it’s also necessary to combine some groups together, particularly many of the smaller ones such as Ramanya Joint Column.
I also suggested in a reply above, but maybe a simplified version can go in the infobox, then the current detailed version could go later in the article? Mr IKEA Shark (talk) 03:50, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I can definitely try that out and show it here at least. I think the hangups I personally have are because a lot of existing colours are already grouping dozens of smaller groups. In reality, NUG controls very little. Most of the groups are only alligned out of enemy-of-my-enemy and the current colours were chosen to reflect most likely fracture lines or identity groups. EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 03:56, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Simplified" map here to compare. I think the big issue is that a lot of the colours, even with distinct shades is still confusing overall. That and the inaccuracy of grouping some of them with the others. Like the two chin groups are fighting, the two shan armies are fighting and the "KNLA and friends" block has at least 100 different groups with different levels of allignment with the NUG that we've kind of abstractly considered. If we are to put it in the infobox I would be against putting it in the infobox. It could be in the body but any grouping beyond the existing detail is misleading. EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 20:17, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Map Update (March)

[edit]
  • Falam fighting continues. [1]
  • AA attacks Dhanyawaddy, advances onto Mala and Pyin Shae Villages [2] [3], taking Hnanmetaung [4]
  • AA attacks Nyaungyo, Bago [5]
  • AA takes towns near Pathein-Monywa highway in Lemyethna Township [6]
  • Junta retreats to Wetlu in Natogyi Township theatre [7]
  • Junta retakes Taungkham [8]
  • Junta is repelled from rural parts of Katha Township [9]
  • Junta-KIA Bhamo continues [10]
  • Junta forces near Twingge and 7-Mile, Thabeikkyin [11]
  • Junta pushes out of Bawlawkhe slightly. [12]
  • PDF presence at Mile 318 on Yangon-Mandalay highway. [13]
  • Yaw Army and others now indepedent- no map change still "PDF" [14]

Updated to MARCH 27 2025 only. Unclear news since earthquake on if any de facto changes. Likely that PDF are contesting Sagaing city for example. EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 20:05, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Myanmar_civil_war_(2021–present)&oldid=1284561678"