Talk:2024 Ecuadorian conflict

The map I made.

Just want this to be clear, as I made it. Lukt64 (talk) 22:13, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

The map doesn't present any information in it's current form. There are no reports about whether there is disputed control over the countries territory. Ecrusized (talk) 22:22, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Well it *is* true that the TV centre is controlled by the gangs rn Genabab (talk) 22:27, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. The gangs don't 'control' any territory and are not claiming territory by any means. They are making demands from the government, none of which are land concessions. ViceViceBaby (talk) 23:13, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Completely agree. This map is not nessesary in the slightest, people don't need an overview of the whole country to understand that gangs are hold up in a TV station. TheBritinator (talk) 23:28, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

I suggest making a more zoomed-in version, there's currently no need to show the whole country. – Hilst [talk] 22:40, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

The situation is changing rapidly. Lukt64 (talk) 22:41, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Not rapidly enough to necessitate a map of that scale. You can barely even see the blue dot in the map, let alove the TV station's name. – Hilst [talk] 22:48, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Also add the university in Guayaquil where students were hiding to not get kidnapped. There are more things going in Cuenca where the inmates got a hold of the prison. 186.43.184.59 (talk) 22:54, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

I agree. I think it would be better to have an ordinary map of Ecuador that labels the notable sites involved (the tv station, university, and prisons that have been taken over). Mapperman03 (talk) 23:44, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

The existence of this map implies that the situation will ever expand to cover the entirety of Ecuador. It probably won't. At worst, using a map of a select city, or select cities, would be necessary, unless it's clear this'll become that wide a conflict. - presidentofyes, the super aussa man 23:32, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

How is this a civil war/conflict

Its literally just a gang taking over a tv station Gorgonopsi (talk) 23:05, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

There have been other incidents beyond the TV Station hostage situation that can warrant the term conflict. Especially considering the President's response to the situation by declaring an 'internal armed conflict'. ViceViceBaby (talk) 23:12, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

https://apnews.com/article/ecuador-violence-attacks-emergency-gangs-prison-12f01b66f3fd523fcdca04e729aa27af

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/01/09/ecuadoran-president-declares-armed-conflict-gunmen-storm-tv-studio/ Lukt64 (talk) 23:12, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Why does the article even exist? We had Ecuadorian security crisis but it was removed in a problematic Afd that I refuted in a long rant on another site.

This ought to be merged to a remade Ecuadorian security crisis. - presidentofyes, the super aussa man 23:25, 9 January 2024 (UTC) I was yapping extensively here, I no longer support a merge - presidentofyes, the super aussa man 00:01, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

If, God forbid, the situation worsens into full scale armed conflict, then it could be separated into a different section on a "Gang war in Ecuador" (similar to Gang war in Haiti), with the violence preceding the war being in an article like Ecuadorian security crisis, or something similarly named. But if not, I see no reason for a separate article at the moment, especially when an article covering the overall issue had been merged for faulty reasons. - presidentofyes, the super aussa man 23:30, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

I would be inclined to agree, but with the situation still developing there's not much saying whether it could escalate or not. If it dies down and doesn't come to much then yes I would say merge it, but we'll just have to wait and see. TheBritinator (talk) 23:31, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

This article is about the 2024 events connected to Noboa's declaration of an "open armed conflict". The AfD was months before the current events even happened.
Also, some pages on alternatehistory.com (like this one) aren't accessible to people without an account. ChaotıċEnby(t · c) 23:31, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Having been on the site for months, I'm not sure how I forgot that. Anyways:

"I've noticed that the Wikipedia article for the "Ecuadorian security crisis"- at 40k bytes- was merged into the article "Crime in Ecuador"- at 5k bytes before the merger. The merger supposedly took place because of "improper synthesis", which is BS considering how all of the events listed in the chronology of the violence are certainly proper parts of the overall security crisis. Plus, some editors suggested that "security crisis" isn't even a proper term, which is incorrect."

I proceeded to list 15 news articles using the phrase "security crisis" to describe the events in Ecuador.

Really, a merger isn't necessary and I'm not sure why I pushed for one 16 minutes ago, but Ecuadorian security crisis ought to be remade still- this event is part of it, even if significant enough to warrant its own article. I'll do that some time, and explain my reasoning when I do - presidentofyes, the super aussa man 23:41, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

This appears to be a unique event in and of itself. Yes, part of an on-going security crisis, but a flare up that warrants its own article in my opinion. I do not think 'civil war' is an appropriate term for it, 'conflict' or 'emergency' seem appropriate. Mapperman03 (talk) 23:42, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Restore the article "Ecuadorian security crisis"

Contrary to what the title suggests, this public security crisis in Ecuador did not begin in 2024. It has been occurring since at least 2020: there were several riots and massacres in prisons, bomb attacks and shootings in 2022, and last year a candidate the presidency was assassinated by a gang.

I think it would be better to restore the article Ecuadorian security crisis to better organize the subject and describe here only recent events.--Fontaine347 (talk) 12:34, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

I've done so. - presidentofyes, the super aussa man 21:26, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

WikiProject banners

I removed the banner for WikiProject Law enforcement from the talk page banner list because the project scope explicitly excludes "Crime and criminology, sociology, law, and similar topics that are related to police work but are more concerned with society or the criminal justice system overall than law enforcement alone." This means it also excludes civil disorder even though police are involved in regaining order. If you disagree, please discuss or explain why the banner should be reinstated. Also see WP:PROJSCOPE and WP:OVERBANNER. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 21:20, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Goverment of Ecuador

Should the info-box say Goverment of Ecuador or just Ecuador? I think because the president declared a state of war and the county is united against the violence, it should just say Ecuador. LuxembourgLover (talk) 14:10, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

It implies that the criminal gangs are not Ecuadorian citizens, which is not the case. Borgenland (talk) 14:12, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Should the map be added back?

There is currently multiple different wikis that use the map, most notably the spanish version of the conflict, which is the most detailed version of the article. The map has also been updated to include many more cities, and gang controlled territory Lukt64 (talk) 14:31, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

I'd wait until the deletion discussion is over to even begin discussing this. – Hilst [talk] 17:34, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Article titles and organization

I've seen that some of you have been discussing on how to describe the events that have been occurring in Ecuador recently and I have a history of organizing article titles on the project and making their names consistent. Looking at the current title, "2024 conflict in Ecuador", it seems like it can be simplified per WP:NCE (When the incident happened. Where the incident happened. What happened.) into "2024 Ecuadorian conflict". Now, I remember previously editing Internal conflict in Peru and noticed that there is a consistency when naming similar articles, especially with Internal conflict in Myanmar, Internal conflict in Azawad, Internal conflict in South Sudan and other articles. Currently, Internal conflict in Ecuador redirects to this article ("2024 conflict in Ecuador").

So, I wanted to ask, should this article maintain the "2024 conflict" title or should Ecuadorian security crisis be renamed to "Internal conflict in Ecuador" and the "2024 conflict" can be part of the Internal conflict in Ecuador?

@Lukt64, Ecrusized, Genabab, ViceViceBaby, TheBritinator, Hilst, Mapperman03, Presidentofyes12, Gorgonopsi, Chaotic Enby, Fontaine347, Cameron Dewe, LuxembourgLover, and Borgenland: Pinging you all as you were previously involved. I know that you have been discussing whether or not this is a conflict or not, but that is why I'm reaching out to you all so we can brainstorm better organization regarding this topic. WMrapids (talk) 17:57, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Crisis is an understatement in this matter. And the comparisons with other internal conflicts can seem like a bit of a mockery when you compare criminal gangs to more organized rebel groups who can be bothered to have a clear political ideology (rather than solely commercial interests), uniforms and/or support from foreign governments. As such, I support retaining the current title. Borgenland (talk) 18:08, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Agree with the idea of renaming it to "Internal conflict", which doesn't necessarily imply a level of organization or ideology from the combatants in my opinion. I don't know too much about Ecuadorian history, is there any need for disambiguation? I don't think the pre-2024 part of the security crisis rises to the level of internal conflict, at least. ChaotıċEnby(t · c) 18:08, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

I agree with the security crisis aspect, perhaps looking into renaming it into internal conflict may be a more appropiate disambiguator. TheBritinator (talk) 18:38, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

I think if the government is willing to call it an internal armed conflict, it probably is one Genabab (talk) 20:05, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

 Comment: @Borgenland, Chaotic Enby, TheBritinator, and Genabab: We now have the "War on Drugs in Ecuador" article created by Moondragon21. Should we merge some of these articles? It seems we have multiple articles telling something similar.--WMrapids (talk) 01:18, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

• Perhaps they could be merged. I just translated the article from Spanish and the conflict dates back to 2018. With the new situation this year, maybe wait and see how the conflict develops before making a final decision. Moondragon21 (talk) 01:36, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

  @Moondragon21: Do you object to the merger? Both Ecuadorian security crisis and War on Drugs in Ecuador say that both events began around 2018.

  What we can do is provide a merged "Background" section, add the "Belligerents" section from "War on Drugs in Ecuador" into "Ecuadorian security crisis" and then merge some of the confrontations into the timeline. Does that sound okay to you? WMrapids (talk) 05:33, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

  @WMrapids: The War on Drugs in Ecuador is much older than the recent security crisis. To properly cover the subject that article probably needs to go back at least into the 1990's and explore the relationships between politics and drugs. The recent events since 2017 are merely icing over a much older issue. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 01:49, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

• @WMrapids and @Moondragon21: I see the "War on Drugs in Ecuador" article as a country level article related to the War on drugs. It probably should not be merged with either the 2024 conflict in Ecuador or article about the Ecuadorian security crisis, which I see as being complimentary articles. The 2024 conflict in Ecuador article should primarily deal with the current 2024 events, while the Ecuadorian security crisis should serve as providing deep background and a timeline of events leading up to the current conflict. I do think it is quite consistent with the naming of other event related articles to include the year, at least at this stage. Those other conflicts have no year in the title because they are protracted conflicts over multiple years. This Ecudorian conflict, on the other hand, looks more like a brief explosion of violence that will be brought back under control relatively quickly. However, if the conflict continues for more than a year, renaming could be reviewed then. The future is unpredictable. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 02:46, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

• I object to the merge because I think its premature to assume 2024 Ecuadorian conflict will become the same as War on drugs in Ecuador so we should give it some time as its a moving picture. - Moondragon21 (talk) 17:29, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

  @Moondragon21 and Cameron Dewe: Alright, that makes sense. It looks like it's best to wait and see what happens. Thanks for the feedback!--WMrapids (talk) 04:18, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

• This page's title has been bugging me since I first saw it. I get the situation is somewhat difficult to describe, but calling the situation just "conflict" would probably be confusing to our readers. I think it should be synchronized with either the war on drugs page or the security crisis page. We indicate the security crisis to be part of the war on drugs and these events to be part of the security crisis. I feel like the best solution is to A. expand the "Armed confrontations" section of the war article B. expand this month's section in the security crisis article and C. indicate this article is an expansion upon that section. This is not to dissimilar to how many war articles are so heavily broken down into child articles because there is so much to write. That, or we could honestly just merge into a larger section of the Ecuadorian security crisis or War on drugs in Ecuador articles. Almost all of the text on this page is "background" which should be in the parent articles anyway, and "reactions", a stock section we put in way too, any articles and really doesn't matter anyway. That leaves all of 583 words of prose left in the body. Not an unwieldy amount to be merged, especially because the parent article is a lame bulleted list of events and should be beefed up anyway, and the...grandparent[?] article also needs expansion as well. DarkSide830 (talk) 06:34, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Article title moved

Well, I made the bold edit and moved the article title per WP:NCE. If you have any objections, feel free to revert it and we can discuss the title. Thanks for all of your participation thus far!--WMrapids (talk) 05:28, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Support

What are the requirements to add Supported By in the info box? The untied states have sent advises and meterlas.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-01-12/us-sending-general-top-state-department-officials-to-ecuador

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-01-10/ecuador-gets-pledge-of-us-aid-to-fight-cartel-terror-campaign

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-01-10/ecuador-gets-pledge-of-us-aid-to-fight-cartel-terror-campaign

(IDK why I can’t just uses the references tool) LuxembourgLover (talk) 19:11, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

• You have to add references to infoboxes in source mode. Moondragon21 (talk) 22:08, 13 January 2024 (UTC)