Jump to content

Talk:Axis of Resistance

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


Welcome

[edit]

This article was created to address a topic I was looking for on Wikipedia and did not find. Considering that I haven't done a lot on Wikipedia and would like to change that, I gladly welcome constructive and civil feedback to help improve this article and my future assistance on this site. BAKURA (talk) 18:43, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What is the source for the map?

[edit]

What do the colours mean and where does the map even come from? I'm not aware of any official treaty that unites all of those countries. If it is an "unofficial" grouping, who made it? Where was this reported? Esn (talk) 18:33, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Impartially

[edit]

this article seems to not a Impartially article the picture

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ca/Flickr_-_The_Israel_Project_-_Hezbollah%2C_Iran%27s_Front_Line.jpg

which made by the israel project that is in Jerusalem and Washington, DC

Are you people serious?

[edit]

"Axis"? Wow. Talk about propaganda. And of course there is a crazy political cartoon demonizing the topic of the article in it as well. Sheer propaganda, clearly FSA wrote this page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.45.52.222 (talk) 04:12, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Axis is term used by themselfs.

Axis of Resistance is a badass name Hibsiwakawam (talk) 23:05, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Axis of Resistance. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:29, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Infograph

[edit]

The infograph used in the article is against WP:LABEL, where the users are advised to avoid using "terror" (or its derivatives), "unless widely used by reliable sources to describe the subject, in which case use in-text attribution." There's no inline citation provided for the term used! --Mhhossein talk 20:18, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you, the claim needs to have an in line citation. Saff V. (talk) 07:29, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, seems to be a blatant violation of WP:LABEL. Much of the material in the infographic doesn't appear in the article itself either. Grngu (talk) 13:16, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Infograph is informative and attributed. You have a lot of sources at the bottom of the image, including Al Jazeera, New York Times and others.--יניב הורון (talk) 00:40, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. And it would be DUE to include the response of the target of this Axis of Terror[1][2][3] - including stating this alternative name in the lede. Hezbollah is considered a terrorist organization by multiple governments.Icewhiz (talk) 06:45, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There should be INLINE citations, an important point you are missing. --Mhhossein talk 16:48, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Axis of Terror

[edit]

I checked the three sources ([4], [5] and [6]) and in all of them the term is used by Israeli officials and it's certainly not an "alternative name" used by reliable independent sources for the subject. Although, there's a separate page for Axis of evil. On the other hand, there are sources showing that the alliance is know as the "Axis of Resistance":

  • "...what is known as the “axis of resistance,” a power bloc that includes Iran, Iraq, Syria, Hezbollah, and Hamas in Palestine."Foreign Affairs.
  • "The term resistance axis (jabhat al-muqawama) designates the alliance among the Islamic Republic of Iran, Syria and the strongest Arab non-state actors, the Lebanese Hezbollah and the Palestinian Hamas." Middle East Policy Council
  • "The world has long been hearing about the so-called “Axis of Resistance”, made up of..." Middle East Monitor
  • "Syria’s support for Iran has enhanced Tehran’s regional influence...and helped to consolidate an “axis of resistance” that ..." United States Institute of Peace.

While searching for "Axis of Terror" brings up almost no sensible result. --Mhhossein talk 18:59, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:ONUS, "The onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content." So, please avoid further reverts unless there's a consensus that the term is a widely used alternative name for the subject. --Mhhossein talk 19:07, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As we aren't dealing with a formal alliance - but rather an informal alliance (whose members seem to change) - we are mainly seeing sources aligned with Iran using one term, and those that are not using another. At times, the Iranian term is used in scare quotes in other sources - indicating that this is not quite an accepted term by neutral sources.Icewhiz (talk) 07:54, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No, using quotations does not mean the term is not neutral or otherwise. At the moment, this the term used by the sources and axis of terror is not an alternative. --Mhhossein talk 11:13, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree, "Axis of Terror" is not a widely used alternative name and should not be in bold. Also, Mhhossein's version is not accurate since it is attributing the term to "all Israeli officials" and there aren't reliable sources for this. In addition, It's original research and There need to be RS to make this generalization. I say 3 officials doesn't mean "all officials"."By its detractors" is Original Research, too, for the same reason. Saff V. (talk) 11:49, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article was edited based on above discussion. Saff V. (talk) 12:28, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I checked the edit, it's better now. I was searching for more details and saw that some reliable sources use "refer" for describing the term. For example the Reuters say "The “axis of resistance” refers to Shia...". --Mhhossein talk 12:58, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Reuters is using scare quotes - "axis of resistance" - and feels the need to explain a previous quote from Syrian TV. If the main sources using "axis of resistance" without quotes are Iranian aligned - we have a name problem. It might be best to redirect this page to Foreign relations of Iran.Icewhiz (talk) 13:18, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to me that this may be a WP:DICTDEF/WP:NOT fail. There was some initial use of this slogan as a counter to Axis of evil with a different set of countries, and then some subsequent use of this in relation to the Syrian civil war that is mainly Iranian (and not other sources).Icewhiz (talk) 13:23, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, the subject is notable enough and can stand alone on the basis of the numerous reliable sources deeply covering it and one may even find studies regarding it. As for the name, we need to adhere to the reliable sources and see how it's used. Furthermore, you can see some reliable non-Iranian sources using the term without quotations; See [7], [8], [9], [10] and etc. --Mhhossein talk 19:04, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Axis of resistance vs. ISIL; Not about ISIL

[edit]

The chapter about the "Axis of resistance vs. ISIL" says nothing about the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. In fact it makes no mention of the terrorist organization whatsoever. It's just about US support for the (former) Iraqi government. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 14:22, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Misspelling

[edit]

This article has a misspelling. Although the article title is "Axis of Resistance", the infobox has "Resistence", with an 'e' instead of an 'a'. Can someone with appropriate permission fix this? Thanks. Jkgree (talk) 23:41, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I have changed it SharabSalam (talk) 00:57, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced additions

[edit]

@RainbowSilver2ndBackup: sorry for pinging you but what you have added to the article recently is not sourced for example, China is part of axis of resistance? Also Russia? Could you bring sources that says that. I feel you are confusing this subject with another subject. thanks--SharabSalam (talk) 14:23, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 May 2020

[edit]
147.161.14.143 (talk) 09:53, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article "The Axis of Resistance: Time to Put Up or Shut Up" is no longer in the reported location. Its new location is this: https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20150128-the-axis-of-resistance-time-to-put-up-or-shut-up/ Please update.

 Done Naypta ☺ | ✉ talk page | 09:56, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 May 2020

[edit]

The link to Matthew Levitt's article about Hizbullah also doesn't work. This is the new address: https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/hezbollah-pulled-between-resistance-to-israel-and-defense-of-syria Please correct the link. 147.161.14.143 (talk) 09:57, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Naypta ☺ | ✉ talk page | 10:25, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

edit request pics

[edit]

Leadership background – Baratiiman (talk) 12:37, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To editor Baratiiman:  done, and thank you very much! P.I. Ellsworth  ed. put'r there 01:20, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 February 2021

[edit]
Balgard429 (talk) 13:27, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

hi. i wanted to edit the picture of hassan nasrallah because of the removal of the houthi's pic. I would be most grateful if you could give me permission for edit. thanks in advance.

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:35, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Short description?

[edit]

Before I add a controversial short description, should this article's short description be "Alliance of West Asian countries"? Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 09:23, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What about the wording in the lede "Political and strategic alliance between Iran, Syria and Hezbollah"? BobFromBrockley (talk) 09:19, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 July 2022

[edit]

Changing the Islamic Emirate to the Taliban as Afghanistan being the country they control already has that name. Johnnyboi123459 (talk) 09:53, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is this sufficient? Johnnyboi123459 (talk) 09:54, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:36, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Taliban is not part of this Axis of Resistance

[edit]

The Taliban have been criticised by most Iranian leaders (except one advisor) including Ahmadinejad (who is ideologically perhaps closest to them) and Esmail Ghaani; is not recognised by Iran; Tehran has a street named Panjshir Street in honour of the Afghani resistance; no official sources name it as part of the Axis of Resistance (and those that do refer to that single advisor). There have been instances of politicians referring to China and Russia as part of the 'Axis of Resistance' but it doesn't make it true.Angele201002 (talk) 20:47, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest changing the name of the alliance officially to the jerusalem axis / Quds Axis. Today on the quds day every single leader of each group mentioned the name being quds axis. And it can be certainly changed to an OFFICIAL military alliance. There has been operations by this alliance done in the past weeks rocket attacks against istael working as one alliance. 85.76.10.68 (talk) 17:36, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Russia

[edit]

Russia is an ally of Hezbollah and Syria. 2A02:3030:806:B016:1:0:205:B924 (talk) 01:54, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Who claimed Putin or Jinping to be a part of the Axis?

[edit]

I feel as though it is inappropriate to put Vladimir Putin or Xi Jinping as the leaders of the Axis without any sources. Even if it is supposedly claimed by the Axis which is also left without naming an individual party or body. The Axis of Resistance is not an official military alliance so who speaks for the Axis officially? Again, this is not sourced so we have no idea.

I also think it would be appropriate to put Hassan Nasrallah, the Secretary-General of Hezbollah, as one of the leaders instead since he's actually referenced this resistance in plenty of his speeches and is one of the greatest promoters, as Hezbollah provided the Syrian Arab Army the most ground forces throughout the Syrian civil war. I also believe Abdul-Malik al-Houthi should put on the list as the spiritual leader of the Houthis (also known as Ansar Allah).

It would be appropriate to keep Russia and China as allies of the Axis but not members of the Axis themselves.

I also believe the Iraqi militia Ashab al-Kahf (militant group) should be added within the Iraqi groups since it is not formally a part of the Popular Mobilisation Units.

If I could be granted editing permissions, I would gladly make sure to implement all of these changes. Thank you :) RamHez (talk) 17:49, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@RamHez Thank you for your insight. I'm wondering if the analysis on the Wiki page is too focused on state and larger militant organizations. Is there missing context concerning what is happening at the street level, among the people? Is it accurate to focus on who (largely far from the bloodletting) claims or is claimed to be leading this, without any discussion of who might be active at the civil level? 137.186.18.128 (talk) 12:30, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ideology section

[edit]

Why does it list it as right-wing? It is a big tent group comprised of various ideologies, such as Sunni Islamism (Hamas), Khomeinism, Ba’athism (which is a leftist ideology) and many Palestinian leftist groups. Syria’s government claims to be left wing and groups like PFLP are left wing or even far-left. NaniEmperor (talk) 02:55, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This really exists?

[edit]

Or it is more a name that is occasionally used to designate some groups and states, in a non-systematically way? MiguelMadeira (talk) 16:02, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Add Taliban to the infobox under Afghanistan

[edit]

Both Iranian leaders and major political analysts have placed the Taliban in the Axis of Resistance camp. If Hamas counts despite it's very loose involvement, the Taliban should count too. AmericanBaath (talk) 00:00, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 October 2023

[edit]

Indent the Wagner group under Russia, because let's face it, Wagner group is a proxy for the Russian Federation. Lostafacte (talk) 23:34, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Partly done: I've removed Wagner from the infobox altogether as it's unsourced. Agree that if restored it probably belongs with Russia. Elli (talk | contribs) 03:46, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 October 2023

[edit]

Hey, I would like to add that some of the members list such as Pakistan or Afghanistan are definitely not part of this Axis group. You listed Azerbijan while Azerbijan is an enemy of Iran and ally of Israel. Armenia is ally of Iran and enemy of Israel.

Pakistan is also an opponent of this alliance. Afghanistan (Taliban) is not official member, but only claimed by Iran. Taliban has never commented on this group. Cosmickadet (talk) 21:00, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 00:48, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 31 October 2023

[edit]

Next to "Opponents" in the sidebar, it says "State ppponents." This should be changed to fix the typo.

Change "State ppponents" to "State opponents" Bamiel1 (talk) 21:39, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done M.Bitton (talk) 23:47, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 November 2023

[edit]

Can somebody remove all of the state allies (and BRICS) except for Afghanistan, Algeria, and Venezuela, as well as state enemies? they all seem to fall under WP:SYNTH and WP:OR Joaquinazo (talk) 14:00, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: why just those? Please start a discussion about it so that the inclusion criteria could be defined. The rest will follow. M.Bitton (talk) 22:21, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Foreign relations of China

[edit]

The article has a number of China-related categories but it doesn't discuss the Axis' relationship to China at all. Special:Contributions/TheSands-12 05:24, 4 November 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheSands-12 (talk • contribs) [reply]

non-state allies

[edit]

Should Al-Aqsa Martyrs be the only non state ally from Palestine? Or are a lot missing? Irtapil (talk) 13:33, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Move groups from infobox to section

[edit]

Would it be worth moving the groups from the infobox to a table in the main text? Currently it looks cluttered and unhelpful. Could also be used to provide further information e.g. years active and country. ArcMachaon (talk) 19:27, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

False information

[edit]

ISIS and Al-Qaeda are NOT part of the Axis of Resistance... they are backed by Saudi/UAE, which are ANTI- Axis of Resistance Ma1919 (talk) 23:01, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Grammar

[edit]

“imposing a cost on the United States to support Israel” should read “imposing a cost on the United States' support of Israel” 86.31.178.164 (talk) 11:48, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unexplained deletions

[edit]

@Galamore and PeleYoetz: In you recent edits you made the following changes:

  1. You deleted ... to fight Israel's invasion of Lebanon . Why?
  2. You also deleted ... coordinating its members in the event of a major conflict with Israel. Why?
  3. You changed influence of Israel and United States into influence of United States and Israel. Why?
  4. You also removed Israeli historian Ilan Pappe's analysis in the analysis section. why?

Ghazaalch (talk) 10:27, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also to clarify, I reverted @האופה's latest edit as I believed @Ghazaalch's version had consensus, and was then reverted by @PeleYoetz who claimed actually the former has consensus, both both are mistaken.
In fact the consensus lede before it erupted into the edit-war a few weeks back was this one.
Then the lede was expanded with in my view some NPOV issues, and the edit-war commenced.
Rather than continuing with the edit-war, I think it's best to resolve issues you have with each version in talk. Raskolnikov.Rev (talk) 10:34, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Raskolnikov.Rev: If there is no consensus, we'll have to restore the old version and move the current version to the body. Ghazaalch (talk) 11:10, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Its undue for the lead in this article. This article is about the Axis of Resistance, so besides saying that Hezbollah was founded by Iran and is the main component in the alliance, there's no need to get into the historical context for the creation of each, so this is redudnant in lead and more relevant to the body.
  2. It's already there with different wording
  3. Doesn't really matter
  4. Pappe's analysis is irrelevant here, he is not speaking of the axis, only on his opinion that there's are no terrorist groups, just 'Palestinian resistance'.
HaOfa (talk) 13:16, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ghazaalch you seem to have violated 1RR, please self-revert yourself. HaOfa (talk) 13:16, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, if there is disagreement about what should be in the lede, as there clearly is, the consensus version should be restored until consensus is reached for a new version here. That's the best way to proceed instead of the edit-warring, and I hope all sides that can respect that. Raskolnikov.Rev (talk) 18:47, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I reverted to the old stable version until we can agree on a new version. Responding to the comment by @האופה: above, I am asking them some question:
  1. Why it is undue to say that Hezbollah ... fight Israel's invasion of Lebanon , but it is due to say that The coalition has also conducted attacks on Saudi Arabia? And why it is undue to write Iraqi branches of axis help fight ISIS (while we have a section on this in the body) but is due to mention US estimation on how much Iran spent on the axis (while there is no mention of such estimation in the body)?
  2. Why a statement like ... coordinating its members in the event of a major conflict with Israel should not be in the first paragraph of the lede but United states designating the axis as terrorist groups should be in the first paragraph?
  3. Why if it Doesn't really matter, you keep changing it?
  4. Why it is due to mention that that united states designate Hamas as a terrorist group, but it is not due to mention views that do not see it as a terrorist group?

Ghazaalch (talk) 10:25, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why we went back to version -1, when debate is surrounding the change from the seemingly well received 0, to version 1.
To continue the discussion:
  1. Since the lead (and the article) is about the Axis, not Hezbollah. and in that context, attacks by the Axis on Saudi Arabia are more due than historical background to the foundation of Hezbollah. This of course should have its place in the article, under the body's part of Hezbollah, not just for the lead
  2. Personally I think that both are relevant for the first paragraph
  3. The order really doesn't matter to me
  4. It's not Hamas, it's about the general fact cited by RS that most Axis members are considered terrorist organizations. That's how main sources apparently describe the axis.
HaOfa (talk) 12:55, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree on points 1, 2, and 3. I also be fine with placing the statement The U.S. designates most of these groups as terrorist organizations. at the end of the second paragraph instead of the first. PeleYoetz (talk) 13:32, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure I agree. The fact that the US (along other Western countries) designates these groups that way seems to be often mentioned when describing them on Western media. ABHammad (talk) 14:17, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PeleYoetz: they invoked a consensus that doesn't exist and your response is to revert my revert (to the stable version ) and ask me to participate in the discussion. Can you please explain why? M.Bitton (talk) 13:23, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The previous version has been on this page for several weeks and the debate now, as HaOfa reflects, is about more recent changes. PeleYoetz (talk) 13:30, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please link to the version that you're referring to and explain what makes it the "consensus version". M.Bitton (talk) 13:33, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PeleYoetz: pinging just to make sure you didn't miss the above request. M.Bitton (talk) 13:37, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Axis_of_Resistance&diff=1250450914&oldid=1250414625
Since this edit was made, all subsequent edits were executed above it, without reverting it. PeleYoetz (talk) 13:44, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PeleYoetz: 1) That version is different from the one that you restored. 2) You are still evading the question: what makes you think that the one that you restored has consensus? M.Bitton (talk) 13:50, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Since PeleYoetz is editing other article and no longer responding, I will note here that they made two factually statements to justify their revert: they falsely claimed that a consensus exists and when challenged, they also falsely claimed to have reverted to a stable version. I will also ping Raskolnikov.Rev given that their advice has been ignored in favour of edit warring. M.Bitton (talk) 14:05, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@M.Bitton
  1. Where did PeleYoetz say that there's a consensus for that version? or they have reverted to a stable version?
  2. This discussion should focus on substance, your comments seem not to do so.
  3. You should definitely tone down your style. It is not very respectful.
ABHammad (talk) 14:13, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please read the previous discussion. and refrain from casting aspersions (I won't stand for that). M.Bitton (talk) 14:18, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I read it, and I think you use the word 'falsely' too heavily and liberally. Please engage in the discussion, and comment on content, not on the contributor. ABHammad (talk) 14:26, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I strongly suggest you refrain from casting aspersions (this is the second time that you do it). M.Bitton (talk) 14:27, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
With this edit https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Axis_of_Resistance&diff=prev&oldid=1252684685 it seems you realise I haven't said anything on consensus with what HaOfa calls version 0 (though I do agree that the multiple edits done on version 0 ever since show that the real debate is about getting from 0 to what version of 1, so getting back to version 0 seems like the logical thing to do). Regarding your accusations of aspersion casting, I don't think there's anything here that's not formal and engaging by ABHammad. Could we focus, constructively, on the discussion above? PeleYoetz (talk) 14:40, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Focusing on the edits is all I've been doing (even pinging you to make sure you didn't miss my comments).
I haven't said anything on consensus 1) actions speak louder than words. You reverted a revert that questions (which consensus are you referring to?) an editor who claimed that there was consensus for their bold edit. In other words, you agreed with the bold edit and its rationale, and therefore, took responsibility for it. 2) you said The previous version has been on this page for several weeks and the debate now, as HaOfa reflects, is about more recent changes, which means that not only do you agree with the editor who made the initial claim of a non-existent consensus, but you are essentially claiming the existence of a stable version. 3) When I asked which stable version, you linked to one that looks different from the one that you reverted to. M.Bitton (talk) 14:52, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I restored the stable consensus version of the lede again, and I once more repeat my request to please stop edit-warring and continue the discussion here until we have consensus for how to change the lede, if at all.
My own two cents is that the former stable lede before it was edited and caused the edit-warring was fine, but I'm open to specific additions to be made as long as there are good arguments for it presented. Raskolnikov.Rev (talk) 18:38, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Palestinian groups

[edit]

We see that there is a mention that the axis shares an anti-Sunni ideology. This mistake must be corrected. Only groups that have explicitly declared that they are part of the axis should be included. EpicAdventurer (talk) 22:58, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What do we do about Syria?

[edit]

Assad has fallen in Syria, and none of the rebels are supportive of Iran. Do we remove Syria from the Axis of Resistance? Zapadoslavia (talk) 03:26, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wait until the dust settles for starters. Zerotalk 12:26, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What are we waiting to find out? 2603:9008:2101:E2F3:50C:768C:A98B:EEFB (talk) 18:56, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The new government isn't even fully formed yet and it can only be guessed what their foreign policy will look like. The most that is certain already is that the Assad government is overthrown. Zerotalk 00:50, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but the Assad government was the one serving as a member of the Axis of Resistance. Said government is already overthrown and we have no reason to believe the new one is going to take its place in that role. So I think removing Syria from the list is absolutely fair, unless there's something tangible we're waiting for. 2603:9008:2101:E2F3:2915:E8D7:13EA:4783 (talk) 05:26, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 December 2024

[edit]

At the end of the Syria section please add: The collapse of Syria's government and al-Assad seeking political asylum in Moscow, Russia in December of 2024[1] make Syria's place within the Axis of Resistance unclear. However, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham has publicly announced that they will attempt to form a government based on a Sunni Islamist ideology.[2] This would be contrary to Iran's Shitte ideology and Iran has withdrawn their government officials from Syria, so the country's support of Iran is currently unknown. CrownRecruit (talk) 08:31, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ https://www.nytimes.com/article/syria-civil-war-rebels.html
  2. ^ https://www.nytimes.com/article/syria-civil-war-rebels.html
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Axis_of_Resistance&oldid=1262043522"