"==Discussion about the name of the article==
Earlier discussions
Talk:2006 Israel-Lebanon crisis/Archive1#Discussion about the name of the article
Summary: Consensus for 2006 Israel-Lebanon crisis.
Talk:2006 Israel-Lebanon crisis/Archive3#Discussion about the name of the article
Summary: Name change from crisis to conflict.
Talk:2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict/Archive8#Discussion about the name of the article
Summary: Poll for changing the name of the article, either to war or Hezbollah.
Please do not change these archived discussions. Instead restart discussion on this talk page.  
Talk:2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict/Archive14#Discussion about the name of the article;
Latest Developments
""War"" Poll (This Poll is closed now - ) (results below)
Time to rename article to ""war""?

Result & Discussion of the 'War' Poll Results
Results:
 9 Users opposed the renaming
 17 Users supported the renaming

Discussion:
 Still, this topic is controversial and therefore before changing anything this should be discussed here.
 Please feel free to come up with ideas for a new lemma inculding war  

Including Hezbollah in the name
I would include the name of Hezbollah in the title for four reasons:
1) They instigated the conflict
2) They are one of the primary military force currently engaged
3) This is not a war between two soverign countries as the title suggests
4) While they are part of the Lebanon government, thier military arm has seperate command and control

user:mnw2000 
I agree. It should be Israel-Hizbollah_conflict, Lebanon has little to do with it.  
 I agree, Lebanon army is not a participant, though casualties are mostly Libanese. 'Libanon' in the name is false.  
 Hezbollah is acting independantly of Lebanon, so Hezbollah should be in the name instead of Lebanon.  

I agree as well. Technically, it is not the Israel-Lebanon conflict but the Israel-Hezbollah conflict. Lebanon's troops are not involved. Israel is not targeting Lebonan but Hezbollah. Unfortunately, Hezbollah has established itself in the middle of Lebanon.

No. Use the example of the existing name in 1982 Lebanon War 

How about this compromise The Israel-Hezbollah War in Lebanon (2006) any thoughts. 

Agree with TheFEARgod. Conflict or TheFEARgod's use of War is Neutral. The examples used to cite use of the term ""war"" are of concern.  Should Hezbollah sources which refer to fighting as ""Sixth-Arab-Israeli war"" make it sensible to use that?  Each side aims for certain propaganda/morale advantages when using term ""war"".  Why are editors so eager to have this article renamed to a war?  I can understand the reasoning behind the arguments but what is the rush?  

I think the rush is legitimate, because readers may think calling it a ""conflict"" is trying to downplay the event.  It would be like someone writing an article about the ""September Conflict in New York"" referring to 9/11.  In Lebanon, to the people dying, I'm sure they'd rather it be called a ""massacre"", so ""conflict"" would certainly be an understatement.
I don't think the precendent of the 1982 Lebanon War means anything.  It was a different event in a different century and the Lebanese government was much more involved in the war, even agreeing to sign a peace treaty with Israel at one point (see the article).  Besides, I feel the article should reflect the time period in which it's written and it's clear from all the discussion on this page that the ""Israel-Lebanon War"" would be hotly contested by the community.  20:37, 2 August 2006 (EST)

Hezbollah is bombing Israel, so the conflict isn't only taking place in Lebanon, you'd need to include both places or use a broader term like ""The Middle East""  

Check the title again: ""Israel-Lebanon conflict."" It does contain Israel.

Also, this morning, NPR referred to this as ""the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict."" I'm not sure how other media outlets are referring to it, but if they're also using ""Hezbollah,"" then that's what we should do. -[[User: