There is currently an ongoing debate about this infobox section.
Just one example for a vote to change the tag:
Change. Articles like Foreign Policy's "Iran's victory is more Pyrrhic than it looks" illustrate the need for a more nuanced label. Both sides inflicted damage on each other, the leadership of both sides are claiming victory, and both sides obtained some concessions from the other. A large number of claims in both directions are obviously politically charged and motivated, so the safer approach for now is to label it as "inconclusive" with a link to an "Aftermath" section summarizing the main arguments of commentators, as with War of Attrition. Chagropango (talk) 15:40, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
I mean the current "hot" crisis began in 2023. The wider conflict obviously didn't, but for example WWII's European theater started in 1939 even though the dominoes had been falling for more than a decade.
There is currently an ongoing debate about this infobox section.
Just one example for a vote to change the tag:
Both sides win, obviously, and get a special participation prize. It's better to specify who profited the most.
how much are eggs and gas in Iran? that's the best metric to go by.
The only winners of this war are the oil companies in the rest of the world. And the arms dealers, I guess.
And the repressive Iranian regime
Imagine believing this all began in 2023.
I mean the current "hot" crisis began in 2023. The wider conflict obviously didn't, but for example WWII's European theater started in 1939 even though the dominoes had been falling for more than a decade.
but but October 7!!?
Interesting...
No mention of severe damage to oil and natural gas facilities in US-allied Arab countries that have caused some large facilities to "declare force majeure" on delivery contracts. i.e. significant oil refining and gas processing capacity was damaged and can't be repaired for months, if not years.
But it says disputed next to it
meh. like tic tac toe.