Talk:Hezbollah

This page is subject to the extended confirmed restriction related to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

GA Reassessment

Hezbollah

The following discussion 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.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • GAN review not found

Result: Delisting because consensus has been reached to delist, and discussion has subsided. It is a wonderful world (talk) 18:16, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

This article has several citation needed type tags, violating WP:V. It last went through GAR in 2008, thus making it very likely it is unduly weighted toward that time period. Also were the standards for GA in 2008 lower?

This article is obviously very important right now, so an unwarranted GA status is very bad for the reliability of Wikipedia. It is a wonderful world (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

The article relies too much on newspaper reports and speculation by biased parties, it should be scrapped and rewritten. The lead has it that Hezbollah failed to disarm after the 2006 withdrawal from Lebanon but the Shabaa Farms are still occupied. Keith-264 (talk) 21:49, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

I know it's probably not my place but small examples like the article is still quoting polled support numbers published in 2006 by The Christian Science Monitor. It listed 80% support for Druze, assuming they weren't polling children, nearly half the current population was not in that 2 decade old poll. Does having sources that may reached some level of obsolescence at least when talking in present terms mean something against verifiability? Regardless article's subject is such a complex entity because of its paramilitary/political party hybridizing, that's the argument that has been made in the UN which keeps it off the consolidated terror groups and individuals list. I can't think of any other examples of non state actor groups that are in the same position. Not withstanding all that, just in the past week, so much has happened that may fundamentally change their structure that a whole new section would need to be added to attempt to give context to an unprimed reader. Even before last week I'm not certain if meets broad coverage with news coverage pushing the bulk of its sources and now just this last week such drastic numbers that can only be estimated at this point, the article might as well have a time date describing the group before that date while refraining from describing them after last week. RCSCott91 (talk) 05:35, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

I haven't read the entire article, but just from reading the lede, it seems to have had a major expansion in recent years, which has turned it into a rather incoherent and bloated summary. Given the intensity of the past 16 years with regards to Hezbollah, I suspect if there was no organized and centralized effort to keep the content top notch in that period, most expansions were likely made randomly. Makeandtoss (talk) 10:15, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Not a GA article imo. Selfstudier (talk) 16:22, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Word count according to prosesize (web tool version) is now: 11,513. That puts it at the probably should be split size; still a little short of the definitely split size on word count according to the article size guideline. BUT the prosesize word count does not include tables and lists, which this article has, and may not include long quotations since these are not highlighted as part of the "prosesize" count and the article has several long block quotes. The random increases in the size of the article and its overall size alone would seem to be enough to change the assessment to B class from GA. Donner60 (talk) 07:50, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

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.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 April 2026

Change Slovakia in "Designated as a terror group by" section to Slovenia. ~2026-20151-44 (talk) 07:07, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

•  Done Thank you for pointing out the mistake. ⹃Maltazarian ^{ᚾparley$\lor$investigateᛅ} 08:24, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 April 2026

Under the “Designated as terrorists by” list, France should be removed / omitted. While Germany has designated the entire Hezbollah organization as terrorist, France (much like Italy) has voted for the well-known 2013 EU designation of Hezbollah’s military arm as incitement of terrorism, rather than the whole group (which involves also its political wing). To this day, the entire group (such as Hezbollah’s political party) is not designated as terrorist by either Italy or France. Conversely, the political party is banned in Germany. Setuber (talk) 20:39, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want made. Day Creature (talk) 18:09, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

It has proven to be challenging to find exactly the right source that indoctrinates the differences between recognizing the military wing as banned and acknowledging the plight of the political faction. Many are written in between the lines through op-ed pieces and organizational guides such as:

• https://transatlanticinstitute.org/analysis/frances-hezbollah-problem?page=1

• https://www.wsj.com/opinion/hezbollah-france-lebanon-youssef-raggi-d20b7799

• https://www.cfr.org/backgrounders/what-hezbollah#chapter-how-have-the-united-states-and-other-countries-treated-the-group

• https://www.meforum.org/mef-online/rescuing-hezbollah-inside-frances-panic-over-israels-deepening-incursion

However, this news story better dives into the concrete inflection point:

• https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/after-us-claims-france-says-no-evidence-hezbollah-explosives-stores-2020-09-18/ Setuber (talk) 09:24, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 May 2026

Change the "non-state allies" section to inclusive of the Kurdistan Worker's Party (PKK) among other non-state allies since there is a shared history of mutual anti-imperialist sympathy and common opposition to Turkish influence in the region. Also, it is defined by the past efforts of Kurdistan Worker's Party in the defence of Lebanon from Israeli invasion and a common root between PKK's military birth in Bekaa valley in Lebanon and Hezbollah's organizational predecessors who were training among them. <refhttps://democraticmodernity.com/shared-resistance-history-kurdish-palestinian-struggles-in-the-1980s/></ref> HassanBefranbar (talk) 05:43, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

 Not done: This change is potentially controversial and will require a consensus before it can be implemented. Day Creature (talk) 17:39, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

References

Neutral POV?

Referring to the 2026 Lebanon War as Israel's "War on Lebanon" violates Wikipedia's neutral stance here. It should be the "2026 Lebanon War" instead. Defrancerobert110110 (talk) 17:55, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Probable AI edits

Concerns have been raised about AI-generated content in this article. This is a procedural talk page section to discuss it. There is no need to ping me in response.Rationale: edits such as these and others by this user - ChatGPT params plus textual indicators of AI output Gnomingstuff (talk) 19:15, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Ambiguous Sentence

The first sentence is ambiguous: “Hezbollah is a Lebanese Shia Islamist political party with an active paramilitary wing that has been banned by the Lebanese government since March 2026, amid Israel's war on Lebanon.” Which has been banned, the party or its paramilitary wing? Also, the sentence is followed by references dated earlier than 2026, so those references can’t verify an event taking place in March 2026. It’s a run-on sentence. It needs dividing up for clarity. The references need to follow the particular statements to which they are related. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ~2026-32607-05 (talk) 01:01, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

I completely agree. But without a edit request nothing is going to change. 5aturnius (talk) 16:44, 11 July 2026 (UTC)