Talk:2026

The Spain Morocco border situation?

Is the migrants crossing spainish border illegally and over 10k involved worthy enough for the wiki list? Since a lot of people are involved and around 40 has died within a day ~2026-42393-88 (talk) 13:45, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

Include. Yes, I think it probably deserves a mention, given the number of people involved, the number of deaths, the international aspect, and prominent coverage on BBC News, etc. Wjfox2005 (talk) 08:53, 1 August 2026 (UTC)

Include. This is important. Ilov3gam3z (talk) 17:00, 15 August 2026 (UTC)

Request to block user, or prevent 2026 being edited by temporary accounts

This user is constantly trying to add a bunch of unnecessary text about the 2026 Ceuta migrant crisis on the 30 July entry. Other users, including me, have previously reverted his/her edits, but he/she keeps adding them back again. I've already posted an edit war notification on his/her Talk Page, which has already been ignored. I would like to request that this user be blocked from editing 2026. Wjfox2005 (talk) 18:20, 29 August 2026 (UTC)

@Wjfox2005 WP:ANI would be the right place if all else were to fail. Personally I'd advise trying to engage with them on this talk page and explain to them why the text is unnecessary. If they don't respond and they keep refusing to communicate then ANI would be the place to go Firestar464 (talk) 02:13, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

I saved a snapshot of their contribution on Wayback Machine, so the internet never forgets their action. Luigi Cotocea (talk) 09:20, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

Pictures

It's currently September 2026. Why aren't there pictures on the article if a significant portion of 2026 has already passed? I think it would make sense to insert some pictures right now. Masterlet 08:45, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Bangsamoro Election

This entry was added by @Yivan000: and refined by @Wjfox2005: for September 14.

• Bangsamoro holds its first parliamentary election in the Philippines, marking a milestone in the peace process following decades of separatist conflict.

I'm conflicted on if this should be in the main article, but I'm open to discussion. To me it is more suited to 2026 in the Philippines instead of the main year article. Unless this became a separate region like Somaliland is in Somalia, I would be more open, but I don't think that is the case. Yivan000 mentioned that this is a development regarding the separatist conflict in that region which I am imagining is the Moro Conflict, if it is a significant development in that conflict it may be worth making the entry in relation to that instead.PaulRKil (talk) 12:35, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

Mistake!

Excuse me… the year is 2026 and NOT 2001. Someone just made a terrible mistake! ~2026-51017-45 (talk) 16:11, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

 Done Thanks! -- irn (talk) 16:23, 21 September 2026 (UTC)

Consideration of regulations regarding events.

Notable things are worthy enough to be mentioned but I dont think EACH AND EVERY detail or smaller details regarding conflicts need to be mentioned, nor do some smaller cases. I suggest for some suggestions and discussion regarding what the events area of the article shall include. Because it seems that very small events are also getting their place and we need events with notable IMPORTANCE to be kept here, not everyday things. Kgeo2.0 (talk) 10:19, 4 October 2026 (UTC)

It depends how you define significance I suppose. We could come up with regulations but every event is different so it could be hard to. Could you give an example of something which may not be needed so we know which kind of things you mean. Particularly war related events, as I think those are unclear as to what is significant and what is not. For other events like non-war related disasters we just need to come up with a death toll number that is significant. I would suggest 30 or more. Sunny Days555 (talk) 21:01, 6 October 2026 (UTC)

Me too. I propose the webpage regulations to be the follows:

• Conflict related updates require major significance to be mentioned that may be atleast for 2 or 3 major news sources to report on that particular event of the conflict one wants to include. Territorial changes during already mentioned conflicts and within those shall not be mentioned unless and until a conclussion to that already mentioned conflict reaches. An eg of it will be the collapse of the STC on the 9th of January 2026 which was significant. While the capture of Mocha on 10th September 2026, which initiated the Bab el Mandab crisis was significant but as the counteroffensive by the Yemeni govt has not caused massive changes both territorially or politically, these changes may not be mentioned until and unless there is a collapse of the situation or hostillities cease completely and that mention too shall be optional. Another one I noticed was the 13th January when the event is listed as start of hostillities between the Damascus Syrian govt and the DAANES which can be argued as insignificant but can be kept anyways. I am saying that cuz on the 22nd or 23rd of Jan, the conclusion of the same event has been mentioned. EVERY AND ALL activities or hostillities of a conflict doesnt need mention, thats what I am saying.
• Accusations may not be included as they are still vocal and diplomatic accusations and not major concrete actions by the govt atleast not yet when the accusation is made. Accusations should be strictly barred from the events pannel as a result. This includes removal of the 1st September event inclusion and any other accusation put as events as the importance of them are subjected for questioning.
• Non-war related disasters require atleast a fixed casualty amount ranging from ig 30-50 people or whatever the community says fit. The amount is still a topic of discussion. Minimum casualty events should be either a matter of discussion or not put at the first place.
• Political events that may be included in the article are elections, coups, coup attempts, referendums(either nationwide or regional referendums that are specifically related to questions regarding separation or other such stuff), terror attacks that cause a specific, fixed amount of casualty which is to be determined, protests that lead to govt stepdowns with the dates requiring to be the ones when the protests achieve conclusion.
• Miscellaneous activities include historic firsts or firsts in a major amount of time like 100 years or more or abit less. They also include other things like the aircraft incidents(such as FlyDubai incident), the outbreak of pandemics that are certified by world organizations as major health issues, epidemics or whatever(like the Central Africa Ebola epidemic), would love some other suggestions.

Would love for more suggestions and a finalized list of regulations. Hence, I, hereby call on for the Wikipedians to take part in the discussion. Kgeo2.0 (talk) 10:16, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

I agree with many of your points.

War related topics need to result in significance. Also the start of new conflicts (Like the start of the Iran War when the US and Israel assasinated Ali Khamanei) are significant. As are the starting of major new offensives, like the beginning of the Houthi Offensive or the Ethiopian offensive in September. I think the ends of wars are also significant. One question is what about significant escalations or intensifications in conflicts, including but not limited to multiple new countries becoming involved like in October when the Mecca Alliance is activated? I think that is significant also.

One question I have is about accusations. You mentioned the Russia and Germany incident on September 1 and I agree that accusations alone are not significant, except in that incident it went further. Germany closed a consulate. Probably not significant but it was in response to an airstrike on a German airport. Note that this airstrike was not listed and thus the accusation entry effectively becomes the entry for the airstrike. We could move the event to when the airstrike happened though I agree that it's probably not significant though as nobody died in that incident, however if that is insignificant then what about the RAF Fairford incident? In the RAF Fairford it wasn't even an attack just an attempted attack, so I would argue that it's less significant than the German Airport incident (as at least in the German incident the attack actually took place, and a consulate was closed in response) and thus I think the RAF Fairford incident should be removed also.

30-50 people sounds like a good range. Perhaps 40? I think some discretion may be needed here as some events by nature are more likely and/or more likely to be more deadly. I agree with your stance on the significance of political events.

You mentioned the FlyDubai incident in miscellaneous. Why is this significant given that it was only an attempted hijacking and nobody died? Sunny Days555 (talk) 22:50, 7 October 2026 (UTC)

War related topics need to result in significance. Also the start of new conflicts (Like the start of the Iran War when the US and Israel assasinated Ali Khamanei) are significant. As are the starting of major new offensives, like the beginning of the Houthi Offensive or the Ethiopian offensive in September. I think the ends of wars are also significant. One question is what about significant escalations or intensifications in conflicts, including but not limited to multiple new countries becoming involved like in October when the Mecca Alliance is activated? I think that is significant also.

Wikipedia always focused on important events such when Ukraine war started for example, and such when an country enters at war it's an important subject for any reader. Or when a country makes a new major alliance over time, however offensives such as Hormuz Strait where they had to close it it's important global news because it directly affects gas/oil/production prices over maritime travel. But stuff such an separate article for example X captured town/city Y in an aready ongoing conflict isn't neccesary because an wikipedia article about the onging war might aready detail it. In my opinion if the airstrike itself is considered significant enough, it should be listed on the date it occurred rather than having the later accusation serve as a substitute for it. Also if we remove one incident for being too minor, we should apply the same standard to comparable incidents from the past

One question I have is about accusations. You mentioned the Russia and Germany incident on September 1 and I agree that accusations alone are not significant, except in that incident it went further. Germany closed a consulate. Probably not significant but it was in response to an airstrike on a German airport. Note that this airstrike was not listed and thus the accusation entry effectively becomes the entry for the airstrike. We could move the event to when the airstrike happened though I agree that it's probably not significant though as nobody died in that incident, however if that is insignificant then what about the RAF Fairford incident? In the RAF Fairford it wasn't even an attack just an attempted attack, so I would argue that it's less significant than the German Airport incident (as at least in the German incident the attack actually took place, and a consulate was closed in response) and thus I think the RAF Fairford incident should be removed also.

Firstly accusations should be verifiable from news sources not just personal opinion, but also to take into consideration on what side each news source is on the political spectrum when they made the news. Regarding the RAF Fairford incident, I agree that the same standard should be applied. If an attempted attack with no significant consequences is considered too minor, then it would be difficult to justify keeping it while removing the German airport incident, or vice versa. Because then the general standard should be enforced. Luigi Cotocea (talk) 11:33, 8 October 2026 (UTC)

Regarding your questions: Yes, we may move the event of Leipzig strike on the date it occured but I am skeptical regarding it slightly but you do have a point and Fairford incident is something I do believe we should like get rid off from this page. Personally, I do believe that this incident be made a specific section of the Iran-UK relations but idk even if it is kept separate, it works but I dont think that this specific page is suitable for the incident as it isnt as 'major' in the sense of consequences. No more retaliation by Britain and US just moved its bombers abit. Moreover, the suspects were released so the Fairford incident does apply. Also some events even if they be less death causing(referring to natural events here) can cause significant damage to property and that should also be one of the like criterias for decision on adding but it is quite difficult and takes quite THE time so idk. Up to the community. Your 2nd question regarding the FlyDubai incident is/can be considered major on the basis of attempted terrorist attacks and all but nowadays I dont thinkk its quite the news to be added so its up to y'all. I retreat that claim of mine. Also, by the way, Pedro Sanchez's calling for the election, does that need to be included or we may just say 'early elections were held in Spain following X things and X won and all that' on the date of the Spanish election? I also agree with the suggestions presented by @Luigi Cotocea and you yourself @Sunny Days555. Hence, I call you upon you both, and any other Wikipedian willing to join us to consider these rules and like we need these regulations to be made ACTUAL like implementation and all is necessary. But we may 1st agree on the joint list on things to NOT add, etc. Kgeo2.0 (talk) 14:17, 8 October 2026 (UTC)

Ok, I've just removed some things which weren't significant. It would be good to have more clarification on when terror incidents and protests are significant. How big should a protest get before it is significant? Bearing in mind we already have the flamingo protests of Albania mentioned on this page. The protests in Europe are quite large now. Should these be mentioned? I think the Spain one at least should be mentioned within the election entry as being a trigger for the elections being held early but I will wait to hear what others think.

For ideas on what not to include, the ones I removed were: Disasters with 1 or 0 deaths (including one which is a developing situation, better to wait until 30 or more deaths are confirmed). I also removed terror incidents with no deaths which we discussed before, the Liepzig airport incident, flydubai incident, and the Fairford incident. I think these should meet the same requirement as disasters, at least 30 deaths, or lead to some form of significant escalation. Likewise I removed the Russian missile attack on Moldova as war related entries need to be significant and lead to escalation or something to that affect. I removed the completion of the withdrawal of US troops for Iraq as the conflict there ended a few years ago, I think in 2021. This was just the completion of an already agreed upon withdrawal so more of a formality than anything significant. Sunny Days555 (talk) 19:34, 10 October 2026 (UTC)

Great then, thank you for that. Regarding protests, I believe protests are extremely important to be mentioned if they are like nationwide or cross-nation(like Iran Protests, Flamingo Revolution), protests that trigger major changes or protests that are part of the Gen-Z protests may get a mention too imo but its up to the community. Major changes include resignation of the head of state/head of govt, triggering of snap elections, violent or non-violent overthrow of the government in power, or one that invites worldwide attention massively like remains in the headlines for quite the time. Kgeo2.0 (talk) 09:43, 11 October 2026 (UTC)

France protests on the evening of 18 oct 2026.

On Sunday evening on 18 October 2026, France was facing the aftermath of one of its most violent periods of unrest in recent years, following nationwide demonstrations on Saturday against rising fuel prices, the cost of living and deteriorating public services. The demonstrations brought together high-school and university students, trade unions and supporters of the gilets jaunes (Yellow Vests) movement, marking a convergence between the ongoing 2026 French student protests and wider socioeconomic discontent. What had begun in September with student grievances over teacher shortages and poor school conditions had expanded into a broader mobilisation against inequality, public spending cuts and declining purchasing power. Although hundreds of thousands of people demonstrated peacefully, some groups clashed with police, looted shops and attacked public buildings. In Limoges, a fire severely damaged the historic town hall, while Paris and other cities reported widespread damage. President Emmanuel Macron called for calm and distinguished peaceful demonstrators' grievances from the violence and looting. The events highlighted how rising fuel prices and living costs had broadened the student-led movement into a nationwide protest over France's economic and social conditions.

One of the most striking incidents occurred in Limoges, where the historic city hall (Hôtel de Ville), inaugurated in 1883, was engulfed in flames on Saturday evening. The fire caused the building's approximately 43-metre clock tower and belfry to collapse, while the roof and much of the structure suffered extensive damage. The destruction of the protected historic landmark shocked local residents and drew comparisons with the 2019 Notre-Dame Cathedral fire in Paris. Local authorities condemned the arson as a major loss for France's architectural heritage. The incident occurred during the wider unrest surrounding the cost-of-living demonstrations, although the individuals responsible for setting the building alight should not be conflated with the peaceful protesters.

Should be added on the timeline of october 2026, because it's an important event, due to the scale of the protests across the country. Or even prehaps linked to continuation of 2026 French student protests.

Sources:

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/france-faces-aftermath-worst-unrest-years-2026-10-18/https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/10/18/why-have-frances-school-protests-become-a-wider-political-crisishttps://apnews.com/article/f5ce07c2ef46ad0c02c6ff7018532a59

https://www.france24.com/en/france/20261018-paris-police-in-new-battles-with-protesters-and-lootershttps://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/oct/18/europe-protests-france-spain-portugal-2026-explainerhttps://www.euronews.com/video/2026/10/18/france-paris-lyon-and-marseille-count-the-cost-after-violent-protestshttps://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/fresh-clashes-erupt-in-paris-as-france-protest-arrests-exceed-2-000/4092804 Luigi Cotocea (talk) 06:48, 19 October 2026 (UTC)

The Hôtel de Ville partial collapse may be worth mentioning but it's borderline. The protests are part of the 2026 French Student Protests and the Hôtel de Ville is mentioned on that article. The 2026 French Student Protests are included in the events list on their start date of September 18. The increase and violence and rioting could be added as a sentence onto this, or depending on how significant the protests get an additional event could be added in a separate entry. This would be on the date that something particularly noteworthy happens, though only if it is significant enough to warrant it's own entry. Otherwise just add a sentence onto the event on September 18.

I don't know much about the Hôtel de Ville but I would lean towards not giving it it's own standalone entry, unless it is a particularly historic hotel or it becomes a major point of escalation or contention. Instead I would lean towards just mentioning the increase in violence and rioting with an extra sentence on the September 18 if necessary. Sunny Days555 (talk) 08:33, 19 October 2026 (UTC)