This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Yemen High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Yemen, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Yemen on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.YemenWikipedia:WikiProject YemenTemplate:WikiProject YemenYemen articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Death Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Disaster management High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. 2010s High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject 2010s, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 2010s on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.2010sWikipedia:WikiProject 2010sTemplate:WikiProject 2010s2010s articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Daily pageviews of this article A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 11 February 2019 and 31 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Starapple101.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 21:04, 17 January 2022 (UTC) reply

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 January 2020 and 15 May 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): BAF-1Activities. Peer reviewers: Jguzma38.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 21:04, 17 January 2022 (UTC) reply

The title says 2016, while the article says 2017. Also, "Present" should be spelled without a capital. Debresser ( talk) 13:36, 5 January 2018 (UTC) reply

• The article doesn't say 2017. It's the first sentence that does, I think it's supposed to mean that by spring 2017 the famine had begun to threaten that number of people, but the famine began (as in, started to threaten a certain number of people, probably a smaller number than the one from the spring) back in 2016.

As for the word present - IDK. You can probably change it, I guess. I don't think anyone would be opposed to that, if that's the rule of the thumb on Wikipedia - Karl.i.biased ( talk) 05:41, 6 January 2018 (UTC) reply

Well, why does the article say 2017 if it should be 2016?

The article title obviously can not be "-present", because at some time the famine will stop, I hope, and then the title needs to be changed. I'd say remove the year altogether. Debresser ( talk) 15:54, 6 January 2018 (UTC) reply

The usage of the term Famine is technically incorrect and should be corrected to “Food Security Emergency” or “severe levels of food insecurity” throughout this entire article. Within the humanitarian community, there are three commonly accepted thresholds that are all required to be met in order to declare a famine in an area ( IPC Manual). These thresholds are:

• At least one in five households in an area face an extreme lack of food and/or other basic food needs even with the full employment of coping strategies
• Global Acute Malnutrition: >30%
• Crude Death Rate: >2/10,000/day, or an under 5 death rate: >4/10,000/day

As indicated by the February 2017 Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) analysis for Yemen ( Yemen IPC Analysis - February 2017), there is not currently data to suggest that all three of these thresholds have been met in Yemen at this time. While there are many reports that Yemen is at-risk for a Famine looking forward, particularly in a worse-case scenario, it should be stressed that a Famine has not been declared in Yemen to date and therefore, this language in this article is incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.49.239.90 ( talk) 03:16, 11 March 2018 (UTC) reply

Several sources were added in the article that are trying to push the notion that genocide is occurring, yet these sources do not meet the reliable sources criteria. Press TV is an Iranian-state based news that bashes Saudi Arabia non-stop. Its judgement on this should therefore be avoided by default. I have never heard of "Defend Democracy Press", nor why it should be relevant considering they promote fringe theories. The "Real News Network" offers "real news", yeah. Also, its link is broken: [1]. The Daily Pakistan article does not mention this is a genocide, it just warns that Yemen could become Saudia's Holodomor, but it is just an opinion without a direct conclusion. For such a bold claim, strong, reliable and neutral sources should be used. User:Joppa Chong should either try to find scholars or reliable sources who definitely confirm this, or refrain from pushing his agenda. If it is a genocide, it will be confirmed with time either way. But for now, there are no sufficient sources who confirm this, and thus the article should stay conservative in its statements.-- 3E1I5S8B9RF7 ( talk) 09:44, 1 July 2018 (UTC) reply

An association is not a clear attribution, so I recall you have made me correct that and should not assume there was nothing changed. The article itself does not hold bold claims. In contrast, it would be bad to remove crucial sources because of rumors. These allegations are still unsubstantiated. – Joppa Chong ( talk) 04:28, 4 July 2018 (UTC) reply

I don't know what exactly you are trying to say. And you completely miss the point. Once again, try reading Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Or, to put it the other way around, if this is such an obvious case of genocide, try finding these claims through some other, valid sources. UN Human Rights Comitee or Human Rights Watch or Red Cross, for instance. Reuters, Washington Post, New York Times... No serious sources outside these four dubious websites? Scholars, historians will confirm it with time if it is such a clear example of genocide. So there is no rush. But right now, you seem to have nothing.-- 3E1I5S8B9RF7 ( talk) 15:08, 4 July 2018 (UTC) reply

If you read Wikipedia:Reliable sources#Biased or opinionated sources you see that a reliable source is not necessarily a neutral one. Even the Washington Post and New York Times are said to have their tendencies. Touting The Real News dubious is a bold stance. Press TV might be problematic, but unfortunately, you did not substantiate your claims. – Joppa Chong ( talk) 04:53, 6 July 2018 (UTC) reply

Yes, I did. Press TV is an Iranian state controlled media that is deliberately confrontational towards Saudi Arabia, its arch nemesis. Having it used in a negative context against Saudi Arabia is obviously going to be suspicious. It would be as if you would use news from Gaza to criticize Israel, or news from North Korea to criticize South Korea, or news from Saudi Arabia to criticize Yemen, etc. For such a bold statement, reliable source should emerge. One day it might happen, but until then the article should stay conservative.-- 3E1I5S8B9RF7 ( talk) 15:12, 6 July 2018 (UTC) reply

Press TV controversies suggests the medium is a hot button issue, although hostility towards Saudi Arabian is not mentioned.

Purposeful starvation in this war is also associated with genocide by a Peace Action campaign: [2]. – Joppa Chong ( talk) 02:23, 11 July 2018 (UTC) reply

Hi. I just recently came to this article to do some WP:BURL cleanup and I noticed how many unreliable sources were mentioned on this article. I will admit that I am no expert in the area, but I have to admit that these sources (especially Press TV and Sputnik, which I am more familiar) are not WP:RS for this article. I am not aware of the reliability of other sources mentioned above, but none of them seem to be particularly reliable. I have WP:BOLDly removed these sources from the article. I would suggest that editors check that the sources which are still mentioned in the article substantiate the claims made, as I have not been able to check each individual source for verifiability. -- Bangalamania ( talk) 22:04, 19 September 2018 (UTC) reply

The Real News source showed an interview with Asher Orkaby who associated the huge number of civilian victims with genocide. His org at Harvard, Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies states something about him: [3]. While reliability seems to be given, we could maybe rather consider citing in another article about the conflict. – Joppa Chong ( talk) 16:12, 2 October 2018 (UTC) reply

The referenced article relates to US Navy firing Tomhawk missiles at launch sites in response to their ships being fired on by the Houthi's it doesn't support the text that references it that the US Navy is involved in blockading Yemen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asureas ( talk • contribs) 18:40, 19 April 2022 (UTC) reply