Any number of these conflicts might resolve Yes this year, once they enter the Wars or Major Wars category on Wikipedia's List of Ongoing Armed Conflicts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ongoing_armed_conflicts

I will be fairly liberal with what counts as a conflict. So if the U.S. and Israel declare war on Iran and start accruing losses in one Wikipedia entry, both of those pairings could resolve Yes together. Multiple belligerents fighting as part of a broader conflict with a different Wiki heading still count as long as their (para)militaries are actually fighting each other. So, the Arab-Israeli conflict in 2024 did count for Israel/Lebanon but did not count for Israel/Iran. "Anyone" conflicts can resolve to any conflict involving the listed country. At the end of the year, all unresolved conflicts will resolve No.

A conflict will only resolve N/A if the definition of the countries involved becomes broadly disputed in a high traffic trading event with no reasonable solution after asking mods. One guy misreading the wikipedia rules won't result in an N/A, but 12 people arguing about a 5-way civil war with publicly denied international intervention might. If a wiki entry is added to the Wars or major Wars category merely because of a retroactive addendum to its 2024 numbers, that will not be sufficient to resolve it Yes for 2025. Coterminous states such as Rojava count for their synonyms (in this case, Kurdistan).

• Update 2025-02-07 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Clarification on Kurdish-related conflicts:

  • The market will use the bundled Kurdish Separatist Insurgencies Wikipedia article as the basis for resolution on Kurdistan / Anyone.

  • In particular, conflicts such as those involving Kurds in the Syrian Civil War will not count unless they show sufficient deadly involvement in the last 13 months, similar to how the Arab-Israeli Conflict entry is treated.

  • These conditions apply both for this year and last year, though they could change if the situation escalates.

• Update 2025-02-08 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): For the Nigeria / Cameroon conflict:

  • A resolution of Yes will be given if Wikipedia continues to list both countries as belligerents.

  • The conflict must be in active fighting at the time of evaluation.

• Update 2025-06-16 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): In a comment referencing the resolution of an older market, the creator provided their reasoning for resolving an Israel/Iran conflict as Yes. This indicates a similar standard may be applied to this market. Key factors included:

  • The conflict becoming a "hot war" with strikes that are "much more deadly and sustained" than previous exchanges.

  • Iran being "actively joined, unambiguously and directly (not just through proxies)".

  • This judgment was supported by major media headlines.