Talk:Control of cities during the Syrian civil war

Template:Syrian Civil War sanctions

Al-Ghariyah December 6th

7h Dar’aa | Western Ghariyah | Clashes between the Free Syrian Army (FSA) and Assad forces stationed at a nearby checkpoint amid regime heavy artillery shelling on the township.

Sources Local Coordination Committees in Syria. Shaam News Network (SNN) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.35.252.14 (talk) 11:02, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Need a reliable source. Pro opposition and pro government sources are not reliable sources.Hanibal911 (talk) 11:44, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

This source yalla souriya pro oposition blog and is not a reliable source.Hanibal911 (talk) 12:04, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Naqqarin, Aleppo

Should this town be added and labeled as contested on the map? its just east of aleppo, north-east of the airport. map: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=36.220457&lon=37.264938&z=13&m=b Pro-rebel tweets confirm that the Syrian military has presence in the "Transport Directorate" Building.Rob2013 (talk)23:56, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes, this village should be added but, between yesterday, it was on SAA hands. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.118.35 (talk) 17:39, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Reuters says it is at least contested. OberschIesien90 (talk) 20:37, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

I agree, it should be added and labeled as contested.Rob2013 (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.34.32.40 (talk) 22:20, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

 Done as contested per reuters.Tradedia^talk 06:00, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Syrian TV Report Army have full control from Al Naqqarin http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZYHUQU9wyI http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=463_1386015841 — Preceding unsigned comment added by LogFTW (talk • contribs) 05:50, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

The Al-Monitor is referring to Naqqarin near Aleppo as regime-captured. It is spelled Nqirin in the article. Should this count as evidence that Naqqarin has been captured by the regime? Does anyone have any more information regarding the situation in Naqqarin? http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/security/2013/12/syria-opposition-regime-spy-phobia.html Eharding (talk) 03:15, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Rabiyah, Latakia

This town should be added, the rebels have control of the town. Just recently a specific FSA group known as the Al Harjah Brigade were clashing with ISIS within the town. Map: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=35.787184&lon=36.038246&z=12&m=b&search=Latakia%20Syria Rob2013 (talk)

tall hassel

tall hassel is under siryan army control — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.145.142.225 (talk) 18:59, 12 November 2013 (UTC) Reports say the army recaptured the town http://documents.sy/news.php?id=9236&lang=en It would be of no suprise as it is located near Tall Aran (in fact only a couple of hundred meters are separating the towns)Daki122 (talk) 19:08, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

I wouldnt consider that as a true source just FYI.Rob2013 (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.34.42.11 (talk) 21:19, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

The town must be put as contested the Army has entered it according to SOHR and AFP http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jgjqXCmuwr4UFF4iJS4h653Nu7ig?docId=32cb00c4-4218-4b94-88e2-b3d86e0a4231

Daki122 (talk) 17:02, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Neutral sources are confirming an advance of the army inside Tal Hassel. Village must change in contested status and not only surrounded.--Dimitrish81 (talk) 18:25, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Even Alarabiya is confirming that Regime is advancing in Tal Hassel.http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2013/11/14/Syrian-forces-make-gains-in-Damascus-advance-in-Aleppo-.html Rob2013 (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.34.40.181 (talk) 23:18, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Allegedly Tal Hasel has fallen to pro-government forces https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=594901093879010&id=298382103530912 Rob2013 (talk)75.34.40.181 (talk) 10:53, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Rami Abdelrahman of the British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said clashes were continuing in the southern outskirts of Tel Hasel on Friday evening.But fighters from the al Qaeda-linked Nusra Front and the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant had already withdrawn north towards Aleppo, now divided between Assad's forces and rebels.Al Akhbar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roma-borisov (talk • contribs) 14:55, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

References disappeared

The reference list for information about each city has disappeared. Can anyone fix this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.74.13.43 (talk) 20:46, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Yep, I cant understand what happened with the reflist. Please someone do something to fix that problem.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 17:30, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

It is a space problem, that prevents it from displaying. To be fixed soon. André437 (talk) 05:33, 16 November 2013 (UTC) For more details about this issue, see Talk:Cities and towns during the Syrian civil war#”Detailed map” too large to be transcluded into “cities article”

 Done Tradedia^talk 12:41, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Kurdish village east of Allepo

Village dissapeared from map - kurd controlled village between Aleppo and Kweirs airbase is missing now from map. At moment this is area of clashes. Why is this village removed from map?Kostadin24 (talk) 12:03, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Because it was controlled by Jabhat al-Akrad before FSA turned on them in August. Kurdish forces as such have been gone for months now. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 21:54, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Ok, but why village is removed? This area is contested now and every sign of control is important.Kostadin24 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:56, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Adra

Someone revert changes made by Sopher99 the article is old and there are no reports of rebel presence in Adra only in the Adra industrial areaDaki122 (talk) 21:52, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Article is less than a month old. Sopher99 (talk) 22:38, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Sopher99 your source is old and not giving any details of the clashes.78.191.118.45 (talk) 23:03, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

The article less than a month old and tells when and where they happened, and between who. Sopher99 (talk) 23:05, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

For this month many front lines moved in Damascus region! One month is long period. Kostadin24 (talk) 08:00, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Last news for Adra/14hours old/ - Mortars shell Adra. This doesn't make area contested. In fact Damascus central areas are shelled every day. This doesn't make them contested.Kostadin24 (talk) 08:04, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Request Reshuffle of Brigade Locations North of Damascus

Some of the brigades north of Damascus needs to be reshuffled: Brigade 65 is located just west of Hafir Fawqa, Brigade 67 should be placed right ontop of saidnaya prison between Talfita & Seidnaya. Check the link to see the coordinates: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=33.695923&lon=36.387234&z=13&m=b&search=Daraa%20Syria Rob2013 (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.34.36.67 (talk) 05:45, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

 Done Tradedia^talk 12:41, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Damascus Countryside

The towns of Al-Ruhaybah and Nasaryia must be reverted back to government held as there are no reports that there are any clashes in those towns.The only clashes erupted only when rebels attacked nearby storage bases.The towns should be put back to government control.Other thing is the siege of the base of Brigade 81 must be removed there are also no fights or any raids on the base in months.Only attack happened when the FSA skirmished on the outskirts of the Base there has been no fighting going on in that area.Daki122 (talk) 15:51, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

No because the battle lasted for a over a week and there are no sources saying the government controls those towns. Theres been no fighting in that area because rebels control them uncontested. Sopher99 (talk) 16:14, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Sopher99 Go and s*** your self you f*** a*****.Go and join the Al-Nusra and ISIS fan club you retard.Who the f*** asked for something about it your the most hated person on this site because everyone is trying to fix stupid things that you make.You are adding towns that are rebel controlled in Raqa and you think if you add enough of them it will seem like the rebels control more towns,well you can keep on trying to make your illusion that the rebels are winning but let me tell you nobody else is buying that s***.And of course the Alepo map that you had to revert the changes made by others around the hour posting sources that date back to 2011 (Base 80, Neyrab,Aziza). And for "Rebels control them uncontested" what the hell are you talking about last report about a clash with government troops there was when Al-Nusra took Maaloula after the army took it back the rebels fled because the army cut off there supply route and second of only report that came about clashes in the area was from AJ live blog which is not as reliable as there main website because every "activist" can write there. SOHR hasn't reported fights there for months and if it didn't report them then it is for sure back in government hands.Daki122 (talk) 17:47, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Rebels control 60% of territory and 40% of the population - yet there are 386 red dots and 244 lime dots. Around half of all dots are supposed to be lime if we want to be accurate. And while I am okay with Al nusra I am actually opposed to ISIS, who have killed many FSA leaders and arrested many activists. Regarding the Damascene towns I have said my piece. Rebels control them as they took over the villages and thus fighting subsided. Sopher99 (talk) 21:47, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

And your source for those towns being rebel-held? Speculating that the fighting subsided because the rebels took them is an unsourced POV which Wikipedia does not acknowledge. Unsourced speculation as a whole is not acknowledged. In any case, stick with the sources on hand guys. EkoGraf (talk) 22:13, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Deir ez-Zor and Raqqa province

Then someone noticed that in general, that are not members adds villages and towns are not using the correct sources and broken links, and sometimes do not exist.: http://www.hhassan.com/2013/03/foreign-fighters-in-syria-targeted-by.html%20http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=35.598973&lon=39. http://m.asharq-e.com/content/1363621814277267900/Published%20-%20Features Also, this source can not be used to change because it map without cities and villages. And who wants to and can treat it.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22798391 I know that my message is deleted but can still someone to read it.37.55.208.227 (talk) 05:58, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Talbiseh, Homs

Just read that Syrian troops are clashing with rebels on the outskirts of this town, not sure if you want to put this town as besieged. http://yallasouriya.wordpress.com/2013/11/15/syria-progress-posts-51-minutes-ago-homs-syria/ Rob2013 (talk)

Blogs (and less partisan blogs) are not reliable sources.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 22:55, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Mahin(Homs) Recaptured by Army?

Allegedly Mahin was recaptured by pro-government forces. https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=594706123898507&id=298382103530912 & video report http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b39_1384504118 Rob2013 (talk)

Facebook and pro-regime media are not reliable sources. Sopher99 (talk) 15:15, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

How about SOHR is that good enough for you Sopher https://www.facebook.com/syriaohr/posts/449673305141013 Daki122 (talk) 18:23, 15 November 2013 (UTC) Sopher99 constantly refuses to accept REALITY You are just losing your time by trying to talk to him... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.65.128.25 (talk) 19:15, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

If we are going to start using sohr facebook pages, get ready for a whole lot of regime areas to go contested. Sopher99 (talk) 20:10, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Facebook are not a reliable source.Roma-borisov (talk) 20:14, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Facebook posts by individual persons are not reliable, but official posts by SOHR which we use daily via other sources is considered reliable. If you really feel strong about it that the source should not be Facebook than here this sources (non-Facebook) should be enough than [1].EkoGraf (talk) 20:31, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Facebook is not a reliable source and should not be used. And there should be no exceptions.Roma-borisov (talk) 20:47, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Sorry to disillusion you, but facebook is a media, not a source. And SOHR *is* a reliable source. It is used by virtually all other sources considered reliable.

(The arabic version of SOHR is not on facebook, the english version is.)

Note that SANA, the media organ of a party to the conflict, and thus a primary source, cannot be a reliable source under wikipedia policy, whereas SOHR uses multiple local sources, and is not a party to the conflict. André437 (talk) 05:24, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

The troops recaptured the towns of Muhin and Hawariyen in the eastern countryside of Homs city. Here reliable sources: The Siasat Daily Xinhua Roma-borisov (talk) 21:10, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Both are exactly the same report published in different media. They are based on SANA, thus are *not reliable*, according to wikipedia policy. However SOHR, a reliable source, makes the same claims André437 (talk) 05:24, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

...SOHR,a reliable source... FFS, do you really believe what you wrote? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.72.225.171 (talk) 12:24, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

If SOHR is good enough for almost all mainstream media (Reuters, BBC, NYT, etc), which apparently we accept, it should be good enough for us as well.

The fact that is is published on facebook is totally irrelavant. What matters is the source, not the media used by the source. André437 (talk) 08:58, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

 Comment: FACEBOOK CANNOT BE USED AS A SOURCE in the vast majority of cases, no matter wich Facebook account is. I will start soon to remove most of Facebook pages used incorrectly as sources in Syrian civil war-related pages. See WP:FACEBOOK for more info about that.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 17:35, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

It is true that most sources on facebook are just primary sources expressing their opinion without real sources on the ground, and thus discouraged according to WP:FACEBOOK.

However SOHR is a secondary source based on confirmed sources on the ground, so should be considered reliable. It has an excellent track record, only sometimes being slow to recognize changes. André437 (talk) 08:58, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

"based on confirmed sources on the ground"? By whom? Oh, I know, "their names cant be revealed for security reasons". No more candid & poor excuses, please, everybody knows who SOHR supports... SOHR is a partisan activist primary source, wich only can be considered reliable if what they report has been later published by a real reliable secondary journalistic source (a TV, news agency, newspaper, etc...).--HCPUNXKID (talk) 16:23, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Obviously you don't know the definition of primary source. It applies to SANA, because it is a party to the conflict. SOHR is a secondary source, since it is not a party to the conflict. Since most mainstream western media rely on SOHR, they consider SOHR reliable. If we can accept mainstream western media as reliable, we must, by simple logic, accept SOHR as a reliable secondary source. ... note that Wikipedia guidelines say that just because a secondary source has a preferred outcome does not in itself make a source unreliable. Try reading wikipedia policy. You might learn something. André437 (talk) 10:02, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

SOHR reliable and not a party in the conflict? Hahaha, nice joke, you have a nice future as a comedian. " If we can accept mainstream western media as reliable, we must, by simple logic, accept SOHR as a reliable secondary source" It seems that you dont understand the notion of what "logic" is...Nice try, better luck next time with that prepotence...--HCPUNXKID (talk) 18:11, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

You are wrong SOHR pro opposition source here is a look at their website and there is a flag of the Syrian opposition. Syrian Observatory for Human RightsAnd by the way international news agencies also use data SANA and Syria state tv as data SOHR. So no need to argue that the SOHR neutral source.95.134.223.95 (talk) 10:47, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Qalamoun offensive

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a UK-based monitoring group that uses a network of pro- and anti-Assad sources, said the fighting in Qara and the nearby town of Nabek was "a sign that the operation in Qalamoun has started.Reuters Roma-borisov (talk) 16:24, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Sopher99 syriaohr facebook is not realiable

Sopher99 syriaohr facebook page is not reliable. because it is pro opposition. and if you get it as refference it says there is clashes in raqqah, tal abyad, al tabqa: https://www.facebook.com/syriaohr/posts/450137751761235 also it says there is clashes in saraqeb and maarat numan 78.191.118.45 (talk) 17:12, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

also your source for tal hasel says town is full control of Syrian Army.78.191.118.45 (talk) 17:38, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Rami Abdelrahman of the British-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said clashes were continuing in the southern outskirts of Tel Hasel on Friday evening.But fighters from the al Qaeda-linked Nusra Front and the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant had already withdrawn north towards Aleppo, now divided between Assad's forces and rebels.ReutersRoma-borisov (talk) 17:47, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Facebook is not a reliable source and should not be used.Roma-borisov (talk) 17:50, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Tall Hasell needs to be reverted reuters confirmed that the town was taken stop making stupid changes Sopher99 SOHR said the fighting was going on near a rebel position near the town of Tall Hasell and that the Army also secured the Highway Between Al-Safira and Alepo

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/15/us-syria-crisis-aleppo-idUSBRE9AE11X20131115

Daki122 (talk) 18:20, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

SANAMAYN

Please give sources notifying that this town is under rebel hands. Nothing reliable as far as I know. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.29.220 (talk) 19:12, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Sopher99 your source only shows a building, so it is not a reliable source or a source..78.191.118.45 (talk) 19:37, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Who is playing ?. If green, give your reliable sources !!. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.29.220 (talk) 22:29, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Hey lothar where is the source for sanamayn? why do you convert it to lime? there isnt any reliable source to say it is under rebel control!! 78.191.118.45 (talk) 22:48, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Fixed it and posted reliable source. Daki122 (talk) 00:41, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

It has regrouped and consolidated its presence in towns such as Sanameen, Nawa, Izraa and Deraa city itself, which remain firmly in army control.Reuters Roma-borisov (talk) 11:20, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Madaya

This town is misplaced. It should be closer to Zabadani, not next to the Lebanon border. http://wikimapia.org/#lang=es&lat=33.692352&lon=36.099014&z=13&m=b --95.22.101.102 (talk) 19:24, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

You're right. I think whoever added it must have been using OpenStreetMap or some other poor-quality, non-satellite map. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 03:06, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

South Damascus

Can a experienced editor try to rearrange the towns in the South Damascus Region to a more realistic picture? Its really out of shape, and I for myself am not experienced enough to do this. OberschIesien90 (talk) 17:21, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

I volunteer to do this (and all of the province while we are at it...) Tradedia^talk 06:00, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Can we arranged a couple of Brigades also? Brigade 65 should replace where Brigade 67 is. Brigade 67 is just north to the Saidnaya Prison.http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=33.698208&lon=36.432037&z=13&m=b&gz=0;363374519;336870675;0;0;997352;238502&show=/26274626/Army-Base-HQ&search=Damascus%20Syria Rob2013 (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.141.28.127 (talk) 08:48, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Done! Roma-borisov (talk) 18:36, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Harasta

Harasta is mostly in government hands but rebels have been trying since summer 2012 to advance into it.Reuters Roma-borisov (talk) 08:59, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I am thinking this should maybe warrant Harasta being marked as government-held but with a rebel ring around it? EkoGraf (talk) 14:15, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Most of news agencies publish story about explosion in Harasta. Explosion killed about 75 soldiers in military building. This should confirm SAA presence in city. And green circle arround city.Kostadin24 (talk) 14:30, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Wrong guys. Here is the lcoation of the base http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=33.549049&lon=36.374413&z=16&m=b&search=harasta%20syria Sopher99 (talk) 15:04, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

http://m.gulfnews.com/news/region/syria/fighting-rages-in-qusary-and-damascus-1.1189206

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/27/syria-chemical-attack-damascus_n_3342023.html

http://jordantimes.com/article/slim-hope-of-truce-as-fighting-rages-on-syria-battlefields < from just today

"rebel controlled town of Harasta " If anything we should change it to green. Sopher99 (talk) 15:11, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

These sources are more reliable: Harasta is mostly in government hands but rebels have been trying since summer 2012 to advance into it. Reuters NBS News Globalpost Roma-borisov (talk) 15:28, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Your sources are out-dated Sopher, from half a year ago. The ones about it being mostly government-held are from yesterday. EkoGraf (talk) 16:04, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

The information in this source for October 22, 2012: The Jordan Times and here's proof:Daily News Egypt Roma-borisov (talk) 16:23, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Qara, Rif Dimashq

Fierce fighting around the surrounding areas and government shelling. Rob2013 (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.34.40.181 (talk) 11:45, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Fighting erupted around the town of Qara in Syria’s mountainous Qalamoun region near Lebanon’s border.NOWRoma-borisov (talk) 20:16, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

More reporst from Qarah, http://yallasouriya.wordpress.com/2013/11/16/syria-progress-posts-about-a-minute-ago-qalamoun/ http://yallasouriya.wordpress.com/2013/11/16/syria-progress-posts-13-minutes-ago-damascussuburbs-syria/ Rob2013 (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.34.42.169 (talk) 08:35, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

The source is not reliable need confirmation from other sources.Roma-borisov (talk) 09:12, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

UN Refugee Agency: Hearing reports of 800 families arriving in Arsal after violent clashes in Qarah.Al Jazeera Roma-borisov (talk) 12:50, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Syria's state TV is reporting that troops have captured a town near the Lebanon border, days after launching a wide offensive to regain the mountainous region.The Daily Star Reuters NOWXinhua Roma-borisov (talk) 12:04, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Please mark Qara (near Lebanon border, north of Damascus) as government control. This is confirmed by BBC and other mainstream Western media - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-25006486 This was apparently a key smuggling route for the militants. -Helvetica (talk) 21:39, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

 Done Tradedia^talk 12:41, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

al-Dwayrineh, Aleppo

I noticed being posted on the map but the location is wrong; it is directly east of Aleppo International Airport and just North West of Tal Hasel. Here is the location: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=36.188044&lon=37.281761&z=14&m=b&search=Aleppo%20 Also, if somebody wants to be specific the Jibreen District is also under Government control. It is located west of Al Dwayrineh: http://www.syriatimes.sy/index.php/news/local/9371-jibreen-village-march-in-support-of-the-syrian-army http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13920822000300 Rob2013 (talk)

Fars News not a reliable source.Roma-borisov (talk) 06:49, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Duly noted but this is the best I could find. http://sana.sy/eng/21/2013/11/12/512209.htm Rob2013 (talk)

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/11/19/335564/syrian-army-makes-more-gains-in-aleppo/

Press TV also has video footage and it is reliable.

And here is another one :).

http://www.trust.org/item/20131119145959-vur9p/?source=search — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daki122 (talk • contribs) 11:33, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Rastan & Talbiseh

According to this 20 November 2013 RT report, both towns were retaken by SAA following days of heavy fighting.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 23:32, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Both towns are constantly bombarded by Syrian Air Force & Army artillery but I vert much doubt they've seized both towns.Rob2013 (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.34.46.86 (talk) 07:18, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Pro government media says about destroying boats with weapons in lake, but not mentioned - capturing Rastan.Kostadin24 (talk) 09:59, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

I dont give my personal opinion, I simply give a journalistic source stating that. Ahmadac had reverted my edit claiming RT is not a reliable source, but unless he had proof about it or a consensus on it (as RT is used as a reliable source in dozens if not hundreds of WP articles), I will restore my edit.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 16:21, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

 Comment: As Im not a POV-pusher as other notorious users (more correct call them vandals, if you look this page frequently you know what Im talking about), I will only put both towns as besieged, as this sources confirm: Syria War Turns to Homs (June 2013), Syrian forces pound rebel bastion of Rastan (May 2012), Battle for Syrian town of Rastan continues despite ceasefire (May 2012).--HCPUNXKID (talk) 19:18, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

I agree for this part the towns are besieged as the army controls most of the countryside of the both towns that's why you don't see rebels attacking any nearby villages Daki122 (talk) 20:45, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Atme, Idlib

It seems Atme was allegedly taken by a ISIS(L) from the Suqour al-Sham(Islam) Brigade.http://news.yahoo.com/al-qaeda-affiliate-captures-syrian-town-border-turkey-032952200.html Rob2013 (talk)

Deir Salman and Al-Abbade

Deir Salman and Al-Abbade under the full control of the army! This source of opposition and is based on reports from twitter and can not be used for editing.Yalla Souriya37.53.0.59 (talk) 18:38, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Yallasouriya is totally unreliable and also pro opposition, it only getting news from twitter and dont have any other source.78.191.177.106 (talk) 02:27, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Removal of Syrian civil war map

I can understand the reasons for deleting it from the Cities and towns during the Syrian civil war article, but the link is not enough, a schematic general map of Syria must be included to have a first and general vision of the military situation. Perhaps a map showing only territorial divisions (SAA and allies-held, FSA and allies-held, YPG and allies-held, and contested areas) without cities, towns, military bases or other infrastructures.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 18:38, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Agree. EkoGraf (talk) 00:25, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Babbila

Babbila under the full control of the army! Sopher99 if you do not know to use the Fars News for editing Wikipedia is prohibited, as it is recognized is not a reliable source. You may not know you all sooner or which source to use, the main thing that it was profitable to you. Fars News37.53.0.59 (talk) 18:43, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Why Babbila is marked as disputed, since she was 17 November under full control of the army.EastdayXinhuaChinaNew EuropeThe Cairo Post37.55.38.237 (talk) 17:34, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Deir Al Atya and Nawaa and base 80

Please don't be so prompt to put Deir Al Atya green as it is still contest at this time !!. I wondering why Nawa is red from several days as I didn't see anything about this. Do you have some sources about that ?. Thanks.

It seems too that there is fighting around base 80 from yesterday in Aleppo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.39.253 (talk) 14:52, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Nawa is under Army control (Reuters). While Deir Al Atya should be contested but go figure out why Lothar thinks it is Rebel held And for Base 80 as you said fighting is going on around it not in it and that fighting is mostly concentrated to the north near Naqqarin.Daki122 (talk) 17:08, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Daki122 and thanks to Lothar to change Deir Atya green to minimum contest (many proof on that). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.39.253 (talk) 17:46, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Deir Atiyah changed to besieged, per Syrian troops kill over 100 rebels in siege battle Business Ghana, 25 Nov., 10 medical staffers killed in Syria Business Standard, 26 Nov.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 23:22, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Deir Salman and Abbadeh under the full control of the army!

Where in the news referred to the capture of these cities, it says about the fighting near the town of Oteiba. Alhanuty does not have to interpret the news as you feel like.Reuters 37.55.38.237 (talk) 18:44, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Fixed it and im getting tiered of this pro-opp supporters and cheerleaders always changing towns with no sources they must be pissed off with the Army advances but the hell even if they change it here does not make it better on the ground for the rebels i rely don't know why they think it will change anything on the ground even Al-Jazeera has given up on propaganda http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_2kiUAFAqs&list=UUNye-wNBqNL5ZzHSJj3l8Bg just watch this and all will be cleared -_-.Daki122 (talk) 19:35, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Rebel are trying to retake Oteiba/Otayhbah

[2] Esn (talk) 10:01, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Rebels are trying to retake the town of Oteiba in order to break a heavy blockade on the opposition-held suburbs in the east that ring the capital.Reuters Fierce clashes between regime troops and rebels near an opposition stronghold east of Syria's capital Damascus has killed more than 70 combatants, a monitoring group reported on Sunday. Saturday's fighting in the Eastern Ghouta region killed 28 jihadists of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and the Al-Nusra Front, 26 fighters from the Free Syrian Army, and 18 soldiers, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said.The Daily Star37.52.27.151 (talk) 10:16, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

The sources don't report fighting inside the town of Oteiba nor does the latest report from Reuters report that. It says that rebels attacked string of checkpoints outside towns in Eastern Ghouta and that at least a 100 rebels and 60 government soldiers were killed in clashes also to point out that Otaiba is a transit point in Ghuta so rebels might be trying to cross out or in to Ghuta.Also to point out that fighting near a town does not make the town contested as there is a lot of fighting going around Nawa,Ariha,Marat al Numan and others but that does not make them contested because there is no fighting inside the towns.

Ottayba is red and no source could say anything else. Even Reuters give the only one reference on it : Abdel Rahmane Al Tizi !. Stop playing with this Map as, for few weeks, it tried to be Honest !. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.39.253 (talk) 15:12, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/24/us-syria-crisis-damascus-siege-idUSBRE9AN09420131124 Daki122 (talk) 14:25, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Sheikh Najjar

Meanwhile, Syria's state-run news agency said the Syrian army carried out "intensive, successful qualitative operations" against armed rebels in the northern province of Aleppo, eliminating several groups with all of their weapons and equipments. The operations took place at Kastello, Sheikh Najjar, west of Khan al-Asal town, al-Bab, and east of al-Nairab area among others, the report said.Global TimesPhil StarXinhuaeastday Eastdaywikimapia37.52.27.151 (talk) 10:52, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Government forces started a push into the Sheikh Najjar industrial zone in the northeastern part of Aleppo.Al Monitor37.55.208.23 (talk) 06:29, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

YABROUD

There is now fighting inside this town for days between rebels and SAA. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.39.253 (talk) 19:38, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

You have not given any source if you can provide any reliable source please do so and we can then change the mapDaki122 (talk) 20:34, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Sources about clashes in Yabrud (in Spanish): Siria: 160 muertos en dos días de combates (EFE, 24 Nov.): "El martes pasado el ejército se apoderó de Qara y la batalla continúa en las localidades de Yabrud y Deir Attiya.", Rebeldes atacan a soldados en zona en poder de Al Assad (El Universal, 21 Nov.): "Fuerzas sirias recapturaron Qara y luchan por Yabrud.". So I've changed it to contested.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 23:08, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Cherubim Monastery

Syrian opposition claims: Army turned monastery into base [3] The Daily Star — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.52.27.151 (talk) 21:07, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

And? What does that allegation had to do with this article?. I could bring you dozens of articles about destruction of churches and monasteries by "rebels", if you want...--HCPUNXKID (talk) 22:45, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

HAMA CITY

Since we are suddenly going to use Spanish sources per the Yabroud section just 2 sections above, I thought it would be nice to see what they have to say about other cities.

http://espanol.cri.cn/1161/2013/08/30/1s288247.htm

http://www.eitb.com/es/noticias/internacional/detalle/1689946/siria-guerra--explota-camion-bomba-ciudad-hama/

http://noticias.es.msn.com/mundo/brahimi-exige-una-presencia-%C2%ABcre%C3%ADble%C2%BB-de-la-oposici%C3%B3n-siria-en-ginebra

Sopher99 (talk) 23:34, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

And this one's in Catalan http://www.elperiodico.cat/ca/noticias/internacional/cotxe-explosius-morts-2767280 Sopher99 (talk) 23:40, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

As usual, you are using outdated sources (from August 2013) or manipulating its content (a car bomb -as other users had tried to explain you several times- doesnt mean a town is contested, if so, lets put as contested all the towns bombed by the SAF, OK? I'm sure you wouldnt agree...). And, where is the problem using non-english sources? There are for example, sources in French and no one had protested against its inclusion.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 16:16, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Eastern Ghouta Rebel "Offensive"

This is the latest I could find on the situation. http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jc1r4SVpeSM1NQBz_Qyj3VE1vzDA?docId=7c36c883-3c7e-4e12-bedd-f838c81411c3 Rob2013 (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.141.21.55 (talk) 20:58, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Rob 2013 : Did you change the MAP ?. At this time, it was notified both by rebels and SAA that east Ghouta offensive was a rebel defeat !. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.39.253 (talk) 22:24, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Nope, I dont have the knowledge on how to "edit" the map & what source do you have that rebels & government claim that the counter offensive has failed? with the exception of the link I posted below? Also I noticed somebody changed Otaybah into contested.Rob2013 (talk)--99.141.21.55 (talk) 03:18, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay, so what I haved gathered for eastern ghouta is this, rebels allegedly taken 7 villages but 3 were retaken by pro-government forces http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jc1r4SVpeSM1NQBz_Qyj3VE1vzDA?docId=7c36c883-3c7e-4e12-bedd-f838c81411c3 Right now there is a opposition blackout on the offensive; although the rebels managed to capture the towns of Deir Salman, Al-Qisa, & Bahariyah http://www.kentucky.com/2013/11/25/2953643/hezbollah-takes-casualties-in.html & this link says it the Rebel offensive has failed but I will wait for more info.Rob2013 (talk)--99.141.21.55 (talk) 01:59, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

What's happen on this MAP ?. Everybody could change it like he/she wants ?. Please read any sources (OSDH, rebel sites, pro gouvernement sites..........). All said the same thing : Rebel offensive in east Ghouta failed !. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.220.156.2 (talk) 10:43, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Nope rebel offensive succeeded. http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/11/25/209706/hezbollah-takes-casualties-in.html Sopher99 (talk) 14:07, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Yep, they succeeded...according to themselves, as it can be read on the article. So ridiculous trying to distort the sources...--HCPUNXKID (talk) 16:33, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

And who says they failed I wonder? Sopher99 (talk) 18:26, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

The siege has not failed nore it has succeeded, in order for them to complete the siege even under constant artillery & aerial shelling they need to take otaybah which they haven't.Rob2013 (talk)--99.140.255.64 (talk) 01:30, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

 Comment: There are many sources (just search in Google "Eastern Ghouta siege") that state that Eastern Ghouta region is under siege or besieged. According to that reliable sources, I could put as besieged all the "rebel"-held towns of that area (Mesraba, Al-Shifuniya, Autaya, al-Nashabiya, Saqba, Kafr Batna, Zabdin, Jisrin & al-Maliha). Im not gonna do it yet only as a gesture of good faith, hoping that some other users take note of this and stop POV-pushing, vandalism, misinterpretation of sources and other attitudes that had no place here. This is an offer, and like all offers is time-limited. If I dont see a change in the behaviour of that users, I would feel free to make that changes and put all that towns collectively as besieged. Do I have to remember that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not simply a web, a blog or a forum?. Regards,--HCPUNXKID (talk) 22:51, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Al Dumayr(Rif Dimashq) Contested?

What is the source for this? Rob2013 (talk)--75.34.42.44 (talk) 06:19, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Khanasser, Aleppo

Why is Khanasser contested? what is the sourcce for this?Rob2013 (talk)--99.141.21.55 (talk) 02:00, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Khanasser not contested! Since the source is clearly stated:In Aleppo, the fighting focused around Khanasser, in the southeast of the province, while clashes in Damascus continued around Marj, east of the capital, Abdul Rahman said.Gulfnews Sopher99 correct its inaccuracy. Since you have mistakenly changed it to the challenged.37.55.208.23 (talk) 06:17, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Reverted. Sopher99 is repeatedly vandalising this template. I wonder why he is not banned yet.Ariskar (talk) 13:41, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

It seems he had some administrators friends. Theres no other explanation, other user would have been banned long time ago...--HCPUNXKID (talk) 16:19, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Baharieh and Qasimieh

The Syrian troops repelled the rebels' attack against military positions and checkpoints at the towns of Baharieh, Qasimieh, and Qaria al-Shamieh area in the Eastern al-Ghouta Suburb.Xinhua China Daily Global Times News Track India37.55.208.23 (talk) 06:30, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Where are the proper sources? State tv claims? If this goes on too much further it will be time to reconsider what sources I am going to use... Sopher99 (talk) 18:25, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

abbadah and deir salman

These cities are under the total control of the army since not one reliable source is not specified. And that source which is used to change the 100% opposition and is based mainly on rollers from YouTube:http://eaworldview.com/2013/11/syria-forecast-battles-east-ghouta-near-damascus/#ghouta (This shit is not a reliable source!) If so change that soon will change based on messages from Twitter.37.55.208.23 (talk) 06:39, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Dont say that about Twitter so loud, some users would be delighted of breaking WP rules using activist social media instead of journalistic sources...--HCPUNXKID (talk) 16:44, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

QAYSA AND DEIR SALMAN

Rebels took them. http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/11/25/209706/hezbollah-takes-casualties-in.html Sopher99 (talk) 14:10, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Per one unknown anonymous rebel activist. Dubious. I would hold of until a secondary confirmation is abtained. Even SOHR has so far not confirmed the alleged capture. For now it should be contested as Lothar put it, but if secondary confirmation is not abtained by the time the offensive ends it should be reverted back to Army-held. EkoGraf (talk) 08:46, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

The map

Does nobody give a bother about the fact that user Alhanuty managed ONCE AGAIN to break the map? I request that the map should be repaired. OberschIesien90 (talk) 20:16, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Yalda

According to users Sopher99 & Lothar von Richtofen, shelling or bombing a town is sufficient to change its status, so I guess other users are allowed to change to red or contested every single town bombed or shelled by the Syrian Armed Forces. Thats what their "logic" states, so...--HCPUNXKID (talk) 00:13, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

HA so true. just out of theory; if contributors decided to have a "Under Airstrike/Artillery strike" symbol EVERY city & town from Aleppo to Dara'a would be filled with said symbols. Rob2013 (talk)99.140.255.64 (talk) 13:14, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Completely agree with that comment !. This MAP begin to be a big "nothing" !. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.220.156.2 (talk) 10:58, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

While we´re on the subject of map, what happened to it? I don´t see it. EllsworthSK (talk) 12:49, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

It's there just hidden, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_civil_war#Current it's under "current". Rob2013 (talk) 99.140.255.64 (talk) 13:04, 27 November 2013 (UT

ERBIN AND DOUMA

SAA entered in these 2 towns. So, should be highlighted.

June 2012 map

As I said before, I can understand (but do not agree with) the removal of the current military situation map on this article (although maintaining a link). But, no offence, what is ridiculous is to maintain a June 2012 situation partial map while deleting the current (November 2013) national situation one. I could understand maintaining it on the History of cities and towns during the Syrian civil war, but that map has no place here now, I repeat, in late November 2013.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 23:06, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Sayyida zaynap, nawa, adra are not contested

sopher99 your source for sayyida zaynab is old, syrian army cleared south of damascus in last weeks. for nawa, your source is youtube based and youtube is not a reliable source. for adra, your source not giving any details, so it maybe mean in adra industrial area and it is also contested. also there isnt any source for adra contested..78.191.81.2 (talk) 03:31, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

I know a lot of sources are misusing sources now just read this article:

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2013/Nov-28/239185-battles-rage-around-damascus-jihadists-slay-rival-rebel-leader.ashx#axzz2ln9iUe3A

Several pro-opposition websites reported that the Damascus suburb of Otaiba was seized by rebel groups, earning rebukes from activist networks.

“The news is completely false,” said a media activist group in the Ghouta suburbs. “The areas of Marj and Eastern Ghouta are still surrounded by Assad troops and their mercenaries. We ask the media and coordination committees to stop playing fast and loose with the blood of the fighters in order to get a scoop.”

Even there own activist are saying that the info given from the rebels is false how do they expect people now to bilive everything they say.Plus for Adra information may have been manipulated because it does not match SOHR report of the town i mean they are pro-opp and they are not even reporting fighting in Adra.This is there last report and they only say mortar rounds from rebels struck the town nothing else.

Reef Dimashq: 2 mortar shells fell near the entrance of the police residential area in the A'dra town which led to the death of 1 child, the injury of at least 4 and material losses. Daki122 (talk) 10:56, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Deir Atiah

Breaking News Network correspondent confirmed that Syrian Arab Army has seized control of Deir Atiah town in Damascus countryside after it implemented a series of large-scale operations during the last two days in which it managed to kill dozens of gunmen, including Arab and foreign militants.Bbreaking NewsIslamic Invitation Turkeybut it is pro government source and is not a reliable source and can not be used for editing, still need confirmation of this information from reliable sources.94.178.211.149 (talk) 10:46, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

I have seen this news there will probably be a report any way here is the video that SANA aired from the middle of the town

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJfeI2NNt98

You can go on google maps and can see for your self that this is the town of Deir Atiah (you can recognize the town square )

Daki122 (talk) 10:56, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Here is also The Daily Star report

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2013/Nov-28/239226-syria-army-retakes-deir-attiyeh-town-near-damascus-tv.ashx#axzz2lw9JjOka

Daki122 (talk) 11:01, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Syria's army recaptured Deir Attiyeh on Thursday, state television said, six days after rebel fighters seized the town on the strategic highway between Damascus and the central city of Homs.The Daily StarYahoo NewsNOWFrance Press94.178.211.149 (talk) 11:14, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Beit Saham

In the city of truce between the army and opposition fighters.Al AkhbarThe Arab American News94.178.211.149 (talk) 11:39, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Oteiba

Oteiba under the control of the army! No reports of fighting in the city.

Several pro-opposition websites reported that the Damascus suburb of Otaiba was seized by rebel groups, earning rebukes from activist networks.

“The news is completely false,” said a media activist group in the Ghouta suburbs. “The areas of Marj and Eastern Ghouta are still surrounded by Assad troops and their mercenaries. We ask the media and coordination committees to stop playing fast and loose with the blood of the fighters in order to get a scoop.”The Daily Star94.178.211.149 (talk) 13:01, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Qarah

Qarah under the control of the army. And what a crappy and is not a reliable source used to change Qarah controlled by the opposition. Syrian Observer it's not even SOHR and what it is not clear based on the data source and the opposition is not confirmed not one reliable source. This is ridiculous even on SOHR is not confirmed.94.178.211.149 (talk) 13:32, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Nabk and Qarah

First of all Sopher99 let me advise you to read the whole article before you use a source.The source about Qarah is either written by the rebels or by someone with no brain.

http://www.syrianobserver.com/News/News/Activists+Claim+Qara+Retaken+by+Opposition

The Union also said the rebels had stormed the headquarters of the Republican Guard on Mount Qasioun which overlooks the capital.

Did you read this sentence or you missed that.Now that is what I call a desperate propaganda.If Qarah was retaken by rebels It would be a great victory for them and SOHR would have reported that and they are pro-opp.About Nabk the city is contested according to SOHR and many others there is fighting and yesterday it was reported that a rebel was killed by clashes in Nabk (1 rebel fighter was killed by clashes with regular forces. 2 civilians, 1 is a woman, from the al-Nabek city were killed: the woman was killed by sniper shots and the man was killed under unknown circumstances) Here is the report:

https://www.facebook.com/syriaohr/posts/454924114615932

Daki122 (talk) 13:43, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

First of all, are you out of your mind? You just broke the 1 revert rule despite being banned for three days. I won't report you if you revert your addition to nabk because this soruce - the daily star http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2013/Nov-28/239185-battles-rage-around-damascus-jihadists-slay-rival-rebel-leader.ashx

Clearly states rebels took control of nabk. Also SOHR sources? I thought you all agreed not to use it. Just imagine how much more editing I will be doing on this page if we start using sohr's facebook. Sopher99 (talk) 13:58, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Facebook is not a reliable source. A city An Nabak taken. Pro-opposition websites said 10 people were killed in the town of Nabk in the Qalamoun region by government shelling. Rebels seized the town last week, leading to the closure of the main highway between Homs and Damascus.The Daily Star94.178.211.149 (talk) 14:03, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

REPEAT AFTER ME : FACEBOOK IS NOT A SOURCE. FACEBOOK IS A MEDIA, ON WHICH A SOURCE MAY BE LOCATED. ... If you are thinking of the Wikipedia guideline about Facebook sources, note that it refers only to PRIMARY SOURCES ON FACEBOOK. A primary source is a source that is party to the information involved, and not an observer of that information. Also note that SOHR is an observer of facts to which it is not a party, thus a SECONDARY SOURCE, not affected by the wikipedia guideline about Facebook. I suggest re-reading Wikipedia policy a few times. 174.93.179.165 (talk) 09:46, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

No i did not broke 1 revert I by mistake put Nabak government held then went and fixed it will put as rebel held but any more reports coming about clashes in the town and I will put it back as contested.Daki122 (talk) 14:37, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

And second of all are you out of your mind your using the worst sources.You just changed Qarah based on a sources that claims rebels stormed Mount Qusain what the f*** you are constantly using youtube videos for sources and you are telling me about my sources well at least I use credible sources and not Al-Qaeda newspapers.Daki122 (talk) 14:50, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Alqaeda newspapers? It just so happens that ISIS is notorious for arresting activists who report to such groups that provide the information to the Syrian observor, particularily in Raqqa. Ironically its Alqaeda groups who are the biggest threats right now to the Syrian Observor. Sopher99 (talk) 15:01, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes the Syrian Observer a source so reliable that claims that the rebels stormed a Republican Guard base overlooking Damascus.Next thing you know they will report that the regime is getting help from Martians who are fighting against the rebels and say that if they don't stop they will invade Mars.Daki122 (talk) 15:17, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

? well the rebels consider the lebanese hizbolla aliens, and have threatened to invade Lebanon ... does that count ? ;) André437 (talk) 05:36, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

O yea and here is another source that claims the Army had entered Nabk http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2013/Nov-28/239226-syria-army-retakes-deir-attiyeh-town-near-damascus-tv.ashx#axzz2lw9JjOka

A security source said regime loyalists also entered the nearby town of Nabuk.

So im going to leave it there so you your self can change Nabak as contestedDaki122 (talk) 15:22, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

more sources.Global PostNOWMiddle East Online94.178.211.149 (talk) 15:27, 28 November 2013 (UTC) http://news.yahoo.com/syrian-forces-retake-deir-attiyeh-near-damascus-102645482.html

So Sopher how is NABAK still held by the rebels Daki122 (talk) 15:30, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Nabeck felt tonight into SAA hands. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.39.253 (talk) 22:09, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

60 % of Nabeck under SAA, still contested. Nabeck and Rima (between Nabeck and Yabroud) were bombed last night. Sources:

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/middle-east/government-forces-winning-the-war-in-syria-says-pm-1.1613469

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2013/Dec-02/239596-syrian-aerial-strikes-kill-at-least-50-people-in-town-near-aleppo.ashx#axzz2mJIdYv1jAriskar (talk) 11:13, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Request: Add 2 Syrian Army Bases

I've come to the attention that there are two more bases just south of Al Qutayfah, Rif Dimashq; one of them is the "Artillery Base" which is a pretty big base and the other one is the "Army Brigade Base" which I think is Brigade 14 according to "Yalla Souriya" http://yallasouriya.wordpress.com/2013/11/29/syria-missiles-didnt-stop-on-bakha-farms-close/ which I know it is not a credible source but still it should be taken note & added on the map. Here are the coordinates showing both bases just south of Al Qutayfah http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=33.718843&lon=36.595888&z=14&m=b&show=/23181653/Army-Brigade-Base&search=Damascus%20Syria Rob2013 (talk)99.140.252.69 (talk) 05:14, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

If we have to add all the alleged SAA bases in Wikimapia, there will be dozens missing in the map...--HCPUNXKID (talk) 23:32, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

I only asked if those two bases could be added because they do have a role in the war.Rob2013 (talk)--75.34.42.44 (talk) 05:20, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

And I only give my opinion. I can do it, isnt it?--HCPUNXKID (talk) 17:50, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Of course you can, where did I say you couldn't give your opinion? read the sentence carefully or dont reply at all if you can't understand.Rob2013 (talk)--75.34.34.120 (talk) 01:45, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Only a suggestion:Relax yourself.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 17:18, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Mine was too & I am relaxed.Rob2013 (talk)--99.141.23.162 (talk) 01:43, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Village of Tiyara, Rif Aleppo

This city, situated North East of Al Nairab (Aleppo) is under SAA hands. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.98.99 (talk) 12:52, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

source — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.155.63.218 (talk) 16:00, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

This is a government source & SAMA TV so take it as you will; pictures and videos show the reporter near Tiyarah(Township) & Tal Tiyarah Hill, the town is very small. Sama TV Video & Syrian TV Video Syrian TV shows the transport directorate building & Tal Tiyarah Hill. Pictures of Tal Tiyarah

Rob2013 (talk)--75.34.41.185 (talk) 05:56, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Images are not partisan, its the media who is, so as the images clearly show the town in SAA control, I'll add it to the map. Also I remove Aleppo thermal plant. One thing is adding basic infrastructure (dams, military bases, border crossings, airports, roads...) and another adding every single infrastructure (big or small, relevant or irrelevant) in the whole country, wich will made the map unreadable and a non-sense. I still cant understand why some checkpoints have been added to the map, I will expose that in another post...--HCPUNXKID (talk) 18:19, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you.Rob2013 (talk)-- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.34.41.185 (talk) 18:55, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

It has been said that the photos of Facebook is not a reliable source, as well as videos from YouTube, even if they are taken from the official media This means that the city must be removed or else to mark it contested meas then yet bude granted more reliable data confirming his capture. 46.200.244.1 (talk) 21:30, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Are you sure of what you say? About Facebook, its not the photos what its not a reliable source, but all Facebook pages (official or not) in the majority of cases (see WP:FACEBOOK). And about YouTube, can you endorse your claim?. As far as I know, if the video is from a media outlet, it can be used. Logically, what cannot be considered as a reliable source is a crappy, flickering, activist amateur video. Above all, lets do not make double standards, as other users have used (for example) al-Jazeera videos as sources here, and, curiously, no one had protested its inclusion...--HCPUNXKID (talk) 22:33, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Of course WP:FACEBOOK refers only to PRIMARY SOURCES ON FACEBOOK. That is, sources directly involved in the information involved, and not observers of the information. Which indeed applies to most Facebook pages, but NOT to pages such as SOHR, which is a SECONDARY SOURCE. Kindly respect this guideline André437 (talk) 10:01, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

MESRABA

Can anyone explain what's going on with that town? Someone moved it from Ghouta to Turkey, I suppose by accident. I corrected that, but now a different person did it again. WTF? Kami888 (talk) 00:28, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Rabia, Syria

The small town of Rabia (also the centre of the sub-district of the same name) at the northern part of Latakia Governorate near the border with Turkey, is major centre for the Turkmen militants of the FSA. I guess the town should be mentioned on the map. It is currently controlled by the opposition groups and along with the surrounding forests considered an important passage for weapon smuggling from Turkey to the armed groups.--Zyzzzzzy (talk) 11:45, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was moved. --BDD (talk) 23:36, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Cities and towns during the Syrian civil war → Cities and towns during the Syrian Civil War – The main page was just moved from "Syrian civil war" to "Syrian Civil War", there should be consistency. Charles Essie (talk) 17:51, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Agree -Per consistency.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 22:08, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

 Disagree Pointless. Consistancy is related to disambiguation, and there is no ambiguity. As well, the initial capitalisation is much more natural, the proposed is internally inconsistant. André437 (talk) 10:18, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Checkpoints in map

I cant understand why some users had added a few checkpoints to the map as if they were military bases. If we are going to add checkpoints, just add all, not only a few. In my opinion, something as ephemeral as a checkpoint should not be added to the map, nor as a military base (as they are not military bases), nor as everything else, because if we are going to add every single checkpopoint in the country, the map would be an unreadable mess. Also, check the incoherence of adding checkpoints in a map wich do not have roads in it. Totally a non-sense, they must be removed...--HCPUNXKID (talk) 18:33, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

AgreeAriskar (talk) 19:44, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Disagree. Checkpoints are very useful in assessing the military situation and they do not currently clutter the map, they greatly enhance it. I see no reason why anyone would think that the map would benefit from the removal of, say, the Kindi Hospital or the Brick factory. Kami888 (talk) 04:07, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Disagree. It adds more information to the map, so it is benefitial. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.74.13.43 (talk) 13:00, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

One strange thing is that the bases and checkpoints are just beeing removed if the rebells take over one. At least the major bases like Base 46 should stay and be colored in green in this case, like its handeled with the airports like Meng. The structures just dont dissapear. OberschIesien90 (talk) 16:30, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Disagree. It can be useful to keep checkpoints, even those taken (particularly if maintained) by the rebels, as well as bases, which can be, as in the case of base 80 by the Aleppo airport, of significance in future battles. André437 (talk) 10:34, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Rebels ready to unite with the army against Al Qaeda

The head of the official Syrian rebel force has declared war on al-Qaeda groups in the country, saying he is ready to join arms with government forces against them once President Assad has been ousted.The Times95.134.193.238 (talk) 08:29, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Not trying to be hostile but what does this have to do with the map?Rob2013 (talk)--75.34.32.158 (talk) 09:18, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes, just like that, as information. Maybe someone from experienced users know where this information better place.!95.134.193.238 (talk) 09:22, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

This is the talk page for both the tables and the map (one is redirected to the other.)

This statement shouldn't be seen as alarmist, since the newly formed Islamic Front, a merger of a wide range of moderate to less moderate islamic forces, has called the ISIS "scum" to be eliminated. Even al-Nusra is against the ISIS. Al-Nusra has promised to abide by a rebel consensus, largely neutralising their al-Qaida association. Given that, once Assad is defeated, just who do you think the remaining regime forces would prefer to associate themselves with ? André437 (talk) 10:48, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

And I may have found information confirming that Nasiriya not contested, and under the control of the army. Although see for yourself, here's the source.ISW95.134.193.238 (talk) 09:27, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Ariskar (talk) 10:16, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Al Tall

Why this town is shown as green in red circle on the map? Does anyone has any source, confirming it? In any other page, any other map, Al-Tall is shown as government-held since August 2012 with a number of sources. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_civil_war#Al-Tall http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rif_Dimashq_offensive_%28August%E2%80%93October_2012%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rif_Dimashq_offensive_%28August%E2%80%93October_2012%29.svg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dmitryfcz123 (talk • contribs) 17:11, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Done.Ariskar (talk) 00:54, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

And correctly reverted by Lothar as per: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/14/world/middleeast/in-syria-motorists-press-on-yielding-for-war.htmlAriskar (talk) 10:16, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Unbelieveable. "Residents say that rebels are active in the town" - is enough to change town to green. But when it comes to changing towns the other way, like with Al-Nabk, sometimes 5-6 sources is not enough. I wonder if some towns will stay green long after the end of war, and we'll wait for NYT or Reuters to write that they are government-held:) Dmitryfcz123 (talk) 18:53, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Otaybah

I think the video below already proves that rebels already reached Otaybah and struggling to capture it. It shows the rebels at the entrance of Otaybah (see the board at 0:10)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68Hijo28tTk

If they are in Otaybah, we must also question the regime control in Qasimya, Baharia, Jarba, Qaysa, Abbadeh which pro-rebel sources claim they already stormed them.

Amateur video of militants is not a reliable source. SSA and NDF in Al OtaybaHanibal911 (talk) 20:34, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

It's not Amateur video of militants it's the Syrian National Defense Press Office http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EfJ-XCtFMQ — Preceding unsigned comment added by LogFTW (talk • contribs) 10:14, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

In East Gouta the process of the islamic hordes failed and the army and NDF continues to clean the orchards around the town of Al Otaibam, Deir Salman and Marj Sultan of the remains of the rebels.SSA and NDF in Al OtaybaHanibal911 (talk) 20:42, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

I have seen this video but it is a youtube video and it says otaybah 1km away and on top of that you should see this video

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=177544942452602 it was posted 21 hours ago and has the army walking around the town and shows the same traffic sign that the rebels filmed.(NOTE:This is a pro-regime video and does not reflect that i'm a supporter of the regime,I came across it searching for info for the Syrian war)It is pretty clear that the rebels just skirmished near the town not inside of it and on top of that you had the rebels lying about there alleged capture of the town early in the offensive in eastern guta and then rebel activists denied that info and said rebels did not make any progress and that they were still under siege.

Fair to point out that the only fighting being reported in recent days is in the Marj area were rebels took quite a lot of losses(according to SOHR).Also the rebel offensive in eastern Guta failed to break the siege which means the government forces and their Shiite militias are still in control of the towns.Al-Jazeera(arabic) also pointed out that rebels didn't break the siege and only fighting was going on in the Marj area.Daki122 (talk) 20:40, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Here is a picture so there is no confusion about the town(same reporter from the video the picture also came with the video) https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/1459113_558770940871148_786009580_n.jpg Daki122 (talk) 20:51, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

"Didn't break the siege" is not the same thing as "didn't advance at all". In order for rebels to break the siege, they would need to fully capture and hold Otaybah and the towns west of it. It doesn't seem like they did that successfully, but it does absolutely seem like they at least advanced into the area, given that pro-government media have to report retaking it. That would mean that these towns should have been marked as contested. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 21:10, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Also that's not the same road sign, look closely. The rebel video shows one saying "18km <– Dumeir/<– Palmyra/1km –>Autaiba", while the NDF video shows one saying "30km –> Damascus/13km –> Nashabiah/1km <– Autaib/8km <– Haran Al awamid/20km <– Airport Road". In fact, the distances seem to work out to place the rebel sign roughly here and NDF sign roughly here—on opposite sides of the town. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 22:17, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Lothar just to point out that a skirmish on the outskirts of the town near a checkpoint is not the same as fighting in the town.You can see in this article (as the video has no date could have been filmed maybe last year cuz there is no reporter nor an interview its just a bunch of guys screaming around unlike the video i posted)http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2013/Nov-28/239185-battles-rage-around-damascus-jihadists-slay-rival-rebel-leader.ashx#axzz2ln9iUe3A and I quote “The news is completely false,” said a media activist group in the Ghouta suburbs. “The areas of Marj and Eastern Ghouta are still surrounded by Assad troops and their mercenaries. We ask the media and coordination committees to stop playing fast and loose with the blood of the fighters in order to get a scoop.” So this pretty much sums the things up about otayba Daki122 (talk) 21:18, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

And another source that quotes opposition activists in the area http://www.worldtribune.com/2013/11/25/rebels-take-heavy-losses-fail-to-break-siege-near-damascus/Daki122 (talk) 21:20, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

The claims that the activists reject are those of Otaybah being captured, which I also think are untrue. However, this calls into question the status of the towns west of Otaybah where fighting was reported several days ago. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 22:21, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Daki. Fighting in the area of the town, as the source describes it, is not the same as fighting inside the town itself. EkoGraf (talk) 21:38, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

I did't said they are in Otaiba, they are at the entrance of town. So I don't demand anything regarding Otaiba but I demand regarding Qasimya, Baharia, Jarba, Qaysa, Abbadeh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.155.104.15 (talk) 10:02, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes but there is no fighting in the area around those towns SOHR which is pro-opp never reported fighting there the only fighting was in the Marj area which is a very large area.Another thing to keep in mind is that the rebels never entered any towns every credible source like Reuters AJ The Daily Star and others mentioned only attacks on checkpoints near the towns.No mentions of fighting inside the towns.Daki122 (talk) 13:42, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

False. SOHR has reported fighting on the outskirts of Ahmadiyah now, which is further into supposed government territory than Dayr Salman. Bahariyah is also contested. Reports of fighting in unspecified locations in Eastern Ghouta regularly occur, and you cannot reasonably claim that it is impossible that they refer to the areas in question. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 18:22, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Are you reading your self you just said that the clashes took place near the town not in it.The other says on the front line at Bahariyah,but no mention that fighting is in the towns.Second of this is an insurgency war which means rebels can infiltrate in an area beyond the alleged front lines as civilians(as many times we can see rebels with no military uniform).How do you think the rebels are still fighting in E.Ghuta it is not like they have an air force to bring them ammo and fresh fighters.They just simply infiltrate bypassing army towns in the region.You should remember how many times the Army ambushed the rebels near Adra and Otayba killing up to 60 rebels at a time.This clashes may be happening because army patrols intercept rebels trying to get ammo food and other supplies in the besieged rebel towns nothing new here.Daki122 (talk) 19:15, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

You don't really understand the geography of East Ghouta very well, do you? The entire area is a collection of farming communities with no clear boundaries between farmland and village. Denser clusters of houses bleed out into the surrounding area, and it's hard to even say where one "town" ends and another begins. Just look at it. As defined in official censuses, the "town" includes the both the tighter nucleus and the diffuse surrounding "area" around it. In fact, the communities of East Ghouta are really better understood as "districts" than "towns" or anything else. That was one of the main reasons that it was once shown here with the large faded icon that made certain people mad—it's extremely vague.

Furthermore, Ahmadiyah is tucked deeply within the SAA buffer zone around Damascus International Airport, far from any connections to the outside. It doesn't really reasonably figure into any plausible supply lines, unlike Adra (to Qalamun) or Otaybah (to the vast deserts).However, Dayr Salman, located directly back on the road toward rebel territory, was one of the locations mentioned in the reports of rebel advances—and even pro-government media said that fighting occurred "in the town", in case you were about to split hairs with me again. In order to get from rebel-held East Ghouta to the "area" of Ahmadiyah, the shortest route is through Dayr Salman. You do the math.

The fact that SOHR does not give more specific details is not definitive evidence that nothing happened, like you continually try to claim. Contrary to many people's assumptions, the Observatory isn't some all-seeing eye over Syria. It's run by an exiled dissident who receives information from a broad network of contacts on the ground. These contacts, though generally effective, cannot be everywhere at once, and may very well be restricted by local conditions. It's highly likely that his contacts in East Ghouta have not always been at liberty to disclose locations given the rebel media blackout on the area. Numerous reports of fighting in the general "al-Ghouta al-Sharqiyah" have come out, and there's absolutely no reason to believe that they can't be about fighting here. SOHR may be loosely sympathetic to (parts of) the opposition, but that doesn't mean that it exists to trumpet each and every rebel advance.

I'm not even saying that we should turn anything green, if that's what making you so scared. There is ample evidence to change these locations to simply contested. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk)

But dude this is exactly what i said it is not the towns that are contested it is the countryside around the towns.The towns only act as garrisons and military bases for troops that are stationed there.The towns them self are not contested.See the geography of E.Ghuta the rebels can simply bypass all these towns without bumping in to government check points.I'm not saying that there is no fighting in the area I'm just saying that there is no fighting in the towns(Deir Salman was contested for i while I even gave the source even tough the source (AJ arabic)said that fighting was around the town or more accurate near the Marj area).I do not deny the fighting in E.Ghuta I'm just saying that the fighting is taking place outside these towns.There are 4-6km gaps between the army controlled towns which leaves plenty of room for opposition fighters to move around and clash with the army on checkpoints that they have set up in the Ghuta area.They can attack a town and if they don't succeed they simply vanish into thin air and then regroup and attack again.The clashes have constantly been there since the summer when the army choke off rebel lines and will be there until the army succeeds in capturing all the towns in Ghuta.Daki122 (talk) 12:49, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

And to the point of Deyr Salman the state TV said that weapons were destroyed and did not mention fighting in the town maybe a smuggler tried to get ammo into Ghuta like they do so often.If you ever watched a clip form ANNA news(pro regime TV which of course I do not use as a source but they rely have some cool videos about the war, who follows this war and is of course neutral can rely see some military action on their channel)they often show cars that are meant for the opposition full of ammo in government controlled areas (Even in Homs and Hama city's).Daki122 (talk) 12:57, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Map

And where is the map gone? This list is useless, while the map was one of the best resources on the internet for a strategic picture of the development of the war. It is difficult not to be suspicious of the motives of whoever decided to remove it, with the map turning ever more red as time goes on. Batchuba (talk) 19:30, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Wow, this is a really funny comment. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 03:19, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

The map is there (For a war map of the current situation, see here.) yo just need to click on "here".And for the red part i guess you haven't watched the news for a while or followed the situation of the war in a couple of monthsDaki122 (talk) 20:03, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

I've been following it assiduously, hence the awareness of incontrovertible fact that the SAA have taken two long strings of towns since early summer. I guess you are a propagandist of some sort, since it is not really arguable. None of which is relevant, so regardless - thanks for pointing out the link. Batchuba (talk) 04:33, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

I cannot understand the real reason that the map is not in the previous position in the webpage opening and has been moved in link status.--Dimitrish81 (talk) 10:21, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Exactly. Someone should fix it. AOnline (talk) 22:51, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

No, the map was removed because it's gotten too big for the page to handle correctly. If you try to put it in, it causes the list of references to disappear. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 19:07, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Minbij and Jarabulus

"In the past three days, ISIL has kidnapped at least 51 Kurds in the towns of Minbej and Jarablus," said the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.Among the hostages were nine children and a woman, said the Britain-based group, adding that there was no information on where they had been taken.Minbej and Jarablus are located in Aleppo province, which is home to a Kurdish minority.Syria jihadists kidnap 50 Kurds: activistsSyria jihadists kidnap 50 Kurds Hanibal911 (talk) 20:04, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

This isn't information relevant to the map. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 02:04, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Request: Add Army Base

I would like to request if the Syrian army base of "Regiment 404" could be added; location is in Dara'a governorate; HERE.Rob2013 (talk)75.34.43.199 (talk) 19:32, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Error, regiment 404 not found. (sorry I had to)Ariskar (talk) 17:40, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

An Nabk Still contested or controlled by the Army?

These Reports by Syrians TV Channel and NDF Media office showing the Syrians troops controlled all or at least most part (in the Patrice all) from An Nabk 4/12 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrGgNMM8Klg 4/12 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnZ61QATHMQ 4/12 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqCHl1wexc0 4/12 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4di1LL2Ljv8 5/12 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jY9G8X3Hq8U 5/12 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6L29gVbhue0 5/12 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5phrWDwaabg 6/12 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWjiIAoUVYk

I no founds images from Insurgents in the area — Preceding unsigned comment added by LogFTW (talk • contribs) 00:09, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

we must wait for official confirmation — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.102.233.228 (talk) 07:27, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

We all now the flow of events in Nabk, however its better to wait the offcial confirmation from Syrian and neutral sources.--Dimitrish81 (talk) 10:17, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Is this official enough? Syria army retakes al-Nabk town near Damascus --Bozocv (talk) 20:20, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Not really AOnline (talk) 22:57, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

I agree, Syrian Gov. hasnt officially announced that they control Al Nabk, they're still pockets of resistance.Rob2013 (talk)--99.141.30.223 (talk) 02:15, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

The fact that it's PressTV aside, the source says "government forces cleared the outskirts of the al-Nabk from militants". That's a far cry from taking the town itself. Next time try reading past the title. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 19:16, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

today will be official confirmation.i hope soo.... but press tv is good source... remember qusayr or aleppo province... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.94.111.253 (talk) 08:46, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Al Nabeck is on SAA hands and Rima Farms are contested. You could see that in any "impartial" media. Thanks to change accordingly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.39.74 (talk) 20:27, 8 December 2013 (UTC) Confirmed by Syrian army spokesman 5 hours ago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.39.74 (talk) 21:42, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

An-Nabak is still contested the army has secured most of the town but rebels are still in the eastern part of the town we should wait for conformation first before we put it to government heldDaki122 (talk) 22:58, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2013/Dec-09/240381-syrian-troops-seize-control-of-strategic-highway.ashx#axzz2lw9JjOka

Here is a source that also confirms my claim above it should not be long until the town is put to government heldDaki122 (talk) 23:50, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Pro Insurgent source Al Jazeera said the Army controlled it. قوات النظام تسيطر على النبك بريف دمشق Translation= Regime forces controlled Nabak in Damascus http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-RZHwTwaLU

Is official Al Jazeera you tube account — Preceding unsigned comment added by LogFTW (talk • contribs) 05:58, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Once again presstv proved to be one of the most reliable sources of this war. They were the first to report that SAA controls AlNabk, as they have done with Qusayr,AlSafira,Khanaseer,...I guess we should rank them as reliable from now one contrary to other media sources — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.72.225.171 (talk) 09:11, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Press TV and Al-Mayadin are the most reliable ones as they have reporters from the battle grounds, unlike Al-Jazeera nad other pro-opposition media groups who rely on unofficial reporters who are militia-men in most cases. However, Al-Mayadin, Press TV and othe media groups announced about the victory of the Syrian Army in Al-Nabk.--Zyzzzzzy (talk) 12:00, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

So, I guess I can assume that you like to read Das Schwarze Korps or 1940s-vintage Pravda whenever you want to know something about WWII? After all, they had "reporters on the battlegrounds" also. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 12:54, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Army Takes Control of Town An Nabak.ABC NewsThe Daily StarThe Durango HeraldHanibal911 (talk) 12:26, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Read carefully. All those articles are really the same source (AP), which explicitly makes clear that this is a claim made by state media, which also says that it's still conducting operations in the "outskirts" of the town. The first link is the fullest report, and it says that both "activists" and SOHR are reporting ongoing fighting—conflicting reports. I know it'll drive my little French IP sweetheart temporarily insane, but waiting for a more definitive confirmation is the encyclopaedic way of doing things. And honestly, it won't take too long at this point... ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 12:54, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Again, you are so prompt to put maaloula green but not for al nabeck red and Rima contested unless there is proof by both sides that it is the truth. why waiting so long ?; Regarding maaloula, there is fight inside the town confirmed both by rebels and SAA; — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.220.156.251 (talk) 13:13, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

You're barking up the wrong tree, mon chéri. I didn't change Ma'lula to green. That was this guy. And in case you still haven't figured it out after all these months, nobody changes things just because you command it. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 14:44, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Well dude why are you always at denial.The town has fallen into government hands.This is what pro-opp SOHR reported:Rami Abdurrahman, the head of the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said the government controls most of Nabek. It said fighting was ongoing Monday in areas around the town that have in the past days seen heavy clashes between the Syrian army and its Lebanon Hezbollah allies and Islamist rebels, including many from an al-Qaida-linked group, on the opposition side. Read more: http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2013/Dec-09/240414-syria-army-takes-control-of-town-near-key-highway.ashx#ixzz2myzcCYCC (The Daily Star :: Lebanon News :: http://www.dailystar.com.lb)

Do you know how many times did I read that when a rebel town fell to the government.I mean come on be real and self-revert.And second of what does this link that you posted has to do with the situation.Most of the town was in government hands since yesterday.And about presstv they are one of the most reliable sources in the country they have reporters in Syria that film and follow the situation stop with that Pravda and other stuff.Presstv is a rely good source and if you can name one time that they have claimed that a town was captured from the Army and it was not true.Daki122 (talk) 13:17, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Please re-read my statement. I personally acknowledge that, in all likelihood, Nabk has indeed fallen. But for a major town like this, clearer information will surface very soon. Waiting a few hours at most for clearer confirmation won't kill you. With certain pro-regime outlets having said the same over a week ago, it pays to be just the slightest bit careful. As for the link, it would seem as though the site changed around the article—notice that the URL has nothing to do with the content. In any case, it's the same link that Hanibal911 provided.

If you'd like to use PressTV, why don't we bring in, say, Orient TV? Check out this "on-the-ground" report/ Maybe we could even bring in SANA and its jihadist doppelgänger KavkazCenter! What fun! Having sources or reporters "on the ground" doesn't mean anything on its own, especially when we're talking about a state-run organisation from a country that has 1) abysmal press freedom and 2) an extremely active stake in the conflict. And don't even think to bring in the BBC or something similar as a comparison, that's nowhere near comparable on either count.

As far as their false reporting goes, there was an incident over the summer where PressTV (and Russian channels) used images from unrelated incidents to try and show "massacres" against Syrian Kurds: read about it here. The stupidest part of it all is that there were indeed massacres, and their rush to use cheap propaganda only served to cast doubt on it. At the end of the day, a channel bound tightly to an authoritarian state will just move with the puppet strings, giving out a very specific message. When times are good for its interests, it's easier for it to report more truth. But should the pendulum swing the opposite direction, it will start to malfunction quite fast.

You are more than welcome to get your news from whatever sources you like. But bear in mind that on Wikipedia there are certain standards to adhere to. These can be annoying at times, but that's just how it goes. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 14:44, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

First of all do not say that the massacre against the Kurds did not take place.It did take place and many Kurdish officials did confirm it.This is a highly sectarian issue that you have pointed out and i will not engage in a debate over it.Second of tell me what did the western media outlets do with the chemical attack tell me that there was no propaganda there so by your thoughts all of the western media outlets should be labeled as propaganda machines.The death toll that they reported in the chemical attack never matched it was once a 143 then 357 Al-Jazeera reported 1300 and that almost led to a war against a sovereign state.In the end it turned out that the death toll was around 300-400.That was one hell of a scandal that the western media pulled out when in the first half an hour they blamed the regime has used the weapons while there was no evidence suggesting that they used them.I mean when couple of mountain villagers from mount Fuji managed to poison the Tokyo subway why couldn't the rebels be the ones to blame.So pleas don't talk about propaganda when the biggest propaganda channels are stationed in the west.And unlike your sources up top that you have pointed out Presstv does not only repot about the Syrian war it is a news outlet.The thing is they have never reported anything about the war that has not been confirmed on the ground to witch you have no argument to counter that claim.Daki122 (talk) 15:16, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Ugh, will you please slow down and read what I say more carefully??? I explicitly said "there were indeed massacres", but that the Iranian and Russian fake coverage of it caused a fair number of people to scoff at it.

Western outlets are driven first and foremost by capitalist motives of profit to cater to a readership body, rather than by manipulative coercion to toe the state political line. Sensational stories sell well. In the end, though, there is a self-correcting element—western outlets like Reuters now give the revised number. PressTV, on the other hand, still has the same bullshit report up on its site: [4]. With news channels from the Gulf, there is indeed a high level of government puppetry, but I wouldn't call them exactly "western" to begin with. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 15:33, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Syrian Forces Recapture An Nabak.Associated Press Yacoub El Hillo, the U.N.'s top official and humanitarian coordinator in Syria, said fighting remained heavy around Nabak.The Wall Streer JournalHanibal911 (talk) 15:14, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Here is the updated article form the Daily Star says state Tv aired footage from the town in conformation that the town was secured by the army.Daki122 (talk) 15:21, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Al-Jazeera a pro-opp source is also reporting that the town has fallen to government handsDaki122 (talk) 15:24, 9 December 2013 (UTC) Also a video form pro-gov source it is pretty clear the town has fallen http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjagvpRzOq4&feature=youtu.beDaki122 (talk) 15:30, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Good. Now how long did that take? Three hours at the most? And you were so busy arguing with me over nothing that you hardly noticed. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 15:55, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Lotahr come on only Reuters and some other British papers are objective about the war CNN BBC FOX and others are only here to exploit the situation by writing sad stories how a child was killed during government shelling they never reported how children and civilians died in government held areas from rebel mortars and car bombs i mean Jarmana is shelled every day with dozens killed or wounded and no western media has reported that yet(except for British Reuters which I think is the most objective of them all)Daki122 (talk) 15:44, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

[5] [6] ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 15:55, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Finally Lothar, "my dear", you listened to me. I don't command, I'm just on the ground and can affirm things you can't. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.39.74 (talk) 16:44, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Credit for making the change actually goes to AOnline, sweet cheeks. I've added over a dozen dots in your favourite colour over the past day or so, but that's not one. And yes, I can believe that Normandy is as lovely and scenic as always at this time of year. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 18:41, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

OK Lothar. It seems that you are competent in informatics. You are not alone......Normandy is a great area where I was born. Unfortunately, I'm not in a so safe area. Thanks for my favorite colour (you don't have other choice from several months) but please, don't multiply dots from your favorite colour for each red dot you add !!. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.39.74 (talk) 19:25, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes, yes, of course you are... True, I'm not personally a big fan of "red", but at the same time I also really don't like "green"—though I realise that probably doesn't register through to you properly inside your cozy little dualistic bubble. The fact that you don't like your beloved red dots to be tainted with evil green ones is more a problem with your perceptions than with this map. If a place is shown in a "Wiki-Compatible™" source as controlled by rebels, and unless you have substantive evidence to contradict it, there's no reason to not indicate it as such.

But you, my dear, are not remotely a "Wiki-Compatible™" source. You're just some strange, random IP on who drifts around a Wikipedia talkpage heckling people for not paying more attention to you. By all means, go make a blog or something where you can create maps free of evil Wikipedian heterodoxy to your heart's content. That alone won't make you a "Wiki–Compatible™"" source, but you'll at least be able vent your bitterness in a slightly more productive fashion. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 03:56, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Dear Lothar. Am I strange ?. Probably. But it seems that all I wrote in this talk page were finally true. In this conflict, you have to choose your camp. You can't be "no, no". This Map should be impartial. Unfortunately, from the beginning, it is updated more by pro-rebel "admirators" than impartial persons. It is a fact. Anyway, you and your "friends" could do what you want on this MAP. The battlefield is showing the truth everyday. Even if it is hard for both SAA and Syrian people, "green dots" are going to be less and less present.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.39.74 (talk) 20:13, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

It doesn't matter how many times you're correct, your personal claims are still totally worthless as far as Wikipedia is concerned. Provide a reliable source to back up what you say or don't bother coming and demanding changes here. That's all there is to it.

Hm, first you say that it's impossible to be impartial when viewing this conflict, but then you whine that the map needs to be updated by impartial editors? Funny logic you have going there. I wonder—if someone were to randomly change Raqqa, Azaz, or Abu Kamal to red without evidence, would you be as upset as when a few "green" villages get added with proper references?

It may very well be that this map will be totally "red" someday in the distant future. The current reality, however, is quite different, and the map will seek to reflect that as best as officially-sanctioned sources will allow. And I really think you can take a few deep breaths and stop crying so much—government gains across the past few months have all been rather well-recorded, and red dots have been more numerous than any other colour for a while now.

Though you yourself may view the situation as "black and white", other people are under no obligation to adhere to your personal opinion of how they should view it. It's possible to follow a conflict without fanatically cheering one participant as if you were attending some football match. Moreover, this war is a lot more complicated than "rebels vs. government"—or "takfiri terrorists vs. SAA heroes" or "freedom fighters vs. shabbiha butchers" or "holy mujahideen vs. kuffar dogs" or whatever other dualistic pinhole anyone's trying to view this through. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 23:43, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Why Nawa in contested / conflict ?

Why it's today December 9 in conflict what Source proved it ?

I mean Serious sources No Random Insurgents / militias video / Pro Rebels Blog

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.155.47.13 (talk) 18:49, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

why always as army capture a town suddenly someone start to change towns from red to contested???? without any source... please change NAWA to red. as — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.102.233.228 (talk) 11:37, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

According to the Free Syrian Army (FSA), some 5,000 displaced civilians were caught in heavy shelling across southern Syria on Saturday as regime forces targeted the border towns of Sheikh Maskin, Nawa and Al Nimr.The Jordan Times The Muslim TimesHanibal911 (talk) 14:35, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

These two sources are very pro rebel sources and there said ONLY according by the Rebels - They no specified if the zone is in conflict or not it's not enough — Preceding unsigned comment added by LogFTW (talk • contribs) 19:34, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

can we change to red? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.102.233.228 (talk) 10:27, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes please change to red — Preceding unsigned comment added by LogFTW (talk • contribs) 16:11, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Not without sources of your own. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 03:19, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

That is who said the description https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_civil_war#Nawa 'In early August 2013 the town was under the control of the Army.'

Some Shelling away no mean contested Town so if Shelling far away mean contested zone we must be put Raqqah contesting because this place got bombing every days.

Don't ruin this map again — Preceding unsigned comment added by LogFTW (talk • contribs) 14:21, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

There is one key logical distinction which you seem to be unable to understand: if you have to shell a town (from "far away"), you don't have full control over it. Rebel-controlled Raqqa isn't being shelled by rebels. Thus, if government forces controlled Nawa, they wouldn't be shelling it. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 22:49, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Madaya, Rif Dimashq

Can anybody confirm that the town is under Government control or under Siege? Pro-opp has posted videos of Artillery strikes & Tanks near the town; Video 1 Video 2 Video 3 I know these are just videos but if anybody has better sources, please let me know.--99.141.22.133 (talk) 21:49, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

More than just Madaya—the situation in the whole Zabadani area is miserably unclear. Der Spiegel gave a pretty good overview of the situation in late April 2013. Tensions were high and tenuously stable thanks to mediation by a local committee, with the only remaining govt forces in the city being a "Colonel Assam" and his 20 men holed up in the General Security Directorate—not attacking and not being attacked. Their presence allowed for power and supplies to keep coming into the city. Also notable is that 'Ayn Hawr, further up the valley, is/was apparently a major transit point along Syria-Hizbullah paths and tunnels (Zabadani was once a IRGC base area as well.

This past June Channel 4 reported that Zabadani rebels were apparently strong enough in the late spring/early summer to clear their own valley and push up through Wadi Barada into Qudsaya. ICRC reported at the end of June that they delivered medical supplies successfully to Bludan, which seems to have been a first place of refuge for civilians fleeing violence in Zabadani owing to its higher elevation. On 29 July, pro-rebel activists in Qalamun reported heavy shelling across the region, with Zabadani under fire from positions in the surrounding mountains as well as from the Wadi Qaq (?) checkpoint; Shallah (?) and the Serghaya (here) road. Zabadani pro-rebel activists also reported on 11 August that the east side of the city was shelled by tanks at the Al-'Aqabah (?) and Qal'at al-Tall (?) checkpoints and mortars from the Wadi Qaq checkpoint (?).

On 29 August, an Economist report noted that Zabadani and Madaya were "in rebel hands", while Al-Akhbar reported in early September that the army was shelling Madaya and nearby Buqqayn while launching attacks against Zabadani. Later in the month, the Lebanese President called for the protection of Christians in Ma'lula and Bludan, while FPM leader Michel Aoun claimed on 10 September that Nusra was planning to storm Bludan just like it did Ma'lula. I'm not sure what to make of how that relates to ground control given that the town was shelled by the army at the beginning of the month, according to SOHR.

In mid-September, government media started issuing some reports on fighting in the mountains above the valley. On 13 September, SANA claimed that the army took several positions near "Jennet Bludan", which I guess is this resort high on the mountainside. On 14 September, they claimed that the army "fully" took over the mountains to the east of Zabadani, but it doesn't mention if they climbed down the slopes to Madaya/Bludan; given that later on in the month they still claimed ongoing operations in the mountains, I'm guessing probably not. There were apparently clashes around a restaurant (maybe the same resort). The next day, government sourced vomited up a particularly dense tangle of Newspeak, saying that the reports of "significant" advances in Bludan were "initially meaningless" but also "at least good and hopefully true". Take that as you will, I suppose.

Reports of mountain fighting were at least partially corroborated by a Facebook page for the rebel village of Hurayrah in the mountains behind Madaya, which posted urgent messages on 13 and 19 September discussing loyalist mobilisation and clashes in the area; the village does not seem to have been overrun, however. On 28 September, pro-rebel activists reported heavy shelling on Zabadani from the checkpoint at Hawsh to the south (near here, I guess) as well as from the mountains to the east; no casualties reported.

On 26 September, Syrian soldiers apparently confiscated 400 food rations from UNWFP convoy at a checkpoint in the Madaya Valley. A collection of pictures in October showed that ISIS apparently may have at least a small presence in Zabadani. In early November, the UN said that UNICEF managed to secure access to Bludan, which was "inaccessible for months", after passing through 8 checkpoints, and estimated that its population had ballooned from a pre-war 4,000 to 60,000 with a heavy influx of internally displaced Syrians. The Hurayrah Facebook page posted its last post (to date) on 16 October, which seems to describe a successful supply raid.

Shortly before the Qalamun offensive, Al-Hayat released a piece which contained axes of advance hypothesised by rebel leaders in a potential attack on the mountains. The third axis they described was against the villages of this valley, but I'm having some difficulty understanding the details. The Google translate version is: "The third axis will be at the craft area or what is known as the tower near the Zabadani and Bludan and Serghaya and welding..." I think that "welding" refers to the town of Ham in Lebanon, which could indicate that this is either a sympathetic area to be cleared by Hizbullah or perhaps already a Hizbullah base. "The tower" is more ambiguous, but probably refers to one/some of the mountains rising above (e.g.?). "Craft Area" is beyond me, though.

In Zabadani, pro-rebel activists on 25 November reported shelling from Hawsh and the Ba'ath/Hizbullah camp (here) and clashes on and again on 3 December mainly from Hawsh and 'Aqabah ChPs.

TL;DR I don't think we can label either Madaya or Bludan "government-held" at this point. The safest bet would be to turn them "constested", though I think a case could also be made for green with red ring. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 07:33, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

i agree. but would be fair to change NAWA as red and Suran as red, and yabrud as contested... what about rima? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.102.233.228 (talk) 11:39, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Well the Zabadani area is unclear because the opposition(majority of them are syrians but some extremists are stationed in Zabadani.) is local there are no foreign jihadists among the rebels there that can be clearly seen in the videos as the tanks and APC's are not attacked nor is there any gunfire.It is like a semi agreed truce between the government and the rebels in the area we should put Madaya as contested for now as we have seen the evidence and if any new evidence suggest that Bludan is contested then we put it contested as wellDaki122 (talk) 14:16, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

And can anyone post the source about NAWA here cuz i cant find it.If there is no source then it should be changed back to government controlled.Daki122 (talk) 14:19, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

According to the Free Syrian Army (FSA), some 5,000 displaced civilians were caught in heavy shelling across southern Syria on Saturday as regime forces targeted the border towns of Sheikh Maskin, Nawa and Al Nimr.The Jordan Times The Muslim TimesHanibal911 (talk) 14:40, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

aleppo governorate

kann someone linked and integrate "aleppo offensive" ?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.213.116.72 (talk) 22:38, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Bab al-Hawa crossing NW Aleppo

According to Dailystar (LB), islamists have captured the Bab al-Hawa crossing with Turkey in NW Aleppo governorate. Source: [7] Location: [8] Ariskar (talk) 10:44, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

This is just for information/referenece, as Islamist and FSA opposition territorial control becomes ever more distinct lately.Ariskar (talk) 10:47, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Ariskar (talk) 10:34, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Adra(Township),Eastern Ghouta

Press TV confirms that Adra has been taken by Rebels today (12-11-13). According to Farsnews, Syrian Military will begin a counter-attack. Labeled as Contested or Taken(By rebels)?--75.34.43.255 (talk) 01:57, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

A Couple more sources Link 1 & Link 2 for link 2 scroll all the way to the bottom of the report.--75.34.43.255 (talk) 02:16, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Fars News and Press TV not reliable sources.It also said 13 regime loyalists were killed battling rebels at Adra in Damascus province, and that five civilians also lost their lives.Global Post,following their defeat in three major towns in the rugged al- Qalamoun region north of Damascus, the rebels stormed Wednesday the Adra al-Umalieh suburb.People DailyHanibal911 (talk) 07:23, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Rebels stormed a bakery and have stolen 30 tons of flavour in this area. In fact, soldiers and civilians were killed. These events doesn't means that Adra is under rebels hands (it is so far). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.220.156.251 (talk) 10:29, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

It better remain as contested, similarly to the Industrial area, until we get more clear sources I think. Fighing is reported anyway.Ariskar (talk) 10:34, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Here is a video report about Adra it seems that the army controls large parts of the town but fighting is still raging in it.It should be contested at most not rebel held as the rebels only attacked the town didn't took over the town(only some parts).Daki122 (talk) 13:34, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

I do not get the idea of labeling the terrorists as rebels. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.153.114.160 (talk) 18:46, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Well. Because rebels has real no win battles from months, administrators of this MAP are so prompt to put green dots. But they wait, wondering themselves for days to know if they have to put Al Nabeck red. Shame on you !. If you really knew what's happen now in Adra, you would be really astonished................... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.23.45 (talk) 19:04, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Don't worry i fixed that and they will have from now on to post 10 sources for every change like i did for Nabk.Daki122 (talk) 19:20, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Daki122. I just want truth and honesty. I assume the fact that I'm (I have no choice) for the regime. But, if a town or an area fall into rebels hands, with proof (real ones, I have the honesty to accept it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.23.45 (talk) 19:51, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Adra 2

Just for info: current Adra situation according to a pro-regime website: http://www.syrianperspective.com/ http://twitpic.com/dojlq3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.155.104.15 (talk) 14:52, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Adra should be contested but I did a revert in the past 24 hours so i cant change it any way AFP says the Army this morning began an offensive in the area to recapture the whole Adra area including the Industrial one. Here is the report:

Syrian troops loyal to President Assad launched a broad offensive on Friday aimed at expelling rebels from the town of Adra, northeast of Damascus, state news agency SANA said.

The industrial town, the scene of fierce fighting for three days, is strategically located on a main road into the capital.

The fighting follows a string of army victories against opposition fighters, particularly in Damascus province, where rebel positions have been under siege for more than a year.

"Our armed forces started this morning to stage a broad offensive on Adra, to assault the terrorists' positions after encircling the area," said a military source, quoted by SANA.

Assad's regime has branded all rebels and dissidents as "terrorists" ever since the outbreak of a revolt in March 2011.

Friday's fighting comes two days after Islamist rebels attacked security and army positions, as well as pro-regime militiamen, in Adra.

[AFP]

And a link of another source http://en-maktoob.news.yahoo.com/syrian-army-bid-recapture-town-131208272.html Daki122 (talk) 15:31, 13 December 2013 (U

Adra Town and the Industrial Area need to be juxtaposed. The Industrial area lies to the east of the town. Please edit accordingly.

The area marked on this map shows the industrial districts to the west. The larger industrial city to the east is a separate matter. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 23:58, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2013/Dec-13/240983-syrian-troops-launch-offensive-after-dozens-killed.ashx#axzz2lw9JjOka

Another report we may find usefulDaki122 (talk) 16:52, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

City of Adra's rebels. I do not know why some fans want Battlefield Assad otherwise this is a very bad show. Before the military operation in the region Qalamoun Area Qarah Red finish. But after this little incident just before its collapse was green. I agree Wikipedia Assad. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.186.169.249 (talk) 18:14, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Da fu*k did the user [[User talk:2.186.169.249] said can anyone explain to me :D.Daki122 (talk) 18:45, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Pro-Assad Daki122 you're a fool. Wikipedia can not show you the rebels win, but small victories Rakhyly Assad will soon show. You're a bastard and a dog trait. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.186.169.249 (talk) 19:02, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

We have detected a retard on this talk page please follow the protocol and ignore him before he starts crying about his little rebels loosing.Oh and by the way go back to school and learn a little English tard.Daki122 (talk) 19:18, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Given that this IP is Iranian, you might want to learn some Farsi (or Azeri) before you mock his/her English skills—which you should not do in the first place, and particularly not with such offensive slurs. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 22:29, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Stupid people like you should be in Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.186.169.249 (talk) 19:26, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

So if your so smart why don't you go away a**hole. Daki122 (talk) 19:34, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

According to 3 sources (2 independent, 1 pro regime) I changed Adra town to "rebel-held/under siege" status, until further noticeAriskar (talk) 13:21, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Is there actually any source about the status of the Ramadan Industrial Area east of Adra? Maybe put it on the map as unclear/contested? OberschIesien90 (talk) 15:50, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

The Army lunched a counter-attack on Adra since yesterday and fighting is raging since then.Also the SOHR has reported Army advances in the area and the recent report from Daily Star also confirms that it should be contested not rebel held.Daki122 (talk) 20:42, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Fourth color

I have noticed that YPG forces are displayed in yellow and the rebels in green and SAA in red, but with the current tide of events, Al nusra and ISIS cities should be painted in black. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.232.170.187 (talk) 22:33, 14 December 2013 (UTC) I definitely agree, especially since there are clashes between ISIS and FSA — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.65.153.190 (talk) 22:44, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Been saying this for a year now. EkoGraf (talk) 00:06, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Yep, and you're still wrong. Despite all the complaints that the so-called "FSA" makes about ISIS, there is no real ongoing conflict between the two. In fact, we've seen rebel leaders even talk about how ISIS is "reality" and so they are cooperating. ISIS has risen to the "most powerful rebel group" (according to SOHR) in northern Syria by exploiting the fact that other rebels aren't willing to offer concerted resistance to them. When ISIS took over Azaz, groups like Liwa al-Tawhid totally abandoned fellow "moderates" like Asifat al-Shamal instead of helping them. Additionally, ISIS and Nusra are present alongside other rebel groups in many places, and now we even have non-Qaida Islamist groups scuffling with "FSA" near Bab al-Hawa. There is no clear dividing line between "rebel" and "Qaida" that we can use to enact such a change. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 00:18, 15 December 2013 (UTC)