Talk:Control of cities during the Syrian civil war

Template:Syrian Civil War sanctions

Hamidiyah near Abou l Duhur airbase

[1] Rebels saying they ambushed and killed 10 SAA units in Hamidiyah near the airbase. So I guess Hamidiyah should be added and marked as contested. ChrissCh94 (talk) 22:14, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Agreed! Hanibal911 (talk) 10:44, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

ChrissCh94 Reliable source said that Al Nusra managed to control al-Hamidiyeh village on East side of Ad-Duhur military airport but pull out to outskirt later. So that according to data from reliable source Elijah J. Magnier and pro opposition source here Al Nusra captured this village but later retreat on outskirt. So we need add this village and mark as under army control but put grey semi-circle or circle near. Hanibal911 (talk) 11:18, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 Your pro-opposition source said that "Free Rebels ambushed Assad army entering in Hamidiyah and killed and wounded 10 of them". It doesn't say that rebels withdrew from there, neither that JAN did this. I'm not sure if we can use tweets for editing like this because we don't know what sources did Elijah Magnier use. He is neutral but uses both rebels and government sources. Here SOHR said that SAF bombed at least 24 times areas around the airport, including Hamidiyah and Tall Salmo villages . DuckZz (talk) 19:58, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

EJM is more reliable than SOHR and is a 100% reliable source. Since he said JAN withdrew, that is what we will go with. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 20:15, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

DuckZz Elijah J. Magnier it is a reliable source it is tweet of the chief International correspondent of a Kuwaiti daily newspaper Al Rai. And it is more neutral a source than SOHR which partially supports the Syrian opposition. And this source said that Al Nusra pull out to the outskirts. And SOHR reported that air force bombed this village so maybe when Al Nusra invaded the village but later retreated after the bombing. But if you find the information from a reliable source which clearly says that the village is not under the control of the army then I fix it. And pro opposition source clearly said that rebels ambushed and killed 10 SAA units in the village Hamidiyah near the airbase.here About this earlier said editor ChrissCh94 who a good knows Arabic. Hanibal911 (talk) 20:28, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Also SOHR reported about clashes between al- Nusra and the Islamic battalions against the regime forces near the Abu al-Duhur airbase.SOHR Hanibal911 (talk) 20:33, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

XJ-0461 v2 Your 100% reliable EJM is the same source that said that the rebels were en route from central Homs toward the north 2 weeks before it happened, even before there was a final agreement. That is the most striking error (since it would have been VERY easy to verify since UN observers were involved), but there have been others. I suspect that EJM is holed up in Kuwait, and jumps the gun on various rumours often without verifying. Probably for a "scoop". He may not be biased, but he isn't necessarily reliable either.

The other article (published by Nusra) says (according to google translate) that more than 10 elements of the Assad gangs were killed or wounded in an ambush by Nusra, in the village of Hamedya. That means that the regime forces were moving, and surprised by Nusra. In other words, since Hamedya is a village (and thus small), the regime probably had no presence in the village. And that Nusra was in place (possibly temporarily) when the regime forces arrived.

Note also that Nusra published images showing them digging trenches, presumably in or around the village in question.

These 2 articles suggest that the village is not regime controlled, and that there is (or was at the time) at least a rebel presence in proximity. André437 (talk) 19:03, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Al Jazeera reporter inside al-Hamidiyeh 2 days after the source we used to make it red. Also, Al Jazeera reporter inside Tal Salmo a few days after the source we used to make it contested. Moreover, Elijah J. Magnier said: “JAN Map video clearly showing the current situation in Abu Dhuhur airbase” (my emphasis added). This means that Elijah J. Magnier (a reliable source) thinks that the JAN Map is correct & reflects the present situation. This is an endorsement of the JAN map which confirms the 2 Al Jazeera reports. Therefore, al-Hamidiyeh & Tal Salmo should be made grey. Tradedia^talk 01:05, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

"Retweet/Favorites not endorsement" That does not mean he is accepting or endorsing the map. It is just a detailed [clear] map of the situation by JAN. Since this does not confirm anything, find another source.XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 03:01, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Madaya - Rif Dimashq

I think Madaya should go to either contested or rebel-held based on those 2 reports of regime shelling the town: pro-gov Al Mayadeen [2] and pro-opp SOHR [3]

Other pro-gov sources reporting the strikes ON Madaya [4] [5] ChrissCh94 (talk) 02:06, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

For now we not have reports which clearly said that it is completely under control of the rebels so for now would be better mark it as contested. Hanibal911 (talk) 08:29, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

I agree with Hanibal911.Lindi29 (talk) 11:00, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Alright contested makes sense ChrissCh94 (talk) 14:00, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

So we changing it to contested? ChrissCh94 (talk) 02:19, 28 January 2015 (UTC) Hanibal911 Lindi29

ChrissCh94 yes.Lindi29 (talk) 13:03, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

ChrissCh94 Lindi29I have already notified of the editor which a make updates on map. Hanibal911 (talk) 13:51, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

So where's that update to contested? Hanibal911 ChrissCh94 (talk) 09:45, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Khattab (Homs)

Village Khattab east of Homs city on the frontline between SAA and ISIS is not marked on the map. According to Peto Lucem village has been recaptured by SAA, tweet here and map here. Village should be put out and marked red, or at least put out and marked contested. Rhocagil (talk) 22:57, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

There's SOHR confirming the latest gov. advance in Khattab, E-Homs: [6] ChrissCh94 (talk) 09:26, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

They also captured Mushayrifah per gov-source [7] so at least add those 2 towns as contested or gov-held. ChrissCh94 (talk) 09:44, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Kafrlata - Idlib

I think it is rebel held since it explains how the attacks in Ariha were orchestrated. Here a pro-regime page describing every detail of the attack on Ariha said the rebels were defeated and retreated back to Kafrlata [8]. And we have numerous accounts of shelling on Kafrlata so I really doubt it is contested. Can my fellow editors provide me with sources saying otherwise? ChrissCh94 (talk) 17:29, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

There is a misunderstanding here. Rebels did not attack Ariha town. Their main objective (announced on IF channels) was to capture the mountain part that overlooks Ariha (in that case Al Fanar checkpoint too). Groups in this offensive :

• Mainly Islamic Front (Suqur Sham, Faylaq Sham) supported by
• FSA (Liwa Haq, 13th Division) and
• Al Nusra (even thought i haven't seen them)

Here SOHR source says that rebels advanced on the mountain on al-Baradat building complex, which includes Al Fanar checkpoint. They also said that rebels destroyed a regime vehicle in Mastomah, and here is the proof FSA 13th division destroying shilka in Mastomah.

• On this source SOHR2 also said that rebels advanced on the mountain and detonated a tunel bomb in Al Fanar complex. Here is the proof, Islamic Front detonating the bomb.

Now some pro-opposition sources. Islamic front shooting mortars from Kafr Lata here and here2 .. Suqur Sham (IF) commander giving moral speech in Kafr Lata before the offensive.

−Now I'm 100% sure that rebels took Al Fanar because it's located right in the start of the mountain, and if SOHR says that rebels advances there, it means it's not possible to advance while avoiding this checkpoint.

• This video shows rebels overlooking the town of Ariha.
• This video shows Al Fanar checkpoint and FSA (Liwa Haqq) members just passing by it. Kafr Lata should definately be changed, I'm not sure for Al Fanar but i want other opinions. DuckZz (talk) 23:11, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes, so confident, yet SOHR did not trumpet this "glorious" victory...interesting. The rebel offensive has failed [again] http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/idlib-syrian-army-reaffirms-full-control-areeha/ XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 00:40, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

If rebels gained areas around the town, not even trying to attack Ariha, not even in plans. What is the best thing a pro-Government editor (2 times banned user from twitter) can write ? "SAA, NDF recaptured Ariha" haha facepalm really...DuckZz (talk) 00:46, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Congrats, the SAA/NDF advanced in the area they already controlled. Al-Masdar so reliable, haha. The rebels never attacked Ariha, and now they retake Ariha. Next thing we will see is SAA retaking Homs or Qusayr, lol, they are so desesperate for wins they make-up advances in towns they hold already. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.219.152.90 (talk) 01:59, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

"haha facepalm really" Is this supposed to be a coherent sentence, because it is not. Also, the article referred to the Ariha area [locations such as Jabal al arba'een] being retaken, not the town itself [you would have known that if you read more than just the title]. Also, the fact that you are tracking the editor is just sort of weird. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 02:57, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

I gotta say DuckZz you are becoming way too biased. To be fair, except for the Southern Front, the rebels are indeed losing the war and infighting has triumphed among them. In 2013 they controlled more than half the country while now they only control rural Aleppo and Daraa. Sadly the war is headed towards a bloody stalemate where every party will make gains and consolidate them in areas of strength while losing the less important ones. Not to forget the rise of the jihadis. ChrissCh94 (talk) 09:12, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

CnrissCh94 .I agree Kafrlata is rebel controlled .Pyphon (talk) 12:35, 31 January 2015 (UTC)pyphon

 Done Hanibal911 (talk) 12:43, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

ChrissCh94 I don't understand why you think like that. Rebels will lose that's for sure, but it'll take a while. I support the Syrian army (SAA) against rebels but i also support FSA rebels against NDF army, nobody can really hate me because of this. DuckZz (talk) 16:32, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

It's just you oppose everything regime related. Everyone is entitled to an opinion but it must not interfere with our work. Nobody here hates you! Cheers mate. ChrissCh94 (talk) 18:05, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

the rebel advance in Southern Syria will define the conclusion of the war.Alhanuty (talk) 20:19, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

What do you mean? XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 20:55, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Correction: The outcome of the battle of Aleppo will define the outcome of the war. Hint 2012: Rebels were winning in Aleppo and in all of Syria while in 2014: rebels are losing in Aleppo and in all of Syria. ChrissCh94 (talk) 23:30, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Northern Homs

This area has always been tricky but after extensive research in pro-gov and pro-opp coordination committees I found out that:

• Hawsh Haju is rebel held via pro-gov source [9] and [10] along with Al Saan and Ain Hussein
• Pro-opp source reporting shelling on Hawsh Haju by gov-forces: [11]

So please change Hawsh Haju to green and add Ain Hussein and Al Saan also as rebel-held ChrissCh94 (talk) 09:43, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

While in Eastern Homs it seems gov-forces have bee advancing and have captured Khattab and Mushayrifah via pro-gov [12] [13] and pro-opp [14] sources. So I suggest adding those 2 towns, Khattab as gov-held and Mushayrifah as contested. ChrissCh94 (talk) 09:48, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Also pro-government source said that the village of Mushayrifah ash Shamaliyah was captured from Islamic State so for now i noted this village as contested between Syrian troops and ISIS.here Hanibal911 (talk) 11:38, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

 Done According to data from pro government source and SOHR I noted Ayn Husayn, Hawsh Haju under control by moderate rebels and Khattab as gov-held but also I noted Mushayrifah ash Shamaliyah as contested. Hanibal911 (talk) 12:14, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Mushayrifah is now gov-held via SOHR [15]. So the SAA now captured Khattab and Mushayrifah in E-Homs ChrissCh94 (talk) 12:47, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

 Done Hanibal911 (talk) 13:02, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Peto Lucem General Map 30/1/2015

Here is https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8n1Y6vCAAAh42A.jpg:large Peto Lucem Maps are very 99,99% correct most times

It's Al-Masdar Map.here.Nice try,but Al-Masdar and Peto Lucem are pro-regime sources and we cant use them.Lindi29 (talk) 14:25, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

True. Both Al-Masdar and SOHR are unreliable in my opinion. Only use Al-Masdar to rebel advances, and SOHR for regime advances.

What are you talking about Lindi? PetoLucem and Masdar have nothing to do with each other. Leith Fadel, the person behind al-Masdar uses his map, but they're are not the same person. Peto Lucem maps together with DeSyracuse's map have been some of the most precise maps during this conflict. While I agree that PetoLucem is a bit pro regime and DeSyracuse is a bit pro rebel.

PetoLucem maps are NOT from al-Masdar, he (leith Fadel) simply uses the same maps Peto publishes on Twitter. Stop spreading lies. Masdar is fairly pro regime but the maps he uses are made by PetoLucem, not himself.MesmerMe (talk) 15:45, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, this map is fairly consistent with the one we have here. Only major difference is in Deir-Ez-Zor, where Peto has given the southern half to the SAA, whereas we have it as under ISIS control. That part of the governate is fairly empty anyway [only things we have listed in it as Shulah and Kabajeb], so the discrepancy is of no consequence. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 19:36, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

XJ-0461 v2 .I agree Peto Lucem maps are always like ours and Lindi29 what do you mean (nice try )nobody was asking to change our map in line with his .Pyphon (talk) 19:52, 31 January 2015 (UTC)pyphon

The map is just very correct it showing the reality in the ground, Peto's Maps are always right.

Lucem always exagerates regime held territory. Aleppo specially, they had the Owaija District under SAA control for example. Now the rebels recaptured Breij area, and not a SINGLE source reported the rebels to have recaptured the Owaija District, but it is obvious they had to be there in other to reach Breij.

Not really. And they did not recapture the Breij area. What source said that? XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 17:58, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Zabadani & rest

According to IvanSidorenko and his pro-government sources here2, the SAA (and company) are aiming to capture Zabadani (already contested), Madaya, Serghaya and Yabous. What others think ? DuckZz (talk) 16:46, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

That is interesting. Madaya and Serghaya were confirmed to be SAA held by Al-Monitor a long time ago. I am not aware of any rebel counter offensives in the area [which would place them back in rebel hands since then]. We really should not change anything with Zabadani since it is already contested and SOHR confirms SAA checkpoints in the town. As for Yabous, I have no news on that. I would say for now, green rings on all the towns you mentioned, and if you can find a corroborating source, we can take further action. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 18:01, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

deSyracuse map shows Serghaya as contested. The map is 20 days old so maybe rebels do have control of those towns but now facing clashes with SAA & Hezbolah. I belive that IvanSidorenko is a bit pro-government oriented and not biased. Maybe Madaya should go contested since it's right next to Zabadani and SOHR reported barel bomb attacks on it's western outskirts DuckZz (talk) 18:25, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

DuckZzPro opposition source showed that area wher located Madaya, Serghaya under control by army.here Also Ivan Sidorenko it is not pro government source and also deSyracuse map it is pro opposition source which we cant use to display success by rebels. Also previously biased a pro-opposition source clear showed that Serghaya under control by army.here Hanibal911 (talk) 19:25, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Also earlier some reliable sources reported that Serghaya under control by army. This issue has already been discussed previously. Hanibal911 (talk) 19:34, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

We did agree earlier that Madaya was contested.. Serghaya is under local NDF control. ChrissCh94 (talk) 23:10, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Pro opposition source showed that area wher located Kafr Yabous under control by Syrian troops and Hezbollah.here Hanibal911 (talk) 09:02, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 .ChrisCh94 . Why is Madaya gone green? Pyphon (talk) 09:57, 2 February 2015 (UTC)pyphon

PyphonPro gov. source reported that Madaya rebel-held but besieged by army and allies and Zabadani contested.here And SOHR also confirmed that city Zabadani for now contested and army present inside city.SOHR Hanibal911 (talk) 10:22, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 .Thankyou good work .Pyphon (talk) 10:32, 2 February 2015 (UTC)pyphon

SAA advances in Hasakah

SAA has advanced southeast of Hasakah city and captured two villages, confirmed by SOHR [16]. But no names are stated. Would be good to try and find out which ones they are. EkoGraf (talk) 21:04, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

There is info for Ivan Sidorenko [17] about 5 village and their name. Abu Saad / Khchwet / Aldaudih / sera / Rhqra (217.99.81.204 (talk) 21:21, 1 February 2015 (UTC))

Al-Masdar talks about them here: http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-liberates-5-villages-rural-al-hasakah/ XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 22:57, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

We should see which two of the five are closest to the fronltine and in a south-eastern direction so those two are most likely the ones they captured per SOHR. EkoGraf (talk) 23:00, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

SAA Advances in Hasakah - Deir Ez Zoor - Rif Dimashq

SAA have advanced on multiple fronts via SOHR [18] [19] [20] I hope the editors make the correct changes. ChrissCh94 (talk) 23:19, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Why is Kfar Yabous JAN-held? ChrissCh94 (talk) 23:20, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

According to this map by Desyracuse,[21] it is SAA held. I will change it. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 00:47, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

We also agreed to change Madaya to contested earlier in this talk page. In addition, here's a pro-gov source showing it as opp-held [22] ChrissCh94 (talk) 01:47, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Why is Kfar Yabous another time to JAN-held? Yesterday it was grey, next red and today is grey.(83.26.97.125 (talk) 16:19, 2 February 2015 (UTC))

https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/561919497121333249 XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 17:08, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Qamishlo

Please change the icon of qamishlo kurds controll more than 85% Of qamishlo yet it looks like assad controlls 90% of qamishli judging by the amount of red on the icon/mark.

Source? XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 00:47, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

What does asad controll except the bordergate & the small city centre?

XJ-0461 You don´t need any source to put the rings in different order (yellow-red-yellow).Rhocagil (talk) 04:26, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

In order to change the city from a regime majority control to Kurdish majority control [which is what he wants], you need a source. On a side note, if the order of the rings were to be changed, It would show that the kurds control the city center, which they do not [unless a source is provided to the contrary]. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 05:00, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Pro oppositio source here clearly shows that the city is divided almost in half, and the army located is inside the city and around it. So that for now city marked correct. Also Rhocagil you should know that we can not change the card without specifying the source. Hanibal911 (talk) 08:55, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

XJ-0461 v2 I don´t think that kind of argument is valid. Do you think that SAA is in control of the city centers in Al-Dumayr, Ar-Ruhaybah and Al Wa´ar or FSA in Khan Shaykhun? No this is not an argument and this is not the question. The three circle mark is just a mark, but in the case of Qamishlo it looks wrong. I suggest the three mark circle should be changed to (yellow-red-yellow). And Hanibal911 if you want a source, just use the one that you just provided. Even thou I believe is slightly wrong it´s still obvious that majority of the city area is under kurd control. Rhocagil (talk) 21:15, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

The source he provided showed 50/50 control [orange in the middle is SAA held according to other sources], no Kurdish majority. To debate that ring configurations would at this point simply be a matter of aesthetics, so it should be left as is unless another source is provided. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 22:38, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

RhocagilOn this map here the areas in city Qamashli which marked in red it is territory which under control by Syrian troops and areas which marked in yellow it is territory which under control by YPG and areas which marked in orange it is territory which jointly controlled between Syrian troops and YPG. Hanibal911 (talk) 08:21, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Kurdish presence in alleppo

source https://twitter.com/sergermed/status/561985092890144768

https://twitter.com/sergermed/status/560952310776750080

https://twitter.com/sergermed/status/560576534407565312

same account have also mentioned about kurds+fsa rebels in Qazel, Ghara/Yani yaban, Dalhah & Baghirin these villages aren't even marked in this map.

YPG in KOBANE

According to this confirmed source YPG controlls zorava tel aotk korabi and susan are they even marked on the map?

https://twitter.com/ColdKurd/status/561294811094065153

Joum Ali in kobane.

Joum ali in kobane

https://twitter.com/jackshahine/status/561974858951950336?lang=sv

It's completelly liberated why does the map show ISIS presence?

Al-Dalli Daraa

Al-Dalli to contested per:

http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/daraa-syrian-army-attempts-counter-rebels-battalion-82/

"The Southern Front Brigades of the Free Syrian Army (FSA) continued their offensive at the village of Dilli north of Sheikh Miskeen, bombarding the 5th Division near the southwest sector and gaining ground in the direction of the village-center." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 08:50, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Agree Dalli is contested .Pyphon (talk) 08:55, 2 February 2015 (UTC)pyphon

 Done Hanibal911 (talk) 09:33, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Newly liberated villages in Kobane

till-Hajb ,Tayri ,karab-kurd , jilak liberated https://twitter.com/ColdKurd/status/562279177546891264

Let's wait some more sources or some pictures to confirm that YPG is really inside those villages. Sheran town has been marked as Kurdish controlled since 5 days ago, but actually it was liberated by YPG only last night. https://twitter.com/jackshahine/status/562232838133919744 The same source (Jack Shahine) posted a picture of Aydiq village here: https://twitter.com/jackshahine/status/562274741936209920 .in the southern front, but I have yet to see a picture of Rubi. --8fra0 (talk) 17:33, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

7 more villages liberated last night: Xerabnas (Qaramogh), Satiyah, Qabajigh (Qarajokh), Tashli Huyuk (Tashluk), Mojek, Bir Arab, Bishalti. This is reflected in dozens of sources: http://www.lebanon24.com/mobile/details/1002615 http://www.lebfeed.com/%D9%88%D8%AD%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%AD%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B4%D8%B9%D8%A8-%D8%AA%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%B7%D8%B1-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%89-%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%89-%D9%82%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%AC%D8%BA-%D9%88/ http://www.alahednews.com.lb/fastnews/253822/-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%88%D8%AD%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%B1%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%AA%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%B7%D8%B1-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%89-%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%89-%D9%82%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%AC%D8%BA-%D9%88%D8%B7%D8%A7%D8%B4%D9%84%D9%88%D9%83-%D9%88%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%85%D9%88%D8%BA-%D9%88-%D8%B3%D8%AA%D9%8A-%D9%88-%D9%85%D9%88%D8%AC%D9%83-%D9%88-%D8%A8%D9%8A%D8%B1%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A8#.VNHxy2jF870 http://slabnews.com/article/158887/ http://www.masdark.com/arabic/304311.html

I think that we can change them. On the other hand, Tel Ghazal is still contested: https://twitter.com/jackshahine/status/563117893823774721 --8fra0 (talk) 23:41, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

8fra0 when you were editing Kobane region (Tel Ghazal), did you accidentally edit Tall Ghazal in Hasakah to contested? Anyway you are better with editing the map then me so could you please change Tall Ghazal to Kurd held. I didn´t see any source for Tall Ghazal anywhere. Rhocagil (talk) 01:45, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

I edited the wrong Tel Ghazal, sorry. --8fra0 (talk) 11:11, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

New sources say that Tal Ghazal, Makhraj, Khazinah, Dibrak and other villages are in YPG hands: https://twitter.com/jackshahine/status/563372401409667072 This source has proved to be very reliable in the past days. Maybe Rubi and Tafshu are still in IS control as there is no evidence of clashes there, they should be edited I think. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 8fra0 (talk • contribs) 16:31, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Also Rubi is under YPG control according to https://twitter.com/m22bali/status/563420727626723328 --8fra0 (talk) 19:48, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

And Rubi silos also in YPG control, Tafshu village liberated by FSA and YPG jointly according to https://twitter.com/jackshahine/status/563456403059515392 and https://twitter.com/arabthomness/status/563452316117135364 --8fra0 (talk) 22:02, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

New reports of Selib, Dikmatash and Kor Ali under YPG control in Kobane western front: https://twitter.com/arabthomness/status/563749990183763969 --8fra0 (talk) 17:33, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Yabous

Someone changed "Yabous" next to the Lebanon-damascus crossing to be held by JAN. According to Al Akhbar already gov forces have pushed all JAN rebels out of Yabous and Kfar Yabous after they briefly raided these towns a few days back. See here: http://english.al-akhbar.com/node/23507 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.27.226 (talk) 22:41, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Then why is Kfayr Yabous JAN-Held? ChrissCh94 (talk) 00:55, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

because a majority of the people who edit this map are pro-rebel and don't have a neutral stance where they just use facts to mark the map. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.26.157 (talk) 16:30, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

You know what to do ChrissCh94 =).200.48.214.19 (talk) 16:45, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Clashes reported by SANA

There are several clashes reported by SANA and quoted by Al-manar and some other news outlets but these villages/towns are not marked as contested on the map. al-Manar and SANA also point out they targeted ISIS in Palmyra so i suggest there is isis presence in Palmyra.

Here are the villages/towns summed up: Homs: Eidon(inside al-Rastan), Deir Ful, Ghantu, Rahoum (Rahhoum) Hamah: ISIS presence in Palmyra Latakia: Ghanima Idlib: Kafr Lata (Kafr Latah) Daraa: Sheikh maskin, Jasim, Inkhel (Inkhil)

sources: http://www.sana.sy/en/?p=27257 http://www.almanar.com.lb/english/adetails.php?fromval=1&cid=23&frid=23&eid=193620 http://syriatimes.sy/index.php/news/local/16483-syrian-arab-army-kills-23-terrorists-plus-chechen-tunisian-moroccan-mercenaries-linked-to-al-nusra-front-outside-hama-and-lattakia

Spenk01 (talk) 23:50, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Spenk01 Source al manar made a mistake in the message. Here is the original of this message from government source SANA: Army units eliminated 23 terrorists in Hamadi Omar in Hama countryside and destroyed their weapons and ammo, in addition to destroying a cache of rockets in Mkaiman al-Shamali, leaving several terrorists dead or injured.SANA Just sometimes when the source publishes data from SANA he makes mistakes. Also city of Palmyra located in the Homs province. Hanibal911 (talk) 08:03, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Spenk01 Also dont need to cheat that SANS said that ISIS presence inside city Palmyra. Dont need manipulation of facts. Hanibal911 (talk) 08:11, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 Seems like i was mistaken by saying SANA was talking about ISIS presence in Palmyra. But how about the clashes SANA reported are these not credible enough to be taken in the map? Spenk01 (talk) 21:46, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Syria

Who controls the territory of Syria:

1) Syrian government currently controls around 50 percent of the territory, but it rules between 55 and 72 percent of the population left inside Syria.

2) The rebels (Including ISIS and Al Nusra} control 45 percent of the territory and 17–34 percent of the population.

• Islamic State (ISIS) It currently controls around 30 percent of Syria’s territory. The population under the Islamic State’s rule can be estimated at between 2 million and 3.5 million people, which translates into something like 10–20 percent of Syria’s current population.

• The groups like Ahrar al-Sham, the Nusra Front, the Islam Army, and the various FSA factions, we arrive at perhaps 15 percent of the territory and between 1 million and 2.5 million people, although political control remains divided among or shared by many different groups.

3}Kurds control no more than 5 percent of the territory with 5–10 percent of the population.Carnegie Endowment Hanibal911 (talk) 11:59, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Eastern Homs

I am raising this issue beacause there is a big vacum on the Eastren Homs and is not showing clearly where the frontilne between SSA and Isis is but news said that SSA just captured Khattab and some other villages from Isis on this area but still it is not showing the frontline,yesterday i added some other places near the villages that SSA has just captured beacause it's logical that there is the frontline and that SSA will continue his offenisve on this places but my edit was reverted beacause I didn't have any source,I want that a consenus for this places to be reached so i am suggesting to add more places to show where the the frontline between SSA and Isis.Hanibal911,ChrissCh94,Boredwhytekid,André437,Spenk01,Alhanuty,EkoGraf,DuckZz,Tradedia,Pyphon,Rhocagil,XJ-0461 v2.Can i have your opinions?Lindi29 (talk) 13:29, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Problem is this front lacks sources. Part of the problem is that the area is considered remote even by Syrian standards. Most of the villages consist of hundreds of citizens at most. SAA is barely engaged there, providing artillery and logistical support for the NDF. My vote is that we add places that were captured by either side. For example ISIS captured a village, we add this village as ISIS-held. But I don't think we should go over and add the remaining random villages since we barely know who controls what. ChrissCh94 (talk) 17:30, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

I agree with ChrissCh94 foe now we do not have data which can clearly say who control this villages. Also i think that we cant be contrary to the accepted rules of editing and add to the map a villages or city without a source who could confirm such actions. We can not be sure that the villages that we add under control of ISIS or army. My personal opinion is that we should not break the rules of editing. We have previously struggled with editors which add on map the villages without sources and some editors was blocked. So that guys we should not repeat of their actions. Hanibal911 (talk) 17:43, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Agree with Hanibal911 and ChrisCh94 it would be difficult to show which village was under control and on our map you can almost make out the frontline of the situation as it stands .The ISIS seems to be in trouble at this time losing ground on many fronts with reports of fighters leaving for Turkey .Pyphon (talk) 09:08, 4 February 2015 (UTC)pyphon

I'm not up to date on the area, but I agree with others that we should not make changes without sources.

Also, there is no stable "front line" in the sense of ww1 trench warfare. Rather, there are points of control (such as checkpoints). All sides are able to at least temporarily infiltrate between points of control of an opposing side. (That is partly how the kurds were able to defeat Daesh in Kobane city : by infiltrating and ambushing Daesh fighters.)

In some areas, such as in sieges, control points are close enough that infiltration is much more difficult. But no side has enough forces to do that everywhere. Even a million soldiers wouldn't be enough for an area as large as Syria. André437 (talk) 10:14, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Well as much as I like a more clear frontline. I tend to agree with above statements. Lindi29 maybe you can mail SOHR and ask them if they (he) have some information that could clarify the situation. Give the regards from us other in the wiki discussion group. Rhocagil (talk) 16:19, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Al Hirak Daraa

Hello everybody,

Several weeks ago we made Al-Hirak contested because some online sources said fighting was going on inside the city. Due to the closeness of Hirak to the army base this was already cause for heated debate. I wonder if anybody has found any recent sources of fighting in Hirak? It's a big and strategically important city, so SANA, SOHR of Twitter should mention it if there's fighting ongoing. If there are no sources, should Hirak be made green again with a red ring to the east, near the army base? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 15:38, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

JAN sieges Hazm Movement held town in Aleppo: Sheikh Suleiman

According to one of the more neutral sources on this conflict the JAN conflict with Hazm is spreading eastward from Idlib province and now into Aleppo province. This article http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/security/2015/02/tension-high-ghouta-damascus-factions-infighting.html states: "In the meantime, Jabhat al-Nusra has also been fighting another battle on a different front in Aleppo, against the Hazm Movement which is described as moderate by the West. Groups of Jabhat al-Nusra surrounded the village of Sheikh Suleiman in the western countryside of Aleppo. The organization also raided the movement’s headquarters and weapons warehouses, while its other groups have been setting up checkpoints and deploying snipers on the roofs of the buildings near the Atarib-Sarmada road." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.215.182.19 (talk) 18:04, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Zabadani area

Peto Lucem new map clearly show Madaya, Buqqayn, 'Ayn al-Hawr to be rebel held. Zabadani seem to be contested only to the east. Also, the villages of Sabna and Hawsh 'Arana are rebel held in the Qalamoun area.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B9A8QzxIMAEeeSj.jpg:large — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.179.159.29 (talk) 18:09, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

 Done Hanibal911 (talk) 19:32, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

No. Zabadani is for sure contested: SAA presence inside the city is well documented as discussed in the past even if probably the core of the city is still rebel controoled. The map is not detailed enough to show the SAA presence inside the city. Therefore Zabadani should go back to contested.Paolowalter (talk) 07:46, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

I agree with the IP,Peto Lucem is pro-regime and in this case we can use his reports(map)beacause Zabadani was contested before now he is showing that rebels captured it.

SOHR reported that 4 members of the regime forces killed when the Islamic battalions targeted them in al- Zabadani.SOHR So this means that the army still present in the city. Hanibal911 (talk) 21:02, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 this source there are clashes on the mountain and around the city not inside the city.Lindi29 (talk) 21:12, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Al-hasakah area

This is pro gov source, but in this area we do not too many reliable source. Sana news: army established full control over the villages of al-Watwatiyeh, Jammo, Jammo Farm, and the eastern part of Bab al-Kheir village south of Hasaka city. [23]. I find Al Watutiyah very close to 121 Artillery base(83.26.172.121 (talk) 18:52, 4 February 2015 (UTC)) The advance of SAA in this area is supported also by SOHR even if it does not mention names (see discussion in [24]). Therefore we can assume that this village is one of those mentioned by SOHR and change it.Paolowalter (talk) 11:28, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

"The loyalist forces captured the villages of Al-Watwaatiyyeh, Al-Jamou, and Mazra’ Al-Jamou in the vicinity of the recently liberated Baab Al-Khayr earlier this morning." almasdarnews — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.65.91.237 (talk) 19:19, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Report by Masdar [25] the SAA has captured 11 Hasakah villages. Please try and find their locations and at least one more source that can confirm the report is correct. EkoGraf (talk) 00:39, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Kurdish source confirmed the capture of the village of Sabaa Skor by the SAA [26]. Its locaiton is here [27]. Please add it to the map. Thanks! EkoGraf (talk) 13:29, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

ARA News it is biased pro opposition source so we can use it for displayed success of army. Hanibal911 (talk) 14:24, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

 Done Hanibal911 (talk) 14:28, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Bab al-Hawla

SOHR Reported that regime forces bombarded and opened heavy machine gun.Contested ?SOHRLindi29 (talk) 21:06, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

I agree that it should be marked contested. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:D4D4:29E7:5AF:E5EC (talk) 01:47, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

SOHR not said about Bab al-Hawla he said about town of Houla which controlled by rebels. Also SOHR not said about clashes in this town only said that Syrian army bombarded and opened heavy machine gun fire on al-Hawla. So that nothing needs to be changed.SOHR Hanibal911 (talk) 08:36, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 February 2015

Add

{ lat = "36.659", long = "39.613", mark = "Location dot black.svg", marksize = "6", label = "Raj'an", link = "Raj'an", label_size = "0", position = "left" },

Sources: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=36.659314&lon=39.612236&z=16 http://www.understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/ISIS%20Sanctuary%20Map%20JAN.%2015.%202015.pdf

Add { lat = "36.601", long = "39.492", mark = "Location dot black.svg", marksize = "6", label = "Nussif Tall", link = "Nussif Tall", label_size = "0", position = "left" },

Sources: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=36.690653&lon=39.492502&z=16&m=bs http://www.understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/ISIS%20Sanctuary%20Map%20JAN.%2015.%202015.pdf Add { lat = "36.644", long = "39.226", mark = "Location dot black.svg", marksize = "6", label = "Za'zu'ah", link = "Za'zu'ah", label_size = "0", position = "left" },

Sources: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=36.644078&lon=39.225976&z=16 http://www.understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/ISIS%20Sanctuary%20Map%20JAN.%2015.%202015.pdf

I want to show these ISIS controlled villages, as ISIS supplies its fighters near Serekaniye using this road.

2601:0:B200:F7D9:ED96:280A:4E54:5A9F (talk) 1:50, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Talbiseh

SOHR reported about clashes between the regime troops and rebels in the city of Talbise.SOHR So we need mark this town as contested. Hanibal911 (talk) 08:41, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Talbiseh is a rebel stronghold. It is not contested. Just south of the city there is the Malouk army complex from which army troops attack the border of the city. This has been going on for months, but the rebels are holding up well... so the city is not contested & the clashes can still be reported routinely for months in the future along the same pattern. No evidence that army troops can do anything other than hit & run attacks. The red semi-circle is enough for now. Tradedia^talk 12:38, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

SOHR reported clashes around Talbsieh mostly in the north area.here.As for now the red cricle is enough.Lindi29 (talk) 12:55, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Those are original research. The pro-opp source states cleraly of fighting inside the city. That has always been sufficient to turn the city contested.Paolowalter (talk) 18:38, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Please read the references critically. The first reference only says the regime shelled Talbise (in one sentence among many referring to other locations). The second reference says "clashes around Talbisa". Both suggest that regime forces are not in the town. Thus neither is adequate to change its' status to contested, even if it weren't a rebel stronghold. André437 (talk) 17:06, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

André437 I Agree that we need more data before mark this town as contested. But if you carefully read this source SOHR you can will notice that it says "Clashes took place between the regime forces and fighters in the vicinity of al- Mashrafeh area in the east of Homs with information about casualties on both sides. Other clashes took place between the same parties in the city of Talbise." Source clear said that clashes in the city of Talbise. Hanibal911 (talk) 20:01, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Deir ErZoor

From [28] the SAA control arounf Deir Erzoor should be enlarged.Paolowalter (talk) 18:38, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, Twitter sources are not accepted here. You said so yourself multiple times when somebody proposed using Twitter sources to show opposition gains :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 20:33, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

No way only 1 twitter source,SOHR Reports have been ignored since 27 january for the airport and there were only edits for the Regime,when there were clashes around the airport and no 1 has mention that,only I did that,so what should do,we should enlarge the Isis presence around the airport.SOHR,SOHR,SOHR,SOHR,SOHR,SOHR,SOHR,SOHR,SOHR.Lindi29 (talk) 20:43, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Elijah J Magnir is a 100% neutral,reliable source, SOHR is no longer, especially in Deir-Ez-Zor. They have been so wrong so many times regarding news from that area. The "twitter" source is sufficient to make change to the map. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 20:46, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Lindi29 SOHR also clear said that army advances in this area. So we cant put black icon near airport. Hanibal911 (talk) 20:58, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

XJ-0461 v2 he is not 100% neutral beacause on his reports are many mistakes,example 25 january he tweets for this jihadistEjmAlrai,without any confirmation or source that he his dead and I tweet to him that's a lie and he is not from mitrovica and his name is not abu abdallah and you need to show a reliable source not biased sources from kurds beacause,I said to him I have reliable source from were he comes from and that he his still alive beacause on my local news there were another report for his death now this is the second one and was a lie,his parents spoke to him on the phone and denied that he is dead,and on 2 febuary he teweets that he is not dead.EjmAlrai,that confirms that his report and sources are not 100% reliable and can not be compare with SOHR who is the main source for this war and also has her own activist in Syria.Lindi29 (talk) 21:08, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

That is only one example and that is of a KIA, which a very hard to verify. We are talking about accuracy concerning battle events. The concensus here is the EJM is 100% reliable and neutral. If you feel that this is incorrect, make a section on the talk page dedicated to it where you present your evidence so that other editors here may consider it.XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 22:32, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 I agree with you that we show Isis presence near the airport and to show the regime advance too but to show were the regime has clearly advance not just to enlarge the map for the Regime where there are clashes everyday at the airport and in the map is showing Isis not even close to the airport but it show in Jaffra where Isis has already captured it.Lindi29 (talk) 21:25, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

EjmAlrai is the AL RAI Chief International Correspondent. We have used him as a source to update the map dozens of times in the past, as well as a source for updating Syria-related articles, and he is neutral. EkoGraf (talk) 00:38, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

YPG newly liberated villages confirmed by YPG official account and Reporters in kobane

https://twitter.com/Kobane_YPG/status/563754661665308672

https://twitter.com/jackshahine/status/563823001549160448

ISIS has retreated from most of the villages this map is wrong edit it.