Jump to content

Talk:Control of cities during the Syrian civil war: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Semi-protected edit request on 8 February 2015: request removed since totally unusable
PBS (talk | contribs)
added sigs to unsigned sections
Line 66: Line 66:
:Source? [[User:XJ-0461 v2|XJ-0461 v2]] ([[User talk:XJ-0461 v2|talk]]) 00:47, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
:Source? [[User:XJ-0461 v2|XJ-0461 v2]] ([[User talk:XJ-0461 v2|talk]]) 00:47, 2 February 2015 (UTC)


What does asad controll except the bordergate & the small city centre?
What does asad controll except the bordergate & the small city centre? <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Creepz55|Creepz55]] ([[User talk:Creepz55|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Creepz55|contribs]]) 00:53, 2 February</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->


XJ-0461 You don´t need any source to put the rings in different order (yellow-red-yellow).[[User:Rhocagil|Rhocagil]] ([[User talk:Rhocagil|talk]]) 04:26, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
XJ-0461 You don´t need any source to put the rings in different order (yellow-red-yellow).[[User:Rhocagil|Rhocagil]] ([[User talk:Rhocagil|talk]]) 04:26, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
Line 86: Line 86:


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.
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.
<small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Creepz55|Creepz55]] ([[User talk:Creepz55|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Creepz55|contribs]]) 00:49, 2 February 2015‎</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->


== YPG in KOBANE ==
== YPG in KOBANE ==
Line 92: Line 93:


https://twitter.com/ColdKurd/status/561294811094065153
https://twitter.com/ColdKurd/status/561294811094065153
<small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Creepz55|Creepz55]] ([[User talk:Creepz55|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Creepz55|contribs]]) 00:54, 2 February 2015‎</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->


== Joum Ali in kobane. ==
== Joum Ali in kobane. ==
Line 100: Line 102:


It's completelly liberated why does the map show ISIS presence?
It's completelly liberated why does the map show ISIS presence?
<small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Creepz55|Creepz55]] ([[User talk:Creepz55|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Creepz55|contribs]]) 00:58, 2 February 2015‎</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->


== Al-Dalli Daraa ==
== Al-Dalli Daraa ==
Line 106: Line 109:


http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/daraa-syrian-army-attempts-counter-rebels-battalion-82/
http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/daraa-syrian-army-attempts-counter-rebels-battalion-82/
<small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:‎ Creepz55|‎ Creepz55]] ([[User talk:‎ Creepz55|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/‎ Creepz55|contribs]]) 00:58, 2 February 2015</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->


"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." <small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/84.24.43.183|84.24.43.183]] ([[User talk:84.24.43.183|talk]]) 08:50, 2 February 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
"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." <small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/84.24.43.183|84.24.43.183]] ([[User talk:84.24.43.183|talk]]) 08:50, 2 February 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Revision as of 13:19, 9 February 2015

Template:Syrian Civil War sanctions


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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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

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)[reply]

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

SAA Advances in Hasakah - Deir Ez Zoor - Rif Dimashq

SAA have advanced on multiple fronts via SOHR [1] [2] [3] I hope the editors make the correct changes. ChrissCh94 (talk) 23:19, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why is Kfar Yabous JAN-held? ChrissCh94 (talk) 23:20, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
According to this map by Desyracuse,[4] it is SAA held. I will change it. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 00:47, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
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 [5] ChrissCh94 (talk) 01:47, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
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))[reply]
https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/561919497121333249 XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 17:08, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

What does asad controll except the bordergate & the small city centre? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 (talkcontribs) 00:53, 2 February

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 (talkcontribs) 00:49, 2 February 2015‎

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 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 (talkcontribs) 00:54, 2 February 2015‎

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? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 (talkcontribs) 00:58, 2 February 2015‎

Al-Dalli Daraa

Al-Dalli to contested per:

http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/daraa-syrian-army-attempts-counter-rebels-battalion-82/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎ Creepz55 (talkcontribs) 00:58, 2 February 2015

"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)[reply]

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

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

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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 (talkcontribs) 16:31, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Then why is Kfayr Yabous JAN-Held? ChrissCh94 (talk) 00:55, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
You know what to do ChrissCh94 =).200.48.214.19 (talk) 16:45, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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. [6]. 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 [7]). 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)[reply]

"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)[reply]

Report by Masdar [8] 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)[reply]

Kurdish source confirmed the capture of the village of Sabaa Skor by the SAA [9]. Its locaiton is here [10]. Please add it to the map. Thanks! EkoGraf (talk) 13:29, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

Bab al-Hawla

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

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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. Tradediatalk 12:38, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Deir ErZoor

From [11] the SAA control arounf Deir Erzoor should be enlarged.Paolowalter (talk) 18:38, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 (talkcontribs) 12:46, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Stop using so many biased twitter sources to report YPG gains please, at the very least wait for official YPG statements before changing to Yellow villages that get reported as liberated as late as 3 days after the change is made here.

190.67.154.84 (talk) 13:03, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Biased? You're funny People edit this map with Pro iran & pro assad sources and some pictures taken back in 2012. If any ISIS source,Assad source report something then it's 100% right, right?

Also if this was a lie you would see ISIS media trying to prove that YPG are lying. Sorry but i believe YPG official account.

___

I am pro-YPG pal, but I don't see the point in rushing to put everything yellow as soon as it gets mentioned in twitter, Jackshanine is a p. good source but in that particular tweet he is quoting another user whose realiability we don't know about.

Again, wait a bit until YPG (or ANHA) post the list of liberated villages so the changes can be done accordingly and we don't end putting yellow contested villages, like it happened with Sheran, which was marked yellow when in truth it was being besieged for 2 days.


190.67.154.84 (talk) 13:38, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

https://twitter.com/jackshahine/status/564092268064542720 -->

Also you can see here from a raqqa S.I inside source that ISIS are preparing for a war outside tel ebyad

https://twitter.com/Raqqa_sl1/status/564082763914305537 https://twitter.com/Raqqa_sl1/status/564082719433711616 https://twitter.com/Raqqa_sl1/status/564082785649180672

Wow ISIS retreating from jarablus according to Elijah J magnier. https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/564094868494888960

And btw ANHA already posted a list in their kurdish section http://ku.hawarnewsagency.com/ypg-li-3-eniyen-kobane-28-gund-hatin-rizgarkirin/

newly liberated villages

Eastern front

Qeremûx, Kara Mezra, Xirab Kort, Girêmoz, Walaqî, Boztepe, Êynbat, Gundê Xerîb, Cumelî, Kortekê, Kopeksatan, Girbelav, Îto and Til Sofî

Southern front Kaşê Berkelê, Dongêzê ya Biçuk û Mezin, Yaramaz, Bogazê,Girdê

Western front Selîm, Qurqurî, Korelî, Dîkmetaş, Aşmê, Elem and H.Şûkrî — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 (talkcontribs) 17:21, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

From what I've understood through numerous sources, YPG in western front has reached the river, on southern front YPG is at Sarrin grain depot and on the eastern front around Bexdik village. So the current map must be updated. Roboskiye (talk) 18:35, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
On the southeastern front YPG is on Lafarge cement plant and Chelebi village. On the eastern front they are at Bandarkhan village, just 20 km from Tel Abyad/Girê Spî. The current version of the map is too outdated. It actually shows the situation as it was for one week ago. Now more than 150 villages are recaptured by YPG. Roboskiye (talk) 16:37, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Some sources: http://www.aljazeera.net/news/arabic/2015/2/8/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%82%D9%88%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-%D8%B9%D8%B4%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%89-%D8%A8%D9%85%D8%AD%D9%8A%D8%B7-%D8%B9%D9%8A%D9%86-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A8 http://www.alahednews.com.lb/fastnews/254584/%D8%A7%D8%B4%D8%AA%D8%A8%D8%A7%D9%83%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A8%D9%8A%D9%86-%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-%D9%88%D9%85%D8%B3%D9%84%D8%AD%D9%8A-%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%B9%D8%B4-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%89-%D8%A8%D8%B1%D9%8A%D9%81-%D9%85%D8%AF%D9%8A%D9%86%D8%A9-%D8%AA%D9%84-%D8%A7%D8%A8%D9%8A%D8%B6-%D8%B4%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%84-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B1%D9%82%D8%A9#.VNeRd_nF870 Roboskiye (talk) 16:43, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Al-hasakah and area Qamishili area

In last few days it was many raport about advance SAA in this two area. Almasdar [12] and [13] - The Syrian Arab Army (SAA) – in cooperation with the National Defense Forces – asserted their control over the villages of al-Zaraza, Shamasa, Tal Mohamed, al-Tiben, Khaled, Howedka, Akoula villages and nine other farms in the area. (Tal Hamees area). SAA offensive confirm by SOHR and EjmAlrai without name. Why Melabiya turn black when in this area SAA take few village and [14] [15] Ivan Sidorenko report about army prepare to retake base 121 And one more raport [16] that army control the entire way from Qamishli to Tell Brak (217.99.116.28 (talk) 13:41, 7 February 2015 (UTC))[reply]

It´s very interesting news. Sadly no source except Almasdar give names to the liberated villages and Almasdar is by many here considered not trustworthy. Me myself think that Almasdar is at least as trustworthy as SOHR in reporting gains and losses of ground among the fighting parts. Map should be updated. Rhocagil (talk) 18:03, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rhocagil I agree, if we use SOHR we should use al-Masdar too atleast we know who edits the articles at al-Masdar and could easily contact the editor unlike SOHR which is unrealible on clashes where FSA is not involved and untrustworthy due the following reasons: ""SOHR" has no incorporation, no official reports, no physical address. They never explain their methodology, only assert random numbers."Spenk01 (talk) 21:48, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Spenk01 SOHR or he Rami Abdul Rahman is a one man office that work out of his apartment and does not think he has to explain his methodology (About SOHR NY Times). Anyway I think most of the news from SOHR are valid or good enough for making editorial changes to the map. With that said, I also like to say that I totally agree with you on your opinion on Al-Masdar, we know who edits the articles and it should be used. Rhocagil (talk) 23:37, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Reliable source reported that ISIS pulls out of 15 villages and farms in Al-Qamishli. Syrian army NDF Approaching IS in Tal Hamis and Tal al-Braq.Elijah J. Magnier Hanibal911 (talk) 09:39, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Another 2 report about this offensive [17] and EjmAlrai confirm SAA advance. (217.99.116.28 (talk) 09:36, 8 February 2015 (UTC))[reply]

Islamic State withdraw

Many reliable sources mentioning a TOTAL Islamic State withdraw from Northern Aleppo countryside, Elijah J Magnier being one of then:

https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/564053529183412224 https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/564069326861238272 https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/564094868494888960

Yes, we need to wait further confirmations, but is most likely a Idlib/Latakia style withdraw like in february 2014, to focus on Raqqa, Hasakah and Deir Ez-Zor(and Iraq). They had no men to maintain the fronts around Kobane, and would be trapped by YPG/FSA from the east and FSA/IF/JaN from the west. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.156.1.66 (talk) 19:54, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here map from pro opposition source which showed a situation in this area. Hanibal911 (talk) 20:16, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Of course we can't do anything at this moment. There is much talk about this, probably most of things being reported are 50% true and 50% rumors.

  • Liwa Thuwar Raqqa (FSA linked) source said that FSA relebes (not said exactly which groups) captured the village of Qudaja, located right here.
  • Same group published photos showing the bridge in Qarah Qawzak. They said that IS still controls the town. Also they published these photos saying " We managed to cut the supply route between Sarinn ".
  • Kataib Shamal (FSA from Kobane) said the same thing for Qudaja vilage, but a friend also said that it's not important because other villages around were also captured.
  • Another interesting channel.

Does anyone agree to change Dir Barah, Barkh Batan and Quwaytaji to green ? Mainly because pro-opposition sources (including the channels above) are talking about villages located in the south of these 3 locations, mentioning for example Qudaja as captured but not mentioning the 3 villages that I wrote here. DuckZz (talk) 21:41, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

https://twitter.com/archicivilians/status/564184662172368898?lang=sv reports of more villages also it doesn't only say fsa but burqan al furat (ypg jabhat akrad sham al simal and LTR) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 (talkcontribs) 22:21, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The reliable source said that now YPG fully control the entire southern reef of Kobani until Manbaj, north of Aleppo.Elijah J. Magnier also source said that fierce fighting between ISIS and Al Nusra in the reef Aleppo while ISIS is pulling from the area.Elijah J. Magnier and for now YPG stopped to north East of Manbij and east of the river.Elijah J. Magnier Hanibal911 (talk) 16:55, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agree . Its very fast moving .Pyphon (talk) 17:17, 8 February 2015 (UTC)pyphon[reply]

FSA+Akrad and islamist groups

Hawar ala nahr should be edited https://twitter.com/arabthomness/status/564102969147547648?lang=sv — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 (talkcontribs) 22:26, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We can't use biased sources like this. This guy is not just pro-opposition but pro-opposition + not reliable. DuckZz (talk) 23:42, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kafr Shams

According to IvanSidorenko, Government forces are trying to capture this town (including Masharah and Deir Adas), here and here. Opinions ? DuckZz (talk) 23:57, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Just like always: wait a couple days. There are reports from both pro gov. and opposition sources that SAA/NDF will strom Deir al Adas in the coming days, and finally launching an offensive on Douma. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Totholio (talkcontribs) 00:09, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

SOHR clear said that clashes still in surroundings town of Kafr Shams but not inside the town.SOHR Hanibal911 (talk) 09:15, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Violent clashes are still taking place between the regime forces supported by militiamen against the Islamic and rebel battalions in the vicinity of the town of Kafar Shams, amid mutual bombardment between the two parties.SOHR Hanibal911 (talk) 09:18, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
DuckZz IvanSidorenko not a reliable source which just publishes the pro-government and the pro-opposition data. Hanibal911 (talk) 09:25, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Petro Lucem also talks about fighting: https://twitter.com/PetoLucem/status/564449500690149376 He claims the SAA is attacking Zimrin and Kafr Shams. So it seems the town is rebel held, since Petro Lucem is a known Al-Masdar/pro-SAA person who only adminsts rebel gains if he absolutely has to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 15:51, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dont need to misrepresent facts because source not said that Syrian troops attacking Zimrin and Kafr Shams. Source said that Syrian tropps launched a military operation in area of the towns Kafr Shams and Zimrin. But not said that clashed inside Kafr Shams. Also this source previously showed that this town under control by Syrian army.here Hanibal911 (talk) 16:05, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Peto Lucem is quoting Loy .s .Don't know if he is reliable but maybe it can go contested until we here more as offensive seems to be going on .Pyphon (talk) 16:05, 8 February 2015 (UTC)pyphon[reply]

Also pro opposition source previously showed that this town under control by Syrian army.here Hanibal911 (talk) 16:09, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Seems Kafr Shams is under rebel control: http://breakingnews.sy/en/article/52982.html This article says SAA targeted rebels in Kafr Shams town, not around it. So that means Kafr Shams and Tell Arab to the northwest to rebel held. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 16:51, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No ,contested .Pyphon (talk) 17:00, 8 February 2015 (UTC)pyphon[reply]

No, rebel held. The article cleary says: "striking militants IN Kafr Shams". Not outskirts. Not area. Not "in the vincinity of". IN the town :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 18:43, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This source not said that the city is under rebel control. So that as a compromise, we can mark the town as a contested. Hanibal911 (talk) 18:54, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In the town yes SAA are in the town ,contested ;)Pyphon (talk) 21:01, 8 February 2015 (UTC)pyphon[reply]

Hanibal911 This obviously Pro-SAA reporter says terrorists control Kafr Shams. I would say lets make it contested, but then again i don't know because these clashes may last only for few days. My opinion, we make it contested until further (until SAA stops the offensive) DuckZz (talk) 23:51, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That source says the town has been under rebel control for a year and a half, but we have had multiple pro-opposition sources confirming the town to be SAA-held. Like the pro-opp/mildly neutral deSyracuse [18] and the the hardcore pro-opposition Archi [19]. Both marked it as SAA-held in November and later January. So I think that casts some doubt on that journalist's report. And SOHR specifically stated the fighting was in the countryside. As for the breaking news source, it says an operation was carried out (past tense) not that it was continuing. EkoGraf (talk) 07:37, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How much more proof does the editor want? This is starting to get funny

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-PIbV01LjQ&feature=youtu.be

This map should be updated because it's getting funny now.

VIDEOS ,PICTURES are not reliable evidence for changing our map. Read the rules .Also you should know no pro op sources for por op gains .Pyphon (talk) 12:27, 8 February 2015 (UTC)pyphon[reply]

We cant use as a source the amateur video from YouTube. Hanibal911 (talk) 14:59, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Please, we´ve been using them for years. See Aleppo battle article. YPG already released imagies of Euphrates river, it was confirmed by Elijah Magnier and other experts with contact on the ground, basically everyone acknoweldges it. EllsworthSK (talk) 19:35, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Be patient. The map is neutral, therefore it takes a bit of time to change everything. DuckZz (talk) 19:58, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also for now we have many other more reliable sources which show a situation in this area. Also according to the rules in Wikipedia amateur video from YouTube this is not reliable sources. Hanibal911 (talk) 20:11, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If we really want to be orthodox with wiki rules, neither is SOHR, any primary source and basically 99 percent of what we are using. We´ve reached compromise in Battle of Aleppo page, we can use it as template. EllsworthSK (talk) 20:31, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tall Abyad/Girê Spî villages

Alarabiya, clearly states that the frontline is now in the villages of Tall Abyad: http://www.alarabiya.net/ar/arab-and-world/syria/2015/02/08/%D8%AA%D8%AC%D8%AF%D8%AF-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B9%D8%A7%D8%B1%D9%83-%D8%A8%D9%8A%D9%86-%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%B9%D8%B4-%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A3%D9%83%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%AF-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D8%B1%D9%8A%D9%81-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B1%D9%82%D8%A9-.html It meantions villages of Juran, Hurriya, Kurmaza and Kenane. Unfortunately this sourced edit got removed on be half of a map which itself bases its updates on other sources, and which seems to have missed to check Arabic section of Alarabiya! Please update and correct the map. Roboskiye (talk) 07:30, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

An addition to Alarabiya, this source mentions Sarzuri (Zarzuri) and Bir Arab under YPG control. These villages are just two km away from Juran and Hurriya, located north and south of them respectively. Roboskiye (talk) 10:54, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Changes in Qanitara and Daraa

the news from pro oppositions and pro government sources confirmed that these areas are captured by SAA

Kafr Shamis, Zimreen and Deir ‘Adass in north of Daraa

http://syriahr.com/en/2015/02/the-regime-forces-backed-by-hezbollah-and-iranian-fighters-clash-with-the-rebel-and-islamic-factions-in-daraa/ http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-begins-offensive-northern-daraa/

“Tal Fatima”, “Tal Ra’eed”, and “Tal Maqran” in Qanitara

http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/patience-virtue-syrian-army-launches-offensive-al-quneitra/ 46.143.248.55 (talk) 08:43, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not exact. The three hills (which I cannot locate exactly) are confirmed only by the article you mentioned. It is true that Al Masdar is a very reliable soucre and can be used. For the three towns, it is only mentioned fighting near or inside Deir al- Adas by SOHR and that the offensive is geared to takes thos towns. Some tweets states that Deir al- Adas is taken by SAA [20], but we must wait more solid confirmation. Clearly SAA is on the offensive and we must watch how the situation evolves. Deir al- Adas contested should be enough for now see [21].Paolowalter (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 10:21, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kafr Shams is rebel held: http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-begins-offensive-northern-daraa/

Also, Deir Adas: https://twitter.com/KeepingtheLeith/status/564717581450616832 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.183.240.250 (talk) 11:42, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 8 February 2015

Note the above edit request by Kobaniyamin8 added 431,749 characters, the exact same length as another one by the same user and 2 by an IP. I assume therefore they are by the same person and are probably identical. John Smith the Gamer (talk) 14:31, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Probably. Since they are all totally unusable, I removed them. Hopefully they will read the note below, to do it right the next time. André437 (talk) 12:41, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 8 February 2015

Whoever is doing these edit requests is very unclear on the concept.
What is wanted is only the proposed changes, in a normal readable format, with adequate supporting references.
BTW, if you are capable of presenting the code, you don't need the semi-protected edit request unless you have a very new account. In any case, you need the above info to discuss the proposed changes for approval before the changes are made.
Thanks for your cooperation. André437 (talk) 12:31, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Syria map

Is it just me, or does the map look very very small on avarage sized monitors ? In my case it needs to be zoomed to at least 125% to make it visually attractive. DuckZz (talk) 10:43, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you mean the detailed map? Banak (talk) 11:10, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I mean this view of map DuckZz (talk) 11:34, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]