Talk:Control of cities during the Syrian civil war

Important message from creator of map: Please read

Wikipedia administration is obviously not happy about the way the map is being managed (refer to the indefinite block of Hanibal911 for violation of Wikipedia rules on the map). We need to conform more strictly with Wikipedia rules. I have been in contact with administrators with respect to the situation and am in charge of putting back the map in strict conformity with Wikipedia rules & standards. You have to realize that many admins do not like the map and consider it un-encyclopedic and in violation with WP:NOTNEWS. They are waiting for an opportunity to harm it and lead to its deletion. Those of you who have been around about a year ago know that the map has been nominated for deletion and survived the procedure. You also have to know that the first version of the article “Cities and towns during the Syrian Civil War” was deleted after an “Articles for deletion” (AfD) procedure and I had to fight back and create a new modified version. In any case, I will do whatever it takes to protect us. I count on your cooperation and discipline. Please avoid getting in contact with admins and be very nice if they are around and let me handle them. We need to conform strictly with the following Wikipedia rules:

1-Copying from maps is strictly prohibited. Maps from reliable outlets are approximate and therefore unreliable for any use. Maps from amateur sources are below the standards of Wikipedia for any use. They violate WP:RS and WP:CIRCULAR.
I cite the WP:RS rule verbatim: “Anyone can create a personal web page or publish their own book, and also claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published media, such as books, patents, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, personal or group blogs, Internet forum postings, and tweets, are largely not acceptable as sources.” Source: Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published_sources
I cite the WP:CIRCULAR rule verbatim: “Do not use websites that mirror Wikipedia content or publications that rely on material from Wikipedia as sources.” At least one map maker has admitted to using the Wikipedia map as a source. There is strong suspicion others do the same.

2-WP:POV pushing and intentional misinterpretation of sources will no longer be tolerated. If you are not sure what the source is saying, post it on the talk page first so that it would be discussed. Tradedia^talk 09:00, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Tradedia I really didn't know that tweets can't be used as a source. I mean, i understand the term that anybody can make a tweet, but we have a "list" of pro-government and pro-opposition users that are active for several years, i believe that 50% of our edits are based on their tweets, and it's somehow working, no complains about that ... but ok. Something else, can we use this talk page as a source, i mean if we aren't sure about something, we disquss it here, and if everyone agrees about something, we make an edit based on the talk page, is that ok ? DuckZz (talk) 12:14, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Edits are not made based on total consensus, DuckZz, they are made based on general consensus involving everyone who participates in editing the page.

Tweets are fine to use as sources, so long as they can be backed up by other, more reliable, sources, should they come from smaller, lesser known, and possibly less reliable ones. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DaJesuZ (talk • contribs) 18:25, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

So Elijah Magnier can no longer be used as a source,but SOHR is the only source that can be used, SOHR has been an agreed condition between the editors and admins three years ago, and so the main source will be news outlets,what about ISW.Alhanuty (talk) 12:24, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

With such rules no Pro ISIS sources can be used. How is that neutral ? (All pro ISIS sources are tweets) !!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helmy1453 (talk • contribs) 16:34, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

The reference to twitter was more in the context of copying from maps. The problem with maps is that we don’t know when they are guessing and when they are not. Twitter is not a source. Twitter is a media tool. The person writing the tweet is the source. Since Elijah Magnier is a well-known journalist, he is a valid source. So it all depends on the credibility of the person writing the tweet. Anyone can open a twitter account and start relaying rumors. It is important to also not use a source automatically, but assess the credibility of the writer and see what other sources are saying about the same town/situation. Some people who tweet are known to have information about the situation in Syria. So they can be used as a source, while taking into account their bias (no pro-gov/opp/kurd/ISIS sources for gov/opp/kurd/ISIS gains). However, we cannot use the tweets of PinkFuzzy444 because we don’t know who the heck it is. So we need to be careful and weight the news by the credibility of the writer. Again, we have to look at what other writers are saying as well. For example, it might be prudent to make a town contested based on one source and then wait a little for other sources to change the color completely. We are trying to avoid mistakes, but at the same time be reactive to changes on the ground, so it is all common-sense. All previous and new sources should be looked at before making a map change decision. There is a balance to be found between jumping the gun too early and being unreactive and have something become outdated. Concerning the question about the “talk page as a source”, the answer is yes. Tradedia^talk 18:04, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 .Because of the unfair way Hanibal911 has been treated I will no longer donate to Wikipedia and will advise others to do the same .Also I say goodbye to all of you on this talk page .thankyou .86.135.154.220 (talk) 13:38, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Didn't realise it, but we lost Lindi29 to a sockpuppetry indeff on the first, and the tools that were used to find the top editors are down (as of the day Hanibal911 was blocked). Lindi was quite active too (about 5% of edits to this module). Banak (talk) 22:56, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Tradedia Users LightandDark2000 and 佐倉千代 are using twitter Hashtags as a source, pro-opposition tweets for Rebel advances etc.. breaking the rules and even making edits according to "their own opinion"... please respond, i can't revert them all because they make more than 10 changes during their edits so i need to do it manually. DuckZz (talk) 12:02, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Frustration with how this project was being managed drove me from this map 6 months ago. Glad to see some order is being restored. Boredwhytekid (talk) 19:09, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

A quick clarification please, Tradedia; pro-gov't al Masdar and (for the purposes of this map) pro-op Institute for the Study of War are two of the more vigorous outlets reporting on the Syrian Civil War. Their reporting/information often comes in the form of maps, some more detailed than others. 100% unusuable? Not trying to equivocate, and will abide by your response for all future editing. Thank you. Boredwhytekid (talk) 19:23, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Also would appreciate clarification on archicivilians, which I see is still in use as a source Boredwhytekid (talk) 20:38, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Boredwhytekid: Interesting that you mention the Institute for the Study of War. Just now, I had to revert an edit (based on their map) on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rif_Damashq.svg (see File talk:Rif Damashq.svg#Khan al-Shih). ISW maps have been found in our past experience to be approximate. So in this case, our Rif Damashq map was correct, and we made it wrong by copying from ISW map!

Concerning al Masdar, he usually hosts maps by pro-gov PetoLucem (or another Persian map maker). There is a major difference between our map and their maps. Our map marks towns (or bases, etc.) that we have information for. On the other hand, their maps color the whole territory assigning a control status to every area. Do they really have enough information to assign every area to a specific party? Do they have information to be able to draw the frontlines? Our map has started by marking all the towns for which we had information/sources. We did not have the aim to cover the whole Syrian territory. We prefer not to guess. If we don’t have reliable sources/information about an area, we should just leave it empty.

Just because an amateur map is classified as pro-gov, it doesn’t mean that map is always correct for the towns that it marks as under rebel control (and vice versa for pro-rebel maps). We need to be examining all sources, instead of blindly copying someone else's map. For example, just because Peto Lucem is classified as pro-gov, does not mean all the rebel areas on his maps are correct. Many months ago, he had the area around Al-Tulaysiyah marked as rebel held (you can read all about it in the archives of this talk page). However, I was able to find a source that showed that in reality it was gov held. We informed Peto Lucem of his mistake and he corrected it.

Also, i can give you 2 recent examples off the top of my head where the map by DeSyracuse was wrong and we copied it and made our correct map wrong:

1- See Talk:Cities and towns during the Syrian Civil War/Archive 34#Abu al-duhur airbase

2- His map dated 8-january-2015 shows Kafr Shams gov-held. This was before the large gov offensive (beginning february). So we know it was wrong since one of the gov offensive’s objectives was to capture Kafr Shams.

Also, see here an honest dialogue with DeSyracuse, where I confront him with the fact that his maps are not up to Wikipedia standards.

We never know when maps are approximate, guess-work, or worse (same story for archicivilians)… We need a source that talks specifically about a location so that we know it is not guessing. So the source has to say: “location xyz is under this control or that status…” The news could be right or wrong, but we need a news, not a guess. Amateur maps have been wrong too many times and made our map wrong too many times. They are not sources. They are our competitors. Tradedia^talk 18:49, 20 June 2015 (UTC) Do not archive this yet. Tradedia^talk 01:54, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

I agree with all the points raised by Tradedia in this section. Also, frustration with the blind application of "sources" by Hanibal911 was part of the reason I stopped contributing to this page a while back. (I was also busy with other priorities.)

I'm glad to see the reorientation of this page, as I think that it makes a very valuable contribution to Wikipedia as well as informing about the situation in Syria.

-- my 2 cents André437 (talk) 17:44, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Quneitra

Syrian Army captured Al Hamidiyah and Tal Qubba on July 2nd 2015- not changed for over a month. SOHR has not reported because his source was killed in the town, so there will be no announcement from him on this, because his sources are very limitedd in Syria, covering less than 12% of the country (Rebel/Al Quieda held Area). Article will be nominated for deletion if these are not changed.

2-http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-captures-tal-qabaa-near-the-israeli-bordder/

1-http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/southern-front-conducts-another-large-assault-on-the-golan-heights-and-daraa-city/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by SyrianObserver2015 (talk • contribs) 11:16, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Do you have any pro-rebel sources that can confirm this? I agree and would edit these however it would violate the map rules which I interpret as unnecessarily strict and inhibit the map from portraying a realistic representation of the current situation in the war. Prohibited Area (talk) 12:43, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Once again there are no pro opposition members left in this town, the town has been in army control for over a month, the pro opposition obviously has no sources here, once again map changes are made for opposition gains instantly with pro opposition sources (SOHR) which has sources in less than 15% of the country, how can you base a map of a war on such a limited and biased source which has made many false claims in the past? Once again make the change or this article will be nominated for delition, again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SyrianObserver2015 (talk • contribs) 12:52, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

I cannot make the edit without a pro-rebel source or a neutral source. I have listed some proposals above regarding the rules of editing which you are welcome to comment on to express your opinion on. For the time being we will have to be patient.Prohibited Area (talk) 14:09, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Thats BS heres a video of the location with Druze and SAA in control ; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcAPPxkaljg. Guess I will nominate it again to point out the flaws and complete bias of this page, and its editors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SyrianObserver2015 (talk • contribs) 14:49, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

I will make the edit on the basis that Al-Masdar is a reliable source.Prohibited Area (talk) 17:06, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Will someone, anyone at all, please explain to me how making an edit in favor of the government, without confirmation of anti-government or neutral sources, makes any sense, and would you, kindly, explain to me how it shows bias in favor of the rebels, SyrianObserver2015, when we do not make edits in favor of the rebels without government or neutral sources confirming whatever assertions are made?DaJesuZ (talk) 23:54, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Well things have changed and if you want your map kept I suggest you keep it up to date, you can update rebels with pro rebel source, but can't update Government area for over a month, as far as I am concerned the info below the map is mostly false and out of date. The editors of this map are a joke. So you can start to change or you can see your map nominated for deletion every week untill it is gone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.40.58.48 (talk) 13:10, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

No bias is being shown, and I realize that me continuing this is going a it far, and personally, I don't care. This map is meant to be as close to what's going on in reality as possible, based on confirmation of opossing sides' advances, confirmed by those who oppose those who made those advances. Rebel gains can't be documented here without confirmation from neutral of government sources, and opposition advances can't be documented without government or neutral sources. No bias is being shown here. We are placing the same citeria for documentation of advances for BOTH sides, talk. DaJesuZ (talk) 17:16, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

lots of Bias is being shown here, the town of Al Hamidiyah in Quineitra has been captured by government forces for over a month, there is one official opposition mouthpiece, SOHR a man living in a london council house, yet there are half a dozen independent english news agencies in Syria that are unbiased to either side. The town of Al-Hamidiyah was never announced by SOHR, Why? To Keep rebels moarals high in the south as they have sufffered a string of defeats. There are other areas of the map also in government control marked green and grey (South), I will be looking for these to change soon, remember that this map is on the verge of being deleted because of the lack of credable sources, more specifically this pages over relience on a biased media source that has made many false claims and continues to do so. You keep saying we all agreed in the past and the map kept getting nominated in the past because SOHR is the one and only fucking source this page seems to use.

If there are any inaccuracies on the map either edit them yourselves or post on the talk page of the necessary edits to be made along with an adequate sources for these edits. SOHR and Al-Masdar can be used for both rebel and govt gains and losses. Otherwise the source needs to be a pro-govt source detailing a govt loss or a pro-rebel source detailing a rebel loss.Prohibited Area (talk) 10:43, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Map improvement

Thank you very much for your fine and detailed work on this map. There is only one thing missing that is of crucial importance in any conflict map , main roads and highways ! Is there any possibility of including them in this so detailed map ?

Thanks in advance and best regards

2A02:582:C92:AB00:9111:BCDE:D06A:BDF6 (talk) 10:58, 7 August 2015 (UTC) Thanos

Good point! Rhocagil (talk) 20:52, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

You are completely correct. Roads and highways would be a far better thing to show on this map than province boundaries. Someone needs to contact the maker of the location map and tell them to make a special version for this template with major roads on it. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 19:35, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

The first time there was a section on this talk page asking for roads was back in 24 April 2013! Unfortunately no one has done it. Instead, the guy who edits the location map the most has added small rivers! Rivers don't add much value or explain war (river above Rastan doesn't even show up). All they do is interfere with labels which are also blue. They clutter the map. If you guys bug this guy enough, he might be willing to replace his rivers with roads… Tradedia^talk 02:52, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

I think rivers are equally important as roads so both should be added, in my opinion. Prohibited Area (talk) 08:46, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Most rivers in Syria (besides the Euphrates) are not navigable, although the other rivers could act as defensive barriers. So roads would be much more important to add. I don't have the info or skills to do that myself. André437 (talk) 04:08, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Fu'ah and Kafraya

[1] Al Masdar reports Jaish al Fatah have breached SAA fortifications in Fu'ah and Kafraya. Should we change both towns to contested, the source suggests clashes are ongoing. Also can we remove or change Suwwagiyah, Deir al-Zahgb and Bab al-Hawa checkpoint to rebel control as I havent found any sources which claim they are still under SAA control, most sources claim that Fu'ah and Kafraya are the only regime-held towns in Idlib Governorate now, suggesting that they no longer control these positions.Prohibited Area (talk) 12:02, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

We'll know when the rebels breach the regime lines and actually enter the cities: it will be reported all over the online media. Think Zabadani: everyone will be talking about it. Zabadani was surrounded for months, but it was only stormed a few weeks ago. Reading that report, it doesn't really sound like the towns have been breached, unlike the reports from Zabadani, which were pretty clear. I would wait; we'll know when the rebels breach the government lines. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 20:19, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

[2] I'm not sure if these villages are on the map, but the breaking of the supply route from Latakia to Hama is certainly notable. 50.187.216.93 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 22:48, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Since it's a big part of the opposition campaign right now there should probably be a submap of it, like with Deir el Zor [3] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.187.216.93 (talk) 22:50, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

The second Jubb al-ahmar on this map is called "Jeb Red", a literalish translation of Jubb al-ahmar (al-ahmar means red). It seems kind of weird to not call them both "Jubb al-Ahmar" 50.187.216.93 (talk) 03:13, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

That was supposed to go in the section below. 50.187.216.93 (talk) 03:14, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 August 2015

It appears that the opposition has captured the village of Jubb al Amar, which is on this map. [4] Jubb al Ahmar should be green. 50.187.216.93 (talk) 23:12, 11 August 2015 (UTC) 50.187.216.93 (talk) 23:12, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

No. Firstly, the source is somewhat biased against the regime, as IUCA has a lot of pro-rebel editors in it (archicivilians, Thomas Van Linge, etc). Second, we cannot use maps generally for edits on this map, especially when this is a very fluid frontline with many other reliable sources reporting on it. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 23:19, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Okay then. I'll try to find another source. It's a fairly recent development anyway. Also, this is the Jubb al-Ahmar to the west of Basah not south. 50.187.216.93 (talk) 23:26, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Ah, I didn't know that. OK. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 23:34, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, there are two of them within a few miles of eachother. Weird.

Also, the IUCA claim that "Syrian Army forces have fallen back to a line of houses/highway E of Joureen" Corresponds to other reports that they have fallen back around Joureen [5], it makes sense. I think its reliable. 50.187.216.93 (talk) 23:36, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Here's a pro-SAA source confirming Jubb al Ahmar was captured. It shows places SAA has withdrawn from too. [6] 50.187.216.93 (talk) 00:01, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

This is not a source. This is an amateur map. And it is wrong. If you read the comments to the map, you will see that Leith Fadel (editor of Al-Masdar) and another user are telling the map maker that Jubb Al Ahmar is gov-held. If "Jubb al Ahmar was captured", there would be a news report (somewhere, anywhere) mentioning it.

On another note, I call for anyone to investigate the issue of 2 Jubb Al Ahmar close to each others. This is how it is in Wikimapia. However, I suspect an error on the part of Wikimapia users. Maybe one user marked it in one place, and another user didn’t see it and marked it in a different place. The interesting thing is that both Jubb Al Ahmar were put on Wikimapia 3 months ago. If someone could check these locations on a map service other than Wikimapia, it would be great… Tradedia^talk 04:49, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

It's the same on this map too, جب الأحمر DuckZz (talk) 14:08, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm looking at the map from 8/9, you linked to the one from 8/3. The one from 8/11 also shows Jubb al Ahmar taken. [7] 50.187.216.93 (talk) 05:33, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

I'll look in arabic media. 50.187.216.93 (talk) 05:45, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Ceasefires declared

BBC is reporting ceasefires in Kàfraya, al-Fuah, and al-Zub-howers-it's-spelt. I don't k ow how to make edits, but because this is reported on a huge news source, I think someone should make the appropriate edits, at least for the next couple days, or should they be left alone, because the ceasefires are only for the next two days? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DaJesuZ (talk • contribs) 04:54, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

I have edited Zabadani Prohibited Area (talk) 10:30, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

It's not a truce, revert your edit so i don't have to do it. Pro-government and pro-rebel sources said that there will be a 48houre casefire, and that's not a truce, and it will pass today anyway. DuckZz (talk) 14:09, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

It is a truce, both sides have declared to end hostilities for a certain period of time, that's practically the dictionary definition of a truce. After 48 hrs I will revert back to contested or if the deal breaks and hostilities resume I will also revert.Prohibited Area (talk) 16:49, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

AFP states that the ceasefire in Zabadani has been extended by another 24 hours, into Saturday. https://twitter.com/GebeilyM/status/631480843786190848 — Preceding unsigned comment added by DaJesuZ (talk • contribs) 20:14, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Untitled Villages

Can we remove multiple untitled villages north of Raqqa? Updating the map in future would be made difficult as we wouldn't know which source corresponds with which village. Can we either remove them or can someone find a source in which we can edit their names.Prohibited Area (talk) 10:30, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

There's no reason for deleting sourced content, as in this case. Furthermore, I will add more towns north of Raqqa wich were deleted with no reason or discussion (Addrobiah, for example). Its funny to see people (I dont point to Prohibited Area, Im talking in general) wich want to remove ISIS-held or SAA-held towns, but at the same time add every single tiny village controlled by the YPG, ah the partisan biased editors, growing in numbers in WP everyday...--HCPUNXKID 16:29, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

HCPUNXKID My problem isn't that they're IS held, my problem is that they are not named. I have previously suggested removing villages from areas under YPG control as there is no longer clashes there and therefore no longer a necessity for the density of the villages within the controlled area, however have received no responses or consensus from the rest of the editors.Prohibited Area (talk) 16:46, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

I agree that there is no use in showing tiny villages on the map if they are not on the frontline or for some reason very strategic. The "dot"-size of many small villages are also problematic. I´ve seen villages with less then ten houses marked whit "fsize" five/six, should be marked size one/two, if marked at all (Do we have guidelines for this?).Rhocagil (talk) 18:36, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

I have a visual guideline which I have used, which goes something like this: 3 houses: size 2. 10 houses: size 3. 30 houses: size 4. 50 houses: size 5. 80 houses: size 6. 170 houses: size 7. 300 houses: size 8. etc.

That said, I don't think any of these villages behind the frontlines of any group should be removed at all, ever. The goal of the map is to show territorial control of cities and towns in the Syrian Civil War, and we don't accomplish that by striking actual towns from the map. However, I'm all for removing non-existent villages from the map, and making ones that have 10 houses size 3: I have done this to hundreds of villages that don't exist or are too small. But by removing villages that actually exist just because "Well they're behind the frontline now" is bad for 2 reasons: it makes it harder to find them if a counteroffensive occurs, and it understates the territorial control of groups. For example, removing kurdish villages behind the frontline might make some people think "oh well they don't actually have that many towns", even when they have A LOT. Same with ISIS, regime, etc.

So no removing villages just because. That's not how it works. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 22:15, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

 Done. Removed unnamed towns from the map, added again sourced towns removed without reason or discussion.--HCPUNXKID 14:22, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Kweirs airport

According to Ivan Sidorenko, ISIS is present on Tell Riman, which is right here. So i think the Aleppo map needs to be updated, because this area is close to Al Safira, and now look at the map again, there's a space between Safira icon and the actuall map, and i believe the hill is right there, so that means the entire red spot NE of Safira should go black. DuckZz (talk) 22:45, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Seems like a legit source. I think he's pro-government, right? Someone can make the edit if they want. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 23:03, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

He is definitely pro-Government. But his reports are generally accurate, and he has a lot of SAA/NDF sources.

Serghaya

Why Serghaya became under rebel control ? I have not seen any news about it. Lessi94 (talk) 11:23, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Its not, its the editors of this map are mostly supporters of isis/fsa/al nusrat/opposition:

Latest reports: http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/07/21/421200/Syria-Idlib-ISIL-Nusra

Not one mention of its capture anywhere, all I see was a Kuwaiti news report stating it was being attacked, which could be highly inaccurate due to the fact it is from Kuwait. No sign of it even being still under attack either.SyrianObserver2015 (talk) 13:23, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

This bothers me to. I can´t find when the edit was made, by whom and what source was used.Rhocagil (talk) 18:24, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Fixed XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 19:06, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Could someone put the town as governement-held ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lessi94 (talk • contribs) 21:43, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Lessi94 You need a better source. If you think the town was wrongly marked, then you should indicate in which edit you believe it was wrongly changed. Otherwise, you must provide a non-biased or anti-government source (NOT presstv, and preferably not al-Masdar), such as Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, or a different outlet, to show that the government controls this town.

Also, to clarify, I am not a supporter of ISIS, FSA, or al Nusra. I know some editors have their leanings, but personally, I have noticed that a lot of them are supporters of the government. Best wishes. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 22:08, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Edit was made because of Eliah Magnier, the most reliable source person we have, who said that 50+ rebels were evacuated from Zabadani to Serghaya which is under their control and so far stable. DuckZz (talk) 22:26, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Please show me that tweet, because I can´t find it. Rhocagil (talk) 23:15, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

This discussion reminds me that we should resume posting info to the tables, for all changes to the map. Preferable BEFORE changing the map.

That way it would be very easy to confirm the validity of any changes. The current practice doesn't leave a readily verifiable audit trail. Which is partly why many admins are hostile to our map.

As for Magnier as a source, a few times he has made important false reports that he could have (but didn't) verify beforehand. (Like when he announced the UN-supervised withdrawal in progress of rebels from Homs city, about a week before it happened.)

So I would be more comfortable with a confirming source for somewhat surprising info like this. André437 (talk) 03:38, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Eliah Magnier is not a source that can be used to make map edits, Tweets are not sources unless they come from one of the two sources that are used for maps edits: SOHR, Al Masdar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.94.235.92 (talk) 15:09, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Al-Heisa near Raqqa

So there are two neighbouring villages called "Al-Heisa" on the map (between Ain Issa and Raqqa). One is yellow and one is black, so I think it needs clarification? --Ahmetyal (talk) 14:43, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

On wikimapia, they both have a similar name. It won't matter when coalition advances past that point towards Raqqa. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 20:38, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Latakia map error? ~ Hasakah ~ Dier ez Zoir

I couldn't helep but notice the city/town in Latakia that has a green, partially besieged icon to the West of it. Because of the rebel push into Latakia coming from the East of the country, I'm wondering how that's possible, and if there is anything to back it up.

On another note, I've looked at a ton of maps on Twitter recently, especially those concerning al-Hasakah, and almost all of them have the Islamic State pocket within the city being completely eliminated by the Kurds. I haven't kept up with the situation there, at least not since the IS push into the city was cut off, and the government was restricted to the city centre. Is there any new news as to what's going on? I think the Hasakah map needs to be updated.

Next, what's become of the Islamic State pushes around the Palmyra area, especially to the North and West, such as around al-Qaratayn? I remember hearing about the SAA and NDF massing for the defense of Mahin, but I haven't heard much since then. Is there any news regarding the IS attempt to turn the Palmyra push by the governmrnt into a salient? Last time I checked, the government was almost entirely cut off around there.

Regarding the central Homs area, I've read several articles, primarily on Twitter, about IS reinforcements being sent to Dier ez Zoir. I suspect they intend to capture the city, relieve the troops they have trapped there, and repurposed many fighters (this is entirely speculation on my part), and I want to know if there is any news regarding that city.

This is a small inquiry that I've been wondering about for a while; months ago, I noticed that there were several villages to the East of the IS controlled area to the southeast of Damascus, and sometime during the last couple months, they were deleted. The towns were named, and under SAA control. What happened to them? Going back through the downloadable version of the map, you can see the towns in the picture.

Lastly, this is just about the general appearance of the map, and the messiness of the front lines: While I understand the front lines depicted in the downloadable file are approximate, and therefore not exact, they're still messy, very messy. Looking st the map for the Islamic State's Wikipedia page, the map is much more clean. Could someone do something about this? DaJesuZ (talk) 14:56, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

There is an issue with the placement of the rebel siege icon. Someone meant to put "NE", but instead put "SW". IT happens to me sometimes. It will be fixed soon, but I am busy working on something else. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 20:16, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

You are wrong. The SW icon was put there deliberately, because SOHR said that rebels advanced here and there, when searching for those locations, you see their positions are NW of Majdal and Namlik, not hills but some positions build by gov.forces, 3 of them, so NW icon is enough to show rebel presence in that spot, if you want to find out how much, you can see the lates color map. DuckZz (talk) 22:31, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

In regards to Hasakah, I have come across no pro-IS or pro-Kurd sources that detail the YPG capture of areas south of Tell Brak and Tell Hamis. Although occasionally IS clashes or infiltrates YPG lines and attacks villages suggesting they are still active their. However the majority of maps show that IS no longer control a lot of the villages labelled as under their control south of Tell Brak. Recently pro-Kurdish sources claimed that the YPG were pushing towards Al-Hawl and there were clashes within the vicinity of the town however again these sources lacked detail as to which towns were taken or contested. Additionally these pro-Kurdish sources will not be adequate to use because of potential bias.Prohibited Area (talk) 14:25, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

I think Hasakah was taken by the Kurds weeks ago, around the same time they took Sarrin, so I'm not sure why this map still shows ISIS in control of large sections of it. Ryn78 (talk) 17:56, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

NOTICE: Turkish Insurgency Detailed Map

This is a notice to all editors of the Syrian Civil War map:

To Tradedia, DuckZz, Alhanuty, Boredwhytekid, Paolowalter, LightandDark2000, 8fra0, Roboskiye, EkoGraf, Ahmetyal, HCPUNXKID, Prohibited Area, XJ-0461 v2, Tgoll774, BD2412, LogFTW, Ariskar, NightShadeAEB, André437, Rhocagil, Jackmcbarn, Greyshark09,

As most of you probably already know, PKK and other Kurdish insurgent attacks have been steadily escalating in south-east Turkey for the past 3 weeks. Though the PKK is known for hit-and-run attacks and ambushes, of which it has made many recently, it could escalate these attacks into all-out city warfare. This is not just speculation; there have been multiple reports from Kurdish sources that the PKK has already seized several villages, including photographic evidence: https://twitter.com/anfenglish/status/632943451496153090 http://www.anfenglish.com/kurdistan/armed-clash-between-local-people-and-soldiers-in-silvan http://www.anfenglish.com/kurdistan/police-and-soldiers-cannot-get-out-of-their-bases-in-varto https://twitter.com/janbolad/status/632916674522578944 https://twitter.com/cahitstorm/status/632879638453338112

Although many of these reports are yet to be fully confirmed by western media outlets, there is a reasonable indication that the PKK is engaged in a full insurgency against Turkey, and that some militants intend to seize control of many towns and villages. It it for this reason that I have created the bare elements necessary to start a Turkish Insurgency Detailed Map. I have copied from the Syrian Map, as I don't have the knowledge of how to create a map module, and the necessary requirements for the map.

It is for this reason that I call all editors of both this map and the Iraqi Insurgency Map to help build the Turkish Insurgency Detailed Map. The module and documentation page can be found through a wiki or google search. The goal of the map is to show who controls which cities, towns, and villages in southeastern Turkey, and to document the PKK insurgency. Most editors here have shown a great willingness to tirelessly document control in Syria and Iraq, and I call on you to extend this great work to Turkey. I need someone with experience, probably Tradedia, to help me by making the appropriate location map pages, which I do not know how to do. Thank you. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 20:33, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

May I be the SyrianObserver2015 of this new map's talk page, calling BS whenever the map displays something that I don't like?DaJesuZ (talk) 22:52, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

DaJesuZ Can you please let other people know about this? There really needs to be more participation if this project is going to get off the ground. The location map and module desperately need attention. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 23:02, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

If you put user names like this : Pbfreespace3 , they will be notified by email (by default, if they haven't changed it).

There might already be a map of Turkey available. I could make new icons if you need any. Just let me know. Otherwise I don't have much time to contribute, but good luck with your project :) André437 (talk) 03:55, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Speaking of projects, should we make these maps into a wikiproject? Banak (talk) 20:55, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Banak, You could if you want to. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 20:59, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Hakoura

What source is Hakoura in the al Ghab Plain being rebel held based upon? MesmerMe (talk) 13:53, 18 August 2015 (UTC) Reliable sources,changing town status based on assumption or without a source is prohibited.Alhanuty (talk) 14:10, 18 August 2015 (UTC) That is my point, what source was used to change (some time ago) the twon of Hakoura to rebel held. Im nost necessairly asking for a change back to Government held, I just would like the source, since it looks implausbile. MesmerMe (talk) 14:41, 18 August 2015 (UTC) It was set long time ago. Impossible to recover the source now. By the way SOHR on English reports https://www.facebook.com/syriahroe/photos/a.150495128392167.28686.121855461256134/738219519619722/?type=1&theater that Al Msheek and Al-Qahira are taken by SAA.Paolowalter (talk) 23:21, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

[8] Banak (talk) 00:35, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Northern Dara'a Provencé

The towns of Sha' Rah and At Taff in Northern Dara'a have been changed to green recently, they are still Syrian Arab Army held, anyone a legitimate source for doing this? The towns were not even contested. Seems this map is being manipulated by user Duckss and he seems butthurt by the truth, calm down young boy, don't behead me virtually lol.

SAA took al-tabbah village in this area suggesting they are on the attack not the defence. [9] A pro SAA source and probably won't find a neutral/Pro rebel source on this territory change however. Tabbah does not seem to be on this map either, situated just south of al-masmiyah according to wikimapia. Alastairjc (talk) 10:20, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Apparently rebels recaptured al-tabbah village [10] yesterday. Might be a good idea to put this location on the map because it will better reflect the front line in northwestern Quneitra province. I would do it myself but I don't know how to. More details around this area are scarce at the moment. Alastairjc (talk) 09:41, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

That is a tweet not a source these towns were changed 5 days ago, tyhey were not contested they have lots of Syrian Army soldiers in there STILL, so how did they just suddenly become rebel held the entire area is under SAA control?????????? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SyrianObserver2015 (talk • contribs) 12:02, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Al-Qahira

According to yahoo news there's significant clashing in the village of Al-Qahira. 50.187.216.93 (talk) 04:06, 19 August 2015 (UTC) Thanks for changing it!! 50.187.216.93 (talk) 18:21, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

More SAA Gains

The government appears to have made some significant gains. Here's a reliable source (if you consider russian state news reliable, I'd say it's more reliable than unreliable) [11] and here's a much more in depth but not-so-reliable source (a religious shia twelver site) [12]. I'm curious to know what the "16 villages" are from the Sputnik article. 50.187.216.93 (talk) 03:43, 20 August 2015 (UTC) Most sources so far just restate gains of al-Mansoura, Khirbet al-Naqous, Tal Waset, al-Ziyarah. Which are already red because no one changed them to green. So I'm not sure if there are any other changes. This pro-government source says Msheik was captured. 50.187.216.93 (talk) 03:56, 20 August 2015 (UTC) Yeah, I don't there's any news then. 50.187.216.93 (talk) 04:01, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Syrian Army Capture Two towns North Aleppo.

Tal Rayman and Al-Salihiyah have been captured by the SAA in North Aleppo, also Handarat in Aleppo city has been under SAA control since April, I posted the sources and someone deleted my topic and reverted the edit based on his support for his foreign invaders. I am very close to nominating this map again. Dara'a also needs to be fixed SAA have made gains here all summer long in the city, in the provence two towns were just turned to green with no source and no contest between the two warring factions, once again the rebels could not take these two towns as they are completely surrounded and have hundreds of SAA in them. AT Taff and Sha' arah as they are spelled here on the map!!!!!!! So these were changed 5 days ago no source they just walked in even though they have suffered heavely all over Dara'a I smell BULLSHIT.

http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-captures-two-towns-from-isis-in-east-aleppo/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by SyrianObserver2015 (talk • contribs) 12:07, 20 August 2015 (UTC)