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
No edit summary
Line 398: Line 398:


[http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/hezbollah-and-the-syrian-army-capture-tal-ithriyah-isis-controls-1km-of-highway-in-east-hama/ Al-Masdar] states that Tal ithriyah is under SAA control. Is it this place [http://wikimapia.org/#lang=it&lat=35.316246&lon=37.798462&z=12&m=b Jabal ithriyah]?.[[User:Paolowalter|Paolowalter]] ([[User talk:Paolowalter|talk]]) 22:12, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
[http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/hezbollah-and-the-syrian-army-capture-tal-ithriyah-isis-controls-1km-of-highway-in-east-hama/ Al-Masdar] states that Tal ithriyah is under SAA control. Is it this place [http://wikimapia.org/#lang=it&lat=35.316246&lon=37.798462&z=12&m=b Jabal ithriyah]?.[[User:Paolowalter|Paolowalter]] ([[User talk:Paolowalter|talk]]) 22:12, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
: I believe Tell Ithriyah is this hill: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=de&lat=35.354441&lon=37.760353&z=15&m=b. [[Special:Contributions/84.138.74.98|84.138.74.98]] ([[User talk:84.138.74.98|talk]]) 22:26, 30 October 2015 (UTC)


== Khan Touman ==
== Khan Touman ==

Revision as of 22:26, 30 October 2015

Template:Syrian Civil War sanctions


SAA advance to South of Aleppo

SAA advanced and captured three villages to south of Aleppo(Sufayrah,Al-Qarassi and Al-Huwayz) village Balas contested.source 46.200.207.127 (talk) 11:51, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pro FSA source reported that the vilages Khan Touman and Balas under control by rebels and that Tal Al Mahruqat,Al Waddihi,Kadar,Tank Battalion,Al Sabaqiyah,Abtin,Tel Shaheed,Mount Azzan,Al Malahiya, Rasm Bakru under control of SAA.https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CRzAFStUYAAXgTZ.png:large 46.200.207.127 (talk) 13:18, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Clashes between SAA and opposition forces in al-Eis http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=36.000924&lon=37.052078&z=13&show=/21654766/Al-Eis-%28Qinnasrin%29&search=Al-Hadher and al-Hadher http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=35.995508&lon=37.024441&z=13&show=/1696731/Al-Hadher&search=Al-Hadher, southwest of Aleppo. http://wahareport.com/2015/10/20/syria-daily-report-20102015/ 46.200.207.127 (talk) 18:33, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

SAA entered the imperative town of Sheikh Ahmad on the fringes of the Kuweires Military Airbase after intense firefights with ISIS.http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/breaking-cheetah-forces-enters-sheikh-ahmad-4km-left-to-lift-the-siege-of-kuweires-airport/ 46.200.207.127 (talk) 18:39, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

SAA captured villages of Tal Maflass http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=36.004257&lon=37.237988&z=13&m=b&show=/object/history/list/?object_type=1&id=33938090&lng=en ,Al-Ayoubi(including its surrounding farms) http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=36.004257&lon=37.237988&z=13&m=b&show=/object/history/list/?object_type=1&id=33938090&lng=en and Air Defense Battalion Base.http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-and-hezbollah-make-massive-gains-in-southern-aleppo-rebel-defenses-collapse/ 37.53.191.209 (talk) 16:29, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

SAA advance in southern countryside of Aleppo and captured Ghayghar, Al-Ajoubiyah Farms, Tal Mafless, Balas, and Jawar Al-Jahish after fierce clashes with Liwaa Suqour Al-Sham and Harakat Nour Al-Deen Al-Zinki. SAA also advance deep into the town of Kafr ‘Abid, which is located directly south of Balas and directly east of Kafr ‘Abish. So Kafr Abit still contested.http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/hezbollah-and-the-syrian-army-capture-several-sites-in-southern-aleppo-dagestani-emir-killed/ 37.52.24.103 (talk) 06:37, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

East Hama

Does anybody know where al-Sa’en al-Aswad is SOHR? Paolowalter (talk) 20:40, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Nusra and Jund Al-Aqsa launched a powerful assault on strategic town al-Sa’en in Hama Governorate but resulting in a series of intense firefights between the aforementioned Islamist group and NDF throughout the day they was unable to break-through the frontline defenses of Syrian troops and were forced to retreat to north in order to evade both the Syrian and Russian Air Forces that were lurking around the Hama-Idlib border.http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/important-battle-brewing-in-northern-hama-jabhat-al-nusra-attacks-al-siin/ 46.200.207.127 (talk) 06:09, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I read the news. I just asked wher eis the town.Paolowalter (talk) 07:38, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Made the edit as an arch in the north, per ALMSDR news reporting the attack at the outskirts and a retreat north-ward.Ariskar (talk) 08:53, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Paolowalter I don´t give much for this map but it points out the village you requested.Rhocagil (talk) 13:55, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Masdar map of N Homs

Check this map by Al-Masdar. Some of the rebel-held areas on Al-Masdar map are marked red on our map. It this just sloppy journalism or we can rely on this? --Hogg 22 (talk) 07:35, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is consensus on not using maps. I saw some discrepancies but they are not large, al-Halamuz seems the largest difference.Paolowalter (talk) 15:06, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rebels E and SE of al-Hamraa (NE of Hama)

I think we have some wrong data on the map. Please find city of al-Hamraa, NE of Hama, on Hama-Idlib border. All willages S and SE of al-Hamraa are red, but some pro-SAA sites are reporting rebel attacks in that area.

For example:

  • syria 24 english: SAA Destroy TWO (2) Militant tanks EAST of Hamra
  • Al-Masdar: [rebels] launched several attacks on the SAA’s positions along the Hama-Idlib border, targeting the Syrian Government controlled towns of Sukayk, ‘Abdel-‘Aziz, Al-Hamra, and Qal’at Rahiya on Friday morning. I believe ‘Abdel-‘Aziz and Qal’at Rahiya are willages Tall `Abd al `Aziz and Ruhayyah SE of al-Hamraa, see wikimapia. We have those willages on the map as Ruhayyah and Tall Abdelaziz.

Does anyone has more info on this area? --Hogg 22 (talk) 09:31, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand which changes you requires. The map is essentially correct Paolowalter (talk) 15:06, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And here it is: Iranian (pro-SAA) farsnews.com reports of airstrikews on rebel-held Tawal al-Dabaghin, which I found on wikimapia, just east of Al-Hamraa! I'm adding it to the map. --Hogg 22 (talk) 12:35, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Syrian Arab Army, legitimate Government Forces capture more towns in Aleppo.

Sockpuppet
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Source for captured towns: [1] Sana: "Army units, in cooperation with the popular defense groups, established control over al-Huweiz and al-Qarasi villages in the southwestern countryside of Aleppo province, a military source announced." — Preceding unsigned comment added by SyrianObserver2016 (talkcontribs) 13:49, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Already turned red some days ago.Paolowalter (talk) 15:06, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Aleppo maps

There are two maps of Aleppo, but the first primary one does not show the so called- ammunition storage base as a goverment held territory while the other does. Both are created by MrPenguin20. In addition, the Rif-Aleppo map, Maryamayn is indicated as rebel-held and KafrAbid contested, showing rebel advatage. Is it true ? What do we know about the infarntry school ? Pro-gov. sources don't mention it's under SAA control. Oroszka (talk) 15:26, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As far as we know, the infantry academy is still under Islamic State control, so the map looks a little off in that area. Regime forces haven't been mentioned to've entered the academy, but have been in its vicinity, and to the east of it for days. DaJesuZ (talk) 19:23, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Aleppo supply road cut

Here is a twitter post from a very reputable source (a page run by numerous well-known mapmakers) https://twitter.com/IUCAnalysts/status/657547319181709312

Here is a post from an IS source (assuming it's IS at least) displaying that they defeated an attempted Government counterattack. https://twitter.com/maghrebiwtis/status/657649089300049920

Here is an article from a source of unknown bias outlining the situation. I am not an Arabic reader by the way, so someone would have to translate for me. https://a3maqagency.wordpress.com/2015/10/23/%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%81%D9%88%D8%AC%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%81%D9%8A%D9%83-%D9%82%D8%B7%D8%B9-%D8%B7%D8%B1%D9%8A%D9%82-%D8%A5%D9%85%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%86%D8%B8%D8%A7%D9%85-%D8%A7%D9%84/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.126.188.171 (talk) 05:23, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Syrian regime is suffering from a manpower shortage, so an advance by both the rebels and Islamic State like this is very possible (however, this is simply my point of view, and POV edits are not allowed), but that would mean we have several town and cities marked incorrectly. The Arabic source you provided states that the Islamic State has severed the Syrian government's supply lines to Aleppo. I have no idea if this is true, but keep an eye out for more stories about it. This would be a massive development, and would influence the battle for Aleppo city, massively. DaJesuZ (talk) 08:37, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly this pro ISIS source https://a3maqagency.wordpress.com/2015/10/23/%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%81%D9%88%D8%AC%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%81%D9%8A%D9%83-%D9%82%D8%B7%D8%B9-%D8%B7%D8%B1%D9%8A%D9%82-%D8%A5%D9%85%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%86%D8%B8%D8%A7%D9%85-%D8%A7%D9%84/ And more reliable source reported that the Syrian Army Reopens the Ithriyah-Salamiyah Road in East Hama After Defeating ISIS. http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/breaking-syrian-army-reopens-the-ithriyah-salamiyah-road-in-east-hama-after-defeating-isis/ 91.124.122.78 (talk) 11:30, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This very source clearly states that IS holds parts of the Aleppo-Khanasser Hghway: "While the Syrian Armed Forces were successful in the aforementioned military endeavor, the Syrian Government’s main supply route along the Aleppo-Khanasser Highway that leads to the Aleppo Governorate remains cutoff by ISIS; this report has been confirmed by multiple sources from the Syrian Arab Army and National Defense Forces in the Hama Governorate. As long as ISIS has control of the Ithriyah-Khanasser Road, the Syrian Armed Forces will not have direct access to the imperative Aleppo-Khanasser that leads to the Aleppo Governorate’s provincial capital." 84.138.74.98 (talk) 12:38, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

SAA advance in Latakia province

SAA capture of Kataf Al-Ghaddar and have advanced inside the strategic city of Salma, capturing several building blocks and hilltops from the Islamist rebels, while also minimizing their losses at this volatile front. http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-special-forces-sweep-through-the-hills-surrounding-the-strategic-city-of-salma/ 91.124.122.78 (talk) 11:32, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Aleppo changes

Rebels have retaken the villages of Al-Qarassi and Ayyubid yesterday and today. Those two villages are shown as SAA held on this map. We should change them to green. Source: http://www.petercliffordonline.com/syria-iraq-news-5/

The road between Khanassir and Aleppo has been cut by Islamic State fighters. Fighting is ongoing, but the sources are clear: the road is closed. We should make the red dots for the supply road black. Source: http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/10/24/uk-mideast-crisis-syria-aleppo-idUKKCN0SI08U20151024 Source: http://www.muscatdaily.com/Archive/Gcc/Syria-army-battles-to-retake-Aleppo-supply-line-from-IS-4dn6 Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/23/us-mideast-crisis-syria-idUSKCN0SH2D520151023 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.31.204.195 (talk) 12:42, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This source too biased pro rebel source.http://www.petercliffordonline.com/syria-iraq-news-5/ Also Syrian Army Reopens the Ithriyah-Salamiyah Road in East Hama After Defeating ISIS.http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/breaking-syrian-army-reopens-the-ithriyah-salamiyah-road-in-east-hama-after-defeating-isis/ http://isis.trendolizer.com/2015/10/breaking-syrian-army-reopens-the-ithriyah-salamiyah-road-in-east-hama-after-defeating-isis.html 91.124.122.78 (talk) 15:09, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Only Islamic State members, speaking to Reuters via internet from inside Syria, said their group had taken control of the road southeast of Aleppo. But SOHR only reported about fierce fighting between Syrian government forces and Islamic State in area of this road.http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/24/us-mideast-crisis-syria-aleppo-idUSKCN0SI08N20151024 So we not confirmations from reliable sources that ISIS captured some part of this road. The road was closed due to the clashes but not under the control of ISIS. But reliable source clear said that the Syrian Army Reopens the Ithriyah-Salamiyah Road in East Hama After Defeating ISIS.http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/breaking-syrian-army-reopens-the-ithriyah-salamiyah-road-in-east-hama-after-defeating-isis/ 91.124.122.78 (talk) 15:22, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, so this means that we can't use Al-Masdar as a source when "members of the Syrian Army claim to have taken a town"? Because we used some of those articles last week to make changes in Hama governorate? If your line of reasoning is solid, we can only use direct statements from sources on the ground in the area.

IS took TWO sections of the highway near Ithriyah. One section between Ithriyah and Salamniyah and one section between Ithriyah and Khanaser. The Al-Masdar article clearly states that SAA retook only the section between Ithriyah and Salamniyah but that IS still controls parts of the highways between Ithriyah and Khanaser! 84.138.74.98 (talk) 16:25, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Assad's forces control Tel Ambassador from the nearby village of Jabboul after another against ISIS. https://twitter.com/24Aleppo/status/657958483917197313 91.124.122.78 (talk) 16:56, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tweets are not a reliable source. 84.138.74.98 (talk) 16:59, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

SOHR claim that the clashes continue between regime force and IS on Khenaser-Ethria road in the southern eastern countryside amid advances for the regime in the area.http://www.syriahr.com/en/2015/10/human-losses-and-continued-clashes-in-aleppo/ So SAA advance against ISIS in this area. 91.124.122.78 (talk) 17:59, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article does not state that SAA took full control of the area, so it should not be changed to red (yet), as clashes are still ongoing. 84.138.74.98 (talk) 18:26, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

But also for now we cant marked this road on black color. So for now I think we just need remowed this icon. For now we only know that SAA advance in this area. 91.124.122.78 (talk) 18:59, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Masdar News (as well all know is very pro-Government) mentions that only the portion between Salmaniyah and Ithriyah has been reopened. The portion between Ithriyah and Khanisir is still held by IS. The article even states that. http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/breaking-syrian-army-reopens-the-ithriyah-salamiyah-road-in-east-hama-after-defeating-isis/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.126.188.171 (talk) 20:37, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
According to all reliable sources, the highway is still blocked by IS; though SAA may make progress, SAA does not have full control of the highway which is the SAA's vital supply route to the whole Aleppo region. This should be reflected by the map, and some IS presence should be shown between Ithriyah and Khanassir. 84.138.74.98 (talk) 20:52, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sources for Idlib changes

I've seen some changes in the past few days. I have some questions about them:

  1. Which source was used to make the town of Al Taman'ah (east of Khan Shaykun, Idlib) contested between the FSA and Jabhat al-Nusra?
  2. Which source was used to make Tell Al-Teri red? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 15:59, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There was heavy fighting between the moderates in Taman'ah and today jund al aqsa left jaish al fateh cause they are too moderate for them. More moderate infighting soon.Totholio (talk 16:42, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Source please? Your not giving one, just talking. I can claim "the SAA retook Idlib city when they landed on the back of a Divine Budha Elephant". Doesn't make it true. Also, Al Taman'ah was contested BEFORE Jund al-Aqsa left Jaysh al-Fatah, so your argument is invalid.

User: Sakultah

User Sakultah is on a source-less editing rampage. More then ten non sourced edits the last week (did not ever give a sourced edit). Latest Ex; 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Can somebody that knows how block this editor. Rhocagil (talk) 16:30, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Talbiseh (Homs)

SOHR claim that clashes continue in Talbisa between regime forces and Islamic battalions what devastated 2 tanks for regime forces.http://www.syriahr.com/en/2015/10/continued-clashes-in-homs-countryside/ 91.124.122.78 (talk) 18:04, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Too poor evidences need something more or these places will be keeping on red. --LogFTW (talk) 10:51, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Eastern Aleppo IS offensive

Al-Masdar [2] states that IS took Tall Riman [3] and Salihiyah [4] before moving in the direction of Tel Aran [5] and Aziziyah [6], without taking the latter two. Non-reliable sources also reported clashes between SAA and IS at Tal Hasel [7] and the cable factory [8]. 84.138.74.98 (talk) 05:46, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Non-reliable sources should not be quoted at all. They cannot be used, more often than not false and just increase confusion.Paolowalter (talk) 08:24, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. SOHR confirms [9] clashes between SAA and IS near al-Sfirah [10], Tal Aran [11] and Tal Hasel [12]. The article does not state change in ground control though. 84.138.74.98 (talk) 10:58, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pro SAA source https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CSKq0qGUEAAmmZ7.jpg:large https://twitter.com/PetoLucem/status/658278280513081344 and Pro ISIS source http://img15.hostingpics.net/pics/871561aleppoe20151025M.jpg showed that al-Sfirah [13], Tal Aran [14] and Tal Hasel [15] under control SAA and that clashes still far away from these cities. But both of these sources confirmed that ISIS retake Saligiyah and Tell Riemann to north of Al Safira Saphyr99 (talk) 18:00, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

These are not reliable sources. 84.138.74.98 (talk) 20:42, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Southe Aleppo

From http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/4th-mechanized-division-and-hezbollah-capture-over-45km-of-territory-in-southern-aleppo/ I'd say Al-Hamraa with a green ring on the west/south side, Kafr-Abid contested (as is), Shugaydilah contested. Any objections?Paolowalter (talk) 08:27, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On a different note, Al-Masdar states that the road Ithriyah - Khanasser still is blocked by IS: [16]. 84.138.74.98 (talk) 10:30, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Telegraph also states that IS seized the highway [17]. Until we have a reliable source stating that SAA took back FULL CONTROL of the highway, we should indicate some IS presence between Ithriyah and Khanassir. 84.138.74.98 (talk) 10:46, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rural icon in south Aleppo deleted

Why was the rural icon, used to represent the Islamic State taking control of portions of the Hama-Aleppo highway? All sources, including al-Masdar, have stated that IS holds at least a small section of the highway. I do not know the exact coordinates of the icon, so I'm relying on someone else to place it again.DaJesuZ (talk) 13:05, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Markabah still under SAA

SOHR confirmed that the village Markabah in Hama still under control by Syrian troops.http://www.syriahr.com/en/2015/10/russian-airstrikes-on-hama-countryside-and-clashes-in-homs-countryside/ and other source announce that 23 October that the rebels(Regiment.111 & the 6th brigade) captured village Markabah, seized a tank and withdrew due to airstrikes.https://twitter.com/BosnjoBoy/status/657621744769966081 Saphyr99 (talk) 17:09, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unclear situation in Aleppo

The rebels claimed to have captured al-Hamra[1], but it is red on this map. What is the actual situation? The situation in Kafr Abid is similar. Al-Masdar said it was captured by the army on the 22nd, but it turned out to be contested. Both sides of the conflict provide very inconsistent news regarding the situation. I urge editors to confirm their sources more carefully. Deserttanker (talk) 21:35, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The new from the rebels on their own conquest are worthless. They lie all the time. SOHR is quite reliable but the its statement is quite vague "information reported ...". Of course al-Hamra is on the front line and the situation there has to be monitored continuously. Same thing for Kafr Abid situation is fluid and the front line is close or within the town. Paolowalter (talk) 09:04, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Masdar states [18] that '[..] Islamist rebel forces captured the Aleppo Cement Factory [19], Al-Halisah Farms [20], and a number of hilltops near the strategic city of Khan Touman [21] [..]'. 131.188.48.174 (talk) 15:20, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Also, SOHR reports "clashes around the village of Tyarah" [22] here [23] and "in al- Sheikh Hlal area" [24] here [25], though there is no claim about change in territory control. 131.188.48.174 (talk) 15:31, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Road to Aleppo

There is a consensus on this page that the road from Aleppo to Hama has been cut off by the Islamic State. All sources on this page state that the road was cut off by the Islamic State, and some even state that the rebels from Idlib attacked the road. Al-Masdar DOES state that they cleared the road in one area, but at least one section of the road remains cut of by IS.

Someone on this page is deleting my marker, showing there being an IS presence there (I used the rural icon, as roads are not shown on the map, so I can't use a point to show control over a road, because of those being used for cities), and replacing it with a marker showing regime forces having fully opened the road, which they haven't, as shown by all sources have shown that IS fighters still hold at least part of the road.

I'll be copying the line for the marker I made, and putting it back in the edit page, should it be deleted, and deleting the army icon on the road to aleppo, should it be put back. DaJesuZ (talk) 06:02, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The dots showing rural icons have a ill defined meaning. Nevertheless the road is at a large extent under SAA control with only some sections taken by IS. No reason to put black dots and removing red ones. The best solution is to remove dots alltoghether waiting that the situation stabilizes.Paolowalter (talk) 09:04, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

syrianewsapp. which is pro red states that SAA and its allies withdrawn from points between Ithrea and zakeya chackpoint. problem is I don't know where the hell is zakiah checkpoint ? does anyone knows where it can be ? Helmy1453 (talk) 19:08, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Could it be this here? [26] Reportedly, IS took it today. 84.138.74.98 (talk) 22:35, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Masdar states [27] that IS today (26th) occupied the highway between Salamiyah and Ithriyah near Sheikh Helal [28]; however, the article also states that SAA was able to unblock the highway at Sheikh Helal afterwards. Furthermore, the article states that Ihtriyah-Khanassir is still blocked and that Al-Bashiri Farms, Ithriyah Checkpoint and the Majabel Checkpoint near the town of Ithriyah are under IS control and that SAA "targets" these places. I cannot locate any of the three places. 84.138.74.98 (talk) 00:45, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Source clear said that the SAA recapture Al-Bashiri Farms, Ithriyah Checkpoint, and Majabel Checkpoint near the town of Ithriyah and reopen the Ithriyah-Sabourah Road.http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-attempts-to-reopen-strategic-highway-cutoff-by-isis/ SOHR also reported about clashes between SAA against IS around al-Shekh Hilal in Salamia countryside and that the SAA re-gain control in few areas.http://www.syriahr.com/en/2015/10/clashes-between-is-and-regime-forces-in-salamia-countryside/ 46.200.206.144 (talk) 05:39, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The source does NOT state that the SAA recapture Al-Bashiri Farms, Ithriyah Checkpoint, and Majabel Checkpoint near the town of Ithriyah! "The Syrian Armed Forces have started their large-scale counter-assault in east Hama; however, there have been no reported gains yet (other than the recapture of the Ithriyah-Sabourah Road), as they target the Al-Bashiri Farms, Ithriyah Checkpoint, and the Majabel Checkpoint near the town of Ithriyah." So the three places are under IS and SAA only "targets" them. 84.138.74.98 (talk) 09:50, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Source clear said that SAA recapture of the Ithriyah-Sabourah Road as they target the Al-Bashiri Farms, Ithriyah Checkpoint, and the Majabel Checkpoint near the town of Ithriyah. So course mantion that after SAA retake Al-Bashiri Farms, Ithriyah Checkpoint, and Majabel Checkpoint near the town of Ithriyah they reopen of the Ithriyah-Sabourah Road. But source not said that this objects under ISIS. 46.200.206.144 (talk) 11:41, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Your second sentence makes no sense. The source does NOT mention or imply, that SAA opened the road AFTER it retook the three places. It only states that SAA opened Ithriyah-Sabourah Road. It does also not state that the three places are directly on the road Ithriyah-Sabourah, so opening the road does not imply that SAA took the three places. Also the source states that SAA "targets" the three places. Why would SAA target them, if SAA had control of them? Of course SAA targets them since some one else (IS) is there! 131.188.48.174 (talk) 12:38, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

SOURCES AGAIN (FOR THE 1000TH TIME)

  1. Mansoura (Ghab plain) changed to red without a legitimate source (so no Twitter, YouTube, rumors)
  2. Al-Taman'ah (Idlib) changed to contested between FSA and Al-Nusra, no sources given
  3. Khalasah (Aleppo) changed to contested without a legitimate source
  4. Mahija (Daraa) changed back to red, without a source mentioned here

When will this stop? You are completely destroying this map. Twitter maps are more accurate these days than Wikipedia is. It's a shame! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 14:21, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Khalasah - was marked as under SAA but I marked as under FSA because SOHR said that The Russian warplanes carried out several airstrikes on places in Khan Toman area, the town of al- Hader and the village of Khalsah in the southern countryside of Aleppo, coincided with shelling by the regime forces on the village of Dadin in the southern countryside of Aleppo.http://www.syriahr.com/en/2015/10/at-least-14-ndf-militiamen-killed-in-an-explosion-on-al-ramosah-road-and-the-regime-forces-retake-the-cement-plant/ village Al-Hamreaa near Khalasah marked as contested.
  2. Mansoura under SAA - http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-captures-al-mansoura-inside-the-al-ghaab-plains/
  3. Mahija (Daraa) - was marked under FSA also without sources.
  4. Al-Taman'ah (Idlib) - changed to contested between FSA and Al-Nusra according to SOHR. And also (pro FSA) news source SyriaLiveNetwork also reported 20 October about clashes between Ahrar Al-Sham and Jund Al-Aqsa in Al-Tamanah town.here 46.200.206.144 (talk) 19:44, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fafin / Infantry School area?

Is there any source, that the SAA has taken the Infantry School or that Fafin (north of Aleppo) is disputed? I was waiting now for long, thinking, that the red icons would be reverted to black. As I remember there was only some rumors that the SAA was fighting in Fafin, this was some weeks ago, but then they were repulsed. Same question for the area north of the Juvenile Prison (which I suppose is really in the hand of SAA), but this is the place most in the north with the SAA, because the cement factory (north of it) is with ISIS.Mughira1395 (talk) 10:24, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  1. (pro FSA source) SAA take Juvenile Prison near Aleppo after ISIS retreat. https://www.facebook.com/LCCSy/posts/1243486995678434 (reliable source) http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/isis-in-danger-at-the-strategic-aleppo-infantry-academy-syrian-army-advances-north/
  1. (pro FSA source) ISIS have surrendered Cement plant near Aleppo to regime forces. http://qasioun.net/en/article/Syrian-regime-hits-the-opposition-sites-in-Aleppo-countryside-using-Poisoned-gases/3777/
  1. (Pro FSA source) Regime forces now controls the Infantry School,after ISIS seized it from Rebel forces. https://twitter.com/Abboud11S/status/653952289426788353 (pro FSA source) Aleppo Infantry School under control Assad troops. https://www.zamanalwsl.net/news/64946.html#.Vh1IKUrJQvQ.facebook
  1. Fafin - contested. http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/isis-in-danger-at-the-strategic-aleppo-infantry-academy-syrian-army-advances-north/ 46.200.206.144 (talk) 11:37, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I turned Fafin black because it was contested only briefly with no other mention of fighting since a while. Infantry School was already debated in the past, pro-FSA sources were not reliable (twitter). All other sources and map agree it is under IS control, so it has to stay black.Paolowalter (talk) 15:08, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks - your first and your last source is the same. Do you really think that this tweet is to be taken serious?? But let us take Masdar: What you brought was from 13th of October and there was no mention about Infantry School taken by SAA (nor your other source Qasioun), instead it mentioned that the Infantry School was taken by ISIS on 11th. This was also written on 12th, here: http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-captures-kafr-tunah-and-jabal-antar-from-isis-in-northeast-aleppo/ and here: http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-makes-huge-gains-in-northern-aleppo-isis-loses-more-territory/

Now let us see what cames from Masdar the following days: On 14th very obvious, that Infantry School was not taken by SAA, but is still with ISIS, and also Fafeen is reported in hand of ISIS and not mentioned with the gains of SAA: http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/complete-battle-map-of-syria-mid-october-update/ and also: http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/isis-continues-advance-into-aleppo-city-islamist-rebels-retreat-from-two-towns/

On 15th ISIS is still at Infantry School: http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/islamist-rebels-recapture-tal-jibeen-from-isis-while-the-syrian-army-targets-the-aleppo-infantry-academy/

Same on 16th: http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/over-1500-iraqi-and-pakistani-shia-join-hezbollah-and-the-syrian-army-for-massive-aleppo-offensive/

And it is unlikely that Masdar will not report such an advance of the SAA. And this also shows the "quality" of the tweet of 13th...

So, as I see from the sources the Infantry School must be with ISIS / put black and the same for Fafeen (as there were no more combat reports since 11th, when the SAA came only to the eastern perimeter of the town - see your Masdar-source, and afterwards, see also Masdar-source of 15th, it was reported with ISIS.Mughira1395 (talk) 15:13, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Video near Ithriya

Can someone geolocate this? --Hogg 22 (talk) 19:22, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This video from the pro-ISIS source and there is no reliable confirmations when and where this video was filmed. 37.52.25.132 (talk) 20:30, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The video is not a reliable source, but it was filmed here [29] (notice the tower in the video, it is "Burj at-Taghtiyah"). 84.138.74.98 (talk) 21:03, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This reporter says that IS captured this "army base checkpoint"and he also says that government forces recaptured at least 4 which makes him realible. I actually don't have to say this because we are using him as a source for at least a year for all (government, rebel, Kurd, ISIS) changes. The checkpoint should be added on the map as the area is already somehow marked as under ISIS control on the colour map. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.175.83.43 (talk) 23:12, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This article says "ISIS is now in control of 19 checkpoints belonging to the pro-regime forces and allied militias in Aleppo suburbs, as the entire district of Ithreya fell to the radical group." So Al-Ithriyah on the map should now be black? Esn (talk) 03:59, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Consider how reliable other sources are, I believe a video is more then enough. Regarding "water pump" under IS control (source is given by Esn), there are several wells in the area, all on to the east of Ithriya, just like the captured checkpoint. I don't think Ithriya sahould be black, but black semicircle to the east seams appropriate.--Hogg 22 (talk) 07:38, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly ARA News biased anti-SAA source and another source clear said that the with help from Russian Air Force the Syrian troops clear the Raqqa-Salamiyah Highway that is perpendicular to the Khanasser-Ithriyah Highway after intense clashes with ISIS and that the Khanasser-Ithriyah Highway is still closed due to ISIS’ presence at the checkpoints located north of Ithriyah; however, Syrian Army and pro-government militia “Liwaa Al-Quds” are working to recapture these sites from ISIS. http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/russian-air-force-restarts-aerial-campaign-in-east-hama-to-help-the-syrian-army-defeat-isis/ 37.52.25.132 (talk) 08:40, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please let's try to stick to reliable sources for making changes even at the cost of waiting a few more days. Private videos (not from professional sources) are banned. Remember that there is no independent sources in those areas and basically all reports are biased. We can retain Ithriya with a black semicircle for a while to signal IS activities around the town waiting for additional news. Paolowalter (talk) 10:13, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Come on, Paolowalter, any video is reliable, unless You trying to say that it's been edited? Checkpoint is easily identified in video and it's completely irrelevant who made the video. The only legitimate question is whether information is too old, since things can change quickly. But to discard evidence because video author is "biased" is nonsense. --Hogg 22 (talk) 11:24, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hogg 22 this video here was taken from pro ISIS source and video showed ISIS fighters on some distance from Burj at-Taghtiyah but not inside of him. Also we can't know when this video was filmed week or months ago or maybe in past year. So all amateur video from YouTube or from biased sources can't be a reliable sources. 37.52.25.132 (talk) 11:41, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hogg 22 But here source said that ISIS controlled willage of Tabaret al-Sakhaneh between Khanaser and Ithriya. 37.52.25.132 (talk) 11:45, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Correct, the video cannot be used as a source on its own, but the reporter BosnoSinj, a reliable source, confirmed [30] that IS took Burj at-Taghtiyah. 131.188.48.174 (talk) 11:55, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, now we will wait for some reliable source like BosnoSinj to view the video, make logical conclusion that this is Burj at-Taghtiyah CP, without *any* other knowledge about the situation, post it on twitter and only then we will find it appropriate to add a black dot. That sounds logical. Not. --Hogg 22 (talk) 12:06, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
?? As I said, the tweet is a proper source. The video is not, it only substantiates BosnoSinj's claim. Anyway, Burj at-Taghtiyah CP should be added to the map as black. 131.188.48.174 (talk) 13:48, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I added it, but it was reverted. --Hogg 22 (talk) 14:26, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hogg 22 I think mb this source can help,also about the Khanaser and Ithriya highway a pro-goverment source talks about airstrikes hitting Isis position,Near Tel-Mregan where in the map shows the Isis icon presence.I think we should add it??46.99.24.56 (talk) 15:55, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References

Al-Masdar lies again

I stated in 21st of october that Almansoura and it's grains are green, we never changed them as SOHR and Al-Masdar didn't mention it. Now Almasdar in 26th of October here states that SAA captured Al-Mansoura ??? how can they capture it if it was in thier hand from the first place ? under all circomstances tht proofs that from 21st of october till 26th our map was showing wrong color for Al-Masoura . and maybe till today. and these happens all the time. We need to solve this we can't just use Al-Masdar for SAA and it's alies gains that is just wrong Helmy1453 (talk) 19:23, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

First of all you got 0 credibility being a nusra supporter, every normal person knows in a war the situation changes every day. Specially on a front like this. Masdar claimed on 26 that the city was captured, they had control before on the silos you .... Totholio (talk) 19:02, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Something else, this complete article by Al-Masdar is made up because they are claiming something while the same group which Al Masdar mentiones claims exactly the opposite. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.175.83.43 (talk) 23:09, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Right, because no Islamist terror group has EVER gone back on what it said before, right? XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 15:37, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Totholio, I'm an IS supporter in this war (in the short term; I do NOT want these people turning the area into an actual caliphate), someone supporting a particular side does not immediately ruin that person's credibility. Credibility i determined by how objective/accurate his reports and edits are, no matter who they are in support of. I haven't made too many edits, but they've mostly been in support of the Islamic State. I don't have no credibility because of that. DaJesuZ (talk) 14:11, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

IS 10 km west(!) of Palmyra

Can someone help me find the location of "al-Baiyarat area 10 kilometers west of Palmyra city". According to pro-SAA sana.sy, IS has some fortified positions there. Our map has only red marks in that area. --Hogg 22 (talk) 09:43, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. The same pro-SAA source mentions IS-controlled willage of "Tabaret al-Sakhaneh" between Khanaser and Ithriya, which could be a nice addition to the map. --Hogg 22 (talk) 09:52, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tabbaret es-Sakane [31] should be added to the map as a black dot, according to SANA-source [32]: "Other ISIS positions were targeted by army air strikes in Tabaret al-Sakhaneh village along Khanaser-Atherya axis." 131.188.48.174 (talk) 11:47, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hogg 22 this is location of al-Baiyarat 10 kilometers west of Palmyra city.46.99.28.184 (talk) 11:58, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for Your effort, but I was hoping to see some object on the map with that name, not just line that measures 10 miles (not km :). --Hogg 22 (talk) 12:03, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hogg 22 Mb I measured wrong sorry, but thats the al-Baiyarat area.Al-Maqsam,Al-Qadahat,Abu al Fawaris.Tarafah,Ad Daw,Turayfawi,Bir um Tabair,Al-Qulaybah,Al-Qarmad(Al-Qadri Farms),Al-Bayda.This what it called Al-Baiyarat area but i see the map is not correct there to much mistakes where it shows the besiege icon on Palmyra it looks like the syrian army are near which is not in fact I just saw a Isis video showing military exercise in Palmyra.It's impossible to do military drills and fight an opponent at the same time.46.99.28.184 (talk) 12:33, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thanks for the info! So, basically, "al-Baiyarat" is propably name for all this fertile area W of Palmyra? I see a lot of argicultural land there. Do You have some local knowledge of the area or just from the internet? Regarding siege symbol, that's because of SAA on SyriaTel hill. --Hogg 22 (talk) 12:53, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hogg 22 I have been reading and searching a lot of sources and maps not just from internet but from books too.And for the al-Baiyarat area to confrim my argument here a pro-goverment source which talks about it but the matter here is that this pro-goverment source claims that the army is 5 km from Qassoun Mountain and this doesn't confrim that they captured Syria Tall Tel beacause how can you capture the Tel when you are 5 km from the Qassoun Mountain which is located there?? and the other problem is that the other pro-goverment " Sana" source claims that that the army hit Isis forces in Baiyarat area 10 km west of Palmyra which Al-Masdar denies that and claims that the army is 5 km near Palmyra and Isis has no forces there ,this are 2 contradictory statements.46.99.17.248 (talk) 13:22, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hogg 22 I also found these villages in Hama that Sana was talking about:Tanahij,Jbab,Amun,Shaykh Hilāl,Rasm at Tinah.46.99.17.248 (talk) 13:41, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sheikh Hilal and Raqqa-Ithiriyah highway under SAA. Source said that the in conjunction with their success along the Raqqa-Salamiyah Highway, the SAA and NDF pushed south of Sheikh Hilal village in order to buffer-zone to the south of the aforementioned highway.sourcesource 37.52.25.132 (talk) 13:58, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also many mistakes make when translated articles from SANA from Arabic to English. So it is likely in the original article stated that SAAF carried out sorties against gatherings and dens of ISIS in areas of the villages of al-Sheikh Hilal, Rasm al-Tineh, Rasm Amoun, Jbab and Tanahej in the eastern countryside of Hama province. 37.52.25.132 (talk) 14:05, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Assuming that the translation is incorrect and guessing some arbitrary "correct" translation is original research. Also the Al-Masdar article does not even mention the Raqqa-Ithiriyah highway, it is only reporting success on Raqqa-Salamiyah highway which consists of two parts, Raqqa-Ithiriyah and Ithiriyah-Salamiyah. The article does not specify, which part it is referring to, however, the mentioned village Sheikh Hilal is on the Ithiriyah-Salamiyah part, making it more likely, that the article refers to the Ithiriyah-Salamiyah part of the Raqqa-Salamiyah highway. 131.188.48.174 (talk) 14:12, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You are right source later said that SAA and their allies recapture of Ithriya-Salamiyah road that was obstructed by ISIS for several hours before pro-government forces were able to reclaim lost points. In addition to their success along Ithriyah-Salamiyah Road, SAA were able to recapture points lost to ISIS on roads leading to towns of Al-Sa’an, and Sheikh Hilal; this gave pro-government forces breathing room as they prepared for massive assault on Khanasser-Ithriya Highway. SAA began their assault on ISIS’ positions along Khanasser-Ithriya Highway after Russian Air Force conducted several airstrikes in order to weaken ISIS defenses.http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-attempts-to-reverse-isis-gains-along-the-highway-to-aleppo/ 37.52.27.29 (talk) 07:44, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Back to the subject. Not only that IS is 10 km west of Palmyra, but there is not a single SAA solder within 10 km of Palmyra in any direction, as admitted by Al-Masdar. In article "Syrian Army Eyes the Ancient City of Palmyra: Ground Operations to Begin Soon", it clearly says:

Unfortunately, the Syrian Armed Forces have since lost the hilltop at Tal Syriatel, the Palmyra Diving School, and the eastern groves of Al-Bayarat; this leaves them about 10km away from the Qassoun Mountains that overlook Palmyra’s west district.

So, I'm painting to black anything within 10 km of Qassoun Mountains. --Hogg 22 (talk) 08:03, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please Add Roads and Highways to the Maps

Following the news about civil war in Irak and Syria, we hear about important roads and Highwys. But we don't see them on the maps to get better oriented. Please someone add roads and highways also to the maps. Thanks! -> In Persian:

با دنبال کردن خبر ها در باره ی جنگ درونمرزی در عراق و سوریه و .. ما همواره چیزهایی در باره ی راه ها و شاهراه های مهم میخوانیم ولی آنهارا در نقشه پیدا نمیکنیم و نمیتوانیم جا های یاد شده را بهتر بیابیم. پس خواهشمندم که راه ها و شاهراه هارا هم به این نقشه ها بیفزایید. سپاس.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.75.52.4 (talk) 11:57, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply] 
Good idea, I was thinking of the same, especially knowing situation near Ithriya. We can add them just the same as other background maps, but these should be simpler, with just lines. --Hogg 22 (talk) 12:01, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Who can do this? Who manages the background map? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.75.52.4 (talk) 15:38, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Wouldn't the addition of roads and major highways require a changing of the background image for the template? I'm pretty ignorant when it comes to this, but I don't know of any way to add the roads without a changing of the .png image used in the background, besides, what colour would we make them? Black would be too close to IS's dot colour, similarly, grey would be too close to al-Nusra's. DaJesuZ (talk) 14:06, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I dont know if a new layer can provide the roads or rather changing the backgroud map. But what concerns the color of highways, it is often yellow-orange with thin red borders on each side like here : Damascus Road Map . The roads colors must be kept neutral to civil war parties. we can see then from rectangle-dots ( f.e. IS presence on Ithariya road ) , who controls the road part at any time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.75.52.4 (talk) 08:32, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I made a Map with Roads and Highways on base of the existent map. Here it is in png format:SyriaRoadMap

-> Can somebody who has the autority, replace the old one with this one please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.75.52.4 (talk) 13:47, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Contradicting claims for Mansoura

Yesterday, Al-Masdar [33] stated that Mansoura was taken by SAA. Today, SOHR [34] states that Syrian Arab Air Force bombs "[..] places in the villages of Tal Waset, al- Mansoura, al- Qahera, al- Hamidiyya as well as the town of al- Zyarah in Sahl al- Ghab [..]". I guess, we should mark Mansoura as contested until the situation clarifies. 131.188.48.174 (talk) 15:05, 28 October 2015 (UTC) i agree and I did mentioned that before on 21st of October. Helmy1453 (talk) 17:14, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Do you realize how crap SOHR translation to english is? They could easily mean the silos. Why you open new topic for mansoura every day? Totholio (talk) 19:05, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Totholio, Mansoura is an important town in the al-Ghab plains area, and has been viciously fought for by the opposition and regime forces; bringing things up about Mansoura can't be faulted, if there is evidence that one of the two sources we label as, "reliable," is incorrect, or outright lying. The silos, as reported on this pager, were taken by the government days ago. Mansoura should be marked as contested, if the government is bombing the town.DaJesuZ (talk) 19:28, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I know, definitely contested. Masdar claimed SAA controls southern part of the town.Totholio (talk) 11:57, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ISIS near Jisr al-Shughour?

According to the CBC: "We stop in a place just south of Jisr al-Shughour. It's the last Syrian army post. Two rusting tanks and a pick-up lie behind this frontline, along with uniformed men, still fighting to win this war.

On the surrounding hilltops just 300 metres away, invisible to the naked eye, are ISIS fighters."

Is this a mistake, or is the presence of ISIS in Idlib province claimed anywhere else? Esn (talk) 18:23, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actually yes RT wrote about it a couple of days ago. I thought it was strange, probably an editorial mess-up. I still think it is, but i does raise question.

“Su-25 attack jets have destroyed three fortified points of Islamic State terrorists near the village of Salma in the province of Latakia,” Konashenkov said. “The sites were equipped with bunkers, pillboxes and mortar positions.”

Rhocagil (talk) 19:14, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like if the Islamic State had fighters in Idlib, and especially Latakia, al-Masdar or SOHR would report about it, and so far, neither of them have. al-Masdar and RT have reported of, "islamists," being there, but that usually means that they're referring to the Islamic Front, or it's constituent groups, or al-Nusra. This does deserve some attention, though, since IS was driven from Idlib more than a year ago. Is it possible they're referring to extremely northern Hama, the CBC article, I mean? Right now, the government doesn't hold any ground in Idlib near Jisr al-Shughour.DaJesuZ (talk) 19:59, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is pure propaganda shit, Russian, Iranina, Lebaneese and Chinesse (mainly all Assad supporters) like to call anyone fighting SAA ISIS just for the fun of it. but it is pure Bogas. Helmy1453 (talk) 20:23, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Palmyra changes ??

Is their a source for the making of Tall Syria Tell black and the other areas west of Palmyra that the SAA have had captured less than a month ago seems unrealistic that IS took all these areas west of Palmyra and no one mentions it in talk page or even posts a source? Unrealistic because their is a massive force of SAA west of Palmyra all the ways up to Tall Syria Tell I see no sourced edit for these massive changes probably user Duckzz or Dajesus map manipulating again?? This latest post talks about the SAA around the close vicinity of Palmyra city so these changes look like copying a map I strongly recommend reverting them to as they were 3 days ago! http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-restarts-palmyra-operations-with-the-help-of-russian-airstrikes/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.83.250.22 (talk) 10:44, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean? It is discussed in detail on the talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War#IS_10_km_west.28.21.29_of_Palmyra. 131.188.48.174 (talk) 17:56, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Khanasser-Ithriya Highway

SAA has been immersed in a fierce battle with ISIS for control of strategic Khanasser-Ithriya Highway that leads to the SAA controlled areas of the Aleppo Governorate. SAA received boost when Hezbollah arrived from town of Khanasser to help drive ISIS from long stretch of hills that are spread across this desolate area in Hama Governorate. Hezbollah/SAA recover integral hilltop at Tal Ithriya after a series of intense firefights with ISIS this has allowed for SAA to concentrate some of their units to Sheikh Hilal front, where they confronted another ISIS assault on this town located along Raqqa-Salamiyah Highway. SAA were able to defeat ISIS fighters attempting to push north towards town of Sheikh Hilal and also defeat another ISIS group which was try assault SAA positions near town of Al-Sa’an. Khanasser-Ithriyah Highway is still closed due to ISIS’ presence along northern hills overlooking main road that is used by SAA/allies if it still remains closed, SAA will have to rely on airdrops in order to resupply their forces in Aleppo. SAA/Hezbollah have less than 1km of territory left to go before the Khanasser-Ithriya Highway is reopened.http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/hezbollah-and-the-syrian-army-capture-tal-ithriyah-isis-controls-1km-of-highway-in-east-hama/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.124.122.249 (talk) 12:26, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So what do you want ? Helmy1453 (talk) 14:05, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
None of us expect the Islamic State to hold the highway. Such advances by them in the past have led to failure, push back, or encirclement. You saying, "Hey guys! Look at this!" doesn't give us anything on the map to chance. The map is still valid, and the article doesn't show otherwise. What's the point of this section, if I may ask? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DaJesuZ (talkcontribs) 17:29, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Masdar states that Tal ithriyah is under SAA control. Is it this place Jabal ithriyah?.Paolowalter (talk) 22:12, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I believe Tell Ithriyah is this hill: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=de&lat=35.354441&lon=37.760353&z=15&m=b. 84.138.74.98 (talk) 22:26, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Khan Touman

SAA/Hezbollah Advance to Khan Touman and capture farms Qarassi Farms located between strategic towns of Khan Touman and Qarass in southern Aleppo.http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/breaking-syrian-army-and-hezbollah-advance-to-khan-touman-in-southern-aleppo/ https://twitter.com/Amin_Akh/status/660109667734061057 91.124.122.249 (talk) 15:48, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kafr Dulbah

SOHR: Violent clashes took place between SAA against rebels and Islamist factions around Kafr Dulbah in northern countryside of Lattakia, amid advancement for rebels and seizing areas being controlled by SAA, certain information reported that rebels could seize village of Kafr Dulbah.http://www.syriahr.com/en/2015/10/the-rebel-factions-advance-in-the-northern-countryside-of-lattakia/

Pro SAA sources denied this information and reported that village of Kafr Dulbah still under SAA.https://www.facebook.com/The.True.Tube/posts/931054166942324 https://www.facebook.com/Somar.Hatem.News/posts/655917151178543 https://www.facebook.com/Eyadalhosainmainpage/posts/1647620432144606 91.124.122.249 (talk) 13:01, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Facebook posts are not a credible source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.83.250.22 (talk) 13:12, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

SOHR said might control it. ARounf Kafr Dulbah . when SOHR says they did control part of Kafr Dulbah let me know and I will make it contested. untill otherwise Kafr Dulbah stays red. Helmy1453 (talk) 14:07, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
On another note that actually indicates that Tartiah which is to the north of Kafr Dulbah is not contested anyway. I guess Tartiah should go green per as concluded from above source. any Ideas about that ? Helmy1453 (talk) 14:14, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

SOHR states [35] very clearly: "[..] amid advancement for the rebels and seizing areas being controlled by the regime forces, certain information reported that the rebels could seize the village of Kafar Dalbah [..]". So, Kafr Dulbah to green. 131.188.48.174 (talk) 18:19, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"could seize the village of Kafar Dalbah," doesn't mean, "have seized the village of Kafar Dalbah." The village is staying red until actual confirmation the opposition has taken the town.DaJesuZ (talk) 20:29, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"could", past tense of "can", as in: "were able to". What does the arabic version of the article say? 84.138.74.98 (talk) 20:42, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Map with Roads and Highways Ready

I made a Map with Roads and Highways on base of the existent map. Here it is in png format:SyriaRoadsMap Can somebody who has the autority, replace the old one with this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.75.52.4 (talk) 13:04, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That looks absolutely awesome! 84.212.61.74 (talk) 13:08, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Great efforet thatnk you. I don't know how to replace the original one with th is though :( Helmy1453 (talk) 14:08, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Damascus east ghouta

Apparently Hawash al-Dumal http://wikimapia.org/#lang=it&lat=33.474695&lon=36.463451&z=15&m=b has been taken by SAA Al-Masdar. The detailed map of Damascus should be updatedPaolowalter (talk) 22:01, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]