File talk:Rif Aleppo2.svg

[March 8, 2014] Thank you for the new map. This larger map makes more sense as to how things progressed.

Legend additions

Very nice map!

The legend could be augmented to explain what the "triangles" signify. Are they checkpoints? Also, it would help if there was horizontal bar, perhaps in the lower left area, indicating scale in kilometers. Hulahoop122 (talk) 23:52, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

From what I gather, the brown triangles are local peak points/heights. It's actually kind of useful since local heights are frequently the points of contention between the regime and opposition. Kami888 (talk) 00:38, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What does the gray area mean? No control, Islamist control or something else? --109.60.127.225 (talk) 13:36, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The grey/black area means ISIS control. Just like on the Template:Syrian civil war detailed map. Esn (talk) 03:58, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ramousah, Jdeydeh and Ashrafiyeh

Per a new pro-opposition map [1] Ramousah and Jdeydeh districts are firmly in government hands, please change them to red. Also, here is one more map [2], based on opposition sources, per which Ramousah and Jdeydeh are government-held, as well as Ashrafiyeh. So please change Ashrafiyeh to red too please. EkoGraf (talk) 10:59, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure about Jdeydeh because I don't know the precise borders of the district and both maps show rebel presence around that area. Only one of the maps confirms Ashrafiyeh and that one is just a very bad source all around for our purposes (clearly very abstract and inaccurate), the other shows it as mostly YPG. Both however appear to confirm that the ring road and everything south of it is under government control, so I'll make the change based on that. Kami888 (talk) 14:22, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

They also both show the majority of Salah-ad-din and Saif al-Doula as government held. I am not sure if the map should be changed to reflect that. Kami888 (talk) 14:37, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand how its a very bad source? Its HRW relaying what the opposition said. Also, BOTH maps confirm Jdeydeh is government held and there has been no fighting reported in that Christian district for almost a year and a half. EkoGraf (talk) 15:41, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's bad because it's verifiably wrong about the control of many districts. Anyway, if Ashrafiyeh and Jdeydeh change on the Aleppo battle map and stay that way, I'll make sure to change them here too. Sounds good? Kami888 (talk) 19:02, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jdeydeh has changed on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Battle_of_Aleppo_map.svg please update the map as well. Also most part of Salaheddine. Furthermore al-Aziza and al-Maamel went red Paolowalter (talk) 22:54, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sheikh Najjar

Sheikh Najjar half red per maps posted by sources close to both sides of the conflict Pro-Government Pro-rebel The region of sheykh Najjar should be marked ad conflict area: http://www.almanar.com.lb/english/adetails.php?fromval=1&cid=23&frid=23&eid=144098 MZarif (talk) 14:38, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Aleppo Map

The aleppo map should be edited in my opinion according to this sources. http://pydrojava.net/eng/index.php/news/157-liwaa-jabhat-al-akrad-liberated-3-regions-in-aleppo

And this videos are proof that Jabhat al akrad are present even in Hayderiye http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQLyKW-KVSQ

Also i wonder is it still clashes going on in Eshrefiyeh or do we simply not know if YPG succeded to defend it or if SAA captured it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by KurdishFalcon (talk • contribs) 22:03, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why this map doesn't change ,a lots of changes happened!!!MZarif (talk) 04:07, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

New AC map

The map should be updated marking government controlled the areas marked as such by the new AC map: https://twitter.com/CdricLabrousse/status/454351857402396672/photo/1 --Paolowalter (talk) 08:06, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am not really seeing any gains by SAA relative to the current map, this map just has larger areas marked as contested due to frequently shifting frontlines and disagreements between pro-government and anti-government mappers. For example, it's probably better to keep the entire Sheikh Najjar district as contested for now rather than trying to draw a more precise frontline, because there is no consensus on where exactly that frontline is within the district, and it is still subject to frequent change. Let's try to draw precise frontlines only when we actually know with decent certainty where they are exactly, and when they're not changing on almost daily basis. Kami888 (talk)

In general terms I agree with you. Nevertheless it is a phylosophy different from what is used in the main page of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Syrian_civil_war_detailed_map. Fro this particular case, you can see a large stretch of government controlled area reacing Khan al-Asal and that is a major shift. Also the northern part of Bustan al.Qasr are clearly controlled by the government. Otherwise if you are too conservative, you risk of having an obsolete map, like the one of Battle of Aleppo.79.41.102.144 (talk) 19:48, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well you bring up interesting points, but I still think being conservative is better than rushing and having edit wars over minor advances. If you feel strongly the other way, I'm not stopping you from editing the map yourself, you know. :) As for the "large stretch of government controlled area reacing Khan al-Asal" and "the northern part of Bustan al.Qasr", here's a pro-government map that actually shows those areas as rebel held. So go figure, eh? 98.231.43.200 (talk) 18:55, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.facebook.com/syriahroe/posts/512581522183524?stream_ref=10 indicates that the SAA is present in A’ndan. This town should be contested in some way.Paolowalter (talk) 16:58, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No. Kami888 (talk)

This map is fine until a major shift occurs, or a sustainable advance. Every time someone 'launches an attack' is not enough to just shift fronts. Thanks admin — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.127.127.203 (talk) 08:44, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rebel Offensive

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/04/syria-rebels-advance-aleppo-city-2014412101712303691.html

Ramouseh & Rashidin parts need an update. Layramoon must be green. Sheikh Najjar Industrial city regime offensive is stopped. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.155.104.15 (talk) 06:16, 14 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are a lot videos with rebels in the north part of Ramouseh, a few with easy geolocalization. Yes, I know that this is not a source for wikipedia but complement the previous news.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjPVu55t-To3TEyNEskVi9Q/videos

And a article in EAworldwiev .

http://eaworldview.com/2014/04/syria-daily-regime-trouble-aleppo/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.35.118.73 (talk) 13:31, 14 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Aziza

I agree that we cannot change the map just like that for any advance. But I think we should make a list of the changes that must be done eventually. Here is an article from SOHR http://www.syriahr.com/index.php?option=com_news&nid=18129&Itemid=2&task=displaynews#.U1Kf9Pl_sYk saying that rebels are on the borders of Aziza, unlike what the map says.Oussj (talk) 16:15, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Map is obsolete

Here is a news and an updated map, which is really significiantly different from current map

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/aleppo-syrias-stalingrad-10320 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.253.209.56 (talk) 18:27, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's interesting, but there's little reason to believe that this MS paint map is more accurate than the map we have. Kami888 (talk) 19:29, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WSJ map

http://online.wsj.com/news/interactive/ALEPPO0425?ref=SB10001424052702304626304579505351626614392 Boredwhytekid (talk) 19:58, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Army take news zones in east

Al Matahen and Sheikh Najjar

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1-3G_tb7ZA

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=804_1398544119 — Preceding unsigned comment added by LogFTW (talk • contribs) 00:34, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Shammar

Per SOHR [3] the Army captured the village of Shammar, east of Aleppo [4]. So you need to appropriately push government-held territory (red) a bit to the east to encompase the village. EkoGraf (talk) 03:08, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll change it shortly. Kami888 (talk) 22:31, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. EkoGraf (talk) 22:51, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, FARS claims that also the next town Suran has been taken by SAAR

[5]. Just let watch carefully, if these news surface elsewhere. Paolowalter (talk) 06:18, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Toward al-Bab

Advance of SAA east of Aleppo toward al-Bab [6]. Furthermore Suran, reported occupied by SAA by Fars, is in the middle. The problem is this map is not updated.Paolowalter (talk) 16:52, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Syrian troops seized the town Al Madyunah and Soran after ISIS withdraw from the town without clashes.Hawar News Hanibal911 (talk) 17:46, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Actually wrong Soran, its this one [7]. But to summ it up. Map is becoming out-of-dated. Government-held territory needs to be extended east to include Shammar, Al Madyunah and Soran. EkoGraf (talk) 18:47, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Syrian Army advanced on east Aleppo

Syrian Army Taken total or partiality Al Matahen zone, Shaykh Najjarn and al-Ramouseh in east of Aleppo the days May 25, 26, 27 and 28

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=627_1398785300

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=986_1398646885

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=993_1398733982

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=474_1398660859

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=804_1398544119 — Preceding unsigned comment added by LogFTW (talk • contribs) 09:28, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Clashes continue between Regime Forces and Armed Opposition Groups in Dowar Alborj in Allyramon area in north Aleppo and Regime Forces progress in the region.Hawar News Hanibal911 (talk) 17:48, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Arab Chronicle map

Look at the AC map [8]. The government controlled areas should cover at least those indicated in the map. If it is not maintained this map is useless. Paolowalter (talk) 19:05, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Recent changes

Arqoub was already shown as government held, there was a rebel incursion since the last update. I'm also not entirely sure where Bani Zaid is though. I just made northern Rasafa region green for now but the matter should be settled on the "Battle of Aleppo" talk page, I'll copy whatever decision is made there. Kami888 (talk) 04:12, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bani Zaid according to wikimapia is visible [9], the northern part of the area on the west of Sheick Maqsood. In the Battle of Aleppo it is apparently used as a synonim of Rasafeh, that is apparently larger. Rebel control is sure on the northern part, not clear the situation in the southern part. Paolowalter (talk) 19:38, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sheick Najar

SAA advance farther in Sheick Najar. See [10]. This map is lagging far behind the development. Paolowalter (talk) 19:46, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So the whole south-west corner of the industrial zone needs to go red. EkoGraf (talk) 21:04, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The very south-west portion is already red, look closely. As for the rest, I prefer to keep it as contested until we get more concrete information. Kami888 (talk) 21:06, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The area up to and including Bureij roundabout (at the midpoint between the northern and southern borders of Sheikh Najjar) is confirmed under regime control, by multiple sources and by photo evidence ^[1] 99.246.110.7 (talk) 22:17, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

More sources

SANA said a "Aleppo Hill" was taken by the army http://sana.sy/eng/337/2014/05/03/542302.htm

These are recent sources from the currently situations yes Is from Iran but they are very active following the situation http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13930210001441

http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13930213000996

http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13930209001409

http://www.tasnimnews.com/English/Home/Single/356860

Recent TV Reports

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aV78tMqct1I

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVIPwEDSoMs

Ill hope it helps you — Preceding unsigned comment added by LogFTW (talk • contribs) 09:02, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This the map from the pro opposition source displays the army advances in the north of Aleppo and shows that the army captured the territory east of Sheik Najar industrial zone as well as army moving towards Aleppo prison. Hanibal911 (talk) 09:22, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Army offensive in Aleppo

Army launched a major offensive in Aleppo. The Syrian army broke siege of the central prison of the city Aleppo. Also troops blocked all supply channels rebels in the eastern part of Aleppo.Arab Chronicle Also Hezbollah, Syrian troops and Iraq'i shia militias advancing toward Owaija, north to Aleppo, closer to the main northern access. This confirms the pro opposition source.Arab Chronicle Arab Chronicle Hanibal911 (talk) 19:40, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We had a source that said that the army had made it to the Kindi Hospital. Wouldn't that mean the army is already in Owaija? Based on the information you presented, a northeaster section of the Aleppo city map [Eastern Hanano, ARd Al-Hamra, and northern Owaija] needs to be turned red.Dr Marmilade (talk) 20:01, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I read the text on the map Hanibal911 links. Arab Chronicle It is labeled as depicting a "Regime Long-Term Strategy Possibility." The red arrows depict "Loyalists main goals and possible new strategic initiatives." So, nobody is saying that the regime has made those advances. They are just speculating that these may be regime goals. So, no, this Arab Chronicles map does not tell anything about the facts currently present on the ground or make any predictions that the regime will achieve these goals. All it does is say "hey, maybe this is what the regime is trying to do." I agree. That probably is what the regime is trying to do. And the rebels would probably like to cut off the regime's supply lines to the West, but neither of them has accomplished those goals and plans and speculations about their intentions do not belong on this map. Dperrella (talk) 20:54, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

SAA approaching the central prison

From SOHR [11] SAA is very close to the central prison. The map is becoming increasingly obsolete in the Sheick Najar area. Most of the oliver must become red. As well the area between Sheick Najar and teh prison (Hayyan).Paolowalter (talk) 20:27, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Today, on 20 May 2014 the SAA entered Aleppo Central Prison after clearing Haylan and the Aqaub Hill on the way to the prison complex. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.127.127.203 (talk) 00:09, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

SAA entered the Prison. This map needs to be updated — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.121.122.98 (talk) 14:51, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

^ https://twitter.com/2Rook14/status/462689529652985856/photo/1

[1] ttps://twitter.com/2Rook14/status/462689529652985856/photo/1

[1]