Jump to content

Talk:Control of cities during the Syrian civil war

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Azad4707 (talk | contribs) at 01:38, 11 February 2015 (kobanî). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Syrian Civil War sanctions


Kurdish presence in alleppo

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

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

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

same account have also mentioned about kurds+fsa rebels in Qazel, Ghara/Yani yaban, Dalhah & Baghirin these villages aren't even marked in this map. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 (talkcontribs) 00:49, 2 February 2015‎

YPG in KOBANE

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

https://twitter.com/ColdKurd/status/561294811094065153 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 (talkcontribs) 00:54, 2 February 2015‎

Joum Ali in kobane.

Joum ali in kobane

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

It's completelly liberated why does the map show ISIS presence? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 (talkcontribs) 00:58, 2 February 2015‎

Newly liberated villages in Kobane

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

Let's wait some more sources or some pictures to confirm that YPG is really inside those villages. Sheran town has been marked as Kurdish controlled since 5 days ago, but actually it was liberated by YPG only last night. https://twitter.com/jackshahine/status/562232838133919744 The same source (Jack Shahine) posted a picture of Aydiq village here: https://twitter.com/jackshahine/status/562274741936209920 .in the southern front, but I have yet to see a picture of Rubi. --8fra0 (talk) 17:33, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
7 more villages liberated last night: Xerabnas (Qaramogh), Satiyah, Qabajigh (Qarajokh), Tashli Huyuk (Tashluk), Mojek, Bir Arab, Bishalti. This is reflected in dozens of sources: http://www.lebanon24.com/mobile/details/1002615 http://www.lebfeed.com/%D9%88%D8%AD%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%AD%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B4%D8%B9%D8%A8-%D8%AA%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%B7%D8%B1-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%89-%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%89-%D9%82%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%AC%D8%BA-%D9%88/ http://www.alahednews.com.lb/fastnews/253822/-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%88%D8%AD%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%B1%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%AA%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%B7%D8%B1-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%89-%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%89-%D9%82%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%AC%D8%BA-%D9%88%D8%B7%D8%A7%D8%B4%D9%84%D9%88%D9%83-%D9%88%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%85%D9%88%D8%BA-%D9%88-%D8%B3%D8%AA%D9%8A-%D9%88-%D9%85%D9%88%D8%AC%D9%83-%D9%88-%D8%A8%D9%8A%D8%B1%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A8#.VNHxy2jF870 http://slabnews.com/article/158887/ http://www.masdark.com/arabic/304311.html
I think that we can change them. On the other hand, Tel Ghazal is still contested: https://twitter.com/jackshahine/status/563117893823774721 --8fra0 (talk) 23:41, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

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

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

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


please change milê from black to yellow because the news says peshmerga attack isis from milê which south of kobanî. http://rudaw.net/kurmanci/kurdistan/100220156 and change name of kobanê to kobanî plase. it's name is kobanî and all wikipedia use that name https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koban%C3%AE

Yabous

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

Then why is Kfayr Yabous JAN-Held? ChrissCh94 (talk) 00:55, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
because a majority of the people who edit this map are pro-rebel and don't have a neutral stance where they just use facts to mark the map. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.26.157 (talk) 16:30, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You know what to do ChrissCh94 =).200.48.214.19 (talk) 16:45, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Eastern Homs

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

Problem is this front lacks sources. Part of the problem is that the area is considered remote even by Syrian standards. Most of the villages consist of hundreds of citizens at most. SAA is barely engaged there, providing artillery and logistical support for the NDF. My vote is that we add places that were captured by either side. For example ISIS captured a village, we add this village as ISIS-held. But I don't think we should go over and add the remaining random villages since we barely know who controls what. ChrissCh94 (talk) 17:30, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with ChrissCh94 foe now we do not have data which can clearly say who control this villages. Also i think that we cant be contrary to the accepted rules of editing and add to the map a villages or city without a source who could confirm such actions. We can not be sure that the villages that we add under control of ISIS or army. My personal opinion is that we should not break the rules of editing. We have previously struggled with editors which add on map the villages without sources and some editors was blocked. So that guys we should not repeat of their actions. Hanibal911 (talk) 17:43, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

I'm not up to date on the area, but I agree with others that we should not make changes without sources.
Also, there is no stable "front line" in the sense of ww1 trench warfare. Rather, there are points of control (such as checkpoints). All sides are able to at least temporarily infiltrate between points of control of an opposing side. (That is partly how the kurds were able to defeat Daesh in Kobane city : by infiltrating and ambushing Daesh fighters.)
In some areas, such as in sieges, control points are close enough that infiltration is much more difficult. But no side has enough forces to do that everywhere. Even a million soldiers wouldn't be enough for an area as large as Syria. André437 (talk) 10:14, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

Al Hirak Daraa

Hello everybody,

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

JAN sieges Hazm Movement held town in Aleppo: Sheikh Suleiman

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

Zabadani area

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


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

 Done Hanibal911 (talk) 19:32, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No. Zabadani is for sure contested: SAA presence inside the city is well documented as discussed in the past even if probably the core of the city is still rebel controoled. The map is not detailed enough to show the SAA presence inside the city. Therefore Zabadani should go back to contested.Paolowalter (talk) 07:46, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the IP,Peto Lucem is pro-regime and in this case we can use his reports(map)beacause Zabadani was contested before now he is showing that rebels captured it.
SOHR reported that 4 members of the regime forces killed when the Islamic battalions targeted them in al- Zabadani.SOHR So this means that the army still present in the city. Hanibal911 (talk) 21:02, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hanibal911 this source there are clashes on the mountain and around the city not inside the city.Lindi29 (talk) 21:12, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Al-hasakah area

This is pro gov source, but in this area we do not too many reliable source. Sana news: army established full control over the villages of al-Watwatiyeh, Jammo, Jammo Farm, and the eastern part of Bab al-Kheir village south of Hasaka city. [1]. I find Al Watutiyah very close to 121 Artillery base(83.26.172.121 (talk) 18:52, 4 February 2015 (UTC)) The advance of SAA in this area is supported also by SOHR even if it does not mention names (see discussion in [2]). Therefore we can assume that this village is one of those mentioned by SOHR and change it.Paolowalter (talk) 11:28, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

Report by Masdar [3] the SAA has captured 11 Hasakah villages. Please try and find their locations and at least one more source that can confirm the report is correct. EkoGraf (talk) 00:39, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kurdish source confirmed the capture of the village of Sabaa Skor by the SAA [4]. Its locaiton is here [5]. Please add it to the map. Thanks! EkoGraf (talk) 13:29, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ARA News it is biased pro opposition source so we can use it for displayed success of army. Hanibal911 (talk) 14:24, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Hanibal911 (talk) 14:28, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bab al-Hawla

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

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

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

Semi-protected edit request on 5 February 2015

Add

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — {{U|Technical 13}} (etc) 22:50, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Talbiseh

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

Talbiseh is a rebel stronghold. It is not contested. Just south of the city there is the Malouk army complex from which army troops attack the border of the city. This has been going on for months, but the rebels are holding up well... so the city is not contested & the clashes can still be reported routinely for months in the future along the same pattern. No evidence that army troops can do anything other than hit & run attacks. The red semi-circle is enough for now. Tradediatalk 12:38, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
SOHR reported clashes around Talbsieh mostly in the north area.here.As for now the red cricle is enough.Lindi29 (talk) 12:55, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Those are original research. The pro-opp source states cleraly of fighting inside the city. That has always been sufficient to turn the city contested.Paolowalter (talk) 18:38, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Deir ErZoor

From [6] the SAA control arounf Deir Erzoor should be enlarged.Paolowalter (talk) 18:38, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

No way only 1 twitter source,SOHR Reports have been ignored since 27 january for the airport and there were only edits for the Regime,when there were clashes around the airport and no 1 has mention that,only I did that,so what should do,we should enlarge the Isis presence around the airport.SOHR,SOHR,SOHR,SOHR,SOHR,SOHR,SOHR,SOHR,SOHR.Lindi29 (talk) 20:43, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Elijah J Magnir is a 100% neutral,reliable source, SOHR is no longer, especially in Deir-Ez-Zor. They have been so wrong so many times regarding news from that area. The "twitter" source is sufficient to make change to the map. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 20:46, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Lindi29 SOHR also clear said that army advances in this area. So we cant put black icon near airport. Hanibal911 (talk) 20:58, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
XJ-0461 v2 he is not 100% neutral beacause on his reports are many mistakes,example 25 january he tweets for this jihadistEjmAlrai,without any confirmation or source that he his dead and I tweet to him that's a lie and he is not from mitrovica and his name is not abu abdallah and you need to show a reliable source not biased sources from kurds beacause,I said to him I have reliable source from were he comes from and that he his still alive beacause on my local news there were another report for his death now this is the second one and was a lie,his parents spoke to him on the phone and denied that he is dead,and on 2 febuary he teweets that he is not dead.EjmAlrai,that confirms that his report and sources are not 100% reliable and can not be compare with SOHR who is the main source for this war and also has her own activist in Syria.Lindi29 (talk) 21:08, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That is only one example and that is of a KIA, which a very hard to verify. We are talking about accuracy concerning battle events. The concensus here is the EJM is 100% reliable and neutral. If you feel that this is incorrect, make a section on the talk page dedicated to it where you present your evidence so that other editors here may consider it.XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 22:32, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hanibal911 I agree with you that we show Isis presence near the airport and to show the regime advance too but to show were the regime has clearly advance not just to enlarge the map for the Regime where there are clashes everyday at the airport and in the map is showing Isis not even close to the airport but it show in Jaffra where Isis has already captured it.Lindi29 (talk) 21:25, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

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

ISIS has retreated from most of the villages this map is wrong edit it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 (talkcontribs) 12:46, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

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

___

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

newly liberated villages

Eastern front

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

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

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

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

Al-hasakah and area Qamishili area

In last few days it was many raport about advance SAA in this two area. Almasdar [7] and [8] - The Syrian Arab Army (SAA) – in cooperation with the National Defense Forces – asserted their control over the villages of al-Zaraza, Shamasa, Tal Mohamed, al-Tiben, Khaled, Howedka, Akoula villages and nine other farms in the area. (Tal Hamees area). SAA offensive confirm by SOHR and EjmAlrai without name. Why Melabiya turn black when in this area SAA take few village and [9] [10] Ivan Sidorenko report about army prepare to retake base 121 And one more raport [11] that army control the entire way from Qamishli to Tell Brak (217.99.116.28 (talk) 13:41, 7 February 2015 (UTC))[reply]

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

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

Another 2 report about this offensive [12] and EjmAlrai confirm SAA advance. (217.99.116.28 (talk) 09:36, 8 February 2015 (UTC))[reply]

Islamic State withdraw

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Magnier report is totally unreliable. When questioned (on twitter) about this report, he said that the rebels had not yet reached the Euphrate ... yet Manjib is some 20 km WEST of the river (actually a lake/reservoir near Manjib), which means that the rebels would be more than 20km + a large river/lake away from Manjib. They would also have to pass in proximity of Sarrin, a Daesh stronghold held for over a year. In sum, Magnier saying that the rebels have reached Manjib is (at least was at the time) false, by his own admission. But not surprising, Magnier has a well established habit of jumping the gun. Proof that nominally neutral does not equal reliable ...
BTW, despite certain editors doubts, archicivilians has a much better track record. As well as trying to be as objective as possible, as witnessed by his not uncommon qualification "unconfirmed reports". André437 (talk) 05:51, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

FSA+Akrad and islamist groups

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

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

Kafr Shams

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

That source says the town has been under rebel control for a year and a half, but we have had multiple pro-opposition sources confirming the town to be SAA-held. Like the pro-opp/mildly neutral deSyracuse [13] and the the hardcore pro-opposition Archi [14]. Both marked it as SAA-held in November and later January. So I think that casts some doubt on that journalist's report. And SOHR specifically stated the fighting was in the countryside. As for the breaking news source, it says an operation was carried out (past tense) not that it was continuing. EkoGraf (talk) 07:37, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Masdar says Kafr Shams is under rebel control: http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-begins-offensive-northern-daraa/ These are the points mentioned: - rebels fighting in both Al-Suhayliyah and al-Dalli (both should be contested, not only al-Dalli) near Sheikh Maskin - rebels control Kafr Shams and Zimrin, which are bombarded by the SAA; half red ring around both at the eastern side - Qarfa: fighting around the town (twitter reports confirm this). Contested? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 13:20, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Tall Abyad/Girê Spî villages

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

An addition to Alarabiya, this source mentions Sarzuri (Zarzuri) and Bir Arab under YPG control. These villages are just two km away from Juran and Hurriya, located north and south of them respectively. Roboskiye (talk) 10:54, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It does not matter how many verifiable sources you provide. The reaction is same and simple: They refer to the same outdated map and revert you! By the same logic one can re-edit whole of wiki map according to that inaccurate map. Any one daring to answer this? Roboskiye (talk) 20:49, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Here is more info about Tall Abyad front. 8 villages under YPG control and 8 villages scene of fighting. http://www.masdark.com/arabic/312599.html Roboskiye (talk) 20:55, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Changes in Qanitara and Daraa

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

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

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

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

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

Not exact. The three hills (which I cannot locate exactly) are confirmed only by the article you mentioned. It is true that Al Masdar is a very reliable soucre and can be used. For the three towns, it is only mentioned fighting near or inside Deir al- Adas by SOHR and that the offensive is geared to takes thos towns. Some tweets states that Deir al- Adas is taken by SAA [15], but we must wait more solid confirmation. Clearly SAA is on the offensive and we must watch how the situation evolves. Deir al- Adas contested should be enough for now see [16].Paolowalter (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 10:21, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

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


I believe the editors should wait a couple days, lot's of lies from the opposition using 3 year old photos as "killed SAA" they need help there for sure, but this is a way bigger offensive than just taking a couple cities, related to the Shebaa attack, iranian advisors are coming with gifts to SAA — Preceding unsigned comment added by Totholio (talkcontribs) 14:31, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Al-Masdar and Leith are pro-Assad, so no. Also, yes, this is a big offensive, however rebels are strong in Daara, they captured dozens of villages and towns in the last months, including those Assad is trying to recover now, surely both sides have already suffered dozens of casualties, but the rebels far outnumber Assad there, so if the battle becomes a bloodbath, the rebels have more men to throw at the fight. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.183.240.250 (talk) 14:37, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also biased pro opposition source Archicivilians reported that battles ongoing in Kafr Shams and Deir Adass. So this mean that both these towns now contested. Hanibal911 (talk) 15:12, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The reliable source said that Syrian army and Hezbollah fully control Deir al-Adas and Tayha.Elijah J. Magnier Hanibal911 (talk) 15:54, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Raport from pro gov petro lucern that SAA take DeirAlAdas, Habbariyyah, Eliah confirm EjmAlrai SAA and #Hezbollah fully control Deir al-Adas and Tayha and is bombarding Kfar-Shams and Madhara now. And pro SAA talk about take control Al-Dinaaji (217.99.148.246 (talk) 16:07, 9 February 2015 (UTC))[reply]

Bloody H*LL Hannibal, are you out of your mind?! You always say "no twitter sources, no twitter sources", but you want to change Deir al-Adas based on a TWITTER SOURCE. Nexy, pro-SAA Al Masdar cleary states Kafr Shams under rebel control, and you refuse to edit the map. Are you insane?! Or is this just the true colour showing ;) I think the second one, dear editor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 16:30, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Stop being butthurt anonymus this is only the beginning.Elijah got sources on the ground, he knew everything before most of the people knew nothing about for months. South Syria will be the iranian/Hezbollah operation centrum in the coming months. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Totholio (talkcontribs) 16:39, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We dont use anonymous reports from twitter. But Elijah J. Magnier it is the chief international correspondent of Kuwaiti newspaper. Hanibal911 (talk) 17:05, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Deir al-Adas: no sources, turned to red. Reason: Twitter sources. Barqah: no sources, turned to red. It goes on and on and on .... unbelievable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 19:24, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Stop talking nonsense! The reliable source said that Syrian army and Hezbollah fully control Deir al-Adas and Tayha.Elijah J. Magnier Alsp pro opposition source here showed that Barqa under control by army. Also, we use data from Twitter for displayed success Kurds and rebels but it does not bother you. I see that you are against the Syrian government and you do not like a situations when someone on the map shows success for army. Hanibal911 (talk) 19:44, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unbelievable ,you accusing Hanibal of bias ,haha that rich coming from you ;)Pyphon (talk) 19:41, 9 February 2015 (UTC)pyphon[reply]

http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-armys-offensive-northern-daraa-full-swing/ gives some details on the situation of this area (provding a proof of its realiability BTW). I'd say Deir al-Adas contested and Kafr Shamis green with red ring plus Tal Ghasham red. The article clams that Tal Ghasham s taken by SAA: wher is this place? Paolowalter (talk) 20:58, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Probably here [17] (217.99.148.246 (talk) 21:35, 9 February 2015 (UTC))[reply]
Paolowalter The more reliable source said that Syrian army and Hezbollah fully control Deir al-Adas and Tayha.Elijah J. Magnier So now those towns marked under control by army. Hanibal911 (talk) 21:38, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Also another the reliable source from Netherlands also reported that Syrian troops and Hezbollah fully control Deir al-Adas and Tayha.Lowlands Solutions Hanibal911 (talk) 21:48, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Paolowalter Here Tall Ghashim Hanibal911 (talk) 21:50, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hanibal911 Wouldn't it be more logical to turn Ayn Afa from contested to red and Deir Adas from green to contested. I know what Elijah said but still, i have seen at least 3 videos showing 3 destroyed tanks around Deir Adas, but what ever. DuckZz (talk) 21:53, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We cant use in this issue the rebels amateur video from YouTube. Also two a more reliable sources reported that Deir Al Adas under control by army. When this source Elijah J. Magnier reported that Al Nusra captured town of Kafr Yabous no one said that this unreliable data also previously all the editors have recognized that it is a reliable source. Hanibal911 (talk) 22:21, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
SAA controk of Deir Al Adas is officialy confirmed [18]. Also Tell Mseih is declated under SAA control.Paolowalter (talk) 14:47, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Official confirmation from EjmAlrai SAA and #Hezbollah control of Deir al-Adas is confirmed NOW. (83.26.143.237 (talk) 15:13, 10 February 2015 (UTC))[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 8 February 2015

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

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

Semi-protected edit request on 8 February 2015

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

Syria map

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

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

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

Namer

According to this source rebels try to break into this this village.here.Lindi29 (talk) 13:33, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Twitter reports of fighting in and around both Qarfa and Namer. This Al-Masdar article mentioning fighting in Qarfa: http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-begins-offensive-northern-daraa/ The text: "The 5th Division attacked a group of Al-Nusra Front fighters at the village of Qarfa, killing 8 enemy combatants and capturing a bulldozer. 6 out of the 8 militants were unknown; however, the 2 that were identified were the following: “‘Anas Khodor Al-Hariri” and “Zayd Bilaal Abu ‘Umran.”

Source Al Masdar said that clashes near village Qafra. Also this pro opposiion source here just said that rebels try to break also into Namer but not said that clashes inside this village. Hanibal911 (talk) 15:07, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Also pro opposition source here only said that that the rebels just have entered in Rustom Ghazali palace which located at the entrance of the village. So that the clashes on outskirts of the village or it was just hit and run. Hanibal911 (talk) 15:26, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ras Al Makta' - Eastern Homs

SOHR reports that SAA has captured the Ras Al Makta' area in Eastern Homs south of Umm al Surj [19] ChrissCh94 (talk) 16:38, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

SAA captured Ras Al Makta and the village of Al-Masheerfa according to Al-Masdar http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-secures-villages-northeast-homs/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by SyAAF (talkcontribs) 17:45, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Source said that village of Al-Masheerfa was captured of army earlier on last week. Which is also confirmed SOHR. Hanibal911 (talk) 18:00, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hanibal911,ChrissCh94I open an issue for this and added this places as Isis held beacause the SSA just captured several villages near that area and continued the offensive now they captured this town that I added 1 week ago in other words i was right!Lindi29 (talk) 18:13, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
We never said you weren't right, we just said that you might be wrong. Now it's true the area was ISIS-held but what about the others? We can't risk adding wrongly held areas. Don't get us wrong! Cheers Lindi29 ChrissCh94 (talk) 20:05, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed with ChrissCh94 Hanibal911 (talk) 20:08, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Are we going to add them? ChrissCh94 (talk) 16:49, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
ChrissCh94 I already added them !But i could not find Ras Al Makta.Lindi29 (talk) 22:43, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Grain Silos near Sarrin

According to data from ISIS they are still control this Grain silos near Sarrin.herehere also pro opposition map deSyracuse also showed that this area under control by ISIS. So how do you think we can add on map those silos and mark their under the control of ISIS. Hanibal911 (talk) 20:17, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

YPG forces are positioned 3 km from Sarrin and are shelling it with mortars. Roboskiye (talk) 20:51, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Hanibal911 even pro-opp sources report that the grain silos is in Isis controll.Lindi29 (talk) 21:31, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sheick Miskin

From pro-opp sources [20] Sheikeh Meskin contested. In any case I have never seen convincing proof that SAA is not present anymore in the east part of the city.Paolowalter (talk) 09:51, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Clashes are on the east, in the village of Qarfa, pro-opposition are saying that Rebels are trying to advance from that village but we don't have any neutral sources showing that rebels control it. DuckZz (talk) 11:41, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That is your interpreation not what is written in the source. Attack on Qarfa does not exclude fighting in Sheick Miksim as well.Paolowalter (talk) 14:47, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lafarge Cement Factory

Reliable journalist Jack Shahine says here that YPG/FSA forces are besieging Lafarge Cement Factory which is east of Mamid here: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=36.543846&lon=38.587418&z=12&m=b That would mean that most of the villages northwest of the Cement Factory are in YPG hands, while in this map are marked as IS controlled. --8fra0 (talk) 12:29, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

8fra0 Need more data for such a major change on map. Hanibal911 (talk) 13:02, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You are right Hanibal911. By now there is photographic evidence of YPG/FSA presence in Khanik Tathani southeast of Khanik Fawkani http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=36.639498&lon=38.520470&z=12&m=b, per https://twitter.com/Raqqa_Sl/status/565134349369368577 , so we can change to YPF/FSA controlled that town and the town northwest of that place. --8fra0 (talk) 13:34, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
8fra0Also reliable source Elijah J. Magnier confirmed data from pro opposition source here that the Liwa' Thuwar Suria advancing in area of La Farge. Hanibal911 (talk) 15:31, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There are many non-pro-Kurdish sources confirming this: http://www.alahednews.com.lb/fastnews/254839/-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%88%D8%AD%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%B1%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%AA%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%B9%D9%8A%D8%AF-%D8%A8%D8%B4%D9%83%D9%84-%D9%83%D8%A7%D9%85%D9%84-%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%AE%D8%B1%D8%A8%D8%A9-%D8%B9%D8%B7%D9%88-%D8%A8%D8%AD%D9%84%D8%A8-%D8%A8%D8%B9%D8%AF-%D8%A7%D8%B4%D8%AA%D8%A8%D8%A7%D9%83%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D9%85%D8%B9-%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%B9%D8%B4-#.VNqGwfnF870 http://rep-eye.com/mainnews/89-2011-12-12-02-34-49/30396-2015-02-10-13-25-54.html http://www.almanar.com.lb/adetails.php?eid=1112032 http://www.syriaday.net/%D9%85%D8%AD%D9%84%D9%8A/%D8%AB%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B1%D9%82%D8%A9-%D9%8A%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%86-%D8%AA%D9%82%D8%AF%D9%85%D9%87-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D8%B1%D9%8A%D9%81-%D9%83%D9%88%D8%A8%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%8A-%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%80-ypg-%D9%8A%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%B7%D8%B1-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%89-%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%89-%D8%AC%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%AF%D8%A9/ Roboskiye (talk) 22:44, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Changes in Rif Dameshqe

the news confirmed that the farms in north part of Duma in rif Damascus is contested and some of them like "Mazra’a Seehaan" were captured by SAA here is source:http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/large-battle-brewing-douma-saa-captures-chick-farm/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.143.248.55 (talk) 12:49, 10 February 2015 (UTC) and al-Danaji village in west of rif dameshqe http://syriahr.com/en/2015/02/regime-forces-backed-by-hezbollah-and-iranian-fighters-advance-in-reef-dimashq/[reply]

Daraa?

Why are Masharah and Al-Tayhah suddenly red? There has been no discussion here, no sources given to change the towns. So, why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.31.204.195 (talk) 14:44, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

SAA and Hezbollah fully control TayhaElijah J. Magnier In Quneitra and Daraa fronts, SAA and Hezbollah took control of Madharah,Deir-Maqer,Al-Tiha Elijah J. Magnier And stop writing nonsense that changes are made without specifying sources. Hanibal911 (talk) 15:14, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Also confirmed that SAA and Hezbollah control of Deir al-Adas.Elijah J. Magnier Hanibal911 (talk) 15:17, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are using Twitter. So if Markito, Archicivilians or Thomas van Linge say rebels take villages, we change them to? Because then we can make Tell Antar and Qarfa to rebel held, as well as the village of Al-Faqa and Bargah. Nice change in politics over here :) great! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.31.204.195 (talk) 15:32, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is some differences between pro rebel Markito, Archicivilians or Thomas van Linge, pro regime petro lucern, KeepingtheLeith and neutral EjmAlrai. Read about rules in wiki. (83.26.143.237 (talk) 15:39, 10 February 2015 (UTC))[reply]
All editors have recognized this source Elijah J. Magnier as a reliable and neutral. And we use it for display the success the army, rebels, Kurds and ISIS. But Markito, Archicivilians or Thomas van Linge it is biased pro opposition sources and in accordance with the rules we do not use pro opposition sources to display success rebels. We can use this source for display the success by army. But we can use for display the success by rebels pro government sources Peto Lucem, Al-Masdar, Syrian Perspective and some other. Hanibal911 (talk) 15:43, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Success? Many videos from Deir al-Adas today showing continued fighting. One Twitter source claims the regime retakes Masharah, and it is red. More than 10 Twitter sources say fighting in Qarfa, and we don't even discuss making it contested. This map, gentleman, is becoming one big joke. Sorry to state it like this, because I do appreciate your work, but I'll be following the real maps made by Twitter authors who do not believe every romour :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.31.204.195 (talk) 16:37, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry but Hanibal911 here is right. ChrissCh94 (talk) 16:47, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
About clashes in Qarfa and Deir Al Adas said only a pro opposition sources. But this more reliable source Elijah J. Magnier because it's not just page in Twitter the activist from social network it is page in twitter of the chief international correspondent from Kuwait news agency. Also we cant use pro-rebel amateur video for displayed success by rebels. Hanibal911 (talk) 16:50, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Also Israeli source Mossad News reported that Hezbollah take control of Deir al-Adas.Mossad News Hanibal911 (talk) 17:11, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
SOHR report that clashes are still taking place in Deir al-Adas also confirms attacks on Qafra and Namer the issue that i opend beacause pro-regime and pro-opp twitter sources reported that rebels are fighting in outskirts of this villages.here,also al-masdar shows Mashrah in rebel controll but shows also regime advances near this town so mb a red siege on these 3 villages it's more logical.here.Lindi29 (talk) 17:28, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And someone change Deir al-Adas to ... green (83.26.143.237 (talk) 19:29, 10 February 2015 (UTC))[reply]

Archicivilians maps have been proven to be inaccurate and this can be seen by the rather small, misplaced contested line. Archicivilian has used this map for most of his changes, and he usually over exaggerates the oppo gains in addition Jumada (talk) 19:42, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Jumada I understood, but if we have reliable info from EjmAlrai that SAA control this city and I don't see new his maps from Dara. Last from january. (83.26.143.237 (talk) 20:54, 10 February 2015 (UTC))[reply]
Several mentioned sources now mention that Deir al-Adas should be red or at least contested, Tell Qareen should be contested, Kafr Shams should be besieged or contested, Kafr Nasij should be besieged from the north and possibly from the east, Mashara should be contested or at least besieged from the north and Khan Arnabah should have the green ring removed, it's outdated.MesmerMe (talk) 20:21, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

84.31.204.109 .Go follow archicivilians map its right up your street extreme bias pro opposition .If MOSSAD news say Hizbollah have taken Deir al Adas its confirmed so stop throwing your toys out the pram and grow some ;)31.50.78.246 (talk) 20:48, 10 February 2015 (UTC)pyphon[reply]

The known vandal Alhanuty has changed Mashara to green based on a misunderstanding of an outdate source and Deir al-Adas to green without any reason. I reverted the first change but I do not want to break the 1RR rule. Can somebody revert the second? More important, can Alhanuty be blocked for the next year? He just vandalize the map. Paolowalter (talk) 21:03, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Done XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 23:16, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[21] This sources says the government advanced in north-western Daraa province and that the situation in Deir-Al-Adas is critical(pro-opp claim) but I also found footage from SANA [22] showing the army cleaning up Deir-al-Adas which means the rebels have lost the town.Daki122 (talk) 21:06, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also pro-opp sources are saying rebels lost Tel Mari and the 2 villages next to it [23].Daki122 (talk) 21:10, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It seems Deir Al Adas is regime held. Reuters even quoted rebel sources saying Deir Maker is regime held. [24] ChrissCh94 (talk) 21:52, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hard to say because SAA did capture Deir Adas, that's why we have those news from western medias (and Elijah). The thing is that clashes then reerupted inside the town according to SOHR and other sources. Pro-opposition channels are saying that rebels recaptured the town but of course we can't use that. For now, we can leave it to contested, as we will have a 100% confirmation in few days. DuckZz (talk) 22:21, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing new that rebel source lie. Today thay said that repelled regime attack on this city and kick out regime forces, another report that they fighting inside the city, now they said that recaptured this city. It impossible win, stability, lost and win in this same time. (83.26.143.237 (talk) 22:37, 10 February 2015 (UTC))[reply]
Come to think of it, I cannot remember a time when rebels have lost a village and not claimed to have recaptured it the next day. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 23:14, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
its a pro-oppo 'moral boost' to lie about the situation on the ground; which is created to mislead their followers on facebook and twitter in an effort to reduce panic, usually the rumour is forgotten and nobody seems to care who created the rumour in the first place, by the end of it they assume they never lost a thing, this was well known for the town of Morek, long after it was lost to government forces, many spoke of a massive rebel counter attack which never came, eventually they moved on to Daraa which was seeing more action Jumada (talk) 23:37, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

XJ and all other editors SOHR has confirmed that clashes have continued in Deir Adas,so stop inventing reasons to put Deir Adas as regime-held,the regime captured happened in the afternoon,but clashes resumed in the evening,and the situation is changing,so the best thing to do is go with Hannibal's edit and keep it as contested.Alhanuty (talk) 23:59, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Does not matter. More reliable and more recent sources such as EJM and the Mossad [come on man!] have declared the town to be in SAA hands. We will not leave the town contested forever so Abdel-Rahman can play catch up. No other reliable source has reported that the rebels reentered the town. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 00:01, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

SOHR is more reliable than biased EJM,SOHR proved to be authentic for a longtime,also SOHR report has came after the previous reports.Alhanuty (talk) 00:21, 11 February 2015 (UTC) http://syriahr.com/en/2015/02/8-rebels-killed-by-an-ambush-by-regime-forces-in-dara-countryside/ http://www.syriahr.com/2015/02/%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%B4%D9%87%D8%A7%D8%AF-%D9%86%D8%AD%D9%88-10-%D9%85%D9%82%D8%A7%D8%AA%D9%84%D9%8A%D9%86-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D9%83%D9%85%D9%8A%D9%86-%D9%84%D9%82%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%86/ http://www.syriahr.com/2015/02/%D9%86%D8%AD%D9%88-20-%D8%B4%D9%87%D9%8A%D8%AF%D8%A7%D9%8B-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D9%85%D8%AD%D8%A7%D9%81%D8%B8%D8%A9-%D8%AF%D8%B1%D8%B9%D8%A7-%D8%A8%D9%8A%D9%86%D9%87%D9%85-14-%D9%85%D9%82%D8%A7%D8%AA%D9%84/[reply]

If i'm not mistaken in the translation here is even a video of the SAA touring in Deir al-Adas https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=748649765250148 Spenk01 (talk) 00:21, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to say my part, we have been using Elijah J. Magnier's reports for a long time as a neutral source to show BOTH sides advances and he has proven reliable. If he says the town is government-held it probably is and the reported fighting is most likely taking place in the outskirts. EkoGraf (talk) 00:29, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Eko,it clearly states "clashes taking place in Der al-Adas town between regime forces backed by Hezbollah and Iranian fighters against Islamic battalions.",so i the town is clearly contested,and this report is more recent than EJM,also EJM has a biasness towards the regime.Alhanuty (talk) 00:43, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Do not lie. EJM has no bias towards the regime. He is a fully neutral,credible, and experienced reporter, unlike SOHR. SOHR never really has done a good job with its translations anyway. Since no other reliable source has reported a rebel counterattack [which would be big news], SOHR should be ignored in the face of all the sources against it such as EJM, Al-Masdar, Reuters, THE MOSSAD!!, etc. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 01:19, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

scale of miles the SOHR report is more recent than the other sources,so contested,EJM has a biasness towards the regime,anf this has been seen in other situations before,he claim that Dier Adas was taken before 24 hours that regime enter,even pro-regme source leith even was skeptable on it,also Al-Masdar is a very pro-regime source and is heavily biased,and all editors know that.Alhanuty (talk) 01:22, 11 February 2015 (UTC) why doesn't this map have a scale of miles that would be vary helpful. Evey map should have a scale of miles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.245.243.173 (talk) 01:16, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]