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 2601:c7:8301:8d74:1db4:bfdc:1999:782e (talk) at 03:45, 13 February 2016 (→Fighting in Azaz). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Syrian Civil War sanctions


Al rai & Qabassin

How come al rai and qabassin have smaller dots than Tal rifat and mare? My hometown kibessine is almost as big as mare yet its showed as a little village. Also the kurdish name of it should be written under kabassin in kurdish we say başhkêy which is the old name. and how come afrin is shown as big as tal rifat? There are hundreds of thousands of kurds and some arabs from aleppo that live in afrin now. it should be as big as azaz.

Orontes river near the al-Rastan district

Hey, respectful editors, I'm a simple spectator to this Syrian war map, created and updated by all of you, I want to thank you for your really huge work.
My notice is when I looked at the wikimapia map of al-Rastan district, I have found one natural discordance between satellite map and this interactive map you keep: it concerns the flow of Orontes river around the towns of al-Rastan and Talbiseh. In your map, Orontes river surrounds these 2 cities from the east and south, while on satellite map that's not true: al-Rastan is located on the southern banks of some reservoir (it seems that its name is al-Rastan reservoir http://wikimapia.org/#lang=ru&lat=34.902827&lon=36.732101&z=11&m=b&show=/8607402/al-Rastan-Lake), and then Orontes river flows from it to the south, outflanking al-Rastan from the WEST. Moreover, it is a major division, as Orontes divides here two plains - al-Rastan plain and al-Houla plain (then flowing to the south, down to Homs city), and in military reasons, helps rebels to defend this area, as the SAA faces some difficulties with forced crossing of Orontes here (from the northern direction where is Hama and from the western direction where is Kafr Nan). So, as this feature is a significant point of military situation in this area, I suggest you to check the flow of Orontes, maybe you will find some power and wish to change it to more authentic shape. ^_^
Thank you very much, please don't rage at me, I really appreciate your work, and this is just a little try to help you.

I see what you mean, the river is big in this area and it is a reason why militaries move slow here. However, the Orontes river ('AAsi' in arabic) flows south to north.

It's again me (the author of this tread) ^_^ About direction of Orontes flow - that's my mistake, I thought it flows from the north. But my point was that this river surrounds al-Rastan and Talbiseh from the opposite side (from the west and north, not from the east). Map inaccurately shows the course of river in this area. That what I meant.

Uh, how old is this post, actually? This matter was fixed a month or two back. Deuar (talk) 22:53, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kafr Bassil

There is a small village named Kafr Bassil which is just west of Shaykh Miskin. Haven't heard if SAA have taken the village, but I think if we at some point have the sources to put this village as either rebel held or government held, we should do that. Given the current situation, i think every village is worth mapping, since the Daraa region is getting "hotter" atm.

The Syrian army have taken alle the strategic places around Shaykh Miskin, I find i hard to believe that the rebel still control the small village of Kafr Bassil just west of Shaykh Miskin. The village is also being shown as government controlled in maps (i know we can't make changes due to maps or twitter claims)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 February 2016

Al sin is now controlled by the Syrian Army. the line: { lat = "36.23", long = "37.411", mark = "Location dot black.svg", marksize = "5", label = "Al-Sin", label_size = "0" }, should be changed to: { lat = "36.23", long = "37.411", mark = "Location dot red.svg", marksize = "5", label = "Al-Sin", label_size = "0" }, source: https://twitter.com/PetoLucem/status/694846914056077312

KokoroXIII (talk) 12:02, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/latest-russian-fm-stop-airstrikes-36682496

End of battle — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.193.1.32 (talk) 15:49, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done Eteethan(talk) 13:56, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Where is this ?

According to reliable source. ISIS controls some area SE of Damascus. We have a large blank spot SE of Damascus, so it would make sense to add something there. But where is this ?DuckZz (talk) 23:04, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you can name the locations, I'll find them on wikimapia and mark them as IS-held. Even just the outermost locations will do. PutItOnAMap (talk) 09:56, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is it. There's also a crossroad just north of it. DuckZz (talk) 11:51, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DuckZz Yes probably it is a Tall Sidrishah hillhere Sûriyeya (talk) 12:35, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: Please, lets be serious. A tweet from a self-declared activist AINT a reliable source, I suppose that everyone here know that...--HCPUNXKID 14:01, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BosnjoBoy has been agreed to be reliable by experienced editors of this map. Obviously, not reliable for the advances of the side they support, but otherwise we can use their updates for our mpap. PutItOnAMap (talk) 19:14, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

First, gimme evidence of that consensus you allege. Secondly, I found it very ridiculous to give the same credibility to an unknown self-declared activist wich we dont even know his name than to worldwide recognized experts as Joshua Landis or Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi.

Thirdly but not last, perhaps you dont remember this:

WP:RS: “Anyone can create a personal web page or publish their own book, and also claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published media, such as books, patents, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, personal or group blogs, Internet forum postings, and tweets, are largely not acceptable as sources.” Source: Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published_sources

or this:

"WP:TWITTER": Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, usually in articles about themselves or their activities, without the self-published source requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as: 

   the material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim;
   it does not involve claims about third parties;
   it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the source;
   there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity;
   the article is not based primarily on such sources.

This policy also applies to material published by the subject on social networking websites such as Twitter, Tumblr, Reddit, and Facebook.--HCPUNXKID 10:03, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You want consensus? Fine. Ask any other editor here - most will say yes. Bosnjoboy has been used for multiple sides by multiple editors for this page. You can check the history of edits if you want.

Secondly, just because we use a source does not mean that we are giving it the same credibility as one of these world renowned reporters you speak of. It's simply that we consider the source reliable enough to use for updates - it passes our required benchmark. Whether you find that ridiculous or not is a matter for you.

About your third point - key word there: "Largely." There are clear exceptions, such as this one, and this fact is supported by the other wikipedia rule regarding twitter that you provide, which specifically sanctions the use of twitter under certain criteria. Bosnjoboy meets these criteria, as agreed by most editors here (all barring yourself, of what I've seen so far) and for now we consider him a legitimate source to use.

Social media, when used responsibly and carefully, can be a very useful source for map updates. It is neither practical nor reasonable to dismiss it out of hand. Therefore, I will revert that edit. PutItOnAMap (talk) 11:03, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bosnjoboy boy meet that criteria? Really? Have you really read WP:Twitter? Lets see the conditions needed:
-the material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim; Yes
-it does not involve claims about third parties; No
-it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the source; No
-there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity; No
-the article is not based primarily on such sources. Sometimes  Yes, sometimes  No (I have seen Syrian civil war-related articles wich 70%-80% of the sources are from Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Reddit, etc.., if that's not breaking WP rules, I wonder what would be...)
So, at least 3 out of 5 of the criteria needed for allowing a Twitter account as a reliable source aint filled.Am I wrong?.--HCPUNXKID 17:28, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There were at least 2 discussions about various twitter sources, back in 2014 and last year. In both sections, this source (Bosno Sinj) is said to be reliable and can be used with no problem. We are using him for 2 years at least and I have no seen any mistake so far. As I can see he is not writing much, and is not retweeting or writing what others do. His reports are a bit different and mostly uknown to other activits from twitter. For example I had no idea that rebels control that much teritory in north Raqqa, or that Mahaja town in Daraa province is under truce. It's like we're using Leith Fadel from twitter, he basically writes a tweet every 2 minutes. 31.176.254.105 (talk) 15:04, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it would be logic to compare this unknown activist with Fadel, but of course not with the experts (not reporters) I cited above, unless WP aint no more an encyclopedia but a personal blog, something I unfortunately think lately... And please, just give me a link to that consensus allegation you made about it. Dont tell that "I have no seen any mistake so far", as I remember editors saying the same about SOHR, until others editors bring them evidence of it. Reporting different things that others doesnt give him/her/it more reliability. And another thing, you really think that its logic to admit a tweet (less that 140 characters written by who knows & most of the times without verification) from an unknown person as a reliable source but not a map? Sincerely, I cant understand that, as it has no logic. If we admit that, I will either report this or ask for a bulk of Tweeter accounts to be accepted also as reliable sources, if we're going to break WP rules, let's break it as much as possible...--HCPUNXKID 17:11, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mayer

According to opp.sources condirmed that SAA captured village Mayer near Al Zahra.hereherehereherehere and YPG captured villages Ziyarah and KhuraybahhereSûriyeya (talk) 12:30, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also opp.source Qasioun News confirmed that the YPG captured Faysal Mill Factory. Sûriyeya (talk) 13:31, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
SOHR also said that the Mayer taken SAA.here Sûriyeya (talk) 14:06, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Any pro-Gov. sources saying this yet ? 86.135.155.210 (talk) 16:00, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

pro-opposition Germani journalist reported that the SAA take village of Kafr Naya.here Sûriyeya (talk) 16:14, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
SOHR said that the YPG captured villages Ziyarah and Khuraybahhere and other reliable source said that the YPG captured Ziyarah.here Sûriyeya (talk) 16:19, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Reliable source Al Masdar also said that the SAA captured villages of Mayer and Kafr Naya.here Sûriyeya (talk) 16:20, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The latest news is that Kafr Naya is still contested amd Iput it such

http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/battle-for-northern-aleppo-heats-up-as-islamist-rebels-counter-syrian-army-gains/ Same thing for Deit Jamal http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/27364/ sill contested.Paolowalter (talk) 08:01, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

SOHR said that the village of Ratyan taken SAA.here Sûriyeya (talk) 08:31, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Last report from opp.source confirmed that the all village of Ratyan taken SAA.here Sûriyeya (talk) 10:43, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

HCPUNKSKID

Hi mate i have noticed in the past you have made changes to city maps is there any chance you can update Damascus as it is very behind and as the capitol city lets the whole map down .86.135.155.210 (talk) 20:55, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I will try to update both Damascus & Deraa detailed maps, but I cant promise you anything. Thank you for your attention. Regards.--HCPUNXKID 17:33, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You're doing awesome work, keep it up! MesmerMe (talk) 19:54, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, it feels so good when someone recognize your work instead of reverting it or insulting you. Regards.--HCPUNXKID 17:48, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Doing awesome work would have been updating the map when it needed to be, (Personal attack removed) is not going to make someone who does not want to show SAA advancements in reality, last time this (Personal attack removed) updated the map of Aleppo he made serious errors same with the last time he updated Damascuss made Daryya 3 time bigger than what it really is (rebel held) and totally messed it up to make it seem as if the terrorists were gaining when the opposite was true this map is so wrong in the following areas: Aleppo, Deir Ez Zoir, Damascus. Where it happens most of the fighting is taking, place this map is a joke. Better maps now exist that are updated daily in the main cities, by unbiased non-ISIS terrorists supporters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.94.239.30 (talk) 16:17, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Listen (Personal attack removed). First, you're so (Personal attack removed) that you're mistaking me for who knows, as I aint edited Damascus map since October 2014. (Personal attack removed) And finally, you can use that tone and vocabulary with that (Personal attack removed). To the other editors, I know I should ignore that type of (Personal attack removed) instead of insulting them, but Im tired of trolls.--HCPUNXKID 17:46, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Easy now. We all know that there are major mistakes on the city level maps presented on this map. Most notably in Daraa, Damascus, and partly Aleppo. However, there is no reason to become aggrigated, especially since most mistakes are there because of recent SAA advances in Southern Ghouta (of Eastern Ghouta), Darayya, Naima, Athman, Northern Aleppo, SAA getting closer to Hayan, Bayanoun, Rashidin District, and Khan Touman. Moreover, the situation within and around Deir Ezzour city-proper is extremely difficult to depict since little to no information is released from that area of the war, especially considering inter-city frontlines. MesmerMe (talk) 16:57, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Atman

Reliable sources SOHR and Al Masdar confirmed that the SAA captured the town of Atman in Darra.herehere Sûriyeya (talk) 07:52, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

SAA later captured the village of Al-Naymah.herehere opp.source also confirmed that the Al-Naymah taken SAA.here Sûriyeya (talk) 10:41, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Eib & Sharah

Eib and Sharah, located in on the western outskirts of the Lajat area in Eastern Darraa, shoulb be moved slightly to the east. My reasoning is that the two towns are depicted as being on the main supply route between Darra and Damascus, while this most certainly is not the case. This is also the case with the other view dots north of Eib. But since I am not skilled to do so, could somebody make these changes for me? Source: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=33.055292&lon=36.311531&z=12&m=b&show=/16766603/Eib&search=Eib MesmerMe (talk) 17:01, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The town 'Alma too! location is not correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.144.205.88 (talk) 13:15, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that the entire highway should be pushed slightly to the east, as seen in its positioning over Izra. MesmerMe (talk) 16:33, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kurdish Advances

YPG have captured Deir Jamal and are closing in on Minakh Airbase hence it would be logical to place a siege icon to show a 'strong presence' according to Al-Masdar [[1]]91.85.60.235 (talk) 10:02, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I wouldn't use a siege icon unless there is a siege. As the SDF capture more areas near the airport (if they do), then we can mark those places in yellow. This will adequately show their advances, I think. PutItOnAMap (talk) 14:19, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but we still need to update Deir Jamal as SDF-held91.85.60.235 (talk) 16:04, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Opp.sources said that the YPG captured villages of Maranaz and Tall Ajar.herehereherehere Sûriyeya (talk) 21:43, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Maraanaz captured by YPG confirmed by pro-rebel-source: http://eldorar.com/node/94459 Roboskiye (talk) 22:25, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Kurds liberated Minakh / Menagh Airbase in Aleppo (shortly south of Azaz) link fighting in the area/village still ongoing according to a couple of twitter sources link 37.201.186.156 (talk) 01:39, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Uwaynat/Abyan misregard

That's again me, everyday watcher at this template, and now I have noticed one strange correction in the map, that is not really true.
Firstly, I would say that I'm relying on Wikimapia data.
Then the matter; and the matter is that Uwaynat town, that is 1-2 km west from the as-Sin town (both in eastern Aleppo) (http://wikimapia.org/#lang=ru&lat=36.178900&lon=37.459259&z=12&m=b&show=/34534697/Al-Uwaynat), has strangely dissapeared from its actual location. I'm following not only eastern Aleppo agenda, also Latakia one, and what I saw - now, after someone's machinations, the town named Abyan (rebel-held near the frontline on the Latakia - Aleppo highway) (http://wikimapia.org/#lang=ru&lat=35.744562&lon=36.114120&z=13&m=b&show=/34158523/Abin), now has received the name of... Uwaynat.
That's funny, people, I love you for that joke, but it seems to me (according to Wikimapia) that it is a mistake and it should be corrected (reestablish Uwaynat on the map and return Abyan its actual name).
Best wishes for you, taqbir, Allahwakbar, and so on ^_^. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.243.186.84 (talk) 23:20, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Here is correct coordinates for Bashurahere and Abyan(Ubyan)here Sûriyeya (talk) 09:07, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deir Jamal

According to pro-SAA Al-Masdar News, YPG takes full control of Deir Jamal in northern Aleppo. Source. Kordestani (talk) 01:53, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Al Masdar not pro-SAA it is a reliable source. Sûriyeya (talk) 09:02, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
SOHR also reported that SAA captured village Kiffin and YPF captured the towns of Deir Jamal, Maranaz and the village of Tall Ajar.hereherehere Sûriyeya (talk) 11:21, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ibta and Daeel

Is is true http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/ibtaa-and-dael-surrender-to-the-government/ that Ibtaa and Dael surrender?Paolowalter (talk) 08:28, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

City maps nered to be updated; Damascus, Deir Ez Zoir, Darra and Aleppo. Joke map.

The city maps here are severely behind in the current situation, Damascus map looked as it did one year ago, why no update, plenty of updates when terrorists made gains this time last year everyday it could be updated now it is not??? Same with Aleppo looks the same now for over 10 months when there has been major advances in and around the city again here when terrorists made gains this map was updated everyday but since SAA made gains no update. This map is a joke, you can't even update the most vital areas, and idiots who have no knowledge of the history of the conflict now update this map not knowing much else but how to copy and paste and repeat the rules. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.134.99.56 (talk) 09:20, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Map for Aleppo was updated. Sûriyeya (talk) 11:21, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bashura

village Bashurah in Latakia taken SAA according to reliable soures Al Masdar and SOHR.herehere Sûriyeya (talk) 09:29, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Al Ta'ana

According to SOHR,Al Masdar and France 24 the village of Al Ta'ana taken SAA from ISIS.hereherehere Sûriyeya (talk) 09:32, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Abtaa and Da'el

SOHR said that the truce between the Syrian army and the elders of the town Abtaa and army stop bombing and the release of detainees the introduction of food and medical supplies of daily life to the town, in return for lifting Syria's current flag is internationally recognized, the government official circles in the town. Also SOHR said that a similar agreement will be between the regime and the elders of the city Da'el on the same conditions.here Sûriyeya (talk) 11:00, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The agreement eventually means surrender unconditionally. A limited amount of SAA will enter both cities to ensure the transition of the towns back into government hands

http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/ibtaa-and-dael-surrender-to-the-government/ | Al-Masdar News This means that SAA eventually will control these cities at the price of no further destruction and bombardement For now it is a truce After the process is complete these cities should be red — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.66.217.218 (talk) 11:11, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Al Masdar is still being used a source ? They claimed that Al Waer is fully under Gov. control and that all Rebels left. Why didn't we changed that district to red ? Because everyone else claimed the opposite, including civilians and rebels from inside the town. They also said the same thing for all the other towns which are marked on our map as under truce. DuckZz (talk) 13:28, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/12/syria-rebels-leave-homs-rare-ceasefire-deal-151209153257762.html A prominent anti-Assad source claimed that rebels left Al-Waer...upsss it seems almasdarnews is much more valid than you . Moreover, sohr is way worse thatn any other pro or anti-Assad news netwrok, for the simple reason that it is a 1-man(located in England) 'network'... Moreover, truce according to th map other users made is defined as Government & Opposition stable mixed control (truce)...When SAA forces enter this city...truce will be no more Imho Al-Waer should be marked red, other cities of Daraa Gov. should be labeled as truce till the end of the transitionary period...when they should be red — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.87.206.137 (talk) 16:36, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Al Waer is perhaps under de facto gov control in that it is surrounded by gov areas and the rebels have agreed to withdraw from it within 6 months of the agreement being signed. Therefore, it is not under gov control yet, but it is under truce. The same applies to Abtaa. However, the Al Masdar article referenced here didn't say that the ceasefires had been estabiled yet, and SOHR only references Abtaa's ceasefire as in place, I presume. Therefore, Dael should still be marked as rebels-held, and Abtaa should be under truce. PutItOnAMap (talk) 14:38, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
DuckZz Al Masdar also said about truce in the town of Abtaa as part of agreement betwee the government forces and the elders of the town Abtaa and that only limited amounts of Army personnel are to enter the town, not as a liberation force but rather to see the smooth transition of the towns back into government hands. SOHR also manytimes rush in their reports. SOHR said 4 Februay that the village Mayer as SAA-held but they take this village only yesterday and he also made many other mistakes(SOHR said that the SAA captured Duwayrikah and Touma before SAA take these villages) Abut Al Waer he said that on agreement all rebels will leave Al Waer for a certain period but governmen buildongs reopened in this area and also many other sources confirmed that th most rebels leave Al Waer. So that editors agreed to use Al Masdar and SOHR as the relaible sources. Also in report about Da'el and Abtaa Al Masdar just published data from other sources and nothing more. Also you talk about the reliability of Al Masdar though you are edit on basis of data from the dubious sources from Twitter(with the exception of Bosnoy) Sûriyeya (talk) 16:50, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Other sources about Al Waer: here video confirmation confirmed that rebels leave Al Waer.hreherehereherehereherehere Up to 2,000 fighters will leave Waer district in Homs as part of the reconciliation agreement between Syrian government and armed rebels, says Homs governor.Reuterssource Reliable source said that the Homs, the city once known as the "capital of the revolution" will fully return to government control.sourcesourcesource So I was right. Syrian Rebels Lose Homs After Ceasefire Agreement With Assad.source So about Al Waer also said many other sources not just only Al Masdar. Sûriyeya (talk) 16:57, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Most mainstream media sources, including the BBC, referred to Al Waer being 'essentially' surrendered to the SAA, but under a truce that expires in a few months. We should leave it as truce-marked until that time period expires, then change it to red. PutItOnAMap (talk) 13:58, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

About Abtaa there is contradicting information SOHR at 19:00 9 February states that the truce is established (see also pro-rebelshttps://twitter.com/Serif_Imamagic0/status/697146362920640512), [http:www.almasdarnews.com/article/rebels-refuse-reconciliation-in-dael-and-ibta-civilians-arrested/ AlMasdar] state that the truce was rejected. Anybody has more precise infos?Paolowalter (talk) 21:08, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Qadiriyah

ANHA reports that YPG has repelled an ISIS attack on the village of Qadiriyah east of Tishrin dam. http://hawarnews.com/ypg-%D8%AA%D8%AD%D8%A8%D8%B7-%D9%87%D8%AC%D9%88%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%8B-%D9%84%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B1%D8%AA%D8%B2%D9%82%D8%A9/ The village is wrongly marked black on the map. Should be yellow. Roboskiye (talk) 12:12, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Roboskiye But in the beginning of January some sources said that the ISIS retake the village Qadiriyah. Perhaps earlier these were incorrect reports?here Sûriyeya (talk) 12:40, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

SAA advance in Latakia

SOHR and Al Masdar claim that the SAA captured four villages including Ruwaisat and Swedish(Al-Hawr, Al-Ruweisat, Al-Sweida, and Wad Al-‘Zaraq).herehere Sûriyeya (talk) 17:07, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

YPG capture town at Minnagh

for rebels against kurds source say YPG capture FSA village: https://twitter.com/JulianRoepcke/status/696818924755750912

this village should be shown on map — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:C7:8301:8D74:1DB4:BFDC:1999:782E (talk) 23:49, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, they didn't. Minnagh is still in rebels' hands. Read your own source. --Hogg 22 (talk) 08:36, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hogg 22, Please read again carefully. They says YPG captured an village near Menagh air base. Kordestani (talk) 09:59, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Kordestani Source only said that YPG captured village Kafr Antun near Menagh air base. 46.200.240.215 (talk) 09:19, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 9 February 2016

There are few errors that made by fanatics, we have to correct them Vieragt (talk) 13:19, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we should judge the characters of map editors as 'fanatics'. What errors do you think have been made? Point them out here and we can discuss whether they need to be corrected or not. PutItOnAMap (talk) 13:56, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 20:51, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

SDF Military Bases

These icons are hard to spot on several different screens I have used. I suggest we change the colour for them specifically to a different shade of yellow, preferably one similar to the colour used for the SDF industrial complex icon. This applies to the military base icon used for the KRG forces in Iraq, too, and other 'yellow-based' forces such as the Kurdish groups in the Turkish insurgency or the Tuareg militias in the Libyan civil war.

What are your opinions on this? PutItOnAMap (talk) 13:55, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have made a new icon for the SDF miltiary bases, which I hope is more visible. I'm going to test it here - I'd like your opinions on whether it's better or worse than the old one. PutItOnAMap (talk) 15:58, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed the colours of the SDF military bases. Admittedly, they are slightly less visible in Hasakah and Qamishli cities now, but they can still be easily spotted there, and they are much clearer to see outside of the cities now. Still, this is just my opinion. What do you think of it? I can change it back if you want. PutItOnAMap (talk) 16:05, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree with you. It icon is orange colour. But we used yellow icon for Kurds. I'm going to change to yellow. Kordestani (talk) 23:53, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yellow color contrasts very poorly with the maps background and its hard on the sight, dots are only ok because they have a very slight black-grey line surrounding them. Please put them back in Orange, no other faction uses said color in this map and it fits well enough so everyone can notice it's SDF/YPG at simple sight. 186.116.192.216 (talk) 18:07, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The reason I used the dark yellow/orange anyway is because it is already used for SDF dams and industrial complexes, which would be hard to see if they were in yellow. I agree with the user above, but I'd like more people to express their opinions on this. I've changed the colour now and I want to see what some of the regular editors of this map think of it. Sûriyeya DuckZz Paolowalter Roboskiye .--HC MesmerMe Tradedia Bruskom LightandDark2000 Is it better or worse to use the new colour? PutItOnAMap (talk) 11:09, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: If the colour is the yellowish one used in the SDF/YPG-held industrial complexes, I agree with it. Its still some king of yellow and its clearly more visible.--HCPUNXKID 21:13, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is similar to that colour. You should be able to see it on the map now. PutItOnAMap (talk) 10:46, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I personally think that the new base color for the SDF is OK. It's definitely easier to see against the module background than the old color, and if it is really the same color for SDF/YPG-held dams, then I'm fine with it. I'm actually going to test out whether or not the color conflicts with the YPG/SDF background color for the map file, but unless a problem arises there, I really have no problem with the new color scheme. LightandDark2000 (talk) 12:02, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Menagh

http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/kurdish-forces-approach-strategic-airbase-in-northern-aleppo/

https://www.facebook.com/stepnewsagencysy/posts/720445968090688

Neutral and anti-Kurd sources say contested or YPG-held.

Some sources and reports says YPG and its allies have captured Menagh Air Base and village from FSA-Ahrar Al-Sham. Here, here and here. Kordestani (talk) 04:19, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Also Al-Masdar News reported it.. Source. Kordestani (talk) 10:47, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

South East Hama

AlMasdar reports that Tal ‘Umri, ‘Ezzeldeen, Al-Taba’at, and Al-Mukhram are under SAA control. I found the former two town and turned red. But now the are SW of Salamiyah is mixed red-gray and makes no sense. Any info that could help clarify the situation? I guess that Aydun and Dalak should go red. What do you think?Paolowalter (talk) 08:26, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should leave them as they are for now. It's possible that the Nusra forces have been split up and cut off from each other in these two towns. However, in a few weeks, if the isolated town is not reported on, change it to red. Btw, I think we underestimated the rebel and Nusra presence in southern Hama and north Homas. AlMasdar This article reports areas being taken that, according to our map, are already deep within SAA-held territory (e.g. Al Mukharam), so we were wrong on that count, and possibly are still wrong when it comes to labelling villages near those places, too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PutItOnAMap (talk • contribs) 15:57, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article states that in location like Al Mukharam SAA repelled attacks not that these locations were taken by SAA. In any case I agree that the situation in this area is poorly documented.Paolowalter (talk) 19:18, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

YPG & FSA

Please, have a look on this map. It looks more reliable as there are division between YPG and FSA in North-Eastern Aleppo and Northern Raqqa where it is mentioned that YPG and FSA are controlling that areas together. At current map it is not shown. I guess, it is better to clarify this issue. --Ліонкінг (talk) 10:03, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The forces working in Raqqa that are not IS fight together as part of the SDF. There are former FSA factions in the SDF, and they work with the YPG, so they share the same icon because they're united by the SDF. PutItOnAMap (talk) 10:46, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mennagh Military Airport

There are a lot of contradicting statements about the situation in the Mennagh Military Airport: AlMasdar hints (without stating it with certainty) that the airport is still controlled by rebels. Also many twitter posting states that e.g. [2] quite reliable and somehow pro-gov. Should we probably put it back to green or contested? And the nearby village?Paolowalter (talk) 19:24, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pro-rebel source confirmed captured: :https://twitter.com/VivaRevolt/status/697210629124464640
YPG source claims it was captured: :https://twitter.com/DrPartizan_/status/697480862967930880
Other source say contested: https://twitter.com/Ald_Aba/status/697495104026734592 Anti-:kurd source say contested: https://twitter.com/Abduhark/status/697433379147489285

I think we shouyld mark airbase as contested. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:C7:8301:8D74:1DB4:BFDC:1999:782E (talk) 22:07, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: Mennagh Military Airport confirmed as YPG-held per SOHR, AFP & Press TV: http://www.albawaba.com/news/syrian-kurds-capture-strategic-airbase-nusra-militants-804182. Oh, and the report confirms also what everyone informed knows except some WP editors: Mennagh was in Nusra hands, not in FSA, but "curiously" it was painted lime instead of grey. That "curiosity" happens with towns along all the map, I wonder why...--HCPUNXKID 07:13, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, there's a simple answer to that. Over the past few months there have been a number of rebel to Nusra defections; plus, when articles refer to 'armed gunmen' or something like that taking over an area held by the SAA, we assume they are rebels (as if they were IS, this would happen on an IS frontline, and if they were SDF, this would happen on an SDF frontline). The rebel frontlines are all over the place, and as the rebels are greater in number than Nusra, when we hear about a place being taken, we assume it is by the rebels unless Nusra is mentioned. PutItOnAMap (talk) 17:06, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, this was not held by Nusra, but by rebels. According to Al Masdar, Ahrar ash-Sham and the FSA were the forces defending it, with no Nusra militants involved at all in the final attempt to take it. [3] PutItOnAMap (talk) 17:12, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it seems you're so wrong, as the article I brought states clearly it was held by Nusra, not FSA. Also, doing a Google search "Minnigh nusra" gives 720.000 hits, while "Minnigh fsa" gives 393.000, and "Minnigh rebels" gives only 39.500 hits, so no, you're explanation doesnt fits. Also, the "rebels" label is so wide, as as far as I know it could encompass from FSA to Nusra or even more radical groups, as Jund al Aqsa.--HCPUNXKID 21:06, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

'Rebels' cover everything apart from Nusra, SDF and IS (as is the case on our map). IS militants working as a unit of Nusra at the time took the base, so there was a lot of internet interest around that (hence the generation of results).

Your sources may refer to Nusra, but Al Masdar is a reliable source, and it didn't mention Nusra at all. PutItOnAMap (talk) 23:06, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

All of the recent, reliable sources I checked (including the ones I listed below) made no mention of Nusra at all in the battle for the Menagh Airbase this month. LightandDark2000 (talk) 11:57, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And most recently, Fighting Rages In Syria’s Aleppo Amid Ceasefire Talks, and source from today: http://www.thenational.ae/world/middle-east/timing-of-syria-ceasefire-emerges-as-key-sticking-point-between-us-and-russia (Rebels claim that they lost the base to SDF/YPG). LightandDark2000 (talk) 11:55, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I turned the base yellow again. SOHR seems out of touch these days. It gibes little info and with days of delay. It is often obsolete and therefore to be used with care e.g. SOHR: the Minagh base was taken by YPG and Kafr Naja by SAA the day before.Paolowalter (talk) 15:43, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fighting in Azaz

Azaz checkpoint has already fallen to YPG and there is fighting around the hospital (in western part of the city)

Will provide good source as soon as I have one, source right now is just Twitter but corroborated by multiple people claiming to be on the ground

Get ready to update this map — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.228.119.131 (talk) 21:44, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Any sources of it ? Oroszka (talk) 15:57, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Here: https://twitter.com/cahitstorm/status/697895882855940096 https://twitter.com/curdistani/status/698203026964742145

Al-Bukamal

From AlMasdar pro-SAA fighters took control of the hospital. Maybe it is just a hit and run attack. Should it be marked somehow?Paolowalter (talk) 22:45, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Al Masdar playing dumb ?

Village Bluzah in south Aleppo is marked as under gov. control even thought Rebels control it. Few weeks ago, SAA captured the village for few hours and rebels recaptured after reinforcements arrived, acc. to SOHR and both pro-gov and rebel sources. Why do I mention Al Masdar ? Simple. I don't know who made the edit, but I can garantee Al Masdar was the sources used. Why ? Because basically, Rebels recaptured the village very quickly that not even SOHR had the time to make an article named "Gov. captured Bluzah" but they only managed to publish the article "Rebel recaptured Bluzah after clashes". Al Masdar published an article basically 6 hours after the event, named "Gov. captured Bluzah". This can't be a mistake, this is donne by purpose and it's called "Propaganda". DuckZz (talk) 21:02, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Perhpas this is the 5th ro so time you are trying to make a point about almasdar...this is no-brainer...these things have been discussed numerous times and everyone understands the way they should proceed about changing something on the war map Moreover, sohr, almasdarnews, etc are being used with caution and always it is good to provide additional (reliable) sources In a war like this villages keep changing hands...nothing new about that so keep calm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.87.206.137 (talk) 00:56, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Control_of_cities_during_the_Syrian_civil_war&oldid=704714347"