Talk:Control of cities during the Syrian civil war

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.

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)

Should we cut the Aleppo map to half of what it is now?

We should make the Local Map only as it appears on on top of the main map. Anything east beyind the Airport (or east beyond the Industrial City) will no longer need any color changing on the Local Map, only on the Main map. Also, these areas are no longer contested and quite far from where the action is. They are not in the city anyway.

Thank you

Azaz

I have changed the city to pure lime colour. Aymenn Jawad al Tamimi visited the city last year and reported that the Northern Storm FSA of al Jabha al Shamiyya was in control over the town despite a minor Nusra presence.[1] That is even before the withdrawal of Nusra this summer, it was not sufficient to add a grey half to Azaz. In fact I lobbied these forums to make Marea half-grey based on reports that Nusra was arresting the FSA there, but I was ignored. It was not profitable to exaggerate Nusra control in Aleppo it seemed, except for in Idlib to give Nusra bad press. Now that YPG is attacking Azaz, I notice Azaz is suddenly half grey. What gives, guys?

All the Twitter sources about Nusra still being in the Azaz "area" do not specify the city nor any other location, and many of those sources, like https://twitter.com/AbuSaeedHalabi, said that Nusra's reinforcements were only for the Nubl & Zahra fighting, not within the YPG front lines. I am keeping this lime because Nusra only had half control in Marea and Tel Rifaat, until they withdrew in August and released some detainees. There was never any source that reported Azaz under Nusra control except for hysterical YPG fanboys trying to legitimize their assault. Their accusations are not considered reliable as per the rules of this template last I checked. NightShadeAEB (talk) 18:08, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Here is the relevant part: "Situated in the northern countryside of Aleppo province, the town of Azaz–the center of the Azaz district–is the nearest major settlement to the Bab al-Salama border crossing that leads into the southern Turkish city of Kilis. At the present time, Azaz town is controlled by the group Liwa Asifat al-Shamal ("The Northern Storm Brigade"), which is affiliated with the Islamic Front rebel coalition. Also present within Azaz town but lacking any governing authority is Syria's al-Qa'ida affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra. To the east of Azaz town lies the smaller settlement of Sawran, beyond which is a frontline, an area of no-man's land of about 800 meters to a kilometer, and then the localities of Doudyan and Dabiq to the northeast and southeast, solely controlled by the Islamic State (IS). Northern Storm also solely controls the town of Sawran." [2] NightShadeAEB (talk) 18:19, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

As expected not two hours and already someone's POV pushing. User: EkoGraf Aymenn Jawad is not unknown, he's a policy researcher well cited in the media for years, and even testified to British parliament. [3] You are seriously telling me somebody who testified on ISIS before the House of Commons is an unknown and his tweet has the same weight as an unknown Twitter user? WP policy cares about sources, not the mediums of a source. A reliable person is still reliable even if he talks to you via Whatsapp, don't liken him to a Twitter-exclusive source.

I don't understand what you are arguing. Aymenn Jawad visited Azaz himself, and said Nusra doesn't govern, as mentioned above. Furthermore, Nusra has since WITHDRAWN its already small presence into a very minimal one. Yet Azaz was fully green when Nusra had a modest presence, but now that Nusra has a negligible presence you make it half grey, just to coincide with the YPG's assault? Can you explain why Azaz wasn't half grey a year ago, when I tried in vain to bring the question of Nusra control in Marea and Hreytan, but as soon as the YPG attacks I notice that Azaz is half grey? Please revert your own edit as soon as possible. NightShadeAEB (talk) 20:40, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

I found the culprit [4], it was here based on a paraphrase of an unknown statement by Fabrice Balanche [5] at Al Monitor, the website with an anti-opposition owner. The author herself is part of "Future of Iran Initiative", seems legit. Anyways, this is either a dishonest paraphrase of what Balanche told them, or Balanche slipped up and fell to the common stereotypes surrounding the opposition. Aymenn Jawad al Tamimi's visit to Azaz strongly refutes it. NightShadeAEB NightShadeAEB (talk) 20:54, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

User:NightShadeAEB It doesn't matter who he is. Twitter is simply not permitted per WP policy. Read WP:TWITTER. I have reverted people in the past who made changes to the map based on Twitter, whether they are pro-government or pro-rebel, and will do so in the future. Also, accusing me of POV-pushing from the start instead of trying to discus the issue in a calm manner is not in line with WP policy on assuming good faith from your fellow editors. Nevertheless, I hope you will continue making constructive edits on Wikipedia and improve the quality of its articles. Regards! EkoGraf (talk) 23:04, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

That is NOT what WP says, and your attempts at distorting its meaning are definitely not in good faith. Wikipedia is against using unreliable sources or self-published sources about external topics, whether or not it is social media. Aymenn Jawad al Tamimi is neither; you yourself said that he was an unknown Twitter user, implying that if he wasn't it would be different. You are now moving goal posts, and you talk to me about good faith? If you bothered reading my edit summary, and what I just wrote here, my source is not just a single tweet - it's the article published by Aymenn Jawad last year, which he has reaffirmed in the tweet this week. You did not even read or respond to what I just wrote here - this is typical of POV pushers.

I did my research; I researched who changed it and when, I researched which source was used, and I researched reliable sources on the city of Azaz, and what do you do? You just revert my edit, and I can't stop you because of the 1RR rule. This is extremely frustrating; I may not be active most of the time, but I'm by no means new to this. If you refuse to reason and just do whatever you want, I will call this to the attention of moderators.

Let me quote User:Tradedia who created this map, about the Twitter of well known individuals:

"The reference to twitter was more in the context of copying from maps. The problem with maps is that we don’t know when they are guessing and when they are not. Twitter is not a source. Twitter is a media tool. The person writing the tweet is the source. Since Elijah Magnier is a well-known journalist, he is a valid source. So it all depends on the credibility of the person writing the tweet. Anyone can open a twitter account and start relaying rumors. It is important to also not use a source automatically, but assess the credibility of the writer and see what other sources are saying about the same town/situation. Some people who tweet are known to have information about the situation in Syria. So they can be used as a source, while taking into account their bias (no pro-gov/opp/kurd/ISIS sources for gov/opp/kurd/ISIS gains)." [6]

As you see, I may not be as active as some of you users, but for the few contributions that I make, I am absolutely dedicated enough to go through pages and pages of archived discussion just to achieve clarity. I don't limit myself to a simple edit summary. When those who disagree do not even bother exerting the effort to explain why they disagree, it is very hard to maintain good faith. To conclude, I ask you one last time, please revert your own edit, or provide a source that contradicts mine and has equal or greater credibility. Thank you. NightShadeAEB (talk) 13:19, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Nightshade your source is a tweet, for all we know this is you tweeting this random information, tweets are not sources get that through your whabbi dead brain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.71.81.111 (talk) 14:04, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Another one acting in "good faith". To quote a friend, these people are only interested in broadcasting, they have no intention of exchanging information and achieving consensus. And for all I know, User:83.71.81.111, you could be any other member in this template talking without your account. NightShadeAEB (talk) 14:15, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Al Nusra has always had significant presence in Azaz area. It was Al Nusra that attacked US-supported Division 30 in Azaz and Menagh area. And more specific the Muntasar Billah Brigade of Al Nusra has a presence there.

Al-Nusra replaced Jaysh Muhammad in August 2014 when Juysh Muhammad withdrew from the city. Since then Al Nusra has a significant presence in Azaz and surroundings.

Of the mosques, one shows the influence of the Jabhat al-Nusra presence in the town: namely, the Mus'ab ibn Umair mosque, whose preacher is a member of Jabhat al-Nusra. This preacher attacked the status quo with the schools in Azaz, describing their teaching programs as "secularist-kafir." To counter what it sees as this pernicious influence, Jabhat al-Nusra has established a teaching institute for the Koran and Shari'a for children in Azaz, and the preacher called in his sermon for families to remove their children from the schools in Azaz and register them in the mosque. The other mosques in Azaz, such as the important al-Maytam al-Islami mosque in the center, are officially "independent" in affiliation, but the aforementioned mosque shows clear Islamic Front influence. Namely, its preacher is a judge on Azaz's Shari'a Committee. In any case, looking at education and religious life together points to a notable competition between Jabhat al-Nusra and Northern Storm (Islamic Front) for influence in the town, which has implications for a wider assessment of relations between the two groups.

If you want a respectable source for Nusra presence, Reuters as a leading news agency should be more sufficient: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-nusra-idUSKCN0Q50TL20150731.

In contrast there are no reliable sources that back the false claim that Al Nusra fully retreated to Turkey or joined ISIS once the Azaz pocked was clossed of from Idlib province. So the change should be reverted and Azaz and surrounding villages should be back half grey (Al Nusra) and half green (Non-SDF opposition goups). Northern storm as a militant group had only for a very short period full control over the city after Azaz was freed with from ISIS in 2014 with help of the YPJ.--Niele~enwiki (talk) 01:48, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Important changes !

• 1

Today starts the official truce/casefire in Syria, which means the frontlines won't be active. Airstrikes will continue on ISIS and Nusra, but that doesn't matter. What I want to discuss is the following : Can we now remove the purple icons from the map, at least those who aren't part of a map (Damascus). Because they don't make any sense now. This action will only lower the pressure on our map, and simplify it.

• 2 SOHR reported that Nusra members are withdrewing from several locations in Idlib province. Opposition sources are now writing that Nusra is withdrewing from several Idlib locations to avoid airstrikes on civilians population. Reliable source says that Nusra left Al Bara town and their HQ. He also says that Nusra is moving away from Zawiya mountain area, but that's a lot of villages. DuckZz (talk) 23:30, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

A ceasefire is a combatent agreement to holt hostile action it is not the same as a truce and no sides are calling it a truce .As for Nusra it is still unclear where they have left and where they are going to — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.135.157.233 (talk) 12:37, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Another user here, I agree the purple icon could be confusing. However you should change it by community vote and agreement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:C7:8301:8D74:1DB4:BFDC:1999:782E (talk) 19:10, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

DuckZzWe can't edit a map on the basis of assumptions. We can't change a statuse for all towns or villages which is under truce to SAA-held or rebels-held only just a based of assumptions. So or you provide sources which is provide statuse(SAA or FSA held) for these points or must leaved them as of under truce. So we also need again marked as under a truce Fua,Kafraya, Brouma and Deir al-Zaghb. And we must leave on the map al points which was marked as under truce unchanged if there is no other data proving their status. Sûriyeya (talk) 21:33, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

This seacfire is very fragile. At least wait for two weeks to see if it is going to hold and where? flash news most propebly it will fall apart in less than a month. so wait and don't erge to do any edits based on a seasefire even those who signed it says it is very fragile and the chances of it standing is low. Helmy1453 (talk) 23:01, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Ceasefire

The scheduled ceasefire at midnight has taken effect. I think towns marked as contested between government and rebels, especially near Homs between government and rebels should be changed to mixed/stable control to indicate this. If there are reports of more fighting, then we can change them back. Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:C7:8301:8D74:1DB4:BFDC:1999:782E (talk) 23:48, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

No because these are Al Nusrat and IS areas the ceasefire those not apply to these areas Russinas claim"so far 45 "moderate" Terrorists have made contact with the Russian officers in Latakia about laying down their arms and returning to Syrian society" it is to early to make changes in these areas until it is seen who is abiding by the ceasefire in surrounded areas with very little ammo/food/supplies/men or wiggle room in negotiation about surrendering which some of them have already agereed to do and free the civilians that are being held at gunpoint from reaching safe Government held areas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.94.233.92 (talk) 14:22, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Biased, much? 2601:C7:8301:8D74:1DB4:BFDC:1999:782E (talk) 20:40, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Truth too much to handle, the goat riding spawn of Saten (ISIS, Al Nusrat, FSA) propaganda is not working, you better make a few more dead children videos but make sure they are not acting this time, some one may believe you.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.94.232.239 (talk) 12:16, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 February 2016

{ lat = "36.400", long = "37.144", mark = "Dot yellow ff4.svg", marksize = "6", label = "Ihras", link = "Ihras", label_size = "0", position = "top" }, Tristat (talk) 10:28, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

ISIS offensive against SDF in north countryside of Raqqa

SOHR said that ISIS captured larg parts of a town Suluk, village of Hamam Al-Turkman and village and village near Ayn Issa, clashes still in the city of Tall Abayd and in the town of Ain al-Arous.hereherehere Kurdish sources said about clashes inside a city of Ayn Issa.here here Sûriyeya (talk) 13:24, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Pro-opp. source said ISIS captured part of the city Tall Abyadhere plus SOHR said that the clashes still continued in the city.here Sûriyeya (talk) 13:37, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Pro-opp. source said that the ISIS captured the city of Tall Abyadhere but we need the confirmations from the reliable or Kurdish sources. Sûriyeya (talk) 13:43, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

SOHR said Kurdish forces(SDF/YPG) retake Tall Abyad and Ain al-Arous but ISIS still hold Hammam at Turkuman and Al Qantari.here Sûriyeya (talk) 18:43, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Al-Masdar, pro-gov sources and Al-Nusra (grey) versus opposition (green)

This is in reference to my revert of the following edit. The section authorizing the use of Al-Masdar as a reliable source explicitly says: "we cannot use Al-Masdar to decide if a town is held by Al-Nusra or rebels or joint control between them. Al-Masdar has a tendency to exaggerate the role of al-Qaeda, Al-Nusra, jihadists, etc." This also applies even more to pro-gov sources. Tradedia^talk 21:02, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Like it is not true... without hardcore jihadists like nusra,ahrar,chechens fsa would disappear in weeks.Totholio (talk) 08:52, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

And without the Islamists coming in from Lebanon, Ruskies, and radical-as-fuck Iranians propping up the Assad regime, it would be gone within weeks, as well. Don't descend into ad hominem attacks. That's not something you're going to win at, when the government you support has led a five war war against its own people in an attempt to suppress the will of the people, Totholio. 208.92.227.84 (talk) 17:59, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Not sure what are you talking about, you should go to twitter al nusra fanboy pages. The iranian/iraqi/afghan/russian intervention happened AFTER jihadists from 60 countries invaded Syria not before. Will of the people means hundreds of beheading videos from all over Syria? nice revolution with 80% of the population under Assad. Everyone knows who is not biased that this war plan was made after 2006 SAA supporting Hezbollah and making the qatar-saudi-turkish-EU gas pipeline impossible.Totholio (talk) 18:24, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Please, we should argument like adult human beings... 84.138.71.101 (talk) 19:31, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Vandalism,Unreliable sources,Misinterpreation of sources,Breaking the rules of editing

These two users for a long time are intentionally breaking the rules of editing with unreliable sources from facebook also misinterpreting them, by doing this they are directly and intentionally vandalising the map despite the rules that are in effect. 1.AlAboud83 using unreliable facebook sources which he himself doesn't know what are this sources credibility: 1.diff 2.diff

2.LightandDark2000 intentionally misinterpreting sources: 1.diff. 2.diff. 3.diff.Lists129 (talk) 19:09, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

These are reliable Anti-ISIS,Anti-YPG activist that are reliable,that journalist.Alhanuty (talk) 19:14, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

SOHR confirmed that SDF retake Ain al-Arous, Tall Abyad, Nus Tal and some other points from ISIS.here And reliable source Al Masdar also said The attack on Tell Abyad includes all of the villages in the 4-axes involved; and that the entire assault as a whole was repelled.here Plus SOHR also later said that the SDF retake all most points which they lost earlier. Sûriyeya (talk) 20:02, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Lists129 But according to the source here which used AlAboud83 villages of Dashishah, al Shamsani, Sarjin and Qutbah still ISIS-held. So we need marked them as ISIS held. For now only Sarjin marked as ISIS-held. Sûriyeya (talk) 21:00, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

And also Pro-Opp. source said ISIS seized over village Hamam Al Turkam tha located in east of Tall Abyad after surprise withdrew by Kurdish units from village and its outskirt. And source also said that ISIS still use people of Ein Alrous village as human shield to prevent allies air forces to carry out any airstrikes.here But maybe we need more confirmation. What your think guys? Sûriyeya (talk) 21:05, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Well this map is not credible anymore when you see someone uses some Pro-Opposition sources to change the status on Isis held places to YPG and also this means now that YPG is inside Deirezzor without the slightest confirmation.Lists129 (talk) 23:39, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

The YPG/SDF has not entered the Deir ez-Zor Province, as far as I know. The location of the village is probably somewhat misplaced, since the various map modules incorporating the Syria module are scaled differently. However, the other changes were made according to reliable sources or followed this map module's rules for editing. LightandDark2000 (talk) 02:33, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Ayn Daqnah + Shaykh Isa SDF or FSA held?

Please note I am not saying they need to be changed I am just asking why

These towns are under FSA control on the Wikipedia map but are SDF held on the Wikimapia map, do you guys have any sources who is actually controlling these towns? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AriyanMahmoudKurdi (talk • contribs) 10:51, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

They are probably SDF-held. But remember that the SDF contains a number of FSA factions. LightandDark2000 (talk) 10:59, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi,

In this edit, You changed Shaykh Isa to yelloow (YPG/SDF held). I can't find anything about it in the source You provided. Could You please check it and explain what it was about? --Hogg 22 (talk) 10:01, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

According to this article, the SDF is on the outskirts of Mare', which means that they control the village of Shaykh Isa (which is located beyond Mare's outskirts). LightandDark2000 (talk) 00:54, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Updated Darayya map

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CcPeXZSXIAQSlDn.jpg:large https://twitter.com/miladvisor/status/703650467495211008 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.200.98.127 (talk) 10:57, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Al-Bukamal tribal uprising against ISIS

Al-Masdar has now twice reported on a tribal uprising against ISIS in Al-Bukamal near the Iraqi border:

Feb. 11: [...] local tribal fighters also carried out several attacks around the ‘Aisha Hospital’s large neighborhoods, while Russian fighter jets provided the necessary back-up to crush ISIS’ resistance against the Deir Ezzor popular committees inside the city of Albukamal.[...]

March. 2: Another issue plaguing ISIS in Deir Ezzor is the tribal uprising in the large city of Abukamaal; this has forced the terrorist group to concentrate several contingents to this front.

Are there any other sources corroborating this? Should the area be marked contested between "red" and "black"? Esn (talk) 06:57, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Probably. This sounds like a big development. LightandDark2000 (talk) 00:52, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps. In the past, we've made tribal-held areas, and areas where local forces are in control dark blue. If they are not acting in support of a particular group, make them blue. If they are fighting for the government, make them red. DaJesuZ (talk) 04:10, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

I really wish there were more sources than just those two. I notice that it's been changed to red/black conflict, but it still seems unclear whether they're government-allied. The first link mentions a SANA report of them raising the Syrian two-star flag, but notes the lack of any photographic or video evidence. Also... the very fact that the uprising is described as tribal suggests that, even if they're on the government's side, this is a secondary rather than a primary affiliation (does that matter?). I don't know Arabic, but maybe some news of this has appeared in the Arabic-language press? Esn (talk) 08:16, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

LightandDark2000 Armenian source also said more than 20 ISIS were killed in Al Bukamal as a result of operations conducted by the Syrian troops.here Maybe it is a trible forces with support of some soldiers of army who earlier secretly sneak to the city to help the insurrection of trible forces against the ISIS. But the reliable source clear said that 11th February pro-SAA Sheitat Tribesmen captured the ‘Aisha National Hospital in the Al Bukamal after clashes with ISIS.here Sûriyeya (talk) 09:11, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

I am skeptical. The most recent Masdar article about the tribal uprising only said that IS had to deploy forces to Al Bukamal because of the uprising, not because there were still clashes (I presume it was to stop clashes breaking out again). The Armenian article said IS fighters died in al-Bukamal due to Syrian troops, but it would have been very hard for even covert Syrian troops to get that far into IS territory. Again, the Armenian article did not mention loss of territory on IS's part, only deaths. They might even have been referring to the SAAF, although this is unlikely. I think there would be more coverage of this if there were major clashes rather than just civil and occasionally violent unrest. PutItOnAMap (talk) 10:55, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Let's assume that these fighters are both anti-IS and pro regime; we should not use an anti-IS, pro-Regime source to validate this, as it would be a significant development. It is not likely that these fighters are totally pro-regime, as a few other uprisings by tribes have occured in this area before, and have been for the interests of that tribe, and have not necessarily been pro-Assad. It would be better to mark the clashes ble-black, not red-black. 164.106.171.150 (talk) 16:34, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Truce between Al Nusra and ISIS in southern countryside of Damascus

Opposition source said that ISIS and Jabhat Al-Nusra reached truce in Yarmuk camp and Tadamun and Hajar Aswad in addition to a cessation of hostility, removed all the barriers and checkpoints and releasing free all the detainees from both sides.here Sûriyeya (talk) 12:07, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Clashes between ISIS against YPG in Raqqa

SOHR said that the YPG fighters regained control the town of Hammam al-Turkmen and the entire areas that they have lost or attacked by the ISIS in the northern and northeastern countryside of Al-Raqqah, while clashes are still taking place between both parties on the international highway between Mabrouka and al-Qantri.here Sûriyeya (talk) 12:29, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Bashmara

Hey guys what do you think about it? Opp. source(Al-Souria Net) said that the SAA have begun to assemble in villages north of the town of Qabtan al-Jabal, specifically in Bashamar, after Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) handed over the area without a fight.here So opposition source claim that YPG handed over without a fight the some villages including Bashamar to SAA. But maybe we need more data about this. Sûriyeya (talk) 13:23, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

I doubt that they actually handed over control of the village. The YPG is probably allowing the SAA to base its soldiers there, for tactical reasons of its own. LightandDark2000 (talk) 15:03, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

LightandDark2000 Maybe YPG and SAA jointy holds several villages where SAA send troops and prepar forces for attack on Anhar al Sham/Nusra positions. Also Saleh al-Zain, an armed opposition field commander in northern Aleppo said that SAA and allies from the villages of Nubl and Zahraa are mobilizing large numbers of fighters on the outskirts of the villages of Bashemra, Fafertayn, Birad and Kiymar with the aim of storming Qubtan al-Jabal and Al-Sheikh Aqil and cutting the Ma’aret al-Artiq-Babis road. And pro-rebel Al-Etihad Press also reported that a military columns made up of a number of pickup vehicles equipped with medium and heavy gauge machine guns as well as around 200 fighters had entered the villages of Kiymar, Birad and Fafertayn, which are all controlled by the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces.here So probably for now these villages(Kiymar, Birad and Fafertayn) can be under joint control YPG and SAA and Bashmara SAA-held. But I not will do any cnahges for now and I will whait other data or offers from other editors. Sûriyeya (talk) 17:10, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

We can't use Pro-opposition sources against YPG. Kordestani (talk) 18:20, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Cessation of Hostilities

Can you please turn to some color that places controlled by those who submitted to (U.S - Russian) negotiated stop of killing agreement ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 105.98.76.41 (talk) 03:30, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 4 March 2016

Please change Zakiya to red/black contested (11px-80x80-red-black-anim.gif), per [7]. Esn (talk) 06:40, 4 March 2016 (UTC) Esn (talk) 06:40, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Hama reconciliation

There are new of a major reconciliation agreement in Hama brokered by russian officials AlMasdar. But the list of villages and town is not available.Paolowalter (talk) 08:36, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Unblock

The map needs major updating in the area between Markada and al-Qattah, as there is a major offensive going on by SDF to take the whole area. Please unblock in order to be able update. Roboskiye (talk) 10:59, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

I don't see what the problem was, anyway. There didn't seem to be any edit war going on at the current time when the map was blocked. And, given that this civil war moves very quickly compared to the others and that the standard of reporting means we can update even the smaller villages properly, a block will really hit the quality of this map hard. So much is going to happen in the next 4 days, I expect, and we will not be able to represent any changes that happen during that time.PutItOnAMap (talk) 11:01, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Including articles like this https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/battle-deir-ezzor-airport-intensifies-isis-storms-gates/ which focus on issues that could potentially change the course of the entire war. PutItOnAMap (talk) 11:05, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Please post the changes here so we can keep track of conflict anyway and change map quickly when unblocked. Getting Kordestani to apologize or be blocked might also help to get this page unblocked. Vissar2g (talk) 16:03, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Al-Tanf Al-Walid border crossing

Change from black to green per [8]. Esn (talk) 20:28, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

I can't. It's like it doesn't exist on this map, at least I can't find it as a code. DuckZz (talk) 20:40, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

You're right... I just searched, and I can't find it either. What's going on here? Esn (talk) 04:41, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Note that the rebels that captured it are the New Syrian Army [9] whom are a part of SDF. Therefore it should logically be changed to yellow.82.153.107.40 (talk) 21:51, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Correction. They were ready to be part of SDF, but it never happened, and their plans to join Raqqa groups failed. Now they focused on Jordan area only. DuckZz (talk) 23:21, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

They are reported as part of Southern Front of FSA. PutItOnAMap (talk) 00:02, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Palmyra Ancient Quarries

Put red half-circle across bottom per [10]. Esn (talk) 20:28, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Town Zakiyah is in Raqqa Province not Southern Aleppo province.

As above Zakiyah is in Southern Raqqa near the crossroads, it is not in southern Aleppo province... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.94.238.179 (talk) 21:23, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Now this is a problem we have - certain sources disagree on province boundaries. If I recall correctly, Masdar had Khanasir down as in Hama when it is in Aleppo on our map. So long as we have the coordinates of Zakiyah in the right place (and we do) compared to other villages, we ought not to worry about province boundaries. PutItOnAMap (talk) 00:03, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

SDF updates Northern Raqqa

The SDF have taken over new areas in northern Raqqah and western Hasakah provinces, including Shamandur and Bir Hebda. Those towns are in the area south of the M5 highway near Al-Qatani, here: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=36.378726&lon=39.551125&z=12&m=b&search=Shaddadi Official source confirming the SDF captured those villages: http://aranews.net/2016/03/18763/ And also Al Masdar: https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-democratic-forces-capture-2-villages-northern-raqqa/

There are also Twitter sources claiming that the SDF took the Maliha Oil Field in Deir ez-Zor province. That's here: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=36.197742&lon=40.520325&z=10&m=b&search=Shaddadi Normaly I know Twitter sources aren't good enough, but this report caught my eye: https://twitter.com/Janx53/status/705736581710290944 It shows sattelite images of the oilfield burning, and you can clearly see from the shape of the oilfield that it is indeed Maliha. Add it on the map?