Jump to content

Talk:Battle of Mosul (2016–2017)

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 2406:e006:adb:1001:9810:822d:94f:51b (talk) at 22:07, 1 February 2019 (→Lots of propaganda: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Syrian Civil War sanctions

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. Community Tech bot (talk) 07:28, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. Community Tech bot (talk) 09:52, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:06, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Page size

This page is 637,308 bytes long, which is far too big. What's the best way to subdivide it? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:28, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Does not need forking, it just needs trimming.Slatersteven (talk) 14:53, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)
Before talking about splitting, how about having a couple of editors go through it from top to bottom and 'trim away some of the fat'? Even the article for World War II is only 226kB, so surely this one battle does not need 637kB of content? Surely there is a couple hundred kB of needless blather that can be done away with? Then if we break it down to 3 pages; "Background", "Timeline of events" and "Aftermath", keeping them to say 150kB each, (or aggregate), that's 450kB, which is still huge and twice the size of the WWII page. Really, a sane average of 50-75kB each for a total of 150-225kB combined would be a more appropriate outer limit. (jmho) - wolf 14:55, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I mean how many other battles of a day by day breakdown of events (not matter how minor)?Slatersteven (talk) 14:57, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The first, most obvious solution would be to split off the day by day breakdown to a separate Timeline of the Battle of Mosul. There are also redundant sections, like Humanitarian issues and Battle_of_Mosul_(2016–2017)#Violation_of_the_laws_of_war, that ought to be condensed and probably trimmed. Parsecboy (talk) 17:09, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse Parsecboy's position, with the retention in full of Humanitarian issues. Buckshot06 (talk) 06:05, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with those sections is that it's written as a sort of list - if it was rewritten thematically, a lot of repetition could be avoided. The facts should be kept, but there are better ways to present them. Parsecboy (talk) 15:50, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We don't seem to be getting anywhere. I don't see that "trimming" the content (the undoubted need for which is a separate issue) will make a sufficiently large reduction in the page size. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:37, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of propaganda

The article is full of nonsense not backed at all by the credible, given sources:

“because of the largely Sunni population's deep distrust of the primarily Shia Iraqi government, and its corrupt armed forces.” - neither of the two given sources mentions that Iraqi government is “primarily Shia”.

“The Ba'ath loyalists group, known to be led by Saddam Hussein's former vice president Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri, issued a statement before the start of operations calling for the people of the city to start an uprising against ISIL and announced that they will fight the "terrorist organization." - It is a complete nonsense considering the fact that al-Douri himself is responsible for the raise of ISIS and the terrorist organisation had hundreds, if not thousands, of members in ISIS. The two given Arabic sources are niche and can’t be trusted at all as a reliable sources of content. In the same Wikipedia article we read later on that al-Douri blames for all the ills Iraqi government and USA, and accuses them of “destroying” various majority Sunni cities. It’s all a sectarian mouthpiece to stir furteher violence in Iraq.

“On 11 November, the multiple news outlets including Al Arabiya,[182] Daily Mirror[183] and Middle East Monitor reported about a leaked video of the Iraqi Special Forces allegedly murdering an Iraqi Sunni child by running him over with an M1 Abrams tank. The boy, identified as Muhammad Ali Al-Hadidi, was dragged through the desert and shot before the tank was run over him. The men in the video were identified as Shia militiamen and yelled sectarian slurs at the child as well asking the cameraman to film them doing it. The video caused outrage on social media, with Arab users of social media using the hashtag #CrushedByATank (Arabic: #السحق_بالدبابة‎). The soldiers were wearing the insignia of the Iraqi Special Forces.[184]” - All the sources given state that most likely it’s a propaganda video by ISIS, as the terrorists released similar videos shortly after. Saudi Al Arabiya (the given source) says that the video can’t be verified at all, yet Wikipedia article alleges that certainly the crime was committed by the government or pro-government side.

The Middle East Monitor claimed Iraqi Shia Groups of targeting Sunni Arabs "in a possible genocide", and claimed that "Sunni Arabs are being targeted for ethnic cleansing by Iraqi Christians".[186][187] However, Middle East Monitor was the sole origin of the report.[188][189] - The Middle East Monitor, according to Wikipedia itself, is a Sunni Islamist website promoting pro Islamist causes and antisemitism. It is not a credible source as per Wikipedia standards.

The article also doesn’t mention anywhere at all the enormous sacrifice of Iraqi Army in liberating the city and the precautions that the Army took to save civilian life’s but not its own. The military medics took care of civilians, tens of soldiers were killed trying to rescue civilians [1], Iraqi Army in many places didn’t call for air or artilery support to minimise civilian casualties etc. it all should be mentioned.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Battle_of_Mosul_(2016–2017)&oldid=881336332"