Talk:Battle of al-Hasakah (2022)

WARNING: ACTIVE COMMUNITY SANCTIONS

The article Battle of al-Hasakah (2022), along with other pages relating to the Syrian Civil War and ISIL, is designated by the community as a contentious topic. The current restrictions are:

Limit of one revert in 24 hours: This article is under WP:1RR (one revert per editor per article per 24-hour period)

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be sanctioned.

Remedy instructions and exemptions

Enforcement procedures:

Violations of any restrictions (excluding 1RR/reverting violations) and other conduct issues should be reported to the administrators' incidents noticeboard. Violations of revert restrictions should be reported to the administrators' edit warring noticeboard.
Editors who violate any listed restrictions may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense.
An editor must be aware before they can be sanctioned.

With respect to any reverting restrictions:

Edits made solely to enforce any clearly established consensus are exempt from all edit-warring restrictions. In order to be considered "clearly established" the consensus must be proven by prior talk-page discussion.
Edits made which remove or otherwise change any material placed by clearly established consensus, without first obtaining consensus to do so, may be treated in the same manner as clear vandalism.
Clear vandalism of any origin may be reverted without restriction.
Reverts of edits made by anonymous (IP) editors that are not vandalism are exempt from the 1RR but are subject to the usual rules on edit warring. If you are in doubt, contact an administrator for assistance.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. Remember: When in doubt, don't revert!

Articles for creation

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted from this draft on 21 January 2022 by reviewer Bkissin (talk · contribs).

Aviation: Accidents

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

This article is supported by the Aviation accident project.

Automobiles Low‑importance

	Cars portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Automobiles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of automobiles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AutomobilesWikipedia:WikiProject AutomobilesTemplate:WikiProject AutomobilesAutomobile articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Correction and Detention Facilities (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Correction and Detention Facilities, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Correction and Detention FacilitiesWikipedia:WikiProject Correction and Detention FacilitiesTemplate:WikiProject Correction and Detention FacilitiesCorrection and Detention Facilities articles

Crime and Criminal Biography: Serial, mass, and spree killers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Serial Killer task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Disaster management Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Explosives Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Explosives, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Explosives on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ExplosivesWikipedia:WikiProject ExplosivesTemplate:WikiProject ExplosivesExplosives articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Islam: Islam and Controversy / Salaf / Sunni Islam Low‑importance

	Islam portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Islam and Controversy task force.
	This article is supported by the Salaf task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Sunni Islam task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Kurdistan Low‑importance

	Kurdistan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Kurdistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Kurdistan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.KurdistanWikipedia:WikiProject KurdistanTemplate:WikiProject KurdistanKurdistan articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Aviation / Middle East / North America / United States / Post-Cold War

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	Middle Eastern military history task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	Post-Cold War task force

Syria Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Syria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Syria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SyriaWikipedia:WikiProject SyriaTemplate:WikiProject SyriaSyria articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Terrorism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Terrorism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles on terrorism, individual terrorists, incidents and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TerrorismWikipedia:WikiProject TerrorismTemplate:WikiProject TerrorismTerrorism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Article title[edit]

Multiple sources are calling this a battle stating that ISIS forces are in control of several areas of the city, as such it should be renamed to Battle of Al-Hasakah since sources are referring to it as a battle. See here [1], [2].XavierGreen (talk) 20:37, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

XavierGreen By far the more name is "Hasakah Riot" or "Hasakah Jailbreak" moreover no according to the SOHR they are contained entirely to the prison. Des Vallee (talk) 23:14, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The "riot" sources you listed are from an entirely unrelated incident in 2020.XavierGreen (talk) 03:08, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

While these are large-scale clashes, I am wondering why it's called a 'battle' when almost all sources I've seen are regarding it as a prison riot, jailbreak attempt, or clashes at worst. Common usage would have it thought that "The Battle of al-Hasakah" would be a serious attempt at taking over the city, whereas this is a jailbreak focused on a small geographic area making up only a block or two of Hasakah city itself centred around a particular building. IMO Hasakah jailbreak attempt/Hasakah prison riot or something like that would be a more appropriate title. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.205.21.35 (talk) 14:02, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Even if confined to the prison incidents of this scale and nature are still generally called battles such as the Battle of Qala-i-Jangi.

similarities between Qala-i-Jangi and al-Sina'a

Both contained members of an armed group with prior military experience
Both had the prisoners seizing the armory of the prison
Both lasted multiple days
Both had major armed battles killing dozens
Both contained airstrikes

Really the only difference between Qala-i-Jangi and al-Sina'a is that al-Sina'a was caused by an outside attack instead of an internal uprising. Thus I think we should keep the name as it is.--Garmin21 (talk) 19:51, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Title is too broad, I suggest change to al-Sina'a prison raid Sgnpkd (talk) 04:07, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The raid was only the first part of the battle. If ISIS just attacked the prison and freed prisoners with no battle starting then al-Sina'a prison raid would be a far better name but since a large drawn-out multi-day battle happened I suggest either keeping the name as it is or changing it to Battle of al-Sina'a prison.--Garmin21 (talk) 16:15, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Battle over?[edit]

I'm under the impression this is for the most part over. I can't seem to find any indication that the battle is still ongoing thus we've nothing to record on the timeline, it would seem strange to say the battle is still ongoing yet we've got not info on the ground following the 29th. I think it's safe to say the battle is over. Thoughts?ThePaganUK (talk) 17:56, 31 January 2022 (UTC) guys i mean go read the news SDF forces have more advantage than isis even they caught most prisoners that even they captured all prisoners then why IS won the batlle??? IS THIS LOGIC?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.237.121.194 (talk) 22:51, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

While there are still multiple raids being carried out each day it is over, now we are in the crackdown phase which we can put in an aftermath section but the battle ended when the last groups of ISIS fighters surrendered.--Garmin21 (talk) 01:45, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I mean please publish right informations how SDF and ISIS won the battle at the same time?? i thin SDF Won the battle if you have resources please put it with it Thanks for answering with news and informations SDF Won it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.237.121.254 (talk) 10:06, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Aye I do think the SDF won the battle when looking at the event from a military point of view, hence why I referred their victory as 'a tactical victory'. So far I've seen no evidence they captured all of the prisoners that escaped hence why I believe this is also a strategic IS victory, as it was their intention to free as many prisoners as possible... and they did to an extent.ThePaganUK (talk) 16:08, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bro i mean the military sect is more important they killed and captured lot isis and the martyers is one IS side not kurdish forces and i think it is SDF victory not IS victory i mean please publish right informations thanks/// — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.237.121.163 (talk) 19:01, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As I've already pointed out, there's a massive difference in meaning between the words 'tactical' and 'strategic'. The prison housed anywhere betwenn 3,500 to 4,000 IS prisoners, so far only 1,600 of them have been recaptured or have turned themselves in. IS managing to spring thousands of its fighters was exactly what they intended to do even if it meant hundreds of them being killed, hence why this is a Tactical SDF Victory whilst also a IS Strategic Victory, because IS largely achieved it's main aim. Propaganda cuts both ways; on wiki we post facts with evidence not personal opinions. There is no 3rd party source that says all the IS prisoners were captured, in fact we see the opposite:

SOHR1 ref:https://www.syriahr.com/en/236388/ SOHR2 ref:https://www.syriahr.com/en/236395/

ThePaganUK (talk) 21:14, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We could put "IS Strategic Victory" in the results section only if there are sources that can explicitly confirm the result as such, as per WP:Verifiability. At the moment there aren't. Thus, any personal analysis of the situation/result is contrary to WP:OR and WP:SYNTH guidelines. EkoGraf (talk) 09:28, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Guys but we have to know this IS leader/Abu Ibrahim Al Qurayshi/ killed you right that you said is imprisons escaped but still it is battle that even if they escaped but still they recontrolled the prison by kurdish forces they win goes for SDF not even isis

SDD won[edit]

Please don’t change it SDF won it not isis please don’t spread propagandas 212.237.121.163 (talk) 15:09, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, how can you subsume this event as a total SDF victory, IS did accomplish gains presumably, I suppose someone should add “IS propaganda victory”, or “IS strategic victory”. Stathmopoda orbiculata (talk) 21:02, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Children were in the prison[edit]

I strongly believe it is important to mention Children were in the prison. Some more info https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/children-caught-al-hasakah-prison-violence-must-be-evacuated-safety — Preceding unsigned comment added by PointyPenBoy (talk • contribs) 18:20, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 December 2023[edit]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please change “Rojava” to “Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria”. Rojava does not accurately refer to the whole of Northeast Syria, it simply means Western (Syrian) Kurdistan. Bruhlobob (talk) 14:43, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Lewcm Talk to me! 12:55, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, any reliable source would tell you that the polity in question is not named “Rojava” but the “Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria”.

I-Aaron, II-Emily, I-Stein, II-Burchfieldhttps://www.atlanticcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/The-Future-of-Northeast-Syria.pdf Atlantic Council. August 2019. Retrieved 24 December 2023.

https://euaa.europa.eu/country-guidance-syria-2023/33-syrian-democratic-forces-and-asayish European Union Agency for Asylum. February 2023. Retrieved 24 December 2023 Bruhlobob (talk) 04:36, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi thanks for the sources, because of the extensive use of "Rojava" on the page and other pages that it links to, I'm going to reopen this request for another editor to review as I don't believe I know enough about this topic to make the change. Thanks, Lewcm Talk to me! 21:10, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I appreciate your reply. I have to ask, is there any particular reason this specific page is locked? Bruhlobob (talk) 23:41, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It has been protected to prevent further disruption. M.Bitton (talk) 22:40, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I must insist again that “Rojava” be changed. The official name of the polity should be used rather than it’s common informal name. I have provided multiple sources and can provide many more. Bruhlobob (talk) 04:58, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Feel free to provide as many sources as you feel are necessary. Please note that these sources must be formatted according to those already in use with the article, per WP:CITEVAR. When ready to proceed with the correctly formatted sources, please open a new edit request. Spintendo 23:47, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I appreciate you reply. Again, I’m happy to provide more sources, but are the previous two sources not correctly formatted? Do you disagree with the requested edit or do you not believe the two sources are enough? Bruhlobob (talk) 01:50, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]