Talk:Cities and towns during the Syrian Civil War

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Too many templates[edit]

It appears that this article would require restructuring or splitting, as it is has too many templates in use, starting to break some functionality. Please see Template_talk:Reflist#Not_expanding for more information on an example. Thanks, PaleoNeonate (talk) 11:49, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

@LightandDark2000: I noticed your edit summary when you removed the warning. I will try to explain more precisely here. The issue is that the allowed delay for server-side template expansion is being exceeded. At some point in the page, all templates stop working. See for instance the "Template:Reflist" at the bottom, where the footnote citations would normally display. Also note the page loading time, most of which is because of the server-side delay before the page is being sent to the browser (~10 seconds allowed cpu time). This also causes the article to automatically be included in the special category Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded. Also, if you go into edit/preview mode, at the bottom under "Parser profiling data" can be seen the report. Thanks, —░]PaleoNeonate█ ⏎ ?ERROR 15:43, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
I think that the server-loading issues has more to do with the amount of data/objects in the module itself, not in the templates used. For example, the sheer number of objects/locations in the Syrian Civil War module alone is probably what caused the Middle East conflicts detailed map module to crash in the first place. That issue is still unresolved, by the way. LightandDark2000 (talk) 04:24, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

An Important Message for ALL Map Editors: Please Refrain from Adding Extra, Nonessential Villages[edit]

@EkoGraf, Tradedia, Paolowalter, Spesh531, Niele~enwiki, and Mehmedsons: Hi there. This is LightandDark2000. Today, I noticed a massive issue with some of the larger map modules that has the Syrian Civil War map integrated into them. The Middle East conflicts map had crashed nearly a year ago because too many items/locations have been added to this Syrian Civil War map. Today, the addition of even more villages caused the smaller Levant conflicts map to crash as well. I had to go back and delete a dozen or so villages in order to get that map working again; as for the larger Middle East map, a much larger reduction would be needed (which will require the efforts of multiple users to get it done), which I will not attempt at this time. So please, DO NOT ADD any extra insignificant villages or locations unless absolutely necessary, otherwise we will have more map modules breaking down. If people continue to add more items to this map casually, eventually, even the Syrian Civil War Map will crash as well. Instead, extra villages from inactive fronts or crowded areas need to be deleted/cleaned up. In the past, we've had a couple of diligent users who helped clean up and de-cluttered in active fronts once the fighting shifted away from an area, which kept this problem from ever happening before. However, this maintenance stopped over 1 year ago, and with the addition so many villages and localities since then, this map has become extremely cluttered and very burdensome on the Wikimedia Foundation's systems. Because of this, we have to maintain the map ourselves. So, to everyone who views or edits this map, please be very careful with your editing in the future. Thank you. So, to everyone who views or edits this map, please be very careful with your editing in the future. Thank you.

The larger map modules seem to break down if the Syrian Civil War map exceeds a size of 756,000 bytes. As a result, I think that we need to reduce the map to at least 750,000 bytes, or even 700,000 bytes to be safer. To restore the Middle East Conflicts map, a reduction to 600,000 or 500,000 bytes will probably be needed, but I will wait for user input before attempting to restore the larger Middle East map. LightandDark2000 (talk) 00:29, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
For starters, the Afrin, Latakia, and East Aleppo (Deir Hayfer) areas need to be decluttered/cleaned up. Eventually, I will start by removing minor villages from the Afrin District, because it appears to be the single most crowded place on this map away from any active fronts, which also happens to be jammed with too many insignificant villages to make things worse. LightandDark2000 (talk) 00:29, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Removing villages on the Syrian map is a good way to keep map size down. However, the easiest way to do this without removing settlement data is to remove mountains and hills that are far behind the frontlines. Many of the hills in Latakia province and west of Palmyra could be erased without taking away anything important from the map. Do you agree? TheNavigatrr (talk) 00:48, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes, of course. Some mountain peaks and hills should be kept, but a large number of them can be removed. Unfortunately, the problem has grown so large that many of the villages have to go as well. The Afrin and Latakia areas could seriously use some cleanup, for starters. BTW, this discussion should go under the heading in the Syrian Civil War map's talk page, because this is such a big issue. LightandDark2000 (talk) 00:53, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
The Afrin District should be reduced to the level that it was at about a year ago here. (Note: Please do not submit the changes in the preview link. Instead, enter in one of the map module's titles, such as Module:Syrian Civil War detailed map, into the "Preview Title" bar and hit "Show preview".) LightandDark2000 (talk) 01:00, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
No it doesn't. Removing villages from map is considered vandalism. Most certainly in a now important conflict area as Afrin.
If the it would be a problem for users that there are to many objects on the map, the module should be split in different modules for east, north, west and south Syria. Or by creating a seperate light weight and a detailed map. But certainly not by removing valuable data.
The syrian detailled map should not consider problems resulting from the creation of a Middle East conflict map having to many objects.
Someone can make a 'world conflict' map with all conflict data included from whole the world, but that's their responsibility. This should NOT result in reduction of the importand level of detail of the detailled 'one country'-maps.

--Niele~enwiki (talk) 09:14, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

A better sollution would also be to place all villages larger then size 6 or 7 and all object smaller then size 5 or 6 into two separate modules.
And let the Middle-East and multi-country conflict maps, include only the module with larger villages and towns.
While one-country-maps shows the detailled module with smaller villages that also includes the module with larger villages and towns.--Niele~enwiki (talk) 09:40, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

LightandDark2000 Is not a good decision we can't just removed villages. We not have this problem earlier but if we begin remove villages be will broke the a real situation at the ground. I against such action, we need another decision. Mehmedsons (talk) 10:07, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

It will also be intelligent to remove some detailed map as qamishli or aleppo who are closed front or nearly totally red. I think that we should remove some of the villages situed in the large desertic spaces controlled by SDF in northern Syria and use a more extensively the icon rural presence — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.233.227.191 (talk) 10:47, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
LightandDark2000Niele~enwiki We can removed villages and checkpoints which present at our map and also accurately marked at such maps as Rif Aleppo2.svg, Rif Damashq.svg, Battle of Daraa City.svg and others. Here is an example:link Mehmedsons (talk) 13:09, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
I also remove unused links. Mehmedsons (talk) 19:38, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
I agree on the proposal of removing villages cluttering areas far behind the front lines. In addition to the areas alreasy mentioned, also north Raqqah and north Hasaka are presented in too detail. We can also remove yellow points on the detailed Raqqah map where it is already yellow. Probably Aleppo can just become a large red dot. Paolowalter (talk) 22:54, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

RAQQA , Tribal advance[edit]

Al dahl Oilfield , Hanadie oilfield under goverment control , confirmed by syrian mod and Reporter Mig29

https://twitter.com/MIG29_/status/889222627222540289

make red 

- Second Dahla https://twitter.com/IvanSidorenko1/status/889689093998825473 Syrian army inside it photo proof

Third Ukayrshah https://twitter.com/IvanSidorenko1/status/889683714988531712 Photo proof , + message from the village

https://twitter.com/IvanSidorenko1/status/889669373979439104

Fourth the Agreement Signed Agreement for #SDF to HAND OVER Ukairshy/Dahlah/Muqla/Zawr Shammar/ Al-Sabkhah make those Red https://twitter.com/IvanSidorenko1/status/889682579934326785

And in case you say fake , here is geolocation proof , of photos inside ukayrshah https://twitter.com/warsmonitoring/status/889794271880065025

Keeping the detailed map up-to-date?[edit]

Who is keeping the detailed map up-to-date? I noticed yesterday that Al-Baghuz Fawqani is on the map as ISIL possession, while the linked Wiki article states that ISIL was defeated there in last May. --Corriebertus (talk) 09:13, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

@Corriebertus: The source in the WP-article (http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2018/May-15/449397-sdf-moves-on-daesh-in-syria-sliver.ashx) refers to "the village of Baghuz". However, there are 2 villages in the same area, one called "Al-Baghuz Fawqani" and one called "Baghuz Tahtani". It seems to me that the source is talking about "Baghuz Tahtani". The source is from May 15. A day before (May 14), a source talks about "the Syrian Democratic Forces capturing Baghuz Tahtani". On 31 May, a source talks about "The Daesh militiamen at Deir Ezzor have suffered substantial losses caused by an air raid of the Coalition against their headquarters at Baghuz Fawqani." I could not find any source talking about Al-Baghuz Fawqani being captured from ISIL. Tradediatalk 14:16, 11 August 2018 (UTC)