Editors are subject to a one revert per twenty-four hours restriction when reverting logged-in users on all pages related to the Syrian Civil War and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, broadly construed. When in doubt, assume it is related, and don't revert.
Please see here for more information. Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked or otherwise sanctioned without warning by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.
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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arab world, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Arab world 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.
A news item involving Syrian Civil War was featured on Wikipedia's main page in the In the news section on 3, 4 February; 8, 15, 16, 18 – 31 March; 1 – 8, 10, 11, 13 – 20, 22 – 24 April; 13 November 2011.
A news item involving Syrian Civil War was featured on Wikipedia's main page in the In the news section on 16 July 2012.
A news item involving Syrian Civil War was featured on Wikipedia's main page in the In the news section on 6 May 2013.
Syrian Civil War received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.
The title of the page is not good. It insinuates as if there is a civil war, as in - syrians versus syrians. While this is surely partially correct, it also is correct without a doubt that foreign fighters participate. It does not matter who, it does not matter where, but this means that OUTSIDERS fight in a "civil war", which makes the term inconsistent and not logical.
I suggest a more neutral term. As it stands, the article is extremely one sided in favour of what certain other non-syrian governments describe or wish to convey, and while I can understand that wikipedia does not want to adopt the position of the syrian government, wikipedia should also be NEUTRAL and not use terms which are technically not correct. Who decided on the term "Syrian Civil War" anyway, corporate media? 2A02:8388:1600:6900:D9FD:1933:A841:5320 (talk) 13:05, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
I don't know how to edit these pages, but I know that the chemical weapons statements are false. The only record of chemical weapons has been debunked as a hoax by bbc. As in bbc staged the entire thing. Do a quick search on the net, there is plenty of evidence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 18:03, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
A civil war is a war between organized groups within the same state or country. Clearly this is what is happening in Syria (there is no fight between two different countries in any traditional sense. No country has invaded Syria and Syria has invaded no one. Outside assistance means nothing as it is common. Legacypac (talk) 09:37, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
Since infoboxes can now apparently have 5 columns (see Wars of the Three Kingdoms), should the columns be revised to 1.) The Syrian govt., 2.) The Free Syrian Army & allies, 3.) ISIS, 4.) The other Islamists & 5.) The Kurds, w/the foreign allies of each faction placed in the relevant columns?
Why should the FSA be separate from the non-IS Islamist groups that it clearly works with? FunkMonk (talk) 17:08, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
I agree with FunkMonk. This was previously discussed and rejected. The FSA and the likes of Nusra may not be best friends, and there have been incidents of infighting, but they've cooperated more often than not, and there's a significant "grey area" of overlap between the Islamist rebels and the more secular/pro-Western rebels. -Kudzu1 (talk) 17:24, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
I can't see a reason to separate groups that cooperate. Its hard enough to keep updated. Legacypac (talk) 09:32, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
On the infobox, now foreign support is called "non.-combat aid", so Israel should definitely be included under FSA and friends. FunkMonk (talk) 21:05, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Israel has now been added, with this source.FunkMonk (talk) 09:45, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
"Rebel advances led to government and Hezbollah morale plunging dramatically."
The link goes to stratfor. There is no mention at all of the linked-in statement. So why is this in an article like that? That is pure propaganda. 2A02:8388:1600:6900:BE5F:F4FF:FECD:7CB2 (talk) 18:48, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Whenever you see such discrepancy between source and text, you can remove it on sight. FunkMonk (talk) 02:26, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I've been fact-checking the claim that the Yemeni Houthis are fighting in Syria. All the web sources claiming that the fight or fought in Syria, including the one given, seem to be based on this 2013 article, where the information is credited to "a (Yemeni) official source, speaking on condition of anonymity". I think this is not a reliable enough encyclopedic source and that, until better sources show up, we should delete the claim in the infobox as well as the "See also : Yemeni civil war" because the two are not directly related. Yet, personally I know nothing about the Houthis, does anyone here know more ? (you can talk with me on wp:fr)--GrandEscogriffe (talk) 20:35, 23 July 2015 (UTC) Also, when this point is settled would someone kindly explain me how to edit the infobox ? Thank you