User talk:Sûriyeya

Sûriyeya, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Sûriyeya! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Missvain (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 19:02, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

General sanctions notification

Please read this notification carefully, it contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

A community decision has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to the Syrian Civil War and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. The details of these sanctions are described here. All pages that are broadly related to these topics are subject to a one revert per twenty-four hours restriction, as described here.

General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:28, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Callanecc I dont know how to notify other administrators about illegal actions. Therefore, I address to you. You can blocked of this guy here which broke the rules of editing because he deletes the data and distort the story and provoke war of edits. It deletes the data and some working links in its sole discretion, without any right. See history of edit: here Sûriyeya (talk) 08:39, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Callanecc You can take action! Editor (Berkaysnklf) broke the rules of edit as they use for edit unreliable biased sources for edit and without good reasons revert edits of other editors and he provoke the war of edits. If you will see history of edition here then you see that they deliberately violate the rules of editing. I know that I also maybe twice broke the rule of 1RR when try restored the correctness of the data and to correct what him distorted. But I always try to stick to the rules of editing and not break them but it was a situation when I tried to fix intentionally the data on the map which have been deliberately distorted. Also he violated one of the basic rules:

Rule #1-A reliable source for that specific edit should be provided.
a) A well-known source that has a reputation for neutral (not biased) territorial control coverage, can be used (is deemed reliable) for all edits.
b) A well-known source that does not have a reputation for neutral (not biased) territorial control coverage, can be used (is deemed reliable) only for edits that are unfavorable to the side it prefers (favorable to the side it opposes).
c) A source that is not well-known (or that has proven inaccurate for all edits) cannot be used (is deemed unreliable) for any edit. This includes all maps (see item 2- next).here Sûriyeya (talk) 21:15, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

1RR and Rules for editing

I marked Huwareen as the contested on based reliable source but you dont need edit on based data from twitter or changed of my edits. You must follow the rules of editings.

Rules for editing the map:

1-A source, reliable for that specific edit, should be provided.
a) A well-known source that has a reputation for neutral (not biased) territorial control coverage, can be used (is deemed reliable) for all edits.
b) A well-known source that does not have a reputation for neutral (not biased) territorial control coverage, can be used (is deemed reliable) only for edits that are unfavorable to the side it prefers (favorable to the side it opposes).
c) A source that is not well-known (or that has proven inaccurate for all edits) cannot be used (is deemed unreliable) for any edit. This includes all maps (see item 2- next).

2-Copying from maps is strictly prohibited. Maps from mainstream media are approximate and therefore unreliable for any edit. Maps from amateur sources are below the standards of Wikipedia for any edit. They violate WP:RS and WP:CIRCULAR.
WP:RS: “Anyone can create a personal web page or publish their own book, and also claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published media, such as books, patents, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, personal or group blogs, Internet forum postings, and tweets, are largely not acceptable as sources.” Source: Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published_sources
WP:CIRCULAR: “Do not use websites that mirror Wikipedia content or publications that rely on material from Wikipedia as sources.”

3-WP:POV pushing and intentional misinterpretation of sources will not be tolerated. If you are not sure about what the source is saying (or its reliability), post it on the talk page first so that it would be discussed. FoXrEpOrTeR (talk) 07:34, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

OK! But I was right but I not will again violate rules. Sûriyeya (talk) 07:38, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thank you! :) EkoGraf (talk) 14:12, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Talk Pages

Are very useful.. Use this one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2015_Latakia_offensive for your current problems. SaintAviator lets talk 08:30, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

Bruskom talk to me 19:17, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Bruskom Thank's! Sûriyeya (talk) 18:24, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

My edits

Hi,

Regarding this note... Do You mean my last mistake I reverted or there is more? I will gladly pay more attention to something if You point me precisely what was wrong. Thanks. --Hogg 22 (talk) 11:24, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

No! It is propose for all editors in the future comply with the rules of editing in dispute situations, and do not use the maps as a source for editing. And not to use too-outdated sources. Sûriyeya (talk) 11:37, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

File:Xmas Ornament.jpg

To You and Yours!
FWiW Bzuk (talk) 21:56, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Use of Foreign language References Latakia Offensive

You removed the discussion above so I started another. The word is this: Use foreign language refs ONLY when English language ones not available. There is no need to use them as well as the English language reference just for the sake of it. This is from a discussion on use of them on The Village Pump. SaintAviator lets talk 23:34, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

SaintAviatorBut I can restored this discussion it if you want? Sûriyeya (talk) 07:36, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Its Ok, thanks for the offer. Just use the Arabic references Only if there is no English one. SaintAviator lets talk 08:04, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

SaintAviator OK! Sûriyeya (talk) 08:06, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Hawaranews

Since when did this source from pro-kurd one turned into reliable one to edit in favor for the kurds??Lists129 (talk) 14:51, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Lists129 This source was recognized as a reliable source from other Kurdish sources which is we can use in favor of SDF/YPG. But if you think that source can't be used as a reliable in favor of SDF you can start discussion on Talk page. If other editors confirm that source can't be used in favor of YPG/SDF I'm revert my edits. I will accept any decision. But Pro-SAA sources also confirm SDF/YPG advance.herehere and some other sources hereherehereANF News and pro opp. sources also confirmed that SDF advance and captured Tishrin Dam and some villages.here Syrian democratic forces have seized over Tashrin dam and 8 other villages “Beer Shamal, Beer Bakar, Abdakly, Tal Banat, Khashkash Saghir, Khashkash Kabir, Weisy and Muwailah”here Sûriyeya (talk) 15:35, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Recognized as "realiable" from other pro-kurdish source comon it is just like recognizing a pro-Isis source "reliable" source by other pro-Isis sources.Ridiculous.Lists129 (talk) 20:57, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Lists129 SOHR also confirmed SDF/YPG gains. SOHR said that SDF/YPG captured that Tishrin Dam and parts of the road Manbej - Ar-Raqqah and reach the western banks of the Euphrates River.here Sûriyeya (talk) 21:13, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Up to date sources

• Here are your up to date resources regarding the Turkmen control of towns and villages of Düden (Dudayin), Karamezra, Karaköprü, Delha, Çobanbey and Harcele. Please do not revert my edits. Syrian Turkmen Assembly TRT. Berkaysnklf (talk) 27 December 2015, 16:53 (UTC)

BerkaysnklfBut wher source which said that Baghaydin was retaken from ISIS? Sûriyeya (talk) 16:57, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Berkaysnklf I'm just put village Baghaydin to black because source which said that this village retaken provide data for 2013. But I dont tuch other edits which you made. But if you provide fresh data that village FSA-held I will self revert my edit. Sûriyeya (talk) 17:23, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Your edits relating to population of Syrian towns

Your edits relating to population of Syrian towns are in violation of Wikipedia rules. The sources you have used are unreliable. This is because they are WP:MIRROR of Wikipedia. The policy in WP:MIRROR states: “Mirrors and forks of Wikipedia are publications that mirror (copy exactly) or fork (copy, but change parts of the material of) Wikipedia… Copies of Wikipedia are not reliable sources per the verifiability policy.”

You can see for example in source you used that they are citing Wikipedia. All the other sources you used have the same problem. The only reliable source we have for now is the official Syrian government census of 2004. I am not the only one who thinks that your edits are in violation of Wikipedia rules. Here you can see admin User:Kuru reverting your edit in “Rasm Harmil al-Imam” with the edit summary: “remove reference to wikipedia mirror”. Please do not change population numbers (based on unreliable sources) anymore. Tradedia^talk 08:13, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Tradedia Ok! In the future, I will not do that. Sûriyeya (talk) 08:24, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

You speak Arabic?

Hi,

I noticed You speak Arabic. Could You please check this diff? The source which is given is quite short and google translator didn't give me the name of the village changed. Could You please check if change fits given source? --Hogg 22 (talk) 05:33, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Hogg 22 You are right! Source only said that the 3 people die of a land mine which remained from ISIS in the village Sykol. And not said about the village of Qadiriyah. It was not a reasonable change. Sûriyeya (talk) 08:28, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Tel Hamad

Hi,

Regarding this. Source says

Syrian Arab Army’s 15th Brigade and their allies imposed fire control over Tal Hamad, leaving only a small pocket of resistance left to clear at the western perimeter of this strategic hilltop

which basicaly means they are not there yet. It's under loose rebel control or at least contested. --Hogg 22 (talk) 20:52, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Hogg 22 Also source said that the SAA and their allies imposed fire control over Tal Hamad, leaving only a small pocket of resistance left to clear at the western perimeter of this strategic hilltop located between the cities of Sheikh Miskeen and Nawa.here So only small rebel pocket still left at the western perimeter of this strategic hilltop. Sûriyeya (talk) 20:59, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Fire control + small pocket near the hilltop means rebels left the hilltop and hide next to it while SAA shoots at hilltop ("fire control" = You can't go there because I can shoot You, but I'm still not there either). So, IMHO, contested. --Hogg 22 (talk) 21:06, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Qatar

The source you used to change Qatar status is not acceptable as many other (facebook/twitter of unknown of not reliable origin). Syrian documents is OK, but you did not quote it in the comment. With this new source you can change Qatar yourself, my revert was correct according to the rules.Paolowalter (talk) 10:14, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Paolowalter In this case I ask you self-revert because if I do this I break the rule 1RR. Also I think that we can use data from the pages of Document.Sy in Facebook or Twitter. Sûriyeya (talk) 10:54, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Reliable sources

I dont breaking rules but you breaking rules. This morning you delete my edit but my edit was true. Pro Saa sources and Almasdarnews read : Saa full control over the strategic village of Harbinafseh but you remove. Who is right ? Almasdarnews or you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tr19ss (talk • contribs) 17:46, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Tr19ss You source said that the "SAA enter Harbinafseh’s northern sector after another intense battle and SAA are currently on the move in Harbinafseh, where they look to seize the village over the next few days after wearing out the enemy forces."here Source clear said that the village will taken over the next few days after wearing out the enemy forces. But for now village contested. Sûriyeya (talk) 17:55, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

But Saa reporter posted photo in the village https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1073977052632764&id=990693087627828 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tr19ss (talk • contribs) 18:04, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

We can't use pro SAA sources for showe success of SAA. Reliable source Al Masdar clear said village still contested. Sûriyeya (talk) 19:27, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Faysal

Here It exactly says "clashes continue between opposition and Ypg" for Faysal. So the yelow-lime mark will stay. Berkaysnklf (talk), 00:06, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

And moreover, if you are looking for something important. Try adding the information about Turkish Armed Forces preparation right next to Jarablus. See. Berkaysnklf (talk), 00:11, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Berkaysnklf SOHR said that the clashes continue between SDF against Al-Nusra and the rebel and Islamic factions in the al-Faisal mills area amid information about advancement for SDF and controlling new points in the area. So we marked Faysal Mill Factory as under SDF held. But OK! We mark the Mill Factory as contested but in situation with villages Ghazal and Yan Yabani SOHR clear said these villages retaken ISIS. About Jarablus they try help the SDF or rebels to capture Jarablus but Turkey not prepares forces to enter in Jarablus and fight against ISIS. Sûriyeya (talk) 06:45, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, better. And, why don't you want to believe that Turkey doesn't support neither YPG nor PKK? Turkey is fighting against them. And recently, a truck loaded with YPG arms trying to reach to PKK forces has been captured by Turkish authorities Pro-Turkish gov newsPro-Turkish opp newsNeutral news. I've always said and still saying, Turkey is preventing SDF advance and is not supporting but being against YPG. It is really the most stupid thing to put Turkey in the same column with PKK, YPG, YPJ and KCK. Berkaysnklf (talk), 23:48, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Suran

Well, I was just looking for news about Suran E of Aleppo when this tweet appeared on top of my Twitter feed. So, I mistakenly took it as a proof I was looking for. I forgot that there is another Sawran near Azaz. But, this Suran is behind IS lines anyway, so I would just leave it like this. --Hogg 22 (talk) 14:37, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Burnas

Hi,

Please double-check the location of Al Burnas. --Hogg 22 (talk) 12:08, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Hogg 22here Sûriyeya (talk) 12:22, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Suwaydīyat

Mistype.Paolowalter (talk) 19:02, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Paolowalter OK! Sûriyeya (talk) 19:41, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Hamzat

Hi,

Colud You check this old edit of your. Hamzat is now green, but it's on the road between 2 black dots: Sawran and Til Alyan. Please check and see if we can make it logical. --Hogg 22 (talk) 12:18, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

deSyracuse

This is the first time I'm hearing of this rule for deSyracuse or that its pro-opp. We've been using deSyracuse for years as a semi-neutral source. Please point out the rule to me and its discussion. EkoGraf (talk) 15:53, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

PS Pro-government Peto Lucem map/source from February 15th [1] showing fighting around the town, not in it. Pro-government Masdar news was used to originally mark the town contested on February 6th. Thus the newer pro-gov. source (Feb. 15) takes precedence. EkoGraf (talk) 16:03, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

EkoGraf deSyracuse many times used in his reports data from opp. sources and he denie all data with pro-government sources and when he make maps he also use basically anti-SAA sources. Here also:

Rule #1- A reliable source for that specific edit should be provided.

• a) A well-known source that has a reputation for neutral (not biased) territorial control coverage, can be used (is deemed reliable) for all edits.
• b) A well-known source that does not have a reputation for neutral (not biased) territorial control coverage, can be used (is deemed reliable) only for edits that are unfavorable to the side it prefers (favorable to the side it opposes).

But in situation with Bayanoun probably you are right. Sûriyeya (talk) 16:15, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

I checked the map's talk page logs for the last four months and haven't found anything about deSyracuse. Also, for this map, I didn't see deSyracuse cite opposition sources in regards to Bayanoun. I think it would be appropriate that you start a discussion on the reliability of deSyracuse at the map talk page and we see what everyone thinks. In any case, I'm glad you agree about Bayanoun not being contested when the Peto Lucem source I provided just now is taken into account. EkoGraf (talk) 16:21, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Here about all maps: Rule #2- Copying from maps is strictly prohibited. Maps from mainstream media are approximate and therefore unreliable for any edit. Maps from amateur sources are below the standards of Wikipedia for any edit. They violate WP:RS and WP:CIRCULAR.

WP:RS: “Anyone can create a personal web page or publish their own book, and also claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published media, such as books, patents, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, personal or group blogs, Internet forum postings, and tweets, are largely not acceptable as sources.” Source: Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published_sources
WP:CIRCULAR: “Do not use websites that mirror Wikipedia content or publications that rely on material from Wikipedia as sources.” Sûriyeya (talk) 16:31, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

If you really have a problem with it, take it to the map's talk page. However, like I already said, we have been using deSyracuse as a source for years. EkoGraf (talk) 19:21, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

EkoGraf I said only about that we can't use maps as a source and noting more I not will try denie use deSyracuse if his reports will be not biased. Sûriyeya (talk) 19:31, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

You made a mistake

In this edit, you made a mistake. Instead of inserting the correct icon, 80x80-yellow-black-anim.gif, you inserted "Dashishah", the name of the town. Please fix this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:C7:8301:8D74:1DB4:BFDC:1999:782E (talk) 20:32, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Ok thank's that you noticed on this my mistake. I will fix of this! Sûriyeya (talk) 20:36, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Sûriyeya You are wrong. Serghaya was under Rebel control and we changed the status to truce after the "Zabadani" agreement was reached where "Zabadani, Madaya, Buqajn and Serghaya" went from either contested (Zabadani) or Rebel held (Madaya, Serghaya) to "truce". We changed Kanaker last year after we realized that the town was under Rebel control since the beginning of war, but we actually never changed it because the map was created in 2013. if you want to be that precise, then change Kanaker to Rebel-Truce control, the same as Dumayr in my edit. DuckZz (talk) 21:45, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

DuckZz No one of reliable sources not said that the Kanaker,Ruhayba rebels-held only biased antigovernment sources. Sûriyeya (talk) 06:38, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

DuckZz And I ask you stop edit wothout data which can provide these your edits. Sûriyeya (talk) 06:40, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

You are not talking logic. You say "nobody said", then why were these towns marked on our map as under Rebel control, and then changed to a truce status. Serghaya is the best example DuckZz (talk) 13:39, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

DuckZz But earlier he also was under SAA but for now we not have data that this town FSA-held(not under truce) so you need provide data that this town rebels-held before change a statuse for him. Also you markede Ruhayba without prove as a rebels-held. But in issue with Ruhayba I put green dot with purple ring but we can't edit statuse for other towns and villages just on basis of old data. So you must or provide new data from relaible source or leave they without changes. Sûriyeya (talk) 13:50, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

DuckZz Opp.sources confirmed that the Ruhaybah under jointly control of SAA/rebels so we need again marked him as under truce(purple icon).hereherehere Sûriyeya (talk) 13:56, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

You are again only reading what you want.

• 1 The officers housing is not part of the town. The same as the brigade just south of the town, the same as other locations around Dumayr or Jajrud. This is not a truce, but a ceasefire, the same as today in entire Syria.
• 2 First of all, I always said that we can use twitter, but only sources that we used before, or at least sources with high ranked follow status, and this profile has neither of that, neither did we ever used him, neither he has more than 500 followers. Secondly, there we no clashes in Ruhayban, but in Dumayr town, and SOHR reporter about it, and they did not mention SAA at all but Jaish Islam and other groups clashing with Rebel groups who worked with ISIS sleeper cells, the same clashes reported few weeks ago.

* 3 This source shows the town under Rebel control only, no indication about anything else. And we can't copy from maps. DuckZz (talk) 20:27, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

I know that we can't use maps so sorry I accidentally provide a map as a source. So we leave Dumayr and Ruhayba as a green with purple circle. Sûriyeya (talk) 20:34, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Re: Some villages in Aleppo

I think I didn't made a mistake. It's true that road is cleared some days ago, but obviously just the road, not all the villages nearby, not even 1 km away. Just two days ago, after the road was pronounced clear, I found a report about SAA taking a hill (even more important than village!) less then 1 km from the road. See here. So, obviously, IS was in that area just 2 days ago. And Al-Uwaynat is barely 2 km from hill that they lost 2 days ago. Considering all that, I think I was right. --Hogg 22 (talk) 21:45, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Hogg 22 Today ISIS also confirmed that they withdrew from from the entire road between Ithria and Khanaser after SAA retake village Al Hamam and Tall Hamam hill.herehere and SOHR said that the SAA secured entier road from Aleppo to Salamiyah but Al-Uwwaynat located on distancr less of 1km so SAA can't be secured the entire road if this village was still ISIS held. ISIS clear said that they retreated from all points along this road. So I was right! Sûriyeya (talk) 22:00, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Not really. They retreated, but only after being bombed. My news about bombing IS is several days older then ISIS statement of retreating from there. Anyway, it should have been black dot few days ago, but it is red now anyway. So, it's red. --Hogg 22 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:51, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Module:Syrian Civil War detailed map

Hello, I see that two similar villages. I ask to you. Muqman and Makman villages are same village ? Because this two villages is located same area in Deir ez-Zor province. Same village but different name ? Kordestani (talk) 23:45, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Sûriyeya, be careful about editing too fast at Module:Syrian Civil War detailed map. It is under a WP:1RR restriction, which rules out making two reverts in 24 hours. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 17:20, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

EdJohnston Ok thank's for notice! I will be more attentive. Sûriyeya (talk) 17:25, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Can you revert back NW Deir Ezzor as it was because the user "Sedej" reverted 2 edits on the same day while providing no source. DuckZz (talk) 14:52, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

DuckZz Ok buddy! I do it. Sûriyeya (talk) 15:11, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Altough I completly disagree with it. As show of good faith/compromise to user:DuckZz I placed a Nukbat Brigade presense icon. But offcourse one pro-rebel twitter activist for a pro-rebel edit, can't be a source for village control placed above multiple proffesional news outlets and tweets from all conflict sides and neutral Pulitzer-class awarded journalists like Peter Clifford. But in the futere I do recomand not to use pro-rebel twitter activist Bosnoboy for edits on SDF territory because it was not the first time he claimed rebel presense in SDF area's and other pro-rebel claimes that afterward did not proof right. --Niele~enwiki (talk) 23:45, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Just interested..

Which sides do you support in the Syrian conflict?--Bolter21 (talk to me) 19:47, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Bolter21 I try be a neutral editor but I support all side in fight against terrorists from ISIS and their allies. Maybe sometimes I was little biased but I only want that a map showed such a situation which closest to reality. But a little more I support the SAA and YPG/SDF but I try to be as neutral as possible and impartial when editing a map. I believe that our preferences should not be on the first place. Sûriyeya (talk) 20:06, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Interesting. Well I didn't tried to see if you are biased toward anyone in the editing, just to see in general who do you support. I personally hate all sides except for SDF but I am skeptical about the future of the SDF.. Anyway the only place where I support a very unpopular side is the Syrian Golan, where in general I don't mind of ISIS affiliated Yarmouk-Martyrs or Jahabat a-Nusra control, as long as it is not Hezbollah I don't mind. You see, I am an Israeli so... But it's nice to see that there a neutral editor, I expected most to support Turkish allied rebels or Assad and Russia.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 10:53, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Bolter21Hi man! I see you create this map here for article Palmyra offensive (March 2016) so maybe you can update this map as they outdated as Palmrya and its Airoport retaken SAA. And also create map for this artcle. Battle of al-Qaryatayn (March–April 2016)hereherehere Sûriyeya (talk) 08:03, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

South Aleppo

Isis launched an offensive in Khanasir area to cut the Goverment supply line again,I see you changed one village to Isis but I think Isis captured the northern Jabal Shubyat area were Isis pro-media source Amaq said they captured 7 new villages.Lists129 (talk) 18:16, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Lists129 Mybe it is partialy true but we can't edit without reliable sources. But Amaq is not a crediable source as it's a official ISIS source which can't be used for ISIS success because he too beaised. Lets wait a more data from crediable sources. If we will have such data then we will do changes on map. Sûriyeya (talk) 18:37, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

I know that but what I want to say is that these villages were Isis held since 2013 until SAA launched an offensive in 2015 right after they recaptured the highway but in the map they were shown SAA held beacasue no reports were given for this villages thats the point.But my opinion now is that this will be another temporary offensive to raid and capture weapons.Lists129 (talk) 18:55, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Lists129 Reliable source said that ISIS yesterday take Durayhim Oil Field(SOHR said that it was military field not oil fieldhere about 20km east of town Khanasser and today ISIS take village Atshanah here And source said that currently, ISIS is only 15 km east of the Khanasser Highway. So probably ISIS take some villages but we dont know which and foe now we can't edited without specific data that may indicate which points may have been captured by ISIS. Yesterday Amaq also claim that they take sveral villages but this not confirmed a crediable sources. Sûriyeya (talk) 18:57, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes Amaq reported that first when they were fighting FSA in the north they launched a suprise attack and took some villages in the Jabal Shubyat mountain.Isis captured this area yesterday but also some villages in Jabal Shubyat beacause and today Isis advanced further west captured seven new villages including Atshanah and Isis is trying to storm another village situated on the highway right next to Atshanah[2].Lists129 (talk) 19:09, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Lists129 Probably you are right in this issue but although I partially agree with you, I will wait more data from reliable sources. as Rule #1 - A reliable source for that specific edit should be provided. But ISIS source Amaq is not such source. Sûriyeya (talk) 19:23, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Lists129 Here report from SOHR said that today ISIS violent attack on the Jebel Qalayah, surrounding hills and on some other points. But SOHR only said that ISIS take some hills near the Durayhim military field but not said that ISIS take some of villages. Sûriyeya (talk) 19:49, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Lists129 Reliable sources Al Masdar and SOHR said that ISIS take seven villages east of Khanasser but they not said name of these villages.herehere So we have confirmations from reliable source that ISIS take some villages so for now just need find any sources which can indicated which villages taken. Sûriyeya (talk) 06:44, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Crediable sources

If you are referring to deSyracuse's map, we have been using deSyracuse (a semi pro-opp source) for years. And in this case, the semi pro-opp source confirmed a village was still SAA-held. Besides, a seemingly proper website such as http://www.agathocledesyracuse.com/ is definitely more verifiable than a twitter post from an unverifiable poster. You cited in the edit summary I violated Rule#2-"we can't use all maps for edit". First, this sounded I was acting in a vandalis/POV-pushing way intentionally and this wouldn't be in accordance with WP policy on assuming good faith. Second, the rule doesn't say we can't use any maps, just not all maps. Per this I remind again we used deSyracuse maps for years as a semi pro-opp source to confirm government gains. Also, the rule says, we can't use maps from mainstream media or amateur ones. deSyracuse is not from mainstream media and is far from being an amateur one. In any case, situation resolved now. Cheers! EkoGraf (talk) 15:04, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

EkoGraf LOL! I was right as in rules clear said:

• Copying from maps is strictly prohibited. Maps from mainstream media are approximate and therefore unreliable for any edit. Maps from amateur sources are below the standards of Wikipedia for any edit. They violate WP:RS and WP:CIRCULAR.
• And @deSyracuse also just amateyr source.
• Also in rules clear said: “Anyone can create a personal web page or publish their own book, and also claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published media, such as books, patents, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, personal or group blogs, Internet forum postings, and tweets, are largely not acceptable as sources.”
• I've heard that before your edit on the basis of many maps but now new rules which clearer say that the use of all maps is prohibited. And it does not matter from what source pro-opp. or pro-gov. So we all must follow the rules and not use "ALL" maps. Sûriyeya (talk) 17:26, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

EkoGraf If you not agree with these rules you can talk with this man.Tradedia Sûriyeya (talk) 17:30, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Sûriyeya You quoted to me what I already quoted to you. Maps from mainstream media and Maps from amateur sources. deSyracuse is nether mainstream media or an amateur source, its a professional Syria-related map site. If it was such an amateur source as you claim than Masdar news (who we are using as a reliable source) wouldn't be using his maps like here [3]. Generally I agree, unverifiable maps made by amateurs or approximate maps that are not precise shouldn't be used. However, deSyracuse is to the contrary on both counts. WP: RS makes no mention of a general rule against maps. WP:CIRCULAR talks about not using articles from Wikipedia as sources on Wikipedia, no mention of not using maps. EkoGraf (talk) 18:06, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

PS Laughing at another editor is not per WP: Civil. EkoGraf (talk) 18:07, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

EkoGraf Man you do not want understand the rules of edit, because it is does not matter which source use the maps we can't use a data from them(maps) as a source for edit. In the rule #2 clearly states that we are forbidden use a maps as a source for edit and it does not matter which source but most important that the map may contain errors or not be accurate as well as almost all of the mas from amateur sources. And that's why we use only data from the sources but not from the maps. Because we can't know on based which data was created these maps(crediable or not crediable or only based the rumors or fantasies). Sûriyeya (talk) 18:27, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Sûriyeya You are being uncivil again. I understand the rules pretty clearly. WP:RS and WP:CIRCULAR make no mention of maps being prohibited, and the rule instigated on the talk page of the Wikipedia Syria map (with which I agree) prohibits maps from mainstream media and amateur maps (both of which deSyracuse is not). EkoGraf (talk) 18:34, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

EkoGraf deSyracuse it is just the amateur activist from a twitter and nothing more. I have no desire to conduct lengthy discussions. We have rules and if someone of editors violate of them then we will be notify about this fact administrators. Uusing amateur maps can turn our map in trash. So now EkoGraf I'l ask you please follow to our rules. Or if you will break a rule and use maps then some biased editors will use other biased unreliable maps for biased edits and our map will be very incorrect. Sûriyeya (talk) 18:55, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Sûriyeya That he is in your opinion an amateur activist from a twitter and nothing more is just that, your personal opinion. Per WP policy that's considered unsourced POV Original Research. Per WP policy you need to prove a source is unreliable, which you haven't so far. In contrast, I have actually provided you with a source (Masdar), which you consider reliable, that uses the said maps, essentially giving a level of verifiability to deSyracuse. I also personally find it odd you would have problems with using a twitter activist as a source considering you have been citing twitter posts when editing the map quite a lot. Also, you're comment hes only a twitter activist is contradictory to the existence of an official site with professionally and detailed maps (not really amateur). Not just me, but many others in the past, have used this source to confirm government gains ONLY since its a semi pro-opp source. The administrators have, so far, only been concerned with enforcing the 1RR rule. Anything else is delegated to the talk page for discussions and compromise solutions (as it should be). So please, don't issue threats so casually. So, I would ask again, please stick to WP policy, and that is: be civil and show good faith to fellow editors (instead of making accusations right from the start as you have) and provide evidence on the unreliability of the source in question (which you have not thus far). So, I will do a short summary of established WP policy: WP:CIRCULAR refers to Wikipedia articles being used as sources on Wikipedia, has nothing to do with maps; WP:RS makes no mention of a ban on the usage of maps; unofficial rule on the talk page (with which I agree) prohibits maps from mainstream media and amateur maps (both of which deSyracuse is not); to prove a source is not verifiable/reliable you need to provide sources that confirm this. EkoGraf (talk) 19:50, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

ISIL pocket - Sweida

Another source here reports that the Syrian Army entered the village of Al-Qasr some time ago. This means that at least some of the clashes recently reported were happening inside the village. LightandDark2000 (talk) 06:34, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

LightandDark2000 But source not said that they entered or take some points inside village, maybe thay assault ISIS inside but later retreated. And source which you use today only said about ambush near this village. Sûriyeya (talk) 06:38, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

The source I linked on this talk page says that they did enter the village: "carried out a powerful assault on the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant’s (ISIL) positions inside the imperative village of Al-Qasr on Friday afternoon". Maybe I should have linked this source for my edit. But that fact that there are repeated reports of clashes in (or near) the village suggests that there are ongoing clashes happening withing the area. LightandDark2000 (talk) 06:41, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

LightandDark2000 In report for 16 April SOHR clear said that SAF target Al Qasr in Suwayfa which is under control of ISIS.here So for now we need leave village as ISIS-held Sûriyeya (talk) 07:10, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

LightandDark2000 But I ask you help me revert edithere which is break the rule #2"which said that prohibired use maps" This guy put city of Da'el in Darra as under a truce on based data from map in report which not said that Da'el under truce(it only marked on the map) but according to rules we can't use maps for edit. Sûriyeya (talk) 07:17, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

He shouldn't have used the map as his source, but there was an earlier discussion on the talk page about whether or not Da'el was under a truce. (It's under Archive 61). The discussion was inconclusive, last I checked. LightandDark2000 (talk) 07:20, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

LightandDark2000 Some sources including SOHR said truce is broke inside Da'l as rebels arrested the people which put in downtown of Da'el the Syrian flag and who was advocated a truce with government. So I ask you help me now in this issue and later we can search other data about truce in this town. But he is break the rule of edit when use only map as a source and we must revert this edit. But I can't do this because I break 1RR. Sûriyeya (talk) 07:37, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Blocked as a sockpuppet

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Sûriyeya (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Firstly I'm not a sock puppet of Deonis 2012 or of any others users. I joined to Wikipedia progect as for me very intresting to contribute to the common cause to improve of articles in this encyclopedia. For this moment I did a lot useful to improve articles about Ciwi War in Syria and some others articles too. I newer violatea rules of Wikipedia. So for me it was a complete surprise that I was blocked on a charge of creation of other accounts in order to use them for harm Wikipedia. because I was accused that I a sock puppet of him. But this a crazy nonsence this guy a crazy vandal. He is not follow to any rules when edit articles plus later after he was blocked he is create many fake accounts and probly this guy SOCK MASTER But I do not have nothing to do with it. So if you look closely on most edits which he is do here and on most of my edits here, then you can see big difrantse between us. Also this guy is a very bad knowed English but it is not a problem for me because I'm good know English. So it is clearly for me and I hope for you too that doesn't make sense at all compare me and Deonis 2012 (talk · contribs). So I hope for your a fair decision in my issue. Sûriyeya (talk) 15:21, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Decline reason:

WP:DUCK sockpuppetry. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:52, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

"Also this guy is a very bad knowed English but it is not a problem for me because I'm good know English." Oh yes? Peridon (talk) 16:49, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Sûriyeya. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)