Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Erlbaeko (talk | contribs) at 14:13, 10 July 2016 (→Aqra mountains 10 km south of Manbij). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This article was nominated for deletion on 23 July 2015. The result of the discussion was keep.

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Control of cities during the Syrian civil war. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Control of cities during the Syrian civil war at the Reference desk.

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: Middle East 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 This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  Middle Eastern military history task force Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Syria Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Syria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Syria on Misplaced Pages. 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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Cities This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities

To help centralize discussions and keep related topics together, Template talk:Syrian Civil War detailed map redirects here.

Template:Syrian Civil War sanctions

Rules for Editing the Map 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). 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 Misplaced Pages 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: Misplaced Pages:Verifiability#Self-published_sources WP:CIRCULAR: “Do not use websites that mirror Misplaced Pages content or publications that rely on material from Misplaced Pages 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.

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60 61, 62, 63, 64, 65

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.

Verifiability

WP:V says that "readers must be able to check that Misplaced Pages articles are not just made up". How do we check that a given village is under control of a party? F.ex. the "Hamir Labidah" or the "Qurah Kabirah"-village south of Manbij? What RS is the black IS color based on, and how am I as a reader able to check it? Erlbaeko (talk) 11:46, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Typically, the sources we use to indicate ground control are from either field reporters (such as Jack Shahine), people connected to field reporters (This guy and Abdel Rahman), or local news agencies (Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, al-Masdar, Hawar News). Pbfreespace3 (talk) 14:36, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

That's ok, but as a reader I do like to be able to check what source a given dot color is based on. I don't believe the readers are able to check the sources if they are provided in the "Edit summary" somewhere in the revision history of the Module page. Erlbaeko (talk) 15:13, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Ideally, information on towns (description of control & sources) can be found by clicking on the town dot on the map. Notice the caption of the map which says: "Hold cursor over location to display name; click to go to sources &/or status description (if available, the cursor will show as ; if not, it will show as )."

Notice the “link=” parameter in the map code. This is supposed to link to the part in the Misplaced Pages article that contains the source and talks about the events in the town. So for example, if you click on the dot of the town "Inkhil" on the map, it will take you to the part of the Misplaced Pages article on the town "Inkhil" that has the description of war events (& sources): link = "Inkhil#civilwar" Here the first part before the # is the name of the article (Inkhil). the second part after the # is the name of the section (civilwar).

For this to work, there needs to be a section by this same name in the article or you need to put a wikilink anchor: {{anchor|section}} that will act as a section header (in this case {{anchor|civilwar}}). By the way, sources &/or status description can also be found in "battle/offensive/etc..." articles and not just in towns' articles... A quick look at the map's code will tell you where each town dot will link. Obviously, there are many links that still need to be created... Tradedia 20:10, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, I agree that it is somehow verifiable if the dot is linked to an article that says it is currently under control of a party, and that part is sourced by a citation to a reliable source that directly supports it. Erlbaeko (talk) 22:07, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Twited map as the RS?

Pbfreespace3 Re . Do you mean that this map confirms that IS has control of those villages? Erlbaeko (talk) 21:28, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Pbfreespace3, please do not re-add those villages without a reliable source that says the specific location is under control of a party. "Copying from maps is strictly prohibited" according to the "Rules for Editing the Map" described above. Erlbaeko (talk) 10:10, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Actually, copying from maps is prohibited. But on the other hand, it is allowed to add new marks which are inside the area held by one faction without sources. Important: This doesn't count for changing a colour of course.--Ermanarich (talk) 18:06, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Does it have to be widely reported?

Niele~enwiki. Re: What "faulty tweet" are you talking about? I provided a link to the Misplaced Pages article that contains the source and talks about the events in the village. The source, dated 22 June 2016, clearly states that "The US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces have seized the village of Arima." Do you have any source saying that IS are still in control of the village? Erlbaeko (talk) 09:49, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Erlbaeko SouthFront articles are based on varios pro-side twitter sources.Lists129 (talk) 15:24, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Ok. Do you have any source saying that IS are in control of the village? Erlbaeko (talk) 18:00, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Abdel Rahman is another one who says ISIS controls Arima. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 17:46, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Abdel Rahman

‎Beshogur Re . Who is this Abdel Rahman, and does that tweet counts as a reliable source? Erlbaeko (talk) 16:53, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Twitter as a source

As I already several some times, I'm quite unhappy with Twitter as a source. Anyone can write there anything and there isn't a guarantee that it's true. Furthermore, most of the accounts which are used as a source here are clearly biased and in favour of one side in this conflict. And we actually had very many false informations on this page just because the excessive use of all kinds of Twitter accounts as a source.

But to be honest, I don't think that I can stop all you Users from using Twitter as a source.

Well then, I think that we should make a compromise that gives clear norms, which Twitter sources can be used/used partially and which not. I'd recommend to create a list here which names the Twitter accounts and maybe a comment about there political attitude in this conflict, if they can be used only in case they confirm a defeat of their preferred side. Any Twitter account, which is not on this list (if you agree with my idea) can not be used as long as its reliability is discussed in this section. Do you agree here? If so, we should start creating that list.--Ermanarich (talk) 21:04, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

US Military Map of ISIS

We have a prohibition on maps: 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 Misplaced Pages for any edit. They violate WP:RS and WP:CIRCULAR.

This prohibition was put in place last year because of amateur maps on Twitter and other online venues that are generally not regarded as reliable and accurate sources of information. Now I would like to draw to your attention to this map. This map is produced by the United States Department of Defense, who opposes ISIL. Although the map is admittedly inaccurate in certain frontline areas, it shows a variety of locations held by ISIL which are not marked by our map. Such areas include sites along the Iraq/Syria border, and areas between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. I ask the community: should we be able to use this map, which is anti-ISIL and from an official military source, to make constructive edits on the Syrian and Iraqi maps? I think we should be able to use it for some locations. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 04:08, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

This map is very outdated as it appears that it shows the situation in April 2016, not in July 2016. Regards,131.188.48.178 (talk) 13:51, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Regardless of age, it is their most recent map, and it shows critical ISIS locations near al-Qai'm in the desert. Is that not worth displaying? Pbfreespace3 (talk) 03:43, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

al-Qai'm is in Iraq and not in Syria, right? The IS positions in Syria that are near al-Qai'm are - according to the Department of Defense map - all at the Euphrates river (such as al-Bukamal etc.). But these locations are already IS held according to our map. The US map also shows al-Tanf border crossing to be under IS control, but it has been taken by "New Syrian Army" recently. So I don't think we should add any locations based on the Department of Defense map. 131.188.48.178 (talk) 14:15, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

al-Aslaha

al-Aslaha in Suwayda is rebel-held

• https://twitter.com/archicivilians/status/749721252311535616?s=09
• https://twitter.com/Step_Agency/status/749557827660836864

3bdulelah (talk) 20:11, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

We're not able to change the status of this town since both archicivilians and Step News Agency are noted pro-rebel sources. I tried to look for other sources, but I can't find any. Until we can find some better sources, the town won't change. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 02:57, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Al Aslihah taken the SAA.link Mehmedsons (talk) 14:16, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Bir Mahrutha or Sadd al-Matuta (Syrian-Jordanian border)

Any idea where Bir Mahrutha or Sadd al-Matutua are located? They must be rebel controlled, maybe they are close to each other. https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/us-backed-fighters-suffer-another-setback-syria/ and http://blog.amin.org/sky2018/2016/07/04/مقتل-10-من-المعارضة-السورية Mughira1395 (talk) 22:39, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Rusheidah a border-crossing or al-Masdar reliability?

I know it's not the right place for it, but I am frustrated when I see a rubish of an article (one must say bullshit), on a page which is taken as serious source (ok, tendentious, but serious)... Since yesterday there is an article from Masdar about a fuel convoy belonging to ISIS, which was destroyed by Syrian Air Force: https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/isis-fuel-convoy-destroyed-syrian-air-force-near-iraqi-border Allegedly the second one in a few days. Even they put a map to show the location, it seems they take their readers for fools. The incredibility of nearly every detail in this small artice would let me loose my trust in Masdar or at least in Leith Fadel, the author of the article. When the author writes that Rusheidah, which is - as mentioned in the article! - in the Swaydah-province and that it is a "imperative border crossing" to Anbar in Iraq, one must ask himself, if the author has ever take a look at map: Not only Swaydah has no border to Iraq (in fact is the border-crossing to Jordan!), but one must first travel out of the province, then through Damas-province, then Homs-province to arrive to the nearest border-crossing to Iraq. One must also ask, what a ISIS-fuel-convoy is doing near Rusheidah (which is government held)... In the whole area there is no ISIS (exept of this new little town al-Shi'ab on our map...). There is simply no possiblity to arrive to this region for any ISIS-convoy and there is also no need for ISIS to supply they little presence there with a convoy... I mean: From where did this convoy come? From Jordan? From rebel-held Tanf?? Or from government-held towns? And in any case, the the article would loose its sense. The article seems so be nothing than an attempt to boost moral of pro-government readers (as is of course Masdar as a whole), and without generalizing, but this article is really beneath any level of credibility... Mughira1395 (talk) 16:26, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Al-Habsawi west to Ayn Issa

According to this: https://twitter.com/Step_Agency/status/751435748075864064, SDF retook control over Al-Habsawi west to Ayn Issa.Mughira1395 (talk) 17:46, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

The Damascus map

The Damascus map is a bit odd. Unlike the rest of the map, most of the Damascus map doesn't show anything when you hold your cursor over the dots (so you don't always know which town/contested area is which). Also, only the East Ghouta area is being updated regularly. The West Ghouta pocket (just south of Mezzeh airport) is very out of date. That unnamed purple dot is Moadamiya, which is rebel-controlled but under truce, but Darayya just to the right of it is an important contested city where heavy fighting is going on right now and has been going on sporadically for months, and yet there's no dot to indicate that the city even exists, let alone that it's currently an active battlefield. Moreover, the Moadamiya/Darayya area is presented as one contiguous rebel territory, but in reality the two cities have been cut off from each other for months (since somewhere around January/February 2016; every new map since then shows them as two separate areas with government-controlled territory between them). There is no contiguous rebel territory there anymore, just two cities with the government controlling the outskirts, so the green oval background surrounding them should be completely removed, leaving just a purple dot for Moadamiya and a contested green/red dot for Darayya. This would make it accurate to the maps routinely shown by al-Masdar and other media sources. This is a great map overall, and it should strive to be as complete, up-to-date and accurate as possible.

Here are two maps from al-Masdar of the Darayya area, the first from April 2016 and the second from June 2016: https://media.almasdarnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/1234.jpg

https://media.almasdarnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Darayya-map.jpg Kawada Kira (talk) 02:44, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Aqra mountains 10 km south of Manbij

@Beshogur: Please do not add (or re-add) unreferenced or poorly referenced information to articles or any other page on Misplaced Pages as you did here. Thank you. Erlbaeko (talk) 14:03, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Unreferenced? Those villages, or mountain hills were before sourced. Beshogur (talk) 14:11, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Where is that source? Erlbaeko (talk) 14:12, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

• All unassessed articles
• Start-Class military history articles
• Start-Class Middle Eastern military history articles
• Middle Eastern military history task force articles
• List-Class Syria articles
• Mid-importance Syria articles
• WikiProject Syria articles
• List-Class WikiProject Cities articles
• All WikiProject Cities pages