Talk:Islamic State - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) at 03:08, 17 November 2016 (Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant/Archive 39) (bot). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 03:08, 17 November 2016 by Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) (Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant/Archive 39) (bot)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Islamic State article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

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, 44Auto-archiving period: 14 days

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

Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.

Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments, look in the archives, and review the FAQ before commenting.

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Islamic State received a peer review by Misplaced Pages editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

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

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Iraq High‑importance

	Iraq portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iraq, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Iraq 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.IraqWikipedia:WikiProject IraqTemplate:WikiProject IraqIraq
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

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 met Coverage and accuracy: criterion 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 High‑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
High	This article has been rated as High-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.

Arab world Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arab world, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Arab world 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.Arab worldWikipedia:WikiProject Arab worldTemplate:WikiProject Arab worldArab world
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Crime and Criminal Biography: Terrorism

	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 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.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Terrorism task force (assessed as Top-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Islam: Islam and Controversy High‑importance

	Islam portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles 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.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Islam and Controversy task force.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Politics Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
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.

Organizations Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations 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.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on April 8, 2015.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

"ISIS not the Islamic state it fiercely claims to be". Olean Times Herald. March 18, 2015. I approach Misplaced Pages cautiously as to whether its abundant information on a multitude of subjects is complete and authoritative. But I salute the site for its numerous citations concerning the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, or ISIS — specifically the "criticism of the name 'Islamic State' and 'caliphate' declaration" (found under its entry for the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant).

Template:Syrian Civil War sanctions

This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination.

Discussions:

RM, Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant → Islamic State, Not moved, 7 September 2014, /Archive 10#Move request - 6 September 2014
RM, Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant → Islamic State (Organisation), No consensus, 17 September 2014, /Archive 11#Requested move 17 September 2014
RM, Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant → Islamic State (islamist rebel group), No consensus, 9 January 2015, /Archive 28#Requested move 9 January 2015
Content discussion, References in the text: ISIS or ISIL?, ISIL chosen, 17 September 2014, /Archive 10#References in the text: ISIS or ISIL?
RM, Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant → Islamic State, Not moved, 19 April 2015, /Archive 34#Requested move 19 April 2015
RM, Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant → Islamic State (IS), Not moved, 15 July 2015, /Archive_37#Requested move 15 July 2015

Older discussions:

Islamic State of Iraq and Syria → Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, Moved, 13 August 2013, /Archive 1#Rename
RM, Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant → Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, Not moved (but moved back to "Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant"), 12 June 2014, /Archive 2#Requested Move
RM, Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant → The Islamic State, No consensus, 29 June 2014, /Archive 3#Requested move 2
RM, Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant → Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, Procedurally closed, 31 July 2014, /Archive 3#Requested move
RM, Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant → Islamic State, Not moved, 8 August 2014, /Archive 5#Requested move 8 August 2014
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant → Islamic State (organization), Quick close, 20 August 2014, /Archive 5#Move

Template:Friendly search suggestions

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Islamic State article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

NOTE 1: This talk page has a history of high levels of activity. Please check to see whether your additional content can be added to an existing discussion section, and please make new section titles as precise as possible.

NOTE 2: Please complete citations attached to article content with fields such as Author, Title, URL, Date, Publisher/Work, Agency and Access Date. (See footnotes guide above.) (If you would like to copy the footnotes guide to your userpage, put this template in the Edit Page – {{User:P123ct1/My template}} – and it will display the guide.)

Page views

Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. Updates on reimplementing the Graph extension, which will be known as the Chart extension, can be found on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org.

Conspiracy theories

What is the point in including fruity loops in this article? --BowlAndSpoon (talk) 14:40, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

@BowlAndSpoon: Can you be more specific? --BurritoBazooka (talk) 02:43, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Well, first, they are nuts. Second, this article is about Islamic State, not about conspiracies about Islamic State. Does David Icke think Baghdadi is a lizard? Should this be included in the article? Article is long enough; just a complete waste of space. --BowlAndSpoon (talk) 07:10, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

They have been restored again. Why are they being included? Again, should we include David Icke's take on Islamic State? --BowlAndSpoon (talk) 17:39, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes, this obviously should be removed, or at very least moved in a different section. Here is edit. First, this is not "Criticism" as title of the section tells . Then, it tells for starters (the diff) this is all "rumors". According to next para, "many in the Middle East believe that...". Yes, they may believe in a lot of conspiracy theories, but why this should be included in the very large page? This might be moved to a separate section called "ISIL-related conspiracy theories", but this is clearly undue and WP:FRINGE. My very best wishes (talk) 13:52, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Actually, a proper subsection would be "Allegations of US support" here, but we should not include something which is quite obviously WP:FRINGE/untrue - according to vast majority of sources. My very best wishes (talk) 14:30, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

I originally favored removal, but—considering the extremely prominent role conspiracy theories play in the political discourse of the Arab states and Iran—if reliable sources like The New York Times report on the widespread belief that Islamic State is an American-Israeli conspiracy, then a few short sentences describing this phenomenon in neutral terms is not necessarily UNDUE.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 22:55, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Well, I still favour removal, for the reasons I've already given (article length, who cares?, why restrict to Muslim-world conspiracies?). Anyway, I've said what I have to say. Let's see what others say and how the consensus comes out. --BowlAndSpoon (talk) 23:54, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

To be fair to the peoples of the Middle East, there have been many real conspiracies by Western powers in that part of the world (see, e.g., 1953 Iranian coup d'état), and there is obviously some element of truth underlying even the more outlandish allegations (such as the claim that Baghdadi is secretly an Israeli actor named Simon Elliot). Israel, after all, has a well-known policy of providing medical aid to any Syrian rebels that request it, in return for quiet along the Syria-Israel border; there may also be some military assistance and intelligence-sharing—and there is no doubt jihadists have benefited from Israeli largess. Meanwhile, there is far more evidence that "moderate" rebels backed by the United States and its partners tolerated the rise of Islamic State than there is to support the theory that Assad is somehow to blame for the Syrian uprising turning Islamist. When we include ridiculous claims such as John Kerry's assertion that Assad "purposely ced some territory to them in order to make them more of a problem so he can make the argument that he is somehow the protector against them" (see Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant#Allegations of Syrian support), it's worth considering that the Western press may be more sophisticated than the Arab press but both can be guilty of propaganda.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 02:01, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

General Issues

Lead should contain a maximum of 4 paragraphs and describe in a concise way the various groups persecuted by ISIS as well as the fact that France and Turkey have been systematically targeted.
Anti-Zionist and anti-LGBT action is not mentioned at all in the article. Hula Hup (talk) 18:02, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Hula Hup is correct. This lead is out of control. For your information, Misplaced Pages has style guidelines that cover the leads of all articles. Please read Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style/Lead section. -SusanLesch (talk) 18:16, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

I can't do it this week, but I can come back in early November and attempt to edit the lead to an acceptable length. Best wishes. -SusanLesch (talk) 00:51, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Atiru beat me to it. Great job, thank you! -SusanLesch (talk) 15:40, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Supporters

Prof. Efraim Inbar - add him to section supporters . "..campaign to eradicate the Islamic State (IS) organization. This is a strategic mistake." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.90.196.227 (talk) 05:38, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Oppose IS are truly bad guys, but few of their opponents are much better. The artical doesn't directly support IS, it just provides reasoning as to why their existance holds a place and what the potential backlash of military annihilation would be. IVORK _Discuss 03:58, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Oppose Come on. He just sees not eliminating IS completely as the lesser evil. Hardly amounts to supporting them. --BowlAndSpoon (talk) 23:57, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Western countries, Gulf States, and Turkey have instrumentalised both Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State as part of a proxy war against China, Russia and Iran - as indicated by an unclassified DIA report, which you can access here: http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Pg.-291-Pgs.-287-293-JW-v-DOD-and-State-14-812-DOD-Release-2015-04-10-final-version11.pdf This information needs to appear in the main article as it is of utmost importance and relevance. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:CB00:5B8:9400:D48C:EA2A:B004:32A5 (talk) 13:38, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Map / Contested Areas

I have a suggestion regarding the "ongoing battle" concept. I visit this site regularly for the last 18 month, to check-up on the territorial situation. Even though I see the map every couple of days, when there is a new contested area, I cannot tell which side is on the offensive, and which is defending.

Could you update the template to include this information? There is a "(" position, when siege is underway, we could combine the siege and contest concepts to introduce three different kind of contest. 1. Siege, 2.Offensive, 3.Stalemate(which is what the current contested area template seems to represent).

Thank you in advance, Psubrat2000 (talk) 07:56, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

@Psubrat2000:, I forwarded your request to Talk:Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War#Mark contested areas with markers showing historical progress --BurritoBazooka (talk) 02:57, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Raqqa is spared an offensive

A joint offensive against Mosul in Iraq to get rid of Daesh has started, but Raqqa in Syria is spared. Even though Daesh can be rid of in a matter of months by militarily superior countries, we should note a lack of action by coalition forces delays the end of this organization. -213.74.186.109 (talk) 08:37, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Newly-Declassified U.S. Government Documents

Check out the internet for evidence such as newly-declassified U.S. Government documents which claims the West supported the creation of ISIS. Here's another detailed site documenting 26 things we did not know about the terrorist group. -78.171.180.160 (talk) 17:58, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

I linked the unclassified DIA report in question above. This information needs to appear on the main article. Could someone please update the article? It is of utmost importance. Furthermore, there are e-mails (part of the Clinton e-mails scandal) that indicate that the United States and "the West" had knowledge of the activity of ISIL and al-Qaeda and coordinated the recruitment, funding, training, and arming of both terrorist entities, either directly or indirectly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:CB00:5B8:9400:85C:E0F4:9B0A:43CC (talk) 05:01, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Proposal to reconsider potential move to ISIS

Having reviewed the last discussion about this from 2014, I propose to move the article to "ISIS" (rather than "ISIL") because ISIS is now a more widely-used term for the group.

"ISIS" is now used by the following media organisations:

"ISIL" is used by the following media organisations:

"ISIS" returns about 20,300,000 results on Google news in the United States. It returns about 239,000,000 results on Google search. "ISIL" returns about 1,130,000 results on Google news in the United States. It returns about 20,100,000 results on Google search.

I propose moving the article in line with WP:RECOGNIZABLE.

Atiru (talk) 22:59, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Not done - Various RMs have happened and all have more or less been opposed and I see nothing different here, By all means start an RM but I don't think it'll get very far. –Davey2010 23:54, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 20 October 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved - there is consensus to keep the current title. (non-admin closure) Fuortu (talk) 17:48, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant → ISIS – Having reviewed the last discussion about this from 2014, I propose to move the article to "ISIS" (rather than "ISIL" or "Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant") because "ISIS" is now a more widely-used term for the group.

Google Books returns the following results (within the US):

ISIS: 240,000
ISIL: 82,200
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant: 5,440
Islamic State in Iraq and Syria: 61,200
Daesh: 8,370

Google News returns the following results (within the US):

ISIS: 20,300,000
ISIL: 1,130,000

Google search returns the following results (within the US)

ISIS: 239,000,000
ISIL: 20,100,000

"ISIS" is now used by the following media organisations:

"ISIL" is used by the following media organisations:

I propose moving the article in line with WP:RECOGNIZABLE. Atiru (talk) 13:35, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Very strong support, Obviously. Term used by some of the top MSM orgs and second numbers don't lie. 119.159.37.9 (talk) 16:57, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Comment: Why not use the full form Islamic State of Iraq and Syria? This avoids collision with other things called Isis. ONR (talk) 02:29, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

""ISIL", "ISIS", "Daish", "Daesh", and "Islamic state group" redirect here.", clearly the acronyms are not conflicting with things called Isis or Isil. © Tbhotch (en-2.5). 05:16, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Support, I don't know when was the last time I saw "Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant" and "Islamic State of Iraq and Syria" in reliable sources. They simply call them ISIS. © Tbhotch (en-2.5). 05:16, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Comment: Per WP:ACRONYMTITLE, "if readers somewhat familiar with the subject are likely to only recognise the name by its acronym, then the acronym should be used as a title." However, I think both forms are still applied. --Mhhossein 06:25, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Oppose There's still a lot of places using ISIL, so it's not an ideal move. I think WP:TITLECHANGES applies here - "If an article title has been stable for a long time, and there is no good reason to change it, it should not be changed." There's no real confusion/reason to move this, as the redirects come here anyway. Lugnuts 07:44, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Oppose: aside from the nominators evidence being very US-centric there is no reason to pick one acronym when so many are in use, given that the full name is easily recognisable. Organisations such as the BBC now favour just IS over other acronyms (see a recent example here) which haven't been included in the noms list. Ebonelm (talk) 10:05, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Oppose. IS, ISIL and Daesh are all very common. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:09, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Oppose - There is no consistent use of any one acronym. Per WP:ACRONYMTITLE, the onus is on the nom to demonstrate that their preferred acronym has been exclusive and stable for a prolonged period of time. Stating that "I've googled it" only demonstrates this particular moment in time across the internet (which would include blogs, forums, plus every man and his dog). The 'evidence' presented demonstrates, in itself, that WP:RECOGNIZABLE does not apply. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 20:51, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Oppose: There are any number of acronyms and abbreviations to describe this group and unrecognized state. However, the current name is by far the most proper, as it is the specific name utilized. I would surmise that we would get ten times as many name name proposals if we adopt an abbreviation. DARTHBOTTO_talk•cont 03:24, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Oppose. No good reason to change was shown. Coltsfan (talk) 23:08, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Oppose - many outlets call them IS, Islamic State, "so-called" Islamic State, ISIL or Daesh. Unreal7 (talk) 09:24, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
Oppose - once again, per arguments above. —Мандичка 😜 00:41, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
Oppose as per others. WP:TITLECHANGE applies. Khestwol (talk) 05:43, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Oppose. Possibly move to Islamic State of Iraq and Syria but not the acronym title ISIS. There is too many acronyms (IS, ISIL, ISIS, Daesh) to be consistent enough to move to any of them. MarkiPoli (talk) 14:33, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

"rejecting its statehood"

The statement "the United Nations, various governments, and mainstream Muslim groups rejecting its statehood or caliphhood" is referenced by

Akyol, Mustafa (21 December 2015). "A Medieval Antidote to ISIS". The New York Times. Retrieved 4 January 2016.

Now I don't see the point of this reference. It seems to be a random journalistic opinion piece, it does not seem to evaluate or poll the opinion of "mainstream Muslim groups". As for the UN and "various governments", it is clear that IS is not recognized by any of these, but non-recognition is different from active "rejection". If we claim "the UN has rejected the IS's statehood" I would expect an official UN publication saying exactly that. Afaics, the UN has designated IS a "terrorist organisation", it has not even bothered to address the question of "statehood", let alone "caliphhood" (the UN would hardly try to make theological or religious pronouncements). As for "mainstream Muslim" opinion, I would suggest replacing the reference with something like this, suggesting that IS has at around 10% support in Sunni nations (again the phrasing "rejecting the statehood" isn't borne out by this, you can also "not support" an entity that you recognize as being a de facto state). --dab (𒁳) 21:21, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

@Dbachmann: So, please see this section! --Mhhossein 06:30, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

What section? Your link just leads to the top of the main article. Alfie Gandon (talk) 17:40, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

@Alfie Gandon: Please avoid making similar reverts unless you have built consensus over the issue. You need enough reliable sources for your claim. As you see Pannam2014, among others, is against your edit. --Mhhossein 16:08, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

I agree with Dab. Also, the first line of State (polity) is "A state is a type of polity that is an organized political community living under a single system of government." Does IS tolerate other systems of government in the territory it controls? I don't believe it does, and I know it's unrecognised by other states. Alfie Gandon (talk) 17:40, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Neverending issues with the name

Hello, the article should be named DAESH - the name referred to in the region. It is even said the terrorist organisation considers the word "Daesh" to be condescending and prefers not to use it. If this is unnecessary then consider that The Levant is not even defined or linked in the article. Furthermore, the Levant contains Jordan, Palestine and Israel which are not areas the group claims or occupies. It only makes sense to change the name of the article to DAESH or ISIS. -213.74.186.109 (talk) 12:52, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Categories: