This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 |
Rojava refers to western (or Syrian) Kurdistan, but following territorial expansion, the DFNS as a whole is not considered to be entirely within Kurdistan. Also we rarely see the federation referred to as "Rojava" any longer. In my opinion we should split the article between Rojava, covering the long established Kurdish dominated areas of Syria, and the Democratic Federation of Northern Syria, which is a de facto polity established in the areas controlled by the YPG and later Syrian Democratic Forces since the beginning of the Syrian civil war. Rob984 ( talk) 11:08, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
The map used here is scandalous and extends even more than what Kurdish propaganda represents as Kurdish areas in Syria. For example, no Kurds live in Deir ezzor Governorate or Raqqa, except for a few villages west of Tel Abyad. Political entity maps do not change daily based on front lines, so this map should say areas under control by SDF and should not be used to reflect any political entity. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم ( talk) 04:57, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
The current map, depicting military frontlines instead of the administrative topic of this article, is indeed scandalous. Reverting to the administrative divisions map. -- 2A1ZA ( talk) 09:51, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 18:01, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Democratic Federation of Northern Syria →
Rojava
WP:COMMONNAME. Also note that the archives are all at Talk:Rojava/xx. ―
Justin (koavf)❤
T☮
C☺
M☯
06:02, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi Everyone. Can someone please update the emblem to the corrected version I made fixing the alignment issues? https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coat_of_Arms_of_Rojava_-_13-12-17.svg Albert.trosk ( talk) 12:36, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved: with no prejudice with regards to a future nomination as consensus can change. ( closed by non-admin page mover) SITH (talk) 12:02, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
Democratic Federation of Northern Syria →
Northern and Eastern Syria – In Late 2018-early 2019 the regional administration changed it's name from the DFNS to Self-Adminstration / Autonomous Administration of Northern and Eastern Syria (see above discussion). The
common name for the region itself is Northern and Eastern Syria(with variations in exact grammar)
SA-NES Representation in Benelux
ANF News article on the recent Manbij bombing, uses Northern and Eastern Syria
search results on ANF for Northern and Eastern Syria
Jerusalem Post uses both Northeast Syria and North and East Syria
Reuters, both northern and eastern Syria and Northeast Syria (I used both instances mentioning the SA/AA-NES, and referring to it as a geographical area in relation to SDF controlled areas)
This would also include changing mentions of the region in the article to Northern and Eastern Syria/NES or the Autonomous/Self Administration depending on context (see above discussion)
Thespündragon 16:53, 17 January 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. —
Amakuru (
talk)
13:01, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
Maybe we wait a little longer to see the result of the negotiations between Damascus and the SDF/TEV-DEM? If they come to an agreement we maybe would have to make a move as well. Lean Anael ( talk) 09:31, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
Definately not "Kurdish occupied..." because this government is multi-ethnic. Rojava is a perfectly fine name until and unless something more solid energes as a common or proper name in English. Legacypac ( talk) 03:17, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
It may be best if we can determine a name that can remain regardless of future official name changes. I think a short-form name would be best, rather than a long construction. (ie: SDC administered areas in Northeast Syria) An idea I have is doing something similar to the official 2016 name (DF Rojava-North Syria), with something like a title "Rojava-Northeast Syria". This would be both unambiguous(not being purely geographic), and not give undue weight to the name Rojava, which is officially only used to refer to Kurdish-majority areas. Simply "Rojava" may also work, as it is the most common in western English sources. Thespündragon 00:33, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
{{
ping}}
)
czar
03:35, 1 February 2019 (UTC)I think it's best to hold off on a name change for now, until more detail about the nature of the new structure of the region emerges regarding the proper English translation, the nature of the sub-regions and the role of the new "General Assembly of the NES" vs the Syrian Democratic Council. Considering the volatility of the region more changes might also be made relatively soon. Updating the article further to avoid confusion and clarifying that a name change has occurred is entirely ok by me though. I would also oppose renaming the article to Rojava, since this is both not the official name of the region and not the dominant name in the international media when referring to the region any longer, it's often just referred to as the "Kurdish-led" administration in Northeastern Syria. AntonSamuel ( talk) 09:51, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved to Rojova. ( closed by non-admin page mover) SITH (talk) 21:29, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
Democratic Federation of Northern Syria → Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria – If were going to use the official name of Rojava than we should use the current official name. Charles Essie ( talk) 16:58, 28 February 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. SITH (talk) 18:42, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
Apparently the DFNS is being replaced (?) with the Autonomous Admin of N&E Syria(AANES/NES)? It appears that DFNS may have only referred to the areas currently designated a region (as well as Manbij), whereas the regions in the southeast are part of a different structure, and these 2 structures are being unified into AANES. Something like that? I'm not sure what the administration change is officially, but essentially what was previously referred to as the DFNS is now the AANES/NES.
Sources:
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
So I believe the article should be renamed to either 'Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria' or 'Northern and Eastern Syria' to reflect this administration change.
Thespündragon
19:19, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
Tagging previous editors of this page: @ Applodion: @ Jim7049: @ Khoshhat: @ Purijj: @ Editor abcdef: @ Cirflow: @ 2A1ZA: @ Nøkkenbuer: @ Bobfrombrockley: @ Takinginterest01: What do you guys think regarding a potential name change? Which English translation would you be in favor of? AntonSamuel ( talk) 13:57, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
Info: Kongreya Star's twitter says that there are 7 regions in the SANES, Afrin, Manbij, Kobani(Euphrates), Jazira, Tabqa, Raqqa, and Deir Ezzor [12], i'm trying to obtain a better source Thespündragon 22:17, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
Lede: The Self-Administration of North and East Syria (SANES) (languages bit), commonly referred to as Rojava or Northern and Eastern Syria, is a de facto autonomous region in northeastern Syria. It consists of three self-governing regions, Afrin Region, Jazira Region, and Euphrates Region, and local councils in the Manbij, Tabqa, Raqqa, and Deir Ez-Zor regions. (then the rest of it)
I used SANES as it is the most used on official sites.
Thespündragon
00:11, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
@AntonSamuel I believe at this point enough time has passed that we can start converting the articles to the new name. I believe we should use the official translation SANES or "the Self-Administration" when referring to the Administration itself (ie: the SANES has 3 self-governing regions ... ), and using "Northern and Eastern Syria", "Northern Syria", etc when referring to the region (Policing in Northern and Eastern Syria is performed by the Asayish ... )
Thespündragon
20:31, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
And in the "Politiy names and translations section" we should say something like "there are multiple translations of this into english, including the Self-Administration of North and East Syria, the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria, among others."
Thespündragon
20:35, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
Why has it been renamed to Rojava? Rojava hasn't been the name for ages and it doesn't make sense to use a colloquial Kurdish terminology for an area that is majority Arab (4 million people, only like 1.6/7 of whom are Kurdish). The formal name should be used, aka the DFNS, NES, SANES, or whatever. 2A00:23C4:B12E:D400:83B:113:1AEA:64A0 ( talk) 11:27, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
Can someone give me one respected media outlet or international body (state, organization) that is using the word rojava for this area? After 2011, Kurdish nationalists invented that word for parts of al-Hasaka Governorate and two other pockets in Aleppo Governorate. However, the use of the name HERE has been rolling to cover 30% of Syria's territory, which is a SCAM and scandal. This page is full of pro-Kurdish propaganda and almost all the claims here are entirely based on that. This page poses a huge credibility test for Wikipedia. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم ( talk) 20:56, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
None of these media outlets mentions the word "rojava" in these stories. They simply refer to the area by the facts, that is Kurdish-controlled areas, SDF-controlled areas, Kurdish forces, etc. Any serious attempt at fixing the credibility of this article? Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم ( talk) 08:15, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
I quickly come in with some Ideas and articles of some of the same news agencies you named where they wrote about Rojava. I understand there can be better names, because the region written about here is larger than just Rojava, but the name of the region really changed several times and I also understand that some chose the name Rojava because this is the name most people can associate to something actually written here in the article. People will not google Northeastern Syria but rather Rojava if they search for the region controlled by the SDF.
Following some articles naming Rojava, which in some articles is also referred as an area in Northeastern Syria.
And here some other rather respected media who write about Rojava as well.
I agree that an area including not only Rojava but also the Arab, and Christian areas can be named differently. They have their own name which is "Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria" and I guess this would be fair. It seems Anton Samuel could live with it too. But this would be the third name this article has this year...If we change the name of the article away from Rojava, a Name which for many people interested in the region Northern Syria is best known, we should agree on something a clear majority supports so we can keep a name for this article (for more time than just some months). I would not open a new discussion about the name for now and wait some more time (because we had the same discussion already twice this year), but if someone else opens one, I would try to help to come to a good end of this discussion. Best, Lean Anael ( talk) 20:42, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
Are there any objections to splitting Syrian Kurdistan into a new article, as this article only covers the Northeast Syrian administration rather than the Syrian part of the region Kurdistan. We have articles for Turkish and Iranian Kurdistan as geographic regions, and Iraqi Kurdistan as a geographic region is synonymous with the Kurdistan Region of Iraq, while Syrian Kurdistan does not correctly refer to the Northeast Syrian Autonomous Administration. Thespündragon 13:36, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
@ عمرو بن كلثوم: Hi again, if there are going to be sections on this page that feature opinionated statments about this political entity, then neither pro-PYD, pro-regime or pro-opposition claims should be solely present without presenting other viewpoints, and if conflicting reports exist among largely neutral international agencies regarding a matter, that should also be clarified in line with WP:NPOV. For example, a while back I added a summary of common criticisms against the entity in the introduction to balance out the arguments that defenders of the region present. Adding a statement about alleged ethnic cleansing without credible differing statements, which do exist, such as those from U.N. Independent International Commission of Inquiry and the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights that you removed without an explanation from the Human rights in North and East Syria is quite problematic. So I think some clarification regarding the subject is due if it should be featured on the page and not just on the related Human rights article. AntonSamuel ( talk) 22:24, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
I haven't had a chance to look at the edits, but I did protect the article for a few days so that you two (and, hopefully, others) could figure this out here. A broader point: the article should represents the scholarly and mainstream consensus. If that consensus is split, then that should also be mentioned. The question as to whether applying due weight in this instance should be done in a homogeneous way or whether it ought to be split depends on the strength of reliable sources. El_C 19:55, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
Well the UN has said that there was no ethnic cleansing by the YPG/SDF.. I think this should be included as well if a Lawrow citation of Demographic change by the Kurds is included. And if we are at demographic change the Arabic Belt policy should have a prominent place, too. The Kurds have been displaced with state policies and easily to source laws, while what Lawrow says contradicts the scholarly and mainstream consensus (at least of European universities) that the new administration of Rojava makes a strong effort to give all ethnias same political and juridical rights. I will make an effort to include some academic sources next time the article is liberated to edit in it again. Lean Anael ( talk) 07:46, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
During the ongoing Syrian civil war, organizations such as Amnesty International [1] and the Middle East Observer as well as Russia's foreign minister Sergey Lavrov [2] [3] have accused SDF forces of committing ethnic cleansing in captured areas with predominantely Arab population such as Tel Abyad. [4] [5] Contrasting with these claims, the head of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights has stated that there was "no 'ethnic cleansing' in Tel Abyad against the Turkmen and Arabic population" [6] and the U.N. Independent International Commission of Inquiry also released a report that stated that the commission "found no evidence to substantiate claims that YPG or SDF forces ever targeted Arab communities on the basis of ethnicity, nor that YPG cantonal authorities systematically sought to change the demographic composition of territories under their control through the commission of violations directed against any particular ethnic group". [7]
References
Requesting comment on the matter discussed in the section above, about which one of the two alternatives featured below regarding human rights violations claims is the most appropriate (or if a third option is preferable) after suggestion to do so from @ El C. Presently the first of the two segments that are posted below is featured on the Rojava page. AntonSamuel ( talk) 09:59, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
The segment added by @ عمرو بن كلثوم:
During the ongoing Syrian civil war, many human rights groups, including Amnesty International [1] and international organizations [2] [3] have accused SDF forces of committing ethnic cleansing in Arab areas they were capturing from other war factions. [4] The most recent accusation was made on 8 May 2019 by Russia's foreign minister Sergey Lavrov who said [5]:
The US attempts to resettle Kurds in the areas where Arab tribes have always lived historically is a very bad process and a direct way to separatism and the breakup of Syria
My (@ AntonSamuel) attempt to create a more neutral segment (I also suggested that this information is more suited to the "Human rights" section than in the "Demographics" section):
During the ongoing Syrian civil war, organizations such as Amnesty International [6] and the Middle East Observer as well as Russia's foreign minister Sergey Lavrov [7] [8] have accused SDF forces of committing ethnic cleansing in captured areas with predominantely Arab population such as Tel Abyad. [9] [10] Contrasting with these claims, the head of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights has stated that there was "no 'ethnic cleansing' in Tel Abyad against the Turkmen and Arabic population" [11] and the U.N. Independent International Commission of Inquiry also released a report that stated that the commission "found no evidence to substantiate claims that YPG or SDF forces ever targeted Arab communities on the basis of ethnicity, nor that YPG cantonal authorities systematically sought to change the demographic composition of territories under their control through the commission of violations directed against any particular ethnic group". [12]
References
AntonSamuel ( talk) 09:59, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
@ Rosguill @ Thespoondragon @ Adoring nanny @ عمرو بن كلثوم Some time has passed now and no new comments on the matter has been added, so I've reworked my earlier proposal by rewording it, shortening the second part without direct quotes and removed the mentioning of Lavrov that was argued to be undue. If consensus can be reached and there are no additional viewpoints from other editors I suggest the discussion be closed and the current segment on the page be replaced. AntonSamuel ( talk) 20:27, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
During the ongoing Syrian civil war, organizations such as Amnesty International [1] and the Middle East Observer [2] [3] have accused SDF forces of forcibly displacing inhabitants of captured areas with predominantely Arab population such as Tel Abyad. [4] Contrasting with these claims, the head of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights has refuted claims of ethnic cleansing in Tel Abyad against the Turkmen and Arabic population [5] and the U.N. Independent International Commission of Inquiry also released a report that stated that the commission did not find evidence of the YPG or SDF forces committing ethnic cleansing in order to change the demographic composition of territories under their control. [6]
References
Portal:Syrian Civil War has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Syrian Civil War and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Portal:Syrian Civil War during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. GreyShark ( dibra) 07:09, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
"Some of the criticism against the region has included opposition to conscription, and claims of authoritarianism, Kurdification, the imprisonment and harassment of dissidents and journalists, the promotion of a radical anti-capitalist ideology, and influence from the Kurdistan Workers' Party."
This final line in the intro section has 2 sources, yet nothing in these sources indicate anything about "the imprisonment and harassment of dissidents and journalists"; in fact, one of the 2 sources cited is an article from Rudaw (a highly partisan media company from Iraq), complaining about being banned from Rojava in response to several alleged smear campaigns and allegations of 'fake news' from the company. The other source doesn't discuss journalists at all, making this inclusion even more bizarre.
Overall, the portion of this line should be removed, unless I'm missing something. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Master of Oof ( talk • contribs) 01:44, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
I have added a map of the Treaty of Sevres, but two users here have removed it, with the first user claiming it is not relevant here. If people here are claiming this is the western part of Kurdistan, and the map I inserted shows a proposed state of Kurdistan, then how is this not relevant here. It just seems some pro-Kurdish users here are cherry-picking and trying to hide any historical facts of the region they are claiming to be part of Kurdistan. This article has VERY SERIOUS credibility issues. If this persists, I will be reporting this and ask for arbitration. Your call. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم ( talk) 03:35, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
This sentence is in the lead in the "Polity names and translations" section: "Much of northern Syria is considered to be Western Kurdistan (Kurdish: Rojavayê Kurdistanê) or Rojava (/ˌroʊʒəˈvɑː/ ROH-zhə-VAH; Kurdish: [roʒɑˈvɑ] "the West")"
It doesn't say who is considering this, it also has an unreliable kurdish source.-- Supreme Deliciousness ( talk) 04:42, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
The source is good. It is an academic book used in European universities. Maybe we could adapt the wording, because Rojava is really not so big to be called "Much of Northern Syria". But that there exists a Rojava we can't deny. Paradise Chronicle ( talk) 07:23, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
How is Hawarnews a good source? It is directly affiliated with SDF. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم ( talk) 15:04, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
Another credibility concern here is the extent of this area. When SDF were advancing, everything they control would automatically be incorporated into this area. For those new to this discussion and topic (most I guess), please see how the so-called "rojava" map kept expanding from 2012, 2014, now (and so many more in between) and including 80-100% Arab areas like Azaz, Tell Abyad, al-Bab, Manbij, Deir Ez-Zor, Raqqa, in addition to almost all Arab towns in Al-Hasakah Governorate. Many Arab demonstrations have come out against SDF rule (military occupation) in those areas, showing that SDF control is no more than another war faction occupying these areas by force. A group of users have successfully kept reverting any attempt at fixing the neutrality and credibility aspects of this article. The Syrian army has redeployed in Manbij, Raqqa, Al-Hasakah, Ain-al-Arab/Kobani (information with reputable sources), among many other places, but users here refuse to take these out of the jurisdiction of AAONES. When I add a map showing the historical Kurdish presence in the area or the Treaty of Sevres map for Kurdistan, they get deleted for "irrelevance". How is this "irrelevant" when "rojava" is claimed to be "Western Kurdistan" (here and elsewhere), and I have an official international treaty map showing NO WESTERN KURDISTAN? BTW, if you don't know, this map is used by nationalist Kurds to push their Kurdistan requests. People in this Talk page say this article is not about Rojava one day, and change their opinion the following day. PYD/PKK websites and "news agencies" can do that, but not here on Wikipedia, well, at least if some credibility still exists. At this point, arbitration is needed for this article. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم ( talk) 19:50, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
Despite the passage of nearly two years since the administration lost control of this region (see Operation Olive Branch) the article still writes it as a part of the region. What is the reason for this? Placed dubious tags on Afrin citations. KasimMejia ( talk) 07:41, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 |
Rojava refers to western (or Syrian) Kurdistan, but following territorial expansion, the DFNS as a whole is not considered to be entirely within Kurdistan. Also we rarely see the federation referred to as "Rojava" any longer. In my opinion we should split the article between Rojava, covering the long established Kurdish dominated areas of Syria, and the Democratic Federation of Northern Syria, which is a de facto polity established in the areas controlled by the YPG and later Syrian Democratic Forces since the beginning of the Syrian civil war. Rob984 ( talk) 11:08, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
The map used here is scandalous and extends even more than what Kurdish propaganda represents as Kurdish areas in Syria. For example, no Kurds live in Deir ezzor Governorate or Raqqa, except for a few villages west of Tel Abyad. Political entity maps do not change daily based on front lines, so this map should say areas under control by SDF and should not be used to reflect any political entity. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم ( talk) 04:57, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
The current map, depicting military frontlines instead of the administrative topic of this article, is indeed scandalous. Reverting to the administrative divisions map. -- 2A1ZA ( talk) 09:51, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 18:01, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Democratic Federation of Northern Syria →
Rojava
WP:COMMONNAME. Also note that the archives are all at Talk:Rojava/xx. ―
Justin (koavf)❤
T☮
C☺
M☯
06:02, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi Everyone. Can someone please update the emblem to the corrected version I made fixing the alignment issues? https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coat_of_Arms_of_Rojava_-_13-12-17.svg Albert.trosk ( talk) 12:36, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved: with no prejudice with regards to a future nomination as consensus can change. ( closed by non-admin page mover) SITH (talk) 12:02, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
Democratic Federation of Northern Syria →
Northern and Eastern Syria – In Late 2018-early 2019 the regional administration changed it's name from the DFNS to Self-Adminstration / Autonomous Administration of Northern and Eastern Syria (see above discussion). The
common name for the region itself is Northern and Eastern Syria(with variations in exact grammar)
SA-NES Representation in Benelux
ANF News article on the recent Manbij bombing, uses Northern and Eastern Syria
search results on ANF for Northern and Eastern Syria
Jerusalem Post uses both Northeast Syria and North and East Syria
Reuters, both northern and eastern Syria and Northeast Syria (I used both instances mentioning the SA/AA-NES, and referring to it as a geographical area in relation to SDF controlled areas)
This would also include changing mentions of the region in the article to Northern and Eastern Syria/NES or the Autonomous/Self Administration depending on context (see above discussion)
Thespündragon 16:53, 17 January 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. —
Amakuru (
talk)
13:01, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
Maybe we wait a little longer to see the result of the negotiations between Damascus and the SDF/TEV-DEM? If they come to an agreement we maybe would have to make a move as well. Lean Anael ( talk) 09:31, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
Definately not "Kurdish occupied..." because this government is multi-ethnic. Rojava is a perfectly fine name until and unless something more solid energes as a common or proper name in English. Legacypac ( talk) 03:17, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
It may be best if we can determine a name that can remain regardless of future official name changes. I think a short-form name would be best, rather than a long construction. (ie: SDC administered areas in Northeast Syria) An idea I have is doing something similar to the official 2016 name (DF Rojava-North Syria), with something like a title "Rojava-Northeast Syria". This would be both unambiguous(not being purely geographic), and not give undue weight to the name Rojava, which is officially only used to refer to Kurdish-majority areas. Simply "Rojava" may also work, as it is the most common in western English sources. Thespündragon 00:33, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
{{
ping}}
)
czar
03:35, 1 February 2019 (UTC)I think it's best to hold off on a name change for now, until more detail about the nature of the new structure of the region emerges regarding the proper English translation, the nature of the sub-regions and the role of the new "General Assembly of the NES" vs the Syrian Democratic Council. Considering the volatility of the region more changes might also be made relatively soon. Updating the article further to avoid confusion and clarifying that a name change has occurred is entirely ok by me though. I would also oppose renaming the article to Rojava, since this is both not the official name of the region and not the dominant name in the international media when referring to the region any longer, it's often just referred to as the "Kurdish-led" administration in Northeastern Syria. AntonSamuel ( talk) 09:51, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved to Rojova. ( closed by non-admin page mover) SITH (talk) 21:29, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
Democratic Federation of Northern Syria → Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria – If were going to use the official name of Rojava than we should use the current official name. Charles Essie ( talk) 16:58, 28 February 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. SITH (talk) 18:42, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
Apparently the DFNS is being replaced (?) with the Autonomous Admin of N&E Syria(AANES/NES)? It appears that DFNS may have only referred to the areas currently designated a region (as well as Manbij), whereas the regions in the southeast are part of a different structure, and these 2 structures are being unified into AANES. Something like that? I'm not sure what the administration change is officially, but essentially what was previously referred to as the DFNS is now the AANES/NES.
Sources:
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
So I believe the article should be renamed to either 'Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria' or 'Northern and Eastern Syria' to reflect this administration change.
Thespündragon
19:19, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
Tagging previous editors of this page: @ Applodion: @ Jim7049: @ Khoshhat: @ Purijj: @ Editor abcdef: @ Cirflow: @ 2A1ZA: @ Nøkkenbuer: @ Bobfrombrockley: @ Takinginterest01: What do you guys think regarding a potential name change? Which English translation would you be in favor of? AntonSamuel ( talk) 13:57, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
Info: Kongreya Star's twitter says that there are 7 regions in the SANES, Afrin, Manbij, Kobani(Euphrates), Jazira, Tabqa, Raqqa, and Deir Ezzor [12], i'm trying to obtain a better source Thespündragon 22:17, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
Lede: The Self-Administration of North and East Syria (SANES) (languages bit), commonly referred to as Rojava or Northern and Eastern Syria, is a de facto autonomous region in northeastern Syria. It consists of three self-governing regions, Afrin Region, Jazira Region, and Euphrates Region, and local councils in the Manbij, Tabqa, Raqqa, and Deir Ez-Zor regions. (then the rest of it)
I used SANES as it is the most used on official sites.
Thespündragon
00:11, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
@AntonSamuel I believe at this point enough time has passed that we can start converting the articles to the new name. I believe we should use the official translation SANES or "the Self-Administration" when referring to the Administration itself (ie: the SANES has 3 self-governing regions ... ), and using "Northern and Eastern Syria", "Northern Syria", etc when referring to the region (Policing in Northern and Eastern Syria is performed by the Asayish ... )
Thespündragon
20:31, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
And in the "Politiy names and translations section" we should say something like "there are multiple translations of this into english, including the Self-Administration of North and East Syria, the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria, among others."
Thespündragon
20:35, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
Why has it been renamed to Rojava? Rojava hasn't been the name for ages and it doesn't make sense to use a colloquial Kurdish terminology for an area that is majority Arab (4 million people, only like 1.6/7 of whom are Kurdish). The formal name should be used, aka the DFNS, NES, SANES, or whatever. 2A00:23C4:B12E:D400:83B:113:1AEA:64A0 ( talk) 11:27, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
Can someone give me one respected media outlet or international body (state, organization) that is using the word rojava for this area? After 2011, Kurdish nationalists invented that word for parts of al-Hasaka Governorate and two other pockets in Aleppo Governorate. However, the use of the name HERE has been rolling to cover 30% of Syria's territory, which is a SCAM and scandal. This page is full of pro-Kurdish propaganda and almost all the claims here are entirely based on that. This page poses a huge credibility test for Wikipedia. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم ( talk) 20:56, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
None of these media outlets mentions the word "rojava" in these stories. They simply refer to the area by the facts, that is Kurdish-controlled areas, SDF-controlled areas, Kurdish forces, etc. Any serious attempt at fixing the credibility of this article? Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم ( talk) 08:15, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
I quickly come in with some Ideas and articles of some of the same news agencies you named where they wrote about Rojava. I understand there can be better names, because the region written about here is larger than just Rojava, but the name of the region really changed several times and I also understand that some chose the name Rojava because this is the name most people can associate to something actually written here in the article. People will not google Northeastern Syria but rather Rojava if they search for the region controlled by the SDF.
Following some articles naming Rojava, which in some articles is also referred as an area in Northeastern Syria.
And here some other rather respected media who write about Rojava as well.
I agree that an area including not only Rojava but also the Arab, and Christian areas can be named differently. They have their own name which is "Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria" and I guess this would be fair. It seems Anton Samuel could live with it too. But this would be the third name this article has this year...If we change the name of the article away from Rojava, a Name which for many people interested in the region Northern Syria is best known, we should agree on something a clear majority supports so we can keep a name for this article (for more time than just some months). I would not open a new discussion about the name for now and wait some more time (because we had the same discussion already twice this year), but if someone else opens one, I would try to help to come to a good end of this discussion. Best, Lean Anael ( talk) 20:42, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
Are there any objections to splitting Syrian Kurdistan into a new article, as this article only covers the Northeast Syrian administration rather than the Syrian part of the region Kurdistan. We have articles for Turkish and Iranian Kurdistan as geographic regions, and Iraqi Kurdistan as a geographic region is synonymous with the Kurdistan Region of Iraq, while Syrian Kurdistan does not correctly refer to the Northeast Syrian Autonomous Administration. Thespündragon 13:36, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
@ عمرو بن كلثوم: Hi again, if there are going to be sections on this page that feature opinionated statments about this political entity, then neither pro-PYD, pro-regime or pro-opposition claims should be solely present without presenting other viewpoints, and if conflicting reports exist among largely neutral international agencies regarding a matter, that should also be clarified in line with WP:NPOV. For example, a while back I added a summary of common criticisms against the entity in the introduction to balance out the arguments that defenders of the region present. Adding a statement about alleged ethnic cleansing without credible differing statements, which do exist, such as those from U.N. Independent International Commission of Inquiry and the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights that you removed without an explanation from the Human rights in North and East Syria is quite problematic. So I think some clarification regarding the subject is due if it should be featured on the page and not just on the related Human rights article. AntonSamuel ( talk) 22:24, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
I haven't had a chance to look at the edits, but I did protect the article for a few days so that you two (and, hopefully, others) could figure this out here. A broader point: the article should represents the scholarly and mainstream consensus. If that consensus is split, then that should also be mentioned. The question as to whether applying due weight in this instance should be done in a homogeneous way or whether it ought to be split depends on the strength of reliable sources. El_C 19:55, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
Well the UN has said that there was no ethnic cleansing by the YPG/SDF.. I think this should be included as well if a Lawrow citation of Demographic change by the Kurds is included. And if we are at demographic change the Arabic Belt policy should have a prominent place, too. The Kurds have been displaced with state policies and easily to source laws, while what Lawrow says contradicts the scholarly and mainstream consensus (at least of European universities) that the new administration of Rojava makes a strong effort to give all ethnias same political and juridical rights. I will make an effort to include some academic sources next time the article is liberated to edit in it again. Lean Anael ( talk) 07:46, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
During the ongoing Syrian civil war, organizations such as Amnesty International [1] and the Middle East Observer as well as Russia's foreign minister Sergey Lavrov [2] [3] have accused SDF forces of committing ethnic cleansing in captured areas with predominantely Arab population such as Tel Abyad. [4] [5] Contrasting with these claims, the head of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights has stated that there was "no 'ethnic cleansing' in Tel Abyad against the Turkmen and Arabic population" [6] and the U.N. Independent International Commission of Inquiry also released a report that stated that the commission "found no evidence to substantiate claims that YPG or SDF forces ever targeted Arab communities on the basis of ethnicity, nor that YPG cantonal authorities systematically sought to change the demographic composition of territories under their control through the commission of violations directed against any particular ethnic group". [7]
References
Requesting comment on the matter discussed in the section above, about which one of the two alternatives featured below regarding human rights violations claims is the most appropriate (or if a third option is preferable) after suggestion to do so from @ El C. Presently the first of the two segments that are posted below is featured on the Rojava page. AntonSamuel ( talk) 09:59, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
The segment added by @ عمرو بن كلثوم:
During the ongoing Syrian civil war, many human rights groups, including Amnesty International [1] and international organizations [2] [3] have accused SDF forces of committing ethnic cleansing in Arab areas they were capturing from other war factions. [4] The most recent accusation was made on 8 May 2019 by Russia's foreign minister Sergey Lavrov who said [5]:
The US attempts to resettle Kurds in the areas where Arab tribes have always lived historically is a very bad process and a direct way to separatism and the breakup of Syria
My (@ AntonSamuel) attempt to create a more neutral segment (I also suggested that this information is more suited to the "Human rights" section than in the "Demographics" section):
During the ongoing Syrian civil war, organizations such as Amnesty International [6] and the Middle East Observer as well as Russia's foreign minister Sergey Lavrov [7] [8] have accused SDF forces of committing ethnic cleansing in captured areas with predominantely Arab population such as Tel Abyad. [9] [10] Contrasting with these claims, the head of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights has stated that there was "no 'ethnic cleansing' in Tel Abyad against the Turkmen and Arabic population" [11] and the U.N. Independent International Commission of Inquiry also released a report that stated that the commission "found no evidence to substantiate claims that YPG or SDF forces ever targeted Arab communities on the basis of ethnicity, nor that YPG cantonal authorities systematically sought to change the demographic composition of territories under their control through the commission of violations directed against any particular ethnic group". [12]
References
AntonSamuel ( talk) 09:59, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
@ Rosguill @ Thespoondragon @ Adoring nanny @ عمرو بن كلثوم Some time has passed now and no new comments on the matter has been added, so I've reworked my earlier proposal by rewording it, shortening the second part without direct quotes and removed the mentioning of Lavrov that was argued to be undue. If consensus can be reached and there are no additional viewpoints from other editors I suggest the discussion be closed and the current segment on the page be replaced. AntonSamuel ( talk) 20:27, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
During the ongoing Syrian civil war, organizations such as Amnesty International [1] and the Middle East Observer [2] [3] have accused SDF forces of forcibly displacing inhabitants of captured areas with predominantely Arab population such as Tel Abyad. [4] Contrasting with these claims, the head of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights has refuted claims of ethnic cleansing in Tel Abyad against the Turkmen and Arabic population [5] and the U.N. Independent International Commission of Inquiry also released a report that stated that the commission did not find evidence of the YPG or SDF forces committing ethnic cleansing in order to change the demographic composition of territories under their control. [6]
References
Portal:Syrian Civil War has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Syrian Civil War and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Portal:Syrian Civil War during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. GreyShark ( dibra) 07:09, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
"Some of the criticism against the region has included opposition to conscription, and claims of authoritarianism, Kurdification, the imprisonment and harassment of dissidents and journalists, the promotion of a radical anti-capitalist ideology, and influence from the Kurdistan Workers' Party."
This final line in the intro section has 2 sources, yet nothing in these sources indicate anything about "the imprisonment and harassment of dissidents and journalists"; in fact, one of the 2 sources cited is an article from Rudaw (a highly partisan media company from Iraq), complaining about being banned from Rojava in response to several alleged smear campaigns and allegations of 'fake news' from the company. The other source doesn't discuss journalists at all, making this inclusion even more bizarre.
Overall, the portion of this line should be removed, unless I'm missing something. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Master of Oof ( talk • contribs) 01:44, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
I have added a map of the Treaty of Sevres, but two users here have removed it, with the first user claiming it is not relevant here. If people here are claiming this is the western part of Kurdistan, and the map I inserted shows a proposed state of Kurdistan, then how is this not relevant here. It just seems some pro-Kurdish users here are cherry-picking and trying to hide any historical facts of the region they are claiming to be part of Kurdistan. This article has VERY SERIOUS credibility issues. If this persists, I will be reporting this and ask for arbitration. Your call. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم ( talk) 03:35, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
This sentence is in the lead in the "Polity names and translations" section: "Much of northern Syria is considered to be Western Kurdistan (Kurdish: Rojavayê Kurdistanê) or Rojava (/ˌroʊʒəˈvɑː/ ROH-zhə-VAH; Kurdish: [roʒɑˈvɑ] "the West")"
It doesn't say who is considering this, it also has an unreliable kurdish source.-- Supreme Deliciousness ( talk) 04:42, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
The source is good. It is an academic book used in European universities. Maybe we could adapt the wording, because Rojava is really not so big to be called "Much of Northern Syria". But that there exists a Rojava we can't deny. Paradise Chronicle ( talk) 07:23, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
How is Hawarnews a good source? It is directly affiliated with SDF. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم ( talk) 15:04, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
Another credibility concern here is the extent of this area. When SDF were advancing, everything they control would automatically be incorporated into this area. For those new to this discussion and topic (most I guess), please see how the so-called "rojava" map kept expanding from 2012, 2014, now (and so many more in between) and including 80-100% Arab areas like Azaz, Tell Abyad, al-Bab, Manbij, Deir Ez-Zor, Raqqa, in addition to almost all Arab towns in Al-Hasakah Governorate. Many Arab demonstrations have come out against SDF rule (military occupation) in those areas, showing that SDF control is no more than another war faction occupying these areas by force. A group of users have successfully kept reverting any attempt at fixing the neutrality and credibility aspects of this article. The Syrian army has redeployed in Manbij, Raqqa, Al-Hasakah, Ain-al-Arab/Kobani (information with reputable sources), among many other places, but users here refuse to take these out of the jurisdiction of AAONES. When I add a map showing the historical Kurdish presence in the area or the Treaty of Sevres map for Kurdistan, they get deleted for "irrelevance". How is this "irrelevant" when "rojava" is claimed to be "Western Kurdistan" (here and elsewhere), and I have an official international treaty map showing NO WESTERN KURDISTAN? BTW, if you don't know, this map is used by nationalist Kurds to push their Kurdistan requests. People in this Talk page say this article is not about Rojava one day, and change their opinion the following day. PYD/PKK websites and "news agencies" can do that, but not here on Wikipedia, well, at least if some credibility still exists. At this point, arbitration is needed for this article. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم ( talk) 19:50, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
Despite the passage of nearly two years since the administration lost control of this region (see Operation Olive Branch) the article still writes it as a part of the region. What is the reason for this? Placed dubious tags on Afrin citations. KasimMejia ( talk) 07:41, 20 October 2019 (UTC)