![]() | 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 40 | ← | Archive 44 | Archive 45 | Archive 46 | Archive 47 | Archive 48 | → | Archive 50 |
A lot of towns are listed under exclusive Nusra control, mostly by Hanibal911. The ones I have issue with the most are Saraqeb and Maarat al Nuuman, which are regional capitals for the rebels since 2012, sporting a large number of Islamist and FSA groups that did not participate in the SRF/Hazzm war with Nusra and were thus left alone. Maara was made into Nusra territory after SRF HQ's were seized (even though Suqur al Sham and Ahrar al Sham seized those HQ's along with Nusra). Saraqeb was made into Nusra territory based on this very vague statement Joshua Landis: ″Blin, Bluin, Bsqala, Binnish, and Saraqib are under the control of Jund Al-Aqsa, a group loyal to Ayman Al-Zwahiri.″ As there have been no reports of Jund al Aqsa expelling Suqur al Sham, Ahrar al Sham, or Jabhat Thuwwar Saraqeb here, an FSA participant in Jaysh al Fateh that dates back to 2012 in Saraqeb city, the statement is far too ambiguous to be used as a definitive marker of control. Additionally at least one pro-rebel source reports that al Farouq linked Jaysh al Sunna in Jaysh al Fateh has a component in Saraqeb called Liwa al Iman here In light of these findings, I pose two main questions:
Ironically, while the map exaggerates Nusra control in Idlib, it ignores it in Aleppo. Since July, Nusra has increasingly arrested members of Liwa al Tawhid defectors and the FSA in Marea Alaan TV here Meanwhile, Nusra's dar al qada appears to be basing itself in Hreytan (where Jabhat Ansar al Din is also based), and extending its authority to Kafr Hamra and Anadan here. These towns should at least be shared between Nusra and rebels. However, I also doubt Darat Izza to be under Nusra control completely; Nusra and Hazzm in Darat Izza signed a neutrality pact to avoid the fighting that took place near Atareb, so Nusra never expelled Hazzm. here And Hazzm in Darat Izza then defected and joined Kataeb Mujahidee Ibn Taymiyya here, a defector from the Levant Front. This means Ibn Taymiyya's faction is stronger than ever in Darat Izza, and until we can find whether they're a proxy of Nusra or a truly independent group, the city should stay half green. Regiment 111 was also reportedly handed over to the Levant Front as part of the agreement between Hazzm and Nusra here. NightShadeAEB ( talk) 09:43, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
And i remember when somebody told me "DuckZ you are wrong, there won't be much problems adding a seperate joint color for Rebels". As it already is, the biggest problem here is the joint control. I understand that JAN needs a color ok, but why joint control ? It's just too complicated to find out which party controls which town and village together with other groups. I don't even know what to say but the joint control is a stupid idea in my opinion, because in almost every town/village there is both JAN and Rebel (IF/FSA....) presence, because they are working together, despite the clashes between some groups. Joint control doesn't make any sense in my opinion, it's either mostly JAN or mostly under Rebel control. Period ! DuckZz ( talk) 10:23, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
The Nasib order crossing is under attack according to this http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2015/Apr-01/292938-syrian-rebels-attack-main-jordan-crossing-activists.ashx and those small dots in the border should be put under surveillance at the very least. Gomes89 ( talk) 14:07, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
The other cities should probably be removed as SAA held actually since it references Nassib as the only government controlled area on the border. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2620:103:A000:A501:45AD:22DA:A511:8CEC ( talk) 14:12, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
"official" al nusra says it is taken
https://twitter.com/DR_SHAHID/status/583341994887376897 — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Totholio (
talk •
contribs)
19:06, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
I know I hate them, but if someone claims something like this it tends to be true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Totholio ( talk • contribs) 20:35, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Sources confirming Nasib crossing was taken by rebels:
http://www.toledoblade.com/World/2015/04/01/Syrian-rebels-seize-Jordan-crossing-from-government-control-rebel-security-source-say.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/reuters/article-3022093/Syrian-rebels-seize-Jordan-crossing-government-rebel-security-source.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 ( talk) 21:02, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
André437 ChrissCh94 Hanibal911 And again i have a problem with the joint control icon. I don't know who made the rules, but they are probably clear enough. SOHR said that rebel brigades and JAN have taken the crossing. Brigades means plural, so at least 2 of them, and to confirm SOHR, here is the statement for this offensive alone, where 4 rebel brigades are named. Also SOHR says that "JAN participated in the operation that had been launched by the rebel brigades". Here is the statement after the border was captured. And from the Yarmuk group There's no source showing that JAN has 50% of the border or 40% but here's the thing, this is not a town/village, so a joint control has no sense, since it's just a border post, nothing big, few buldings, it's either under JAN or Rebel(IF/FSA) control (i mean control, not attack), and i think it's obvious who was the majority here, unlike Idlib, where we had a more complicated situation. Also, the Jordanian TV made the interview day after with the commander that will run the nassib border. DuckZz ( talk) 20:58, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
Hanibal911 Well thank you for this source, because the same guy said exactly this. And this map, even thought it meant to be a joke, he obviously wanted to show a 60%FSA, 20%IF, 20%JAN, and that's 80-20. I am not using him as a source, because he is pro-rebel, but you obviously wanted to show something but failed. And here is the statement of that group that will ran the crossing, in front of them, a top military leader of the southern front (Yarmuk group). I don't have to use youtube or pro-opposition channels, as we already have SOHR. DuckZz ( talk) 21:35, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
Hanibal911 SOHR says that rebels control a part too. As JAN control the border part, and that's the main entrance to Jordan, you can see it here. Put it to joint control as this border is not small and we know now that JAN has the bigger influence, that means at least 50% of the control facing Jordan. DuckZz ( talk) 21:28, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
Pro opposition warned that ISIS prepares offensive in order to capture the city of Idlib. Activist of one of the opposition factions of the Army of Islam which located in al-Hasakah province, northeast of Syria said that the Islamic State is currently preparing for an attack on the city of Idlib, which entered the opposition forces about a week ago. The confidentially source showed that the leaders of ISIS now preparing fighters in the town of Shaddadi in main center for training fighters in Al-Hasakah for the attack on the city of Idlib. here Xeber 24 Hanibal911 ( talk) 19:56, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Makes no sense. There's dozens of rebels/loyalist held towns and villages before Idlib city, IS has no chance of getting near it. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
200.219.152.90 (
talk)
21:51, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Last time when they try take control of Al Mab'ujah they lost about 200 fighters and next 200 was wounded. They lost Tikrit, lost in Deir ez-Zor, Hasakah and Irak. How many fighters they will need? 30 000 - 50 000? They must kill about 10 000 - 20 000 rebels and 10 000 SAA+NDF 83.29.36.148 ( talk) 22:25, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Module:Syrian Civil War detailed map has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change
{ lat = "32.569", long = "36.315", mark = "Location dot lime.svg", marksize = "8", label = " Al-Jizah", link = "Al-Jizah", label_size = "0", position = "bottom" },
to
{ lat = "32.569", long = "36.315", mark = "Map-dot-grey-68a.svg", marksize = "8", label = " Al-Jizah", link = "Al-Jizah", label_size = "0", position = "bottom" },
Source:
http://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/control-terrain-syria-march-31-2015
I don't know much about this town, but the Institute for the Study of War seems to think that it is under al-Nusra control. Granted, it shows towns like Saraqib and Maarat al-Nu'man under moderate rebel control, so I don't know how reliable it is, but we have always called Institute for the Study of war a reliable source.
2601:0:B200:F7D9:B4EB:A45D:FE50:156A ( talk) 01:55, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template.
Kharkiv07
Talk
22:27, 4 April 2015 (UTC)Rebels took the Nassib border crossing, and they also took Bosra. They are pushing east. Also, there are a lot of towns southeast of Suwayda and south of Salkhad that are not shown on the map.
https://www.google.com/maps/@32.4216263,36.7516789,25445m/data=!3m1!1e3
http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=32.304337&lon=36.837747&z=11&m=b
Particularly, Khirbet Awwad needs to be shown, but also the towns north of there. They are under the control of pro-government forces, as desyracuse shows:
http://www.agathocledesyracuse.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/South-Suweydaa-23-March-2015.png
Also, is desyracuse considered a pro-rebel source? He lists Umm Walad as being under the control of the rebels. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:186D:7392:97A4:6D28 ( talk) 00:51, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
SOHR reported about clashes between rebels and IS in Ulayyaniyah (arabic) area. Pro-opposition channels were reporting that rebels advanced in this area and took control of this location. This map from Cheldric can someone illustrate that (its still pro-op)
Stop this hannibal,it has been confirmed by SOHR that Ulanniyah is contested between the rebels and ISIS,and this has been noted out by multiple sources,Desyracuse,Archicivilians and now SOHR,that is the ultimate proof that Ulanniyah is NOT under Regime Control,the area is desert,the regime can't control all these desert areas,I still remember when you didn't want to Al-Halbah on the map,until i explained and showed you the evidence,and like what the regime in town,while rebel and ISIS fight in the area,that doesn't make sense,in this case hannibal,we will need to rely on pro-opposition sources for the situation the desert,because regime sources won't admit it,plus an area in a desert area,includes the town and the oasis,so that is it. Alhanuty ( talk) 00:51, 6 April 2015 (UTC) Also the same issue happened with Bir Qassab. Alhanuty ( talk) 00:55, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Okay,then Mark Mahsah as contested. Alhanuty ( talk) 04:21, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Why did we add all those hills near Al Zabadani? Most of them are not military sites (unlike in Daraa). I suggest keeping the most important one(s). ChrissCh94 ( talk) 20:54, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
By the way, what happened in Zabadani ? Last year, rebels surrendered the town. http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/04/syria-rebels-surrender-border-town-2014426152724543924.html When did they recapture ? Oroszka ( talk) 19:55, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
I believe during SAA/Hezb. Qalamoun offensive, got pushed from Yabroud to west. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Totholio ( talk • contribs) 20:04, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
http://syriahr.com/en/2015/04/35-killed-or-wounded-by-missiles-on-salamia-city/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jafar Saeed ( talk • contribs) 17:24, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
According to https://twitter.com/PetoLucem/status/585095829591089152
Maybe we need to change? Is it possible to contact locals? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arissston ( talk • contribs) 22:55, 6 April 2015 (UTC) :We cannot contact locals as anyone claiming to have information from them would be violating our rules banning original research, their claims would also be unverifiable. As for your source, Peto Lucem acknowledges that the map is pro-gov. and we cannot use pro-gov maps for gov gains. We will, however, wait to see if a neutral reliable source makes a statement about the situation. XJ-0461 v2 ( talk) 01:39, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
It is a biased map. Not made by Peto. Just ignore it. Totholio ( talk) 09:19, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Peto Lucem refutes the map in this tweet: https://twitter.com/PetoLucem/status/585105725346729984 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jafar Saeed ( talk • contribs) 17:54, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
The siege icon on the T2 Pumping Station held by IS needs to be removed. It was a one-off attack by pro-government tribesmen, and it wasn't successful. The icon has been present for over a week, and there is not still tribesmen attacking it. The icon's presence makes it seem like they still are, and I can't find any sources saying there is an ongoing siege. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:4C8D:68EA:2129:963B ( talk) 20:12, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
I agree with Hanibal911. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:BD61:4B54:4ADF:5032 ( talk) 18:50, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Qamenaas contested http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/battle-map-of-the-saa-offensive-in-idlib-tiger-forces-enter-qameenas/. Paolowalter ( talk) 07:50, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Tell Tamar contested between YPG and IS http://syriadirect.org/rss/1955-syria-direct-news-update-4-2-15. Paolowalter ( talk) 21:48, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
The two sources that confirm the news item are 1. ISIS fans in twitter, 2. Hasakah Youth Union which is a known pro-ISIS and anti-YPG source thus being unvalid for purposes of ilustrating ISIS advances against anyone else.
190.65.46.239 ( talk) 18:17, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Majed al-Haskawi is not pro-IS and is pro-FSA, so its valid. The youth union is neither pro or anti IS, their loyalties are largely unknown and likely opportunistic like many others. Syria Direct also doesn't post news it can't confirm. So revert. Tgoll774 ( talk) 15:23, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
IS death cult launched an attack on the government's Khalkhalah airbase but they were repelled. This article also states that the attack was launched from an IS held town of Al-Lijat on the border of the Dara’a Governorate: http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/isis-surprise-attack-in-as-sweida-ends-in-a-disaster-for-them/ This town needs to be marked on the map.
According pro SAA source SAAF bombarded large Opposition Forces meeting in Busra Al-Sham (in my oppinion it is stupid to make meeting near army territory). According IvanSidorenko1 - over 70 killed and injuring including mamy high rank commanders, according leithfadel 70+ dead, including 5 commanders. In the last months in Ildib gov SAAF bombed meeting high-ranking members of JAN. 217.99.129.185 ( talk) 18:32, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
ISIS pulling out of Yarmouk and the Falastine streets inside the camp. Following battle. Elijah J. Magnier Hanibal911 ( talk) 17:50, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Be careful when you use reports from SOHR in English. This is largely erroneous reports and they distort the original data in reports from SOHR! Here in original report SOHR reported that bombing helicopters morning barrels explosive areas in the town of Al-Lataminah countryside north of Hama and other areas in the village of Abu Hbeilat in eastern part Hama province and there was no information about casualties so far. SOHR But in the report which was translated was says that the helicopters dropped barrel bombs on places in the towns of Kafar Zita, Morek and Allatamnah in the north of Hama leading to kill a man from Allataminah. SOHR It would be best not use the translated reports and use only original reports. Also here original report from SOHR reported that the number of death toll rose to at least to 20 elements of the security forces and gunmen loyal to her, including 12 of the Palestine Liberation Army who were killed yesterday during an attack by militants believed to be from the "Islamic state" on area of the hill Tall Dilfa and its surroundings. SOHR But in the report which was translated was says that the 12 members of the regime forces and allied militiamen died while others were wounded, some of them seriously wounded, due to an attack launched by unknown fighters on Tal Defda’ area in the east of the airbase of Khalkhalah. And that clashes are taking place between the regime forces and allied militiamen against the Islamic battalions near the airbase of al- Tho’lah, amid mutual bombardment between the two sides. SOHR But SOHR not said about this in original report or in other original reports. So that someone in the during translation willfully adds excess information and these reports can not be used because they was distorted and report false data. Hanibal911 ( talk) 08:03, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Agree. Best to use original Arabic reports. English versions tend to be mistranslated (bad English). EkoGraf ( talk) 08:12, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Some news from Latakia almasdar. For our map it is simply stating that Rabiya is contested, that is already. Paolowalter ( talk) 06:31, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Paolowalter many new villages have been added under rebel control and some saa held have been changed to rebel held ,do you know why ? 86.178.97.43 ( talk) 10:44, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Seems that YPG is clashing with ISIS in the vicinity of the plant per SOHR (this time Arabic). -- Damirgraffiti |☺What's Up?☺ 19:50, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
That may be deceptive though. If the key internal machinery is missing, the plant is worthless. Especially without power. YPG can't supply it as satellite imagery confirms. Tgoll774 ( talk) 00:02, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Essam al-Rayes' a spokesman of Southern front said that rebels in southern Syria will not cooperate with Al-Nusra after tensions between local rebel groups and Nusra in border crossing between Syria and Jordan. Essam al-Rayes said that "We reject all forms of cooperation with al Nusra and we dont want Syria to become a base for jihad, or the expansion of the Islamic State (ISIS)," The Daily Star So that as I said earlier the situation with the Al Nusra is becoming more similar to the situation with the ISIS which also previously cooperated with moderate rebels against Syrian troops. Hanibal911 ( talk) 15:01, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
From http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/hell-reigns-supreme-over-hell-syrian-army-makes-substantial-gains-in-the-south/ the poultry taken by SAA. Al-Wadiha seem contested. Objections? 87.9.149.62 ( talk) 18:59, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
I strongly object to chicken farms being added to map just because there is fighting there . 86.178.97.43 ( talk) 15:32, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Why is there a rebel held site near Flita and a regime held Tall Hankal? There are dozens of those sites littered in the region so we can't just add 2. I suggest either adding all of the Qalamoun military/observation posts (IMPOSSIBLE) or just remove those 2 insignificant sites. There are full army brigades that we haven't added yet; why should we add a small post manned by 10-15 men? ChrissCh94 ( talk) 20:39, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
I'd tend to avoid cluttering the map with small locations of limited (if any) strategic value. SAA and Hezbollah are taking position around Zabadani every day, it does not mean we have to mark all of them. Paolowalter ( talk) 07:05, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Module:Syrian Civil War detailed map has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
change
{ lat = "34.015", long = "38.098", mark = "80x80-lime-black-anim.gif", marksize = "6", label = "
Al Ulayyaniyah", link = "Al Ulayyaniyah", label_size = "0", position = "top" },
to
{ lat = "34.015", long = "38.098", mark = "Location dot lime.svg", marksize = "6", label = "
Al Ulayyaniyah", link = "Al Ulayyaniyah", label_size = "0", position = "top" },
source:
http://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/syria-situation-report-april-7-14-2015
2601:0:B200:F7D9:1562:E9FB:1354:9CA9 ( talk) 02:22, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
The SAA's Al-Husayniyah Enclave has been destroyed by ISIL therefore it doesnt exist anymore confirm my Mark Monmonier
https://twitter.com/MarkMonmonier/status/588052895481864192
https://twitter.com/MarkMonmonier/status/588133817891876864
Who the hell is mark mononier (isil fanboy ) and how do you post on here without any name or number? 86.178.97.43 ( talk) 15:53, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Haibal911 2 tweets and a map from 1 source and that's enough evidence is it? this map does not belong to you . 86.178.97.43 ( talk) 21:03, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Hanibal, this edit is against the rules. While your source may not oppose the SAA directly, it is still not authoritative enough [we cannot tell how reliable its info is]. Think about it, if they really did "destroy" the enclave, why are the pro-ISIS fanatics not talking about it? We need more sources than just one twitter source to change an entire area from red to black. XJ-0461 v2 ( talk) 21:42, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
I agree. There is no indication that this statetements from MakrMonmonier are reliable. Let's just ignore them. Paolowalter ( talk)
Just another map .this is not like you to make quick changes without many sources . 149.254.56.66 ( talk) 14:03, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
ISIS fighters have largely withdrawn from a Palestinian refugee camp on the outskirts of Damascus after expelling their main rival. The pull-out ISIS from Yarmouk leaves Al Nusra as the main group inside the camp. ISIS had returned to their stronghold in neighboring Hajar al Aswad, from where they had launched their attack. The Palestine Liberation Organization envoy to Damascus said that Nusra was now the main group in the camp. They and Nusra are one. They are changing of positions. The Daily Star Hanibal911 ( talk) 14:48, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Is it possible to add some more villages in the south-east of Kobane canton and north-west of Raqqah province? It would show the actual frontline more accurately, because there is "hole" on the map now.
I would suggest to use this map: https://twitter.com/MarkMonmonier/status/587511795180503040 It matches with the wikipedia map so far, although the villages spelling is different. So could someone please add JALABIYAH as held by YPG and SAB JIFAR as held by IS.
We will add new villages when there are reports about clashes inside them or that YPG/IS captured it. DuckZz ( talk) 09:51, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
SAA captured Nab Al-Murr 1 year ago during the kesab counteroffensive. http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/security/2014/03/syria-kasab-opposition-army-battles.html and still saa control the town , please fix it 92.44.119.74 ( talk) 18:26, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
read please , it clearly says saa recaptured the town http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Latakia_offensive
About 90% of the location dots and other marks appear to have moved 1 pixel down. This might not seem important, but it makes updating the .png map a lot slower, because I rely on finding the difference between screenshots to make the maps, and there are about 150 marks to go through on this map, plus those on the Iraqi map. I was wondering if anyone knew what the cause might be. Banak ( talk) 17:02, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
I don't know exactly, but I am one of the main editors of the "War in Donbass Detailed Map", and I remember making an edit to the page outside of the map, and that moved all of the dots down very much.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Donbass_War_detailed_map
You can look at the edit history of both to find a similarity. I hope this helps. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:D9DE:96EB:1551:6659 ( talk) 22:50, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Based on Chuck Pfarrer map1 & map2, Shash, Khan mamid, Jaban, Sal, Hamadun(&jayl), Qalat hadid and Nur Ali are with YPG. Mitras is with ISIS. Ricardomoha ( talk) 11:36, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
By this logic all western sources are pro-kurds, also SOHR can't be used as well.. Then only ISIS sources or Regime sources are accepted which makes no sense to me. Ricardomoha ( talk) 18:59, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CC5zFsyVIAAtf33.jpg:large Latest map. Basically status quo ante plus from last year. Tgoll774 ( talk) 01:40, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/main-government-supply-line-to-aleppo-cleared-syrian-army-captures-al-rashadiyah/ states that Al-Rashadiyah close to the Khanasser highway is taken by SAA. Where is this village? Paolowalter ( talk) 12:10, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War&action=edit§ion=12 Can someone confirm this and check on FSA claims to have also cut SAA supply routes to Aleppo. A lot of twitter posts about Rebels and IS advances south of Aleppo and cutting the road overnight. Tgoll774 ( talk) 13:53, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
So basically a propaganda war, like with Baiji and others. But from the video its clear some level of combat is going on in the area from FSA and IS. FSA feeds claim IS hold Khanasser, SAA denies, FSA ah screw it. I say lock all edits for a week till we get better info, because it appears we hit a new mobile phase where settlements change hands every day. Tgoll774 ( talk) 15:45, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Have the rebel forces advanced in Latakia ? many more villages added and some taken from the SAA ? I have not read of any resent advance ,can someone kindly explain the situation . 86.178.97.43 ( talk) 18:38, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
SAA is in or near Rabia ... If u change towns, only with Sources please. To much anti-governments editors
WTF is that for nonsense? He/She who changed all those towns to green in Latakia better change it back to red or post some decent sources here. SyAAF ( talk) 21:14, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
The area has been changed several times due to different reports. Pro-opposition maps are showing always the same, and editors are changing this region according to them when a pro-gov or neutral source poops ops with a statement which might confirm that. And SOHR and some other sources were reporting that rebels atacked gov positions with GRAD rockets here and there near Latakia city, which might be logical because they are this close, and the range is limited. DuckZz ( talk) 08:34, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
No Reliable Source is backing those changes actually? Are you saying that? Mr.User200 ( talk) 13:17, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
The editor who made these changes needs to explain why they were changed or they should be reverted as its not one village but a big area . 86.178.97.43 ( talk) 13:44, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
I have no idea, because i did not change it. But the user posted a pro-government source and a pro-opposition map which both match up, so i guess it's ok as we often use pro-opposition sources combined with government maps to make edits in favor for the government. DuckZz ( talk) 10:25, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Why aren't these changes changed back to the original? Sources are lacking, which means the they need to be changed back. MesmerMe ( talk) 20:21, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
YPG has taken control over several villages and hills east of Sarrin, among them are known several villages whose names begin with Qirat, and a village which in Kurdish is called Serekaniye. http://www.4.hathalyoum.net/580799-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%82%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%B1%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%AA%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%B7%D8%B1-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%89-4-%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%89-%D9%88%D8%AA%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%84-%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%AA%D9%8A%D8%AC%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%A8%D9%85%D8%AD%D9%8A%D8%B7.html
http://www.syrianewsapp.com/1/Article/2114/83262104#.VTQTAiGqqko
http://www.alahednews.com.lb/fastnews/267296/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%88%D8%AD%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%B1%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%AA%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%B7%D8%B1-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%89-%D8%B9%D8%AF%D8%A9-%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%89-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AC%D8%A8%D9%87%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AC%D9%86%D9%88%D8%A8%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B4%D8%B1%D9%82%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D9%84%D9%83%D9%88%D8%A8%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%8A#.VTQTECGqqko Roboskiye ( talk) 20:54, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
This source says Qirat and Mitras villages were captured. But we should wait for SOHR or other twitter sources DuckZz ( talk) 21:28, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
I think we should add a rural presence to signal the presence of rebels in the mountain range. A very interesting article by the neutral Al Safir newspaper (frequently quoted by AL Monitor due to its neutrality) that was shared by the pro-gov facebook page shows what rebels control in AL Qalamoun [4]: 3000 rebels controlling 1000km2 of territory including: Tal'at Moussa (aka Moussa MT) - Barouh Mount etc. (dozens of mounts and areas) but most importantly, they control the mountains near Bureij and Jawsiah and Qara. I already said that we cannot add all those mountain peaks but we could resume that by adding rebel rural presence in the space between Qara and Jawsiah crossing. Oh and I suggest removing those 2 mounts near Flita, there are dozens of those and they clutter the map. ChrissCh94 ( talk) 21:52, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
I have noticed that pro-government source PetoLucem https://twitter.com/petolucem often uses Al-Nusra flags in rebel-held territories to imply his viewers that Al-Nusra is in control of those towns.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CC-RSZTVAAEzuEN.jpg:large
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CCyrc8nWEAATHdm.jpg:large
I think that we should not use this pro-govermnet source to edit rebel towns to Al-Nusra control, as this is an attempt by PetoLucem to brand most of the rebels as extreme jihadists who are part of al-Qaeda, to make people turn to his side. Secondly, him putting black Nusra flags does not necessarily mean that towns under these flags are under direct al-Nusra control; it simply is showing that al-Nusra forces are present on those front lines fighting. I think that if we keep doing this, eventually all of the green towns will be turned to grey simply because petolucem has black flags on his map. I also do not think he qualifies as a reliable source to prove al-Nusra control. Let me also say that I am not pro-rebel, pro-government, or pro-Nusra. I just think these towns should not be turned to grey because PetoLucem says they should. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:1547:CFD2:5C0E:E250 ( talk) 19:20, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Petolucem said on twitter more than once that he belives Al Nusra controls 80% of rebel towns, which is crazy but he knows what kind of news his followers want to see. He is not an extreme pro-regime reporter like Leith Fadel for example but he understands that 80% of his readers are pro-government oriented, and they want that "Syrian army vs Al Qaeda" scenario, that's the reason they hate other rebel groups, mostly because the world needs no reason to hate ISIS or Al Nusra, but every other group seems to have some kind of a "OK" reputation. DuckZz ( talk) 20:18, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Hanibal911 I can't revert it, because of, do it yourself. DuckZz ( talk) 20:43, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
You can't use government sources for those changes, revert it, and use kurdish sources if you think something may need to be changed, but everything else should be reverted. DuckZz ( talk) 21:03, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
There are many mentions that SAA controlled Najd Kafr and Nahlaya. E.g. http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-makes-fresh-gains-in-idlib-kafr-najd-under-fire-control/ from yesterday evening reports Najd Kafr almost taken. Teh same source states that Qameenas is contested. On the map Najd Kafr is already red, while Nahlaya is contested and Qameenas green. Any neutral source not on twitter reporting this changes? Paolowalter ( talk) 12:03, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Acc. pro opposition source: Syrian Army imposes firearms-control over al-Muqblah town in Idlib countryside, after restoring Kafer Najed and Nahlaia today morning. Documents.sy 83.30.58.17 ( talk) 18:33, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
ISIS Capture Aadah Mount and Several Important Points in Palmyra Desert.
http://syrian-mirror.net/en/cat/syria-mirror/isis-capture-aadah-mount-and-several-important-points-in-palmyra-desert/ ( Jack6780 ( talk) 23:59, 20 April 2015 (UTC))
Here is my point of view on how Nabe' El Murr is regime held:
I belive we should change it to contested. Pro-opposition sources said that they are trying to advance towards Kessab, and this means Nabe El Murr is not rebel held but contested as Al Masdar has noted. DuckZz ( talk) 21:39, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Some more info from http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/jabhat-al-nusra-attack-on-kassab-repelled/. Nabe' El Murr is back under SAA control, previously was contested. I'd say re dwith a green hal ring on the right. Paolowalter ( talk) 07:03, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Turning Nabe' El Murr contested is unreasonable. It used to be red (see above) it was turned green on the basis of an Al Masdar report and Al Masdar shortly after remarked that the town is back to SAA control. Beside Al Masadr being reliable in general, Al Masdar is not announcing a SAA advance but a short lived rebel advance, followed by restoration of the previous status quo. Therefore Nabe' El Murr back to red as it used to be. Paolowalter ( talk) 11:48, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
It seems that the SAA 5th has launched an attack on NE Daraa and has captured 5 villages. Mseikeh is the only one that is in the map and should be changed to Government held. Sources are pro-opp and pro-gov.
According to document sy. SAA captured Miskya al-Sharqia and al-Gharbiya, al-Khwabe, Ishnan, al-Dallafa https://www.facebook.com/documents.sy/posts/929032690492821 Miskiyah location: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=tr&lat=32.911874&lon=36.341915&z=14&m=b Hwinsp ( talk) 11:26, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
other villages probably here: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=tr&lat=32.871586&lon=36.331959&z=13&m=b&gz=0;363000297;328518313;581073;281162;350189;305669;0;89404;263500;0;538158;78590;568199;271070 Hwinsp ( talk) 11:45, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Pro Rebel source https://twitter.com/Syria_Rebel_Obs/status/590141059986026496 says that the SAA is attacking Nahtah from the East. There should be a red circle on the right side of the town. MesmerMe ( talk) 13:45, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
WHy have all changes been reverted? The only reports that are available say that they've retreated from Busra al-Harir, not from the villages they've already caputured. MesmerMe ( talk) 16:14, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
SOHR reported only retreat from Busra al-Harir not from any other village. The video used to support the revert is in arab and I can't understand it. In any case it is a pro-opp outlet and cannot be used to support rebel advance. Please go revert. Paolowalter ( talk) 16:38, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
There were changes based on Agathocle map but then they were self reverted. Why? Paolowalter ( talk) 16:38, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Pro opposition source said, that rebels recapture all village, but it is only pro opposition source, acording pro regime source SAA enter Busra al-Harir. I am looking source to changes all the villages on the green. 83.30.58.250 ( talk) 18:24, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
The villages need reverting unless reliable sources can be shown . 86.178.97.69 ( talk) 19:05, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Why did we not show the SAA gains? ChrissCh94 ( talk) 19:08, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
I restored the situation before the removal of the gain of SAA in this area. Paolowalter ( talk) 19:27, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
The pro-opposition source http://syriadirect.org/news/syria-direct-news-update-4-21-15/ states today that the offensive was repelled at Busr Al Harir but reports the yesterday advance of SAA without any mention that those gain have been reverted. Paolowalter ( talk) 19:45, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Who changed them to green? > 86.178.97.69 ( talk) 20:47, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
I think the template is a bit imbalanced. For example, there are a lot of blank areas and then suddenly a clutter of villages/farms. This makes viewers and readers think that the blank spaces correspond to an empty desert area which is not the case. So what I suggest is the following:
Your thoughts fellow editors? ChrissCh94 ( talk) 18:03, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
According to this Map, which is from a pro-kurd source, Kakah said is with ISIS, also update the hasakah map with SAA advance. Ricardomoha ( talk) 19:12, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
http://www.agathocledesyracuse.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Khabour-valley-21-April-2015-by-@deSyracuse.png and http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/fr/map/desyracuse-syria-civil-war-21-april-2015_37133#12/36.4826/40.7586 Latest Agacothles de Syracuse Maps. Looks like Tal Barak is under IS administration or contested, but it says control when I click. Tgoll774 ( talk) 19:09, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/twittercetin609-tap-the-map-for-information_36481#15/36.6413/41.0750 Pro-Kurd map for comparing with other map sources. Tgoll774 ( talk) 14:45, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Agathocle map http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/fr/map/desyracuse-syria-civil-war-21-april-2015_37133#11/35.7543/36.0530 confirms our old front line. That was changed only on the basis of Al mansar report http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-on-the-move-in-northern-latakia-turkish-border-crossing-within-distance/ (never confirmed by other sources) that later was made obsolete by http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/jabhat-al-nusra-attack-on-kassab-repelled. Therefore all the area west of Kabir must go red.
Agathocle himself said that he was offline for 2 months and made the map according to frontline news. And he is somehow neutral, while Leith Fadel is extreme pro-government orinanted. Also we have other pro-oposition sources confirming Al Masdar reports. DuckZz ( talk) 20:08, 21 April 2015 (UTC) DuckZz ( talk) 20:07, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
We already marked Nab Al Mur back to red. Step by step, no need to rush and change everything. DuckZz ( talk) 20:57, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Agothocle has admitted that he used the wikipedia map as his source,so there is alot of doubt on it,archicivilians map best describes the situation,which leith confirmed. Alhanuty ( talk) 23:01, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Strongly pro-opp map here https://twitter.com/Conflict_Report/status/590608725985067008 clearly show that the locations between Qastal Maaf and Rabia are under SAA control. These positions includes Ateera and Al-Sooda that must go back to red. Paolowalter ( talk) 08:34, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Module:Syrian Civil War detailed map has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
change
{ lat = "33.104", long = "36.739", mark = "Location dot red.svg", marksize = "6", label = " al-Asfar", link = "#no", label_size = "0", position = "top" },
to
{ lat = "33.104", long = "36.739", mark = "Location dot black.svg", marksize = "6", label = " al-Asfar", link = "#al-Asfar", label_size = "0", position = "top" },
and
{ lat = "33.007", long = "36.739", mark = "80x80-red-black-anim.gif", marksize = "6", label = " al-Qasr", link = "#no", label_size = "0", position = "right" },
to
{ lat = "33.007", long = "36.739", mark = "Location dot black", marksize = "6", label = " al-Qasr", link = "#al-Qasr", label_size = "0", position = "right" },
source:
http://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/syria-situation-report-april-14-21-2015
2601:0:B200:F7D9:D4D5:B002:E9CF:1AB1 ( talk) 01:01, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
http://syriadirect.org/news/is-cuts-off-key-rebel-supply-route-from-jordan-to-the-damascus-countryside/ I'll let the usual editors look it over to cross reference. Tgoll774 ( talk) 20:30, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
http://syriahr.com/en/2015/04/37-fighters-from-rebel-and-islamic-battalions-killed-during-clashes-in-dara/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.73.84.13 ( talk) 01:49, 22 April 2015 (UTC) :SOHR does not say which towns were recaptured, only areas around Busr al-Harir. Also, since this is SOHR, I would wait for a neutral source. Although, I am surprised that the more rebels were killed. That really is something. XJ-0461 v2 ( talk) 02:48, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
This SOHR report does not say villages were taken by rebels and its in English which has proven to be unreliable so the villages should be marked red . 86.178.97.69 ( talk) 07:21, 22 April 2015 (UTC) As long as there is no mention of change of control of towns with names explicitly written or reliable map we must retain the Lajat map with SAA controlled towns. The usual vandal changed it, please could somebody revert this change (I would break the 1RR rule). Paolowalter ( talk) 07:43, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
SOHR is reliable,so shut up,it clearly mentioned that all areas taken by regime forces in the offensive have been recaptured by the rebel,which includes all towns,and Paolowalter,if you don't stop your personal attacks,i will be reporting you for your vandalizing behavior,understood. Alhanuty ( talk) 12:15, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
You fucking braindead, SOHR is the biggest casualty cheaters of all time. Their sources are "activists" who work for al nusra. LOL "reliable"
Agree the editor who made these changes needs to be told how edits work and if they continue blocked . 86.178.97.140 ( talk) 16:14, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
SOHR has established itself as authentic source throughout the entire Syrian Civil War,it was decided so based on Major News Source,and it the conclusion was reached in 2012,way before alot of the new editors cam here. https://www.facebook.com/syriahro/videos/10153299975868115/. Alhanuty ( talk) 17:36, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Recently sohr English translation made major mistakes it was decided not to use it as a sole source editor Hanibal911 stated this and all others agreed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.178.97.140 ( talk) 18:53, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Alhanuty SOHR never said rebels retake villages only regain ground around Busra harir read the report and stop making lies or we report you . 86.178.97.140 ( talk) 19:29, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
The Arabic SOHR report confirmed that regime forces lost all areas they captured since the start of the offensive,so stop making up things,SOHR is still reliable more reliable than the pro-regime sources you listen to. Alhanuty ( talk) 19:34, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
who are you to make up rules here,you people just made accounts like just months ago,and want to dictate,which source is to be used and which doesn't,plus,maybe editors with a pro-regime stance are with you,but alot of neutral editors aren't with these extreme opinions. Alhanuty ( talk) 22:13, 22 April 2015 (UTC) plus that is a pro-regime map. Alhanuty ( talk) 22:13, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Once again SOHR is wrong how many more times must this happen before we all stop using it as a single source for edits .SOHR needs to be confirmed like other sources . 86.178.102.166 ( talk) 14:01, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
Some of you may have noticed. The map has problems with updating recent edits. Just wanted to write this so that evevryone knows it's the same for every user. DuckZz ( talk) 08:16, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Pro opposition and pro Kurdish source reported that Kurdish troops(YPG) jointly with moderate rebels started major offensive against ISIS in area near the town of Sarrin that would capture the town. Syrian Rebellion Observatory Mark Monmonier and that YPG/rebels captured some villages and hill near this town and now trying cut the last supply line from the main of ISIS positions to north toward the town of Sarrin. Maybe someone have more data about this offensive. Hanibal911 ( talk) 17:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
According to SOHR YPG captured the three villages that surround Sarrin (no names specified), with the only supply route left being through the Euphrates river towards IS held areas west of it, indicating YPG control over areas south of the town:
http://www.syriahr.com/2015/04/مصرع-10-عناصر-على-الأقل-من-تنظيم-الدولة/
186.112.206.36 ( talk) 03:11, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
https://7496bff410df41fc380ad565a50f607d4b1e8372.googledrive.com/host/0BzN49CdHSAwmcGU4eEI5dVBGZXM/SarrinCity-2015-04-22.png Pro-YYPG source to compare with other sources. Tgoll774 ( talk) 15:38, 23 April 2015 (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 40 | ← | Archive 44 | Archive 45 | Archive 46 | Archive 47 | Archive 48 | → | Archive 50 |
A lot of towns are listed under exclusive Nusra control, mostly by Hanibal911. The ones I have issue with the most are Saraqeb and Maarat al Nuuman, which are regional capitals for the rebels since 2012, sporting a large number of Islamist and FSA groups that did not participate in the SRF/Hazzm war with Nusra and were thus left alone. Maara was made into Nusra territory after SRF HQ's were seized (even though Suqur al Sham and Ahrar al Sham seized those HQ's along with Nusra). Saraqeb was made into Nusra territory based on this very vague statement Joshua Landis: ″Blin, Bluin, Bsqala, Binnish, and Saraqib are under the control of Jund Al-Aqsa, a group loyal to Ayman Al-Zwahiri.″ As there have been no reports of Jund al Aqsa expelling Suqur al Sham, Ahrar al Sham, or Jabhat Thuwwar Saraqeb here, an FSA participant in Jaysh al Fateh that dates back to 2012 in Saraqeb city, the statement is far too ambiguous to be used as a definitive marker of control. Additionally at least one pro-rebel source reports that al Farouq linked Jaysh al Sunna in Jaysh al Fateh has a component in Saraqeb called Liwa al Iman here In light of these findings, I pose two main questions:
Ironically, while the map exaggerates Nusra control in Idlib, it ignores it in Aleppo. Since July, Nusra has increasingly arrested members of Liwa al Tawhid defectors and the FSA in Marea Alaan TV here Meanwhile, Nusra's dar al qada appears to be basing itself in Hreytan (where Jabhat Ansar al Din is also based), and extending its authority to Kafr Hamra and Anadan here. These towns should at least be shared between Nusra and rebels. However, I also doubt Darat Izza to be under Nusra control completely; Nusra and Hazzm in Darat Izza signed a neutrality pact to avoid the fighting that took place near Atareb, so Nusra never expelled Hazzm. here And Hazzm in Darat Izza then defected and joined Kataeb Mujahidee Ibn Taymiyya here, a defector from the Levant Front. This means Ibn Taymiyya's faction is stronger than ever in Darat Izza, and until we can find whether they're a proxy of Nusra or a truly independent group, the city should stay half green. Regiment 111 was also reportedly handed over to the Levant Front as part of the agreement between Hazzm and Nusra here. NightShadeAEB ( talk) 09:43, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
And i remember when somebody told me "DuckZ you are wrong, there won't be much problems adding a seperate joint color for Rebels". As it already is, the biggest problem here is the joint control. I understand that JAN needs a color ok, but why joint control ? It's just too complicated to find out which party controls which town and village together with other groups. I don't even know what to say but the joint control is a stupid idea in my opinion, because in almost every town/village there is both JAN and Rebel (IF/FSA....) presence, because they are working together, despite the clashes between some groups. Joint control doesn't make any sense in my opinion, it's either mostly JAN or mostly under Rebel control. Period ! DuckZz ( talk) 10:23, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
The Nasib order crossing is under attack according to this http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2015/Apr-01/292938-syrian-rebels-attack-main-jordan-crossing-activists.ashx and those small dots in the border should be put under surveillance at the very least. Gomes89 ( talk) 14:07, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
The other cities should probably be removed as SAA held actually since it references Nassib as the only government controlled area on the border. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2620:103:A000:A501:45AD:22DA:A511:8CEC ( talk) 14:12, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
"official" al nusra says it is taken
https://twitter.com/DR_SHAHID/status/583341994887376897 — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Totholio (
talk •
contribs)
19:06, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
I know I hate them, but if someone claims something like this it tends to be true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Totholio ( talk • contribs) 20:35, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Sources confirming Nasib crossing was taken by rebels:
http://www.toledoblade.com/World/2015/04/01/Syrian-rebels-seize-Jordan-crossing-from-government-control-rebel-security-source-say.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/reuters/article-3022093/Syrian-rebels-seize-Jordan-crossing-government-rebel-security-source.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 ( talk) 21:02, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
André437 ChrissCh94 Hanibal911 And again i have a problem with the joint control icon. I don't know who made the rules, but they are probably clear enough. SOHR said that rebel brigades and JAN have taken the crossing. Brigades means plural, so at least 2 of them, and to confirm SOHR, here is the statement for this offensive alone, where 4 rebel brigades are named. Also SOHR says that "JAN participated in the operation that had been launched by the rebel brigades". Here is the statement after the border was captured. And from the Yarmuk group There's no source showing that JAN has 50% of the border or 40% but here's the thing, this is not a town/village, so a joint control has no sense, since it's just a border post, nothing big, few buldings, it's either under JAN or Rebel(IF/FSA) control (i mean control, not attack), and i think it's obvious who was the majority here, unlike Idlib, where we had a more complicated situation. Also, the Jordanian TV made the interview day after with the commander that will run the nassib border. DuckZz ( talk) 20:58, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
Hanibal911 Well thank you for this source, because the same guy said exactly this. And this map, even thought it meant to be a joke, he obviously wanted to show a 60%FSA, 20%IF, 20%JAN, and that's 80-20. I am not using him as a source, because he is pro-rebel, but you obviously wanted to show something but failed. And here is the statement of that group that will ran the crossing, in front of them, a top military leader of the southern front (Yarmuk group). I don't have to use youtube or pro-opposition channels, as we already have SOHR. DuckZz ( talk) 21:35, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
Hanibal911 SOHR says that rebels control a part too. As JAN control the border part, and that's the main entrance to Jordan, you can see it here. Put it to joint control as this border is not small and we know now that JAN has the bigger influence, that means at least 50% of the control facing Jordan. DuckZz ( talk) 21:28, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
Pro opposition warned that ISIS prepares offensive in order to capture the city of Idlib. Activist of one of the opposition factions of the Army of Islam which located in al-Hasakah province, northeast of Syria said that the Islamic State is currently preparing for an attack on the city of Idlib, which entered the opposition forces about a week ago. The confidentially source showed that the leaders of ISIS now preparing fighters in the town of Shaddadi in main center for training fighters in Al-Hasakah for the attack on the city of Idlib. here Xeber 24 Hanibal911 ( talk) 19:56, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Makes no sense. There's dozens of rebels/loyalist held towns and villages before Idlib city, IS has no chance of getting near it. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
200.219.152.90 (
talk)
21:51, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Last time when they try take control of Al Mab'ujah they lost about 200 fighters and next 200 was wounded. They lost Tikrit, lost in Deir ez-Zor, Hasakah and Irak. How many fighters they will need? 30 000 - 50 000? They must kill about 10 000 - 20 000 rebels and 10 000 SAA+NDF 83.29.36.148 ( talk) 22:25, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Module:Syrian Civil War detailed map has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change
{ lat = "32.569", long = "36.315", mark = "Location dot lime.svg", marksize = "8", label = " Al-Jizah", link = "Al-Jizah", label_size = "0", position = "bottom" },
to
{ lat = "32.569", long = "36.315", mark = "Map-dot-grey-68a.svg", marksize = "8", label = " Al-Jizah", link = "Al-Jizah", label_size = "0", position = "bottom" },
Source:
http://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/control-terrain-syria-march-31-2015
I don't know much about this town, but the Institute for the Study of War seems to think that it is under al-Nusra control. Granted, it shows towns like Saraqib and Maarat al-Nu'man under moderate rebel control, so I don't know how reliable it is, but we have always called Institute for the Study of war a reliable source.
2601:0:B200:F7D9:B4EB:A45D:FE50:156A ( talk) 01:55, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template.
Kharkiv07
Talk
22:27, 4 April 2015 (UTC)Rebels took the Nassib border crossing, and they also took Bosra. They are pushing east. Also, there are a lot of towns southeast of Suwayda and south of Salkhad that are not shown on the map.
https://www.google.com/maps/@32.4216263,36.7516789,25445m/data=!3m1!1e3
http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=32.304337&lon=36.837747&z=11&m=b
Particularly, Khirbet Awwad needs to be shown, but also the towns north of there. They are under the control of pro-government forces, as desyracuse shows:
http://www.agathocledesyracuse.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/South-Suweydaa-23-March-2015.png
Also, is desyracuse considered a pro-rebel source? He lists Umm Walad as being under the control of the rebels. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:186D:7392:97A4:6D28 ( talk) 00:51, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
SOHR reported about clashes between rebels and IS in Ulayyaniyah (arabic) area. Pro-opposition channels were reporting that rebels advanced in this area and took control of this location. This map from Cheldric can someone illustrate that (its still pro-op)
Stop this hannibal,it has been confirmed by SOHR that Ulanniyah is contested between the rebels and ISIS,and this has been noted out by multiple sources,Desyracuse,Archicivilians and now SOHR,that is the ultimate proof that Ulanniyah is NOT under Regime Control,the area is desert,the regime can't control all these desert areas,I still remember when you didn't want to Al-Halbah on the map,until i explained and showed you the evidence,and like what the regime in town,while rebel and ISIS fight in the area,that doesn't make sense,in this case hannibal,we will need to rely on pro-opposition sources for the situation the desert,because regime sources won't admit it,plus an area in a desert area,includes the town and the oasis,so that is it. Alhanuty ( talk) 00:51, 6 April 2015 (UTC) Also the same issue happened with Bir Qassab. Alhanuty ( talk) 00:55, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Okay,then Mark Mahsah as contested. Alhanuty ( talk) 04:21, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Why did we add all those hills near Al Zabadani? Most of them are not military sites (unlike in Daraa). I suggest keeping the most important one(s). ChrissCh94 ( talk) 20:54, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
By the way, what happened in Zabadani ? Last year, rebels surrendered the town. http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/04/syria-rebels-surrender-border-town-2014426152724543924.html When did they recapture ? Oroszka ( talk) 19:55, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
I believe during SAA/Hezb. Qalamoun offensive, got pushed from Yabroud to west. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Totholio ( talk • contribs) 20:04, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
http://syriahr.com/en/2015/04/35-killed-or-wounded-by-missiles-on-salamia-city/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jafar Saeed ( talk • contribs) 17:24, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
According to https://twitter.com/PetoLucem/status/585095829591089152
Maybe we need to change? Is it possible to contact locals? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arissston ( talk • contribs) 22:55, 6 April 2015 (UTC) :We cannot contact locals as anyone claiming to have information from them would be violating our rules banning original research, their claims would also be unverifiable. As for your source, Peto Lucem acknowledges that the map is pro-gov. and we cannot use pro-gov maps for gov gains. We will, however, wait to see if a neutral reliable source makes a statement about the situation. XJ-0461 v2 ( talk) 01:39, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
It is a biased map. Not made by Peto. Just ignore it. Totholio ( talk) 09:19, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Peto Lucem refutes the map in this tweet: https://twitter.com/PetoLucem/status/585105725346729984 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jafar Saeed ( talk • contribs) 17:54, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
The siege icon on the T2 Pumping Station held by IS needs to be removed. It was a one-off attack by pro-government tribesmen, and it wasn't successful. The icon has been present for over a week, and there is not still tribesmen attacking it. The icon's presence makes it seem like they still are, and I can't find any sources saying there is an ongoing siege. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:4C8D:68EA:2129:963B ( talk) 20:12, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
I agree with Hanibal911. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:BD61:4B54:4ADF:5032 ( talk) 18:50, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Qamenaas contested http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/battle-map-of-the-saa-offensive-in-idlib-tiger-forces-enter-qameenas/. Paolowalter ( talk) 07:50, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Tell Tamar contested between YPG and IS http://syriadirect.org/rss/1955-syria-direct-news-update-4-2-15. Paolowalter ( talk) 21:48, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
The two sources that confirm the news item are 1. ISIS fans in twitter, 2. Hasakah Youth Union which is a known pro-ISIS and anti-YPG source thus being unvalid for purposes of ilustrating ISIS advances against anyone else.
190.65.46.239 ( talk) 18:17, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Majed al-Haskawi is not pro-IS and is pro-FSA, so its valid. The youth union is neither pro or anti IS, their loyalties are largely unknown and likely opportunistic like many others. Syria Direct also doesn't post news it can't confirm. So revert. Tgoll774 ( talk) 15:23, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
IS death cult launched an attack on the government's Khalkhalah airbase but they were repelled. This article also states that the attack was launched from an IS held town of Al-Lijat on the border of the Dara’a Governorate: http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/isis-surprise-attack-in-as-sweida-ends-in-a-disaster-for-them/ This town needs to be marked on the map.
According pro SAA source SAAF bombarded large Opposition Forces meeting in Busra Al-Sham (in my oppinion it is stupid to make meeting near army territory). According IvanSidorenko1 - over 70 killed and injuring including mamy high rank commanders, according leithfadel 70+ dead, including 5 commanders. In the last months in Ildib gov SAAF bombed meeting high-ranking members of JAN. 217.99.129.185 ( talk) 18:32, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
ISIS pulling out of Yarmouk and the Falastine streets inside the camp. Following battle. Elijah J. Magnier Hanibal911 ( talk) 17:50, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Be careful when you use reports from SOHR in English. This is largely erroneous reports and they distort the original data in reports from SOHR! Here in original report SOHR reported that bombing helicopters morning barrels explosive areas in the town of Al-Lataminah countryside north of Hama and other areas in the village of Abu Hbeilat in eastern part Hama province and there was no information about casualties so far. SOHR But in the report which was translated was says that the helicopters dropped barrel bombs on places in the towns of Kafar Zita, Morek and Allatamnah in the north of Hama leading to kill a man from Allataminah. SOHR It would be best not use the translated reports and use only original reports. Also here original report from SOHR reported that the number of death toll rose to at least to 20 elements of the security forces and gunmen loyal to her, including 12 of the Palestine Liberation Army who were killed yesterday during an attack by militants believed to be from the "Islamic state" on area of the hill Tall Dilfa and its surroundings. SOHR But in the report which was translated was says that the 12 members of the regime forces and allied militiamen died while others were wounded, some of them seriously wounded, due to an attack launched by unknown fighters on Tal Defda’ area in the east of the airbase of Khalkhalah. And that clashes are taking place between the regime forces and allied militiamen against the Islamic battalions near the airbase of al- Tho’lah, amid mutual bombardment between the two sides. SOHR But SOHR not said about this in original report or in other original reports. So that someone in the during translation willfully adds excess information and these reports can not be used because they was distorted and report false data. Hanibal911 ( talk) 08:03, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Agree. Best to use original Arabic reports. English versions tend to be mistranslated (bad English). EkoGraf ( talk) 08:12, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Some news from Latakia almasdar. For our map it is simply stating that Rabiya is contested, that is already. Paolowalter ( talk) 06:31, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Paolowalter many new villages have been added under rebel control and some saa held have been changed to rebel held ,do you know why ? 86.178.97.43 ( talk) 10:44, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Seems that YPG is clashing with ISIS in the vicinity of the plant per SOHR (this time Arabic). -- Damirgraffiti |☺What's Up?☺ 19:50, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
That may be deceptive though. If the key internal machinery is missing, the plant is worthless. Especially without power. YPG can't supply it as satellite imagery confirms. Tgoll774 ( talk) 00:02, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Essam al-Rayes' a spokesman of Southern front said that rebels in southern Syria will not cooperate with Al-Nusra after tensions between local rebel groups and Nusra in border crossing between Syria and Jordan. Essam al-Rayes said that "We reject all forms of cooperation with al Nusra and we dont want Syria to become a base for jihad, or the expansion of the Islamic State (ISIS)," The Daily Star So that as I said earlier the situation with the Al Nusra is becoming more similar to the situation with the ISIS which also previously cooperated with moderate rebels against Syrian troops. Hanibal911 ( talk) 15:01, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
From http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/hell-reigns-supreme-over-hell-syrian-army-makes-substantial-gains-in-the-south/ the poultry taken by SAA. Al-Wadiha seem contested. Objections? 87.9.149.62 ( talk) 18:59, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
I strongly object to chicken farms being added to map just because there is fighting there . 86.178.97.43 ( talk) 15:32, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Why is there a rebel held site near Flita and a regime held Tall Hankal? There are dozens of those sites littered in the region so we can't just add 2. I suggest either adding all of the Qalamoun military/observation posts (IMPOSSIBLE) or just remove those 2 insignificant sites. There are full army brigades that we haven't added yet; why should we add a small post manned by 10-15 men? ChrissCh94 ( talk) 20:39, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
I'd tend to avoid cluttering the map with small locations of limited (if any) strategic value. SAA and Hezbollah are taking position around Zabadani every day, it does not mean we have to mark all of them. Paolowalter ( talk) 07:05, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Module:Syrian Civil War detailed map has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
change
{ lat = "34.015", long = "38.098", mark = "80x80-lime-black-anim.gif", marksize = "6", label = "
Al Ulayyaniyah", link = "Al Ulayyaniyah", label_size = "0", position = "top" },
to
{ lat = "34.015", long = "38.098", mark = "Location dot lime.svg", marksize = "6", label = "
Al Ulayyaniyah", link = "Al Ulayyaniyah", label_size = "0", position = "top" },
source:
http://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/syria-situation-report-april-7-14-2015
2601:0:B200:F7D9:1562:E9FB:1354:9CA9 ( talk) 02:22, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
The SAA's Al-Husayniyah Enclave has been destroyed by ISIL therefore it doesnt exist anymore confirm my Mark Monmonier
https://twitter.com/MarkMonmonier/status/588052895481864192
https://twitter.com/MarkMonmonier/status/588133817891876864
Who the hell is mark mononier (isil fanboy ) and how do you post on here without any name or number? 86.178.97.43 ( talk) 15:53, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Haibal911 2 tweets and a map from 1 source and that's enough evidence is it? this map does not belong to you . 86.178.97.43 ( talk) 21:03, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Hanibal, this edit is against the rules. While your source may not oppose the SAA directly, it is still not authoritative enough [we cannot tell how reliable its info is]. Think about it, if they really did "destroy" the enclave, why are the pro-ISIS fanatics not talking about it? We need more sources than just one twitter source to change an entire area from red to black. XJ-0461 v2 ( talk) 21:42, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
I agree. There is no indication that this statetements from MakrMonmonier are reliable. Let's just ignore them. Paolowalter ( talk)
Just another map .this is not like you to make quick changes without many sources . 149.254.56.66 ( talk) 14:03, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
ISIS fighters have largely withdrawn from a Palestinian refugee camp on the outskirts of Damascus after expelling their main rival. The pull-out ISIS from Yarmouk leaves Al Nusra as the main group inside the camp. ISIS had returned to their stronghold in neighboring Hajar al Aswad, from where they had launched their attack. The Palestine Liberation Organization envoy to Damascus said that Nusra was now the main group in the camp. They and Nusra are one. They are changing of positions. The Daily Star Hanibal911 ( talk) 14:48, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Is it possible to add some more villages in the south-east of Kobane canton and north-west of Raqqah province? It would show the actual frontline more accurately, because there is "hole" on the map now.
I would suggest to use this map: https://twitter.com/MarkMonmonier/status/587511795180503040 It matches with the wikipedia map so far, although the villages spelling is different. So could someone please add JALABIYAH as held by YPG and SAB JIFAR as held by IS.
We will add new villages when there are reports about clashes inside them or that YPG/IS captured it. DuckZz ( talk) 09:51, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
SAA captured Nab Al-Murr 1 year ago during the kesab counteroffensive. http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/security/2014/03/syria-kasab-opposition-army-battles.html and still saa control the town , please fix it 92.44.119.74 ( talk) 18:26, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
read please , it clearly says saa recaptured the town http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Latakia_offensive
About 90% of the location dots and other marks appear to have moved 1 pixel down. This might not seem important, but it makes updating the .png map a lot slower, because I rely on finding the difference between screenshots to make the maps, and there are about 150 marks to go through on this map, plus those on the Iraqi map. I was wondering if anyone knew what the cause might be. Banak ( talk) 17:02, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
I don't know exactly, but I am one of the main editors of the "War in Donbass Detailed Map", and I remember making an edit to the page outside of the map, and that moved all of the dots down very much.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Donbass_War_detailed_map
You can look at the edit history of both to find a similarity. I hope this helps. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:D9DE:96EB:1551:6659 ( talk) 22:50, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Based on Chuck Pfarrer map1 & map2, Shash, Khan mamid, Jaban, Sal, Hamadun(&jayl), Qalat hadid and Nur Ali are with YPG. Mitras is with ISIS. Ricardomoha ( talk) 11:36, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
By this logic all western sources are pro-kurds, also SOHR can't be used as well.. Then only ISIS sources or Regime sources are accepted which makes no sense to me. Ricardomoha ( talk) 18:59, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CC5zFsyVIAAtf33.jpg:large Latest map. Basically status quo ante plus from last year. Tgoll774 ( talk) 01:40, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/main-government-supply-line-to-aleppo-cleared-syrian-army-captures-al-rashadiyah/ states that Al-Rashadiyah close to the Khanasser highway is taken by SAA. Where is this village? Paolowalter ( talk) 12:10, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War&action=edit§ion=12 Can someone confirm this and check on FSA claims to have also cut SAA supply routes to Aleppo. A lot of twitter posts about Rebels and IS advances south of Aleppo and cutting the road overnight. Tgoll774 ( talk) 13:53, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
So basically a propaganda war, like with Baiji and others. But from the video its clear some level of combat is going on in the area from FSA and IS. FSA feeds claim IS hold Khanasser, SAA denies, FSA ah screw it. I say lock all edits for a week till we get better info, because it appears we hit a new mobile phase where settlements change hands every day. Tgoll774 ( talk) 15:45, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Have the rebel forces advanced in Latakia ? many more villages added and some taken from the SAA ? I have not read of any resent advance ,can someone kindly explain the situation . 86.178.97.43 ( talk) 18:38, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
SAA is in or near Rabia ... If u change towns, only with Sources please. To much anti-governments editors
WTF is that for nonsense? He/She who changed all those towns to green in Latakia better change it back to red or post some decent sources here. SyAAF ( talk) 21:14, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
The area has been changed several times due to different reports. Pro-opposition maps are showing always the same, and editors are changing this region according to them when a pro-gov or neutral source poops ops with a statement which might confirm that. And SOHR and some other sources were reporting that rebels atacked gov positions with GRAD rockets here and there near Latakia city, which might be logical because they are this close, and the range is limited. DuckZz ( talk) 08:34, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
No Reliable Source is backing those changes actually? Are you saying that? Mr.User200 ( talk) 13:17, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
The editor who made these changes needs to explain why they were changed or they should be reverted as its not one village but a big area . 86.178.97.43 ( talk) 13:44, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
I have no idea, because i did not change it. But the user posted a pro-government source and a pro-opposition map which both match up, so i guess it's ok as we often use pro-opposition sources combined with government maps to make edits in favor for the government. DuckZz ( talk) 10:25, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Why aren't these changes changed back to the original? Sources are lacking, which means the they need to be changed back. MesmerMe ( talk) 20:21, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
YPG has taken control over several villages and hills east of Sarrin, among them are known several villages whose names begin with Qirat, and a village which in Kurdish is called Serekaniye. http://www.4.hathalyoum.net/580799-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%82%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%B1%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%AA%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%B7%D8%B1-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%89-4-%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%89-%D9%88%D8%AA%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%84-%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%AA%D9%8A%D8%AC%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%A8%D9%85%D8%AD%D9%8A%D8%B7.html
http://www.syrianewsapp.com/1/Article/2114/83262104#.VTQTAiGqqko
http://www.alahednews.com.lb/fastnews/267296/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%88%D8%AD%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%B1%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%AA%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%B7%D8%B1-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%89-%D8%B9%D8%AF%D8%A9-%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%89-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AC%D8%A8%D9%87%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AC%D9%86%D9%88%D8%A8%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B4%D8%B1%D9%82%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D9%84%D9%83%D9%88%D8%A8%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%8A#.VTQTECGqqko Roboskiye ( talk) 20:54, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
This source says Qirat and Mitras villages were captured. But we should wait for SOHR or other twitter sources DuckZz ( talk) 21:28, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
I think we should add a rural presence to signal the presence of rebels in the mountain range. A very interesting article by the neutral Al Safir newspaper (frequently quoted by AL Monitor due to its neutrality) that was shared by the pro-gov facebook page shows what rebels control in AL Qalamoun [4]: 3000 rebels controlling 1000km2 of territory including: Tal'at Moussa (aka Moussa MT) - Barouh Mount etc. (dozens of mounts and areas) but most importantly, they control the mountains near Bureij and Jawsiah and Qara. I already said that we cannot add all those mountain peaks but we could resume that by adding rebel rural presence in the space between Qara and Jawsiah crossing. Oh and I suggest removing those 2 mounts near Flita, there are dozens of those and they clutter the map. ChrissCh94 ( talk) 21:52, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
I have noticed that pro-government source PetoLucem https://twitter.com/petolucem often uses Al-Nusra flags in rebel-held territories to imply his viewers that Al-Nusra is in control of those towns.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CC-RSZTVAAEzuEN.jpg:large
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CCyrc8nWEAATHdm.jpg:large
I think that we should not use this pro-govermnet source to edit rebel towns to Al-Nusra control, as this is an attempt by PetoLucem to brand most of the rebels as extreme jihadists who are part of al-Qaeda, to make people turn to his side. Secondly, him putting black Nusra flags does not necessarily mean that towns under these flags are under direct al-Nusra control; it simply is showing that al-Nusra forces are present on those front lines fighting. I think that if we keep doing this, eventually all of the green towns will be turned to grey simply because petolucem has black flags on his map. I also do not think he qualifies as a reliable source to prove al-Nusra control. Let me also say that I am not pro-rebel, pro-government, or pro-Nusra. I just think these towns should not be turned to grey because PetoLucem says they should. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:1547:CFD2:5C0E:E250 ( talk) 19:20, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Petolucem said on twitter more than once that he belives Al Nusra controls 80% of rebel towns, which is crazy but he knows what kind of news his followers want to see. He is not an extreme pro-regime reporter like Leith Fadel for example but he understands that 80% of his readers are pro-government oriented, and they want that "Syrian army vs Al Qaeda" scenario, that's the reason they hate other rebel groups, mostly because the world needs no reason to hate ISIS or Al Nusra, but every other group seems to have some kind of a "OK" reputation. DuckZz ( talk) 20:18, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Hanibal911 I can't revert it, because of, do it yourself. DuckZz ( talk) 20:43, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
You can't use government sources for those changes, revert it, and use kurdish sources if you think something may need to be changed, but everything else should be reverted. DuckZz ( talk) 21:03, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
There are many mentions that SAA controlled Najd Kafr and Nahlaya. E.g. http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-makes-fresh-gains-in-idlib-kafr-najd-under-fire-control/ from yesterday evening reports Najd Kafr almost taken. Teh same source states that Qameenas is contested. On the map Najd Kafr is already red, while Nahlaya is contested and Qameenas green. Any neutral source not on twitter reporting this changes? Paolowalter ( talk) 12:03, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Acc. pro opposition source: Syrian Army imposes firearms-control over al-Muqblah town in Idlib countryside, after restoring Kafer Najed and Nahlaia today morning. Documents.sy 83.30.58.17 ( talk) 18:33, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
ISIS Capture Aadah Mount and Several Important Points in Palmyra Desert.
http://syrian-mirror.net/en/cat/syria-mirror/isis-capture-aadah-mount-and-several-important-points-in-palmyra-desert/ ( Jack6780 ( talk) 23:59, 20 April 2015 (UTC))
Here is my point of view on how Nabe' El Murr is regime held:
I belive we should change it to contested. Pro-opposition sources said that they are trying to advance towards Kessab, and this means Nabe El Murr is not rebel held but contested as Al Masdar has noted. DuckZz ( talk) 21:39, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Some more info from http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/jabhat-al-nusra-attack-on-kassab-repelled/. Nabe' El Murr is back under SAA control, previously was contested. I'd say re dwith a green hal ring on the right. Paolowalter ( talk) 07:03, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Turning Nabe' El Murr contested is unreasonable. It used to be red (see above) it was turned green on the basis of an Al Masdar report and Al Masdar shortly after remarked that the town is back to SAA control. Beside Al Masadr being reliable in general, Al Masdar is not announcing a SAA advance but a short lived rebel advance, followed by restoration of the previous status quo. Therefore Nabe' El Murr back to red as it used to be. Paolowalter ( talk) 11:48, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
It seems that the SAA 5th has launched an attack on NE Daraa and has captured 5 villages. Mseikeh is the only one that is in the map and should be changed to Government held. Sources are pro-opp and pro-gov.
According to document sy. SAA captured Miskya al-Sharqia and al-Gharbiya, al-Khwabe, Ishnan, al-Dallafa https://www.facebook.com/documents.sy/posts/929032690492821 Miskiyah location: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=tr&lat=32.911874&lon=36.341915&z=14&m=b Hwinsp ( talk) 11:26, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
other villages probably here: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=tr&lat=32.871586&lon=36.331959&z=13&m=b&gz=0;363000297;328518313;581073;281162;350189;305669;0;89404;263500;0;538158;78590;568199;271070 Hwinsp ( talk) 11:45, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Pro Rebel source https://twitter.com/Syria_Rebel_Obs/status/590141059986026496 says that the SAA is attacking Nahtah from the East. There should be a red circle on the right side of the town. MesmerMe ( talk) 13:45, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
WHy have all changes been reverted? The only reports that are available say that they've retreated from Busra al-Harir, not from the villages they've already caputured. MesmerMe ( talk) 16:14, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
SOHR reported only retreat from Busra al-Harir not from any other village. The video used to support the revert is in arab and I can't understand it. In any case it is a pro-opp outlet and cannot be used to support rebel advance. Please go revert. Paolowalter ( talk) 16:38, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
There were changes based on Agathocle map but then they were self reverted. Why? Paolowalter ( talk) 16:38, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Pro opposition source said, that rebels recapture all village, but it is only pro opposition source, acording pro regime source SAA enter Busra al-Harir. I am looking source to changes all the villages on the green. 83.30.58.250 ( talk) 18:24, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
The villages need reverting unless reliable sources can be shown . 86.178.97.69 ( talk) 19:05, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Why did we not show the SAA gains? ChrissCh94 ( talk) 19:08, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
I restored the situation before the removal of the gain of SAA in this area. Paolowalter ( talk) 19:27, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
The pro-opposition source http://syriadirect.org/news/syria-direct-news-update-4-21-15/ states today that the offensive was repelled at Busr Al Harir but reports the yesterday advance of SAA without any mention that those gain have been reverted. Paolowalter ( talk) 19:45, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Who changed them to green? > 86.178.97.69 ( talk) 20:47, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
I think the template is a bit imbalanced. For example, there are a lot of blank areas and then suddenly a clutter of villages/farms. This makes viewers and readers think that the blank spaces correspond to an empty desert area which is not the case. So what I suggest is the following:
Your thoughts fellow editors? ChrissCh94 ( talk) 18:03, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
According to this Map, which is from a pro-kurd source, Kakah said is with ISIS, also update the hasakah map with SAA advance. Ricardomoha ( talk) 19:12, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
http://www.agathocledesyracuse.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Khabour-valley-21-April-2015-by-@deSyracuse.png and http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/fr/map/desyracuse-syria-civil-war-21-april-2015_37133#12/36.4826/40.7586 Latest Agacothles de Syracuse Maps. Looks like Tal Barak is under IS administration or contested, but it says control when I click. Tgoll774 ( talk) 19:09, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/twittercetin609-tap-the-map-for-information_36481#15/36.6413/41.0750 Pro-Kurd map for comparing with other map sources. Tgoll774 ( talk) 14:45, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Agathocle map http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/fr/map/desyracuse-syria-civil-war-21-april-2015_37133#11/35.7543/36.0530 confirms our old front line. That was changed only on the basis of Al mansar report http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-on-the-move-in-northern-latakia-turkish-border-crossing-within-distance/ (never confirmed by other sources) that later was made obsolete by http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/jabhat-al-nusra-attack-on-kassab-repelled. Therefore all the area west of Kabir must go red.
Agathocle himself said that he was offline for 2 months and made the map according to frontline news. And he is somehow neutral, while Leith Fadel is extreme pro-government orinanted. Also we have other pro-oposition sources confirming Al Masdar reports. DuckZz ( talk) 20:08, 21 April 2015 (UTC) DuckZz ( talk) 20:07, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
We already marked Nab Al Mur back to red. Step by step, no need to rush and change everything. DuckZz ( talk) 20:57, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Agothocle has admitted that he used the wikipedia map as his source,so there is alot of doubt on it,archicivilians map best describes the situation,which leith confirmed. Alhanuty ( talk) 23:01, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Strongly pro-opp map here https://twitter.com/Conflict_Report/status/590608725985067008 clearly show that the locations between Qastal Maaf and Rabia are under SAA control. These positions includes Ateera and Al-Sooda that must go back to red. Paolowalter ( talk) 08:34, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Module:Syrian Civil War detailed map has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
change
{ lat = "33.104", long = "36.739", mark = "Location dot red.svg", marksize = "6", label = " al-Asfar", link = "#no", label_size = "0", position = "top" },
to
{ lat = "33.104", long = "36.739", mark = "Location dot black.svg", marksize = "6", label = " al-Asfar", link = "#al-Asfar", label_size = "0", position = "top" },
and
{ lat = "33.007", long = "36.739", mark = "80x80-red-black-anim.gif", marksize = "6", label = " al-Qasr", link = "#no", label_size = "0", position = "right" },
to
{ lat = "33.007", long = "36.739", mark = "Location dot black", marksize = "6", label = " al-Qasr", link = "#al-Qasr", label_size = "0", position = "right" },
source:
http://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/syria-situation-report-april-14-21-2015
2601:0:B200:F7D9:D4D5:B002:E9CF:1AB1 ( talk) 01:01, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
http://syriadirect.org/news/is-cuts-off-key-rebel-supply-route-from-jordan-to-the-damascus-countryside/ I'll let the usual editors look it over to cross reference. Tgoll774 ( talk) 20:30, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
http://syriahr.com/en/2015/04/37-fighters-from-rebel-and-islamic-battalions-killed-during-clashes-in-dara/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.73.84.13 ( talk) 01:49, 22 April 2015 (UTC) :SOHR does not say which towns were recaptured, only areas around Busr al-Harir. Also, since this is SOHR, I would wait for a neutral source. Although, I am surprised that the more rebels were killed. That really is something. XJ-0461 v2 ( talk) 02:48, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
This SOHR report does not say villages were taken by rebels and its in English which has proven to be unreliable so the villages should be marked red . 86.178.97.69 ( talk) 07:21, 22 April 2015 (UTC) As long as there is no mention of change of control of towns with names explicitly written or reliable map we must retain the Lajat map with SAA controlled towns. The usual vandal changed it, please could somebody revert this change (I would break the 1RR rule). Paolowalter ( talk) 07:43, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
SOHR is reliable,so shut up,it clearly mentioned that all areas taken by regime forces in the offensive have been recaptured by the rebel,which includes all towns,and Paolowalter,if you don't stop your personal attacks,i will be reporting you for your vandalizing behavior,understood. Alhanuty ( talk) 12:15, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
You fucking braindead, SOHR is the biggest casualty cheaters of all time. Their sources are "activists" who work for al nusra. LOL "reliable"
Agree the editor who made these changes needs to be told how edits work and if they continue blocked . 86.178.97.140 ( talk) 16:14, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
SOHR has established itself as authentic source throughout the entire Syrian Civil War,it was decided so based on Major News Source,and it the conclusion was reached in 2012,way before alot of the new editors cam here. https://www.facebook.com/syriahro/videos/10153299975868115/. Alhanuty ( talk) 17:36, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Recently sohr English translation made major mistakes it was decided not to use it as a sole source editor Hanibal911 stated this and all others agreed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.178.97.140 ( talk) 18:53, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Alhanuty SOHR never said rebels retake villages only regain ground around Busra harir read the report and stop making lies or we report you . 86.178.97.140 ( talk) 19:29, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
The Arabic SOHR report confirmed that regime forces lost all areas they captured since the start of the offensive,so stop making up things,SOHR is still reliable more reliable than the pro-regime sources you listen to. Alhanuty ( talk) 19:34, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
who are you to make up rules here,you people just made accounts like just months ago,and want to dictate,which source is to be used and which doesn't,plus,maybe editors with a pro-regime stance are with you,but alot of neutral editors aren't with these extreme opinions. Alhanuty ( talk) 22:13, 22 April 2015 (UTC) plus that is a pro-regime map. Alhanuty ( talk) 22:13, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Once again SOHR is wrong how many more times must this happen before we all stop using it as a single source for edits .SOHR needs to be confirmed like other sources . 86.178.102.166 ( talk) 14:01, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
Some of you may have noticed. The map has problems with updating recent edits. Just wanted to write this so that evevryone knows it's the same for every user. DuckZz ( talk) 08:16, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Pro opposition and pro Kurdish source reported that Kurdish troops(YPG) jointly with moderate rebels started major offensive against ISIS in area near the town of Sarrin that would capture the town. Syrian Rebellion Observatory Mark Monmonier and that YPG/rebels captured some villages and hill near this town and now trying cut the last supply line from the main of ISIS positions to north toward the town of Sarrin. Maybe someone have more data about this offensive. Hanibal911 ( talk) 17:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
According to SOHR YPG captured the three villages that surround Sarrin (no names specified), with the only supply route left being through the Euphrates river towards IS held areas west of it, indicating YPG control over areas south of the town:
http://www.syriahr.com/2015/04/مصرع-10-عناصر-على-الأقل-من-تنظيم-الدولة/
186.112.206.36 ( talk) 03:11, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
https://7496bff410df41fc380ad565a50f607d4b1e8372.googledrive.com/host/0BzN49CdHSAwmcGU4eEI5dVBGZXM/SarrinCity-2015-04-22.png Pro-YYPG source to compare with other sources. Tgoll774 ( talk) 15:38, 23 April 2015 (UTC)