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 35 | ← | Archive 38 | Archive 39 | Archive 40 | Archive 41 | Archive 42 | → | Archive 45 |
In 3 days time with nothing but an amateur map as a source, 16 red villages, 4 red villages, 6 red villages, 9 red villages, 5 red bases, 1 red base, 6 red bases, 2 red bases, 4 red bases, Khirbat al Atrah to red (which is a joke - to show any SAA-held village in NW Aleppo as NOT besieged), Hawsh Haju to red. How many of those actually add anything of consequence to the map? Are any corroborated by any other source? It's just a piling on of inconsequential red clutter, in most cases*.. Boredwhytekid ( talk) 19:34, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
well it does provide a more accurate view of what sides hold villages and a large part of the population centers. If small IS held dessert villages are marked on the map, why cannot larger villages in Latakia and other areas also be included? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
169.231.156.148 (
talk)
19:55, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
Personally i have no problem with the changes because the map from desyracuse is neutral in my opinion and doesn't favor any side. Some other things to bother me, for example
My concern is that desyracuse might be blindly copying military sites from wikimapia and that some of these bases might have been destroyed by the rebels... Tradedia talk 06:34, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
This location was recently added to the map as an SAA-held town SW of Nubl/Zahraa, but looking on wikimapia it doesn't exist. The area labelled as it is literally a barren patch of ground [1]. I propose we remove it. Nhauer ( talk) 20:52, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
I guess it´s valued as a strategic hill and there for marked. (Like the strategic hill Tall Shair next to the west of Kobane) Rhocagil ( talk) 21:22, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
It was not added: it has always been there as a green dot. I changed it to red based on some maps I listed in the edit summary retaining the coordinates. Now I found a little better coordinate on wikimapia and I'll change them. Paolowalter ( talk) 21:48, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Boredwhytekid, Hanibal911, Alhanuty, ChrissCh94, DuckZzI have rasied this issue that De-Syracuse is not a pro-opp source,it is a neutral source who reports on everything that happens in Syria,reliable like Jousha Landisuses this source for his reports. here, here, here, here. Lindi29 ( talk) 15:36, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
Yes before, i belived that he supported rebel gains but now i just think he's trying to remain somehow neutral when writing about events on both sides (rebel and government). He was among the individuals who clearly said about the failed Al Nusra attacks on Zahra and Nubl, even before SOHR.
The modifications made supported by his map were also supported by other source [en.wikipedia.org/?title=Module%3ASyrian_Civil_War_detailed_map&diff=641737354&oldid=641725859] (and now also by [2]) or by good sense [en.wikipedia.org/?title=Module%3ASyrian_Civil_War_detailed_map&diff=641740190&oldid=641737354]. Paolowalter ( talk) 14:32, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
There are some inconsistencies on the map next to Hasakah. The town Tall Majdan was added just outside the detailed map with coordinates 36.533,40.6. But Tall Majdan appears also on the on the detailed map. From Wikimapia the right coordinates are [3]. After correction, the dot ends up on the detiled map (as you can see now) in a black (ISIS controlled) area. Logically it should be removed. On the same basis the village Rafrar, taken by SAA following http://www.agathocledesyracuse.com/archives/236 and https://twitter.com/IvanSidorenko1/status/554776902876299264 it is located [4] in a red area on the controlled map. Should the Tall Majdan black dot removed? Paolowalter ( talk) 19:02, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
Hey guys how you think we can add on the map El Mahash oil field which locatedto east from the army base 137th Armoured Brigade map in area which under control by army using pro-government map here Hanibal911 ( talk) 12:46, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
Agree.We should also add the bordast tower to which is contested. Lindi29 ( talk) 12:50, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
Clashes between Al Nusra and SRF in Jabal al-Zawiya. Elijah J. Magnier Hanibal911 ( talk) 17:12, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
SOHR reports the same, the say "wanted people" what could refer to ex-SRF members. DuckZz ( talk) 17:40, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Why in the north-east of the country where YPG and SAA/NDF have truce to hold towns is it painted Yellow-Red, but around Aleppo and Idlib where both JAN and non-JAN rebels have truce to hold towns, these towns are not painted Green-Grey. They are painted only Green. This is a major problem with the map. It still acts as if JAN is in a united rebellion with these groups. They do have a truce and common enemy and are working together, but more and more we see JAN is its own group that is very dangerous to the rebellion and the people of Syria. Where JAN is not located the towns should be pure green. But where they are located it should be Grey-Green to show a truce, were rebel groups have sold out revolutions spirit to work with extreme fanatics. Khan Shaykun (in Idlib province) is one of the few places on map where this has been successfully done. That example should be in many other areas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.158.99 ( talk) 22:13, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Also a small green dot should be added to Kobane- to show rebel FSA presence in Kobane to support YPG. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.158.99 ( talk) 22:15, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Nice try, i see the propagadna is working really well on both sides. You act like you came here and saw this map 2 days ago but we know that is not the case. Every month or so the same editor (probably you) suggest the same idea over and over again just to ruin the map and make it more complicated to edit. Jabhat Al Nusra fighters are present in 60% of the areas under anti-government control. Same goes for the Islamic front, FSA and other rebel groups. Applying this rule will mean to change the entire map completely. DuckZz ( talk) 23:59, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
No, I am not an editor, just someone following events and chiming in here in the comments. and, Yes, I believe the map should be changed completely to reflect the situation more accurately- it should reflect a truce between blocs of groups that are very different ideologically, very different in who arms them, very different in goals, different tactics. Look at the towns of Nubl and Zahraa under siege. The circle around them is green. If you are a random viewer you would think, oh so the islamic front and fsa are sieging them.. but , reality check, those sieges are almost completely launched by JAN. Also you did not respond to my initial question: Why in the north-east of the country where YPG and SAA/NDF have truce to hold towns is it painted Yellow-Red, but around Aleppo and Idlib where both JAN and non-JAN rebels have truce to hold towns, these towns are not painted Green-Grey? This is a major contradiction of this map- that becomes more and more crystalized as time passes and JAN splits from the rebel groups that still are seen as palatable by certain state actors. Green should be for rebel groups that have not seized huge parts of rebel areas to run as their own caliphate and have not been blacklisted from working with all state actors. Grey , for JAN and its allies, represents a group that sometimes works with other more "palatable" groups but is obviously embarking on a much more extreme path.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.24.193 ( talk) 08:15, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
There is a report from IavnSidorenko than IS pulled back from Al-Thayyem field, that are under control of local figthers allied with SAA. Is it OK to turn it red? Paolowalter ( talk) 07:52, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
I know IvanSidorenko supposed to be neutral source, but i sounds a little to good to be true (???). Since i don´t speak arabic I have no idea what the man in the clip says. Rhocagil ( talk) 16:19, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
There are videos as well of the capture. here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SlzfAwP-9WQ&feature=youtu.be and here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JV4CXRqVohw&feature=youtu.bevideos — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.173.4.182 ( talk) 16:59, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Al-Thayyem field should be made contested. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
169.231.158.99 (
talk)
22:21, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Al-Masdar has also declared the field under tribal fighter control [most likely loyalists]. http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/deir-ezzor-complete-field-report-battle-zone/ XJ-0461 v2 ( talk) 23:37, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Confirmed by Elijah J Magnier https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/555607509780946946/photo/1 Fab8405 ( talk) 09:48, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Any source showing this village under rebel control ? A friend from Alepo said that ISIS bombs them in Mare' from this high ground village. DuckZz ( talk) 15:00, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
On our map a village Tall Salmu noted as under control by moderate rebels. But biased pro opposition source reported that today this village was captured of Al Nusra. here So either this village was contested between the army and Al Nusra then we must noted this village as contested between army and Al Nusra or if the Al Nusra took it from moderate insurgents we need marked him as under control by Al Nusra. But more likely it is that the village should be noted as contested between the Syrian troops and Al Nusra. Because source said that this village it is the gate of Abu ad-Duhur Military Airbase. So I ask of other editors express their opinions. Hanibal911 ( talk) 21:15, 13 January 2015 (UTC) Judging from the source it seems that the claim is that JAN took it from SAA. The source is strongly pro-opp biased and therefore it cannot be used to register opposition advance. Just let's look for additional info fro other sources. Paolowalter ( talk) 21:25, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
Yea i saw that tweet too but the actual first reports were published few days ago on opposition channels, i have read some on facebook (Idlib news channel etc). All of them said that Rebels (not mentioning any group) "have put Tall Salmu under their control". Before this, i know that government forces managed to break some rebel lines to the north of the airport (last year) and that Tall Salmu (what is actually a hill and not really a village) came under heavy SAF attack, dozens of rebel casulties.
I think that Tell means hill and Tall describes a higher ground with something on it, not sure but nevermind, i know it's a village but located on high ground (where everything else around Abu Duhur is flat) thats why it's important.
It states referring to Aleppo, the Aleppo countryside and the road leading from TUrksih border/Azaz to Aleppo: "Jabhat al-Nusra is stronger in some areas of the city than others, and has set up more checkpoints on the road from the Turkish border since Al-Monitor’s last visit in late October. The area is nevertheless still mostly under the control of the more moderate Jabhat Shamiya, a group recently formed on the basis of the Islamic Front that fights alongside Jabhat al-Nusra on several fronts but is not officially aligned with it." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.158.99 ( talk) 22:10, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Hanibal991 I agree with you.We must not forget that these so called activists also reported the capture of Nubol(or to be exact half the city of Nubol) they also reported that the rebels captured Tel-Bazzaq(Qunetra) but it also turned out to be fake.To note also that Abo-al-Duhur airport is operational and that means that there must be a safe zone around the airport established by the Army. Daki122 ( talk) 14:45, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Hanibal911 The problem with you is that you obviously don't understand English really well, everything what you said in your post above is the same thing i said in my last post. The airport is besieged, Tall Salmu was not in rebel hands due to SAF heavy airstrikes on that location, and that lasted for few days, the situation changes every 5 days because rebels, or JAN in this case, are not able to stay on Tall Salmu for a long time beucase that place is a strategic location that overlooks the airport. The SAA knows that and bombs Tall Salmu on daily basic. Do you understand it now ? I don't care for the color, that's not what i wanted to discuss. DuckZz ( talk) 14:56, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
I agree with Hanibal911 beacause JAN are going in a big offensive to capture not only the air base but nubl and al-zahraa. Daki122 Ofc this is a pro-opp source but we dont use them to show advances against the regime,we only agree on some that are really trustworthy,yes they said they captured nubl and al-zahraa but we first disscus it that is true and to verify if that true we rely on others reliable sources who are neutral.Regard Lindi29 ( talk) 15:23, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
From [5] Tall Salmo is controlled by SAA; it must go red with gray ring on the south. 87.5.44.175 ( talk) 17:24, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Al-Masdar is an unreliable source,and is a well known pro-regime source,also we can never use a regime source to show a regime advance in Tal Salmu,there is reports of Air raids in the area near by. http://syriahr.com/en/2015/01/the-government-warplanes-attack-several-regions-in-aleppo-and-idlib/ Alhanuty ( talk) 22:54, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
With the current tide of events a complete disband of FSA remain a option on the table. What will be the way to handle this scenario? Change colors and battle map distribution?, maybe at the very end of this year, the map will show a divided Syria between ISIS and the Regime. More rummors comes from a massive FSA disband in the Southern Front, with many men joining ISIS in the East. The same in Qalamoun Region, meanwhile all Kurdish Positions look in harms way with ISIS closing in. 200.48.214.19 ( talk) 17:10, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
First: this is not a place for predictions.
Second: ISIS will never be able to overrun all Kurdish and Rebel positions in Northern Syria, they are already on defensive. SAA+NDF, while on offensive, are failing to actually deliver a crushing blow to the rebels, and are actually losing on some fronts. The opposition will not end in 2015. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 191.251.123.194 ( talk) 22:39, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
In 2010, the entire map was red. Now, not even half the map is red. Using your logic, we should discuss possible scenarios for the complete downfall of the regime :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.184.91.68 ( talk) 02:24, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
The uprising begun on 2011, in 2010 there where no armed opposition, ISIS, JAN. If we use YOUR logic the map will have noting to do with the conflict. A all red map would be the political map of Syria before the conflict 200.48.214.19 ( talk) 13:14, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Pro opposition source said that clashes break out between Syrian Army and opposition fighters in city Talbiseh in Homs countryside. DocumentSy DocumentSy So that guys maybe some one of editors to have other data about situation in this city. Hanibal911 ( talk) 13:16, 9 January 2015 (UTC) Fighting in this town has been reported several times in the recent past. I guess from SOHR. See also [6] (pro-opp). It is maybe time to turn it into contested. Paolowalter ( talk) 15:38, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
Paolowalter ( talk) 21:54, 10 January 2015 (UTC) If any, it confirms fighting inside the city. Paolowalter ( talk) 18:19, 11 January 2015 (UTC) http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/homs-syrian-army-makes-swift-gains-north/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.155.17.25 ( talk) 16:25, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
I haven't seen this map in two weeks, and when I looked today I was rather surprised to see the addition of six red towns north of Idlib city (these are: Kafr Jalis, Ad Duwayr, one without a name, Ayn Shib, An Ghafer and Tan 'Isa). I've checked this talk-page, but there has been no mention of a government offensive on this area. I've checked the news ... no mention of any SAA offensive in this area. Recently, Idlib city was raided by Islamist rebels, coming from surrounding towns. And now, all of the sudden, those towns are marked as SAA held? Without a source? Every map you check - even SyrianPerspective - shows those area's as rebel controlled (some FSA, some Jabhat al-Nusra). So, why are those six towns suddenly red or contested? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 ( talk) 09:27, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Well then change Al Ghafer, because we already had a section on this talk page where you suggested that Al Ghafer should be changed, and nobody complained. DuckZz ( talk) 15:49, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Just keep an eye on it as pro gov sources report attacks on Kafr Takharim and Almanaz north of Al Ghafer . Pyphon ( talk) 10:10, 17 January 2015 (UTC)pyphon
Apparetnly in Al Waer a truce was estblished few days ago [8]. It should be marked so on the map. Paolowalter ( talk) 10:23, 15 January 2015 (UTC)ú
It is a 24 hour ceasefire, in this time they will go to the table and hopefully agree on everything.
The source SOHR confirms a truce process non a simple ceasefire. We put it on truce and wait for further news. Paolowalter ( talk) 07:28, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Can anyone explain why khan shaykhun is the only city on the entire map that has a green dot with a grey circle within it? THis indicates a peaceful coexistence between JAN & allies (backed by no foreign states) with FSA&islamist forces that are openly backed by foreign states. That grey/green truce should be in many,many more towns that are now only showed as green. Its more and more clear that JAN should not fall under green. They are backed by no foreign states, they are the only rebel group to create their own break away caliphate, they do have truce and cooperation but they are also clearly on a very different path than the other "more palatable" rebel groups. They are launching their own raids into Lebanon. For this map to be accurate,which i think everyone wants, this needs to be seriously debated here.
My suggestion is to start gathering an evidence supported list of all locations where JAN is heavily present in rebel areas and then include within all these green dots a grey circle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.24.193 ( talk) 08:29, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
I guess you are kidding, JAN was made by qatari/saudi warmongers and sent to Syrian in 2012 by IS.
ok, so maybe they were, but I think its pretty clear that the NATO $ today is not going to them, its going to these more "palatable" groups and this is another source of the divisions between them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.25.115 ( talk) 18:11, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
From [9] and [10] fighting in Talbiseh, Al-Mashrafeh, Al-Madrajeh, Al-Ghajjar, Al-Farhaaniyyeh, Al-Sina’ayyeh, Gharnaata, ‘Ayn Hussein Al-Jnoubi and Al-Zafrana. Some updatng of the map is necessary. 79.10.133.67 ( talk) 17:56, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Lindi29Pro government source said that in northwestern Idlib, the Syrian Arab Army’s 11th Tank Division warded off a number of attacks by the militants from the Islamic Front (Jabhat Al-Islamiyya) at the village of Ariha in Jabal Al-Zawiyyeh. According to a military source, 14 Islamic Front militants were killed in the clashes at Ariha. But source not said about clashes in the city of Ariha! Also Ariha it is not village and city of Ariha not located in Jabal az-Zawiya. And for editing the major towms to contested we need more information. Hanibal911 ( talk) 11:44, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
There is no source(even the one above) that says clashes are in Ariha it is a government stronghold in Idlib with dozens of checkpoints around it most of the clashes are west of Ariha in the mountains overlooking the supply route to Idlib so reverted.Also to point out that many times city names are used to point out where the clashes are happening(in witch area or countryside). Daki122 ( talk) 13:55, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
The rebels have long controlled areas just outside the town, so clashes on the edge of the town are frequent and not surprising. But since Ariha is a regime stronghold, not enough to make it contested.
The town was taken by the rebels for about 10 days, in a surprise attack a year or two ago. Regime forces from adjacent areas quickly retook the town. There is an important (informal) base a little north of the town.
André437 (
talk)
15:40, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Disagree almasdar news does report rebel gains . Pyphon ( talk) 16:27, 17 January 2015 (UTC)pyphon
It seems the local truce between the YPG and the SAA is over:
1. http://www.jpost.com/Breaking-News/Kurds-battle-Assads-forces-in-Syria-opening-new-front-in-civil-war-388043 2. http://globalnews.ca/news/1778386/syrian-kurdish-fighters-clash-with-government-forces-in-northeastern-syria/ 3. http://rudaw.net/english/kurdistan/170120151
Clashes mainly in Hasakah city. Twitter sources claiming that the YPG took several checkpoints, buildings and the grain silos. Reports of fighting in Qamishli also. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 ( talk) 17:06, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Hassaka_media twitter account is not pro-kurdish, (seems to be anti everything) which maybe makes it more reliable. Rhocagil ( talk) 20:03, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
I would not be so quick to judge. The YPG needs the SAA and the opposite is also true. They will not allow themselves to be weakened by infighting, knowing full well the danger of doing so in the presence of ISIS. XJ-0461 v2 ( talk) 21:32, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry this is ridiculous. There are clearly heavy clashes taking place between the regime and the YPG. The aim of this map is to detail the current situation so considerations regarding whether the regime-YPG are likely to settle things soon are irrelevant. Jafar Saeed ( talk) 03:55, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Pro kurdish source reported that the Strategic Mountain Mishtanour near of Kobane has been released and cleaned up from ISIS. Mazloum Mustafa Who else has information about the situation in the area. Hanibal911 ( talk) 12:36, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Alledgedly they also captured the radio tower. Here and Here DuckZz ( talk) 13:13, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
SOHR reported to that this hill is captured. Lindi29 ( talk) 13:17, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Reliable source reported that In the last days, 1000 civilians and 210 rebels left Ghouta and joined to regime area in capital for reconciliation. Elijah J. Magnier Also source said that more than 700 civilians and armed rebels came out of Mayda'a (Damascus) and join the reconciliation plan with Syrian army. Elijah J. Magnie Hanibal911 ( talk) 16:57, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
which means the town is rebel-held,and on the map it is shown under regime-control. Alhanuty ( talk) 17:44, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
How many people live in Mayda aprox, and how many rebels are located in all Ghouta. 200.48.214.19 ( talk) 19:00, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
I think we can still add town and villages in this region. Wikimapia. Lindi29 ( talk) 13:30, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
I agree wholeheartedly. We really need to show that ISIS controls all these villages and not just some, as the current map just gives the impression that there are areas where ISIS has no presence. If we add more black dots, it will show more accurately the ISIS encirclement of Kobani. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:F19A:3146:52EC:F471 ( talk) 01:30, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Syria TV report with subtittles. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wx-VBCu4X0 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.203.137.34 ( talk • contribs) 21:41, 3 October 2014
All Qaeda is in All Green Towns not only in Idlib Towns
The so called Islamic Front Was created by Al Qaeda member Abu Khaled al-Suri he was killed by the ISIS http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/syria-suicide-bombers-kill-al-qaeda-rebel-leader-in-aleppo-1.2548340
Even if you don't consider the islamic front as part of AQ, the nusra which is cleARLY AQ is in the vast majority of green areas.
SHouldn't a grey dot be put then within most of the greens (if it can be documented)? That could be used to show they are working together.
If hezbollah is the main garrison in any government town, I would understand putting a yellow dot within the red. Although I think they are primarily focused in a few areas, from what I've read.
— Preceding
unsigned comment added by
72.252.161.166 (
talk •
contribs) 23:39, 13 November 2014
A frightening situation , this article explains that FSA has withdrawn from Menagh and Nursa has taken control of this. It says fighting between Nusra and FSA has moved to Aleppo’s countryside. So it is not just in Idlib countryside now. http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2014/11/jabhat-al-nusra-idlib-islamic-emirate.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.252.161.166 ( talk • contribs) 20:54, 13 November 2014
According to SOHR's report http://syriahr.com/en/2014/11/7-militants-died-in-clashes-with-ypg-in-ras-al-ayn/ 2 villages(Mestriha and Felastin) south of Jaz'ah should be contested. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saeed alaee ( talk • contribs) 06:39, 18 November 2014
And again we have pro-SAA editors change the Daraa and Quneitra map towards their own views without sources. I want the following questions answered with neutral sources:
1. Why was Dilli changed back to red and why is the 60th Engeneering Regiment nearby deleted as a green army base dot? 2. Why is the green circle around Mahajjah deleted, whilst SANA itself says there were bombings there, so rebels nearby? 3. Why is the city of Bosra changed from contested to red without a neutral source given? 4. There is a grey JaN ring in Nawa, whilst there is no infighting in southern Syria. So why the grey ring?! 5. Why is Tell Antar contested? No sources given
And before people start bombarding this post with PetroLucum or Al-Masdar stuff, I mean neutral sources. Al-Minotor wrote an article which states Sheikh Maskin and Brigade 82 should be green, as well as many towns north of it. We ignored it based on Al-Masdar reports (could as well listen to SANA). So, if that's the case, I will use Twitter sources from opposition activistst to change towns to green, since that is what pro-SAA people here do to contested and rebel towns in the south. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 ( talk • contribs) 08:52, 19 November 2014
1- Dilli needs to be contested. The rebels took it, the regime counter-attacked and now clashes are happening inside the village. You used a totally pro-regime source to change it back to red. Also, SOHR reported 60th Batallion to be on rebel hands, so put it back(it's a small base, so maybe use a checkpoint icon).
2- Add the Daara Central Prison back, as it was AGAIN excluded. This is getting really boring.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.183.246.229 ( talk • contribs) 11:15, 19 November 2014
It seems Sawran is ISIS-held since this recent video depicts rebels shelling ISIS positions IN THE CITY. [12] ChrissCh94 ( talk)
I will remove the green semicircle from Etihimlat, that's for sure but I think we need some other sources to change Sawran to black. DuckZz ( talk) 13:45, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Agree . Pyphon ( talk) 18:31, 19 January 2015 (UTC)pyphon
In the video posted above, on 0:46 we can see a hill in the middle of the "unknown" city. If we look at this map and the location, i think it's the same hill. DuckZz ( talk) 20:24, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Nice Map of Syrian Conflict with coments and tiles with colors of fighting forces. It does not display JAN, the only fault i have found.
http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/fr/map/desyracuse-syria-civil-war-8-january-2015_25484#11/33.3781/36.4351
200.48.214.19 (
talk)
16:49, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
We already used it. EkoGraf ( talk) 17:13, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
So as earlier I said that I am neutral editor then I want ask why the cities Al Hirak and Al Zabadani which earlier was marked as contested but today have been marked under control of army. If there is no data from reliable sources that those cities under control of army they should again be marked as disputed. Hanibal911 ( talk) 16:08, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Al Zabadani is the biggest rebel stronghold in Al Qalamun. There are dozens of pictures posted only this year from opposition activists from inside the city. Rebels are clashing west of the city with SAA forces where SOHR reported that they managed to destroy 1 tank and kill dozens of Government foces. The city is controled by rebels and SOHR and other channels are reporting heavy airstrikes and barel bombardment on the city every few days. DuckZz ( talk) 17:01, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
I did Google News checks on both of these locations. Where is this information coming from that there is ongoing fighting at either of these locations? Isn't SOHR just a single guy in the UK? Shii (tock) 00:13, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
It has been a long time that we dont have any news on this area,but now Sohr reported that SSA carried out raids on areas in the villages of Qlib al- Thour, Jana al- Elbawi, al- Qasatel, Aqrab and villages in the township of Aqayrabat. SOHR,also according to pro-opp source shows that this towns are under Isis controll. here, here. Lindi29 ( talk) 17:22, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
I found at the pro-government website "almasdarnews" that article http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/breaking-syrian-army-captures-strategic-area-southwest-syria/
they report about the capture of "Al-Mahaadhiyyeh Orchards" near Sa´sa and Hassnou (not at the map?)
however the last lines of the article are my concern: "The success at Al-Mahadhiyyeh has led to the SAA’s advance towards the imperative village of Sa’sa; if captured, could lead to the counter-offensive in the Al-Quneitra Governorate." English is not my first language but for me it sounds like SAA is moving forward to Sa´sa so i would say Sa´sa is ´rebel´ held. What would you say?
Blockeduser2014 ( talk) 23:31, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
SAA recaptured the whole area at Sasa town. Well I don´t know but Peto Lucem and Al Masdar are about the same source. Rhocagil ( talk) 01:07, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Interesting, two conflicting pro-gov sources. Does anyone have a recent pro-opp map of the area? As of 2 weeks ago, Sa'sa is under SAA control per http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/fr/map/desyracuse-syria-civil-war-8-january-2015_25484#11/33.2671/36.1821 . Perhaps it was just an editorial mistake? XJ-0461 v2 ( talk) 01:30, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
The same situation we had with the city of Ariha when this source Al Masdar said that clashes at the village Ariha but this data was mistake. And later pro opposition source says that city Ariha under control by army. So for now we have many data from pro-opposition sources whuch confirm that Sasa under control by army. And a one message from a source which repeatedly was seen in the publication of conflicting information. So for now we need leave things as they are and search for more data. Hanibal911 ( talk) 12:17, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Yes Sa'sa was SAA held the areas near it was captured now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.99.15.105 ( talk) 21:53, 22 January 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 = "36.871", long = "38.347", mark = "Location dot black.svg", marksize = "6", label = " Tirmik Bijan", link = "Tirmik Bijan", label_size = "0", position = "top", },"
to
"{ lat = "36.871", long = "38.347", mark = "Dot_yellow_ff4.svg", marksize = "6", label = " Tirmik Bijan", link = "Tirmik Bijan", label_size = "0", position = "top", },"
and
"{ lat = "36.854", long = "38.379", mark = "Location dot black.svg", marksize = "6", label = " Qarah Halinj", link = "Qarah Halinj", label_size = "0", position = "top", },"
to
"{ lat = "36.854", long = "38.379", mark = "Map-arcNN-yellow.svg", marksize = "6", label = " Qarah Halinj", link = "Qarah Halinj", label_size = "0", position = "top", }, { lat = "36.854", long = "38.379", mark = "Location dot black.svg", marksize = "6", label = " Qarah Halinj", link = "Qarah Halinj", label_size = "0", position = "top", },"
Sources: http://www.petercliffordonline.com/syria-iraq-news-4/ https://twitter.com/ChuckPfarrer/status/558683892782481408
Tirmik Bijan has been taken by the YPG, and Qarah Halinj is being shelled from Mishtenur hill. Please change from black to yellow, and add a siege icon. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:34FA:6BF0:637A:7BB8 ( talk) 02:22, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
They are pro-opposition sources, but I think we can use them to show a Kurdish advance against ISIS. People have edited without discussion with less reliable sources. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:34FA:6BF0:637A:7BB8 ( talk) 02:24, 24 January 2015 (UTC) 2601:0:B200:F7D9:4CE2:5F37:2591:5F10 ( talk) 01:06, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
I admit, I can't find better sources, but I will let you know when I do. Can you put a semicircle icon instead? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:0:B200:F7D9:34FA:6BF0:637A:7BB8 ( talk) 02:41, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Source petercliffordonline.com says village (suburb) south next to Kobane Tirmik Bijan is under kurdish control. Article: Update 43 & Update 44 and map. I don´t know, but I think this source is neutral. Rhocagil ( talk) 13:00, 22 January 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 = "36.893", long = "38.354", mark = "80x80-yellow-black-anim.gif", marksize = "12", label = "
Ayn al-Arab (Kobanê)", link = "Cities and towns during the Syrian Civil War#Ayn al-Arab", label_size = "90", position = "top" },
to
{ lat = "36.893", long = "38.354", mark = "Dot_yellow_ff4.svg", marksize = "12", label = "
Ayn al-Arab (Kobanê)", link = "Cities and towns during the Syrian Civil War#Ayn al-Arab", label_size = "90", position = "top" },
Source:
https://twitter.com/ChuckPfarrer/status/559434237993312256
http://www.agathocledesyracuse.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Kobane-24-Jan-2015-by-@deSyracuse.png
The reason I am asking for this edit so soon is that the battle for the actual city of Kobanî has been mostly resolved. You will remember the report of the Iraqi army taking the south entrance to Tikrit: that doesn't make the city contested. Though there is still fighting in the east, I think the city should be marked under Kurdish control. If you don't agree, then I'll just wait the few hours until the eastern part is completely secured by the YPG, then request again. But for now, I think it should go to yellow.
2601:0:B200:F7D9:A816:54EA:40F1:2784 ( talk) 23:14, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
A Turkish news source (probably not fans of the Kurds), gives these reports:
http://www.imctv.com.tr/2015/01/25/65468/kobanide-4-sokak-sonra-zafer-var
http://www.imctv.com.tr/2015/01/26/65545/kobanide-zafere-son-adimlar
A Russian source (pro-Assad, generally) reports a Peshmerga commander:
http://www.vestikavkaza.ru/news/Kobani-svoboden-na-90.html
SOHR (anti-Assad) reports ISIS has been driven on to "the outskirts of al- Sena’ah area":
Do I need more sources? There has been fighting on the outskirts of many towns: Tikrit, Samarra, Mosul; but we don't mark those contested. As of right now, I really don't think control of Kobanî is contested at this point. I think the Kurds have it. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:1498:3B64:993F:66D2 ( talk) 00:26, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
I have a problem understanding the map. Until few days ago, looking at the map I thought that Ad Dumayr and Ruhayban were government held, with some rebel presence inside the town. Someone said that thats not the case, as these 2 towns are under truce and thats the reason why theres a red-lime-red icon.
Just to make it clear. A truce means this "an Agreement where at least 2 sides agree to an casefire until further notice in which one of the side controls a location while the other allows such action under certain conditions". In our case, rebels "control" these towns in the same time they agreed to stop fighting SAA forces in Eastern Qalamun (thats true becaue we have no information about clashes here).
I really can't find new "clear" sources about Dumayr and Ruhayban so be nice.
Opinions from other editors ? Hanibal911 you don't have to, i have read everything on your talkpage. DuckZz ( talk) 22:28, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
You really don't understand what i want to say. Yes they are under truce, but in the same time either under rebel or government control. The Cheldric labrouse source you posted confirms that "Truces where the regime accept to withdraw and let a rebel government in that area". The last known truce we had in Al Qabun district in Damascus, where SOHR reported exactly the same thing "A truce and withdraw of government forces". Every truce in Syria is the same, in favor for rebels in that area, while we mark it as purple on a town map, we should mark it as lime-red on the normal map..... A truce only means that a place should't be contested. That's why we changed Al Waer, but in a wrong way. DuckZz ( talk) 23:51, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
cant be used in this situation because it is only just rebel amatuer videos and unreliable for this issue because we cant use their for show success of rebels. Hanibal911 ( talk) 05:46, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
We use violet for City truce situations so it would be logical to have plain violet icons for cities and towns . Pyphon ( talk) 18:03, 23 January 2015 (UTC)pyphon
André437 Here, what do you think about this. It will be better than to add a new color to the map, it's already difficult enough.
And yes, post the new JAN color so others can see. DuckZz ( talk) 19:12, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Hanibal911 I agree, not a good idea with new icons. Instead of that, we can just change the Al Waer and Ruhayban red-lime-red icon to lime-red or lime-red-lime.---- The source that was used to change Al Waer clearly said that a truce agreement has been made and that rebels will control the district. SOHR said the same thing ... so i don't know where's the problem about that. DuckZz ( talk) 20:03, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Its getting to look like a decorated Christmas tree . Pyphon ( talk) 20:25, 23 January 2015 (UTC)pyphon
The situation as it is, is clear enough. I do not see any advantage in adding new color or new congigurations. Truce deal can widely change and we often do not the details. In any case, we must remind that a truce is a conditional surrender of the rebels, who stop figthin the government in exchange of some guarantees. Paolowalter ( talk) 00:12, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Here new map from opposition source deSyracuse which showed that ISIS mostly lost their position inside city of Kobane. here Hanibal911 ( talk) 12:59, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
The Siege of Kobane is coming to a end soon. The battle South of the city is already shifted from urban to rural fighting, with YPG/FSA trying to advance to the villages south and west of the city. The only battle that remains is on the Eastern Front, where YPG recaptured the Islamic/Sharia school. There is now only 2 major targets for YPG to reclaim the city, Tishrin school and Tell Arabpinar. Maybe in 1/2 weeks the city will be under full YPG control. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.157.18.100 ( talk) 14:14, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
What do you guys think to put a lime icon along Kobani, maybe without a name but just for the sake of ? I know for sure that 2 FSA linked groups are fighting there since the beginning, Kataib Shamal and Liwa Raqqa. They are regularly posting news, videos and photos of their figters there. The last information was that Liwa Raqqa fighters have captured the hospital in the south-west of the city. Before I start posting sources, i want to know what others think. DuckZz ( talk) 18:52, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
I don't think that's a good idea. Kobane is almost libarated, the entire map would be yellow so i don't see a sense in that because according to that we can also make maps for Hama and Idlib city which are all red.
We have to find a way to indicate rebel presence in the city 3bdulelah ( talk) 20:53, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Pro Kurd Twitter account Peshmerge Kobane has been fully liberated. Rhocagil ( talk) 02:20, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
Hanibal911 This is what i have.
Why is the town of Masharah in Quneitra turned to contested? Last time there was any news, it was of rebels shelling Tell BRrizaq near the town. Can somebody provide sources or revert the contested status back to green?
Al masdar is relaible. More than SOHR. That has been discussed many times. Paolowalter ( talk) 20:44, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Both SOHR and Al-Masdar are not reliable. Both can only be used for advances for the other side. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.41.251.231 ( talk) 20:47, 25 January 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 = "36.854", long = "38.379", mark = "Location dot black.svg", marksize = "6", label = " Qarah Halinj", link = "Qarah Halinj", label_size = "0", position = "top", },"
to
"{ lat = "36.854", long = "38.379", mark = "Dot_yellow_ff4.svg", marksize = "6", label = " Qarah Halinj", link = "Qarah Halinj", label_size = "0", position = "top", },"
Sources:
https://twitter.com/jackshahine/status/559837529709772801
https://twitter.com/ChuckPfarrer/status/559846335621656576
http://www.sasnewsagency.com/read/10221
Halinj village is YPG-held. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:6571:56B8:6EF9:5C27 ( talk) 03:07, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello everybody,
I've been following the events in and around Shayk Maskin for the last two days. I have several questions:
1. Why is Shayk Maskin still contested? Brigade 82 was the last part of the town that was held by the SAA wasn't it? The fighting now seems to be around the Electric Grid Station checkpoint. 2. Does anybody have information about al-Dalli and Suhaliyah north of Shayk Maskin? Twitter sources posted videos and claims that both had fallen to the Southern Front? 3. Maybe add a green circle to the western side of Qarfa? Rebels are close by, that was the reason Rustom Ghazali burned down his own palace there in December 14. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 ( talk) 16:34, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
This is a summary of events:
http://eaworldview.com/2015/01/syria-daily-insurgents-celebrate-victories-across-country/
It seems that rebels have made another sweeping advance in Daraa, capturing the Engeneering Brigade in Suhayliyah and al-Dalli, and are currenty (according to twitter) fighting for Al-Furqan village. Some activists are even talking about fighting close to Izzra itself. We should keep an eye on that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 ( talk) 18:09, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
Why are there so many edits north of Sheik Miskin, it's not possible to put them all there. What's about this Farun Storage base, does it even mention in some sources ? An under that, there also 2 checkpoints/bases which are covered with this edit. There's another one, third, you can see a fraction of it to the left. What's the point ? The map is overfilled DuckZz ( talk) 20:55, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
I believe taking a good look there is important. Official FSA news said they captured Dilli, Burqa, Faqah and al-Suhayliyah and one Battalion 60 base. That can't be used for rebel advances here, but we should really look at the situation. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
177.41.251.231 (
talk)
00:06, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Listen to friends if you want to use to edit a link to Arabic source is better to provide a link to it on the talk page. Because when you when you edit put a link to the source your link often displayed as broken and we can not verify data wgich you have provided as a source which confirm your editings. And here examples of this: here or here Because if we cant verify the accuracy of the information which was provide as a source. And this editing will be considered is not justified. I hope for your understanding. Regrds! Hanibal911 ( talk) 10:30, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Brigade 82 must be green now. 88.224.195.133 ( talk) 17:25, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Just pointing out: the rebels seized the Brigade 82 HQ inside the city of Sheikh Miskin. That HQ is not shown in our map, since it is inside the city. The base pointed out as green here is still regime held. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.41.251.231 ( talk) 17:41, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Neutral sources for Brigade 82 and Sheikh Maskin:
So it seems the entire Brigade 82 should go to green together with Al-Shayk Miskin. Only the Military Housing remain red, and maybe the BRigade itself contested?
186.112.217.134 ( talk) 04:47, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
This village was marked as under control by Kurds only based data from a pro Kurdish source here but we cant use data from Kurdish sources to show success of Kurds. So if not have confirmation this data from reliable source we need again mark this village under control by ISIS. Let's not break the rules of editing. Hanibal911 ( talk) 10:15, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
reports of saa advancing in deyr ez zor any truth in this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 ( talk • contribs) 15:02, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello i have been reading about jabhat al akrad lately and i watched tons of videos from them most of the videos are from clashes in northern aleppo but the map only shows the villages rebel held are there no jabhat al akrad in northern aleppo? Im also following people that are close to al akrad and they claim to be activly fighting in northern aleppo against isis together with Dawn of freedom and islamic battalions. Thus i think yellow dots together with green dots should be placed just like in kobane city — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 ( talk • contribs) 14:54, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
We marked 1 vilage under joint control because there was a source showing that, everything else is unclear. DuckZz ( talk) 15:14, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
First soure is map made by thomas(arabthomnes) 17 january 2015 https://pietervanostaeyen.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/2000px-syria2.png
second source is known ypg source. https://twitter.com/ColdKurd/status/506045034958159872 31 august 2014
Third source is https://twitter.com/sergermed/status/525539988495400960 a guy known to be close to al akrad front — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 ( talk • contribs) 16:30, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Last 2 sources are a bit old. Try to find something from this year because the frontline has changed alot so the groups too. DuckZz ( talk) 21:57, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Trusted Akrad commander source said that rebels captured Hawr Al Nahr. DuckZz ( talk) 22:05, 27 January 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 = "36.875", long = "38.302", mark = "Location dot black.svg", marksize = "6", label = " Minas", link = "Minas, Syria", label_size = "0", position = "top", },
to
{ lat = "36.875", long = "38.302", mark = "Dot_yellow_ff4.svg", marksize = "6", label = " Minas", link = "Minas, Syria", label_size = "0", position = "top", },
and
{ lat = "36.898", long = "38.268", mark = "Location dot black.svg", marksize = "6", label = " Kurabi", link = "Kurabi", label_size = "0", positon = "top", },
to
{ lat = "36.898", long = "38.268", mark = "Dot_yellow_ff4.svg", marksize = "6", label = " Kurabi", link = "Kurabi", label_size = "0", positon = "top", },
and
{ lat = "36.885", long = "38.291", mark = "Location dot black.svg", marksize = "6", label = " Mazra‘at Saghir", link = "Mazra‘at Saghir", label_size = "0", position = "top" },
to
{ lat = "36.885", long = "38.291", mark = "Dot_yellow_ff4.svg", marksize = "6", label = " Mazra‘at Saghir", link = "Mazra‘at Saghir", label_size = "0", position = "top" },
Sources: http://www.agathocledesyracuse.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Kobane-27-Jan-2015-by-@deSyracuse.png https://twitter.com/ChuckPfarrer/status/560037597616295936 https://twitter.com/ChuckPfarrer/status/560146708525748225
These villages have been taken by the YPG. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:D0EA:D699:DC28:4E9C ( talk) 22:42, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
I couldn't find any reliable source or visual evidence (pictures, videos, and so on) confirming the YPG control of the following villages aorund Kobane: Kurabi and Jiqur (western front); Kulmah (southern front); Shiran and Mazraat Dawud (eastern front). According to this source those villages seem still in IS control, or at least disputed: http://www.agathocledesyracuse.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Kobane-27-Jan-2015-by-@deSyracuse.png -- 8fra0 ( talk) 14:45, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Agree but then again nobody can provide us with sources that ISIS controll all of the villages in northern aleppo and hasakah some of the villages that are shown as isis held in many place have probably been recaptured 10 times by rebels/kurds/al nussra front/saa Creepz
pro Al Nusra source confirmed that Tabarat al Khashir under control by army. here Hanibal911 ( talk) 22:01, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Greetings. So this pro-gov source here [13] and this neutral source here [14] [15] both show Jafra is still ISIS-held and/or contested while Mari'iyah is gov-held. ChrissCh94 ( talk) 02:26, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Pro rebel source said that clashes inside Hamidiyah btw JaN and Assad here. Hamidiyah go to contested? ( 217.99.157.220 ( talk) 20:36, 28 January 2015 (UTC))
source on balazah, banan al has and abu abdah being fsa held and not regime. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 ( talk • contribs) 08:07, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
These villages outside Kobanî are under control of the YPG.
http://syriahr.com/en/2015/01/advances-for-ypg-and-rebel-battalions-southwest-of-kobane/
This source was used to justify an edit of these villages. However, Syrian Observatory of Human Rights is a well-known pro-rebel source, and under the editing guidelines should not be allowed to show rebel gains. Therefore, these villages should be marked under Kurdish control. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:CC74:2374:3F11:4F92 ( talk) 21:27, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
The source is used to show everyone’s gains, you don't have to spin the topic and use it for your own purpose. Kataib Shamal group published pictures showing their fighters inside those vilages here and here2. DuckZz ( talk) 22:00, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
I'm trying to say that the Kurds control the village. The FSA are only acting as a supporting force, and they don't have full or even partial control of the villages. There is no joint control agreement between FSA and YPG. I think it is a misrepresentation to show joint rebel control of these villages. I would be perfectly happy with a green rebel presence icon, as I feel it would more accurately represent the situation on the ground. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:CC74:2374:3F11:4F92 ( talk) 22:40, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Also, these YPG gains need to be added.
http://syriahr.com/en/2015/01/advances-for-ypg-and-rebel-battalions-southwest-of-kobane/ 2601:0:B200:F7D9:CC74:2374:3F11:4F92 ( talk) 02:56, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry but we edit the map according to sources we have and not according to those we don't have, logically. There are at least 2 rebel groups (Northern Sun, Liwa Raqqa) present in Kobani area so we can assume they have a significant amount of fighters there, of course YPG is the main leading role and that's why we mark it only as partial rebel control and not full. Also if you're interested, they have their facebook channels with dozens of pictures from these villages. DuckZz ( talk) 11:01, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
https://twitter.com/sergermed/status/560578422511259648?lang=sv
https://twitter.com/sergermed/status/560576534407565312
some of these villages are marked however Qazal,Dalha,Kara köpru,Tatmarash and Maryamin aren't marked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 ( talk • contribs) 07:55, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
It's a trusted commander source. We can only use it in this case, for example : there are 3 villages, 1-2-3, the first one is marked as Kurd control, the last two as ISIS. If this source reports that Kurds gained the village "3" located far more to the east, then we can change the village "2" under Kurd control, but not "3" as we need more sources. Understood ? DuckZz ( talk) 11:16, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Well the guy makes sense because if you look at the map these three villages are the three villages al akrad might have ran to after being expelled from Dodiyan also there is confirmed al akrad presence in qara mazraah this explains from where al akrad are getting their support to attack qara mazraah which is far north dodiyan will probably be recaptured.
https://twitter.com/ShamiWitness/status/501400501804859392?lang=sv — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 ( talk • contribs) 11:33, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
SOHR reported clashes between Hazm and Nusra which ended in a Nusra victory and Nusra control over the 111th Regiment in Aleppo [16] with casualties on both sides as well as POW's ChrissCh94 ( talk) 11:49, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Confirmed source within YPG.
https://twitter.com/ColdKurd/status/560174122958086144 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.100.194.177 ( talk) 21:53, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Qeremezre in the southeast of Kobani is also in YPG's control Confirmed by a reliable pro YPG source with pictures https://twitter.com/Avashin/status/560799992362053632 https://twitter.com/Avashin/status/560800122016395265 -- 88.72.87.121 ( talk) 14:11, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
City of Azaz need mark under jointly controlled by moderate rebels and Al Nusra because pro opposition source clear showed that this city under their joint control. here Hanibal911 ( talk) 20:02, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Don't start it. If we start to do this, the map will be ruined in few weeks. Al Nusra has presence in almost every town where rebels are but in minority numbers. We already agreed to mark their presence only in Idlib province because everywhere else they have a small number of fighters. We can only mark a place under their control if a source, for example SOHR, names only their group inside an article, for example Wadi Daif etc. Therefore joint control edits are bad ideas. There were already enough sources from Jan channels saying that their soldiers are active on Alepo frontlines and mainly keeping checkpoints around towns/villages. I belive a week ago their checkpoint was atacked with an IED. DuckZz ( talk) 21:49, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Arabthomes map is biased and full of mistakes, we already have deSyracuse, his maps are more reliable. . . . . . . . . . I meant to say full control, not joint control. All places that might me under full JAN control are already marked in Idlib province. We all know that there's probably a significant amount of rebel groups (Islamic front) inside Marat Numan but sources are still showing that JAN has the upper hand. Joint control is a pretty bad idea, at least for JAN-Rebel presence. On the other hand Kurd-Rebel is more logical since they don't fight each other. DuckZz ( talk) 00:24, 28 January 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 35 | ← | Archive 38 | Archive 39 | Archive 40 | Archive 41 | Archive 42 | → | Archive 45 |
In 3 days time with nothing but an amateur map as a source, 16 red villages, 4 red villages, 6 red villages, 9 red villages, 5 red bases, 1 red base, 6 red bases, 2 red bases, 4 red bases, Khirbat al Atrah to red (which is a joke - to show any SAA-held village in NW Aleppo as NOT besieged), Hawsh Haju to red. How many of those actually add anything of consequence to the map? Are any corroborated by any other source? It's just a piling on of inconsequential red clutter, in most cases*.. Boredwhytekid ( talk) 19:34, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
well it does provide a more accurate view of what sides hold villages and a large part of the population centers. If small IS held dessert villages are marked on the map, why cannot larger villages in Latakia and other areas also be included? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
169.231.156.148 (
talk)
19:55, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
Personally i have no problem with the changes because the map from desyracuse is neutral in my opinion and doesn't favor any side. Some other things to bother me, for example
My concern is that desyracuse might be blindly copying military sites from wikimapia and that some of these bases might have been destroyed by the rebels... Tradedia talk 06:34, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
This location was recently added to the map as an SAA-held town SW of Nubl/Zahraa, but looking on wikimapia it doesn't exist. The area labelled as it is literally a barren patch of ground [1]. I propose we remove it. Nhauer ( talk) 20:52, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
I guess it´s valued as a strategic hill and there for marked. (Like the strategic hill Tall Shair next to the west of Kobane) Rhocagil ( talk) 21:22, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
It was not added: it has always been there as a green dot. I changed it to red based on some maps I listed in the edit summary retaining the coordinates. Now I found a little better coordinate on wikimapia and I'll change them. Paolowalter ( talk) 21:48, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Boredwhytekid, Hanibal911, Alhanuty, ChrissCh94, DuckZzI have rasied this issue that De-Syracuse is not a pro-opp source,it is a neutral source who reports on everything that happens in Syria,reliable like Jousha Landisuses this source for his reports. here, here, here, here. Lindi29 ( talk) 15:36, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
Yes before, i belived that he supported rebel gains but now i just think he's trying to remain somehow neutral when writing about events on both sides (rebel and government). He was among the individuals who clearly said about the failed Al Nusra attacks on Zahra and Nubl, even before SOHR.
The modifications made supported by his map were also supported by other source [en.wikipedia.org/?title=Module%3ASyrian_Civil_War_detailed_map&diff=641737354&oldid=641725859] (and now also by [2]) or by good sense [en.wikipedia.org/?title=Module%3ASyrian_Civil_War_detailed_map&diff=641740190&oldid=641737354]. Paolowalter ( talk) 14:32, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
There are some inconsistencies on the map next to Hasakah. The town Tall Majdan was added just outside the detailed map with coordinates 36.533,40.6. But Tall Majdan appears also on the on the detailed map. From Wikimapia the right coordinates are [3]. After correction, the dot ends up on the detiled map (as you can see now) in a black (ISIS controlled) area. Logically it should be removed. On the same basis the village Rafrar, taken by SAA following http://www.agathocledesyracuse.com/archives/236 and https://twitter.com/IvanSidorenko1/status/554776902876299264 it is located [4] in a red area on the controlled map. Should the Tall Majdan black dot removed? Paolowalter ( talk) 19:02, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
Hey guys how you think we can add on the map El Mahash oil field which locatedto east from the army base 137th Armoured Brigade map in area which under control by army using pro-government map here Hanibal911 ( talk) 12:46, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
Agree.We should also add the bordast tower to which is contested. Lindi29 ( talk) 12:50, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
Clashes between Al Nusra and SRF in Jabal al-Zawiya. Elijah J. Magnier Hanibal911 ( talk) 17:12, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
SOHR reports the same, the say "wanted people" what could refer to ex-SRF members. DuckZz ( talk) 17:40, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Why in the north-east of the country where YPG and SAA/NDF have truce to hold towns is it painted Yellow-Red, but around Aleppo and Idlib where both JAN and non-JAN rebels have truce to hold towns, these towns are not painted Green-Grey. They are painted only Green. This is a major problem with the map. It still acts as if JAN is in a united rebellion with these groups. They do have a truce and common enemy and are working together, but more and more we see JAN is its own group that is very dangerous to the rebellion and the people of Syria. Where JAN is not located the towns should be pure green. But where they are located it should be Grey-Green to show a truce, were rebel groups have sold out revolutions spirit to work with extreme fanatics. Khan Shaykun (in Idlib province) is one of the few places on map where this has been successfully done. That example should be in many other areas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.158.99 ( talk) 22:13, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Also a small green dot should be added to Kobane- to show rebel FSA presence in Kobane to support YPG. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.158.99 ( talk) 22:15, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Nice try, i see the propagadna is working really well on both sides. You act like you came here and saw this map 2 days ago but we know that is not the case. Every month or so the same editor (probably you) suggest the same idea over and over again just to ruin the map and make it more complicated to edit. Jabhat Al Nusra fighters are present in 60% of the areas under anti-government control. Same goes for the Islamic front, FSA and other rebel groups. Applying this rule will mean to change the entire map completely. DuckZz ( talk) 23:59, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
No, I am not an editor, just someone following events and chiming in here in the comments. and, Yes, I believe the map should be changed completely to reflect the situation more accurately- it should reflect a truce between blocs of groups that are very different ideologically, very different in who arms them, very different in goals, different tactics. Look at the towns of Nubl and Zahraa under siege. The circle around them is green. If you are a random viewer you would think, oh so the islamic front and fsa are sieging them.. but , reality check, those sieges are almost completely launched by JAN. Also you did not respond to my initial question: Why in the north-east of the country where YPG and SAA/NDF have truce to hold towns is it painted Yellow-Red, but around Aleppo and Idlib where both JAN and non-JAN rebels have truce to hold towns, these towns are not painted Green-Grey? This is a major contradiction of this map- that becomes more and more crystalized as time passes and JAN splits from the rebel groups that still are seen as palatable by certain state actors. Green should be for rebel groups that have not seized huge parts of rebel areas to run as their own caliphate and have not been blacklisted from working with all state actors. Grey , for JAN and its allies, represents a group that sometimes works with other more "palatable" groups but is obviously embarking on a much more extreme path.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.24.193 ( talk) 08:15, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
There is a report from IavnSidorenko than IS pulled back from Al-Thayyem field, that are under control of local figthers allied with SAA. Is it OK to turn it red? Paolowalter ( talk) 07:52, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
I know IvanSidorenko supposed to be neutral source, but i sounds a little to good to be true (???). Since i don´t speak arabic I have no idea what the man in the clip says. Rhocagil ( talk) 16:19, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
There are videos as well of the capture. here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SlzfAwP-9WQ&feature=youtu.be and here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JV4CXRqVohw&feature=youtu.bevideos — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.173.4.182 ( talk) 16:59, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Al-Thayyem field should be made contested. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
169.231.158.99 (
talk)
22:21, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Al-Masdar has also declared the field under tribal fighter control [most likely loyalists]. http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/deir-ezzor-complete-field-report-battle-zone/ XJ-0461 v2 ( talk) 23:37, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Confirmed by Elijah J Magnier https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/555607509780946946/photo/1 Fab8405 ( talk) 09:48, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Any source showing this village under rebel control ? A friend from Alepo said that ISIS bombs them in Mare' from this high ground village. DuckZz ( talk) 15:00, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
On our map a village Tall Salmu noted as under control by moderate rebels. But biased pro opposition source reported that today this village was captured of Al Nusra. here So either this village was contested between the army and Al Nusra then we must noted this village as contested between army and Al Nusra or if the Al Nusra took it from moderate insurgents we need marked him as under control by Al Nusra. But more likely it is that the village should be noted as contested between the Syrian troops and Al Nusra. Because source said that this village it is the gate of Abu ad-Duhur Military Airbase. So I ask of other editors express their opinions. Hanibal911 ( talk) 21:15, 13 January 2015 (UTC) Judging from the source it seems that the claim is that JAN took it from SAA. The source is strongly pro-opp biased and therefore it cannot be used to register opposition advance. Just let's look for additional info fro other sources. Paolowalter ( talk) 21:25, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
Yea i saw that tweet too but the actual first reports were published few days ago on opposition channels, i have read some on facebook (Idlib news channel etc). All of them said that Rebels (not mentioning any group) "have put Tall Salmu under their control". Before this, i know that government forces managed to break some rebel lines to the north of the airport (last year) and that Tall Salmu (what is actually a hill and not really a village) came under heavy SAF attack, dozens of rebel casulties.
I think that Tell means hill and Tall describes a higher ground with something on it, not sure but nevermind, i know it's a village but located on high ground (where everything else around Abu Duhur is flat) thats why it's important.
It states referring to Aleppo, the Aleppo countryside and the road leading from TUrksih border/Azaz to Aleppo: "Jabhat al-Nusra is stronger in some areas of the city than others, and has set up more checkpoints on the road from the Turkish border since Al-Monitor’s last visit in late October. The area is nevertheless still mostly under the control of the more moderate Jabhat Shamiya, a group recently formed on the basis of the Islamic Front that fights alongside Jabhat al-Nusra on several fronts but is not officially aligned with it." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.158.99 ( talk) 22:10, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Hanibal991 I agree with you.We must not forget that these so called activists also reported the capture of Nubol(or to be exact half the city of Nubol) they also reported that the rebels captured Tel-Bazzaq(Qunetra) but it also turned out to be fake.To note also that Abo-al-Duhur airport is operational and that means that there must be a safe zone around the airport established by the Army. Daki122 ( talk) 14:45, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Hanibal911 The problem with you is that you obviously don't understand English really well, everything what you said in your post above is the same thing i said in my last post. The airport is besieged, Tall Salmu was not in rebel hands due to SAF heavy airstrikes on that location, and that lasted for few days, the situation changes every 5 days because rebels, or JAN in this case, are not able to stay on Tall Salmu for a long time beucase that place is a strategic location that overlooks the airport. The SAA knows that and bombs Tall Salmu on daily basic. Do you understand it now ? I don't care for the color, that's not what i wanted to discuss. DuckZz ( talk) 14:56, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
I agree with Hanibal911 beacause JAN are going in a big offensive to capture not only the air base but nubl and al-zahraa. Daki122 Ofc this is a pro-opp source but we dont use them to show advances against the regime,we only agree on some that are really trustworthy,yes they said they captured nubl and al-zahraa but we first disscus it that is true and to verify if that true we rely on others reliable sources who are neutral.Regard Lindi29 ( talk) 15:23, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
From [5] Tall Salmo is controlled by SAA; it must go red with gray ring on the south. 87.5.44.175 ( talk) 17:24, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Al-Masdar is an unreliable source,and is a well known pro-regime source,also we can never use a regime source to show a regime advance in Tal Salmu,there is reports of Air raids in the area near by. http://syriahr.com/en/2015/01/the-government-warplanes-attack-several-regions-in-aleppo-and-idlib/ Alhanuty ( talk) 22:54, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
With the current tide of events a complete disband of FSA remain a option on the table. What will be the way to handle this scenario? Change colors and battle map distribution?, maybe at the very end of this year, the map will show a divided Syria between ISIS and the Regime. More rummors comes from a massive FSA disband in the Southern Front, with many men joining ISIS in the East. The same in Qalamoun Region, meanwhile all Kurdish Positions look in harms way with ISIS closing in. 200.48.214.19 ( talk) 17:10, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
First: this is not a place for predictions.
Second: ISIS will never be able to overrun all Kurdish and Rebel positions in Northern Syria, they are already on defensive. SAA+NDF, while on offensive, are failing to actually deliver a crushing blow to the rebels, and are actually losing on some fronts. The opposition will not end in 2015. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 191.251.123.194 ( talk) 22:39, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
In 2010, the entire map was red. Now, not even half the map is red. Using your logic, we should discuss possible scenarios for the complete downfall of the regime :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.184.91.68 ( talk) 02:24, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
The uprising begun on 2011, in 2010 there where no armed opposition, ISIS, JAN. If we use YOUR logic the map will have noting to do with the conflict. A all red map would be the political map of Syria before the conflict 200.48.214.19 ( talk) 13:14, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Pro opposition source said that clashes break out between Syrian Army and opposition fighters in city Talbiseh in Homs countryside. DocumentSy DocumentSy So that guys maybe some one of editors to have other data about situation in this city. Hanibal911 ( talk) 13:16, 9 January 2015 (UTC) Fighting in this town has been reported several times in the recent past. I guess from SOHR. See also [6] (pro-opp). It is maybe time to turn it into contested. Paolowalter ( talk) 15:38, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
Paolowalter ( talk) 21:54, 10 January 2015 (UTC) If any, it confirms fighting inside the city. Paolowalter ( talk) 18:19, 11 January 2015 (UTC) http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/homs-syrian-army-makes-swift-gains-north/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.155.17.25 ( talk) 16:25, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
I haven't seen this map in two weeks, and when I looked today I was rather surprised to see the addition of six red towns north of Idlib city (these are: Kafr Jalis, Ad Duwayr, one without a name, Ayn Shib, An Ghafer and Tan 'Isa). I've checked this talk-page, but there has been no mention of a government offensive on this area. I've checked the news ... no mention of any SAA offensive in this area. Recently, Idlib city was raided by Islamist rebels, coming from surrounding towns. And now, all of the sudden, those towns are marked as SAA held? Without a source? Every map you check - even SyrianPerspective - shows those area's as rebel controlled (some FSA, some Jabhat al-Nusra). So, why are those six towns suddenly red or contested? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 ( talk) 09:27, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Well then change Al Ghafer, because we already had a section on this talk page where you suggested that Al Ghafer should be changed, and nobody complained. DuckZz ( talk) 15:49, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Just keep an eye on it as pro gov sources report attacks on Kafr Takharim and Almanaz north of Al Ghafer . Pyphon ( talk) 10:10, 17 January 2015 (UTC)pyphon
Apparetnly in Al Waer a truce was estblished few days ago [8]. It should be marked so on the map. Paolowalter ( talk) 10:23, 15 January 2015 (UTC)ú
It is a 24 hour ceasefire, in this time they will go to the table and hopefully agree on everything.
The source SOHR confirms a truce process non a simple ceasefire. We put it on truce and wait for further news. Paolowalter ( talk) 07:28, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Can anyone explain why khan shaykhun is the only city on the entire map that has a green dot with a grey circle within it? THis indicates a peaceful coexistence between JAN & allies (backed by no foreign states) with FSA&islamist forces that are openly backed by foreign states. That grey/green truce should be in many,many more towns that are now only showed as green. Its more and more clear that JAN should not fall under green. They are backed by no foreign states, they are the only rebel group to create their own break away caliphate, they do have truce and cooperation but they are also clearly on a very different path than the other "more palatable" rebel groups. They are launching their own raids into Lebanon. For this map to be accurate,which i think everyone wants, this needs to be seriously debated here.
My suggestion is to start gathering an evidence supported list of all locations where JAN is heavily present in rebel areas and then include within all these green dots a grey circle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.24.193 ( talk) 08:29, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
I guess you are kidding, JAN was made by qatari/saudi warmongers and sent to Syrian in 2012 by IS.
ok, so maybe they were, but I think its pretty clear that the NATO $ today is not going to them, its going to these more "palatable" groups and this is another source of the divisions between them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.25.115 ( talk) 18:11, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
From [9] and [10] fighting in Talbiseh, Al-Mashrafeh, Al-Madrajeh, Al-Ghajjar, Al-Farhaaniyyeh, Al-Sina’ayyeh, Gharnaata, ‘Ayn Hussein Al-Jnoubi and Al-Zafrana. Some updatng of the map is necessary. 79.10.133.67 ( talk) 17:56, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Lindi29Pro government source said that in northwestern Idlib, the Syrian Arab Army’s 11th Tank Division warded off a number of attacks by the militants from the Islamic Front (Jabhat Al-Islamiyya) at the village of Ariha in Jabal Al-Zawiyyeh. According to a military source, 14 Islamic Front militants were killed in the clashes at Ariha. But source not said about clashes in the city of Ariha! Also Ariha it is not village and city of Ariha not located in Jabal az-Zawiya. And for editing the major towms to contested we need more information. Hanibal911 ( talk) 11:44, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
There is no source(even the one above) that says clashes are in Ariha it is a government stronghold in Idlib with dozens of checkpoints around it most of the clashes are west of Ariha in the mountains overlooking the supply route to Idlib so reverted.Also to point out that many times city names are used to point out where the clashes are happening(in witch area or countryside). Daki122 ( talk) 13:55, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
The rebels have long controlled areas just outside the town, so clashes on the edge of the town are frequent and not surprising. But since Ariha is a regime stronghold, not enough to make it contested.
The town was taken by the rebels for about 10 days, in a surprise attack a year or two ago. Regime forces from adjacent areas quickly retook the town. There is an important (informal) base a little north of the town.
André437 (
talk)
15:40, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Disagree almasdar news does report rebel gains . Pyphon ( talk) 16:27, 17 January 2015 (UTC)pyphon
It seems the local truce between the YPG and the SAA is over:
1. http://www.jpost.com/Breaking-News/Kurds-battle-Assads-forces-in-Syria-opening-new-front-in-civil-war-388043 2. http://globalnews.ca/news/1778386/syrian-kurdish-fighters-clash-with-government-forces-in-northeastern-syria/ 3. http://rudaw.net/english/kurdistan/170120151
Clashes mainly in Hasakah city. Twitter sources claiming that the YPG took several checkpoints, buildings and the grain silos. Reports of fighting in Qamishli also. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 ( talk) 17:06, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Hassaka_media twitter account is not pro-kurdish, (seems to be anti everything) which maybe makes it more reliable. Rhocagil ( talk) 20:03, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
I would not be so quick to judge. The YPG needs the SAA and the opposite is also true. They will not allow themselves to be weakened by infighting, knowing full well the danger of doing so in the presence of ISIS. XJ-0461 v2 ( talk) 21:32, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry this is ridiculous. There are clearly heavy clashes taking place between the regime and the YPG. The aim of this map is to detail the current situation so considerations regarding whether the regime-YPG are likely to settle things soon are irrelevant. Jafar Saeed ( talk) 03:55, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Pro kurdish source reported that the Strategic Mountain Mishtanour near of Kobane has been released and cleaned up from ISIS. Mazloum Mustafa Who else has information about the situation in the area. Hanibal911 ( talk) 12:36, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Alledgedly they also captured the radio tower. Here and Here DuckZz ( talk) 13:13, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
SOHR reported to that this hill is captured. Lindi29 ( talk) 13:17, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Reliable source reported that In the last days, 1000 civilians and 210 rebels left Ghouta and joined to regime area in capital for reconciliation. Elijah J. Magnier Also source said that more than 700 civilians and armed rebels came out of Mayda'a (Damascus) and join the reconciliation plan with Syrian army. Elijah J. Magnie Hanibal911 ( talk) 16:57, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
which means the town is rebel-held,and on the map it is shown under regime-control. Alhanuty ( talk) 17:44, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
How many people live in Mayda aprox, and how many rebels are located in all Ghouta. 200.48.214.19 ( talk) 19:00, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
I think we can still add town and villages in this region. Wikimapia. Lindi29 ( talk) 13:30, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
I agree wholeheartedly. We really need to show that ISIS controls all these villages and not just some, as the current map just gives the impression that there are areas where ISIS has no presence. If we add more black dots, it will show more accurately the ISIS encirclement of Kobani. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:F19A:3146:52EC:F471 ( talk) 01:30, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Syria TV report with subtittles. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wx-VBCu4X0 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.203.137.34 ( talk • contribs) 21:41, 3 October 2014
All Qaeda is in All Green Towns not only in Idlib Towns
The so called Islamic Front Was created by Al Qaeda member Abu Khaled al-Suri he was killed by the ISIS http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/syria-suicide-bombers-kill-al-qaeda-rebel-leader-in-aleppo-1.2548340
Even if you don't consider the islamic front as part of AQ, the nusra which is cleARLY AQ is in the vast majority of green areas.
SHouldn't a grey dot be put then within most of the greens (if it can be documented)? That could be used to show they are working together.
If hezbollah is the main garrison in any government town, I would understand putting a yellow dot within the red. Although I think they are primarily focused in a few areas, from what I've read.
— Preceding
unsigned comment added by
72.252.161.166 (
talk •
contribs) 23:39, 13 November 2014
A frightening situation , this article explains that FSA has withdrawn from Menagh and Nursa has taken control of this. It says fighting between Nusra and FSA has moved to Aleppo’s countryside. So it is not just in Idlib countryside now. http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2014/11/jabhat-al-nusra-idlib-islamic-emirate.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.252.161.166 ( talk • contribs) 20:54, 13 November 2014
According to SOHR's report http://syriahr.com/en/2014/11/7-militants-died-in-clashes-with-ypg-in-ras-al-ayn/ 2 villages(Mestriha and Felastin) south of Jaz'ah should be contested. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saeed alaee ( talk • contribs) 06:39, 18 November 2014
And again we have pro-SAA editors change the Daraa and Quneitra map towards their own views without sources. I want the following questions answered with neutral sources:
1. Why was Dilli changed back to red and why is the 60th Engeneering Regiment nearby deleted as a green army base dot? 2. Why is the green circle around Mahajjah deleted, whilst SANA itself says there were bombings there, so rebels nearby? 3. Why is the city of Bosra changed from contested to red without a neutral source given? 4. There is a grey JaN ring in Nawa, whilst there is no infighting in southern Syria. So why the grey ring?! 5. Why is Tell Antar contested? No sources given
And before people start bombarding this post with PetroLucum or Al-Masdar stuff, I mean neutral sources. Al-Minotor wrote an article which states Sheikh Maskin and Brigade 82 should be green, as well as many towns north of it. We ignored it based on Al-Masdar reports (could as well listen to SANA). So, if that's the case, I will use Twitter sources from opposition activistst to change towns to green, since that is what pro-SAA people here do to contested and rebel towns in the south. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 ( talk • contribs) 08:52, 19 November 2014
1- Dilli needs to be contested. The rebels took it, the regime counter-attacked and now clashes are happening inside the village. You used a totally pro-regime source to change it back to red. Also, SOHR reported 60th Batallion to be on rebel hands, so put it back(it's a small base, so maybe use a checkpoint icon).
2- Add the Daara Central Prison back, as it was AGAIN excluded. This is getting really boring.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.183.246.229 ( talk • contribs) 11:15, 19 November 2014
It seems Sawran is ISIS-held since this recent video depicts rebels shelling ISIS positions IN THE CITY. [12] ChrissCh94 ( talk)
I will remove the green semicircle from Etihimlat, that's for sure but I think we need some other sources to change Sawran to black. DuckZz ( talk) 13:45, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Agree . Pyphon ( talk) 18:31, 19 January 2015 (UTC)pyphon
In the video posted above, on 0:46 we can see a hill in the middle of the "unknown" city. If we look at this map and the location, i think it's the same hill. DuckZz ( talk) 20:24, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Nice Map of Syrian Conflict with coments and tiles with colors of fighting forces. It does not display JAN, the only fault i have found.
http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/fr/map/desyracuse-syria-civil-war-8-january-2015_25484#11/33.3781/36.4351
200.48.214.19 (
talk)
16:49, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
We already used it. EkoGraf ( talk) 17:13, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
So as earlier I said that I am neutral editor then I want ask why the cities Al Hirak and Al Zabadani which earlier was marked as contested but today have been marked under control of army. If there is no data from reliable sources that those cities under control of army they should again be marked as disputed. Hanibal911 ( talk) 16:08, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Al Zabadani is the biggest rebel stronghold in Al Qalamun. There are dozens of pictures posted only this year from opposition activists from inside the city. Rebels are clashing west of the city with SAA forces where SOHR reported that they managed to destroy 1 tank and kill dozens of Government foces. The city is controled by rebels and SOHR and other channels are reporting heavy airstrikes and barel bombardment on the city every few days. DuckZz ( talk) 17:01, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
I did Google News checks on both of these locations. Where is this information coming from that there is ongoing fighting at either of these locations? Isn't SOHR just a single guy in the UK? Shii (tock) 00:13, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
It has been a long time that we dont have any news on this area,but now Sohr reported that SSA carried out raids on areas in the villages of Qlib al- Thour, Jana al- Elbawi, al- Qasatel, Aqrab and villages in the township of Aqayrabat. SOHR,also according to pro-opp source shows that this towns are under Isis controll. here, here. Lindi29 ( talk) 17:22, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
I found at the pro-government website "almasdarnews" that article http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/breaking-syrian-army-captures-strategic-area-southwest-syria/
they report about the capture of "Al-Mahaadhiyyeh Orchards" near Sa´sa and Hassnou (not at the map?)
however the last lines of the article are my concern: "The success at Al-Mahadhiyyeh has led to the SAA’s advance towards the imperative village of Sa’sa; if captured, could lead to the counter-offensive in the Al-Quneitra Governorate." English is not my first language but for me it sounds like SAA is moving forward to Sa´sa so i would say Sa´sa is ´rebel´ held. What would you say?
Blockeduser2014 ( talk) 23:31, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
SAA recaptured the whole area at Sasa town. Well I don´t know but Peto Lucem and Al Masdar are about the same source. Rhocagil ( talk) 01:07, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Interesting, two conflicting pro-gov sources. Does anyone have a recent pro-opp map of the area? As of 2 weeks ago, Sa'sa is under SAA control per http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/fr/map/desyracuse-syria-civil-war-8-january-2015_25484#11/33.2671/36.1821 . Perhaps it was just an editorial mistake? XJ-0461 v2 ( talk) 01:30, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
The same situation we had with the city of Ariha when this source Al Masdar said that clashes at the village Ariha but this data was mistake. And later pro opposition source says that city Ariha under control by army. So for now we have many data from pro-opposition sources whuch confirm that Sasa under control by army. And a one message from a source which repeatedly was seen in the publication of conflicting information. So for now we need leave things as they are and search for more data. Hanibal911 ( talk) 12:17, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Yes Sa'sa was SAA held the areas near it was captured now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.99.15.105 ( talk) 21:53, 22 January 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 = "36.871", long = "38.347", mark = "Location dot black.svg", marksize = "6", label = " Tirmik Bijan", link = "Tirmik Bijan", label_size = "0", position = "top", },"
to
"{ lat = "36.871", long = "38.347", mark = "Dot_yellow_ff4.svg", marksize = "6", label = " Tirmik Bijan", link = "Tirmik Bijan", label_size = "0", position = "top", },"
and
"{ lat = "36.854", long = "38.379", mark = "Location dot black.svg", marksize = "6", label = " Qarah Halinj", link = "Qarah Halinj", label_size = "0", position = "top", },"
to
"{ lat = "36.854", long = "38.379", mark = "Map-arcNN-yellow.svg", marksize = "6", label = " Qarah Halinj", link = "Qarah Halinj", label_size = "0", position = "top", }, { lat = "36.854", long = "38.379", mark = "Location dot black.svg", marksize = "6", label = " Qarah Halinj", link = "Qarah Halinj", label_size = "0", position = "top", },"
Sources: http://www.petercliffordonline.com/syria-iraq-news-4/ https://twitter.com/ChuckPfarrer/status/558683892782481408
Tirmik Bijan has been taken by the YPG, and Qarah Halinj is being shelled from Mishtenur hill. Please change from black to yellow, and add a siege icon. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:34FA:6BF0:637A:7BB8 ( talk) 02:22, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
They are pro-opposition sources, but I think we can use them to show a Kurdish advance against ISIS. People have edited without discussion with less reliable sources. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:34FA:6BF0:637A:7BB8 ( talk) 02:24, 24 January 2015 (UTC) 2601:0:B200:F7D9:4CE2:5F37:2591:5F10 ( talk) 01:06, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
I admit, I can't find better sources, but I will let you know when I do. Can you put a semicircle icon instead? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:0:B200:F7D9:34FA:6BF0:637A:7BB8 ( talk) 02:41, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Source petercliffordonline.com says village (suburb) south next to Kobane Tirmik Bijan is under kurdish control. Article: Update 43 & Update 44 and map. I don´t know, but I think this source is neutral. Rhocagil ( talk) 13:00, 22 January 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 = "36.893", long = "38.354", mark = "80x80-yellow-black-anim.gif", marksize = "12", label = "
Ayn al-Arab (Kobanê)", link = "Cities and towns during the Syrian Civil War#Ayn al-Arab", label_size = "90", position = "top" },
to
{ lat = "36.893", long = "38.354", mark = "Dot_yellow_ff4.svg", marksize = "12", label = "
Ayn al-Arab (Kobanê)", link = "Cities and towns during the Syrian Civil War#Ayn al-Arab", label_size = "90", position = "top" },
Source:
https://twitter.com/ChuckPfarrer/status/559434237993312256
http://www.agathocledesyracuse.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Kobane-24-Jan-2015-by-@deSyracuse.png
The reason I am asking for this edit so soon is that the battle for the actual city of Kobanî has been mostly resolved. You will remember the report of the Iraqi army taking the south entrance to Tikrit: that doesn't make the city contested. Though there is still fighting in the east, I think the city should be marked under Kurdish control. If you don't agree, then I'll just wait the few hours until the eastern part is completely secured by the YPG, then request again. But for now, I think it should go to yellow.
2601:0:B200:F7D9:A816:54EA:40F1:2784 ( talk) 23:14, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
A Turkish news source (probably not fans of the Kurds), gives these reports:
http://www.imctv.com.tr/2015/01/25/65468/kobanide-4-sokak-sonra-zafer-var
http://www.imctv.com.tr/2015/01/26/65545/kobanide-zafere-son-adimlar
A Russian source (pro-Assad, generally) reports a Peshmerga commander:
http://www.vestikavkaza.ru/news/Kobani-svoboden-na-90.html
SOHR (anti-Assad) reports ISIS has been driven on to "the outskirts of al- Sena’ah area":
Do I need more sources? There has been fighting on the outskirts of many towns: Tikrit, Samarra, Mosul; but we don't mark those contested. As of right now, I really don't think control of Kobanî is contested at this point. I think the Kurds have it. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:1498:3B64:993F:66D2 ( talk) 00:26, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
I have a problem understanding the map. Until few days ago, looking at the map I thought that Ad Dumayr and Ruhayban were government held, with some rebel presence inside the town. Someone said that thats not the case, as these 2 towns are under truce and thats the reason why theres a red-lime-red icon.
Just to make it clear. A truce means this "an Agreement where at least 2 sides agree to an casefire until further notice in which one of the side controls a location while the other allows such action under certain conditions". In our case, rebels "control" these towns in the same time they agreed to stop fighting SAA forces in Eastern Qalamun (thats true becaue we have no information about clashes here).
I really can't find new "clear" sources about Dumayr and Ruhayban so be nice.
Opinions from other editors ? Hanibal911 you don't have to, i have read everything on your talkpage. DuckZz ( talk) 22:28, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
You really don't understand what i want to say. Yes they are under truce, but in the same time either under rebel or government control. The Cheldric labrouse source you posted confirms that "Truces where the regime accept to withdraw and let a rebel government in that area". The last known truce we had in Al Qabun district in Damascus, where SOHR reported exactly the same thing "A truce and withdraw of government forces". Every truce in Syria is the same, in favor for rebels in that area, while we mark it as purple on a town map, we should mark it as lime-red on the normal map..... A truce only means that a place should't be contested. That's why we changed Al Waer, but in a wrong way. DuckZz ( talk) 23:51, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
cant be used in this situation because it is only just rebel amatuer videos and unreliable for this issue because we cant use their for show success of rebels. Hanibal911 ( talk) 05:46, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
We use violet for City truce situations so it would be logical to have plain violet icons for cities and towns . Pyphon ( talk) 18:03, 23 January 2015 (UTC)pyphon
André437 Here, what do you think about this. It will be better than to add a new color to the map, it's already difficult enough.
And yes, post the new JAN color so others can see. DuckZz ( talk) 19:12, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Hanibal911 I agree, not a good idea with new icons. Instead of that, we can just change the Al Waer and Ruhayban red-lime-red icon to lime-red or lime-red-lime.---- The source that was used to change Al Waer clearly said that a truce agreement has been made and that rebels will control the district. SOHR said the same thing ... so i don't know where's the problem about that. DuckZz ( talk) 20:03, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Its getting to look like a decorated Christmas tree . Pyphon ( talk) 20:25, 23 January 2015 (UTC)pyphon
The situation as it is, is clear enough. I do not see any advantage in adding new color or new congigurations. Truce deal can widely change and we often do not the details. In any case, we must remind that a truce is a conditional surrender of the rebels, who stop figthin the government in exchange of some guarantees. Paolowalter ( talk) 00:12, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Here new map from opposition source deSyracuse which showed that ISIS mostly lost their position inside city of Kobane. here Hanibal911 ( talk) 12:59, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
The Siege of Kobane is coming to a end soon. The battle South of the city is already shifted from urban to rural fighting, with YPG/FSA trying to advance to the villages south and west of the city. The only battle that remains is on the Eastern Front, where YPG recaptured the Islamic/Sharia school. There is now only 2 major targets for YPG to reclaim the city, Tishrin school and Tell Arabpinar. Maybe in 1/2 weeks the city will be under full YPG control. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.157.18.100 ( talk) 14:14, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
What do you guys think to put a lime icon along Kobani, maybe without a name but just for the sake of ? I know for sure that 2 FSA linked groups are fighting there since the beginning, Kataib Shamal and Liwa Raqqa. They are regularly posting news, videos and photos of their figters there. The last information was that Liwa Raqqa fighters have captured the hospital in the south-west of the city. Before I start posting sources, i want to know what others think. DuckZz ( talk) 18:52, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
I don't think that's a good idea. Kobane is almost libarated, the entire map would be yellow so i don't see a sense in that because according to that we can also make maps for Hama and Idlib city which are all red.
We have to find a way to indicate rebel presence in the city 3bdulelah ( talk) 20:53, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Pro Kurd Twitter account Peshmerge Kobane has been fully liberated. Rhocagil ( talk) 02:20, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
Hanibal911 This is what i have.
Why is the town of Masharah in Quneitra turned to contested? Last time there was any news, it was of rebels shelling Tell BRrizaq near the town. Can somebody provide sources or revert the contested status back to green?
Al masdar is relaible. More than SOHR. That has been discussed many times. Paolowalter ( talk) 20:44, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Both SOHR and Al-Masdar are not reliable. Both can only be used for advances for the other side. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.41.251.231 ( talk) 20:47, 25 January 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 = "36.854", long = "38.379", mark = "Location dot black.svg", marksize = "6", label = " Qarah Halinj", link = "Qarah Halinj", label_size = "0", position = "top", },"
to
"{ lat = "36.854", long = "38.379", mark = "Dot_yellow_ff4.svg", marksize = "6", label = " Qarah Halinj", link = "Qarah Halinj", label_size = "0", position = "top", },"
Sources:
https://twitter.com/jackshahine/status/559837529709772801
https://twitter.com/ChuckPfarrer/status/559846335621656576
http://www.sasnewsagency.com/read/10221
Halinj village is YPG-held. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:6571:56B8:6EF9:5C27 ( talk) 03:07, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello everybody,
I've been following the events in and around Shayk Maskin for the last two days. I have several questions:
1. Why is Shayk Maskin still contested? Brigade 82 was the last part of the town that was held by the SAA wasn't it? The fighting now seems to be around the Electric Grid Station checkpoint. 2. Does anybody have information about al-Dalli and Suhaliyah north of Shayk Maskin? Twitter sources posted videos and claims that both had fallen to the Southern Front? 3. Maybe add a green circle to the western side of Qarfa? Rebels are close by, that was the reason Rustom Ghazali burned down his own palace there in December 14. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 ( talk) 16:34, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
This is a summary of events:
http://eaworldview.com/2015/01/syria-daily-insurgents-celebrate-victories-across-country/
It seems that rebels have made another sweeping advance in Daraa, capturing the Engeneering Brigade in Suhayliyah and al-Dalli, and are currenty (according to twitter) fighting for Al-Furqan village. Some activists are even talking about fighting close to Izzra itself. We should keep an eye on that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 ( talk) 18:09, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
Why are there so many edits north of Sheik Miskin, it's not possible to put them all there. What's about this Farun Storage base, does it even mention in some sources ? An under that, there also 2 checkpoints/bases which are covered with this edit. There's another one, third, you can see a fraction of it to the left. What's the point ? The map is overfilled DuckZz ( talk) 20:55, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
I believe taking a good look there is important. Official FSA news said they captured Dilli, Burqa, Faqah and al-Suhayliyah and one Battalion 60 base. That can't be used for rebel advances here, but we should really look at the situation. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
177.41.251.231 (
talk)
00:06, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Listen to friends if you want to use to edit a link to Arabic source is better to provide a link to it on the talk page. Because when you when you edit put a link to the source your link often displayed as broken and we can not verify data wgich you have provided as a source which confirm your editings. And here examples of this: here or here Because if we cant verify the accuracy of the information which was provide as a source. And this editing will be considered is not justified. I hope for your understanding. Regrds! Hanibal911 ( talk) 10:30, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Brigade 82 must be green now. 88.224.195.133 ( talk) 17:25, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Just pointing out: the rebels seized the Brigade 82 HQ inside the city of Sheikh Miskin. That HQ is not shown in our map, since it is inside the city. The base pointed out as green here is still regime held. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.41.251.231 ( talk) 17:41, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Neutral sources for Brigade 82 and Sheikh Maskin:
So it seems the entire Brigade 82 should go to green together with Al-Shayk Miskin. Only the Military Housing remain red, and maybe the BRigade itself contested?
186.112.217.134 ( talk) 04:47, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
This village was marked as under control by Kurds only based data from a pro Kurdish source here but we cant use data from Kurdish sources to show success of Kurds. So if not have confirmation this data from reliable source we need again mark this village under control by ISIS. Let's not break the rules of editing. Hanibal911 ( talk) 10:15, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
reports of saa advancing in deyr ez zor any truth in this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 ( talk • contribs) 15:02, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello i have been reading about jabhat al akrad lately and i watched tons of videos from them most of the videos are from clashes in northern aleppo but the map only shows the villages rebel held are there no jabhat al akrad in northern aleppo? Im also following people that are close to al akrad and they claim to be activly fighting in northern aleppo against isis together with Dawn of freedom and islamic battalions. Thus i think yellow dots together with green dots should be placed just like in kobane city — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 ( talk • contribs) 14:54, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
We marked 1 vilage under joint control because there was a source showing that, everything else is unclear. DuckZz ( talk) 15:14, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
First soure is map made by thomas(arabthomnes) 17 january 2015 https://pietervanostaeyen.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/2000px-syria2.png
second source is known ypg source. https://twitter.com/ColdKurd/status/506045034958159872 31 august 2014
Third source is https://twitter.com/sergermed/status/525539988495400960 a guy known to be close to al akrad front — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 ( talk • contribs) 16:30, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Last 2 sources are a bit old. Try to find something from this year because the frontline has changed alot so the groups too. DuckZz ( talk) 21:57, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Trusted Akrad commander source said that rebels captured Hawr Al Nahr. DuckZz ( talk) 22:05, 27 January 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 = "36.875", long = "38.302", mark = "Location dot black.svg", marksize = "6", label = " Minas", link = "Minas, Syria", label_size = "0", position = "top", },
to
{ lat = "36.875", long = "38.302", mark = "Dot_yellow_ff4.svg", marksize = "6", label = " Minas", link = "Minas, Syria", label_size = "0", position = "top", },
and
{ lat = "36.898", long = "38.268", mark = "Location dot black.svg", marksize = "6", label = " Kurabi", link = "Kurabi", label_size = "0", positon = "top", },
to
{ lat = "36.898", long = "38.268", mark = "Dot_yellow_ff4.svg", marksize = "6", label = " Kurabi", link = "Kurabi", label_size = "0", positon = "top", },
and
{ lat = "36.885", long = "38.291", mark = "Location dot black.svg", marksize = "6", label = " Mazra‘at Saghir", link = "Mazra‘at Saghir", label_size = "0", position = "top" },
to
{ lat = "36.885", long = "38.291", mark = "Dot_yellow_ff4.svg", marksize = "6", label = " Mazra‘at Saghir", link = "Mazra‘at Saghir", label_size = "0", position = "top" },
Sources: http://www.agathocledesyracuse.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Kobane-27-Jan-2015-by-@deSyracuse.png https://twitter.com/ChuckPfarrer/status/560037597616295936 https://twitter.com/ChuckPfarrer/status/560146708525748225
These villages have been taken by the YPG. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:D0EA:D699:DC28:4E9C ( talk) 22:42, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
I couldn't find any reliable source or visual evidence (pictures, videos, and so on) confirming the YPG control of the following villages aorund Kobane: Kurabi and Jiqur (western front); Kulmah (southern front); Shiran and Mazraat Dawud (eastern front). According to this source those villages seem still in IS control, or at least disputed: http://www.agathocledesyracuse.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Kobane-27-Jan-2015-by-@deSyracuse.png -- 8fra0 ( talk) 14:45, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Agree but then again nobody can provide us with sources that ISIS controll all of the villages in northern aleppo and hasakah some of the villages that are shown as isis held in many place have probably been recaptured 10 times by rebels/kurds/al nussra front/saa Creepz
pro Al Nusra source confirmed that Tabarat al Khashir under control by army. here Hanibal911 ( talk) 22:01, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Greetings. So this pro-gov source here [13] and this neutral source here [14] [15] both show Jafra is still ISIS-held and/or contested while Mari'iyah is gov-held. ChrissCh94 ( talk) 02:26, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Pro rebel source said that clashes inside Hamidiyah btw JaN and Assad here. Hamidiyah go to contested? ( 217.99.157.220 ( talk) 20:36, 28 January 2015 (UTC))
source on balazah, banan al has and abu abdah being fsa held and not regime. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 ( talk • contribs) 08:07, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
These villages outside Kobanî are under control of the YPG.
http://syriahr.com/en/2015/01/advances-for-ypg-and-rebel-battalions-southwest-of-kobane/
This source was used to justify an edit of these villages. However, Syrian Observatory of Human Rights is a well-known pro-rebel source, and under the editing guidelines should not be allowed to show rebel gains. Therefore, these villages should be marked under Kurdish control. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:CC74:2374:3F11:4F92 ( talk) 21:27, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
The source is used to show everyone’s gains, you don't have to spin the topic and use it for your own purpose. Kataib Shamal group published pictures showing their fighters inside those vilages here and here2. DuckZz ( talk) 22:00, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
I'm trying to say that the Kurds control the village. The FSA are only acting as a supporting force, and they don't have full or even partial control of the villages. There is no joint control agreement between FSA and YPG. I think it is a misrepresentation to show joint rebel control of these villages. I would be perfectly happy with a green rebel presence icon, as I feel it would more accurately represent the situation on the ground. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:CC74:2374:3F11:4F92 ( talk) 22:40, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Also, these YPG gains need to be added.
http://syriahr.com/en/2015/01/advances-for-ypg-and-rebel-battalions-southwest-of-kobane/ 2601:0:B200:F7D9:CC74:2374:3F11:4F92 ( talk) 02:56, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry but we edit the map according to sources we have and not according to those we don't have, logically. There are at least 2 rebel groups (Northern Sun, Liwa Raqqa) present in Kobani area so we can assume they have a significant amount of fighters there, of course YPG is the main leading role and that's why we mark it only as partial rebel control and not full. Also if you're interested, they have their facebook channels with dozens of pictures from these villages. DuckZz ( talk) 11:01, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
https://twitter.com/sergermed/status/560578422511259648?lang=sv
https://twitter.com/sergermed/status/560576534407565312
some of these villages are marked however Qazal,Dalha,Kara köpru,Tatmarash and Maryamin aren't marked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 ( talk • contribs) 07:55, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
It's a trusted commander source. We can only use it in this case, for example : there are 3 villages, 1-2-3, the first one is marked as Kurd control, the last two as ISIS. If this source reports that Kurds gained the village "3" located far more to the east, then we can change the village "2" under Kurd control, but not "3" as we need more sources. Understood ? DuckZz ( talk) 11:16, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Well the guy makes sense because if you look at the map these three villages are the three villages al akrad might have ran to after being expelled from Dodiyan also there is confirmed al akrad presence in qara mazraah this explains from where al akrad are getting their support to attack qara mazraah which is far north dodiyan will probably be recaptured.
https://twitter.com/ShamiWitness/status/501400501804859392?lang=sv — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 ( talk • contribs) 11:33, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
SOHR reported clashes between Hazm and Nusra which ended in a Nusra victory and Nusra control over the 111th Regiment in Aleppo [16] with casualties on both sides as well as POW's ChrissCh94 ( talk) 11:49, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Confirmed source within YPG.
https://twitter.com/ColdKurd/status/560174122958086144 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.100.194.177 ( talk) 21:53, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Qeremezre in the southeast of Kobani is also in YPG's control Confirmed by a reliable pro YPG source with pictures https://twitter.com/Avashin/status/560799992362053632 https://twitter.com/Avashin/status/560800122016395265 -- 88.72.87.121 ( talk) 14:11, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
City of Azaz need mark under jointly controlled by moderate rebels and Al Nusra because pro opposition source clear showed that this city under their joint control. here Hanibal911 ( talk) 20:02, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Don't start it. If we start to do this, the map will be ruined in few weeks. Al Nusra has presence in almost every town where rebels are but in minority numbers. We already agreed to mark their presence only in Idlib province because everywhere else they have a small number of fighters. We can only mark a place under their control if a source, for example SOHR, names only their group inside an article, for example Wadi Daif etc. Therefore joint control edits are bad ideas. There were already enough sources from Jan channels saying that their soldiers are active on Alepo frontlines and mainly keeping checkpoints around towns/villages. I belive a week ago their checkpoint was atacked with an IED. DuckZz ( talk) 21:49, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Arabthomes map is biased and full of mistakes, we already have deSyracuse, his maps are more reliable. . . . . . . . . . I meant to say full control, not joint control. All places that might me under full JAN control are already marked in Idlib province. We all know that there's probably a significant amount of rebel groups (Islamic front) inside Marat Numan but sources are still showing that JAN has the upper hand. Joint control is a pretty bad idea, at least for JAN-Rebel presence. On the other hand Kurd-Rebel is more logical since they don't fight each other. DuckZz ( talk) 00:24, 28 January 2015 (UTC)