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 45 | ← | Archive 48 | Archive 49 | Archive 50 | Archive 51 | Archive 52 | → | Archive 55 |
Ali Bajliya and Brigade 93 have reportedly been liberated. However, I can't find any original source for everyone else's claims aside from Liwa Thuwwar al Raqqa. Given the wild claims made by LTR before, especially regarding the fall of Ayn Issa and the capture of Tel Seman, Khunayza and Hazima, I request that nobody changes anything from black until it gets confirmed by SOHR or other reputable sources. NightShadeAEB ( talk) 15:23, 22 June 2015 (UTC) SOHR confirmed that they captured huge parts of it. Alhanuty ( talk) 16:58, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Pro-YPG sources claiming there has been a renewed offensive towards Sarrin from a Kurdish offensive in the north and an FSA offensive in the east. The map also shows Mistras to be under YPG control. Are there any neutral sources to back this up?
http://imgur.com/UYw7Gpn — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prohibited Area ( talk • contribs) 11:27, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
To the user that made the edit from green to contested, do NOT use English SOHR reports as there have been issues with those reports, like wrong info (yes, I have seen the debate here: /info/en/?search=Talk:Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War/Archive_46#Dear_editors.21.21.21) . I ain't going to revert out of fear of the one revert policy and get myself in trouble for it.
Only Arab SOHR reports allowed. Besides, the base IS retaken by the YPG-Rebels per: http://www.syriahr.com/2015/06/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%88%D8%AD%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%B1%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%81%D8%B5%D8%A7%D8%A6%D9%84-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D9%82%D8%A7%D8%AA%D9%84%D8%A9-%D8%AA%D8%AF/.
To back it up (via news, that is neutral):
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/22/us-mideast-crisis-syria-kurds-idUSKBN0P21HV20150622
Regards.-- Damirgraffiti |☺What's Up?☺ 22:32, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
According to this Al Jazeera reporter, 93.brigade is captured and the town is contested. Some users find him pro-rebel but he states on his twitter wall that he follows the rebel uprising but not supporting anyone. Maybe the same as Eliah Magnier. I find him useful, maybe we can list him as an reliable source ? 100% of his reports are at the end confirmed as true DuckZz ( talk) 23:59, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
What do you think about making a map of the city of Qamishli? I think its a good option, as Qamishli is as big as Hasakah, and its on a similar situation (part on Kurdish hands, part on Syrian gov. hands), so it would be a non-sense & a double standard not making it. I think the main problem 'till now was the absence of control zone maps of the city, but in the last weeks some maps had been released, and they show mostly the same (the only difference seems to be the extension of the shared control zone):
So, waiting for yout thoughts on this issue.-- HC PUNXKID 23:12, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
If someone is on to make it. Rhocagil ( talk) 01:04, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
For the Damascus map - al-Masdar says that Al-Tal is under truce, with pro-gov't checkpoint surrounding, but no presence inside the town. Boredwhytekid ( talk) 14:27, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
This pro government map show more closely how the current situation is in Shulah, the Oil Field East of the city is SAA held, but the city is IS/SAA held. My suggestion is to keep it like it currently (or possible a read half circle) and put a SAA held SAA Oil Field. Moreover, this map shows Akram Oil Field, North of Palmyra as SAA held, since this is a Pro Government map no changes should be made, but it's an interesting note. MesmerMe ( talk) 08:37, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
This pro-government map says that the areas south of Palmyra and east of Suwayda are not government held. Our map shows government towns and positions there. I don't think there are any. What is the status of these areas? Who holds and controls this terrain? Is there a significant army presence in these towns and on those mountains to warrant red icons? 2601:C7:8303:22DC:80FF:CA06:FCEA:9BC6 ( talk) 17:01, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Al Masdar has started a new map obviously based on copying our map without even giving us credit! So after DeSyracuse copied our map and put his name on it, now Al Masdar is copying our map and putting their name on it. I wonder if there is a way to sue them for copyright infringement... In any case, their map is a clear violation of WP:CIRCULAR (“Do not use websites that mirror Wikipedia content or publications that rely on material from Wikipedia as sources.”) There is no way to know if the differences between their map and our map (or the additional things on their map) are based on information or guessing. Tradedia talk 18:30, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Is this going to be enforced at all? I mean, just since the last time I logged on, 1, 2, 3 (a map is referenced, but not even provided here), 4, 5, 6, 7, etc..! edits just straight from other maps. Not to mention the unsourced edits.. 1 2, 3, 4,.. Are the rules being enforced or not? Because 1RR makes it impossible for editors to push back a tide like that.. Boredwhytekid ( talk) 12:53, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
I would like to change Abwah (east of Al-Qantari) back to ISIS-hold. Pro kurd map and pro SAA map shows that it´s still under ISIS control and there hash´t been any map or source that I can find that have shown the different. Ok we should not use maps for edits, but in this case it would be a reverse-edit (as I do not know who and with what (if any) source this edit was made with). What say you Roboskiye, DuckZz, Boredwhytekid, NightShadeAEB, Tradedia ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rhocagil ( talk • contribs) 15:05, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Al Masdar article here indicates town Maskar Al-Hesan is under SAA control. Anyone heard of any other source confirming this or mentioning the same battle as referred to in the article? Rhocagil ( talk) 23:20, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Because of this report: https://twitter.com/sylezjusz/status/613831088356655105
and this map which we are not allowed to use: https://twitter.com/sylezjusz/status/613839485021888512/photo/1
would it be reasonable that, on the map, the village al-Mustrihah has been captured by the Burkan al-Furat forces? It seems likely that Burkan al-Furat came to the village Mughira (Maghar) from Ayn Issa, not from Sarrin. Additionally, it is unlikely that ISIL would want to hold such a small village in a now-unimportant area. I want to gather consensus for the changing of control of this village, as it was not directly mentioned, even though it is right next to the other village whose capture is confirmed. thoughts? Pbfreespace3 ( talk) 00:55, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Well I trust "sylezjusz", but does he qualify as neutral for edits like this? Rhocagil ( talk) 01:28, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
According to pro-government source Ivan Sidorenko ISIS is in control of Tal (Hill) Baroud and is sending reinforcement to attack Hasakah city from there so it should be changed to black:
https://twitter.com/IvanSidorenko1/status/613874120137289728
It is unknown whether the villages south of it are still under govt control, but according to a map from pro-kurdish source sylezjusz from 3 days ago, it seems clear that they aren't:
http://i.imgur.com/5VIDyXa.png
I will leave it to you to decide whether the sylezjusz data should be applied but the first one seems legit enough, what do you think?
190.67.146.112 ( talk) 01:41, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
SOHR reports about the clashes between SAA&NDF and ISIS inside the city of Hasakah: "IS advanced more and more after seizing the two neighborhood of al- Nashwah and al- Shari’ah, the children’s hospital and education collage reaching to the Sport City’s street that separates IS from the central prison and the criminal security branch." cnn, albawaba, almasdarnews. here is a map from deSyracuse Stharkov ( talk) 12:43, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Halab city map needs to be updated. unfortunately I don't know how to do it myself. there are many sources on the talk talkthat Al-rashidin should go green. also 1 2 3 claim that al-layramoun is green . though all of them are pro opposition. the problem is I digged in pro regime sources they don't confirm nor deny. what do you think about that ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helmy1453 ( talk • contribs) 13:44, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
The map shows there to be an IS presence in the area where Syria's border with the Israeli-controlled Golan and Jordan meets (In the villages of Tasil, Jamla among others). I can't find any reference to IS being in control here on any news sites or other places when searching for information about it online, what is this claim based on? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SamuelMaglor ( talk • contribs) 14:05, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
This is what i think.
Well you know my opinion. I think all of the towns should go yellow except Tell Abyad. Maybe also Ayn Issa should go under shared control as it was FSA that initiated the battle (kurds still helped and are helping them) and FSA probably want to maintain a large number of their forces in Ayn Issa as it for them would be a prioritized front. Maybe Brigade 93 should go green, but I do think it´s under equally shared control ( according to SOHR). The question you should ask is how many boots FSA brigades have on the ground, how much control can they impose? During the siege of Kobane there where about 200-250 FSA-people fighting with the kurds. Rumor says they after the siege they recruited 200 more (from where, through Turkey?). And I don´t like the concept of marking places as by whom they were captured, I´d like to mark them as by who are in control (you know this from the Idelb-disgustion). Showing FSA presence is better maybe with the rural icons or similar to the green dot in Kobane (as they probably have an office there or something like that). Rhocagil ( talk) 00:41, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
I need clear answers here.
Suluk yellow yes, I do think so! The source for the green+yellow edit was however this one. But probably not any conformation from the FSA-groups themselves. Ayn Issa stays mixed. Maybe it´s ok to mark brigade 93 green. If edited to green it will signal that this is the "main interest front" for the FSA-brigades, witch is not untrue. And in that perspective it´s ok for me (but that´s just me). Maybe there will be more discussion when other editors realize you have changed it, and if so we could always debate it again. Rhocagil ( talk) 00:08, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Eaworldview al Masdar, yahoo, SOHR, BBC all reporting IS executing civilians in Barkh Batan. Personally, since the village is so small, I doubt IS could carry out executions without at least momentarily being in control. Barkh Batan has been reverted to YPG/rebel control though. Opinions? Contested maybe? Boredwhytekid ( talk) 15:22, 25 June 2015 (UTC) I think that it should be under YPG control. ISIS control means a lot more than 30 people in a small village holding control for a few hours. Pbfreespace3 ( talk) 16:49, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
I see Kobane City Contested. Unless Turkey let IS attack from across its border or IS infiltrated through a large portion of YPG held territory. I think someone made a mistake Tgoll774 ( talk) 16:14, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
ISIS fighters managed to infiltrate the city by disguising themselves as YPG fighters however it looks like the real YPG forces took out most of the attackers and have the remaining ones contained to a single house http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/25/middleeast/isis-syria/index.html. The city should probably be put back to full Kurdish control for now. 76.99.189.128 ( talk) 16:34, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
I think we should wait for confirmation that the ISIL hostiles have been neutralised, before setting it back to Yellow/ Green. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prohibited Area ( talk • contribs) 18:45, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
What's probably going to happen is the media will only report the attack and never report "YPG now in full control of Kobanî", and the town will continue to be shown as contested, never changed back. I think we should change Kobanî back to yellow. Pbfreespace3 ( talk) 16:52, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
SOHR may say something, as far as I know clashes have been ongoing in the city as of this morning. Furthermore I am sure that Kurdish sources will report if and when the city is liberated. Prohibited Area ( talk) 20:17, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
IS is not contesting Kobane, what's going on in Kobane is a bloody suicide terrorist attack, and that's not enough to mark the city as contested. -- 8fra0 ( talk) 19:48, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
What are you doing? Why are you using maps? Why are you using pro-rebel/YPG sources for rebel/YPG advances? here "Since the Free Syrian Army is the primary combatant in the Ayn Issa region, using "lime" color for non-town/village symbols." Source? Stharkov ( talk) 18:27, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
NightShadeAEB No use. This user is doing this for a certain period of time, last 2 weeks. I already reported him on this talk page but no answer from the administrator while he is more busy explaining to us how using maps or other similar sources are bad for this article, while on the other hand this user and others are doing more than just POV vandalism edits. I think it's better to just edit something without providing any source than providing sources against the rules. The best example is the area around Ayn Isa (north Raqqa), on our map it was rebel held, kurd held, contested, then again rebel held, then lime-kurd held and now again under IS control. According to some users, these edits were just fine, no sources but still OK ... unbelievable DuckZz ( talk) 19:20, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
This is the latest news from "trustworthy" source (SOHR) on Brigade 83. It clearly states that battle is still ongoing inside the brigade, it should be marked contested. THis is also somewhat proof to user LightandDark2000 that maps shouldn't be used as source. It also shows that YPG are in the battle backed by FSA. Witch means that personal assumptions like 'Free Syrian Army is the primary combatant in the Ayn Issa region are ridiculous. I could edit this but I´m not sure if we use to use the same contested-icon when a military complex is contested as a town. This also raises the question if we need a new type of contested-icon when joint forces are engaged with ISIS. Further more if we need new icons for military and industrial complex under join control. Rhocagil ( talk) 21:02, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Roboskiye Sorry I don´t read arabic. Rhocagil ( talk) 21:19, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
LightandDark2000. He does not get it, he´s on vandalizing again. Rhocagil ( talk) 01:02, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
1 edit,Unjustified edit,No source provided, 2 edit,using a pro-opp source, 3 edit,using a pro-opp source. PapaDock547 ( talk) 14:08, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
This is another one vandalism <--- he made containing five changes. Three sources were given 1, 2 and 3. Not a single line in this sources provide any information about two of the changes in the edit; one Abwah and two Surab Sharqiya. LightandDark2000, you have to stop this personal campaign of yours. I do not understand what you are trying to achieve, but it´s getting very messy. Rhocagil ( talk) 23:37, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Pro rebel account reports clashes in https://twitter.com/markito0171/status/614736301213007872 Khunayfis & Phosphate mine. The former is already marked contested, the latter not. How do we mark an industrial area contested? A red ring around? Or we just wait the outcome of the clashes? 192.135.12.144 ( talk) 10:59, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
I've protected the page for three days. All I'm seeing right now is name calling, gaming the system to barely avoid 1RR, and refusing to talk civilly. You may request an administrator to edit the page once you have come to a community consensus.
I realize this is not ideal for a fast-moving situation, but it is the best solution. Please try to avoid this situation in the future. Magog the Ogre ( t • c) 16:59, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
This is the second time I'm making a post about it, but it's still clearly a major problem.
That problem being outright vandalism whenever IS launches a successful offensive.
Even when numerous pro-Kurd or pro-Government sources admit that towns were taken from them by IS, the moderation to this page still refuses to cede those towns to IS. I'm not pro-IS. I just think it's absurd to misrepresent the situation into being something that it's not. And if this map can't cede territory to IS when it's been literally confirmed by all parties, than this map is propaganda and cannot be trusted. End of story.
Something really needs to be done about the vandalism because it's a massive problem that should be dealt with immediately. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.126.188.171 ( talk)
I think the city map needs to update following the situation there or not! here. PapaDock547 ( talk) 16:20, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
The map of Hasaka City needs to be updated. IS has taken control over Liliyah and West Nashwan districts. [3] I guess this pro-Kurdish source is reliable in this context. -- Ahmetyal ( talk) 10:32, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Since this module is page protected for the time being, I propose that now is an ideal time to review and iron out standards of conduct. All interested parties should reaffirm base consensuses, such as abiding by 1RR; but more importantly, it's obvious that the future conduct of the project needs to be essentially a complete 180 from the past - what which has led to the module being page protected in the first place.
We should take time not only to continue to track events/compile sources for future edits, but to lay down wiki-appropriate solutions to our daily disagreements.
I'm spitballing here, but some sort of order needs to be established to stop the willy-nilly, petty argumentation, editing without even trying to engage the wider community of editors, name calling...
Tgoll774 Roboskiye Pbfreespace3 Alhanuty NightShadeAEB LightandDark2000 Rhocagil EkoGraf HCPUNXKID Paolowalter 8fra0
If I'm blowing smoke just ignore this.. Boredwhytekid ( talk) 18:04, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Can we at least all agree to open a section and post sources on the talk page before making edits? It's going to be a shame if after the page protection elapses this module just falls right back into unsourced edits, improper sources used on edits, POV and vandalism accusations, etc.. Boredwhytekid ( talk) 17:51, 29 June 2015 (UTC) I will agree to that, for now. Rhocagil ( talk) 20:43, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Speaking as a user, it would be very useful for this and other similar modules to be clearer about sourcing. Even if that doesn't mean declaring all edits in Talk, it would at least be nice to have mandatory mentions of edited towns in edit summaries. GeoEvan ( talk) 01:02, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Comment: "ALWAYS open a talk page discussion, FOR EVERY EDIT" Really? Are u serious? Oh yes, Im gonna ignore that nonsense bullshit, that what your namecalling deserves, for sure...-- HC PUNXKID 13:59, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
What does this SOHR article mean? http://www.syriahr.com/en/2015/06/is-advances-in-tal-abiad-city/ I know SOHR has a bad English translation, but it doesn't let understand if this Mashoq Faqani is an eastern neighborhood inside Tal Abyad city or another town in its outskirts...and so, because I'm not Syrian( and I don't know how Tal Abyad it's done) nor Arabic speaker the answer is: is Tal Abyad itself contested or the battle is, for now, in the outskirts? Fab8405 ( talk) 17:43, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
It seems like YPG still is in control over Shyookh Fawqani [8]. Anyone against changing it to yellow? -- Ahmetyal ( talk) 17:48, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
There are many reports that Turkey might invade part of Syria along the border to set up a buffer zone. https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1GIGM_enUS520US520&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=turkey&tbm=nws
If this occurs, we should have a color to use for Turkish-held towns and other objects. I think purple could be a good color: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/20/Location_dot_purple.svg
Teal is another color: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Location_dot_teal.svg
But I think that dark green is the best color, since it reflects Turkey's support for the rebels as well as it's closeness with ISIS: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Location_dot_green.svg
The reason I am posting this is so that this map can be prepared if and when Turkey invades. Thoughts? Pbfreespace3 ( talk) 17:12, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
I think dark green would be the best color, and here's why. Firstly, the light green color on this map indicates moderate Sunni rebels, some Islamist. Turkey is mostly Sunni, and the ruling government party is Islamist. Second, Turkey has said it supports these moderate and Islamist rebels, therefore a greenish color makes sense. I think people will be able to tell light and dark green apart on the map. Alternatively, teal could be used, as it is more distinguishable from the light green than the dark green is. Pbfreespace3 ( talk) 20:23, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
I can't belive someone actually made a section about this. What's next, a color for France-Portugal invasion on Syria, it was also announced last year, the same as Turkey and America, according to government sources they will enter Syria, and that was 3 years ago, and 2 years ago. Every year we have dozens of these so called "Expert analysis" of what will happen, eventually nothing happens like always. If actually Turkey creates this so called "Buffer zone", nothing should be changed, no color added, we only should make something similiar like in Quneitra province for the Izrael Golan height, someone just should make the same thing in north Syria, end. DuckZz ( talk) 20:36, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Well that is why I though that darker green would be a better color, since it is closer to black, but the teal would work as well. Maybe Turkey won't invade, but with the massing of troops on the border, it is worthwhile for us to have a plan if they do decide to invade. Here are all of the colors together:
There is also this one , but I don't want people to be confused with the Turkish military and ISIS, so I don't think it should be used. Pbfreespace3 ( talk) 22:23, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
I don't think Erdogan really cares about ISIS or YPG (these are both players in only small and low populated areas), the main goal they have is to prop up the islamist rebels attacking the government to unseat Damascus. That is their goal all along- it can pay off with money and expand their political and religious networks. They can use the excuse of defeating ISIS (internationally) and defeating YPG (domestically) to shore up an area supporting the islamist rebels. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.25.10 ( talk) 03:54, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
This is the seconf time I am postinf this section. last time no one comented. There is a major offensive in Aleppo by the green and definitly the rashdin area which is marked contested is green 1 and the north west district of Zahraa is contested in stead of red. I don't know technicaly how to edit the svg file or I would have done it my self 2. I posted here I posted on the tal of the file [ [9]] still no answer what so ever. Does anyone here even care about the accuracy of this map ???? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helmy1453 ( talk • contribs) 18:56, 3 July 2015 (UTC) 2 3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helmy1453 ( talk • contribs) 19:03, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Pro-regime sources only say that western perimeter of scientific research center has fallen, while they claim to have counter-attacked, capturing Bureijj town to north of aleppo and the Al-Salahiddeen District within Aleppo. http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/complete-field-report-from-aleppo-city-ansar-al-shariah-on-the-offensive/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.25.10 ( talk) 01:16, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks to the quick & nice work of MrPenguin20, now we have a new city map, Qamishli: [10].
If someone knows how to upload it properly to the map in order to add later the icons: Qamishli aiport, YPG base, Qamishli crossing, etc.. it would be nice. Regards,-- HC PUNXKID 14:11, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Our map has some serious issues, particularly with the Kurdish areas/areas taken by the Euphrates Volcano alliance. Areas to the South of what has been established as the Kobane Canton, by the Kurds, might I add, are still listed as being under the control of the Kurds. This is one of the biggest issues with this map. The situation in the North of the country is entirely reversed from what it was just a few months ago; instead of the Kurds being on the march, supported by FSA units, the FSA is now pushing South, supported by the Kurds, meaning many of the areas, particularly the key town on Ay Issa, are under the control of the FSA, and may have a small Kurdish presence there.
I've argued this a few times, and I'll bring it up again; the Kurdish areas of the map are gorossly incorrect, and need to updated immediately. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DaJesuZ ( talk • contribs) 16:17, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Can you give us any sources to back up your claims? You say that the FSA is in the lead, but every source writing about Ayn Issa and the Raqqah front writes about the "joint forces" compromising of both the YPG and the FSA. It might be that the growing numbers of the FSA are in the lead in some areas that are mostly Arab, but I've yet to see a creditable news outlet showing a FSA-led offensive near Raqqah. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.31.204.195 ( talk) 10:39, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Can this be confirmed by neutral or anti-government sources? Al Masdar is reporting that SAA have taken Saida which is directly east of Daraa. This would mean also expanding the red on the Daraa map some to the east. http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-conducts-surprise-attack-in-northeast-daraa/ Also it claims that government & Druze forces are targeting Khirbat and Jabeeb- so these towns should have red half circles put around them (?), if this is confirmed by pro-rebel or neutral source. Here is one other source: http://news.webindia123.com/news/Articles/World/20150702/2632605.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.25.10 ( talk) 17:52, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Just looking at this single sentance shows me this is not a large offensive, but more of a raid: At least 50 vehicles fitted with machine guns were also destroyed during the operation, SANA said. 50 vehicles destroyed, right (laughs) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.31.204.195 ( talk) 11:02, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
According to this map, which we often use.
These locations are outdated, and pro-rebel accounts are showing it the same as this map, so we can use this map. DuckZz ( talk) 12:38, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Situation around Mt Abdulaziz seams to be a little different then on our map. At least two hills should maybe be marked black. This is the pro kurdish source I´m referring to. Does anybody else have info/news about this?? Rhocagil ( talk) 20:22, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
And this one Rhocagil ( talk) 11:01, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Pro-government sources have been admitting that the YPG has taken the area from ISIS, https://twitter.com/syrianews_home/status/618132576990035968,and this goes in agreement with what pro-YPG sources are saying http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/twittercizirecanton-tap-the-map-for-information_36481#12/36.5007/40.7510,especially with ISIS offensive on Hasakah City. Alhanuty ( talk) 22:25, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
According to pro-gov. Al-Masdar " the assault was repelled once again, as the entrenched soldiers inside the facility withstood the relentless attacks from the Islamist factions and pushed them back to the western corridor." What do independent and pro-opp. sources say ? Oroszka ( talk) 11:59, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
pro opposition sources claim Scientific Research Building is green, but other tahn that the same as the source you mentioned SOHR — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helmy1453 ( talk • contribs) 13:28, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
One of the trick is accepting only SOHR that is heavily rebel biased. It is most likely contested. Paolowalter ( talk) 16:02, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
There are not the ISIS the editor who put this there is just wrong remove that.
Here are very credible map who no showing ISIS precense in this area https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CI59TnUUsAAgkGx.jpg https://twitter.com/TheArabSource/status/613832649665163264/photo/1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.211.176.124 ( talk) 15:21, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
I do not remember the original source supporting this IS rural presence but I have not seen anything since. In any case the original source can be repeated? In any case the "Rural presence" was present before the map was published. I have a strong feeling that is an unsupported edit maybe due to occasional clash. If we have no additional confirmation it should be removed. The point is that this Rural Presence icon are hard to remove because they are very vague (how do prove that they are not there?). Paolowalter ( talk) 20:30, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
SAA advancing around Palmyra and captured 3 area in the vicinity of Palmyra and also SAA captured Abu al Fawaris near Palmyra. https://www.facebook.com/syria.net/posts/865688856819792 https://www.facebook.com/Jaramana.N.N/photos/a.522699704465195.1073741859.144459405622562/840758009326028/?type=1 https://www.facebook.com/radioshamfm/posts/838551862864776 https://www.facebook.com/Division11.Tanks/posts/869292646484226 https://www.facebook.com/Alikhbaria.Sy/photos/a.391781824178176.85065.208881799134847/931229386900081/?type=1 https://www.facebook.com/www.documents.sy/posts/791817537584187 Also SAA captured village of Al-Bayarat is located directly west of the ancient city of Palmyra it is only 10 kilometers away from this aforementioned city. http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-recaptures-strategic-village-near-palmyra/ Saphyr66 ( talk) 09:01, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
SAA and Hezbollah advance to the outskirt of Palmyra (Tadmur) recovering 11km into #ISIS land with the aim 2recapture the city. https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/618754112029458432 Saphyr66 ( talk) 12:15, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
SOHR where never eager to report advance SAA. Rhocagil ( talk) 18:49, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
SOHR website is up for me. It seems fine. I agree with Rhocagil, it might take them some time to report, since their sources for ISIS vs SAA conflicts are inside ISIS. XJ-0461 v2 ( talk) 20:02, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
About SOHR. Hackers claiming to be affiliated with ISIS took down the website of the SOHR Wednesday and threatened its director. ISIS hasked SOHR website. http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2015/Jul-08/305737-isis-hackers-take-down-syria-war-monitor-site.ashx Saphyr66 ( talk) 20:03, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
A few of places west of Palmyra were changed to red lacking sources clearly spelling their names as taken by SAA. The last new from Al Masdar http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-on-the-doorsteps-of-palmyra-numerous-villages-captured/ states between others that abu al Fawaris was taken by SAA. This plave is on our map but not on wikimapia. Anybody has more info? I remind that these places ar ein the middle of the desert, no way of having info from independent sources. Paolowalter ( talk) 22:00, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
SAA in coordination with the Tiger Forces and NDF – captured a number of sites in the west Palmyra countryside, including the strategic hill at Tal Al-Qal’at, which sits adjacent to this ancient city located in the deserts of east Homs. Following their advance at the collection of hills in the western Palmyra countryside SAAand the Tiger Forces carried out another powerful assault and capturing the Al-Qadri Farms after fierce clashes with ISIS. Tiger Forces the SAA and NDF are approximately 7.5 kilometers away from the ancient city and with recent success at the Jazal Mountains to the north, the Syrian Armed Forces are in prime position to besiege Palmyra from its northern and western flanks. http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-captures-al-qadri-farms-in-west-palmyra/ SAA advances-news report from the surroundings of Palmyra https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucDoQUh34Z8&feature=youtu.be Saphyr66 ( talk) 07:44, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
SAA taking full control of Al-Bayarat. SAA also took control of Jabal Al-Qal’at, Burj Al-Ishara, Thaniyah Al-Rajmat, Bathar Al-Mazra’, Abu Al-Fawaress Quarries, Rawisiyah Abu Al-Fawaress, and Dhuhour Al-Hayal. http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-on-the-doorsteps-of-palmyra-numerous-villages-captured/
Hezbollah elite forces and SAA breaking ISIS lines around Palmyra registration more advance today toward the city under ISIS. https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/619121000718864384 Attacking forces have an advantage, fighting in open land against ISIS on the road and the farms around Palmyra. https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/619121314834460672 ISIS tried to counterattack but was pushed back by Syrian Air force covering the advance of the attacking forces toward Palmyra. https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/619121558296985600 Initial attack was d gas fields but when attacking forces saw the road open (opportunity), forces were pushed toward the city now. https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/619122464602230784 Still not clear if they want to enter city or establish a demarcation line. From forces involved, it seems they aiming for Tadmur. https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/619122696056508416 Syrian army launches offensive to recapture Palmyra. http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2015-07/09/c_134398206.htm So that according to reliable sources SAA retake most areas to west & south-west Palmyra and now prepare retake city. There are conflicting reports that the SAA entered into the city. Saphyr66 ( talk) 13:35, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
SAA & Hezbollah advancing to western gate of Palmyra in #ISIS land and are about 4 km from the city entrance. https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/619040679457480704 Probably here http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=34.559870&lon=38.234138&z=13&m=b&gz=0;382178306;345572544;444602;43117;61798;0;24032;2827;24032;2827;0;2827&search=Palmyra Saphyr66 ( talk) 17:29, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
SAA near Palmyra https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucDoQUh34Z8&feature=youtu.be Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said government troops were now some five kilometers (three miles) west of the city and engaged in fierce clashes with forces from the extremist group. "Regime forces could enter the city at any moment, they are not far away and the area between them and the city is desert," Observatory director Rami Abdel Rahman said. http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2015/Jul-09/305917-syria-army-battles-isis-outside-palmyra-activists.ashx So SOHR said area west Palmyra under SAA. Saphyr66 ( talk) 17:35, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
Ayn Issa has been edited 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 times, today! If there is no consensus, and there doesn't seem to be, then why not leave it contested until more news comes out? Obviously some are reading the sources as it's IS held, other as it's Kurdish held. Clearly there's no agreement here. Either way, it's a front line. Magog the Ogre - help relieve edit warring? Boredwhytekid ( talk) 01:32, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Pbfreespace3 your source justifying Ayn Issa to change to Lime/Yellow is https://twitter.com/markito0171/status/618840501874200576, which is not a valid source and Markito will be insulted to know he is considered a Pro-Islamist source when he is actually on no side but innocent civilians. I already used my revert, so someone else has to revert your unjustified edit. Also Markito isn't present in Syria, he is just reposting what he sees. Tgoll774 ( talk) 01:26, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
YPG offensive arround Sarrin makes progress around Mighribtin. See:
There is no consensus with Map makers yet, so i suggest collecting reliable sources for the area around Sarrin here and then editing the map. 2.242.80.83 ( talk) 08:35, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Pbfreespace3 I dont know why are you removing this e-syria-civil-war-1-june-2015_41967#11/34.4740/38.2654 places where they were added with a source to show which faction has presence and who is in controll of this places.You have to fix them,also can you add this place to beacause it is confirmed that the SAA captured this farms. 46.99.22.173 ( talk) 11:42, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Following the ISIL counter-offensive on Ain Issa, Brigade 93 has been shown as under ISIL control. Is this accurate? Prohibited Area ( talk) 12:11, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
ISW map shows all 3 as rebel held. Poking around, SOHR reports the area being barrel bombed on June 21st; SOHR reports the SAA shelling the area June 23rd; same from June 3rd; pro-op Syria Direct from the 25th and 23rd also claims the area is rebel held (with links to opposition organization's announcements from Wadi Barada and its environs); another pro-op source cites the same. Thoughts? Boredwhytekid ( talk) 20:03, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
You want to talk about pocket size? OK, lets do this. Lets use as a reference, rebel-held Darayya:
Do you see a pattern here? The ISW map is an outlier. So it is contradicted by all other maps, including all pro-gov maps (Al Masdar and Islamic World News; can you find any more?). All maps (including ours and excluding ISW) have the same order of magnitude. On the other hand, the ISW map has a different order of magnitude. All maps (including ours) are apples. The ISW map is an orange!
Now, how do we know which size on which map is closer to reality (excluding ISW)? How do we know that the size in some map is based on information and not on guessing, mistake or bias? What we do on our map is that we do not look at other maps, but rather look at real sources (news reports). News reports will tell us which towns are rebel-held, which towns are contested, and which towns are gov-held. This then determines the size of our pocket.
And the best for last: here is the latest ISW map released July 2. Do this look correct to you? Now Khan al-Shih is shown gov-held! And Hadar rebel-held! What a joke… Tradedia talk 00:02, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Concerning the business insider map, it is not easy to estimate the pocket size because the map is not as detailed as the others and Darayya is represented by a dot and the Khan al-Shih pocket seems to be represented by 2 (connected) smaller squares for 2 towns…
Concerning our map, it is not an outlier. Let me add the maps by Thomas van Linge, Desyracuse, and Archicivilians:
So our map looks like it is in between the pro-gov maps & the pro-opp maps.
Now, how do we know which size on which map is closer to reality? For all these maps, we do not know how the map maker decided on the size & shape of the pocket. Did he base it on reliable information? Or rather on guessing? Or is it bias? Or just a mistake? Or mindless copying of another map? There is no way to know. What we do on our map is that we do not look at other maps, but rather look at real sources (news reports). News reports will tell us which towns are rebel-held, which towns are contested, and which towns are gov-held. This then determines the size & shape of our pocket. Tradedia talk 03:39, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
According to pro-kurdish source Isis has broken the siege on Khirbat al Burj and the Grain silos and captured Mitras! 46.99.33.8 ( talk) 15:06, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
This issue may be solved by Tradedia who knows how to find good sources for specific areas. Let's just analyze this year, i have seen like 100 SOHR reports that Government forces are
This is only SOHR, rebel sources are reporting the same. How come that we have so much sources for just 1 location and we have that entire location marked red on our map ? This is the region I'm talking about, if you hover with the mouse over it, you can see how big it is. DuckZz ( talk) 21:17, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Houla Region (Tal Thahab&Taldou&Kafar Laha it is region under FSA) Here: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=34.814367&lon=36.478043&z=11&m=b&show=/26550789/Houla-Region not Houla plain Saphyr66 ( talk) 06:18, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
The Houla Region or Houla Plain (Arabic: الحولة al-Ḥūlāh) is an area consisting of three villages in the Homs Governorate of central Syria, northwest of the city of Homs. The biggest village in the Houla region had 20,041 inhabitants in 2004 and is called Kafr Laha. The second largest village, Taldou, had 15,727 inhabitants in 2004 and is located in the outskirts of Houla. The third village, Tell Dahab had 12,055 inhabitants in 2004. /info/en/?search=Houla — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saphyr66 ( talk • contribs) 06:27, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
All of them just say "Houla area or Houla town", and they say besieged, but i can't figure out do they only mean the Houla town or all 3 towns in Houla area (Houla, Tall Dhahab and Taldou). Other SOHR reports are enough to mark 1 town green (basically every few days), but what about the rest, i will not edit anything until this area is clear and disqussed DuckZz ( talk) 15:40, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Suluk and Aliya, deep into YPG/FSA held territory, were edited to contested 4 days ago, citing this source: http://aranews.net/2015/07/kurds-fortify-southern-kobane-to-deter-isis-attacks/ Given that no further news have emerged confirming the clashes there, I suppose that: A) Aranews published a fake news (many times before they published unconfirmed news); B) or Aranews meant Aliye and Suluk [countryside]. I suggest to revert those two towns to Kurdish control. -- 8fra0 ( talk) 08:52, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
I think you are right, we should revert the edit. And probably the source means "B) or Aranews meant Aliye and Suluk [countryside]". Source also says that “but the joint forces were able to deter IS progress and kill dozens of them with the support of the coalition’s air strikes”. Where the source refers to “The clashes are still ongoing in these areas", it is talking about the southern Kobane area. Rhocagil ( talk) 20:50, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Acc. to pro opp Step.News.Agency , SAA captured Qabr Fiddah - Al Shari`ah - Karim and Ramleh https://www.facebook.com/Step.News.Agency.Sy/posts/638335749635044 location: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=35.481501&lon=36.330929&z=13&m=b&gz=0;363118743;354299734;144195;0;564765;145455;166511;706053;0;678102;0;261521;159645;9791 Hwinsp ( talk) 18:48, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
I have changed to red or added Al Shari`ah, Huwayz, Qabr Fiddah, Al Kareem. Probably Al Shari`ah was already changed, sorry, following http://www.syriahr.com/2015/07/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B2%D9%8A%D8%AF-%D9%85%D9%86-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B4%D9%87%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%A1-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%82%D8%B5%D9%81-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AC%D9%88%D9%8A-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%89-%D8%A7%D9%84/ http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/battle-map-and-analysis-of-the-al-ghaab-plains-syrian-army-advances-westward/ and https://twitter.com/Amin_Akh/status/617815282896269313. Paolowalter ( talk) 10:05, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
No, the only thing proved by your sources is the city is at least partially held by rebels, so that it could be contested. In the past consensus was reached not to accept vague statements like "city was bombed" as proof that it is under control by one side. The most robust confirmation of the status of Latmin is in https://twitter.com/TheArabSource/status/618505067293859840. It is under rebel control but on the front line (as supported by the second of your sources). Therefore green with red half-circle on east. Paolowalter ( talk) 20:36, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
According to AL-masdar (article here) SAA are advancing in Ghaab Plains. Is there conformation from other sources about this?? Rhocagil ( talk) 00:33, 15 July 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 45 | ← | Archive 48 | Archive 49 | Archive 50 | Archive 51 | Archive 52 | → | Archive 55 |
Ali Bajliya and Brigade 93 have reportedly been liberated. However, I can't find any original source for everyone else's claims aside from Liwa Thuwwar al Raqqa. Given the wild claims made by LTR before, especially regarding the fall of Ayn Issa and the capture of Tel Seman, Khunayza and Hazima, I request that nobody changes anything from black until it gets confirmed by SOHR or other reputable sources. NightShadeAEB ( talk) 15:23, 22 June 2015 (UTC) SOHR confirmed that they captured huge parts of it. Alhanuty ( talk) 16:58, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Pro-YPG sources claiming there has been a renewed offensive towards Sarrin from a Kurdish offensive in the north and an FSA offensive in the east. The map also shows Mistras to be under YPG control. Are there any neutral sources to back this up?
http://imgur.com/UYw7Gpn — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prohibited Area ( talk • contribs) 11:27, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
To the user that made the edit from green to contested, do NOT use English SOHR reports as there have been issues with those reports, like wrong info (yes, I have seen the debate here: /info/en/?search=Talk:Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War/Archive_46#Dear_editors.21.21.21) . I ain't going to revert out of fear of the one revert policy and get myself in trouble for it.
Only Arab SOHR reports allowed. Besides, the base IS retaken by the YPG-Rebels per: http://www.syriahr.com/2015/06/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%88%D8%AD%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%B1%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%81%D8%B5%D8%A7%D8%A6%D9%84-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D9%82%D8%A7%D8%AA%D9%84%D8%A9-%D8%AA%D8%AF/.
To back it up (via news, that is neutral):
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/22/us-mideast-crisis-syria-kurds-idUSKBN0P21HV20150622
Regards.-- Damirgraffiti |☺What's Up?☺ 22:32, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
According to this Al Jazeera reporter, 93.brigade is captured and the town is contested. Some users find him pro-rebel but he states on his twitter wall that he follows the rebel uprising but not supporting anyone. Maybe the same as Eliah Magnier. I find him useful, maybe we can list him as an reliable source ? 100% of his reports are at the end confirmed as true DuckZz ( talk) 23:59, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
What do you think about making a map of the city of Qamishli? I think its a good option, as Qamishli is as big as Hasakah, and its on a similar situation (part on Kurdish hands, part on Syrian gov. hands), so it would be a non-sense & a double standard not making it. I think the main problem 'till now was the absence of control zone maps of the city, but in the last weeks some maps had been released, and they show mostly the same (the only difference seems to be the extension of the shared control zone):
So, waiting for yout thoughts on this issue.-- HC PUNXKID 23:12, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
If someone is on to make it. Rhocagil ( talk) 01:04, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
For the Damascus map - al-Masdar says that Al-Tal is under truce, with pro-gov't checkpoint surrounding, but no presence inside the town. Boredwhytekid ( talk) 14:27, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
This pro government map show more closely how the current situation is in Shulah, the Oil Field East of the city is SAA held, but the city is IS/SAA held. My suggestion is to keep it like it currently (or possible a read half circle) and put a SAA held SAA Oil Field. Moreover, this map shows Akram Oil Field, North of Palmyra as SAA held, since this is a Pro Government map no changes should be made, but it's an interesting note. MesmerMe ( talk) 08:37, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
This pro-government map says that the areas south of Palmyra and east of Suwayda are not government held. Our map shows government towns and positions there. I don't think there are any. What is the status of these areas? Who holds and controls this terrain? Is there a significant army presence in these towns and on those mountains to warrant red icons? 2601:C7:8303:22DC:80FF:CA06:FCEA:9BC6 ( talk) 17:01, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Al Masdar has started a new map obviously based on copying our map without even giving us credit! So after DeSyracuse copied our map and put his name on it, now Al Masdar is copying our map and putting their name on it. I wonder if there is a way to sue them for copyright infringement... In any case, their map is a clear violation of WP:CIRCULAR (“Do not use websites that mirror Wikipedia content or publications that rely on material from Wikipedia as sources.”) There is no way to know if the differences between their map and our map (or the additional things on their map) are based on information or guessing. Tradedia talk 18:30, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Is this going to be enforced at all? I mean, just since the last time I logged on, 1, 2, 3 (a map is referenced, but not even provided here), 4, 5, 6, 7, etc..! edits just straight from other maps. Not to mention the unsourced edits.. 1 2, 3, 4,.. Are the rules being enforced or not? Because 1RR makes it impossible for editors to push back a tide like that.. Boredwhytekid ( talk) 12:53, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
I would like to change Abwah (east of Al-Qantari) back to ISIS-hold. Pro kurd map and pro SAA map shows that it´s still under ISIS control and there hash´t been any map or source that I can find that have shown the different. Ok we should not use maps for edits, but in this case it would be a reverse-edit (as I do not know who and with what (if any) source this edit was made with). What say you Roboskiye, DuckZz, Boredwhytekid, NightShadeAEB, Tradedia ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rhocagil ( talk • contribs) 15:05, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
Al Masdar article here indicates town Maskar Al-Hesan is under SAA control. Anyone heard of any other source confirming this or mentioning the same battle as referred to in the article? Rhocagil ( talk) 23:20, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Because of this report: https://twitter.com/sylezjusz/status/613831088356655105
and this map which we are not allowed to use: https://twitter.com/sylezjusz/status/613839485021888512/photo/1
would it be reasonable that, on the map, the village al-Mustrihah has been captured by the Burkan al-Furat forces? It seems likely that Burkan al-Furat came to the village Mughira (Maghar) from Ayn Issa, not from Sarrin. Additionally, it is unlikely that ISIL would want to hold such a small village in a now-unimportant area. I want to gather consensus for the changing of control of this village, as it was not directly mentioned, even though it is right next to the other village whose capture is confirmed. thoughts? Pbfreespace3 ( talk) 00:55, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Well I trust "sylezjusz", but does he qualify as neutral for edits like this? Rhocagil ( talk) 01:28, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
According to pro-government source Ivan Sidorenko ISIS is in control of Tal (Hill) Baroud and is sending reinforcement to attack Hasakah city from there so it should be changed to black:
https://twitter.com/IvanSidorenko1/status/613874120137289728
It is unknown whether the villages south of it are still under govt control, but according to a map from pro-kurdish source sylezjusz from 3 days ago, it seems clear that they aren't:
http://i.imgur.com/5VIDyXa.png
I will leave it to you to decide whether the sylezjusz data should be applied but the first one seems legit enough, what do you think?
190.67.146.112 ( talk) 01:41, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
SOHR reports about the clashes between SAA&NDF and ISIS inside the city of Hasakah: "IS advanced more and more after seizing the two neighborhood of al- Nashwah and al- Shari’ah, the children’s hospital and education collage reaching to the Sport City’s street that separates IS from the central prison and the criminal security branch." cnn, albawaba, almasdarnews. here is a map from deSyracuse Stharkov ( talk) 12:43, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Halab city map needs to be updated. unfortunately I don't know how to do it myself. there are many sources on the talk talkthat Al-rashidin should go green. also 1 2 3 claim that al-layramoun is green . though all of them are pro opposition. the problem is I digged in pro regime sources they don't confirm nor deny. what do you think about that ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helmy1453 ( talk • contribs) 13:44, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
The map shows there to be an IS presence in the area where Syria's border with the Israeli-controlled Golan and Jordan meets (In the villages of Tasil, Jamla among others). I can't find any reference to IS being in control here on any news sites or other places when searching for information about it online, what is this claim based on? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SamuelMaglor ( talk • contribs) 14:05, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
This is what i think.
Well you know my opinion. I think all of the towns should go yellow except Tell Abyad. Maybe also Ayn Issa should go under shared control as it was FSA that initiated the battle (kurds still helped and are helping them) and FSA probably want to maintain a large number of their forces in Ayn Issa as it for them would be a prioritized front. Maybe Brigade 93 should go green, but I do think it´s under equally shared control ( according to SOHR). The question you should ask is how many boots FSA brigades have on the ground, how much control can they impose? During the siege of Kobane there where about 200-250 FSA-people fighting with the kurds. Rumor says they after the siege they recruited 200 more (from where, through Turkey?). And I don´t like the concept of marking places as by whom they were captured, I´d like to mark them as by who are in control (you know this from the Idelb-disgustion). Showing FSA presence is better maybe with the rural icons or similar to the green dot in Kobane (as they probably have an office there or something like that). Rhocagil ( talk) 00:41, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
I need clear answers here.
Suluk yellow yes, I do think so! The source for the green+yellow edit was however this one. But probably not any conformation from the FSA-groups themselves. Ayn Issa stays mixed. Maybe it´s ok to mark brigade 93 green. If edited to green it will signal that this is the "main interest front" for the FSA-brigades, witch is not untrue. And in that perspective it´s ok for me (but that´s just me). Maybe there will be more discussion when other editors realize you have changed it, and if so we could always debate it again. Rhocagil ( talk) 00:08, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Eaworldview al Masdar, yahoo, SOHR, BBC all reporting IS executing civilians in Barkh Batan. Personally, since the village is so small, I doubt IS could carry out executions without at least momentarily being in control. Barkh Batan has been reverted to YPG/rebel control though. Opinions? Contested maybe? Boredwhytekid ( talk) 15:22, 25 June 2015 (UTC) I think that it should be under YPG control. ISIS control means a lot more than 30 people in a small village holding control for a few hours. Pbfreespace3 ( talk) 16:49, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
I see Kobane City Contested. Unless Turkey let IS attack from across its border or IS infiltrated through a large portion of YPG held territory. I think someone made a mistake Tgoll774 ( talk) 16:14, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
ISIS fighters managed to infiltrate the city by disguising themselves as YPG fighters however it looks like the real YPG forces took out most of the attackers and have the remaining ones contained to a single house http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/25/middleeast/isis-syria/index.html. The city should probably be put back to full Kurdish control for now. 76.99.189.128 ( talk) 16:34, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
I think we should wait for confirmation that the ISIL hostiles have been neutralised, before setting it back to Yellow/ Green. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prohibited Area ( talk • contribs) 18:45, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
What's probably going to happen is the media will only report the attack and never report "YPG now in full control of Kobanî", and the town will continue to be shown as contested, never changed back. I think we should change Kobanî back to yellow. Pbfreespace3 ( talk) 16:52, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
SOHR may say something, as far as I know clashes have been ongoing in the city as of this morning. Furthermore I am sure that Kurdish sources will report if and when the city is liberated. Prohibited Area ( talk) 20:17, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
IS is not contesting Kobane, what's going on in Kobane is a bloody suicide terrorist attack, and that's not enough to mark the city as contested. -- 8fra0 ( talk) 19:48, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
What are you doing? Why are you using maps? Why are you using pro-rebel/YPG sources for rebel/YPG advances? here "Since the Free Syrian Army is the primary combatant in the Ayn Issa region, using "lime" color for non-town/village symbols." Source? Stharkov ( talk) 18:27, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
NightShadeAEB No use. This user is doing this for a certain period of time, last 2 weeks. I already reported him on this talk page but no answer from the administrator while he is more busy explaining to us how using maps or other similar sources are bad for this article, while on the other hand this user and others are doing more than just POV vandalism edits. I think it's better to just edit something without providing any source than providing sources against the rules. The best example is the area around Ayn Isa (north Raqqa), on our map it was rebel held, kurd held, contested, then again rebel held, then lime-kurd held and now again under IS control. According to some users, these edits were just fine, no sources but still OK ... unbelievable DuckZz ( talk) 19:20, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
This is the latest news from "trustworthy" source (SOHR) on Brigade 83. It clearly states that battle is still ongoing inside the brigade, it should be marked contested. THis is also somewhat proof to user LightandDark2000 that maps shouldn't be used as source. It also shows that YPG are in the battle backed by FSA. Witch means that personal assumptions like 'Free Syrian Army is the primary combatant in the Ayn Issa region are ridiculous. I could edit this but I´m not sure if we use to use the same contested-icon when a military complex is contested as a town. This also raises the question if we need a new type of contested-icon when joint forces are engaged with ISIS. Further more if we need new icons for military and industrial complex under join control. Rhocagil ( talk) 21:02, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Roboskiye Sorry I don´t read arabic. Rhocagil ( talk) 21:19, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
LightandDark2000. He does not get it, he´s on vandalizing again. Rhocagil ( talk) 01:02, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
1 edit,Unjustified edit,No source provided, 2 edit,using a pro-opp source, 3 edit,using a pro-opp source. PapaDock547 ( talk) 14:08, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
This is another one vandalism <--- he made containing five changes. Three sources were given 1, 2 and 3. Not a single line in this sources provide any information about two of the changes in the edit; one Abwah and two Surab Sharqiya. LightandDark2000, you have to stop this personal campaign of yours. I do not understand what you are trying to achieve, but it´s getting very messy. Rhocagil ( talk) 23:37, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Pro rebel account reports clashes in https://twitter.com/markito0171/status/614736301213007872 Khunayfis & Phosphate mine. The former is already marked contested, the latter not. How do we mark an industrial area contested? A red ring around? Or we just wait the outcome of the clashes? 192.135.12.144 ( talk) 10:59, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
I've protected the page for three days. All I'm seeing right now is name calling, gaming the system to barely avoid 1RR, and refusing to talk civilly. You may request an administrator to edit the page once you have come to a community consensus.
I realize this is not ideal for a fast-moving situation, but it is the best solution. Please try to avoid this situation in the future. Magog the Ogre ( t • c) 16:59, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
This is the second time I'm making a post about it, but it's still clearly a major problem.
That problem being outright vandalism whenever IS launches a successful offensive.
Even when numerous pro-Kurd or pro-Government sources admit that towns were taken from them by IS, the moderation to this page still refuses to cede those towns to IS. I'm not pro-IS. I just think it's absurd to misrepresent the situation into being something that it's not. And if this map can't cede territory to IS when it's been literally confirmed by all parties, than this map is propaganda and cannot be trusted. End of story.
Something really needs to be done about the vandalism because it's a massive problem that should be dealt with immediately. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.126.188.171 ( talk)
I think the city map needs to update following the situation there or not! here. PapaDock547 ( talk) 16:20, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
The map of Hasaka City needs to be updated. IS has taken control over Liliyah and West Nashwan districts. [3] I guess this pro-Kurdish source is reliable in this context. -- Ahmetyal ( talk) 10:32, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Since this module is page protected for the time being, I propose that now is an ideal time to review and iron out standards of conduct. All interested parties should reaffirm base consensuses, such as abiding by 1RR; but more importantly, it's obvious that the future conduct of the project needs to be essentially a complete 180 from the past - what which has led to the module being page protected in the first place.
We should take time not only to continue to track events/compile sources for future edits, but to lay down wiki-appropriate solutions to our daily disagreements.
I'm spitballing here, but some sort of order needs to be established to stop the willy-nilly, petty argumentation, editing without even trying to engage the wider community of editors, name calling...
Tgoll774 Roboskiye Pbfreespace3 Alhanuty NightShadeAEB LightandDark2000 Rhocagil EkoGraf HCPUNXKID Paolowalter 8fra0
If I'm blowing smoke just ignore this.. Boredwhytekid ( talk) 18:04, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Can we at least all agree to open a section and post sources on the talk page before making edits? It's going to be a shame if after the page protection elapses this module just falls right back into unsourced edits, improper sources used on edits, POV and vandalism accusations, etc.. Boredwhytekid ( talk) 17:51, 29 June 2015 (UTC) I will agree to that, for now. Rhocagil ( talk) 20:43, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Speaking as a user, it would be very useful for this and other similar modules to be clearer about sourcing. Even if that doesn't mean declaring all edits in Talk, it would at least be nice to have mandatory mentions of edited towns in edit summaries. GeoEvan ( talk) 01:02, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Comment: "ALWAYS open a talk page discussion, FOR EVERY EDIT" Really? Are u serious? Oh yes, Im gonna ignore that nonsense bullshit, that what your namecalling deserves, for sure...-- HC PUNXKID 13:59, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
What does this SOHR article mean? http://www.syriahr.com/en/2015/06/is-advances-in-tal-abiad-city/ I know SOHR has a bad English translation, but it doesn't let understand if this Mashoq Faqani is an eastern neighborhood inside Tal Abyad city or another town in its outskirts...and so, because I'm not Syrian( and I don't know how Tal Abyad it's done) nor Arabic speaker the answer is: is Tal Abyad itself contested or the battle is, for now, in the outskirts? Fab8405 ( talk) 17:43, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
It seems like YPG still is in control over Shyookh Fawqani [8]. Anyone against changing it to yellow? -- Ahmetyal ( talk) 17:48, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
There are many reports that Turkey might invade part of Syria along the border to set up a buffer zone. https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1GIGM_enUS520US520&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=turkey&tbm=nws
If this occurs, we should have a color to use for Turkish-held towns and other objects. I think purple could be a good color: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/20/Location_dot_purple.svg
Teal is another color: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Location_dot_teal.svg
But I think that dark green is the best color, since it reflects Turkey's support for the rebels as well as it's closeness with ISIS: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Location_dot_green.svg
The reason I am posting this is so that this map can be prepared if and when Turkey invades. Thoughts? Pbfreespace3 ( talk) 17:12, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
I think dark green would be the best color, and here's why. Firstly, the light green color on this map indicates moderate Sunni rebels, some Islamist. Turkey is mostly Sunni, and the ruling government party is Islamist. Second, Turkey has said it supports these moderate and Islamist rebels, therefore a greenish color makes sense. I think people will be able to tell light and dark green apart on the map. Alternatively, teal could be used, as it is more distinguishable from the light green than the dark green is. Pbfreespace3 ( talk) 20:23, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
I can't belive someone actually made a section about this. What's next, a color for France-Portugal invasion on Syria, it was also announced last year, the same as Turkey and America, according to government sources they will enter Syria, and that was 3 years ago, and 2 years ago. Every year we have dozens of these so called "Expert analysis" of what will happen, eventually nothing happens like always. If actually Turkey creates this so called "Buffer zone", nothing should be changed, no color added, we only should make something similiar like in Quneitra province for the Izrael Golan height, someone just should make the same thing in north Syria, end. DuckZz ( talk) 20:36, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Well that is why I though that darker green would be a better color, since it is closer to black, but the teal would work as well. Maybe Turkey won't invade, but with the massing of troops on the border, it is worthwhile for us to have a plan if they do decide to invade. Here are all of the colors together:
There is also this one , but I don't want people to be confused with the Turkish military and ISIS, so I don't think it should be used. Pbfreespace3 ( talk) 22:23, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
I don't think Erdogan really cares about ISIS or YPG (these are both players in only small and low populated areas), the main goal they have is to prop up the islamist rebels attacking the government to unseat Damascus. That is their goal all along- it can pay off with money and expand their political and religious networks. They can use the excuse of defeating ISIS (internationally) and defeating YPG (domestically) to shore up an area supporting the islamist rebels. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.25.10 ( talk) 03:54, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
This is the seconf time I am postinf this section. last time no one comented. There is a major offensive in Aleppo by the green and definitly the rashdin area which is marked contested is green 1 and the north west district of Zahraa is contested in stead of red. I don't know technicaly how to edit the svg file or I would have done it my self 2. I posted here I posted on the tal of the file [ [9]] still no answer what so ever. Does anyone here even care about the accuracy of this map ???? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helmy1453 ( talk • contribs) 18:56, 3 July 2015 (UTC) 2 3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helmy1453 ( talk • contribs) 19:03, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Pro-regime sources only say that western perimeter of scientific research center has fallen, while they claim to have counter-attacked, capturing Bureijj town to north of aleppo and the Al-Salahiddeen District within Aleppo. http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/complete-field-report-from-aleppo-city-ansar-al-shariah-on-the-offensive/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.25.10 ( talk) 01:16, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks to the quick & nice work of MrPenguin20, now we have a new city map, Qamishli: [10].
If someone knows how to upload it properly to the map in order to add later the icons: Qamishli aiport, YPG base, Qamishli crossing, etc.. it would be nice. Regards,-- HC PUNXKID 14:11, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Our map has some serious issues, particularly with the Kurdish areas/areas taken by the Euphrates Volcano alliance. Areas to the South of what has been established as the Kobane Canton, by the Kurds, might I add, are still listed as being under the control of the Kurds. This is one of the biggest issues with this map. The situation in the North of the country is entirely reversed from what it was just a few months ago; instead of the Kurds being on the march, supported by FSA units, the FSA is now pushing South, supported by the Kurds, meaning many of the areas, particularly the key town on Ay Issa, are under the control of the FSA, and may have a small Kurdish presence there.
I've argued this a few times, and I'll bring it up again; the Kurdish areas of the map are gorossly incorrect, and need to updated immediately. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DaJesuZ ( talk • contribs) 16:17, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Can you give us any sources to back up your claims? You say that the FSA is in the lead, but every source writing about Ayn Issa and the Raqqah front writes about the "joint forces" compromising of both the YPG and the FSA. It might be that the growing numbers of the FSA are in the lead in some areas that are mostly Arab, but I've yet to see a creditable news outlet showing a FSA-led offensive near Raqqah. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.31.204.195 ( talk) 10:39, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Can this be confirmed by neutral or anti-government sources? Al Masdar is reporting that SAA have taken Saida which is directly east of Daraa. This would mean also expanding the red on the Daraa map some to the east. http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-conducts-surprise-attack-in-northeast-daraa/ Also it claims that government & Druze forces are targeting Khirbat and Jabeeb- so these towns should have red half circles put around them (?), if this is confirmed by pro-rebel or neutral source. Here is one other source: http://news.webindia123.com/news/Articles/World/20150702/2632605.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.25.10 ( talk) 17:52, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Just looking at this single sentance shows me this is not a large offensive, but more of a raid: At least 50 vehicles fitted with machine guns were also destroyed during the operation, SANA said. 50 vehicles destroyed, right (laughs) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.31.204.195 ( talk) 11:02, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
According to this map, which we often use.
These locations are outdated, and pro-rebel accounts are showing it the same as this map, so we can use this map. DuckZz ( talk) 12:38, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Situation around Mt Abdulaziz seams to be a little different then on our map. At least two hills should maybe be marked black. This is the pro kurdish source I´m referring to. Does anybody else have info/news about this?? Rhocagil ( talk) 20:22, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
And this one Rhocagil ( talk) 11:01, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Pro-government sources have been admitting that the YPG has taken the area from ISIS, https://twitter.com/syrianews_home/status/618132576990035968,and this goes in agreement with what pro-YPG sources are saying http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/twittercizirecanton-tap-the-map-for-information_36481#12/36.5007/40.7510,especially with ISIS offensive on Hasakah City. Alhanuty ( talk) 22:25, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
According to pro-gov. Al-Masdar " the assault was repelled once again, as the entrenched soldiers inside the facility withstood the relentless attacks from the Islamist factions and pushed them back to the western corridor." What do independent and pro-opp. sources say ? Oroszka ( talk) 11:59, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
pro opposition sources claim Scientific Research Building is green, but other tahn that the same as the source you mentioned SOHR — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helmy1453 ( talk • contribs) 13:28, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
One of the trick is accepting only SOHR that is heavily rebel biased. It is most likely contested. Paolowalter ( talk) 16:02, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
There are not the ISIS the editor who put this there is just wrong remove that.
Here are very credible map who no showing ISIS precense in this area https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CI59TnUUsAAgkGx.jpg https://twitter.com/TheArabSource/status/613832649665163264/photo/1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.211.176.124 ( talk) 15:21, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
I do not remember the original source supporting this IS rural presence but I have not seen anything since. In any case the original source can be repeated? In any case the "Rural presence" was present before the map was published. I have a strong feeling that is an unsupported edit maybe due to occasional clash. If we have no additional confirmation it should be removed. The point is that this Rural Presence icon are hard to remove because they are very vague (how do prove that they are not there?). Paolowalter ( talk) 20:30, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
SAA advancing around Palmyra and captured 3 area in the vicinity of Palmyra and also SAA captured Abu al Fawaris near Palmyra. https://www.facebook.com/syria.net/posts/865688856819792 https://www.facebook.com/Jaramana.N.N/photos/a.522699704465195.1073741859.144459405622562/840758009326028/?type=1 https://www.facebook.com/radioshamfm/posts/838551862864776 https://www.facebook.com/Division11.Tanks/posts/869292646484226 https://www.facebook.com/Alikhbaria.Sy/photos/a.391781824178176.85065.208881799134847/931229386900081/?type=1 https://www.facebook.com/www.documents.sy/posts/791817537584187 Also SAA captured village of Al-Bayarat is located directly west of the ancient city of Palmyra it is only 10 kilometers away from this aforementioned city. http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-recaptures-strategic-village-near-palmyra/ Saphyr66 ( talk) 09:01, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
SAA and Hezbollah advance to the outskirt of Palmyra (Tadmur) recovering 11km into #ISIS land with the aim 2recapture the city. https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/618754112029458432 Saphyr66 ( talk) 12:15, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
SOHR where never eager to report advance SAA. Rhocagil ( talk) 18:49, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
SOHR website is up for me. It seems fine. I agree with Rhocagil, it might take them some time to report, since their sources for ISIS vs SAA conflicts are inside ISIS. XJ-0461 v2 ( talk) 20:02, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
About SOHR. Hackers claiming to be affiliated with ISIS took down the website of the SOHR Wednesday and threatened its director. ISIS hasked SOHR website. http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2015/Jul-08/305737-isis-hackers-take-down-syria-war-monitor-site.ashx Saphyr66 ( talk) 20:03, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
A few of places west of Palmyra were changed to red lacking sources clearly spelling their names as taken by SAA. The last new from Al Masdar http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-on-the-doorsteps-of-palmyra-numerous-villages-captured/ states between others that abu al Fawaris was taken by SAA. This plave is on our map but not on wikimapia. Anybody has more info? I remind that these places ar ein the middle of the desert, no way of having info from independent sources. Paolowalter ( talk) 22:00, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
SAA in coordination with the Tiger Forces and NDF – captured a number of sites in the west Palmyra countryside, including the strategic hill at Tal Al-Qal’at, which sits adjacent to this ancient city located in the deserts of east Homs. Following their advance at the collection of hills in the western Palmyra countryside SAAand the Tiger Forces carried out another powerful assault and capturing the Al-Qadri Farms after fierce clashes with ISIS. Tiger Forces the SAA and NDF are approximately 7.5 kilometers away from the ancient city and with recent success at the Jazal Mountains to the north, the Syrian Armed Forces are in prime position to besiege Palmyra from its northern and western flanks. http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-captures-al-qadri-farms-in-west-palmyra/ SAA advances-news report from the surroundings of Palmyra https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucDoQUh34Z8&feature=youtu.be Saphyr66 ( talk) 07:44, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
SAA taking full control of Al-Bayarat. SAA also took control of Jabal Al-Qal’at, Burj Al-Ishara, Thaniyah Al-Rajmat, Bathar Al-Mazra’, Abu Al-Fawaress Quarries, Rawisiyah Abu Al-Fawaress, and Dhuhour Al-Hayal. http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-on-the-doorsteps-of-palmyra-numerous-villages-captured/
Hezbollah elite forces and SAA breaking ISIS lines around Palmyra registration more advance today toward the city under ISIS. https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/619121000718864384 Attacking forces have an advantage, fighting in open land against ISIS on the road and the farms around Palmyra. https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/619121314834460672 ISIS tried to counterattack but was pushed back by Syrian Air force covering the advance of the attacking forces toward Palmyra. https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/619121558296985600 Initial attack was d gas fields but when attacking forces saw the road open (opportunity), forces were pushed toward the city now. https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/619122464602230784 Still not clear if they want to enter city or establish a demarcation line. From forces involved, it seems they aiming for Tadmur. https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/619122696056508416 Syrian army launches offensive to recapture Palmyra. http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2015-07/09/c_134398206.htm So that according to reliable sources SAA retake most areas to west & south-west Palmyra and now prepare retake city. There are conflicting reports that the SAA entered into the city. Saphyr66 ( talk) 13:35, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
SAA & Hezbollah advancing to western gate of Palmyra in #ISIS land and are about 4 km from the city entrance. https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/619040679457480704 Probably here http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=34.559870&lon=38.234138&z=13&m=b&gz=0;382178306;345572544;444602;43117;61798;0;24032;2827;24032;2827;0;2827&search=Palmyra Saphyr66 ( talk) 17:29, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
SAA near Palmyra https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucDoQUh34Z8&feature=youtu.be Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said government troops were now some five kilometers (three miles) west of the city and engaged in fierce clashes with forces from the extremist group. "Regime forces could enter the city at any moment, they are not far away and the area between them and the city is desert," Observatory director Rami Abdel Rahman said. http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2015/Jul-09/305917-syria-army-battles-isis-outside-palmyra-activists.ashx So SOHR said area west Palmyra under SAA. Saphyr66 ( talk) 17:35, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
Ayn Issa has been edited 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 times, today! If there is no consensus, and there doesn't seem to be, then why not leave it contested until more news comes out? Obviously some are reading the sources as it's IS held, other as it's Kurdish held. Clearly there's no agreement here. Either way, it's a front line. Magog the Ogre - help relieve edit warring? Boredwhytekid ( talk) 01:32, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Pbfreespace3 your source justifying Ayn Issa to change to Lime/Yellow is https://twitter.com/markito0171/status/618840501874200576, which is not a valid source and Markito will be insulted to know he is considered a Pro-Islamist source when he is actually on no side but innocent civilians. I already used my revert, so someone else has to revert your unjustified edit. Also Markito isn't present in Syria, he is just reposting what he sees. Tgoll774 ( talk) 01:26, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
YPG offensive arround Sarrin makes progress around Mighribtin. See:
There is no consensus with Map makers yet, so i suggest collecting reliable sources for the area around Sarrin here and then editing the map. 2.242.80.83 ( talk) 08:35, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Pbfreespace3 I dont know why are you removing this e-syria-civil-war-1-june-2015_41967#11/34.4740/38.2654 places where they were added with a source to show which faction has presence and who is in controll of this places.You have to fix them,also can you add this place to beacause it is confirmed that the SAA captured this farms. 46.99.22.173 ( talk) 11:42, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Following the ISIL counter-offensive on Ain Issa, Brigade 93 has been shown as under ISIL control. Is this accurate? Prohibited Area ( talk) 12:11, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
ISW map shows all 3 as rebel held. Poking around, SOHR reports the area being barrel bombed on June 21st; SOHR reports the SAA shelling the area June 23rd; same from June 3rd; pro-op Syria Direct from the 25th and 23rd also claims the area is rebel held (with links to opposition organization's announcements from Wadi Barada and its environs); another pro-op source cites the same. Thoughts? Boredwhytekid ( talk) 20:03, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
You want to talk about pocket size? OK, lets do this. Lets use as a reference, rebel-held Darayya:
Do you see a pattern here? The ISW map is an outlier. So it is contradicted by all other maps, including all pro-gov maps (Al Masdar and Islamic World News; can you find any more?). All maps (including ours and excluding ISW) have the same order of magnitude. On the other hand, the ISW map has a different order of magnitude. All maps (including ours) are apples. The ISW map is an orange!
Now, how do we know which size on which map is closer to reality (excluding ISW)? How do we know that the size in some map is based on information and not on guessing, mistake or bias? What we do on our map is that we do not look at other maps, but rather look at real sources (news reports). News reports will tell us which towns are rebel-held, which towns are contested, and which towns are gov-held. This then determines the size of our pocket.
And the best for last: here is the latest ISW map released July 2. Do this look correct to you? Now Khan al-Shih is shown gov-held! And Hadar rebel-held! What a joke… Tradedia talk 00:02, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Concerning the business insider map, it is not easy to estimate the pocket size because the map is not as detailed as the others and Darayya is represented by a dot and the Khan al-Shih pocket seems to be represented by 2 (connected) smaller squares for 2 towns…
Concerning our map, it is not an outlier. Let me add the maps by Thomas van Linge, Desyracuse, and Archicivilians:
So our map looks like it is in between the pro-gov maps & the pro-opp maps.
Now, how do we know which size on which map is closer to reality? For all these maps, we do not know how the map maker decided on the size & shape of the pocket. Did he base it on reliable information? Or rather on guessing? Or is it bias? Or just a mistake? Or mindless copying of another map? There is no way to know. What we do on our map is that we do not look at other maps, but rather look at real sources (news reports). News reports will tell us which towns are rebel-held, which towns are contested, and which towns are gov-held. This then determines the size & shape of our pocket. Tradedia talk 03:39, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
According to pro-kurdish source Isis has broken the siege on Khirbat al Burj and the Grain silos and captured Mitras! 46.99.33.8 ( talk) 15:06, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
This issue may be solved by Tradedia who knows how to find good sources for specific areas. Let's just analyze this year, i have seen like 100 SOHR reports that Government forces are
This is only SOHR, rebel sources are reporting the same. How come that we have so much sources for just 1 location and we have that entire location marked red on our map ? This is the region I'm talking about, if you hover with the mouse over it, you can see how big it is. DuckZz ( talk) 21:17, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Houla Region (Tal Thahab&Taldou&Kafar Laha it is region under FSA) Here: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=34.814367&lon=36.478043&z=11&m=b&show=/26550789/Houla-Region not Houla plain Saphyr66 ( talk) 06:18, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
The Houla Region or Houla Plain (Arabic: الحولة al-Ḥūlāh) is an area consisting of three villages in the Homs Governorate of central Syria, northwest of the city of Homs. The biggest village in the Houla region had 20,041 inhabitants in 2004 and is called Kafr Laha. The second largest village, Taldou, had 15,727 inhabitants in 2004 and is located in the outskirts of Houla. The third village, Tell Dahab had 12,055 inhabitants in 2004. /info/en/?search=Houla — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saphyr66 ( talk • contribs) 06:27, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
All of them just say "Houla area or Houla town", and they say besieged, but i can't figure out do they only mean the Houla town or all 3 towns in Houla area (Houla, Tall Dhahab and Taldou). Other SOHR reports are enough to mark 1 town green (basically every few days), but what about the rest, i will not edit anything until this area is clear and disqussed DuckZz ( talk) 15:40, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Suluk and Aliya, deep into YPG/FSA held territory, were edited to contested 4 days ago, citing this source: http://aranews.net/2015/07/kurds-fortify-southern-kobane-to-deter-isis-attacks/ Given that no further news have emerged confirming the clashes there, I suppose that: A) Aranews published a fake news (many times before they published unconfirmed news); B) or Aranews meant Aliye and Suluk [countryside]. I suggest to revert those two towns to Kurdish control. -- 8fra0 ( talk) 08:52, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
I think you are right, we should revert the edit. And probably the source means "B) or Aranews meant Aliye and Suluk [countryside]". Source also says that “but the joint forces were able to deter IS progress and kill dozens of them with the support of the coalition’s air strikes”. Where the source refers to “The clashes are still ongoing in these areas", it is talking about the southern Kobane area. Rhocagil ( talk) 20:50, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Acc. to pro opp Step.News.Agency , SAA captured Qabr Fiddah - Al Shari`ah - Karim and Ramleh https://www.facebook.com/Step.News.Agency.Sy/posts/638335749635044 location: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=35.481501&lon=36.330929&z=13&m=b&gz=0;363118743;354299734;144195;0;564765;145455;166511;706053;0;678102;0;261521;159645;9791 Hwinsp ( talk) 18:48, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
I have changed to red or added Al Shari`ah, Huwayz, Qabr Fiddah, Al Kareem. Probably Al Shari`ah was already changed, sorry, following http://www.syriahr.com/2015/07/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B2%D9%8A%D8%AF-%D9%85%D9%86-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B4%D9%87%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%A1-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%82%D8%B5%D9%81-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AC%D9%88%D9%8A-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%89-%D8%A7%D9%84/ http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/battle-map-and-analysis-of-the-al-ghaab-plains-syrian-army-advances-westward/ and https://twitter.com/Amin_Akh/status/617815282896269313. Paolowalter ( talk) 10:05, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
No, the only thing proved by your sources is the city is at least partially held by rebels, so that it could be contested. In the past consensus was reached not to accept vague statements like "city was bombed" as proof that it is under control by one side. The most robust confirmation of the status of Latmin is in https://twitter.com/TheArabSource/status/618505067293859840. It is under rebel control but on the front line (as supported by the second of your sources). Therefore green with red half-circle on east. Paolowalter ( talk) 20:36, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
According to AL-masdar (article here) SAA are advancing in Ghaab Plains. Is there conformation from other sources about this?? Rhocagil ( talk) 00:33, 15 July 2015 (UTC)