![]() | It is requested that an image or photograph of Raqqa Is Being Slaughtered Silently be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
Wikipedians in Syria may be able to help! The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
![]() | WARNING: ACTIVE COMMUNITY SANCTIONS The article Raqqa Is Being Slaughtered Silently, along with other pages relating to the Syrian Civil War and ISIL, is designated by the community as a contentious topic. The current restrictions are:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be sanctioned.
|
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Raqqa is no longer under Daesh administration, so what exactly are they doing now as a group? According to the page they are still active. I think it would be appropriate to include some information about what they're doing now that Raqqa has been lifted from Daesh control, considering that they're most well-known for reporting on activities and atrocities during the occupation. 2601:87:4400:AF2:84D7:679C:1DA0:C7F6 ( talk) 22:47, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because it describes a recognized group of citizen journalists that provides some of the only info out of Raqqa. They have both been cited and had full length feature pieces written about them by major english language media outlets (CNN, Guardian, Telegraph, and so on) . Did the nominator even read the article as they tagged it for deletion so quick after creation? -- Legacypac ( talk) 02:44, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Stories specifically about the group (not just mentioning their reporting):
Lots of info to expand this article with. Legacypac ( talk) 03:44, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because it makes a case for notability, and cites (amongst other sources) The Guardian [8] It may turn out ultimately not to meet notability guidelines, but it certainly isn't a candidate for speedy deletion. -- AndyTheGrump ( talk) 02:49, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Just for the record the acct that nominated this article for speedy deletion has been indef blocked for disruptive editing. Legacypac ( talk) 04:38, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Volunteer Marek, what you need to do here is: 1) carefully read your own sources, 2) don't misrepresent them, and 3) stop cherrypicking other sources whenever the initial ones are ruled out. The Independent article says the exact following:
It is thought to be the first reported use of white phosphorus in air strikes on Raqqa, which has been heavily bombed by the Russian and French air forces in the wake of the Paris attacks.
Russian radio chatter between the pilots and their bases was intercepted by local activists, Ahmed claimed.
That is as close as it gets to the subject. Not sure how you've managed to translate any of this into: RBSS also relayed reports from the ground that the Russian military was using illegal White phosphorus munitions in its airstrikes. The activists quoted by the author only suggest that Russia may have been involved in the WP incident(s). For all I know, it could be French warplanes, or even Assad's air force. I don't see RBSS explicitly accusing Russia of being behind the WP (and neither do you).
The Times is inaccessible for non subscribers, but I've managed to do a few keyword searches on Google. First I tried
"russia white phosphorus raqqa thetimes.co.uk", which shows the article you used, but with a struck raqqa. However, since Raqqa may have different spellings, I tried an even better
"russia white phosphorus slaughtered silently thetimes.co.uk", and your article doesn't even appear in the results. Most likely
WP:SYNTH at its finest.
Then comes Al-Bawaba, which actually cites The Independent's article. It also mentions the same thing about French airstrikes at the same place/time. As you were saying? Fitzcarmalan ( talk) 23:01, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
RBSS has proven very reliable and non-partisan.- Irrelevant. When did I ever say it was unreliable?
France is not using WP.- I'm not saying it is; kindly read again what I said above.
Let's put in the accusations against Russia properly.- I agree, but so far I have seen none related to RBSS directly accusing Russia of using white phosphorus in Raqqa. Have you? Fitzcarmalan ( talk) 08:48, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
Ahmed, an activist based in Idlib is with Raqqa is Being Slaughtered Silently
[14] and they are reporting Russia using WP. Not the most well written source but with photos
[15] "In addition, a group of citizen journalists from the ‘Raqqa is Being Slaughtered Silently’ network reported on Sunday the use of the banned white phosphorus during Russian airstrikes on the de facto capital of ISIS, Raqqa." quoting Ahmed in Idlib
[16] and so one.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
for what its worth, RBSS isn't a citizen journalism group, its a front for western intelligence they are paid and equipped by MI6/CIA and their spies help spot for drones and airstrikes under the pretext of journalism — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.244.77.96 ( talk) 19:14, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Original post is mine. In fact in my view their Kurdish stance is not 'anti Kurd' rather it is a reasonable position based on YPG atrocities and they are of the same position as the entirety of the 'moderate democratic' Arab opposition with respect to Kurds but the issue of them being a front for western intelligence is a fact just look at the videos the Islamic state has released of them being executed (if you can understand/read arabic, unfortunately most western journalists cannot which is why, combined with an unreasonable attitude of dismissal as propaganda, this is not more widely known), and there are long interviews with them explaining exactly what they did and how they spied, and they mention every time how they crossed into Turkey and were handed money and spying equipment by British or American intelligence officers
the 'specific proposal for improving the article' is to add a section with relevant information about them being a front for western intelligence!
typical attitude of the Wikipedia editor, if someone says something you don't like and are ignorant of, it immediately becomes 'terrorist propaganda' http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/islamic-state/12079470/Show-trial-confessions-then-the-five-orange-suited-men-are-lined-up-and-shot-in-the-back-of-the-head.html This describes the video and the confessions (the western journalist is of course exactly like you and criticizes the video) but an unbiased objective person watching that video can see that the confessions they make are true. (unsigned IP edit)
they confessed to spying and receiving money and equipment from MI6/CIA, not to being reporters/ whether the confession is obtained at gunpoint is immaterial, what is important is whether it is credible and likely to be true, which based on the information they gave, it is/ they are not legitimate reporters in any sense, they are intelligence operatives, spies/ being a spy is a crime in every country and merits execution in some
"The five men "admit" providing information to men who take it to Turkey where it is released to the western media, including the BBC." they were accused of spying. Legacypac ( talk) 00:52, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
"He says that he was then asked to provide information on a series of Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isil) headquarter buildings and on individuals, including one Australian jihadi and two Britons. " - Did you bother to read this bit as well?
the WHOLE POINT is that they are both reporters (as a cover for spying) AND spies at the same time
because russians support assad?
non-biased journalists, my ass
i also wouldn't be surprised if these "journalists" actually were spies to direct american and british airstrikes 77.34.165.226 ( talk) 17:15, 21 August 2016 (UTC)Extraordinary allegations that the most vocal group against ISIL from within Raqqa have turned to supporting ISIL need extraordinary sourcing. Only reporting the allegation half of what a Kurdish news agency reported is not sufficient for these claims. This material was correctly cleared out by an IP and I've removed it again. Legacypac ( talk) 01:52, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
I read the sources and commented here about my revert. I've been reverted again, telling me to discuss but at this point I'm talking to myself. Legacypac ( talk)
And an IP has again removed the POV insertions of garbage. Legacypac ( talk) 19:36, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
@ Legacypac: You are deleting the entire criticism section without giving any reasons. Can you explain here why did you delete the section? Ferakp ( talk) 18:15, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
I have done some open source research in addition to reviewing his past contributions to the Wikipedia project, and it looks like Ferakp is quite invested and involved in Internet activism in relation with and in a manner which benefits KCK and various affiliates such as PYD, YPG, PJAK and PKK. Therefore, I would like to advise him again to refrain from using this project as an outlet for his activism. Wikipedia rules ( WP:ACTIVISM) are explicit in stating that this project is not an outlet for political activism. With that said, even a cursory review of this talk page indicates to me that Legacypac has explained to you why Aranews cannot be regarded as a reliable source, and I have also attempted to do the same in my previous comment. Assuming that it was not made sufficiently clear to you, Ferakp, I will spell it out for you in a crystal clear summary why Aranews is not to be regarded as a reliable source according to WP:NEWSORG:
I see that Legacypac has given you due diligence and respect and have assumed good faith on your part, Ferakp. But your past slow edit-warring and apparent insistence on operating like an activist is eroding my ability to further assume your good faith. Please refrain from further reverting this article with to your previous edit with dubious information and sources and make yourself acquainted with WP:ACTIVISM, WP:NEWSORG and NPOV. Otherwise, I will also feel compelled to seek protection of this article and sanctions against your accounts for apparent violation of various Wikipedia rules, including, but not limited to those I have referred to above.
-- Harpoon6 ( talk) 14:52, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
One man's story of how ISIS took his hometown http://mashable.com/2015/08/04/the-taking-of-raqqa-isis/#zXUAoIom2gOr via @mashable — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.170.3.71 ( talk) 08:15, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
![]() | It is requested that an image or photograph of Raqqa Is Being Slaughtered Silently be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
Wikipedians in Syria may be able to help! The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
![]() | WARNING: ACTIVE COMMUNITY SANCTIONS The article Raqqa Is Being Slaughtered Silently, along with other pages relating to the Syrian Civil War and ISIL, is designated by the community as a contentious topic. The current restrictions are:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be sanctioned.
|
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Raqqa is no longer under Daesh administration, so what exactly are they doing now as a group? According to the page they are still active. I think it would be appropriate to include some information about what they're doing now that Raqqa has been lifted from Daesh control, considering that they're most well-known for reporting on activities and atrocities during the occupation. 2601:87:4400:AF2:84D7:679C:1DA0:C7F6 ( talk) 22:47, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because it describes a recognized group of citizen journalists that provides some of the only info out of Raqqa. They have both been cited and had full length feature pieces written about them by major english language media outlets (CNN, Guardian, Telegraph, and so on) . Did the nominator even read the article as they tagged it for deletion so quick after creation? -- Legacypac ( talk) 02:44, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Stories specifically about the group (not just mentioning their reporting):
Lots of info to expand this article with. Legacypac ( talk) 03:44, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because it makes a case for notability, and cites (amongst other sources) The Guardian [8] It may turn out ultimately not to meet notability guidelines, but it certainly isn't a candidate for speedy deletion. -- AndyTheGrump ( talk) 02:49, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Just for the record the acct that nominated this article for speedy deletion has been indef blocked for disruptive editing. Legacypac ( talk) 04:38, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Volunteer Marek, what you need to do here is: 1) carefully read your own sources, 2) don't misrepresent them, and 3) stop cherrypicking other sources whenever the initial ones are ruled out. The Independent article says the exact following:
It is thought to be the first reported use of white phosphorus in air strikes on Raqqa, which has been heavily bombed by the Russian and French air forces in the wake of the Paris attacks.
Russian radio chatter between the pilots and their bases was intercepted by local activists, Ahmed claimed.
That is as close as it gets to the subject. Not sure how you've managed to translate any of this into: RBSS also relayed reports from the ground that the Russian military was using illegal White phosphorus munitions in its airstrikes. The activists quoted by the author only suggest that Russia may have been involved in the WP incident(s). For all I know, it could be French warplanes, or even Assad's air force. I don't see RBSS explicitly accusing Russia of being behind the WP (and neither do you).
The Times is inaccessible for non subscribers, but I've managed to do a few keyword searches on Google. First I tried
"russia white phosphorus raqqa thetimes.co.uk", which shows the article you used, but with a struck raqqa. However, since Raqqa may have different spellings, I tried an even better
"russia white phosphorus slaughtered silently thetimes.co.uk", and your article doesn't even appear in the results. Most likely
WP:SYNTH at its finest.
Then comes Al-Bawaba, which actually cites The Independent's article. It also mentions the same thing about French airstrikes at the same place/time. As you were saying? Fitzcarmalan ( talk) 23:01, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
RBSS has proven very reliable and non-partisan.- Irrelevant. When did I ever say it was unreliable?
France is not using WP.- I'm not saying it is; kindly read again what I said above.
Let's put in the accusations against Russia properly.- I agree, but so far I have seen none related to RBSS directly accusing Russia of using white phosphorus in Raqqa. Have you? Fitzcarmalan ( talk) 08:48, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
Ahmed, an activist based in Idlib is with Raqqa is Being Slaughtered Silently
[14] and they are reporting Russia using WP. Not the most well written source but with photos
[15] "In addition, a group of citizen journalists from the ‘Raqqa is Being Slaughtered Silently’ network reported on Sunday the use of the banned white phosphorus during Russian airstrikes on the de facto capital of ISIS, Raqqa." quoting Ahmed in Idlib
[16] and so one.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
for what its worth, RBSS isn't a citizen journalism group, its a front for western intelligence they are paid and equipped by MI6/CIA and their spies help spot for drones and airstrikes under the pretext of journalism — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.244.77.96 ( talk) 19:14, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Original post is mine. In fact in my view their Kurdish stance is not 'anti Kurd' rather it is a reasonable position based on YPG atrocities and they are of the same position as the entirety of the 'moderate democratic' Arab opposition with respect to Kurds but the issue of them being a front for western intelligence is a fact just look at the videos the Islamic state has released of them being executed (if you can understand/read arabic, unfortunately most western journalists cannot which is why, combined with an unreasonable attitude of dismissal as propaganda, this is not more widely known), and there are long interviews with them explaining exactly what they did and how they spied, and they mention every time how they crossed into Turkey and were handed money and spying equipment by British or American intelligence officers
the 'specific proposal for improving the article' is to add a section with relevant information about them being a front for western intelligence!
typical attitude of the Wikipedia editor, if someone says something you don't like and are ignorant of, it immediately becomes 'terrorist propaganda' http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/islamic-state/12079470/Show-trial-confessions-then-the-five-orange-suited-men-are-lined-up-and-shot-in-the-back-of-the-head.html This describes the video and the confessions (the western journalist is of course exactly like you and criticizes the video) but an unbiased objective person watching that video can see that the confessions they make are true. (unsigned IP edit)
they confessed to spying and receiving money and equipment from MI6/CIA, not to being reporters/ whether the confession is obtained at gunpoint is immaterial, what is important is whether it is credible and likely to be true, which based on the information they gave, it is/ they are not legitimate reporters in any sense, they are intelligence operatives, spies/ being a spy is a crime in every country and merits execution in some
"The five men "admit" providing information to men who take it to Turkey where it is released to the western media, including the BBC." they were accused of spying. Legacypac ( talk) 00:52, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
"He says that he was then asked to provide information on a series of Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isil) headquarter buildings and on individuals, including one Australian jihadi and two Britons. " - Did you bother to read this bit as well?
the WHOLE POINT is that they are both reporters (as a cover for spying) AND spies at the same time
because russians support assad?
non-biased journalists, my ass
i also wouldn't be surprised if these "journalists" actually were spies to direct american and british airstrikes 77.34.165.226 ( talk) 17:15, 21 August 2016 (UTC)Extraordinary allegations that the most vocal group against ISIL from within Raqqa have turned to supporting ISIL need extraordinary sourcing. Only reporting the allegation half of what a Kurdish news agency reported is not sufficient for these claims. This material was correctly cleared out by an IP and I've removed it again. Legacypac ( talk) 01:52, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
I read the sources and commented here about my revert. I've been reverted again, telling me to discuss but at this point I'm talking to myself. Legacypac ( talk)
And an IP has again removed the POV insertions of garbage. Legacypac ( talk) 19:36, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
@ Legacypac: You are deleting the entire criticism section without giving any reasons. Can you explain here why did you delete the section? Ferakp ( talk) 18:15, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
I have done some open source research in addition to reviewing his past contributions to the Wikipedia project, and it looks like Ferakp is quite invested and involved in Internet activism in relation with and in a manner which benefits KCK and various affiliates such as PYD, YPG, PJAK and PKK. Therefore, I would like to advise him again to refrain from using this project as an outlet for his activism. Wikipedia rules ( WP:ACTIVISM) are explicit in stating that this project is not an outlet for political activism. With that said, even a cursory review of this talk page indicates to me that Legacypac has explained to you why Aranews cannot be regarded as a reliable source, and I have also attempted to do the same in my previous comment. Assuming that it was not made sufficiently clear to you, Ferakp, I will spell it out for you in a crystal clear summary why Aranews is not to be regarded as a reliable source according to WP:NEWSORG:
I see that Legacypac has given you due diligence and respect and have assumed good faith on your part, Ferakp. But your past slow edit-warring and apparent insistence on operating like an activist is eroding my ability to further assume your good faith. Please refrain from further reverting this article with to your previous edit with dubious information and sources and make yourself acquainted with WP:ACTIVISM, WP:NEWSORG and NPOV. Otherwise, I will also feel compelled to seek protection of this article and sanctions against your accounts for apparent violation of various Wikipedia rules, including, but not limited to those I have referred to above.
-- Harpoon6 ( talk) 14:52, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
One man's story of how ISIS took his hometown http://mashable.com/2015/08/04/the-taking-of-raqqa-isis/#zXUAoIom2gOr via @mashable — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.170.3.71 ( talk) 08:15, 22 October 2017 (UTC)