Module talk:Libyan Civil War detailed map

Dot size
Aren't the dots for the cities too big on this map? On the Syrian and Iraqi war maps, the cities are presented to be much smaller.GreyShark (dibra) 07:10, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Agree.Lindi29 (talk) 20:31, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Gaddafi supporters
Should we add some Gaddafi loyalists presence in Bani walid region ?If they do not control specific region,we could add a rural areapresence dot--94.66.176.141 (talk) 17:57, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Not only in Bani Walid region, because the sentence to death to Saif Al Islam Gaddafi causes several uprisings in different places:

https://fbcdn-video-j-a.akamaihd.net/hvideo-ak-xtp1/v/t42.1790-2/11230152_903845549703728_479473248_n.mp4?efg=eyJybHIiOjYxMiwicmxhIjo4Mzd9&rl=612&vabr=340&oh=5c7dcd3a5968489fe358e20e7be5964e&oe=55C9B6B6&__gda__=1439286399_12a8059469a963f857f795e00beb94e8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7D3AD04aJo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djG1vhlIGNo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IK5c_VXDtfI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h52wEkm6leU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h52wEkm6leU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MproesQ8O6U

2054jp (talk) 16:09, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Border Crossing
can you add the border crossings.hereLindi29 (talk) 22:22, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

List of airports in Libya
can you add them.hereLindi29 (talk) 20:47, 26 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Done. Spenk01 (talk) 02:00, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Ajdabiya
Are we sure that Ajdabiya is HoR controlled? Because I read this piece of news about an Ansar al-Sharia leader who "was taken to Ajdabiya in the Al-Wahat district for treatment". Why would they take him to hostile territory? They must have some presence in the area, don't they? Best regards --83.36.157.35 (talk) 16:34, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't think Ajdabiya is fully under Ansar al-Sharia control. According to this article the Libyan army still has checkpoints there and east Ajdabiya is still secure. i'll put it on contested instead Spenk01 (talk) 22:33, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Can we get some more sources for Ansar al-Sharia presence in Ajdabiya? If not, I'd suggest reverting it to HOR control. Prepster (talk) 11:21, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Sidra oil storage facility taken over
Could we trust this souce? https://twitter.com/ArmchairArab/status/549509731984080896

He refers to the Petroleum Facility Guard of Ibrahim Jahdran, allied with Op. Dignity --83.36.157.35 (talk) 17:08, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Adding powerplants
is it worth adding powerplants to the map? http://enipedia.tudelft.nl/wiki/Libya/Powerplants Spenk01 (talk) 19:07, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

If we can't get a reliable, no. I'd say yes if we know who controls. Else I don't have an opinion either way.John Smith the Gamer (talk) 17:01, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

IS attack near Sabha
I'm not sure how to put this on the map, but IS have presence near Sabha according to this. Maybe as "rural presence" (like small black dots on the Syrian civil war map)GreyShark (dibra) 17:56, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't think they really think they are involved in any clashes at this moment there and as the source said; Isis had killed 12 soldiers on the road above Sabha so i think rural presence will do. Spenk01 (talk) 02:22, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Tuareg
I believe that the Tuareg are going to need theor own color,because they have different loyalties,and conflicting reports of whom they pledge allegiance.Alhanuty (talk) 01:07, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Ceasefire Agreement Declared
It seems there is a ceasefire between the government and the rebels. http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/16/us-libya-security-idUSKBN0KP0VL20150116

I think that the towns that are currently marked as contested should instead be marked under joint control, like those on the Syria map, with a ring in the center. This will reflect the situation on the ground. Can this be done, please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:0:b200:f7d9:6882:3e9c:f365:fef4 (talk • contribs) 22:44, 17 January 2015 UTC

Three concentric circles is normally used for a stable situation, I assume this is what you mean? John Smith the Gamer (talk) 12:56, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

(OP) Yes. That is what I mean. The current map gives the impression that those towns are still being fought over, but I think marking them as being under joint control more accurately reflects the situation on the ground.

(OP) http://www.libyaherald.com/2015/01/18/lna-announces-ceasefire-but-fight-against-terrorists-excluded/ Also, the agreement excludes Ansar al-Sharia and ISIS, so no concentric circles there. Update, please.


 * sorry for the late edit but it's done Spenk01 (talk) 21:56, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Ghat is under GNC
It is suggested by GNC to host the nigotations https://twitter.com/fahdrad/status/553902728460894208?s=09
 * Are you 100% sure about that? Do you think that means they got the airport near Ghat too? Spenk01 (talk) 01:35, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Rural Presence Near Sabha
Why does the map say that ISIL controls the rural region near Sabha? None of the sources mention this. All of our sources mention them being in control of Derna. Please remove them from the Sabha area, please. Anasaitis (talk) 00:09, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
 * The dots do not mean ISIS controls the area. We added ISIS presence there since there were reports about people being beheaded by ISIS in Sebha: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/03/us-libya-security-idUSKBN0KC0B820150103 Spenk01 (talk) 21:59, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes it is. That desert area is controlled the Islamic State followed by massive beheading of innocent Christians from Egypt and Chad and Ethiopia and Eritrea. --햄빵이 (talk) 09:10, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Icons
Why did you change the joint controll icons without consensus?,Also this is a bad icon beacause it's showing bin jawad contorlled by the Regime in the west and GNC in the east which is wrong.Lindi29 (talk) 17:20, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I think it looks better than the three circles and according to the legend i put it means mixed control but you may be right that it makes some users confused. I'd like to have it this way until we get a better option than the 3 circles. (But keep in mind that this is just a temporary ceasefire and not a truce.)

Sydra town (& oil terminal?) Under Libyan dawn control
According to the source below which was used to add ISIS presence near Sidra, Sidra 'which houses the largest oil terminal' is under Libyan dawn control; Is this reason enough to change Sidra oil facility to green? http://www.worldtribune.com/2015/02/13/isil-convoys-hundreds-fighters-advance-libyan-oil-port/

Sirt
Sirt under control by Islamic State.Al Wasat Hanibal911 (talk) 17:42, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Benghazi
you changed the color to black (ISIL) in accordance with foxnews. However, when reading the source it says "More than a dozen Islamic State fighters from Iraq and Syria -- some with direct ties to the group's leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi" and later "An ISIS presence has been flagged in Benghazi, Derna and Sirte", which implies there are few ISIL operatives present there, but this is way far from holding the city (or part of it). In fact the source says presence of Ansar al-Sharia in Benghazi is dominant "Libya is not only a safe haven for ISIS but at least six other terror groups, including Ansar al-Sharia, which paraded police vehicles through Benghazi last month." This source from March 4 is specifically talking about ISIS-Army clashes, but i'm not sure of its reliability; Yahoo report from today is talking about Ansar al-Sharia in Benghazi in present sense; it also says that in Benghazi there is Libya Dawn fighting against Dignity coalition, so it seems three parties are present there with marginal ISIL (if at all).GreyShark (dibra) 17:16, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
 * GreyShark ✅ I fix my mistake and mark Benghazi as contested between Tobruk Government and Ansar al-Sharia. Hanibal911 (talk) 21:23, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you, please also see my remark at the Template talk:Lebanese Insurgency detailed map.GreyShark (dibra) 22:02, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Ansar Al-Sharia and ISIS
I think Ansar Al-Sharia officially joined ISIS so their dots should change to black. http://shoebat.com/2015/02/17/islamic-terrorists-attacked-benghazi-officially-join-isis-ansar-al-sharia-isis/

Nofalyah is recaptured by Libya Dawn.
Aljazera reported that Nofalyah is recaptured by Libya Dawn but I can't find it in their site. Here is another source http://www.babnet.net/mobile/festivaldetail.php?id=102050 3bdulelah (talk) 12:37, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
 * 3bdulelah But later Misrata militias (Libyan Dawn) pull out from Nawfaliyah and Bin Jawad and retreating to their hometown Misrata.herehere Also according to data from Al Arabiya Libya Dawn (Misrata militias) have reportedly withdrawn from Sirte to Misrata earlier today.here Hanibal911 (talk) 13:24, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Al Arabyah is not a neutral source (pro-Hafter) 3bdulelah (talk) 14:04, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
 * 3bdulelah But about the retreat Libyan Dawn from Nawfaliyah repoerted not Al Arabiya. This confirmed some other sources. Hanibal911 (talk) 15:36, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/security/2015/03/yemen-is-alqaeda-spring-saudi-arabia-decisive-storm.html Nofaliyah under IS control Tgoll774 (talk) 23:01, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

https://pietervanostaeyen.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/2000px-libya2.png more supporting evidence Tgoll774 (talk) 17:55, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes it is true. Nofaliya was recaptured by the Islamic State. --햄빵이 (talk) 09:08, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

We need To fix this map
A lot of cities are consdered under Tobruk government by default.

Ghadames: I could not find a source on who is controling the city?

Ghat: most likley the city is under locals control (not allied with any side) but the airport is controled by Libya dawn according to this source

Kufra: I could not find a source on who is controling the city (Most likely local tribes)

I think Hanibal911 can help us with that 3bdulelah (talk) 18:35, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
 * 3bdulelah I'll try to help you. Hanibal911 (talk) 12:09, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Dams
Whats the point of putting dam icons on the map if they dont show control of any side? -- HC PUNX  KID 17:41, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
 * HC I think that if there is no information of who controls these dam we need to remove them from the map! Hanibal911 (talk) 17:59, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Agree.-- HC PUNX  KID 18:04, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Ansar al-Sharia
I can't find mainstream RS apart from the one cited saying that Ansar al-Sharia pledged allegiance to ISIS. It seems that only a certain Abu Abdullah al-Libi, which SITE describes as "general Shariah jurist for Ansar al-Shariah in Libya" (not even its leader), pledged allegiance. This doesn't mean that the group as a whole did. Nykterinos (talk) 13:13, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Ansar al-Sharia did not, as a whole, pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. However, they are not rival groups at the moment - in fact, there is solid proof of recent co-operation in Benghazi and Derna. The current solution is to have both feature under the same colour, which works quite well for the purpose of the map. Nspwk (talk) 14:24, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification. I may agree that we can use the same colour on the map for the sake of simplicity (even though I’d prefer they remain distinct), but the related articles need to be revised to clarify that they are not (yet) the same group. Nykterinos (talk) 20:42, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Tawergha
Tawergha is a ghost town. How can either side control it? It's marked as Green but I suggest removing it unless a source is provided for either a return of the population to the town proper (rather than refugee camps near the town) or maybe a large factional militia build-up (again inside the town rather than near it). Prepster (talk) 22:46, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

If the town is not going to be removed (in spite of no one providing a source for the town being repopulated after it was ethnically cleansed and depopulated in 2011) then can we at least change Tawergha to blue. Unless there is a source for Libya Dawn/Tripoli government/green dot presence in this town, which there does not seem to be (which may have to do with my suspicion, confirmed by Tawergha's own Wikipedia page that it is a ghost town and therefore uninhabited. If I cannot remove the town (because my edits have been reverted) then would I or someone else at least be allowed to change it to Blue to make up for the lack of a source connecting it to Libya Dawn? Prepster (talk) 22:47, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Nofaliya
Why is Nofaliya still marked as under ISIS control? I changed the colour to green, but my edits were reverted. The latest source I know of (19 March) mentioned that it is under GNC control. See --Xwejnusgozo (talk) 15:48, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes. You are true. Thanks for your edit. However, after GNC retook Nofaliya, they withdrew from Nofaliya and bin Jawad in 20 March because of the Islamic State's offensive. They withdrew from there after only two days. # THe Islamic State is setting up checkpoints after they retook the city from GNC in 28 March.# Moreover, al-monitor reported that nofaliya, surt, derna is under the Islamic state's control in 30 March. #.
 * In addition, Tobruk based government claimed they are controlling bin Jawad in 31 March. # --햄빵이 (talk) 14:48, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
 * The Islamic State is currently not controlling any oil fields in Libya. However they have some presence in deserts stretching south from the coast between Sirte and Sidra. --햄빵이 (talk) 14:52, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

I changed rural presence around Sabha
It is because Ethiopian and Eritrean Christians were beheaded in Wilayat Fazzan. Well, in this module, there was a rural presence of the Islamic State but some guy changed it's colour from black to green. I think it's colour should be reverted to black. --햄빵이 (talk) 08:55, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Really? No source for this month. ISIL lost all the areas I indicated in the map changes, see this map. ISIL has no control in Sabha, and the frontline has been completely been pushed back to Nofaliya, which is still under the control of Libya Dawn's 166 Battalion militia, despite a bunch of ISIL bombing activity there. This shows that Libya Dawn never fully withdrew from Nofaliya, in other words, ISIL never really regained full control of it. So please, stop reverting the changes. Thank you. LightandDark2000 (talk) 14:27, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay. I understood that Rural Sabha is under GNC. But the map you linked shows that the Islamic State controls some near-border rural desert tuareg areas between Murzuq and Ghat. It means that there is where Christians are beheaded. Moreover, I've found a deserted area betweeen Sirte and Sidra is under the Islamic State's control, making them to launch irregular attack at Tobruk controlled areas.#--햄빵이 (talk) 16:15, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Very thank for the map and your knowledge. May I change South Western libya's red rural areas to black coloured areas? It is mentioned at the map you've linked. And may I change near Sidra red rural area to black? --햄빵이 (talk) 16:17, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
 * No, according to the map, ISIL has already lost those areas to Tobruk Government forces there since Monday, April 19. Also, since the frontline has receded to Nofaliya (according to the map), that means by default that ISIL does not control an areas east of Nofaliya (in the Sirte-Nofaliya region). So the changes I made regarding ISIL's territorial control are correct, as of this writing. LightandDark2000 (talk) 06:10, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

- According to this IHS Jane's 360 article (28 May 2015), IS still has presence in Sabha. Regards,-- HC PUNX  KID 22:51, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Aren't Tuareg forces allied with Tobruk government?
Well I thought they could be shown just red. Are they independent from Tobruk? --햄방이 (talk) 16:34, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
 * No idea,but if they are forces acting independently, it may be better to keep them separate in case they unallign themselves.
 * Also for all I know they may have their own government, which may justify their own colour like with Iraqi Kurds. Banak (talk) 16:42, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
 * No, Tuareg militias are loosely allied with Libya Dawn (Tripoli government), whereas Tebu militias are loosely allied with Dignity (Tobruk government). See here: "both sides have enlisted ethnic minorities as proxies: Libya Dawn has drafted in the brown-skinned Tuareg, southern cousins of the Berbers; Dignity has recruited the black-skinned Toubou" and this recent article: "Some Tuaregs in the region, but not all, have aligned themselves with Libya Dawn". Nykterinos (talk) 20:29, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
 * If some of the Tuaregs are allied with one side or another, why not then just remove the Tuareg forces from the map and replace them with the color of the sides that they are allied with? Unless there is one specific Tuareg militia we are highlighting alone, or unless the Tuaregs are clearly not affiliated with any one side in particular, we should remove their section to avoid any such controversy and confusion. LightandDark2000 (talk) 06:12, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree that, either we colour both Tuareg's and Tebu's territories with their own colours (as in this map), or we should colour Tuareg's territory the same colour as Libya Dawn's (green) and Tebu's territory the same colour as Dignity's (red). Nykterinos (talk) 17:32, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Tuaregs partialy cooperated with Libyan army but basically for now they are independent and they are marked on map in a neutral color. Hanibal911 (talk) 17:44, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
 * The sources I cited say that Tuaregs are aligned with Libya Dawn, whereas Tebu are aligned with Haftar's Libyan National Army. See also this article: "On the Libyan Tuareg side, their kin from countries such as war-ravaged Mali and groups like Ahmed al-Ansari have joined the fight, with support from the Misratan Libyan Dawn forces. Meanwhile, there are claims that Tebu from Chad have joined the Libyan Tebu, which has support from the Libyan Dignity government in Tobruk, based in the far northeast." Can you cite other sources saying that Tuaregs are independent more than the Tebu are, so as to require a distinct colour on the map, unlike the Tebu? Nykterinos (talk) 19:45, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
 * See this map:here In this map clear indicated who with whom cooperated in this conflict. Hanibal911 (talk) 19:54, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I know that map (I cited it above), but: 1) it uses a distinct colour not only for the Tuareg, but also for the Tebu (like this map by the BBC), so if we follow it, we should use a distinct colour for the Tebu, too; 2) I don't know why it lists the Tuareg under the Tobruk government together with the Tebu, since all sources I read say the Tuareg are aligned with Libya Dawn and enemies of the Tebu. Nykterinos (talk) 20:34, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I also think that we need add new color for Tebu. Hanibal911 (talk) 20:48, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

- Agree with editors above, if we maintain a different colour for Toureg forces, we must also add another colour for Tebou forces, as both seem to operate quasi-independently. -- HC PUNX  KID 14:29, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
 * There aren't any fully developed colours left to use. .svg and .gif files need to be added first. Blue would be best because only a few new files have to be added, the local forces colour can just be changed to something else. The blueish grey used for JaN in the Syria War Map would be good for Tebu as well, but then the older grey files need to be reuploaded and renamed for Abu Salim and potentially Ansar al Sharia. Nspwk (talk) 10:35, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Thomas van Linge's map is NOT a valid source!
Thomas van Linge is a biased 18 year old with biases all over the place. He never reveals what his sources are and is often found making extremely novice mistakes, more noticeable in his Syria and Iraq maps than in his Libya map, such as including factions that are almost irrelevant because of his personal biases (examples: JRTN with "Sunni insurgents" in Iraq, Syrian Resistance with the Syrian government, various FSA groupings with the Syrian rebels) and colouring entirely unhabited land at his own whim.

I request that all changes made solely because of his map be reverted unless otherwise proven with reliable sources or common sense/circumstantial evidence. It is NOT common sense to have ZERO Jihadi presence in the Fezzan region when both IS and Ansar al-Sharia have attacked military and civilian targets in the area, some of which we can clearly place. It is NOT common sense to ask for sources that prove villages between Dawn area of control X and Dawn area of control Y are held by Dawn. Nspwk (talk) 13:05, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

I agree he doesn't base his maps upon facts but rather on sources he considers legit which are actually biased sources. Even though i've also used this map as source i think we should not be using it here from now on. Spenk01 (talk) 21:16, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

"River system (Man man)"
I saw that some user added the Ghardabiya reservoirs of the Man-made river as IS-held. Dont have any problem with that, but if we include that reservoirs we must also add the other Man-made river reservoirs (Ajdabiya, Omar Mukhtar Benghazi's reservoirs) and other infrastructure (well fields or pipe production plants, for example). -- HC PUNX  KID 14:36, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Ansar al-Sharia and Abu Salim brigade
There is a clear fault in the map regarding the Libyan Ansar al-Sharia - the group is still a part of the Benghazi Mujahedeen Council and the Darna Mujahedeen Council, despite the allegiance of some of its operatives to ISIL. This basically means that both Abu Salim Brigade and Ansar al-Sharia belong to the same group of al-Qaeda affiliated Jihadists, who oppose ISIL. I fix this issue on the map, making Benghazhi and Mreisa into grey color of the al-Qaeda, instead of ISIL black.GreyShark (dibra) 06:46, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Ansar al-Sharia is not part of the Derna council. They left it back in January, see the official statement here: http://sfha.li/wsj1mniwaglcerq/. They have also stayed out of the Derna infighting according to their own members: https://twitter.com/hm_drny/status/608655622809235459 (and there is no evidence otherwise) Nspwk (talk) 10:53, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Nspwk,GreyShark, the map should have distinctive coloring for Islamic State forces and non-IS affiliated Islamist militants such as those belonging to the Shura Councils of Benghazi, Derna and recently, Ajdabiya.  As I am aware, multiple groups are apart of these councils including Ansar al-Sharia, Abu Salim Martyrs Brigade and Libya Shield 1. Obviously there should not be places for all these groups on the maps, but instead of having just 'Ansar al-Sharia' in the same color as Islamic State forces, as it appears on the Libyan Civil War (2014–present) article, why not have 'Mujahideen Shura Councils' in a color separate from IS forces? For example, in the Template:Syrian Civil War detailed map, al-Nusra Front is portrayed in grey, and surrounding areas in white. Why not have these Shura Councils portrayed in the same color scheme? It is important for there not to be any confusion, becuase these groups have engaged in hostilities with each other, particular in the recent Battle of Derna. Also, on Ansar al-Sharia in Derna, this source cites a Libyan publication stating hostilities between Ansar al-Sharia and IS forces . Another source which links Ansar al-Sharia to other Shura councils . I do not mean to be demanding or condescending, as I can imagine how stressful it is to update these maps, but is has really confused me as to why the shades for Ansar al-Sharia look so familiar to IS, let alone that Ansar al-Sharia is only one of many jihadist groups that is apart of these 'Mujahideen Shura Concils'. StanTheMan87 (talk) 14:58, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree - the Mujahedeen Councils are not aligned with ISIL, even though both are radical Islamists. The first are either independent Jihadists or Al-Qaeda affiliated, whereas ISIL is a completely separate Takfiri group, which doesn't recognize any Muslim Jihadist as genuine, unless he pledges to al-Baghdadi. Thus - Mujahedeen Councils should be grey (like in Syrian, Lebanese and Yemeni maps), while ISIL to be black (like in all ME and NA conflict maps).GreyShark (dibra) 10:25, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Errors and fixes
There are a few troubling errors with the map. First, Derna has just recently been cleansed of ISIS by pro-Tripoli military council, so it should be a green dot. Second, I'm pretty sure that Tawergha (and especially its coastline) is controlled by Misratan Forces so it should also be green (only Bani Walid and its surroundings should be blue). Third, is Ajdabiya really still contested? I thought Haftar loyalists secured it. Fourth, Benghazi is contested by ALL factions in the war (Tripoli-loyalists, Haftar-loyalists, and ISIS/Ansar Sharia), not just between Haftar and ISIS as shown by current map. Finally, are Zaltan and al-Maya really controlled by Haftar loyalists? Because last I checked, the road from Tripoli to Tunisia is open and secured by Tripoli-loyalists. If I am wrong in any way, please let me know, but I hope my concerns lead to a better map. Moester101 (talk) 00:42, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Abu Salim Martyrs' Brigade / Shura Council of Derna Mujahideen has no official affiliation with either Dignity or Dawn. They should be their own separate colour. Clashes in Derna are still ongoing despite earlier reports by Libya Herald that Derna was under full control of the Shura Council. Libya Herald itself later posted an article saying IS counter-attacked in Derna (http://www.libyaherald.com/2015/06/15/breaking-news-is-counterattacking-in-derna/) and Alwasat reported clashes in central and southern areas of Derna (http://www.alwasat.ly/ar/news/libya/78891/).
 * I agree. Whoever keeps colouring the entire surrounding countryside blue isn't paying attention to the conflict. I think Tawergha was made blue because it's a ghost town. The dot size was made as small as possible for the same reason. If you want to change it to something more accurate, I'd happily support it.
 * The US airstrike on an Ansar al-Sharia meeting was only 11 km south of the city. Afterwards, they took some of the dead and wounded to the Ajdabiya hospital, which is on the other side of the city. Ajdabiya is definitely not held by Haftar loyalists, although some Libyan sources claimed otherwise in the wake of the airstrike. Like we saw with Derna, Libyan media is not always accurate when it comes to Jihadi groups.
 * The Tripoli loyalists are part of the Shura Council of Benghazi Revolutionaries, which fights alongside IS in Benghazi. There is no proven infighting in Benghazi as far as I know. Maybe the colour black is a little misleading for Benghazi and Ajdabiya? Especially since IS has no presence in Ajdabiya.
 * Several sources have reported Zaltan and Jumayl coming into Libyan Army hands. You could be right about al-Maya - looking back, the source I used was not that reliable. If you can source al-Maya being held by Tripoli's gov't, please change it back to green. Nspwk (talk) 07:51, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
 * The US airstrike on an Ansar al-Sharia meeting was only 11 km south of the city. Afterwards, they took some of the dead and wounded to the Ajdabiya hospital, which is on the other side of the city. Ajdabiya is definitely not held by Haftar loyalists, although some Libyan sources claimed otherwise in the wake of the airstrike. Like we saw with Derna, Libyan media is not always accurate when it comes to Jihadi groups.
 * The Tripoli loyalists are part of the Shura Council of Benghazi Revolutionaries, which fights alongside IS in Benghazi. There is no proven infighting in Benghazi as far as I know. Maybe the colour black is a little misleading for Benghazi and Ajdabiya? Especially since IS has no presence in Ajdabiya.
 * Several sources have reported Zaltan and Jumayl coming into Libyan Army hands. You could be right about al-Maya - looking back, the source I used was not that reliable. If you can source al-Maya being held by Tripoli's gov't, please change it back to green. Nspwk (talk) 07:51, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Several sources have reported Zaltan and Jumayl coming into Libyan Army hands. You could be right about al-Maya - looking back, the source I used was not that reliable. If you can source al-Maya being held by Tripoli's gov't, please change it back to green. Nspwk (talk) 07:51, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Several sources have reported Zaltan and Jumayl coming into Libyan Army hands. You could be right about al-Maya - looking back, the source I used was not that reliable. If you can source al-Maya being held by Tripoli's gov't, please change it back to green. Nspwk (talk) 07:51, 17 June 2015 (UTC)


 * You can't justify any edit without up to date sources.Spenk01 (talk) 11:35, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Where is the edit history for the map?
Forgive my lack of technical understanding...but how do I see the history of actual map edits (i.e. additions of towns and changes of color)? GeoEvan (talk) 01:37, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * GeoEvan Change the word "Template" to "Module" in the title, and you should be at the right page. Banak (talk) 02:13, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * When I do that, I only see four edits, all from last December. Am I missing something? GeoEvan (talk) 19:32, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Whoops, I meant the other way around, it's at Module:Libyan_Civil_War_detailed_map, or click module from this talkpage. Banak (talk) 19:46, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh, thanks - finally found it! Thought I had tried that before, but I must have done something wrong. GeoEvan (talk) 22:22, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Benghazi
It is clear that Benghazi is a complicated issue to be depicted on the map, however current "Haftar vs. ISIS" is certainly only a partial picture. In addition to the presence of Haftar's forces (red) and ISIS (black), the city still has "parts" controlled by the Benghazi Shura Council of Revolutionaries (grey). Shura Council itself is fractured - the major component is Ansar al-Sharia, who have disputes with other members of the council; nevertheless, Shura members are all non-aligned with ISIL at this point.GreyShark (dibra) 10:19, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Deletion of Map Info
Who's the genius that just deleted almost the entire map?! Do you have any idea how much work you just destroyed?! The entire accompanying page to this one has been deleted! Anasaitis (talk) 23:29, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Thankfully, I was able to restore the map. It appears that whoever did this wasn't a user. Could someone please recommend that their IP address be banned? Anasaitis (talk) 23:34, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

derna dot issue
derna is contested between IS and abu salim brigade which the map shows but their is a red dot under it which needs removing

Coastal developments
IS has seized Bin Jawad and unsuccessfully attacked Sidra port west of Ras Lunuf - could replace Sidra icon with a contested symbol because they're not done with the attack, just temporarily repelled

Bin Jawad dot should be black in any event, source code indicates that it should be displaying as black but isn't for some reason (?)

[source for claims]

Edit - ^ these have been updated, maybe my browser was displaying an old version of the page before... it looks right now, thanks to whoever fixed it
 * Actually, on 4 Jan. the BBC said that "IS says it now controls Bin Jawad", and both Reuters and the Guardian specified that "there was no independent confirmation of its capture", "No official or army source could confirm this". We shouldn't take ISIS' propaganda for truth if there are no independent confirmations. Now, this and this sources say that ISIS retreated to the west of bin Jawad. Sabratha, too, was too precipitously marked as ISIS-controlled on this map: it was never really captured by ISIS, and it is still contested. I'm going to mark Sabratha as contested and Bin Jawad as besieged to the west. Nykterinos (talk) 16:38, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

PutItOnAMap (talk) 18:04, 6 January 2016 (UTC) This source reports that IS now controls Bin Jawad. PutItOnAMap (talk) 18:04, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, when two equally reliable sources (like this and this) contradict each other, the status quo ante should prevail: i.e., if HoR-aligned forces held Bin Jawad prior to ISIS offensive, it should be kept marked as red until the overwhelming majority of reliable sources agree that ISIS seized it. Currently, the situation in Bin Jawad is unclear. We shouldn't rush to declare ISIS' victory. Nykterinos (talk) 15:56, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

I would usually agree, but most sources either say "IS claimed to have taken Bin Jawad" or "IS has taken Bin Jawad", with the latter being more prevalent IMO. It is also notable that there is no denial of the claim by the media or any of the other main rival factions in Libya. I agree that we should not scaremonger by exaggerating IS control, but its presence should not be understated either. It launched an attack from what were probably positions in Bin Jawad on Sidra on Monday, and then again on Tuesday. It is contesting a place to the right of Bin Jawad, from which forces were most likely brought in to fight. Moreover, airstrikes were conducted in Bin Jawad and its vicinity, indicating IS control. I think this is the most recent reliable source mentioning Bin Jawad, and it clearly states that IS controls the town. In the absence of denial and with an IS claim, much of the media and the military situation indicating it, I think we should leave Bin Jawad as IS controlled for now. PutItOnAMap (talk) 18:17, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
 * The PFG, which controls Sidra and Ras Lanuf, denied that ISIS seized Bin Jawad, so it's not true that "there is no denial of the claim by the media or any of the other main rival factions in Libya". The Libya Herald source you linked does confirm that ISIS took Bin Jawad, but this confirmation doesn't seem to me so widespread in the media, and there are sources which say the opposite, like the one I linked . Nykterinos (talk) 18:48, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

I agree with you that the PFG have denied it and I'm sorry for not noticing that earlier. As for it does really not make it clear if they mean the outskirts to the east of Bin Jawad (i.e. their coastal control has been pushed back to its edge) or the west (i.e. they have been driven out of the town). Either way, libyaherald which is a pro-Haftar (and thus pro-PFG) source, confirmed that IS controls Bin Jawad, and its confirmation came a day after the PFG's denial of IS control in Bin Jawad. Moreover, a day after the PFG made its claim about Bin Jawad, IS attacked their positions in Sidra, which could probably only have been done if they controlled - or at least controlled enough to get their forces through - Bin Jawad. Airstrikes have been conducted on Bin Jawad since the PFG's claim was made by the Haftar government, which would only have been done if IS had positions in Bin Jawad. PutItOnAMap (talk) 19:06, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

For the avoidance of doubt: I think this confirms it. PutItOnAMap (talk) 12:46, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I've seen it, thanks. It could still be contested, but that, together with the Libya Herald source, is something more solid than before. Next time, we can wait a few more days for this kind of sources to be published before accepting ISIS' claims. Nykterinos (talk) 14:28, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Ajdabiya Shura Council is now part of ISIS
Head of the Ajdabiya Shura Council has pledged allegiance to Abu Bakr, making his group a brand-new ISIS affiliate

https://a3maqagency.wordpress.com/2016/01/06/%D8%A3%D9%85%D9%8A%D8%B1-%D9%85%D8%AC%D9%84%D8%B3-%D8%B4%D9%88%D8%B1%D9%89-%D8%AA%D8%AD%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%81-%D8%AB%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%B1-%D8%A3%D8%AC%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%A8%D9%8A%D8%A7-%D9%8A%D8%A8%D8%A7%D9%8A/

I'm looking for a better source but given the scarcity of reporting in Libya it's unlikely - if this source is deemed ok or the story is corroborated elsewhere, I'm recommending that the current marking for Ajdabiya be changed to reflect this news
 * That source is outdated. ARSC has subsequently denied that it pledged allegiance to ISIS: apparently, there has been a split in the group, with some of its members pledging allegiance to ISIS, but the group as a whole remains independent . Only ARSC, and not ISIS-affiliated fighters, is reported to control territory in southern Ajdabiya ("The Ajdabiya Revolutionaries Shura Council has been in control of the town’s southern suburbs for almost a year" ); therefore, Ajdabiya should be marked as mixed ARSC-LNA control, with ISIS at most as a presence (even though the presence mark was originally conceived for rural areas, not cities). Nykterinos (talk) 21:54, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Apostrophes
As usually, on module maps usually use like for example, "lat = 'xxxxx'". But, this map is not. I have been recently doing that, however i give up because it is large and long in order to add these all. Someone maybe help me to add these marks because to in order to make this like other module maps. If not i will do these myself. --SMB99thx XD (contribs) 11:37, 27 January 2016 (UTC)


 * If you edit the module: Press CTRL+F then search for the apostrophe (') you can see all apostrophes get selected then press CTRL+R a new box will appear under the search box, there you can put the quotation mark (") press on ALL so it will replace all apostrophes with quotation marks. I already did it but this is just a tip for you for the next time you have to bulk edit. Spenk01 (talk) 03:54, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Daesh presence in Maradah?
Hello, I just saw on this map, that the town of Maradah south of El Agheila is contested between the Tripoli-based government and Daesh. But all I could find about this topic is that there was an attack on a turkish company building a road near Maradah in January and shortly later a direct attack on the city. (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-libya-security-idUSKCN0US27G20160114) (http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/isis-attacks-the-maradah-oil-fields-in-northern-libya/)

So, what's the situation there now? I doubt that Daesh is still there. And is the town really in the hands of the Tripoli-based government?--Ermanarich (talk) 21:24, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

GNA colour on map
Shouldn't GNA presence be marked with some other color? Both, Tripoli based and Tobruk based governments do not cooperate with GNA so it shouldn't be marked with green or red.

---

I agree. The GNA ought to be marked in the map.

--Patronus95 (talk) 10:30, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

@PutItOnAMap, SvEcHpInXID, Lacertilia the Magnificent: So what is the situation in Libya now? The Government of National Accord (GNA) is actually not yet represented on this map, even if there is a couple of militias and cities which declared their support for it (and if I remember it right, the GNC also declared its support). Are these two colours (red and green) still actual or how does it look exactly? However, the important point is that we need to include the recent changes in the map.--Ermanarich (talk) 21:23, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Ermanarich I agree with Patronus95 need add color for GNA on the map. Libya TV said Misrata recognize GNA as sole legitimate government of Libya herehere and some other towns also recognize GNA as sole legitimate government of Libya. SvEcHpInXID (talk) 08:35, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

As the GNC has collapsed, it might be a good idea to pledge all its forces to the GNA. However, we suffer from poor information. There are many militias, some of which have not declared their support for the GNA openly. None of them are fighting against the GNA, and many of them share control of several settlements with pro-GNA militias. But the security situation in Libya is, and will be for quite some time, incredibly uncertain.

I propose we change GNC-backed forces to GNA ones, and when instances of non-cooperation/rebellion occur, we mark them in as old GNC-aligned forces, or possibly local forces. PutItOnAMap (talk) 09:14, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

I agree with changing the GNC-backed forces to GNA ones and marking instances of local non-cooperation. With the entry of the Presidential Council into Tripoli, the dissolution of the GNC, and the creation of the State Council, the NSG (the former Tripoli government) is essentially irrelevant. Some of the militias that supported the NSG government still have problems with the Presidential Council (Badi, LROR), but these forces do not form a cohesive anti-GNA bloc.

I very much support the idea of representing the GNA on the map. Some of the territory marked as under the control of the Tobruk-based government is now supportive of the GNA. This is the case with Jathran's zone of influence, as well as some southern cities. Lacertilia the Magnificent (talk) 22:29, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Fine. I changed the description after our discussion. In the next time we should look which of the militias in the area which is now still red supports the GNA. Tuareg and Tabu militias for example declared their support: http://www.libya-businessnews.com/2015/10/27/tuaregs-announce-support-for-serraj-govt/ http://libyaprospect.com/index.php/2016/04/04/tabu-and-tuareg-announce-their-support-for-gna/ It's just the question which areas are controlled by Tebu militias.--Ermanarich (talk) 22:20, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

The fundamental problem here is that some towns are controlled by multiple militias, some of which are not pro-GNA and some of which are, so joint control will have to be used, although it may not be very representative as anti-GNA militias are likely to be in the minority in some towns, and pro-GNA militias will probably be in the minority in others, leading to one icon not being very representative of the actual situation on the ground.

Our solution is not ideal, but it will have to do for now until we can think of a better one. PutItOnAMap (talk) 09:46, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Would it be a good idea to mark the PFG in their own colour but note that they are GNA-aligned in the map legend? (And should the same apply to Tuareg and Tebu militias)? This would be to better represent the political situation on the ground. PutItOnAMap (talk) 08:31, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

PFG=Petroleum Facilities Guard? I think that it sounds good, but do we have colours left to use? Especially if you want to add Tebu militias too, that could become very difficult.--Ermanarich (talk) 11:38, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

I totally support PutItOnAMap's Solution, the PFG may acknowledge the Unity Gov., but it certainly does not acknowledge the GNC, in fact, the two made heavy clashes near sirte before the latter was taken by ISIS.

another reason to have a PFG Colour is it's de-facto alliance with the Tobruk-led LNA (Libyan National Army), the LNA currently has significant forces heading towards sirte from Ras Lanuf (PFG Controlled)

I also suggest having a separate color for the GNC if possible, they are certainly not allies nor do they acknowledge each other. Shaltut (talk) 18:39, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Do we still need the category of Misrata District local tribal milita forces? Depending on whether that has become obsolete, we could assign the color for that category to the PFG. Lacertilia the Magnificent (talk) 16:59, 5 May 2016 (UTC)


 * As I have written elsewhere, the GNC/GNA divide is no longer as clear as it once was. The GNC still claims to be operating, but most militias aren't pledged to it, and they certainly don't have any cohesive presence to my knowledge, so marking the points on the map is quite hard with regards to finding the right sources. We can use blue for PFG, orange for local forces and brown for Tebu militias. PutItOnAMap (talk) 18:59, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

We will have to create new icons. There is no orange airport icon, so I've had to use dark green in Bani Walid for now. Also, there is no joint control brown/purple with yellow, so we cannot represent Tebu militias separately yet. PutItOnAMap (talk) 19:28, 5 May 2016 (UTC)


 * I could do that now. Shouldn't take me very long.--Ermanarich (talk) 19:43, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Just one thing: Should be really start with a new colour for the Tebu? I mean the map shouldn't look too complicated.--Ermanarich (talk) 19:44, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

File:Map-ctl2-red+marroon.svg, File:Fighter-jet-orange-icon.svg--Ermanarich (talk) 20:02, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, I'll change it accordingly. I think the Tebu should have their own colour if the Tuareg do, because they play a key role in this conflict. PutItOnAMap (talk) 20:46, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Hm, I'm still not very happy with how it looks now. Wouldn't it be better to simply take one colour for forces that are not in favour of a special government? maybe we should simply take blue for the PFG and other neutral, non-alligned forces...--Ermanarich (talk) 17:28, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Benghazi Detailed map
I have added a detailed map for the conflict in Benghazi, similar to the ones in Aleppo, Daraa, Deir Ezzor, etc. To my fellow editors: please make suggestions/recommendations/improvements/feedback in general with regards to it. Thanks for your time. PutItOnAMap (talk) 23:03, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Super, thanks for creating it! Shall we maybe make a .svg-file instead? Oh, and are you sure that Daesh holds the territory and not the Shura council of Benghazi? Because the last one should be white according to the map's legend.--Ermanarich (talk) 15:03, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

It's a pleasure.

I could change it to .svg file, I suppose. As for the map itself, Sabri and Suq al-Hout are IS held. The other jihadi area is a mix between IS and shura, and I tried to show that by shading lines, but the shura lines appear to have been shaded in a much thinner colour than the IS ones - therefore, I'll need to edit them to be wider so it's clear that they're also holding that area, too.

I'm also going to make a similar map for Derna as soon as I can. The LNA hold Al Fataeh and District 400, and the Shura hold the rest, right? PutItOnAMap (talk) 17:59, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the information. I already started to create a .svg map before you answered, that was a bit dumb. Now I only need to work on the territory held by the Tobruk-based government. I hope that our works don't overlap already.

As for the situation in Derna, the creation of a map really sounds good. This may not be the right place here, but maybe a creation of a map of Ta'iz in Yemen would be good, if we have enough informations.--Ermanarich (talk) 19:05, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Finished the map and uploaded it with the name Benghazi Conflict Detailed Map.svg, but there are some problems with the visibility.--Ermanarich (talk) 21:13, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, it's much better, although it does not show the Shura forces in their own colour - IS and Shura seem to share the same colour in this new map. Also, if I'm not mistaken, the Shura and IS forces are still present in parts of Gwarsha. Also, I think they're not in control of Alfakat either, although I can't quite remember which source I read that in. I can try to find it, though.

Ta'izz is an issue, I really want to do it but I expect it will just be reverted out due to disagreements. People tend to disagree massively on which sources are reliable or not in the Yemeni module, so they would dispute whatever source anyone used to create such a map. I'll make the Derna map soon.

How did you get the part of the map with detailed roads for Gwarsha, Garyounis, etc? I couldn't find that map of Benghazi on english wikimedia, only a detailed map for the inner city. PutItOnAMap (talk) 21:28, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

I downloaded the map from www.openstreetmap.org. There you have to click on "share" (it looks like the symbol for "share" in the Wikimedia media viewer). There you have to choose your format, either PNG or SVG. Furthermore you can make an excerpt, and then you can download it.

Sadly I'm not as familiar with the situation in Benghazi as you are, I made the map after your map. But it's not very difficult to add new colours to represent the Shura militias on the map.

And well, for the Yemen map it's true. Very unnecessary edit-war there, even though a Ta'izz map would be severally a good thing, since the city is heavily contested.--Ermanarich (talk) 22:28, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for teling me about openstreetmap. I'll change the Benghazi map with that shortly. I was incorrect about Afakat by the way and will just change the map to show the Shura. PutItOnAMap (talk) 09:31, 26 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I will convert my map to an .svg shortly if you think that would be better than a .png, but here is the updated Benghazi map for the time being. PutItOnAMap (talk) 12:17, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

I am adding in the Derna map now. Feedback for that, too, would be more than welcome. PutItOnAMap (talk) 20:23, 26 April 2016 (UTC) 20:23, 26 April 2016 (UTC) 20:20, 26 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Hey, great work regarding the new maps! With SVG-files, it's the thing, that it needs more time to create them, but as soon as they're once created, it's much easier to edit them. I don't know how familiar you are with SVG-editing, if you don't know it very well I could help you a little bit, but not before next tuesday, I'm quite busy with my examen at the moment...


 * To come to Derna map. It looks great! I just think that the red should be maybe a bit stronger so that the contrasts are stronger. Also, a dark coloured area in contested areas like in the map "Battle of Daraa City.svg", which represents the contested or unclear areas may be good to make the contrasts stronger, too.--Ermanarich (talk) 15:25, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I do need to edit the red to make it stronger (without making the grey so dark it could be confused for IS, which was the main reason why I made the Shura colour light grey). I will also draw a black line between the LNA and MSC frontlines. Thank you! PutItOnAMap (talk) 17:44, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

I have now updated the Derna map. It's a bit messier than before, but the colours are much clearer. Is it better now? PutItOnAMap (talk) 09:02, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Well, I don't want to be the grumbler all the time. The differences are now definitely clearer than before, but I'd actually prefer uniformed maps with one continuous design like it's the case with the maps used in the Syrian Civil War map. However, the maps are really helpful. Thank you so far!--Ermanarich (talk) 17:03, 30 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I'll fix it anyway. PutItOnAMap (talk) 18:01, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Wonderful Map, I live in Benghazi and can confirm this is accurate, i will inform you of any update from here. Shaltut (talk) 18:42, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Great Source on Daesh activities
Hello mappers,

I discorvered a great source on Daesh activities, majorily for the situation in Iraq but also for the changes in Syria and Libya: http://www.daeshdaily.com/2016/05/ Ermanarich (talk) 15:20, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

ISIS capture of Zella and Jufra
Fezzan Libya Media Group is denying ISIS captured Zella, Jufra, and other towns in southern Libya. here I'll continue to monitor the situation. Its my understanding that Zella was one of the staging areas for Sirte, depending on how many troops were deployed there I find it hard to believe ISIS took over that location. Although its possible the LNA pulled out. Conflictnews (talk) 17:49, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

LNA secures Zella (Zalah)hereand claim they captured Jufra and Jufra Airbase according to article here Fezzan Libya Media Group also suggests LNA  control al Jufra hereConflictnews (talk) 14:04, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Ajdabiya Under Local Forces
Can someone check if the situation of Ajdabiya is right ??? Last I checked it has been and still is under the Libyan Army Control since February of this year!!! you can check it on &  MohamedAhtash (talk) (19:16), 31st May 2016 (UTC)

PFG Take Nawfiliyah & Ben Jawad
On Monday the Petroleum Facilities Guard (PFG) had taken control of the town east of Sirte (Ben Jawad) and on the 31st of May it had been confirmed that they had also taken control of Nawfiliyah about 130 Km east of Sirte, getting ever closer to Sirte. MohamedAhtash (talk) (19:23) May 31st 2016 (UTC)

Areas under the control of the Petroleum Facilities Guard
I suggest marking areas under the control of the Petroleum Facilities Guard with green dots as they declared support for the Government of National Accord. http://libyaprospect.com/index.php/2016/03/31/petroleum-guards-ready-to-work-under-gna-authority/ 3bdulelah (talk) 21:08, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

I strongly agree! If they support the GNA, they should be shown in green. The map should be as easy to read as possible. Bigles, LightandDark2000, SvEcHpInXID, what do you think?

Oh, and if we do it, neutral and tribal forces could get the blue colour again, it's a better contrast to the yellow of the Tuareg.--Ermanarich (talk) 18:45, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

I agree because the Petroleum Facilities Guard definite itself as a force of the GNA.--Bigles (talk) 19:03, 2 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I found an article in German, which supports the claim that PFG support the GNA and which may even solve the problem with Ajdabiya: http://www.nzz.ch/international/nahost-und-afrika/buergerkrieg-in-libyen-umzingelter-is-bei-sirte-ld.86325


 * It says (amongst others): "Am Montag traf Sarraj in Tripolis den Bürgermeister der Stadt Ajdabiya, Salem al-Jadran. [...] Es wäre eine unerhebliche Begegnung gewesen, wäre nicht der Bruder al-Jadrans, Ibrahim al-Jadran, Chef der «Wächter der Erdöleinrichtungen». [...] Dass ihm die «Wächter» wohlgesinnt sind, kann der Regierungschef als Erfolg verbuchen."


 * Which means: On monday, Sarraj met Salem al-Jadran, the mayor of the city Ajdabiya in Tripolis. It would have been a negligible meeting if the mayor's brother Ibrahim al-Jadran wasn't the head of the "Petroleum Factilities Guard". That the "guardians" are well-disposed, the head of the government can see as a success.


 * And at another point:
 * "Die «Wächter der Erdöleinrichtungen» jedenfalls, die neuen Genossen Sarrajs, sehen derzeit nicht im IS, sondern in Hafter die grösste militärische Herausforderung."


 * However, the "Petroleum Factilities Guard", the new allies of Sarraj currently don't see the biggest military competition in Daesh but rather in Haftar.


 * "Die «Wächter der Erdöleinrichtungen» sind mit der von der Uno unterstützten Einheitsregierung von Ministerpräsident Sarraj affiliiert, die seit Ende März versucht, sich im libyschen Chaos als Zentralmacht zu etablieren."


 * The "Petroleum Factilities Guard" are affiliated with the UNO-supported Government of National Accord of premier Sarraj, which tries since end of March to establish itself as the central power in the Libyan chaos.--Ermanarich (talk) 19:08, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I Agree!SvEcHpInXID (talk) 19:46, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Good source. It's now decided i will change the marks now. --Bigles (talk) 20:26, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Will you make Ajdabiya green, too?--Ermanarich (talk) 20:33, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm in favour of keeping the blue colour for the PFG. It's true that they have declared support for the GNA, but they are a rather autonomous force, which previously supported the Tobruk government and repeatedly clashed with Misrata militias at the end of 2014 for the control of eastern oilfileds. Currently, both Misrata militias and the PFG support the GNA against ISIS, but if and when Sirte is liberated from ISIS, they could start fighting each other again (see here), so I think it' better to keep distinct colours for Misrata militias (currently in green) and the PFG. Finally, if we look at reliable sources, both this and this map mark the PFG with a distinct colour. Nykterinos (talk) 20:43, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I see your point, but on the other hand, there isn't a thing like the army of the GNA. It's only militias which declared support for the Government but act predominantly autonomous. Also, it's not only these two militias which clashed, it rather happens often that two militias fight against each other even if they support the same gov't. But the thing that is - at least in my eyes - much more important, is that the PFG doesn't have a political program or something. They are simply protecting the Petroleum facilities and are pro GNA.


 * I think that too many colours make the map unclear, especially for persons which don't know much about this civil war.--Ermanarich (talk) 21:04, 2 June 2016 (UTC)


 * The PFG is Jabrani's personal army. They are pro GNA for now but they are a wild card. They're not just protecting the oil facilities, they've taken control of many cities in the crescent - calling them simply protectors of the facilities is naive.

Harawa captured by pro-GNA forces
Most libyan sources says that the pro-GNA forces has completely captured Harawa. - -  --LibyaDragoon (talk) 17:10, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Ajadiya Under LNA control
Again the map needs to be updated, as Ajdaiya is not under the control of the GNA rather its under the LNA since the start of the year. & MohamedAhtash (talk) (13:52), 19th June 2016 (UTC)

Southern Ajdabiya was captured by Bengazi Defence Battalions (Shura Council) 3bdulelah (talk) 06:33, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

There should be sources when claiming that Ajdabiya is under the LNA's opponents' contorl, I'm from Libya and know that Ajdabiya is under control of the LNA and is mentioned on a number of loacl news sources and Arab News channels. The Benghazi Defence Battalion (Shura Council) that your talking about controlled areas south of Ajdabiya not even the entire town, and have been subsequently pushed out of south of the town. [] [] [] [] MohamedAhtash (talk) (15:41), 25th June 2016 (UTC)


 * One last question before I change it: I've heard that the mayor of Ajdabiya is the brother of the leader of the PFG. How does that fit with a city controlled by pro-LNA-militias?--Ermanarich (talk) 22:58, 25 June 2016 (UTC)


 * That is true the mayor of Ajdabiya (Salam Jadran) is the brother of the PFG leader (Ibrahim Jadran), however he has been kicked out of Ajdabiya to Tripoli ever since the Army took control of the town in Febraury 2016. Also, today on local news the town is removing (Salam Jadran) as mayor and is holding new elections, but news sources of it are not up yet. MohamedAhtash (talk) (15:41), 25th June 2016 (UTC)
 * ANd how is it with these local militias? They don't exist anymore, right?--Ermanarich (talk) 20:27, 26 June 2016 (UTC)


 * If you mean the Shura Council that was in the South of Ajdabiya then yes they have been kicked out. In accordance with what I mentioned about Salam Jadran this following link hopefully will clarify some of your questions. []MohamedAhtash (talk) (01:19), 27th June 2016 (UTC)

Anchor Mark Colors
We need to have colored anchor symbols for both Koms and Derna Naval Stations. We need a green one for Koms and a grey one for Derna. We already have a red one created for the base in Tripoli. Since we already have ISIS color-coded black, some people might mistake the black anchor symbol for ISIS controlled naval bases, so color coding is necessary to avoid confusion. I'd do it myself, but it won't work on my device for some reason, and I'm not particularly familiar with the process of creating such symbols anyway. Anasaitis (talk) 22:31, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I'll do it now. Only problem is that without border it will hardly be visible. Another option would be to take a darker green for the anchor.--Ermanarich (talk) 23:00, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Anchor_pictogram_green.svg Here it is. Let's see then if it can be differed from the other green on the map when it's laying over it.--Ermanarich (talk) 00:01, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Magid - a problem
Somewhere in Template:Libyan Civil War detailed map, there is a link to Magid - which is a DAB page containing no placenames. Narky Blert (talk) 15:34, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ I removed the link because there is no article or description about the Libyan place "Magid". The link was in Module:Libyan Civil War detailed map which is the 'engine" for Template:Libyan Civil War detailed map. Tradedia talk 05:07, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Ghadames and Taminhint Air Base
I think Ghadames Military Council declared allegiance to LNA https://twitter.com/tomfeneux/status/837035134603956224

Also I thought Taminhint Air Base was under the control of the LNA after Misrata's 3rd Force withdrew? Militaryconflict (talk) 15:15, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Ora
Somewhere in Template:Libyan Civil War detailed map there is a link to Ora, which is a DAB page. Links to DAB pages are generally unhelpful, and in this instance I can see no relevant entry at all. Could someone who knows their way around this template and topic help resolve this problem? Narky Blert (talk) 21:35, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ I removed the link because there is no article or description about the Libyan place "Ora". The link was in Module:Libyan Civil War detailed map which is the "engine" for Template:Libyan Civil War detailed map. Tradedia talk 08:57, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Gharyan
since when Gharyan is under LNA control.Alhanuty (talk) 17:05, 2 April 2017 (UTC)


 * It isn't. Ghariyan is under control of local militia that is allied with Misrata and mostly on side of Ghwell and co. LNA units are not there, neither are Haftar-allied Zintanis. This map isn't .... very good to be polite. EllsworthSK (talk) 10:04, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Several changes
Okay, this map is pretty wrong so I am going to do few changes and description box wouldnt allow me to present all sources

a, Ghariyan is pro-GNC city where GNC MoI and other institutions operate per

b, Ghadames local militia command declared loyalty to Khalifa Haftar LNA per

c, Tawergha has no local forces as locals even 6 years later have not been able to come back. Its under Misrata militias control per

d, I dont understand this "Tuareg forces" moniker. There are local forces basically everywhere, some who are actually loyal and some who are loyal on paper to one side or another. While Ali Kana, who now control Sharara field, claims to be outside of jurisdiction of all, Ghat munincipality recogined GNA.

e, I think we should switch Sabha to local forces. Sabha is currently controlled by multitode of militias, generally devided based on tribe, neighbourhood and so on. Many militias used to be "formally" under 3rd force but in reality under no one but itself. Most of them now switched loyalty to Bin Nayel LNA 12th brigade, such as 116th brigade headed by Abou Jaoud which did this when it took over camp of so-called "Libyan National Guard" that is loyal to Ghwell. For that I will switch it to half-LNA / half-local pin but feel free to change it if you have better sources, or discuss it here

f, I will remove GNA presence in Sabha district because all sources were clear that 3rd moved to Jufrah region from Tamanhinht airbase during evacuation.

e, I am switching al-Zahrah and Sacha oil fields to Haftar pin because of WP:COMMONSENSE as there are no sources that would say they are under Ibrahim Jathran.

f, and this is big one that I think many will disagree with. I am switching Misrata from pro-GNA to pro-GNC because of recent Misrata military council declaration of loyalty to GNC and Ghwell per I understand that civic munincipality still de iure falls under GNC, however this map deals with actual, military power-breakers on the ground which in this case is certainly Misrati military council and not munincipality which takes cares of parks and water and whatnot.

Feel free to discuss EllsworthSK (talk) 20:10, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

I also think Misrata should be GNC, Salah Baadi is Misrata's most powerful militia Leader, and he is the one who invaded Tripoli and burned it's Airport a few years back, he was recently defeated in Tripoli and has since withdrawn. AngryCyrenaican (talk) 17:40, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

I don't think GNC controls any areas any longer, all the western Libyan municipalities already recognize GNA, and even if there some militias who reject Sarraj the majority don't. I agree about the Tuareg forces though, I think it's time they removed from the map and changed to pro-GNA (Ghat) and LNA (Ghdames).

As for Kikla and Yefran they should be either controlled by local forces or GNA as I'm pretty sure they aren't controlled by LNA, there is no source that says this and most Amazigh towns reject Heftar. L IBYAĐRA☪OO N : 10:45, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Updates
This map wasn't updated for sometime so i made several changes to reflect latest changes on the ground, some of those changes (like removing tuareg forces and replacing them with GNA) was already discussed in this talk page. If there any objections or questions about those changes please say them here. thanks

My changes basically are: -- L IBYAĐRA☪OO N : 08:01, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * removed the tuareg forces as discussed in template talk page.
 * made Misrata and Sirte mixed control between GNC and GNA
 * made Sabha and Zintan mixed control between GNA and LNA
 * made some changes in Wershafana area
 * made Al-Khums GNA
 * made Yefran and Kikla GNA
 * Can you cite all of this? The Tuareg color change is fine, but the rest need citations. Nuke (talk) 04:07, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
 * it's hard finding Libyan civil war references in English, is it okay to have them in Arabic?

I have written this in a haste, so tell me if there something wrong. Thanks :) -- L IBYAĐRA☪OO N : 03:53, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Misrata and Sirte: i made the change due to the unclear loyalty of Misrata forces to the GNA, as the leader of GNC goverment Khalifa al-Ghawil still in the city till today along with many anti-GNA leaders. here is an article from late 2017 where Ghawil speaks against GNA from Misrata.
 * Zintan: Since appointing Juwaili (a Zintani commander) in a major military role in GNA, the allegiance of Zintan has been uncertain especially since they fought with GNA forces in Wershafana. Here some articles: 1 2
 * Sabha: the situation there is unclear as most southern Libya, Haftar still control areas around there though the municipality and the local police still answers to GNA in Tripoli, here is a link.
 * Wershafana: GNA forces controlled the whole area since the military operation last year, see the same source used for Zintan.
 * Kikla and Yefran: Kikla was only briefly controlled by Zintan but since 2015 they have withdrawn, Yefran was never taken by Zintan: here a link.
 * Al-Khums: aside from being living there, there is no source that says Al-Khums was controlled by pro-GNC forces. If there still a need for source to prove it, here a link which shows a major GNA police commander visiting the city.
 * Arabic-language references aren't really the best for many issues (like whether Zintan or Misrata forces are pro-GNA or not), but we really need every Arabic-language reference we can get to confirm who controls what, mate! There's not enough info out there for those of us who speak exclusively English for issues where we're not really sure about allegiances and so on, and Google Translate et al are available. A visit to a city like this is frequently the most reliable source we get in this sort of situation. We had another incident like this just last month or so on the Yemen warmap--which, by the way, could use some Arabic source-finding! I'm not sure if there should be any changes, like shifting Misrata to GNC outright (based on another cited comment on the talkpage) or anything like that regarding where the loyalties of militia groups lie, but I think that in terms of territorial changes, this is fine. Nuke (talk) 15:39, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Tawergha and Bani Walid
I made both Tawergha and Bani Walid GNA controlled, refrences: -- L IBYAĐRA☪OO N : 08:15, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Bani Walid: is controled by it's Joint Security Room which is aligned with GNA: here are links: 1 2.
 * Tawergha: Tawergha should now be under GNA control, as it's inhabitns are returning under GNA Central Military region forces, Links: 1 2

History corrupted
I think the history of the file is corrupted. The latest one on the list is from August 23 2016. The old versions that work display the same thing as the newest version. A lot of other revisions don't work properly.

The Map needs to be updated
There are several mistakes in the map,i urge fellow editors to fix the mistakes.Alhanuty (talk) 18:18, 29 November 2020 (UTC)