Talk:Control of cities during the Syrian civil war/Archive 7

Nabk and Qarah
First of all Sopher99 let me advise you to read the whole article before you use a source. The source about Qarah is either written by the rebels or by someone with no brain.

http://www.syrianobserver.com/News/News/Activists+Claim+Qara+Retaken+by+Opposition

The Union also said the rebels had stormed the headquarters of the Republican Guard on Mount Qasioun which overlooks the capital.

Did you read this sentence or you missed that.Now that is what I call a desperate propaganda.If Qarah was retaken by rebels It would be a great victory for them and SOHR would have reported that and they are pro-opp.About Nabk the city is contested according to SOHR  and many others there is fighting and yesterday it was reported  that a rebel was killed by clashes in Nabk (1 rebel fighter was killed by clashes with regular forces. 2 civilians, 1 is a woman, from the al-Nabek city were killed: the woman was killed by sniper shots and the man was killed under unknown circumstances) Here is the report:

https://www.facebook.com/syriaohr/posts/454924114615932

Daki122 (talk) 13:43, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

First of all, are you out of your mind? You just broke the 1 revert rule despite being banned for three days. I won't report you if you revert your addition to nabk because this soruce - the daily star http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2013/Nov-28/239185-battles-rage-around-damascus-jihadists-slay-rival-rebel-leader.ashx

Clearly states rebels took control of nabk. Also SOHR sources? I thought you all agreed not to use it. Just imagine how much more editing I will be doing on this page if we start using sohr's facebook. Sopher99 (talk) 13:58, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Facebook is not a reliable source. A city An Nabak taken. Pro-opposition websites said 10 people were killed in the town of Nabk in the Qalamoun region by government shelling. Rebels seized the town last week, leading to the closure of the main highway between Homs and Damascus.The Daily Star94.178.211.149 (talk) 14:03, 28 November 2013 (UTC)


 * REPEAT AFTER ME : FACEBOOK IS NOT A SOURCE. FACEBOOK IS A MEDIA, ON WHICH A SOURCE MAY BE LOCATED. ... If you are thinking of the Wikipedia guideline about Facebook sources, note that it refers only to PRIMARY SOURCES ON FACEBOOK.  A primary source is a source that is party to the information involved, and not an observer of that information.  Also note that SOHR is an observer of facts to which it is not a party, thus a SECONDARY SOURCE, not affected by the wikipedia guideline about Facebook.  I suggest re-reading Wikipedia policy a few times. 174.93.179.165 (talk) 09:46, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

No i did not broke 1 revert I by mistake put Nabak government held then went and fixed it will put as rebel held but any more reports coming about clashes in the town and I will put it back as contested.Daki122 (talk) 14:37, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

And second of all are you out of your mind your using the worst sources.You just changed Qarah based on a sources that claims rebels stormed Mount Qusain what the f*** you are constantly using youtube videos for sources and you are telling me about my sources well at least I use credible sources and not Al-Qaeda newspapers.Daki122 (talk) 14:50, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Alqaeda newspapers? It just so happens that ISIS is notorious for arresting activists who report to such groups that provide the information to the Syrian observor, particularily in Raqqa. Ironically its Alqaeda groups who are the biggest threats right now to the Syrian Observor. Sopher99 (talk) 15:01, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes the Syrian Observer a source so reliable that claims that the rebels stormed a Republican Guard base overlooking Damascus. Next thing you know they will report that the regime is getting help from Martians who are fighting against the rebels and say that if they don't stop they will invade Mars. Daki122 (talk) 15:17, 28 November 2013 (UTC)


 * ? well the rebels consider the lebanese hizbolla aliens, and have threatened to invade Lebanon ... does that count ? ;) André437 (talk) 05:36, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

O yea and here is another source that claims the Army had entered Nabk http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2013/Nov-28/239226-syria-army-retakes-deir-attiyeh-town-near-damascus-tv.ashx#axzz2lw9JjOka

A security source said regime loyalists also entered the nearby town of Nabuk.

So im going to leave it there so you your self can change Nabak as contestedDaki122 (talk) 15:22, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

more sources.Global PostNOWMiddle East Online94.178.211.149 (talk) 15:27, 28 November 2013 (UTC) http://news.yahoo.com/syrian-forces-retake-deir-attiyeh-near-damascus-102645482.html

So Sopher how is NABAK still held by the rebels Daki122 (talk) 15:30, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Nabeck felt tonight into SAA hands. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.39.253 (talk) 22:09, 28 November 2013 (UTC)


 * 60 % of Nabeck under SAA, still contested. Nabeck and Rima (between Nabeck and Yabroud) were bombed last night. Sources:
 * http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/middle-east/government-forces-winning-the-war-in-syria-says-pm-1.1613469
 * http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2013/Dec-02/239596-syrian-aerial-strikes-kill-at-least-50-people-in-town-near-aleppo.ashx#axzz2mJIdYv1jAriskar (talk) 11:13, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Al Tall
Why this town is shown as green in red circle on the map? Does anyone has any source, confirming it? In any other page, any other map, Al-Tall is shown as government-held since August 2012 with a number of sources. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_civil_war#Al-Tall http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rif_Dimashq_offensive_%28August%E2%80%93October_2012%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rif_Dimashq_offensive_%28August%E2%80%93October_2012%29.svg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dmitryfcz123 (talk • contribs) 17:11, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Done. Ariskar (talk) 00:54, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * And correctly reverted by Lothar as per: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/14/world/middleeast/in-syria-motorists-press-on-yielding-for-war.htmlAriskar (talk) 10:16, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Unbelieveable. "Residents say that rebels are active in the town" - is enough to change town to green. But when it comes to changing towns the other way, like with Al-Nabk, sometimes 5-6 sources is not enough. I wonder if some towns will stay green long after the end of war, and we'll wait for NYT or Reuters to write that they are government-held:) Dmitryfcz123 (talk) 18:53, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Request: Add Army Base
I would like to request if the Syrian army base of "Regiment 404" could be added; location is in Dara'a governorate; HERE. Rob2013 (talk)75.34.43.199 (talk) 19:32, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Error, regiment 404 not found. (sorry I had to) Ariskar (talk) 17:40, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅ Tradedia talk

aleppo governorate
kann someone linked and integrate "aleppo offensive" ?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.213.116.72 (talk) 22:38, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Bab al-Hawa crossing NW Aleppo
According to Dailystar (LB), islamists have captured the Bab al-Hawa crossing with Turkey in NW Aleppo governorate. Source: Location:  Ariskar (talk) 10:44, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
 * This is just for information/referenece, as Islamist and FSA opposition territorial control becomes ever more distinct lately.Ariskar (talk) 10:47, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Ariskar (talk) 10:34, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the proposal was moved. --BDD (talk) 23:36, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Cities and towns during the Syrian civil war → Cities and towns during the Syrian Civil War – The main page was just moved from "Syrian civil war" to "Syrian Civil War", there should be consistency. Charles Essie (talk) 17:51, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅-Per consistency.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 22:08, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Pointless. Consistancy is related to disambiguation, and there is no ambiguity.  As well, the initial capitalisation is much more natural, the proposed is internally inconsistant. André437 (talk) 10:18, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Why Nawa in contested / conflict ?
Why it's today December 9 in conflict what Source proved it ?

I mean Serious sources No Random Insurgents / militias video / Pro Rebels Blog

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.155.47.13 (talk) 18:49, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

why always as army capture a town suddenly someone start to change towns from red to contested???? without any source... please change NAWA to red. as — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.102.233.228 (talk) 11:37, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

According to the Free Syrian Army (FSA), some 5,000 displaced civilians were caught in heavy shelling across southern Syria on Saturday as regime forces targeted the border towns of Sheikh Maskin, Nawa and Al Nimr.The Jordan Times The Muslim TimesHanibal911 (talk) 14:35, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

These two sources are very pro rebel sources and there said ONLY according by the Rebels - They no specified if the zone is in conflict or not it's not enough  — Preceding unsigned comment added by LogFTW (talk • contribs) 19:34, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

can we change to red? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.102.233.228 (talk) 10:27, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes please change to red — Preceding unsigned comment added by LogFTW (talk • contribs) 16:11, 11 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Not without sources of your own. Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 03:19, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

That is who said the description https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_civil_war#Nawa 'In early August 2013 the town was under the control of the Army.'

Some Shelling away no mean contested Town so if Shelling far away mean contested zone we must be put Raqqah contesting because this place got bombing every days.

Don't ruin this map again — Preceding unsigned comment added by LogFTW (talk • contribs) 14:21, 13 December 2013 (UTC)


 * There is one key logical distinction which you seem to be unable to understand: if you have to shell a town (from "far away"), you don't have full control over it. Rebel-controlled Raqqa isn't being shelled by rebels. Thus, if government forces controlled Nawa, they wouldn't be shelling it. Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 22:49, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

An Nabk Still contested or controlled by the Army?
These Reports by Syrians TV Channel and NDF Media office showing the Syrians troops controlled all or at least most part (in the Patrice all) from An Nabk 4/12 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrGgNMM8Klg 4/12 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnZ61QATHMQ 4/12 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqCHl1wexc0 4/12 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4di1LL2Ljv8 5/12 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jY9G8X3Hq8U 5/12 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6L29gVbhue0 5/12 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5phrWDwaabg 6/12 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWjiIAoUVYk

I no founds images from Insurgents in the area — Preceding unsigned comment added by LogFTW (talk • contribs) 00:09, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

we must wait for official confirmation — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.102.233.228 (talk) 07:27, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

We all now the flow of events in Nabk, however its better to wait the offcial confirmation from Syrian and neutral sources.--Dimitrish81 (talk) 10:17, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Is this official enough? Syria army retakes al-Nabk town near Damascus --Bozocv (talk) 20:20, 7 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Not really AOnline (talk) 22:57, 7 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree, Syrian Gov. hasnt officially announced that they control Al Nabk, they're still pockets of resistance.Rob2013 (talk)--99.141.30.223 (talk) 02:15, 8 December 2013 (UTC)


 * The fact that it's PressTV aside, the source says "government forces cleared the outskirts of the al-Nabk from militants". That's a far cry from taking the town itself. Next time try reading past the title. Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 19:16, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

today will be official confirmation.i hope soo.... but press tv is good source... remember qusayr or aleppo province... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.94.111.253 (talk) 08:46, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Al Nabeck is on SAA hands and Rima Farms are contested. You could see that in any "impartial" media. Thanks to change accordingly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.39.74 (talk) 20:27, 8 December 2013 (UTC) Confirmed by Syrian army spokesman 5 hours ago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.39.74 (talk) 21:42, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

An-Nabak is still contested the army has secured most of the town but rebels are still in the eastern part of the town we should wait for conformation first before we put it to government heldDaki122 (talk) 22:58, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2013/Dec-09/240381-syrian-troops-seize-control-of-strategic-highway.ashx#axzz2lw9JjOka

Here is a source that also confirms my claim above it should not be long until the town is put to government heldDaki122 (talk) 23:50, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Pro Insurgent source Al Jazeera said the Army controlled it. قوات النظام تسيطر على النبك بريف دمشق Translation= Regime forces controlled Nabak in Damascus http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-RZHwTwaLU

Is official Al Jazeera you tube account — Preceding unsigned comment added by LogFTW (talk • contribs) 05:58, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Once again presstv proved to be one of the most reliable sources of this war. They were the first to report that SAA controls AlNabk, as they have done with Qusayr,AlSafira,Khanaseer,...I guess we should rank them as reliable from now one contrary to other media sources — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.72.225.171 (talk) 09:11, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Press TV and Al-Mayadin are the most reliable ones as they have reporters from the battle grounds, unlike Al-Jazeera nad other pro-opposition media groups who rely on unofficial reporters who are militia-men in most cases. However, Al-Mayadin, Press TV and othe media groups announced about the victory of the Syrian Army in Al-Nabk.--Zyzzzzzy (talk) 12:00, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * So, I guess I can assume that you like to read Das Schwarze Korps or 1940s-vintage Pravda whenever you want to know something about WWII? After all, they had "reporters on the battlegrounds" also. Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 12:54, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Army Takes Control of Town An Nabak.ABC NewsThe Daily StarThe Durango HeraldHanibal911 (talk) 12:26, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Read carefully. All those articles are really the same source (AP), which explicitly makes clear that this is a claim made by state media, which also says that it's still conducting operations in the "outskirts" of the town. The first link is the fullest report, and it says that both "activists" and SOHR are reporting ongoing fighting—conflicting reports. I know it'll drive my little French IP sweetheart temporarily insane, but waiting for a more definitive confirmation is the encyclopaedic way of doing things. And honestly, it won't take too long at this point... Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 12:54, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Again, you are so prompt to put maaloula green but not for al nabeck red and Rima contested unless there is proof by both sides that it is the truth. why waiting so long ?; Regarding maaloula, there is fight inside the town confirmed both by rebels and SAA; — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.220.156.251 (talk) 13:13, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * You're barking up the wrong tree, mon chéri. I didn't change Ma'lula to green. That was this guy. And in case you still haven't figured it out after all these months, nobody changes things just because you command it. Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 14:44, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Well dude why are you always at denial. The town has fallen into government hands.This is what pro-opp SOHR reported:Rami Abdurrahman, the head of the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said the government controls most of Nabek. It said fighting was ongoing Monday in areas around the town that have in the past days seen heavy clashes between the Syrian army and its Lebanon Hezbollah allies and Islamist rebels, including many from an al-Qaida-linked group, on the opposition side. Read more: http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2013/Dec-09/240414-syria-army-takes-control-of-town-near-key-highway.ashx#ixzz2myzcCYCC (The Daily Star :: Lebanon News :: http://www.dailystar.com.lb)

Do you know how many times did I read that when a rebel town fell to the government. I mean come on be real and self-revert.And second of what does this link that you posted has to do with the situation.Most of the town was in government hands since yesterday.And about presstv they are one of the most reliable sources in the country they have reporters in Syria that film and follow the situation stop with that Pravda and other stuff.Presstv is a rely good source and if you can name one time that they have claimed that a town was captured from the Army and it was not true.Daki122 (talk) 13:17, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Please re-read my statement. I personally acknowledge that, in all likelihood, Nabk has indeed fallen. But for a major town like this, clearer information will surface very soon. Waiting a few hours at most for clearer confirmation won't kill you. With certain pro-regime outlets having said the same over a week ago, it pays to be just the slightest bit careful. As for the link, it would seem as though the site changed around the article—notice that the URL has nothing to do with the content. In any case, it's the same link that Hanibal911 provided.


 * If you'd like to use PressTV, why don't we bring in, say, Orient TV? Check out this "on-the-ground" report/ Maybe we could even bring in SANA and its jihadist doppelgänger KavkazCenter! What fun! Having sources or reporters "on the ground" doesn't mean anything on its own, especially when we're talking about a state-run organisation from a country that has 1) abysmal press freedom and 2) an extremely active stake in the conflict. And don't even think to bring in the BBC or something similar as a comparison, that's nowhere near comparable on either count.


 * As far as their false reporting goes, there was an incident over the summer where PressTV (and Russian channels) used images from unrelated incidents to try and show "massacres" against Syrian Kurds: read about it here. The stupidest part of it all is that there were indeed massacres, and their rush to use cheap propaganda only served to cast doubt on it. At the end of the day, a channel bound tightly to an authoritarian state will just move with the puppet strings, giving out a very specific message. When times are good for its interests, it's easier for it to report more truth. But should the pendulum swing the opposite direction, it will start to malfunction quite fast.


 * You are more than welcome to get your news from whatever sources you like. But bear in mind that on Wikipedia there are certain standards to adhere to. These can be annoying at times, but that's just how it goes. Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 14:44, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

First of all do not say that the massacre against the Kurds did not take place.It did take place and many Kurdish officials did confirm it.This is a highly sectarian issue that you have pointed out and i will not engage in a debate over it.Second of tell me what did the western media outlets do with the chemical attack tell me that there was no propaganda there so by your thoughts all of the western media outlets should be labeled as propaganda machines.The death toll that they reported in the chemical attack never matched it was once a 143 then 357 Al-Jazeera reported 1300 and that almost led to a war against a sovereign state.In the end it turned out that the death toll was around 300-400.That was one hell of a scandal that the western media pulled out when in the first half an hour they blamed the regime has used the weapons while there was no evidence suggesting that they used them.I mean when couple of mountain villagers from mount Fuji managed to poison the Tokyo subway why couldn't the rebels be the ones to blame.So pleas don't talk about propaganda when the biggest propaganda channels are stationed in the west.And unlike your sources up top that you have pointed out Presstv does not only repot about the Syrian war it is a news outlet.The thing is they have never reported anything about the war that has not been confirmed on the ground to witch you have no argument to counter that claim.Daki122 (talk) 15:16, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Ugh, will you please slow down and read what I say more carefully??? I explicitly said "there were indeed massacres", but that the Iranian and Russian fake coverage of it caused a fair number of people to scoff at it.
 * Western outlets are driven first and foremost by capitalist motives of profit to cater to a readership body, rather than by manipulative coercion to toe the state political line. Sensational stories sell well. In the end, though, there is a self-correcting element—western outlets like Reuters now give the revised number. PressTV, on the other hand, still has the same bullshit report up on its site: . With news channels from the Gulf, there is indeed a high level of government puppetry, but I wouldn't call them exactly "western" to begin with. Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 15:33, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Syrian Forces Recapture An Nabak.Associated Press Yacoub El Hillo, the U.N.'s top official and humanitarian coordinator in Syria, said fighting remained heavy around Nabak.The Wall Streer JournalHanibal911 (talk) 15:14, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Here is the updated article form the Daily Star says state Tv aired footage from the town in conformation that the town was secured by the army.Daki122 (talk) 15:21, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Al-Jazeera a pro-opp source is also reporting that the town has fallen to government handsDaki122 (talk) 15:24, 9 December 2013 (UTC) Also a video form pro-gov source it is pretty clear the town has fallen http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjagvpRzOq4&feature=youtu.beDaki122 (talk) 15:30, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Good. Now how long did that take? Three hours at the most? And you were so busy arguing with me over nothing that you hardly noticed. Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 15:55, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Lotahr come on only Reuters and some other British papers are objective about the war CNN BBC FOX and others are only here to exploit the situation by writing sad stories how a child was killed during government shelling  they never reported how children and civilians died in government held areas from rebel mortars and  car bombs i mean Jarmana is shelled every day with dozens killed or wounded and no western media has reported that yet(except for British Reuters which I think is the most objective of them all)Daki122 (talk) 15:44, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 15:55, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Finally Lothar, "my dear", you listened to me. I don't command, I'm just on the ground and can affirm things you can't. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.39.74 (talk) 16:44, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Credit for making the change actually goes to AOnline, sweet cheeks. I've added over a dozen dots in your favourite colour over the past day or so, but that's not one. And yes, I can believe that Normandy is as lovely and scenic as always at this time of year. Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 18:41, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

OK Lothar. It seems that you are competent in informatics. You are not alone......Normandy is a great area where I was born. Unfortunately, I'm not in a so safe area. Thanks for my favorite colour (you don't have other choice from several months) but please, don't multiply dots from your favorite colour for each red dot you add !!. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.39.74 (talk) 19:25, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes, yes, of course you are... True, I'm not personally a big fan of "red", but at the same time I also really don't like "green"—though I realise that probably doesn't register through to you properly inside your cozy little dualistic bubble. The fact that you don't like your beloved red dots to be tainted with evil green ones is more a problem with your perceptions than with this map. If a place is shown in a "Wiki-Compatible™" source as controlled by rebels, and unless you have substantive evidence to contradict it, there's no reason to not indicate it as such.


 * But you, my dear, are not remotely a "Wiki-Compatible™" source. You're just some strange, random IP on who drifts around a Wikipedia talkpage heckling people for not paying more attention to you. By all means, go make a blog or something where you can create maps free of evil Wikipedian heterodoxy to your heart's content. That alone won't make you a "Wiki–Compatible™"" source, but you'll at least be able vent your bitterness in a slightly more productive fashion. Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 03:56, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Dear Lothar. Am I strange ?. Probably. But it seems that all I wrote in this talk page were finally true. In this conflict, you have to choose your camp. You can't be "no, no". This Map should be impartial. Unfortunately, from the beginning, it is updated more by pro-rebel "admirators" than impartial persons. It is a fact. Anyway, you and your "friends" could do what you want on this MAP. The battlefield is showing the truth everyday. Even if it is hard for both SAA and Syrian people, "green dots" are going to be less and less present.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.39.74 (talk) 20:13, 10 December 2013 (UTC)


 * It doesn't matter how many times you're correct, your personal claims are still totally worthless as far as Wikipedia is concerned. Provide a reliable source to back up what you say or don't bother coming and demanding changes here. That's all there is to it.


 * Hm, first you say that it's impossible to be impartial when viewing this conflict, but then you whine that the map needs to be updated by impartial editors? Funny logic you have going there. I wonder—if someone were to randomly change Raqqa, Azaz, or Abu Kamal to red without evidence, would you be as upset as when a few "green" villages get added with proper references?


 * It may very well be that this map will be totally "red" someday in the distant future. The current reality, however, is quite different, and the map will seek to reflect that as best as officially-sanctioned sources will allow. And I really think you can take a few deep breaths and stop crying so much—government gains across the past few months have all been rather well-recorded, and red dots have been more numerous than any other colour for a while now.


 * Though you yourself may view the situation as "black and white", other people are under no obligation to adhere to your personal opinion of how they should view it. It's possible to follow a conflict without fanatically cheering one participant as if you were attending some football match. Moreover, this war is a lot more complicated than "rebels vs. government"—or "takfiri terrorists vs. SAA heroes" or "freedom fighters vs. shabbiha butchers" or "holy mujahideen vs. kuffar dogs" or whatever other dualistic pinhole anyone's trying to view this through. Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 23:43, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Adra 2
Just for info: current Adra situation according to a pro-regime website: http://www.syrianperspective.com/ http://twitpic.com/dojlq3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.155.104.15 (talk) 14:52, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Adra should be contested but I did a revert in the past 24 hours so i cant change it any way AFP says the Army this morning began an offensive in the area to recapture the whole Adra area including the Industrial one. Here is the report:

Syrian troops loyal to President Assad launched a broad offensive on Friday aimed at expelling rebels from the town of Adra, northeast of Damascus, state news agency SANA said.

The industrial town, the scene of fierce fighting for three days, is strategically located on a main road into the capital.

The fighting follows a string of army victories against opposition fighters, particularly in Damascus province, where rebel positions have been under siege for more than a year.

"Our armed forces started this morning to stage a broad offensive on Adra, to assault the terrorists' positions after encircling the area," said a military source, quoted by SANA.

Assad's regime has branded all rebels and dissidents as "terrorists" ever since the outbreak of a revolt in March 2011.

Friday's fighting comes two days after Islamist rebels attacked security and army positions, as well as pro-regime militiamen, in Adra.

[AFP]

And a link of another source http://en-maktoob.news.yahoo.com/syrian-army-bid-recapture-town-131208272.html Daki122 (talk) 15:31, 13 December 2013 (U

Adra Town and the Industrial Area need to be juxtaposed. The Industrial area lies to the east of the town. Please edit accordingly.


 * The area marked on this map shows the industrial districts to the west. The larger industrial city to the east is a separate matter. Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 23:58, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2013/Dec-13/240983-syrian-troops-launch-offensive-after-dozens-killed.ashx#axzz2lw9JjOka

Another report we may find usefulDaki122 (talk) 16:52, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

City of Adra's rebels. I do not know why some fans want Battlefield Assad otherwise this is a very bad show. Before the military operation in the region Qalamoun Area Qarah Red finish. But after this little incident just before its collapse was green. I agree Wikipedia Assad. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.186.169.249 (talk) 18:14, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Da fu*k did the user Daki122 (talk) 18:45, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Pro-Assad Daki122 you're a fool. Wikipedia can not show you the rebels win, but small victories Rakhyly Assad will soon show. You're a bastard and a dog trait. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.186.169.249 (talk) 19:02, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

We have detected a retard on this talk page please follow the protocol and ignore him before he starts crying about his little rebels loosing.Oh and by the way go back to school and learn a little English tard.Daki122 (talk) 19:18, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Given that this IP is Iranian, you might want to learn some Farsi (or Azeri) before you mock his/her English skills—which you should not do in the first place, and particularly not with such offensive slurs. Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 22:29, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Stupid people like you should be in Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.186.169.249 (talk) 19:26, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

So if your so smart why don't you go away a**hole. Daki122 (talk) 19:34, 13 December 2013 (UTC)


 * According to 3 sources (2 independent, 1 pro regime) I changed Adra town to "rebel-held/under siege" status, until further noticeAriskar (talk) 13:21, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Is there actually any source about the status of the Ramadan Industrial Area east of Adra? Maybe put it on the map as unclear/contested? OberschIesien90 (talk) 15:50, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

The Army lunched a counter-attack on Adra since yesterday and fighting is raging since then.Also the SOHR has reported Army advances in the area and the recent report from Daily Star also confirms that it should be contested not rebel held.Daki122 (talk) 20:42, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Al Dumayr bombing
According to these 2 videos Al-Dumayr was bombed by SAAF as it was reportedly part of the area seized by the Adra islamist campaign (12/12): http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f7b_1387135858 Ariskar (talk) 04:00, 16 December 2013 (UTC)


 * We should we wait for more confirmation on this town; usually what the rebels like to do is do hit & runs or sneak into a government held town & pick a fight.Rob2013 (talk)99.160.184.97 (talk) 04:49, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Live Leak is bullshit. Let's with for some solid sources.Hanibal911 (talk) 12:28, 16 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree, I am not claiming it to be a solid and reliable source to the WP standards. I am just saying it is an indication of a situation currently not captured by other sources. The same on [www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymChXJaxkc8 Youtube]. I am starting a talk topic to see if any of the WP contributors have any more sources on the topic, I am not suggesting a change to the map before more reliable sources. Regards Ariskar (talk) 12:31, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Amateur video is not a reliable source.Hanibal911 (talk) 12:37, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree. But it puts doubt over the actual control of the area, prompting to seek furhter sources to confirm or refute it.Ariskar (talk) 14:00, 16 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I was talking about Al-Dumayr, not Adra.Ariskar (talk) 14:45, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Let's wait for confirmation from reliable sources. Until no independent confirmation.Hanibal911 (talk) 14:58, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

This is the problem with live leak you cant get sources for granted like live leak because then we need to put Ein Terma and Saqba to contested per live leak videos and other youtube videos that i saw as government tanks and forces are present and fighting in the town same goes for al-Meleha as these videos claim that, but have no actual source to back them so i think we should keep our reserves for much more better sources.Daki122 (talk) 16:41, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * It's a good idea to keep up with Youtube/LiveLeak videos and similar sources on your own. While they are generally sketchy, they can help you know what to look for when searching through reliable sources. However, they fall below Wikipedia's quality standards, so they can't normally be used to make changes here. Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 21:07, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Lothar you got my point exactly. I was asking if further info was available on this Ariskar (talk) 00:06, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Brigade 66, Eastern Hama
Does anybody know the status of this Base? Last I saw was allegedly being overrun by RebelsRob2013 (talk)99.160.184.97 (talk) 10:56, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Checkpoints in map
I cant understand why some users had added a few checkpoints to the map as if they were military bases. If we are going to add checkpoints, just add all, not only a few. In my opinion, something as ephemeral as a checkpoint should not be added to the map, nor as a military base (as they are not military bases), nor as everything else, because if we are going to add every single checkpopoint in the country, the map would be an unreadable mess. Also, check the incoherence of adding checkpoints in a map wich do not have roads in it. Totally a non-sense, they must be removed...--HCPUNXKID (talk) 18:33, 3 December 2013 (UTC)


 * AgreeAriskar (talk) 19:44, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Disagree. Checkpoints are very useful in assessing the military situation and they do not currently clutter the map, they greatly enhance it. I see no reason why anyone would think that the map would benefit from the removal of, say, the Kindi Hospital or the Brick factory. Kami888 (talk) 04:07, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Disagree. It adds more information to the map, so it is benefitial. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.74.13.43 (talk) 13:00, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
 * One strange thing is that the bases and checkpoints are just beeing removed if the rebells take over one. At least the major bases like Base 46 should stay and be colored in green in this case, like its handeled with the airports like Meng. The structures just dont dissapear. OberschIesien90 (talk) 16:30, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Disagree. It can be useful to keep checkpoints, even those taken (particularly if maintained) by the rebels, as well as bases, which can be, as in the case of base 80 by the Aleppo airport, of significance in future battles. André437 (talk) 10:34, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

So I tried to add Base 46 as rebel held just to see there is no icon for a green military base avaiable. Can someone create this? OberschIesien90 (talk) 19:32, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Madaya, Rif Dimashq
Can anybody confirm that the town is under Government control or under Siege? Pro-opp has posted videos of Artillery strikes & Tanks near the town; Video 1 Video 2 Video 3 I know these are just videos but if anybody has better sources, please let me know.--99.141.22.133 (talk) 21:49, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * More than just Madaya—the situation in the whole Zabadani area is miserably unclear. Der Spiegel gave a pretty good overview of the situation in late April 2013. Tensions were high and tenuously stable thanks to mediation by a local committee, with the only remaining govt forces in the city being a "Colonel Assam" and his 20 men holed up in the General Security Directorate—not attacking and not being attacked. Their presence allowed for power and supplies to keep coming into the city. Also notable is that 'Ayn Hawr, further up the valley, is/was apparently a major transit point along Syria-Hizbullah paths and tunnels (Zabadani was once a IRGC base area as well.


 * This past June Channel 4 reported that Zabadani rebels were apparently strong enough in the late spring/early summer to clear their own valley and push up through Wadi Barada into Qudsaya. ICRC reported at the end of June that they delivered medical supplies successfully to Bludan, which seems to have been a first place of refuge for civilians fleeing violence in Zabadani owing to its higher elevation. On 29 July, pro-rebel activists in Qalamun reported heavy shelling across the region, with Zabadani under fire from positions in the surrounding mountains as well as from the Wadi Qaq (?) checkpoint; Shallah (?) and the Serghaya (here) road. Zabadani pro-rebel activists also reported on 11 August that the east side of the city was shelled by tanks at the Al-'Aqabah (?) and Qal'at al-Tall (?) checkpoints and mortars from the Wadi Qaq checkpoint (?).


 * On 29 August, an Economist report noted that Zabadani and Madaya were "in rebel hands", while Al-Akhbar reported in early September that the army was shelling Madaya and nearby Buqqayn while launching attacks against Zabadani. Later in the month, the Lebanese President called for the protection of Christians in Ma'lula and Bludan, while FPM leader Michel Aoun claimed on 10 September that Nusra was planning to storm Bludan just like it did Ma'lula. I'm not sure what to make of how that relates to ground control given that the town was shelled by the army at the beginning of the month, according to SOHR.


 * In mid-September, government media started issuing some reports on fighting in the mountains above the valley. On 13 September, SANA claimed that the army took several positions near "Jennet Bludan", which I guess is this resort high on the mountainside. On 14 September, they claimed that the army "fully" took over the mountains to the east of Zabadani, but it doesn't mention if they climbed down the slopes to Madaya/Bludan; given that later on in the month they still claimed ongoing operations in the mountains, I'm guessing probably not. There were apparently clashes around a restaurant (maybe the same resort). The next day, government sourced vomited up a particularly dense tangle of Newspeak, saying that the reports of "significant" advances in Bludan were "initially meaningless" but also "at least good and hopefully true". Take that as you will, I suppose.


 * Reports of mountain fighting were at least partially corroborated by a Facebook page for the rebel village of Hurayrah in the mountains behind Madaya, which posted urgent messages on 13 and 19 September discussing loyalist mobilisation and clashes in the area; the village does not seem to have been overrun, however. On 28 September, pro-rebel activists reported heavy shelling on Zabadani from the checkpoint at Hawsh to the south (near here, I guess) as well as from the mountains to the east; no casualties reported.


 * On 26 September, Syrian soldiers apparently confiscated 400 food rations from UNWFP convoy at a checkpoint in the Madaya Valley. A collection of pictures in October showed that ISIS apparently may have at least a small presence in Zabadani. In early November, the UN said that UNICEF managed to secure access to Bludan, which was "inaccessible for months", after passing through 8 checkpoints, and estimated that its population had ballooned from a pre-war 4,000 to 60,000 with a heavy influx of internally displaced Syrians. The Hurayrah Facebook page posted its last post (to date) on 16 October, which seems to describe a successful supply raid.


 * Shortly before the Qalamun offensive, Al-Hayat released a piece which contained axes of advance hypothesised by rebel leaders in a potential attack on the mountains. The third axis they described was against the villages of this valley, but I'm having some difficulty understanding the details. The Google translate version is: "The third axis will be at the craft area or what is known as the tower near the Zabadani and Bludan and Serghaya and welding..." I think that "welding" refers to the town of Ham in Lebanon, which could indicate that this is either a sympathetic area to be cleared by Hizbullah or perhaps already a Hizbullah base. "The tower" is more ambiguous, but probably refers to one/some of the mountains rising above (e.g.?). "Craft Area" is beyond me, though.


 * In Zabadani, pro-rebel activists on 25 November reported shelling from Hawsh and the Ba'ath/Hizbullah camp (here) and clashes on and again on 3 December mainly from Hawsh and 'Aqabah ChPs.


 * TL;DR I don't think we can label either Madaya or Bludan "government-held" at this point. The safest bet would be to turn them "constested", though I think a case could also be made for green with red ring.  Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 07:33, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

i agree. but would be fair to change NAWA as red and Suran as red, and yabrud as contested... what about rima? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.102.233.228 (talk) 11:39, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Well the Zabadani area is unclear because the opposition(majority of them are syrians but some extremists are stationed in Zabadani.) is local there are no foreign jihadists among the rebels there that can be clearly seen in the videos as the tanks and APC's are not attacked nor is there any gunfire.It is like a semi agreed truce between the government and the rebels in the area we should put Madaya as contested for now as we have seen the evidence and if any new evidence suggest that Bludan is contested then we put it contested as wellDaki122 (talk) 14:16, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

And can anyone post the source about NAWA here cuz i cant find it.If there is no source then it should be changed back to government controlled.Daki122 (talk) 14:19, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

According to the Free Syrian Army (FSA), some 5,000 displaced civilians were caught in heavy shelling across southern Syria on Saturday as regime forces targeted the border towns of Sheikh Maskin, Nawa and Al Nimr.The Jordan Times The Muslim TimesHanibal911 (talk) 14:40, 10 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Sheikh Maskin and Nawa are about 30 km from the border, so not really "border towns". I don't know about Al Nimr.  BTW, the first 2 references are the same article in different media. André437 (talk) 05:21, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Adra(Township),Eastern Ghouta
Press TV confirms that Adra has been taken by Rebels today (12-11-13). According to Farsnews, Syrian Military will begin a counter-attack. Labeled as Contested or Taken(By rebels)?--75.34.43.255 (talk) 01:57, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
 * A Couple more sources Link 1 & Link 2 for link 2 scroll all the way to the bottom of the report.--75.34.43.255 (talk) 02:16, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Fars News and Press TV not reliable sources.It also said 13 regime loyalists were killed battling rebels at Adra in Damascus province, and that five civilians also lost their lives.Global Post,following their defeat in three major towns in the rugged al- Qalamoun region north of Damascus, the rebels stormed Wednesday the Adra al-Umalieh suburb.People DailyHanibal911 (talk) 07:23, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Rebels stormed a bakery and have stolen 30 tons of flavour in this area. In fact, soldiers and civilians were killed. These events doesn't means that Adra is under rebels hands (it is so far). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.220.156.251 (talk) 10:29, 12 December 2013 (UTC)


 * It better remain as contested, similarly to the Industrial area, until we get more clear sources I think. Fighing is reported anyway.Ariskar (talk) 10:34, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Here is a video report about Adra it seems that the army controls large parts of the town but fighting is still raging in it.It should be contested at most not rebel held as the rebels only attacked the town didn't took over the town(only some parts).Daki122 (talk) 13:34, 12 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I do not get the idea of labeling the terrorists as rebels. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.153.114.160 (talk) 18:46, 12 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree. Most of the real terrorists are pro-regime, and most of the rebels aren't terrorists. André437 (talk) 05:39, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Well. Because rebels has real no win battles from months, administrators of this MAP are so prompt to put green dots. But they wait, wondering themselves for days to know if they have to put Al Nabeck red. Shame on you !. If you really knew what's happen now in Adra, you would be really astonished................... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.23.45 (talk) 19:04, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Don't worry i fixed that and they will have from now on to post 10 sources for every change like i did for Nabk.Daki122 (talk) 19:20, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Daki122. I just want truth and honesty. I assume the fact that I'm (I have no choice) for the regime. But, if a town or an area fall into rebels hands, with proof (real ones, I have the honesty to accept it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.23.45 (talk) 19:51, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Aleppo map remove
Hello to all,

could you remove Aleppo map picture from general map (such as you done with Damascus two months ago) ?

Better only dots, as a city parts.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Strizek (talk • contribs) 12:11, 16 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I disagree. The Aleppo, Deir Ez Zor and Deraa maps are quite successful in showing partial control changes in the city districts. In fact I think it would be good if someone could extend this to Homs city as well.Ariskar (talk) 12:24, 16 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Ok, i think, this Aleppo map will be still in Aleppo section, where someone can find it. Maybe only link on the bottom of general page will be suitable. In this way, you can t put dots as a parts of city. (Strizek)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Strizek (talk • contribs) 14:35, 16 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I also think that it would be better to make the map like Damascus (dots). Reason is quite simple, NOBODY is updating those small maps! Aleppo is last updated on 14th of November! It would be just easier to keep it up to date, together with the rest of the towns...
 * Anyway I have found tons of informations on this website: http://www.syrianperspective.com/   but I am new to wiki and I don't want to damage something while trying to edit the map...  XD
 * Please guys check that website, looks like that guy have some connections in Baath party and is giving out even the names of the man killed all together with the info of all current fighting in Syria. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Comins2008 (talk • contribs) 09:35, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Rebels?
Why are Wikipedia -or Wikipedians- still insisting to call this bunch of foreign long-bearded Islamist terrorists as rebels? Any rational explanation?--Zyzzzzzy (talk) 04:35, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Have you come here to present an impartial, reasoned argument backed up with reliable sourcing as to why we should change our terminology? Or have you just come here to jump up and down and scream? Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 05:01, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Look who's talking about NPOV, how sarcastic...--HCPUNXKID (talk) 18:36, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Village of Tiyara, Rif Aleppo
This city, situated North East of Al Nairab (Aleppo) is under SAA hands. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.98.99 (talk) 12:52, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

source — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.155.63.218 (talk) 16:00, 1 December 2013 (UTC)


 * This is a government source & SAMA TV so take it as you will; pictures and videos show the reporter near Tiyarah(Township) & Tal Tiyarah Hill, the town is very small. Sama TV Video & Syrian TV Video Syrian TV shows the transport directorate building & Tal Tiyarah Hill. Pictures of Tal Tiyarah

Rob2013 (talk)--75.34.41.185 (talk) 05:56, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Images are not partisan, its the media who is, so as the images clearly show the town in SAA control, I'll add it to the map. Also I remove Aleppo thermal plant. One thing is adding basic infrastructure (dams, military bases, border crossings, airports, roads...) and another adding every single infrastructure (big or small, relevant or irrelevant) in the whole country, wich will made the map unreadable and a non-sense. I still cant understand why some checkpoints have been added to the map, I will expose that in another post...--HCPUNXKID (talk) 18:19, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you.Rob2013 (talk)-- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.34.41.185 (talk) 18:55, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

It has been said that the photos of Facebook is not a reliable source, as well as videos from YouTube, even if they are taken from the official media This means that the city must be removed or else to mark it contested meas then yet bude granted more reliable data confirming his capture. 46.200.244.1 (talk) 21:30, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Are you sure of what you say? About Facebook, its not the photos what its not a reliable source, but all Facebook pages (official or not) in the majority of cases (see WP:FACEBOOK). And about YouTube, can you endorse your claim?. As far as I know, if the video is from a media outlet, it can be used. Logically, what cannot be considered as a reliable source is a crappy, flickering, activist amateur video. Above all, lets do not make double standards, as other users have used (for example) al-Jazeera videos as sources here, and, curiously, no one had protested its inclusion...--HCPUNXKID (talk) 22:33, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Of course WP:FACEBOOK refers only to PRIMARY SOURCES ON FACEBOOK. That is, sources directly involved in the information involved, and not observers of the information.  Which indeed applies to most Facebook pages, but NOT to pages such as SOHR, which is a SECONDARY SOURCE.  Kindly respect this guideline André437 (talk) 10:01, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
 * You still try to portrait SOHR as a neutral, non-partisan media source, wich is clearly not. Get your facts right, SOHR is a PRO-OPPOSITION ACTIVIST NET, NOT A JOURNALISTIC MEDIA OUTLET. That's not my personal opinion, but a well-known fact. I will continue to delete all Facebook pages used incorrectly as sources, as this (still, I hope) is an encyclopaedia, and not a blog, and still have some rules. Also, it seems to me that you havent read carefully WP:FACEBOOK, wich states, quote: "*As a reliable source:  Sometimes.  The official page of a subject may be used as a self-published, primary source, but only if it can be authenticated as belonging to the subject.". So, if SOHR is a secondary source (as you claim), its Facebook page cannot be used. Rules talk!.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 19:20, 15 December 2013 (UTC)


 * HCPUNXKID, it is becoming apparent why you have been cited so many times for vandalism. Either you don't understand English, or you can't follow simple logic.  The WP:FACEBOOK clause that you cite only applies to primary sources, which SOHR most definitely is not.  Also note that this restriction is grouped under social networking websites.  It should be evident even to you that the SOHR page is not being used for social networking.  It is the English-language version of an arabic language non facebook site.  So grow up and accept that you don't have the right to vandalise Wikipedia to impose your point of view, despite the facts. André437 (talk) 19:24, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
 * "cited so many times for vandalism"? Ha, by whom? By the same 3 or 4 all-we-know-who pro-"rebel" POV-pusher users?. Oh, and thanks for that personal attack, it shows clearly who is nervous and dont have points to argue. If you cannot understand that Facebook is a social network, I've got nothing more to add to the discussion. The cite is very clear: Facebook primary sources: acceptable sometimes, Facebook secondary, etc... sources: not acceptable. Perhaps its you who dont understand English language, a serious problem if its your native tongue...--HCPUNXKID (talk) 22:38, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Kindi Hospital
Pro rebel sources claim Kindi Hospital is totally captured https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IHuSMKGTww&feature=youtu.be — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.253.82.246 (talk) 18:02, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

first moments after capture: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHVDBY3h5cU — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.253.82.246 (talk) 18:05, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

source needs to bi like this next time: http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2013/Dec-20/241857-cleric-killed-in-shelling-of-syria-mosque-monitor.ashx#axzz2lw9JjOka And please sign your posts. Either way I removed Kindi hospital as a base from the map.Daki122 (talk) 20:03, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Whether confirmed or not it should not be removed, thats where I come in.-- Rob2013 (talk)99.160.184.97 (talk) 00:59, 21 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree that Kindi hospital should not be removed from the map. Please restore it. André437 (talk) 19:34, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Several videos (with prisoners)confirmed that Al Kindi Hospital (ancient one) is under rebels hands. Pro-government side confirmed that too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.98.68 (talk) 10:58, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Dude they wrecked the place it was destroyed by suicide bombers its just a pile of ruins have you seen the videos?Daki122 (talk) 23:44, 22 December 2013 (UTC)


 * The (huge) complex is still standing. They may have caused some devastation at 2 entrances, but the video I saw had little impact on the other side of the building.  Also there is a photo of the building after the rebels took control, where the structure (at least from one side) doesn't seem to have suffered much more than bullet holes.  See the photo near the top of this page. André437 (talk) 11:21, 25 December 2013 (UTC)


 * We could instead, since there is space now, just add the Handarat-district as rebel-held. OberschIesien90 (talk) 10:42, 23 December 2013 (UTC)


 * ✅ Hanibal911 (talk) 18:23, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

If you do that, you have no right to put it green. Al kindi Hospital is not the entire Handarat area and there are still fight in this area. At the minimum lightning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.220.156.251 (talk) 11:06, 24 December 2013 (UTC)


 * But the area around the military hospital has long been under rebel control. What evidence do you have of any regime control (or even presence) in proximity ? André437 (talk) 17:02, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

It seems that you don't really know this area. I spoke about Handarat district, not the surrounding of the Hospital. More than this, yesterday, 12 rebells were killed inside the Hospital. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.98.68 (talk) 22:04, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Otaybah
Now appears Otaybah green in the map, probably is not under rebels control, but probably  rebels  have control in the towns in  the western of Otaybah. The source is this article in the Brown Mosses blog, a very recognized specialist about Syria war

http://brown-moses.blogspot.com.es/2013/12/the-rebel-offensives-in-east-ghouta.html

Final situation in the ground in 21 December

http://i.imgur.com/wJ9VrkB.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.34.62.213 (talk) 16:13, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Pro opposition sources and blogs are not reliable. Need confirmation from more reliable sources.Hanibal911 (talk) 16:25, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Do even someone who publishes in Foreignpolicy.com,  work with Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International or is the source of articles in New York Times and other media?

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/profiles/Eliot-Higgins#sthash.ztTemDWp.dpbs

Three articles about Syria, latest is about chemical weapons attack in Damascus, answering a Pulitzer prize.

From wikipedia

''"Brown Moses is among the best out there when it comes to weapons monitoring in Syria," said Peter Bouckaert, emergencies director at Human Rights Watch.[1] New York Times war reporter CJ Chivers said that fellow journalists should be more honest about the debt they owe to Higgins' Brown Moses blog. "Many people, whether they admit or not, have been relying on that blog's daily labour to cull the uncountable videos that circulate from the conflict," he said.[1] Amnesty International said that the Brown Moses Blog was vital in proving the Syrian regime was using ballistic missiles, information then used to send a research mission to Syria.[4]''

About self-published sources and reliable sources in wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources

Self-published material may sometimes be acceptable when its author is an established expert whose work in the relevant field has been published by reliable third-party publications

Eliot Higgins is clearly a "established expert whose work in the relevant field has been published by reliable third-party publications". For example, Foreigh Policy. But there are more colaborations wiht media like New York Times of NGO like HRW

http://cjchivers.com/post/44061848548/for-syrias-antigovernment-fighters-a-saudi

http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/03/16/syria-mounting-casualties-cluster-munitions — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.34.62.213 (talk) 22:45, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Ok it is clear that this is a blog and the person who is running it may be an expert but that still does not change the fact that he is an opp-activist who will always root for the rebels no meter what that is why blogs and sole opinion of one man can not be used as a source.That is why we need to stick to reliable media sources and we should evade such bloggers even if they are experts(even though this guy is an arms expert not a reporter from the conflict zone).Daki122 (talk) 23:35, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Al Dumayr
Hi everyone, pro-assad source annanews confirmed, that al dumayr is in rebels hand and there are about 1500 rebels in the city, here is the source from 23/12/2013, its in russian, but you can translate http://anna-news.info/node/13153 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hellsurvivor (talk • contribs) 18:25, 26 December 2013 (UTC)


 * ANNA News is bullshit. Need more reliable confirmation from trusted sources. Hanibal911 (talk) 18:38, 26 December 2013 (UTC)


 * but they are pro-assad and are speaking about rebels success — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hellsurvivor (talk • contribs) 18:49, 26 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Can confirm that the above reference is pro-Assad and does say what is claimed (using google translate). It also mentions ongoing clashes in Adra.  The same reference has many pro-regime statements for other locations around Damascus. André437 (talk) 19:35, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

here is one more source about clashes there, not a big source but i think we can higlight the city :)http://zamanalwsl.net/en/news/2953.html http://zamanalwsl.net/en/news/2932.html the death of general in al dumayr is already confirmed by regim — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hellsurvivor (talk • contribs) 19:04, 26 December 2013 (UTC)


 * This pro-opposition source. Need to wait for confirmation from reliable sources.
 * pro-opposition and pro government sources are not reliable need confirmation from neutral sources.Hanibal911 (talk) 19:16, 26 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Wait a minute. A pro-regime source which claims a rebel success should be sufficient, just as a pro-rebel source which claims a regime success would be.  Here we have a pro-regime source giving considerable detail of a rebel success, backed by a pro-rebel source which says much the same.  That should be more than enough. André437 (talk) 19:35, 26 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Ok dude if you want i will post every pro-opp source that said that Daraya is government held and on top of that we can not put Dumayr as rebel held dont forget that there is a large military airbase in its vicinity a missile base and a large barracks in the middle of the town.Daki122 (talk) 19:42, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Methodology
I have nothing to say for now about Al Dumayr, Daraya, etc... However, i wanted to make some clarification points about methodology:
 * 1- If an event is covered by a neutral source, then we use this source and ignore all non-neutral sources.
 * 2- If an event is not covered by a neutral source, then we can use a non-neutral source only in two cases:
 * a) pro-gov source talking about rebel success
 * b) pro-rebel source talking about gov success

The reason we do not use non-neutral sources is because they tend to overstate their own successes & understate those of their enemy. However, in some cases, these non-neutral sources are forced to admit their enemy’s success because it might be too obvious, and therefore not admitting it would further diminish their already weak credibility. These cases will be rare, however, we should exploit them whenever possible. Tradedia talk 04:54, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Moadamiyeh
Truce in Moadamiyeh not broken.The TelegraphThe Daily StarAl Arabiya Hanibal911 (talk) 08:50, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Hajanah Battalion (Al Hasakah province)
Someone has information on this military facility Hajanah Battalion Hanibal911 (talk) 11:11, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Kurds in Al-Qamishli.
Hasakah province: Reports that the YPG has taken over 5 villages by al-Qamishli city after violent clashes with the ISIS since midnight, sporadic clashes continue in the area with no reports of losses. -"Syrian Observatory for Human Rights," https://www.facebook.com/syriaohr/posts/467441756697501

Don't forget to add these villages to the map and color them yellow. (Kurdish-controlled settlements are in yellow) --68.229.239.155 (talk) 19:42, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Need confirmation from other sources.. Facebook and blogs are not reliable sources. WP:FACEBOOKWP:BLOGSHanibal911 (talk) 19:54, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

But the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights is reliable. It is a real source, and someone confirmed it in "comments" on the website. They said that the "YPG" said the same thing. --68.229.239.155 (talk) 23:06, 27 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Reliable or not (although I am of the opinion SOHR is reliable) the source does not name the villages in question. EkoGraf (talk) 15:26, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Aside from facebook "sources" here is one from the PYD Party of the YPG Offensive on Tel Hamis: PYDRojava. --Rob2014 (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.160.184.97 (talk) 00:52, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

YPG units also have also liberated several villages around the town of Tell Hamis including Khirbet Hatem, Hallaj, Small Charmookh, Big Charmookh, Khazaf, Ghanamiya and Bazoniya. Firat NewsHanibal911 (talk) 16:02, 28 December 2013 (UTC)


 * This is all already being recorded on the map, as far as the placenames can be found. Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 00:44, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Islamist held villages
Have sources for villages in islamist hands, but cannot find this places on Wikimapia, and I wont search further. If someone knows the places, he may add them.

Gevere - somewhere in Northern Latakia http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2013/12/syria-al-qaeda-targets-turkmen-minority-isis-jihadist-kurds.html##ixzz2n6R9Ha6I

Kanaye - in Idlib, somewhere near Ghassaniyah http://www.katholisches.info/2013/12/16/islam-oder-tod-islamisten-nehmen-2000-christen-als-geiseln-und-drohen-mit-erschiessung/

OberschIesien90 (talk) 15:54, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Al-Qunaya http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=35.917416&lon=36.304064&z=14&m=b&show=/25662320/Qunaya&search=QanayeHanibal911 (talk) 18:56, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Tall Abyad
The YPG is present in the Kurdish areas, or Western Kurdistan. From the northeast, they include the city of Dêrik (Malikia, in Arabic), and stretch past Girkê Legê (Maabada), Jel Agha (Jawadiya), Tirbesipî (Qahtaniyah), parts of Qamishlo (Qamishli) and Amûdê (Amoude), Dirbêsî (Dirbasiye), Serêkanîye (Ras el-Ein), parts of Hassake City and Girê Sipî (Tell Abiyad), Kobanê (Ein al-Arab), and the city Efrîn (Afrin), as well as in Kurdish neighborhoods in Aleppo, like Sheikh Maqsoud and Ashrafiye.Carnegie Endowment Hanibal911 (talk) 07:57, 27 December 2013 (UTC) I think you must make a difference between YPG and kurdish rebel factions which are very present in many places. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oussj (talk • contribs) 10:04, 27 December 2013 (UTC)


 * All areas you mentioned are controlled by YPG. EllsworthSK (talk) 16:25, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

except border town  Tall Abyad Hanibal911 (talk) 06:49, 28 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Naturally. EllsworthSK (talk) 23:22, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Atme, Idlib
It seems Atme was allegedly taken by a ISIS(L) from the Suqour al-Sham(Islam) Brigade.http://news.yahoo.com/al-qaeda-affiliate-captures-syrian-town-border-turkey-032952200.html (Originally attributed to Rob2013 (talk) actually posted by: — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.34.46.86 (talk) 08:06, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

ERBIN AND DOUMA
SAA entered in these 2 towns. So, should be highlighted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.220.39.253 (talk) 17:47, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Rabiyah, Latakia
This town should be added, the rebels have control of the town. Just recently a specific FSA group known as the Al Harjah Brigade were clashing with ISIS within the town. Map: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=35.787184&lon=36.038246&z=12&m=b&search=Latakia%20Syria attributed to:-->Rob2013 (talk) by the actual poster --> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.34.44.19 (talk) 00:34, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

ALEPPO
Don't you think that it is time to update Aleppo Map please? (layramoon, Old City, Ashrafyeh for exemple..........). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.220.156.251 (talk) 09:41, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Douma
The army says it has killed a number of militants in the city of Duma near the Syrian capital Damascus.IBN TV Hanibal911 (talk) 14:31, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * So just because the Syrian army says something it happened? Interesting. We will do the same for rebels then. Sopher99 (talk) 15:00, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Then let's use only reliable sources. Facebook and blogs are not reliable sources. WP:FACEBOOKWP:BLOGS Hanibal911 (talk) 15:06, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

According to Syr.Persp. SAA controls Douma According to other sources SAA is advancing in Douma In any case Douma is at least contested and not rebel held — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.131.200.129 (talk) 19:19, 29 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Syrian Perspective is a strongly pro-regime source, with no attempt at impartiality. Also, you should provide the link. André437 (talk) 00:13, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Sources indicate that Douma contested.New KeralaWars in the WorldIndia VisionXinhuaZee NewsYahoo NewsTitan HeraldNews BBCChennai Online But i want hear from other users  of their opinions.Hanibal911 (talk) 20:57, 30 December 2013 (UTC)


 * The first 2 (essentially identical) references are based on SANA. It sounds like it is referring to some type of commando incursions into Douma (and elsewhere), with no indication of regime forces on the ground.  Thus not confirming that Douma is contested.  The BBC reference just gives the number of (supposed) rebel casualties. André437 (talk) 00:13, 31 December 2013 (UTC)


 * It is BCC (not BBC). The difference between BBC and BCC, is like the difference between Harvard and Hartford Tradedia talk 11:04, 1 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Well Douma is near the Damascus-Homs highway (only a kilometer or so) so it is not a surprise that clashes are happening in Douma as the army had to enter the town form the side of the Highway in order to stop any attacks on it and secure it.Daki122 (talk) 10:44, 31 December 2013 (UTC)


 * All these are based on a dubious source that copy/pasted word for word a SANA report. Besides, the source itself says "rebel-held Douma". It takes more than this to make a large city like Douma contested. By the way, limited operations happening near the Damascus-Homs highway are well represented by the red ring. And as far as the comparison with Khan al-Shih goes, i will write about it later... but it should not be green. Tradedia talk 11:04, 1 January 2014 (UTC)