Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of al-Yaarubiyah


 * The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as |this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Gatoclass (talk) 14:29, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Battle of al-Yaarubiyah

 * ... that the YPG was denounced after the Battle of al-Yaarubiyah for fighting the Free Syrian Army, which was not even present during the battle? Source: "(...) the opposition-in-exile coalition, which after the takeover of Yaroubiya released a statement condemning the YPG for expelling the 'FSA' from the town (even as there were no FSA groups in the town by the time of the YPG takeover)"
 * Reviewed: Atamu Tekena

Created by Applodion (talk). Self-nominated at 20:37, 8 April 2017 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg Length and history verified, but the source for the hook fact seems to be a blog. Am I missing something, or can we find a more IRS-compatible source? Daniel Case (talk) 04:29, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * @Daniel Case: The original statement by the SNC was later deleted (probably because it was embarrassingly wrong), but it was fortunately achieved: Here is the translated text by the SNC, posted on the council's own website. Applodion (talk) 11:41, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, good. Now what are the sources for this statement being wrong and the YPG being condemned for it? Daniel Case (talk) 14:52, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * ? The SNC itself states that "The Syrian Coalition and the General Staff of the FSA pledge to defend the Syrian territories against any aggression, to maintain the geographical unity of Syria, and to preserve its national sovereignty. The militias that attacked FSA bases in the city of Yarubiya will be held accountable." The "militias that attacked" are the YPG, so the SNC is condemning them for attacking the town. In regards to the town being held by Jihadi (non-FSA) groups, please look at all sources listed in the article, which all confirm that al-Yaarubiyah was held by pro-al-Qaeda units. To list but one, this article even titles 'Inside Syria: Al-Qaeda Was Here' Applodion (talk) 16:01, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg OK, we're good here. Daniel Case (talk) 19:23, 11 May 2017 (UTC)


 * I have returned this from prep as I was unable to verify it in a timely manner, also one of the hook sources looks like a blog. Gatoclass (talk) 17:45, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
 * @Gatoclass 1. As seen above, I have already provided the reliable sources for the hook (namely, the original SNC statement blaming the Kurds, and sources for the fact that the FSA was not present), 2. the blog you are refering to belongs to Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi, a respected authority on the subject. Applodion (talk) 18:51, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

I am particularly struggling with this passage:

''The capture of al-Yaarubiyah was hailed as great success by the PYD, but was also welcomed by the Kurdish National Council, a local political opponent of the PYD. Similarly, pro-government media reported about the defeat of the Islamist rebel forces at al-Yaarubiyah with satisfaction.[4][3] On the other side, the Syrian National Coalition condemned the YPG for expelling the "Free Syrian Army" from the town, even though no FSA forces had been present during the battle.[4][13]''

What government are we talking about in the phrase "pro-government media"? And the SNC is "on the other side" of what? Gatoclass (talk) 14:11, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
 * @Gatoclass The government of the country where the battle happened - the Syrian government. And the SNC is "on the other side" insofar as both the PYD, the KNC, and government loyalists celebrated the Jihadi defeat at al-Yaarubiyah, whereas the SNC condemned the YPG for driving the Jihadists out. Applodion (talk) 14:50, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification. I will take another look at the article in the next day or two, and probably add a few clarifications of my own before taking this any further. Gatoclass (talk) 15:15, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
 * @Gatoclass Alright, thanks. Applodion (talk) 17:36, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
 * @Gatoclass How is the review proceeding? Applodion (talk) 13:31, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I had a busy week and very little time for Wikipedia. I will try to get back to this again in the next few days. Gatoclass (talk) 15:16, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
 * @Gatoclass Considering that this DYK was already passed by two users before you came along, it would be nice if you finally finish the review. Applodion (talk) 10:00, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Sorry about the delay in getting back to this. I have made some changes to the article - please check them for accuracy. I do however still have a couple of concerns about the hook, firstly that it is sourced partly to a blog, and secondly, that the initial statement made by the SNC was, according to you, later deleted by the SNC, in which case I wonder if it is a fact worth highlighting? Gatoclass (talk) 10:01, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
 * @Gatoclass Thank you for the response. The changes are absolutely fine, and in regard to your concerns: The blog belongs to Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi, one of the leading experts in regard to the Syrian Civil War, so his work is reliable. And in regard to the deletion - that probably happened exactly because the statement that is the basis of the hook was so extremely anti-PYD and embarrassing. They basically denounced the PYD for defeating al-Qaeda/ISIL forces - considering that this Syrian opposition group tried to present themselves as moderate, secular and not anti-Kurdish, their statement in regard to al-Yaarubiyah is very telling about their true priorities (It should be noted that the chance that they actually beliebed the Jihadists in the town to be FSA, as per their statement, is very small; it is really hard to confuse al-Qaeda/ISIL for FSA). Applodion (talk) 10:37, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Okay, I will give this article the once-over tomorrow to ensure there are no other issues, and take it from there. Gatoclass (talk) 11:43, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
 * @Gatoclass Thank you. Applodion (talk) 13:08, 16 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Symbol confirmed.svg Once again, my apologies for the delay in getting back to this - I haven't had much time for Wikipedia of late, and most of it got burned in response to another nomination this week. I am going to pass this nomination, although some of the sourcing is not independent, because I think there is just enough independent sourcing to sustain it. Gatoclass (talk) 14:22, 22 July 2017 (UTC)