Template:Did you know nominations/Conquest Brigade


 * 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: rejected by Vincent LUFan (talk) (Kenton!) 12:37, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Conquest Brigade

 * ... that the Conquest Brigade (pictured) was described as "moderate Islamist" group, despite closely cooperating with ISIL and supporting the extermination of a religious minority in Syria? Source: "Noteworthy also from the fall of the Mannagh  airbase is a video released by the battalion Liwa al-Fatah, described by one writer as a "moderate Islamist" group. A quick glance at the video quickly demonstrates that in analysis, the term "moderate  Islamist" in this context is quite meaningless. First, Abu Jandal al-Masri, the leader of the JMWA contingent--identified immediately by  the speaker who filmed the video as synonymous with ISIS--is seen to be embracing a member of Liwa al-Fatah. Abu Jandal then proclaims, "I swear by God we will not leave  a  single Alawite alive in Syria... state of Islam, state of the Caliphate." This is all proclaimed to the assent of "God  is  great" from the other fighters, including the Liwa al-Fatah member who filmed the video." (The Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham, pp. 24, 25)
 * Reviewed: Raúl Meza Torres

Created by Applodion (talk). Self-nominated at 19:04, 23 September 2018 (UTC).


 * Added "pictured" and QPQ. Applodion (talk) 07:29, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Added "pictured" and QPQ. Applodion (talk) 07:29, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

This was pulled from the main page by due to sourcing issues raised at WP:ERRORS. As the article was up for less than an hour, it probably deserves a second chance, but right now a lot of work needs to be done if this is to return to DYK. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:54, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Frankly, I do not understand the problem. The source is reliable and clear about the issue, and it is inline-sourced. Further sources for the hook are given in the article, for example the Historical Dictionary of Islamic Fundamentalism clearly states that the group's members were "aligning themselves with the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) for a time". Applodion (talk) 10:11, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * As the main criticism was about the hook being too broad, how about: ALT1: ... that the Conquest Brigade (pictured) was described by one writer as "moderate Islamist" group, despite closely cooperating with ISIL and supporting the extermination of a religious minority in Syria? (same source) Applodion (talk) 10:52, 24 October 2018 (UTC)


 * It's been a month: what do you think of ALT1? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 14:14, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, I have no idea what the "sourcing issues" actually were, but ALT1 seems OK to me because it alleviates the concern about "moderate Islamist" a label that the source criticizes. Catrìona (talk) 16:04, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
 * The problem was that the editor who reported the "sourcing issues" never replied to my question about what exactly the problem was; another editor suggested that it was due to the original hook not being clear enough. Anyway, I hope that it will be ok this time thanks to the tweak. Applodion (talk) 12:11, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Have you tried talking to the editor again on what those sourcing issues were? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:43, 26 November 2018 (UTC)


 * It's been several weeks now. If the issues can't be resolved here, this will be marked for closure as stale. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:43, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, I guess that would be the best course of action. Applodion (talk) 08:57, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Do you at least remember which editor was the one who brought up the sourcing issues? Maybe you can try talking to them one more time and see if things can still be resolved. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:59, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, it was Black Kite, as seen here. The explanation of the removal, as stated on the archived page here, was "It's vital to know who said this 'cos if it was my nan who said it, why should it be important? If, however, it was Kofi Annan, for example, well that's a different matter." Applodion (talk) 14:09, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Er, as far as I can see, the sentence "By 2013, the militia was considered to be "moderate Islamist" in its views by some observers, though it already exhibited strong links to ISIL by this stage.", still doesn't have a source attached, and still doesn't say who the "some observers" were. Also pinging  as the admin who pulled the nomination.  Is there a completely different hook we could use?  It's a good article, and it'd seem a shame not to use it. Black Kite (talk) 20:12, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, one of the experts who called them "moderate Islamist" was Joanna Paraszczuk (see here). Paraszczuk is a generally reliable researcher about Jihadists from the Caucasus, and her work has been used as source for several newspapers and books - neverthless, she is not a well known expert outside her scientific niche. I fail to understand how the inclusion of her name (or that of other not well known experts) would inprove the hook in any way. Regardless, I already thought about an alternate hook, but frankly I could not find another fact that people with no or little knowledge of the Syrian Civil War would consider interesting. I thus think that we should simply end this - I fear that this DYK does not head toward a solution for the foreseeable future. Applodion (talk) 13:38, 14 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Symbol delete vote.svg It appears that the nominator has lost interest in this moving forward; as such, I regrettably mark this for closure. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:59, 19 December 2018 (UTC)