User talk:Islamiyyatstate

January 2022
Hello, I'm Des Vallee. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Battle of al-Hasakah (2022), but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Des Vallee (talk) 00:32, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

AMAQ doesn’t have an official website so we have to rely on people decimating their reports on twitter, this tweet for example shows the 23 SDF hostages: https://twitter.com/charles_lister/status/1484983706196623364?s=21

This one shows an AMAQ report in arabic where ISIS claims to have killed 200 SDF/PKK soldiers https://twitter.com/toratora667/status/1485027935992131584?s=21 It says exactly “ The source confirmed that the outcome of the battles taking place in the prison and its surroundings until the moment of preparing this report amounted to more than 200 militia deaths, including the prison director and a number of their field commanders. The first of the battles only, and the source also reported that the fighters burned about 25 different vehicles and seized 4 four-wheel drive vehicles equipped with heavy machine guns. Islamiyyatstate (talk) 00:36, 23 January 2022 (UTC)


 * It is a twitter source, not allowed on Wikipedia, moreover you are claiming ISIS propaganda as a "reliable source." The source is nonsense, see WP:TWITTER. Des Vallee (talk) 01:49, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

The source isn’t twitter, it’s AMAQ which is ISIS’s news branch. I’m not sure why you don’t want to add ISIS’s claim? Especially the one about the 23 hostages when there’s clear video evidence for it. Islamiyyatstate (talk) 01:53, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The source is a link to a random Twitter account with a screenshot of a supposed statement in Arabic. It's unreliable and even if there was an official "AMAQ Twitter account" it would not be used a source. Sources from twitter users can not be used as a source on Wikipedia, ever unless it is a direct statement about the tweet at which point that point is made clear, the reason for this is unreliability, the reliability of that account is 0. It's not verifiable and the user has no onus, obligation or qualification to tell the truth as oppose reliable news coverage. Optimally scholarly secondary, or tertiary sources should be used or reliable news coverage. Des Vallee (talk) 02:02, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Dude no one is saying the twitter account is the source or that it’s reliable, they just posted the OFFICIAL AMAQ report in Arabic. Anyone who speaks Arabic can easily understand that ISIS is claiming to have killed 200+ members of the SDF, again why don’t you want to ass ISIS’s claims?

And the second citation is a talking about a video released by ISIS which quite literally shows 23 SDF members taken hostage, how can you dispute video evidence ? Islamiyyatstate (talk) 02:05, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

use* Islamiyyatstate (talk) 02:06, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Any statement, video or the like from twitter can not be used on Wikipedia, you are refusing to get the point. They may have posted a "OFFICIAL AMAQ report" but just as if not more likely they created themselves. That's the issue it's unreliable and unverifiable, you need to learn to listen and learn to understand the point. Des Vallee (talk) 02:12, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Alright, I will concede and remove the twitter links and replace them with a link to the actual video from AMAQ and their Arabic news report Islamiyyatstate (talk) 02:24, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Des Vallee (talk) 02:26, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

 Your account has been blocked indefinitely because the chosen username is a clear violation of our username policy – it is obviously profane, threatens, attacks or impersonates another person, or suggests that you do not intend to contribute positively to the encyclopedia (see our blocking and username policies for more information). We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia, but users are not allowed to edit with inappropriate usernames and we do not tolerate 'bad faith' editing such as trolling or other disruptive behavior. If you think there are good reasons why these don't describe your account, or why you should be unblocked, you are welcome to appeal this block – read our guide to appealing blocks to understand more about unblock requests, and then add the text at the end of your user talk page. -- TNT (talk • she/her) 23:33, 23 January 2022 (UTC)