Talk:Control of cities during the Syrian civil war/Archive 41

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 35 ← Archive 39 Archive 40 Archive 41 Archive 42 Archive 43 → Archive 45

Areas north of Shayk Miskin

There have been no neutral sources concerning the areas north of Shayk Maskin (mainly al-Suhayliyah, al-Dalli, Barqah and Faq'ah). Twitter sources and pro-rebel media claimed those towns had been taken in the Brigade 82 offensive. This seems to be the case as you look at images and video evidence. However, we have no sources. So what should we do? Because it seems hard that those towns are still in SAA hands as rebels are shelling Izra itself. It would expose their flank near Brigade 82 to SAA attacks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.31.204.195 (talk) 13:22, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

We are not interested read your imaginations! Also we can not use the data from a pro-opposition sources for display of sucess the rebels. Hanibal911 (talk) 14:58, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

And "we" are not interested in your ongoing data-war. You just used a pro-opposition TWITTER SOURCE to show SAA advances, but refuse to use the only availlable sources to even think about the position of those villages. Shows the true colors of this map, doesn't it :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.31.204.195 (talk) 15:45, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

You keep showing pro op sources and then ask the question (what should WE do?) well the answer is wait for a neutral source to confirm .Then post it and change the map .Pyphon (talk) 16:28, 29 January 2015 (UTC)pyphon

We use progovernment sources for display success of rebels and pro opposition sources for display success of army. Hanibal911 (talk) 16:39, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Because opposition sources distort the situation in favor of the rebels and pro-government in favor of the Army. Hanibal911 (talk) 16:48, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Why is Sheikh Maskin green? See article here: http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/open-confrontation-southern-syria-‘moscow-forum’-sputters-along According to these updates from Al Akhbar (which is pro-HEZ obviously) but which also has a decent track record of accurate information on battles in syria. The new article states that the battle for al-Sheikh Maskin continues with the government bringing in reinforcements from Izra. This occurred after combined FSA & JAN forces took over the brigade 82 post. It says that fighting is currently taking place in towns of Atman, al-Fiqi, al-Dali, and al-Sahiliyah. It also says JAN & SAA clashing at outskirts of Zabadani, and that JAN has taken losses in towns of Yaboos and Kafir Yaboos (north of Beirut-Damascus road) so fighting must be occuring in those areas. Also says fighting ongoing in Ashrafieh neighborhood of Aleppo city. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.151.89 (talk) 20:33, 29 January 2015 (UTC) I suggest turn Sheikh Maskin to contested , as well as the two red government held towns to its north (al-Suhiliyah and Dilli (which I think is also al-Dali in the above article). I'm not sure where the other towns that Al Akhbar names are located. A big battle is ongoing in that area above Daraa- and it could be decisive for the south if rebels move on to Izra or if government reinforcements are able to stop them and counter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.151.89 (talk) 20:51, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Al Akhbar not pro Hezbolah it is a reliable source. And Al Akhbar not said that clashes in the towns of Atman, al-Fiqi, al-Dali, and al-Sahiliyah source just said that rebels advance toward of the Atman, al-Fiqi, al-Dali, and al-Sahiliyah, concurrently in an attempt to “distract” the Syrian troops from the battles in al-Sheikh Maskin, which the insurgents seek to capture in order to control the Damascus-Daraa road.Al Akhbar Hanibal911 (talk) 22:11, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Every pro-opposition source is saying that rebels do not control the villages north of Sheik Miskin but are trying to capture them, specially the 60th batalion. On this FSA channel, you can see the latest videos, in what they are trying to capture Al Suhayliah but with no succes. DuckZz (talk) 22:30, 29 January 2015 (UTC)


Maybe this is helping? http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/rebel-offensive-intensifies-daraa-syrian-army-recaptures-faroun-storage-facility/ This article tells that rebels pushed SAA out of al-suhayliyeh, but retook the Faroun storage facility. It's my first post here, so sorry if I make mistakes, but Almasdarnews is a pro-regime source so we can use it to depict rebel gains? Raspoetin89 (talk) 07:39, 30 January 2015 (UTC)Raspoetin89

I found a SOHR statement http://syriahr.com/en/2015/01/the-government-warplanes-and-helicopters-attack-various-areas-in-idlib-and-daraa/ saying: 'The helicopters dropped barrel bombs on areas in the towns of Barqa' Does that mean we have to change Barqa to contested? Raspoetin89Raspoetin89 (talk) 07:54, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

So that would mean Al-Suhayliyah to contested, Barqah to rebel held. What about Dilli/al-Dalli? It seems fighting is ongoing everywhere there and there are contradicting reports. Contested? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 09:27, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Nice try but SOHR not said that Al-Suhayliyah contested or Barqah under control by rebels. Hanibal911 (talk) 14:47, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
According to Al-Masdar Al-Suhayliyah is captured by rebels and Barqah is contested so we need to change them.Hanibal911 do you agree or do you have any source ? Lindi29 (talk) 16:44, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Lindi29 Source Al Masdar reported that Al Nusra and FSA just captured farms near Al-Suhayliyyeh. Source clear said that Al Nusra captured farms outside of Al-Suhayliyyeh. Also source said that north of Al-Suhayliyyeh, militants from the Al-Nusra Front and the FSA carried out a number of attacks in the villages of Dilli and Burqah the rebels were able to make initial gains but however, the 5th Division was able to forestall their progress and regain their lost positions. Al Masdar Also source Al Akhbar source said that rebels advance toward of the Atman, al-Fiqi, al-Dali, and al-Sahiliyah, concurrently in an attempt to “distract” the Syrian troops from the battles in al-Sheikh Maskin, which the insurgents seek to capture in order to control the Damascus-Daraa road.Al Akhbar But not said that rebels captured those villages. Hanibal911 (talk) 16:57, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911. is correct rebels try to advance in the area but no take towns yet .Wait for more sources fighting is ongoing .Pyphon (talk) 17:09, 30 January 2015 (UTC)pyphon

Daraa

The official Syrian Revolution Facebook page citing what the regime still holds in the province of Daraa': [1]

  • Izraa
  • Mhajjah
  • Al Sanamayn
  • Al Dali
  • Al Faki (AL Fukay')
  • Khirbit Ghazeleh
  • Brigade 15
  • Brigade 52
  • Busra al Sham which is contested
  • Qarfa
  • Namer
  • Nassib Crossing
  • Brigade 34 in Al Lajat
  • Jbab
  • Ghabagheb

ChrissCh94 (talk) 17:24, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

YPG advance in Kobane countryside

SOHR HERE confirms that YPG is advancing a lot around Kobane without specifying the names of the villages in YPG hands. Thomas Van Linge in his twitter account lists the villages taken by YPG, can this source be considered reliable? These are the village in YPG hands: https://twitter.com/arabthomness/status/560880083217711104 https://twitter.com/arabthomness/status/560873399053205505 https://twitter.com/arabthomness/status/560838351415431168

Here Jack Shahine shows pictures of another village in YPG hands: https://twitter.com/jackshahine/status/560819051535269889 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 8fra0 (talk • contribs) 12:11, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

SOHR YPG advances and take control on 14 new villages around Kobane. Rhocagil (talk) 14:13, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

YPG claims to have controlled the Communications Facility south of Kobane with visual proof here:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8lfMukIAAAD7HC.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8lflneIQAAjkpz.jpg:large

186.119.54.226 (talk) 14:56, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

It is here: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=it&lat=36.894097&lon=38.254910&z=16&m=b . It confirms the claims that at least Zorava and Kurabi village are in YPG hands. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 8fra0 (talk • contribs) 16:35, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes it proves it, I wouldn´t see why not.Rhocagil (talk) 17:02, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Jack Shahine (journalist based in Kobane) claims https://twitter.com/jackshahine/status/561308131331162112 that YPG is in control of Siftek, Moman e Boban that is located here: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=36.896371&lon=38.195515&z=13&m=b Let's wait some additional sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 8fra0 (talk • contribs) 23:57, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Hamidiyah near Abou l Duhur airbase

[2] Rebels saying they ambushed and killed 10 SAA units in Hamidiyah near the airbase. So I guess Hamidiyah should be added and marked as contested. ChrissCh94 (talk) 22:14, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Agreed! Hanibal911 (talk) 10:44, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
ChrissCh94 Reliable source said that Al Nusra managed to control al-Hamidiyeh village on East side of Ad-Duhur military airport but pull out to outskirt later. So that according to data from reliable source Elijah J. Magnier and pro opposition source here Al Nusra captured this village but later retreat on outskirt. So we need add this village and mark as under army control but put grey semi-circle or circle near. Hanibal911 (talk) 11:18, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 Your pro-opposition source said that "Free Rebels ambushed Assad army entering in Hamidiyah and killed and wounded 10 of them". It doesn't say that rebels withdrew from there, neither that JAN did this. I'm not sure if we can use tweets for editing like this because we don't know what sources did Elijah Magnier use. He is neutral but uses both rebels and government sources. Here SOHR said that SAF bombed at least 24 times areas around the airport, including Hamidiyah and Tall Salmo villages . DuckZz (talk) 19:58, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

EJM is more reliable than SOHR and is a 100% reliable source. Since he said JAN withdrew, that is what we will go with. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 20:15, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
DuckZz Elijah J. Magnier it is a reliable source it is tweet of the chief International correspondent of a Kuwaiti daily newspaper Al Rai. And it is more neutral a source than SOHR which partially supports the Syrian opposition. And this source said that Al Nusra pull out to the outskirts. And SOHR reported that air force bombed this village so maybe when Al Nusra invaded the village but later retreated after the bombing. But if you find the information from a reliable source which clearly says that the village is not under the control of the army then I fix it. And pro opposition source clearly said that rebels ambushed and killed 10 SAA units in the village Hamidiyah near the airbase.here About this earlier said editor ChrissCh94 who a good knows Arabic. Hanibal911 (talk) 20:28, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Also SOHR reported about clashes between al- Nusra and the Islamic battalions against the regime forces near the Abu al-Duhur airbase.SOHR Hanibal911 (talk) 20:33, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
XJ-0461 v2 Your 100% reliable EJM is the same source that said that the rebels were en route from central Homs toward the north 2 weeks before it happened, even before there was a final agreement. That is the most striking error (since it would have been VERY easy to verify since UN observers were involved), but there have been others. I suspect that EJM is holed up in Kuwait, and jumps the gun on various rumours often without verifying. Probably for a "scoop". He may not be biased, but he isn't necessarily reliable either.
The other article (published by Nusra) says (according to google translate) that more than 10 elements of the Assad gangs were killed or wounded in an ambush by Nusra, in the village of Hamedya. That means that the regime forces were moving, and surprised by Nusra. In other words, since Hamedya is a village (and thus small), the regime probably had no presence in the village. And that Nusra was in place (possibly temporarily) when the regime forces arrived.
Note also that Nusra published images showing them digging trenches, presumably in or around the village in question.
These 2 articles suggest that the village is not regime controlled, and that there is (or was at the time) at least a rebel presence in proximity. André437 (talk) 19:03, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Al Jazeera reporter inside al-Hamidiyeh 2 days after the source we used to make it red. Also, Al Jazeera reporter inside Tal Salmo a few days after the source we used to make it contested. Moreover, Elijah J. Magnier said: “JAN Map video clearly showing the current situation in Abu Dhuhur airbase” (my emphasis added). This means that Elijah J. Magnier (a reliable source) thinks that the JAN Map is correct & reflects the present situation. This is an endorsement of the JAN map which confirms the 2 Al Jazeera reports. Therefore, al-Hamidiyeh & Tal Salmo should be made grey. Tradediatalk 01:05, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

"Retweet/Favorites not endorsement" That does not mean he is accepting or endorsing the map. It is just a detailed [clear] map of the situation by JAN. Since this does not confirm anything, find another source.XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 03:01, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Khattab (Homs)

Village Khattab east of Homs city on the frontline between SAA and ISIS is not marked on the map. According to Peto Lucem village has been recaptured by SAA, tweet here and map here. Village should be put out and marked red, or at least put out and marked contested. Rhocagil (talk) 22:57, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

There's SOHR confirming the latest gov. advance in Khattab, E-Homs: [3] ChrissCh94 (talk) 09:26, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
They also captured Mushayrifah per gov-source [4] so at least add those 2 towns as contested or gov-held. ChrissCh94 (talk) 09:44, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Madaya - Rif Dimashq

I think Madaya should go to either contested or rebel-held based on those 2 reports of regime shelling the town: pro-gov Al Mayadeen [5] and pro-opp SOHR [6]

Other pro-gov sources reporting the strikes ON Madaya [7] [8] ChrissCh94 (talk) 02:06, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
For now we not have reports which clearly said that it is completely under control of the rebels so for now would be better mark it as contested. Hanibal911 (talk) 08:29, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
I agree with Hanibal911.Lindi29 (talk) 11:00, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Alright contested makes sense ChrissCh94 (talk) 14:00, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
So we changing it to contested? ChrissCh94 (talk) 02:19, 28 January 2015 (UTC) Hanibal911 Lindi29
ChrissCh94 yes.Lindi29 (talk) 13:03, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
ChrissCh94 Lindi29I have already notified of the editor which a make updates on map. Hanibal911 (talk) 13:51, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
So where's that update to contested? Hanibal911 ChrissCh94 (talk) 09:45, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Northern Homs

This area has always been tricky but after extensive research in pro-gov and pro-opp coordination committees I found out that:

  • Hawsh Haju is rebel held via pro-gov source [9] and [10] along with Al Saan and Ain Hussein
  • Pro-opp source reporting shelling on Hawsh Haju by gov-forces: [11]

So please change Hawsh Haju to green and add Ain Hussein and Al Saan also as rebel-held ChrissCh94 (talk) 09:43, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

While in Eastern Homs it seems gov-forces have bee advancing and have captured Khattab and Mushayrifah via pro-gov [12] [13] and pro-opp [14] sources. So I suggest adding those 2 towns, Khattab as gov-held and Mushayrifah as contested. ChrissCh94 (talk) 09:48, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Also pro-government source said that the village of Mushayrifah ash Shamaliyah was captured from Islamic State so for now i noted this village as contested between Syrian troops and ISIS.here Hanibal911 (talk) 11:38, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
 Done According to data from pro government source and SOHR I noted Ayn Husayn, Hawsh Haju under control by moderate rebels and Khattab as gov-held but also I noted Mushayrifah ash Shamaliyah as contested. Hanibal911 (talk) 12:14, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Mushayrifah is now gov-held via SOHR [15]. So the SAA now captured Khattab and Mushayrifah in E-Homs ChrissCh94 (talk) 12:47, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
 Done Hanibal911 (talk) 13:02, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Peto Lucem General Map 30/1/2015

Here is https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8n1Y6vCAAAh42A.jpg:large Peto Lucem Maps are very 99,99% correct most times

It's Al-Masdar Map.here.Nice try,but Al-Masdar and Peto Lucem are pro-regime sources and we cant use them.Lindi29 (talk) 14:25, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

True. Both Al-Masdar and SOHR are unreliable in my opinion. Only use Al-Masdar to rebel advances, and SOHR for regime advances.

What are you talking about Lindi? PetoLucem and Masdar have nothing to do with each other. Leith Fadel, the person behind al-Masdar uses his map, but they're are not the same person. Peto Lucem maps together with DeSyracuse's map have been some of the most precise maps during this conflict. While I agree that PetoLucem is a bit pro regime and DeSyracuse is a bit pro rebel.
PetoLucem maps are NOT from al-Masdar, he (leith Fadel) simply uses the same maps Peto publishes on Twitter. Stop spreading lies. Masdar is fairly pro regime but the maps he uses are made by PetoLucem, not himself.MesmerMe (talk) 15:45, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, this map is fairly consistent with the one we have here. Only major difference is in Deir-Ez-Zor, where Peto has given the southern half to the SAA, whereas we have it as under ISIS control. That part of the governate is fairly empty anyway [only things we have listed in it as Shulah and Kabajeb], so the discrepancy is of no consequence. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 19:36, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

XJ-0461 v2 .I agree Peto Lucem maps are always like ours and Lindi29 what do you mean (nice try )nobody was asking to change our map in line with his .Pyphon (talk) 19:52, 31 January 2015 (UTC)pyphon

The map is just very correct it showing the reality in the ground, Peto's Maps are always right.

Lucem always exagerates regime held territory. Aleppo specially, they had the Owaija District under SAA control for example. Now the rebels recaptured Breij area, and not a SINGLE source reported the rebels to have recaptured the Owaija District, but it is obvious they had to be there in other to reach Breij.

Not really. And they did not recapture the Breij area. What source said that? XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 17:58, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

SAA advances in Hasakah

SAA has advanced southeast of Hasakah city and captured two villages, confirmed by SOHR [16]. But no names are stated. Would be good to try and find out which ones they are. EkoGraf (talk) 21:04, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

There is info for Ivan Sidorenko [17] about 5 village and their name. Abu Saad / Khchwet / Aldaudih / sera / Rhqra (217.99.81.204 (talk) 21:21, 1 February 2015 (UTC))
Al-Masdar talks about them here: http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-liberates-5-villages-rural-al-hasakah/ XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 22:57, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
We should see which two of the five are closest to the fronltine and in a south-eastern direction so those two are most likely the ones they captured per SOHR. EkoGraf (talk) 23:00, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Kafrlata - Idlib

I think it is rebel held since it explains how the attacks in Ariha were orchestrated. Here a pro-regime page describing every detail of the attack on Ariha said the rebels were defeated and retreated back to Kafrlata [18]. And we have numerous accounts of shelling on Kafrlata so I really doubt it is contested. Can my fellow editors provide me with sources saying otherwise? ChrissCh94 (talk) 17:29, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

There is a misunderstanding here. Rebels did not attack Ariha town. Their main objective (announced on IF channels) was to capture the mountain part that overlooks Ariha (in that case Al Fanar checkpoint too). Groups in this offensive :

  • Mainly Islamic Front (Suqur Sham, Faylaq Sham) supported by
  • FSA (Liwa Haq, 13th Division) and
  • Al Nusra (even thought i haven't seen them)
Here SOHR source says that rebels advanced on the mountain on al-Baradat building complex, which includes Al Fanar checkpoint. They also said that rebels destroyed a regime vehicle in Mastomah, and here is the proof FSA 13th division destroying shilka in Mastomah.
Now some pro-opposition sources. Islamic front shooting mortars from Kafr Lata here and here2 .. Suqur Sham (IF) commander giving moral speech in Kafr Lata before the offensive.

−Now I'm 100% sure that rebels took Al Fanar because it's located right in the start of the mountain, and if SOHR says that rebels advances there, it means it's not possible to advance while avoiding this checkpoint.

Yes, so confident, yet SOHR did not trumpet this "glorious" victory...interesting. The rebel offensive has failed [again] http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/idlib-syrian-army-reaffirms-full-control-areeha/ XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 00:40, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

If rebels gained areas around the town, not even trying to attack Ariha, not even in plans. What is the best thing a pro-Government editor (2 times banned user from twitter) can write ? "SAA, NDF recaptured Ariha" haha facepalm really...DuckZz (talk) 00:46, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Congrats, the SAA/NDF advanced in the area they already controlled. Al-Masdar so reliable, haha. The rebels never attacked Ariha, and now they retake Ariha. Next thing we will see is SAA retaking Homs or Qusayr, lol, they are so desesperate for wins they make-up advances in towns they hold already. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.219.152.90 (talk) 01:59, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

"haha facepalm really" Is this supposed to be a coherent sentence, because it is not. Also, the article referred to the Ariha area [locations such as Jabal al arba'een] being retaken, not the town itself [you would have known that if you read more than just the title]. Also, the fact that you are tracking the editor is just sort of weird. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 02:57, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

I gotta say DuckZz you are becoming way too biased. To be fair, except for the Southern Front, the rebels are indeed losing the war and infighting has triumphed among them. In 2013 they controlled more than half the country while now they only control rural Aleppo and Daraa. Sadly the war is headed towards a bloody stalemate where every party will make gains and consolidate them in areas of strength while losing the less important ones. Not to forget the rise of the jihadis. ChrissCh94 (talk) 09:12, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

CnrissCh94 .I agree Kafrlata is rebel controlled .Pyphon (talk) 12:35, 31 January 2015 (UTC)pyphon

 Done Hanibal911 (talk) 12:43, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

ChrissCh94 I don't understand why you think like that. Rebels will lose that's for sure, but it'll take a while. I support the Syrian army (SAA) against rebels but i also support FSA rebels against NDF army, nobody can really hate me because of this. DuckZz (talk) 16:32, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

It's just you oppose everything regime related. Everyone is entitled to an opinion but it must not interfere with our work. Nobody here hates you! Cheers mate. ChrissCh94 (talk) 18:05, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

the rebel advance in Southern Syria will define the conclusion of the war.Alhanuty (talk) 20:19, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

What do you mean? XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 20:55, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Correction: The outcome of the battle of Aleppo will define the outcome of the war. Hint 2012: Rebels were winning in Aleppo and in all of Syria while in 2014: rebels are losing in Aleppo and in all of Syria. ChrissCh94 (talk) 23:30, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Al-Dalli Daraa

Al-Dalli to contested per:

http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/daraa-syrian-army-attempts-counter-rebels-battalion-82/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎ Creepz55 (talk • contribs) 00:58, 2 February 2015

"The Southern Front Brigades of the Free Syrian Army (FSA) continued their offensive at the village of Dilli north of Sheikh Miskeen, bombarding the 5th Division near the southwest sector and gaining ground in the direction of the village-center." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 08:50, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Agree Dalli is contested .Pyphon (talk) 08:55, 2 February 2015 (UTC)pyphon

 Done Hanibal911 (talk) 09:33, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Zabadani & rest

According to IvanSidorenko and his pro-government sources here2, the SAA (and company) are aiming to capture Zabadani (already contested), Madaya, Serghaya and Yabous. What others think ? DuckZz (talk) 16:46, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

That is interesting. Madaya and Serghaya were confirmed to be SAA held by Al-Monitor a long time ago. I am not aware of any rebel counter offensives in the area [which would place them back in rebel hands since then]. We really should not change anything with Zabadani since it is already contested and SOHR confirms SAA checkpoints in the town. As for Yabous, I have no news on that. I would say for now, green rings on all the towns you mentioned, and if you can find a corroborating source, we can take further action. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 18:01, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

deSyracuse map shows Serghaya as contested. The map is 20 days old so maybe rebels do have control of those towns but now facing clashes with SAA & Hezbolah. I belive that IvanSidorenko is a bit pro-government oriented and not biased. Maybe Madaya should go contested since it's right next to Zabadani and SOHR reported barel bomb attacks on it's western outskirts DuckZz (talk) 18:25, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

DuckZzPro opposition source showed that area wher located Madaya, Serghaya under control by army.here Also Ivan Sidorenko it is not pro government source and also deSyracuse map it is pro opposition source which we cant use to display success by rebels. Also previously biased a pro-opposition source clear showed that Serghaya under control by army.here Hanibal911 (talk) 19:25, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Also earlier some reliable sources reported that Serghaya under control by army. This issue has already been discussed previously. Hanibal911 (talk) 19:34, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
We did agree earlier that Madaya was contested.. Serghaya is under local NDF control. ChrissCh94 (talk) 23:10, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Pro opposition source showed that area wher located Kafr Yabous under control by Syrian troops and Hezbollah.here Hanibal911 (talk) 09:02, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 .ChrisCh94 . Why is Madaya gone green? Pyphon (talk) 09:57, 2 February 2015 (UTC)pyphon

PyphonPro gov. source reported that Madaya rebel-held but besieged by army and allies and Zabadani contested.here And SOHR also confirmed that city Zabadani for now contested and army present inside city.SOHR Hanibal911 (talk) 10:22, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 .Thankyou good work .Pyphon (talk) 10:32, 2 February 2015 (UTC)pyphon

SAA Advances in Hasakah - Deir Ez Zoor - Rif Dimashq

SAA have advanced on multiple fronts via SOHR [19] [20] [21] I hope the editors make the correct changes. ChrissCh94 (talk) 23:19, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Why is Kfar Yabous JAN-held? ChrissCh94 (talk) 23:20, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
According to this map by Desyracuse,[22] it is SAA held. I will change it. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 00:47, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
We also agreed to change Madaya to contested earlier in this talk page. In addition, here's a pro-gov source showing it as opp-held [23] ChrissCh94 (talk) 01:47, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
Why is Kfar Yabous another time to JAN-held? Yesterday it was grey, next red and today is grey.(83.26.97.125 (talk) 16:19, 2 February 2015 (UTC))
https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/561919497121333249 XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 17:08, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Qamishlo

Please change the icon of qamishlo kurds controll more than 85% Of qamishlo yet it looks like assad controlls 90% of qamishli judging by the amount of red on the icon/mark.

Source? XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 00:47, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

What does asad controll except the bordergate & the small city centre? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 (talk • contribs) 00:53, 2 February

XJ-0461 You don´t need any source to put the rings in different order (yellow-red-yellow).Rhocagil (talk) 04:26, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

In order to change the city from a regime majority control to Kurdish majority control [which is what he wants], you need a source. On a side note, if the order of the rings were to be changed, It would show that the kurds control the city center, which they do not [unless a source is provided to the contrary]. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 05:00, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
Pro oppositio source here clearly shows that the city is divided almost in half, and the army located is inside the city and around it. So that for now city marked correct. Also Rhocagil you should know that we can not change the card without specifying the source. Hanibal911 (talk) 08:55, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

XJ-0461 v2 I don´t think that kind of argument is valid. Do you think that SAA is in control of the city centers in Al-Dumayr, Ar-Ruhaybah and Al Wa´ar or FSA in Khan Shaykhun? No this is not an argument and this is not the question. The three circle mark is just a mark, but in the case of Qamishlo it looks wrong. I suggest the three mark circle should be changed to (yellow-red-yellow). And Hanibal911 if you want a source, just use the one that you just provided. Even thou I believe is slightly wrong it´s still obvious that majority of the city area is under kurd control. Rhocagil (talk) 21:15, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

The source he provided showed 50/50 control [orange in the middle is SAA held according to other sources], no Kurdish majority. To debate that ring configurations would at this point simply be a matter of aesthetics, so it should be left as is unless another source is provided. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 22:38, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
RhocagilOn this map here the areas in city Qamashli which marked in red it is territory which under control by Syrian troops and areas which marked in yellow it is territory which under control by YPG and areas which marked in orange it is territory which jointly controlled between Syrian troops and YPG. Hanibal911 (talk) 08:21, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Syria

Who controls the territory of Syria:

1) Syrian government currently controls around 50 percent of the territory, but it rules between 55 and 72 percent of the population left inside Syria.
2) The rebels (Including ISIS and Al Nusra} control 45 percent of the territory and 17–34 percent of the population.
  • Islamic State (ISIS) It currently controls around 30 percent of Syria’s territory. The population under the Islamic State’s rule can be estimated at between 2 million and 3.5 million people, which translates into something like 10–20 percent of Syria’s current population.
  • The groups like Ahrar al-Sham, the Nusra Front, the Islam Army, and the various FSA factions, we arrive at perhaps 15 percent of the territory and between 1 million and 2.5 million people, although political control remains divided among or shared by many different groups.
3}Kurds control no more than 5 percent of the territory with 5–10 percent of the population.Carnegie Endowment Hanibal911 (talk) 11:59, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Clashes reported by SANA

There are several clashes reported by SANA and quoted by Al-manar and some other news outlets but these villages/towns are not marked as contested on the map. al-Manar and SANA also point out they targeted ISIS in Palmyra so i suggest there is isis presence in Palmyra.

Here are the villages/towns summed up: Homs: Eidon(inside al-Rastan), Deir Ful, Ghantu, Rahoum (Rahhoum) Hamah: ISIS presence in Palmyra Latakia: Ghanima Idlib: Kafr Lata (Kafr Latah) Daraa: Sheikh maskin, Jasim, Inkhel (Inkhil)

sources: http://www.sana.sy/en/?p=27257 http://www.almanar.com.lb/english/adetails.php?fromval=1&cid=23&frid=23&eid=193620 http://syriatimes.sy/index.php/news/local/16483-syrian-arab-army-kills-23-terrorists-plus-chechen-tunisian-moroccan-mercenaries-linked-to-al-nusra-front-outside-hama-and-lattakia

Spenk01 (talk) 23:50, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Spenk01 Source al manar made a mistake in the message. Here is the original of this message from government source SANA: Army units eliminated 23 terrorists in Hamadi Omar in Hama countryside and destroyed their weapons and ammo, in addition to destroying a cache of rockets in Mkaiman al-Shamali, leaving several terrorists dead or injured.SANA Just sometimes when the source publishes data from SANA he makes mistakes. Also city of Palmyra located in the Homs province. Hanibal911 (talk) 08:03, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Spenk01 Also dont need to cheat that SANS said that ISIS presence inside city Palmyra. Dont need manipulation of facts. Hanibal911 (talk) 08:11, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Hanibal911 Seems like i was mistaken by saying SANA was talking about ISIS presence in Palmyra. But how about the clashes SANA reported are these not credible enough to be taken in the map? Spenk01 (talk) 21:46, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Al Hirak Daraa

Hello everybody,

Several weeks ago we made Al-Hirak contested because some online sources said fighting was going on inside the city. Due to the closeness of Hirak to the army base this was already cause for heated debate. I wonder if anybody has found any recent sources of fighting in Hirak? It's a big and strategically important city, so SANA, SOHR of Twitter should mention it if there's fighting ongoing. If there are no sources, should Hirak be made green again with a red ring to the east, near the army base? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 15:38, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Eastern Homs

I am raising this issue beacause there is a big vacum on the Eastren Homs and is not showing clearly where the frontilne between SSA and Isis is but news said that SSA just captured Khattab and some other villages from Isis on this area but still it is not showing the frontline,yesterday i added some other places near the villages that SSA has just captured beacause it's logical that there is the frontline and that SSA will continue his offenisve on this places but my edit was reverted beacause I didn't have any source,I want that a consenus for this places to be reached so i am suggesting to add more places to show where the the frontline between SSA and Isis.Hanibal911,ChrissCh94,Boredwhytekid,André437,Spenk01,Alhanuty,EkoGraf,DuckZz,Tradedia,Pyphon,Rhocagil,XJ-0461 v2.Can i have your opinions?Lindi29 (talk) 13:29, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Problem is this front lacks sources. Part of the problem is that the area is considered remote even by Syrian standards. Most of the villages consist of hundreds of citizens at most. SAA is barely engaged there, providing artillery and logistical support for the NDF. My vote is that we add places that were captured by either side. For example ISIS captured a village, we add this village as ISIS-held. But I don't think we should go over and add the remaining random villages since we barely know who controls what. ChrissCh94 (talk) 17:30, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
I agree with ChrissCh94 foe now we do not have data which can clearly say who control this villages. Also i think that we cant be contrary to the accepted rules of editing and add to the map a villages or city without a source who could confirm such actions. We can not be sure that the villages that we add under control of ISIS or army. My personal opinion is that we should not break the rules of editing. We have previously struggled with editors which add on map the villages without sources and some editors was blocked. So that guys we should not repeat of their actions. Hanibal911 (talk) 17:43, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Agree with Hanibal911 and ChrisCh94 it would be difficult to show which village was under control and on our map you can almost make out the frontline of the situation as it stands .The ISIS seems to be in trouble at this time losing ground on many fronts with reports of fighters leaving for Turkey .Pyphon (talk) 09:08, 4 February 2015 (UTC)pyphon

I'm not up to date on the area, but I agree with others that we should not make changes without sources.
Also, there is no stable "front line" in the sense of ww1 trench warfare. Rather, there are points of control (such as checkpoints). All sides are able to at least temporarily infiltrate between points of control of an opposing side. (That is partly how the kurds were able to defeat Daesh in Kobane city : by infiltrating and ambushing Daesh fighters.)
In some areas, such as in sieges, control points are close enough that infiltration is much more difficult. But no side has enough forces to do that everywhere. Even a million soldiers wouldn't be enough for an area as large as Syria. André437 (talk) 10:14, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Well as much as I like a more clear frontline. I tend to agree with above statements. Lindi29 maybe you can mail SOHR and ask them if they (he) have some information that could clarify the situation. Give the regards from us other in the wiki discussion group. Rhocagil (talk) 16:19, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

JAN sieges Hazm Movement held town in Aleppo: Sheikh Suleiman

According to one of the more neutral sources on this conflict the JAN conflict with Hazm is spreading eastward from Idlib province and now into Aleppo province. This article http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/security/2015/02/tension-high-ghouta-damascus-factions-infighting.html states: "In the meantime, Jabhat al-Nusra has also been fighting another battle on a different front in Aleppo, against the Hazm Movement which is described as moderate by the West. Groups of Jabhat al-Nusra surrounded the village of Sheikh Suleiman in the western countryside of Aleppo. The organization also raided the movement’s headquarters and weapons warehouses, while its other groups have been setting up checkpoints and deploying snipers on the roofs of the buildings near the Atarib-Sarmada road." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.215.182.19 (talk) 18:04, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Bab al-Hawla

SOHR Reported that regime forces bombarded and opened heavy machine gun.Contested ?SOHRLindi29 (talk) 21:06, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

I agree that it should be marked contested. 2601:0:B200:F7D9:D4D4:29E7:5AF:E5EC (talk) 01:47, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

SOHR not said about Bab al-Hawla he said about town of Houla which controlled by rebels. Also SOHR not said about clashes in this town only said that Syrian army bombarded and opened heavy machine gun fire on al-Hawla. So that nothing needs to be changed.SOHR Hanibal911 (talk) 08:36, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Yabous

Someone changed "Yabous" next to the Lebanon-damascus crossing to be held by JAN. According to Al Akhbar already gov forces have pushed all JAN rebels out of Yabous and Kfar Yabous after they briefly raided these towns a few days back. See here: http://english.al-akhbar.com/node/23507 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.27.226 (talk) 22:41, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Then why is Kfayr Yabous JAN-Held? ChrissCh94 (talk) 00:55, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
because a majority of the people who edit this map are pro-rebel and don't have a neutral stance where they just use facts to mark the map. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.26.157 (talk) 16:30, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
You know what to do ChrissCh94 =).200.48.214.19 (talk) 16:45, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Zabadani area

Peto Lucem new map clearly show Madaya, Buqqayn, 'Ayn al-Hawr to be rebel held. Zabadani seem to be contested only to the east. Also, the villages of Sabna and Hawsh 'Arana are rebel held in the Qalamoun area.


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B9A8QzxIMAEeeSj.jpg:large — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.179.159.29 (talk) 18:09, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

 Done Hanibal911 (talk) 19:32, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
No. Zabadani is for sure contested: SAA presence inside the city is well documented as discussed in the past even if probably the core of the city is still rebel controoled. The map is not detailed enough to show the SAA presence inside the city. Therefore Zabadani should go back to contested.Paolowalter (talk) 07:46, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
I agree with the IP,Peto Lucem is pro-regime and in this case we can use his reports(map)beacause Zabadani was contested before now he is showing that rebels captured it.
SOHR reported that 4 members of the regime forces killed when the Islamic battalions targeted them in al- Zabadani.SOHR So this means that the army still present in the city. Hanibal911 (talk) 21:02, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Hanibal911 this source there are clashes on the mountain and around the city not inside the city.Lindi29 (talk) 21:12, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Deir ErZoor

From [24] the SAA control arounf Deir Erzoor should be enlarged.Paolowalter (talk) 18:38, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, Twitter sources are not accepted here. You said so yourself multiple times when somebody proposed using Twitter sources to show opposition gains :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 20:33, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

No way only 1 twitter source,SOHR Reports have been ignored since 27 january for the airport and there were only edits for the Regime,when there were clashes around the airport and no 1 has mention that,only I did that,so what should do,we should enlarge the Isis presence around the airport.SOHR,SOHR,SOHR,SOHR,SOHR,SOHR,SOHR,SOHR,SOHR.Lindi29 (talk) 20:43, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Elijah J Magnir is a 100% neutral,reliable source, SOHR is no longer, especially in Deir-Ez-Zor. They have been so wrong so many times regarding news from that area. The "twitter" source is sufficient to make change to the map. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 20:46, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Lindi29 SOHR also clear said that army advances in this area. So we cant put black icon near airport. Hanibal911 (talk) 20:58, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
XJ-0461 v2 he is not 100% neutral beacause on his reports are many mistakes,example 25 january he tweets for this jihadistEjmAlrai,without any confirmation or source that he his dead and I tweet to him that's a lie and he is not from mitrovica and his name is not abu abdallah and you need to show a reliable source not biased sources from kurds beacause,I said to him I have reliable source from were he comes from and that he his still alive beacause on my local news there were another report for his death now this is the second one and was a lie,his parents spoke to him on the phone and denied that he is dead,and on 2 febuary he teweets that he is not dead.EjmAlrai,that confirms that his report and sources are not 100% reliable and can not be compare with SOHR who is the main source for this war and also has her own activist in Syria.Lindi29 (talk) 21:08, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
That is only one example and that is of a KIA, which a very hard to verify. We are talking about accuracy concerning battle events. The concensus here is the EJM is 100% reliable and neutral. If you feel that this is incorrect, make a section on the talk page dedicated to it where you present your evidence so that other editors here may consider it.XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 22:32, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Hanibal911 I agree with you that we show Isis presence near the airport and to show the regime advance too but to show were the regime has clearly advance not just to enlarge the map for the Regime where there are clashes everyday at the airport and in the map is showing Isis not even close to the airport but it show in Jaffra where Isis has already captured it.Lindi29 (talk) 21:25, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

EjmAlrai is the AL RAI Chief International Correspondent. We have used him as a source to update the map dozens of times in the past, as well as a source for updating Syria-related articles, and he is neutral. EkoGraf (talk) 00:38, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Al-hasakah area

This is pro gov source, but in this area we do not too many reliable source. Sana news: army established full control over the villages of al-Watwatiyeh, Jammo, Jammo Farm, and the eastern part of Bab al-Kheir village south of Hasaka city. [25]. I find Al Watutiyah very close to 121 Artillery base(83.26.172.121 (talk) 18:52, 4 February 2015 (UTC)) The advance of SAA in this area is supported also by SOHR even if it does not mention names (see discussion in [26]). Therefore we can assume that this village is one of those mentioned by SOHR and change it.Paolowalter (talk) 11:28, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

"The loyalist forces captured the villages of Al-Watwaatiyyeh, Al-Jamou, and Mazra’ Al-Jamou in the vicinity of the recently liberated Baab Al-Khayr earlier this morning." almasdarnews — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.65.91.237 (talk) 19:19, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Report by Masdar [27] the SAA has captured 11 Hasakah villages. Please try and find their locations and at least one more source that can confirm the report is correct. EkoGraf (talk) 00:39, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Kurdish source confirmed the capture of the village of Sabaa Skor by the SAA [28]. Its locaiton is here [29]. Please add it to the map. Thanks! EkoGraf (talk) 13:29, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

ARA News it is biased pro opposition source so we can use it for displayed success of army. Hanibal911 (talk) 14:24, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
 Done Hanibal911 (talk) 14:28, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Talbiseh

SOHR reported about clashes between the regime troops and rebels in the city of Talbise.SOHR So we need mark this town as contested. Hanibal911 (talk) 08:41, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Talbiseh is a rebel stronghold. It is not contested. Just south of the city there is the Malouk army complex from which army troops attack the border of the city. This has been going on for months, but the rebels are holding up well... so the city is not contested & the clashes can still be reported routinely for months in the future along the same pattern. No evidence that army troops can do anything other than hit & run attacks. The red semi-circle is enough for now. Tradediatalk 12:38, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
SOHR reported clashes around Talbsieh mostly in the north area.here.As for now the red cricle is enough.Lindi29 (talk) 12:55, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Those are original research. The pro-opp source states cleraly of fighting inside the city. That has always been sufficient to turn the city contested.Paolowalter (talk) 18:38, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Please read the references critically. The first reference only says the regime shelled Talbise (in one sentence among many referring to other locations). The second reference says "clashes around Talbisa". Both suggest that regime forces are not in the town. Thus neither is adequate to change its' status to contested, even if it weren't a rebel stronghold. André437 (talk) 17:06, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

André437 I Agree that we need more data before mark this town as contested. But if you carefully read this source SOHR you can will notice that it says "Clashes took place between the regime forces and fighters in the vicinity of al- Mashrafeh area in the east of Homs with information about casualties on both sides. Other clashes took place between the same parties in the city of Talbise." Source clear said that clashes in the city of Talbise. Hanibal911 (talk) 20:01, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

FSA+Akrad and islamist groups

Hawar ala nahr should be edited https://twitter.com/arabthomness/status/564102969147547648?lang=sv — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 (talk • contribs) 22:26, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

We can't use biased sources like this. This guy is not just pro-opposition but pro-opposition + not reliable. DuckZz (talk) 23:42, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Al-hasakah and area Qamishili area

In last few days it was many raport about advance SAA in this two area. Almasdar [30] and [31] - The Syrian Arab Army (SAA) – in cooperation with the National Defense Forces – asserted their control over the villages of al-Zaraza, Shamasa, Tal Mohamed, al-Tiben, Khaled, Howedka, Akoula villages and nine other farms in the area. (Tal Hamees area). SAA offensive confirm by SOHR and EjmAlrai without name. Why Melabiya turn black when in this area SAA take few village and [32] [33] Ivan Sidorenko report about army prepare to retake base 121 And one more raport [34] that army control the entire way from Qamishli to Tell Brak (217.99.116.28 (talk) 13:41, 7 February 2015 (UTC))

It´s very interesting news. Sadly no source except Almasdar give names to the liberated villages and Almasdar is by many here considered not trustworthy. Me myself think that Almasdar is at least as trustworthy as SOHR in reporting gains and losses of ground among the fighting parts. Map should be updated. Rhocagil (talk) 18:03, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Rhocagil I agree, if we use SOHR we should use al-Masdar too atleast we know who edits the articles at al-Masdar and could easily contact the editor unlike SOHR which is unrealible on clashes where FSA is not involved and untrustworthy due the following reasons: ""SOHR" has no incorporation, no official reports, no physical address. They never explain their methodology, only assert random numbers."Spenk01 (talk) 21:48, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Spenk01 SOHR or he Rami Abdul Rahman is a one man office that work out of his apartment and does not think he has to explain his methodology (About SOHR NY Times). Anyway I think most of the news from SOHR are valid or good enough for making editorial changes to the map. With that said, I also like to say that I totally agree with you on your opinion on Al-Masdar, we know who edits the articles and it should be used. Rhocagil (talk) 23:37, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Reliable source reported that ISIS pulls out of 15 villages and farms in Al-Qamishli. Syrian army NDF Approaching IS in Tal Hamis and Tal al-Braq.Elijah J. Magnier Hanibal911 (talk) 09:39, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Another 2 report about this offensive [35] and EjmAlrai confirm SAA advance. (217.99.116.28 (talk) 09:36, 8 February 2015 (UTC))

YPG newly liberated villages confirmed by YPG official account and Reporters in kobane

https://twitter.com/Kobane_YPG/status/563754661665308672

https://twitter.com/jackshahine/status/563823001549160448

ISIS has retreated from most of the villages this map is wrong edit it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 (talk • contribs) 12:46, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Stop using so many biased twitter sources to report YPG gains please, at the very least wait for official YPG statements before changing to Yellow villages that get reported as liberated as late as 3 days after the change is made here.

190.67.154.84 (talk) 13:03, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Biased? You're funny People edit this map with Pro iran & pro assad sources and some pictures taken back in 2012. If any ISIS source,Assad source report something then it's 100% right, right?

Also if this was a lie you would see ISIS media trying to prove that YPG are lying. Sorry but i believe YPG official account. ___

I am pro-YPG pal, but I don't see the point in rushing to put everything yellow as soon as it gets mentioned in twitter, Jackshanine is a p. good source but in that particular tweet he is quoting another user whose realiability we don't know about.

Again, wait a bit until YPG (or ANHA) post the list of liberated villages so the changes can be done accordingly and we don't end putting yellow contested villages, like it happened with Sheran, which was marked yellow when in truth it was being besieged for 2 days.

190.67.154.84 (talk) 13:38, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

https://twitter.com/jackshahine/status/564092268064542720 -->

Also you can see here from a raqqa S.I inside source that ISIS are preparing for a war outside tel ebyad

https://twitter.com/Raqqa_sl1/status/564082763914305537 https://twitter.com/Raqqa_sl1/status/564082719433711616 https://twitter.com/Raqqa_sl1/status/564082785649180672

Wow ISIS retreating from jarablus according to Elijah J magnier. https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/564094868494888960

And btw ANHA already posted a list in their kurdish section http://ku.hawarnewsagency.com/ypg-li-3-eniyen-kobane-28-gund-hatin-rizgarkirin/

newly liberated villages

Eastern front: Qeremûx, Kara Mezra, Xirab Kort, Girêmoz, Walaqî, Boztepe, Êynbat, Gundê Xerîb, Cumelî, Kortekê, Kopeksatan, Girbelav, Îto and Til Sofî

Southern front: Kaşê Berkelê, Dongêzê ya Biçuk û Mezin, Yaramaz, Bogazê,Girdê

Western front: Selîm, Qurqurî, Korelî, Dîkmetaş, Aşmê, Elem and H.Şûkrî — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 (talk • contribs) 17:21, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

From what I've understood through numerous sources, YPG in western front has reached the river, on southern front YPG is at Sarrin grain depot and on the eastern front around Bexdik village. So the current map must be updated. Roboskiye (talk) 18:35, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
On the southeastern front YPG is on Lafarge cement plant and Chelebi village. On the eastern front they are at Bandarkhan village, just 20 km from Tel Abyad/Girê Spî. The current version of the map is too outdated. It actually shows the situation as it was for one week ago. Now more than 150 villages are recaptured by YPG. Roboskiye (talk) 16:37, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Some sources: http://www.aljazeera.net/news/arabic/2015/2/8/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%82%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%B1%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%AA%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%B7%D8%B1-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%89-%D8%B9%D8%B4%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%89-%D8%A8%D9%85%D8%AD%D9%8A%D8%B7-%D8%B9%D9%8A%D9%86-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A8 http://www.alahednews.com.lb/fastnews/254584/%D8%A7%D8%B4%D8%AA%D8%A8%D8%A7%D9%83%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A8%D9%8A%D9%86-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%88%D8%AD%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%B1%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D9%88%D9%85%D8%B3%D9%84%D8%AD%D9%8A-%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%B9%D8%B4-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%89-%D8%A8%D8%B1%D9%8A%D9%81-%D9%85%D8%AF%D9%8A%D9%86%D8%A9-%D8%AA%D9%84-%D8%A7%D8%A8%D9%8A%D8%B6-%D8%B4%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%84-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B1%D9%82%D8%A9#.VNeRd_nF870 Roboskiye (talk) 16:43, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

How much more proof does the editor want? This is starting to get funny

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-PIbV01LjQ&feature=youtu.be

This map should be updated because it's getting funny now.

VIDEOS ,PICTURES are not reliable evidence for changing our map. Read the rules .Also you should know no pro op sources for por op gains .Pyphon (talk) 12:27, 8 February 2015 (UTC)pyphon

We cant use as a source the amateur video from YouTube. Hanibal911 (talk) 14:59, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Please, we´ve been using them for years. See Aleppo battle article. YPG already released imagies of Euphrates river, it was confirmed by Elijah Magnier and other experts with contact on the ground, basically everyone acknoweldges it. EllsworthSK (talk) 19:35, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Be patient. The map is neutral, therefore it takes a bit of time to change everything. DuckZz (talk) 19:58, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Also for now we have many other more reliable sources which show a situation in this area. Also according to the rules in Wikipedia amateur video from YouTube this is not reliable sources. Hanibal911 (talk) 20:11, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
If we really want to be orthodox with wiki rules, neither is SOHR, any primary source and basically 99 percent of what we are using. We´ve reached compromise in Battle of Aleppo page, we can use it as template. EllsworthSK (talk) 20:31, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Syria map

Is it just me, or does the map look very very small on avarage sized monitors ? In my case it needs to be zoomed to at least 125% to make it visually attractive. DuckZz (talk) 10:43, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

I assume you mean the detailed map? Banak (talk) 11:10, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

I mean this view of map DuckZz (talk) 11:34, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 February 2015

Whoever is doing these edit requests is very unclear on the concept.
What is wanted is only the proposed changes, in a normal readable format, with adequate supporting references.
BTW, if you are capable of presenting the code, you don't need the semi-protected edit request unless you have a very new account. In any case, you need the above info to discuss the proposed changes for approval before the changes are made.
Thanks for your cooperation. André437 (talk) 12:31, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 February 2015

Note the above edit request by Kobaniyamin8 added 431,749 characters, the exact same length as another one by the same user and 2 by an IP. I assume therefore they are by the same person and are probably identical. John Smith the Gamer (talk) 14:31, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Probably. Since they are all totally unusable, I removed them. Hopefully they will read the note below, to do it right the next time. André437 (talk) 12:41, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Kafr Shams

According to IvanSidorenko, Government forces are trying to capture this town (including Masharah and Deir Adas), here and here. Opinions ? DuckZz (talk) 23:57, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Just like always: wait a couple days. There are reports from both pro gov. and opposition sources that SAA/NDF will strom Deir al Adas in the coming days, and finally launching an offensive on Douma. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Totholio (talk • contribs) 00:09, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

SOHR clear said that clashes still in surroundings town of Kafr Shams but not inside the town.SOHR Hanibal911 (talk) 09:15, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Violent clashes are still taking place between the regime forces supported by militiamen against the Islamic and rebel battalions in the vicinity of the town of Kafar Shams, amid mutual bombardment between the two parties.SOHR Hanibal911 (talk) 09:18, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
DuckZz IvanSidorenko not a reliable source which just publishes the pro-government and the pro-opposition data. Hanibal911 (talk) 09:25, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Petro Lucem also talks about fighting: https://twitter.com/PetoLucem/status/564449500690149376 He claims the SAA is attacking Zimrin and Kafr Shams. So it seems the town is rebel held, since Petro Lucem is a known Al-Masdar/pro-SAA person who only adminsts rebel gains if he absolutely has to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 15:51, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Dont need to misrepresent facts because source not said that Syrian troops attacking Zimrin and Kafr Shams. Source said that Syrian tropps launched a military operation in area of the towns Kafr Shams and Zimrin. But not said that clashed inside Kafr Shams. Also this source previously showed that this town under control by Syrian army.here Hanibal911 (talk) 16:05, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Peto Lucem is quoting Loy .s .Don't know if he is reliable but maybe it can go contested until we here more as offensive seems to be going on .Pyphon (talk) 16:05, 8 February 2015 (UTC)pyphon

Also pro opposition source previously showed that this town under control by Syrian army.here Hanibal911 (talk) 16:09, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Seems Kafr Shams is under rebel control: http://breakingnews.sy/en/article/52982.html This article says SAA targeted rebels in Kafr Shams town, not around it. So that means Kafr Shams and Tell Arab to the northwest to rebel held. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 16:51, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

No ,contested .Pyphon (talk) 17:00, 8 February 2015 (UTC)pyphon

No, rebel held. The article cleary says: "striking militants IN Kafr Shams". Not outskirts. Not area. Not "in the vincinity of". IN the town :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 18:43, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

This source not said that the city is under rebel control. So that as a compromise, we can mark the town as a contested. Hanibal911 (talk) 18:54, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

In the town yes SAA are in the town ,contested ;)Pyphon (talk) 21:01, 8 February 2015 (UTC)pyphon

Hanibal911 This obviously Pro-SAA reporter says terrorists control Kafr Shams. I would say lets make it contested, but then again i don't know because these clashes may last only for few days. My opinion, we make it contested until further (until SAA stops the offensive) DuckZz (talk) 23:51, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

That source says the town has been under rebel control for a year and a half, but we have had multiple pro-opposition sources confirming the town to be SAA-held. Like the pro-opp/mildly neutral deSyracuse [36] and the the hardcore pro-opposition Archi [37]. Both marked it as SAA-held in November and later January. So I think that casts some doubt on that journalist's report. And SOHR specifically stated the fighting was in the countryside. As for the breaking news source, it says an operation was carried out (past tense) not that it was continuing. EkoGraf (talk) 07:37, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Al-Masdar says Kafr Shams is under rebel control: http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-begins-offensive-northern-daraa/ These are the points mentioned: - rebels fighting in both Al-Suhayliyah and al-Dalli (both should be contested, not only al-Dalli) near Sheikh Maskin - rebels control Kafr Shams and Zimrin, which are bombarded by the SAA; half red ring around both at the eastern side - Qarfa: fighting around the town (twitter reports confirm this). Contested? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 13:20, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Namer

According to this source rebels try to break into this this village.here.Lindi29 (talk) 13:33, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Twitter reports of fighting in and around both Qarfa and Namer. This Al-Masdar article mentioning fighting in Qarfa: http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-begins-offensive-northern-daraa/ The text: "The 5th Division attacked a group of Al-Nusra Front fighters at the village of Qarfa, killing 8 enemy combatants and capturing a bulldozer. 6 out of the 8 militants were unknown; however, the 2 that were identified were the following: “‘Anas Khodor Al-Hariri” and “Zayd Bilaal Abu ‘Umran.”

Source Al Masdar said that clashes near village Qafra. Also this pro opposiion source here just said that rebels try to break also into Namer but not said that clashes inside this village. Hanibal911 (talk) 15:07, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
Also pro opposition source here only said that that the rebels just have entered in Rustom Ghazali palace which located at the entrance of the village. So that the clashes on outskirts of the village or it was just hit and run. Hanibal911 (talk) 15:26, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Grain Silos near Sarrin

According to data from ISIS they are still control this Grain silos near Sarrin.herehere also pro opposition map deSyracuse also showed that this area under control by ISIS. So how do you think we can add on map those silos and mark their under the control of ISIS. Hanibal911 (talk) 20:17, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

YPG forces are positioned 3 km from Sarrin and are shelling it with mortars. Roboskiye (talk) 20:51, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
I agree with Hanibal911 even pro-opp sources report that the grain silos is in Isis controll.Lindi29 (talk) 21:31, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Islamic State withdraw

Many reliable sources mentioning a TOTAL Islamic State withdraw from Northern Aleppo countryside, Elijah J Magnier being one of then:

https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/564053529183412224 https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/564069326861238272 https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/564094868494888960

Yes, we need to wait further confirmations, but is most likely a Idlib/Latakia style withdraw like in february 2014, to focus on Raqqa, Hasakah and Deir Ez-Zor(and Iraq). They had no men to maintain the fronts around Kobane, and would be trapped by YPG/FSA from the east and FSA/IF/JaN from the west. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.156.1.66 (talk) 19:54, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Here map from pro opposition source which showed a situation in this area. Hanibal911 (talk) 20:16, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Of course we can't do anything at this moment. There is much talk about this, probably most of things being reported are 50% true and 50% rumors.

  • Liwa Thuwar Raqqa (FSA linked) source said that FSA relebes (not said exactly which groups) captured the village of Qudaja, located right here.
  • Same group published photos showing the bridge in Qarah Qawzak. They said that IS still controls the town. Also they published these photos saying " We managed to cut the supply route between Sarinn ".
  • Kataib Shamal (FSA from Kobane) said the same thing for Qudaja vilage, but a friend also said that it's not important because other villages around were also captured.
  • Another interesting channel.

Does anyone agree to change Dir Barah, Barkh Batan and Quwaytaji to green ? Mainly because pro-opposition sources (including the channels above) are talking about villages located in the south of these 3 locations, mentioning for example Qudaja as captured but not mentioning the 3 villages that I wrote here. DuckZz (talk) 21:41, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

https://twitter.com/archicivilians/status/564184662172368898?lang=sv reports of more villages also it doesn't only say fsa but burqan al furat (ypg jabhat akrad sham al simal and LTR) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 (talk • contribs) 22:21, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

The reliable source said that now YPG fully control the entire southern reef of Kobani until Manbaj, north of Aleppo.Elijah J. Magnier also source said that fierce fighting between ISIS and Al Nusra in the reef Aleppo while ISIS is pulling from the area.Elijah J. Magnier and for now YPG stopped to north East of Manbij and east of the river.Elijah J. Magnier Hanibal911 (talk) 16:55, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Agree . Its very fast moving .Pyphon (talk) 17:17, 8 February 2015 (UTC)pyphon

The Magnier report is totally unreliable. When questioned (on twitter) about this report, he said that the rebels had not yet reached the Euphrate ... yet Manjib is some 20 km WEST of the river (actually a lake/reservoir near Manjib), which means that the rebels would be more than 20km + a large river/lake away from Manjib. They would also have to pass in proximity of Sarrin, a Daesh stronghold held for over a year. In sum, Magnier saying that the rebels have reached Manjib is (at least was at the time) false, by his own admission. But not surprising, Magnier has a well established habit of jumping the gun. Proof that nominally neutral does not equal reliable ...
BTW, despite certain editors doubts, archicivilians has a much better track record. As well as trying to be as objective as possible, as witnessed by his not uncommon qualification "unconfirmed reports". André437 (talk) 05:51, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Changes in Rif Dimashq

the news confirmed that the farms in north part of Duma in rif Damascus is contested and some of them like "Mazra’a Seehaan" were captured by SAA here is source:http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/large-battle-brewing-douma-saa-captures-chick-farm/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.143.248.55 (talk) 12:49, 10 February 2015 (UTC) and al-Danaji village in west of rif dameshqe http://syriahr.com/en/2015/02/regime-forces-backed-by-hezbollah-and-iranian-fighters-advance-in-reef-dimashq/

Changes in Quneitra and Daraa

the news from pro oppositions and pro government sources confirmed that these areas are captured by SAA

Kafr Shamis, Zimreen and Deir ‘Adass in north of Daraa

http://syriahr.com/en/2015/02/the-regime-forces-backed-by-hezbollah-and-iranian-fighters-clash-with-the-rebel-and-islamic-factions-in-daraa/ http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-begins-offensive-northern-daraa/

“Tal Fatima”, “Tal Ra’eed”, and “Tal Maqran” in Qanitara

http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/patience-virtue-syrian-army-launches-offensive-al-quneitra/ 46.143.248.55 (talk) 08:43, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Not exact. The three hills (which I cannot locate exactly) are confirmed only by the article you mentioned. It is true that Al Masdar is a very reliable soucre and can be used. For the three towns, it is only mentioned fighting near or inside Deir al- Adas by SOHR and that the offensive is geared to takes thos towns. Some tweets states that Deir al- Adas is taken by SAA [38], but we must wait more solid confirmation. Clearly SAA is on the offensive and we must watch how the situation evolves. Deir al- Adas contested should be enough for now see [39].Paolowalter (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 10:21, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Kafr Shams is rebel held: http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-begins-offensive-northern-daraa/

Also, Deir Adas: https://twitter.com/KeepingtheLeith/status/564717581450616832 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.183.240.250 (talk) 11:42, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

I believe the editors should wait a couple days, lot's of lies from the opposition using 3 year old photos as "killed SAA" they need help there for sure, but this is a way bigger offensive than just taking a couple cities, related to the Shebaa attack, iranian advisors are coming with gifts to SAA — Preceding unsigned comment added by Totholio (talk • contribs) 14:31, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Al-Masdar and Leith are pro-Assad, so no. Also, yes, this is a big offensive, however rebels are strong in Daara, they captured dozens of villages and towns in the last months, including those Assad is trying to recover now, surely both sides have already suffered dozens of casualties, but the rebels far outnumber Assad there, so if the battle becomes a bloodbath, the rebels have more men to throw at the fight. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.183.240.250 (talk) 14:37, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Also biased pro opposition source Archicivilians reported that battles ongoing in Kafr Shams and Deir Adass. So this mean that both these towns now contested. Hanibal911 (talk) 15:12, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
The reliable source said that Syrian army and Hezbollah fully control Deir al-Adas and Tayha.Elijah J. Magnier Hanibal911 (talk) 15:54, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Raport from pro gov petro lucern that SAA take DeirAlAdas, Habbariyyah, Eliah confirm EjmAlrai SAA and #Hezbollah fully control Deir al-Adas and Tayha and is bombarding Kfar-Shams and Madhara now. And pro SAA talk about take control Al-Dinaaji (217.99.148.246 (talk) 16:07, 9 February 2015 (UTC))

Bloody H*LL Hannibal, are you out of your mind?! You always say "no twitter sources, no twitter sources", but you want to change Deir al-Adas based on a TWITTER SOURCE. Nexy, pro-SAA Al Masdar cleary states Kafr Shams under rebel control, and you refuse to edit the map. Are you insane?! Or is this just the true colour showing ;) I think the second one, dear editor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 16:30, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Stop being butthurt anonymus this is only the beginning.Elijah got sources on the ground, he knew everything before most of the people knew nothing about for months. South Syria will be the iranian/Hezbollah operation centrum in the coming months. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Totholio (talk • contribs) 16:39, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

We dont use anonymous reports from twitter. But Elijah J. Magnier it is the chief international correspondent of Kuwaiti newspaper. Hanibal911 (talk) 17:05, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Deir al-Adas: no sources, turned to red. Reason: Twitter sources. Barqah: no sources, turned to red. It goes on and on and on .... unbelievable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 19:24, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Stop talking nonsense! The reliable source said that Syrian army and Hezbollah fully control Deir al-Adas and Tayha.Elijah J. Magnier Alsp pro opposition source here showed that Barqa under control by army. Also, we use data from Twitter for displayed success Kurds and rebels but it does not bother you. I see that you are against the Syrian government and you do not like a situations when someone on the map shows success for army. Hanibal911 (talk) 19:44, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Unbelievable ,you accusing Hanibal of bias ,haha that rich coming from you ;)Pyphon (talk) 19:41, 9 February 2015 (UTC)pyphon

http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-armys-offensive-northern-daraa-full-swing/ gives some details on the situation of this area (provding a proof of its realiability BTW). I'd say Deir al-Adas contested and Kafr Shamis green with red ring plus Tal Ghasham red. The article clams that Tal Ghasham s taken by SAA: wher is this place? Paolowalter (talk) 20:58, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Probably here [40] (217.99.148.246 (talk) 21:35, 9 February 2015 (UTC))
Paolowalter The more reliable source said that Syrian army and Hezbollah fully control Deir al-Adas and Tayha.Elijah J. Magnier So now those towns marked under control by army. Hanibal911 (talk) 21:38, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
Also another the reliable source from Netherlands also reported that Syrian troops and Hezbollah fully control Deir al-Adas and Tayha.Lowlands Solutions Hanibal911 (talk) 21:48, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
Paolowalter Here Tall Ghashim Hanibal911 (talk) 21:50, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 Wouldn't it be more logical to turn Ayn Afa from contested to red and Deir Adas from green to contested. I know what Elijah said but still, i have seen at least 3 videos showing 3 destroyed tanks around Deir Adas, but what ever. DuckZz (talk) 21:53, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

We cant use in this issue the rebels amateur video from YouTube. Also two a more reliable sources reported that Deir Al Adas under control by army. When this source Elijah J. Magnier reported that Al Nusra captured town of Kafr Yabous no one said that this unreliable data also previously all the editors have recognized that it is a reliable source. Hanibal911 (talk) 22:21, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
SAA controk of Deir Al Adas is officialy confirmed [41]. Also Tell Mseih is declated under SAA control.Paolowalter (talk) 14:47, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
Official confirmation from EjmAlrai SAA and #Hezbollah control of Deir al-Adas is confirmed NOW. (83.26.143.237 (talk) 15:13, 10 February 2015 (UTC))

Ras Al Makta' - Eastern Homs

SOHR reports that SAA has captured the Ras Al Makta' area in Eastern Homs south of Umm al Surj [42] ChrissCh94 (talk) 16:38, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

SAA captured Ras Al Makta and the village of Al-Masheerfa according to Al-Masdar http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-secures-villages-northeast-homs/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by SyAAF (talk • contribs) 17:45, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
Source said that village of Al-Masheerfa was captured of army earlier on last week. Which is also confirmed SOHR. Hanibal911 (talk) 18:00, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
Hanibal911,ChrissCh94I open an issue for this and added this places as Isis held beacause the SSA just captured several villages near that area and continued the offensive now they captured this town that I added 1 week ago in other words i was right!Lindi29 (talk) 18:13, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
We never said you weren't right, we just said that you might be wrong. Now it's true the area was ISIS-held but what about the others? We can't risk adding wrongly held areas. Don't get us wrong! Cheers Lindi29 ChrissCh94 (talk) 20:05, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
Agreed with ChrissCh94 Hanibal911 (talk) 20:08, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
Are we going to add them? ChrissCh94 (talk) 16:49, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
ChrissCh94 I already added them !But i could not find Ras Al Makta. Lindi29 (talk) 22:43, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Lafarge Cement Factory

Reliable journalist Jack Shahine says here that YPG/FSA forces are besieging Lafarge Cement Factory which is east of Mamid here: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=36.543846&lon=38.587418&z=12&m=b That would mean that most of the villages northwest of the Cement Factory are in YPG hands, while in this map are marked as IS controlled. --8fra0 (talk) 12:29, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

8fra0 Need more data for such a major change on map. Hanibal911 (talk) 13:02, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
You are right Hanibal911. By now there is photographic evidence of YPG/FSA presence in Khanik Tathani southeast of Khanik Fawkani http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=36.639498&lon=38.520470&z=12&m=b, per https://twitter.com/Raqqa_Sl/status/565134349369368577 , so we can change to YPF/FSA controlled that town and the town northwest of that place. --8fra0 (talk) 13:34, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
8fra0Also reliable source Elijah J. Magnier confirmed data from pro opposition source here that the Liwa' Thuwar Suria advancing in area of La Farge. Hanibal911 (talk) 15:31, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
There are many non-pro-Kurdish sources confirming this: http://www.alahednews.com.lb/fastnews/254839/-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%88%D8%AD%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%B1%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%AA%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%B9%D9%8A%D8%AF-%D8%A8%D8%B4%D9%83%D9%84-%D9%83%D8%A7%D9%85%D9%84-%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%AE%D8%B1%D8%A8%D8%A9-%D8%B9%D8%B7%D9%88-%D8%A8%D8%AD%D9%84%D8%A8-%D8%A8%D8%B9%D8%AF-%D8%A7%D8%B4%D8%AA%D8%A8%D8%A7%D9%83%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D9%85%D8%B9-%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%B9%D8%B4-#.VNqGwfnF870 http://rep-eye.com/mainnews/89-2011-12-12-02-34-49/30396-2015-02-10-13-25-54.html http://www.almanar.com.lb/adetails.php?eid=1112032 http://www.syriaday.net/%D9%85%D8%AD%D9%84%D9%8A/%D8%AB%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B1%D9%82%D8%A9-%D9%8A%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%86-%D8%AA%D9%82%D8%AF%D9%85%D9%87-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D8%B1%D9%8A%D9%81-%D9%83%D9%88%D8%A8%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%8A-%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%80-ypg-%D9%8A%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%B7%D8%B1-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%89-%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%89-%D8%AC%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%AF%D8%A9/ Roboskiye (talk) 22:44, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 February 2015

Add

{ lat = "36.659", long = "39.613", mark = "Location dot black.svg", marksize = "6", label = "Raj'an", link = "Raj'an", label_size = "0", position = "left" },

Sources: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=36.659314&lon=39.612236&z=16 http://www.understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/ISIS%20Sanctuary%20Map%20JAN.%2015.%202015.pdf

Add { lat = "36.601", long = "39.492", mark = "Location dot black.svg", marksize = "6", label = "Nussif Tall", link = "Nussif Tall", label_size = "0", position = "left" },

Sources: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=36.690653&lon=39.492502&z=16&m=bs http://www.understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/ISIS%20Sanctuary%20Map%20JAN.%2015.%202015.pdf Add { lat = "36.644", long = "39.226", mark = "Location dot black.svg", marksize = "6", label = "Za'zu'ah", link = "Za'zu'ah", label_size = "0", position = "left" },

Sources: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=36.644078&lon=39.225976&z=16 http://www.understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/ISIS%20Sanctuary%20Map%20JAN.%2015.%202015.pdf

I want to show these ISIS controlled villages, as ISIS supplies its fighters near Serekaniye using this road.

2601:0:B200:F7D9:ED96:280A:4E54:5A9F (talk) 1:50, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 22:50, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Newly liberated villages in Kobane

till-Hajb ,Tayri ,karab-kurd , jilak liberated https://twitter.com/ColdKurd/status/562279177546891264

Let's wait some more sources or some pictures to confirm that YPG is really inside those villages. Sheran town has been marked as Kurdish controlled since 5 days ago, but actually it was liberated by YPG only last night. https://twitter.com/jackshahine/status/562232838133919744 The same source (Jack Shahine) posted a picture of Aydiq village here: https://twitter.com/jackshahine/status/562274741936209920 .in the southern front, but I have yet to see a picture of Rubi. --8fra0 (talk) 17:33, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
7 more villages liberated last night: Xerabnas (Qaramogh), Satiyah, Qabajigh (Qarajokh), Tashli Huyuk (Tashluk), Mojek, Bir Arab, Bishalti. This is reflected in dozens of sources: http://www.lebanon24.com/mobile/details/1002615 http://www.lebfeed.com/%D9%88%D8%AD%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%AD%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B4%D8%B9%D8%A8-%D8%AA%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%B7%D8%B1-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%89-%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%89-%D9%82%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%AC%D8%BA-%D9%88/ http://www.alahednews.com.lb/fastnews/253822/-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%88%D8%AD%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%B1%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%AA%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%B7%D8%B1-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%89-%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%89-%D9%82%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%AC%D8%BA-%D9%88%D8%B7%D8%A7%D8%B4%D9%84%D9%88%D9%83-%D9%88%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%85%D9%88%D8%BA-%D9%88-%D8%B3%D8%AA%D9%8A-%D9%88-%D9%85%D9%88%D8%AC%D9%83-%D9%88-%D8%A8%D9%8A%D8%B1%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A8#.VNHxy2jF870 http://slabnews.com/article/158887/ http://www.masdark.com/arabic/304311.html
I think that we can change them. On the other hand, Tel Ghazal is still contested: https://twitter.com/jackshahine/status/563117893823774721 --8fra0 (talk) 23:41, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

8fra0 when you were editing Kobane region (Tel Ghazal), did you accidentally edit Tall Ghazal in Hasakah to contested? Anyway you are better with editing the map then me so could you please change Tall Ghazal to Kurd held. I didn´t see any source for Tall Ghazal anywhere. Rhocagil (talk) 01:45, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

I edited the wrong Tel Ghazal, sorry. --8fra0 (talk) 11:11, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

New sources say that Tal Ghazal, Makhraj, Khazinah, Dibrak and other villages are in YPG hands: https://twitter.com/jackshahine/status/563372401409667072 This source has proved to be very reliable in the past days. Maybe Rubi and Tafshu are still in IS control as there is no evidence of clashes there, they should be edited I think. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 8fra0 (talk • contribs) 16:31, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Also Rubi is under YPG control according to https://twitter.com/m22bali/status/563420727626723328 --8fra0 (talk) 19:48, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

And Rubi silos also in YPG control, Tafshu village liberated by FSA and YPG jointly according to https://twitter.com/jackshahine/status/563456403059515392 and https://twitter.com/arabthomness/status/563452316117135364 --8fra0 (talk) 22:02, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

New reports of Selib, Dikmatash and Kor Ali under YPG control in Kobane western front: https://twitter.com/arabthomness/status/563749990183763969 --8fra0 (talk) 17:33, 6 February 2015 (UTC)


please change milê from black to yellow because the news says peshmerga attack isis from milê which south of kobanî. http://rudaw.net/kurmanci/kurdistan/100220156 and change name of kobanê to kobanî plase. it's name is kobanî and all wikipedia use that name https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koban%C3%AE Azad4707 (talk) 01:41, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

please change khorkhori, sal, sarunj, dibrak seykhan, hamamik, karus, sharabati and birak from black to yellow because the offical account of ypg in kobanî. https://twitter.com/Kobane_YPG Azad4707 (talk) 11:07, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 February 2015

Please Edit the Spot of Tal Abyad. It is black at the moment. It should be yellow-black. Kurdish Forces are attacking it at the moment. German Source Thanks 87.159.202.49 (talk) 17:00, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

No the source mention just that the campaing just started and the Kurds are moving toward Tal Abyad. They are still far from engaging fighting in the town. The source does not provide info on villages where fighting would take place ora taken by kurds.Paolowalter (talk) 19:54, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Tall Abyad/Girê Spî villages

Alarabiya, clearly states that the frontline is now in the villages of Tall Abyad: http://www.alarabiya.net/ar/arab-and-world/syria/2015/02/08/%D8%AA%D8%AC%D8%AF%D8%AF-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B9%D8%A7%D8%B1%D9%83-%D8%A8%D9%8A%D9%86-%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%B9%D8%B4-%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A3%D9%83%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%AF-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D8%B1%D9%8A%D9%81-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B1%D9%82%D8%A9-.html It meantions villages of Juran, Hurriya, Kurmaza and Kenane. Unfortunately this sourced edit got removed on be half of a map which itself bases its updates on other sources, and which seems to have missed to check Arabic section of Alarabiya! Please update and correct the map. Roboskiye (talk) 07:30, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

An addition to Alarabiya, this source mentions Sarzuri (Zarzuri) and Bir Arab under YPG control. These villages are just two km away from Juran and Hurriya, located north and south of them respectively. Roboskiye (talk) 10:54, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

It does not matter how many verifiable sources you provide. The reaction is same and simple: They refer to the same outdated map and revert you! By the same logic one can re-edit whole of wiki map according to that inaccurate map. Any one daring to answer this? Roboskiye (talk) 20:49, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Here is more info about Tall Abyad front. 8 villages under YPG control and 8 villages scene of fighting. http://www.masdark.com/arabic/312599.html Roboskiye (talk) 20:55, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I dare to answer this. Editors find it easier to copy an unreliable amateur map, rather than look for real sources… Tradediatalk 05:55, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Kurdish Forces in Tal Abyad (Girê Sipî)

Kurdish Forces Attack Tal Abyad. There Should be yellow-black spots.

German Source: http://www.n-tv.de/politik/Kurden-nehmen-Kampf-um-Tal-Abjad-auf-article14481826.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.159.202.49 (talk) 16:55, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

The source actually says that after the recapture of Kobani their focus will now be the Tal Abyad valley. So, its something that has possibly not happened yet and it was talking about the valley, not the town. EkoGraf (talk) 06:26, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Deir a-Zaghb

Pro opposition source reported that rebels captured the hamlet of Deir a-Zaghb to southwest of town Fu'ah on the road to Idlid.here [www.syriadirect.org/rss/1843-syria-direct-news-update-2-10-15] But we cant use data from pro opposition source for display the success by rebels. So that maybe someone have the data from a reliable source. Hanibal911 (talk) 09:22, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Almasdar news reported the same .31.50.78.246 (talk) 09:35, 12 February 2015 (UTC)pyphon

You can provide a source and I will add this hamlet on the map. Hanibal911 (talk) 09:47, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 Done pro government source confirmed.hereAl Masdar Hanibal911 (talk) 10:12, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes but why is it turned grey ?i thought it said (islamic front)31.50.78.246 (talk) 15:59, 12 February 2015 (UTC)pyphon

Daraa?

Why are Masharah and Al-Tayhah suddenly red? There has been no discussion here, no sources given to change the towns. So, why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.31.204.195 (talk) 14:44, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

SAA and Hezbollah fully control TayhaElijah J. Magnier In Quneitra and Daraa fronts, SAA and Hezbollah took control of Madharah,Deir-Maqer,Al-Tiha Elijah J. Magnier And stop writing nonsense that changes are made without specifying sources. Hanibal911 (talk) 15:14, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
Also confirmed that SAA and Hezbollah control of Deir al-Adas.Elijah J. Magnier Hanibal911 (talk) 15:17, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

You are using Twitter. So if Markito, Archicivilians or Thomas van Linge say rebels take villages, we change them to? Because then we can make Tell Antar and Qarfa to rebel held, as well as the village of Al-Faqa and Bargah. Nice change in politics over here :) great! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.31.204.195 (talk) 15:32, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

There is some differences between pro rebel Markito, Archicivilians or Thomas van Linge, pro regime peto lucem, KeepingtheLeith and neutral EjmAlrai. Read about rules in wiki. (83.26.143.237 (talk) 15:39, 10 February 2015 (UTC))
All editors have recognized this source Elijah J. Magnier as a reliable and neutral. And we use it for display the success the army, rebels, Kurds and ISIS. But Markito, Archicivilians or Thomas van Linge it is biased pro opposition sources and in accordance with the rules we do not use pro opposition sources to display success rebels. We can use this source for display the success by army. But we can use for display the success by rebels pro government sources Peto Lucem, Al-Masdar, Syrian Perspective and some other. Hanibal911 (talk) 15:43, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Success? Many videos from Deir al-Adas today showing continued fighting. One Twitter source claims the regime retakes Masharah, and it is red. More than 10 Twitter sources say fighting in Qarfa, and we don't even discuss making it contested. This map, gentleman, is becoming one big joke. Sorry to state it like this, because I do appreciate your work, but I'll be following the real maps made by Twitter authors who do not believe every romour :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.31.204.195 (talk) 16:37, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry but Hanibal911 here is right. ChrissCh94 (talk) 16:47, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
About clashes in Qarfa and Deir Al Adas said only a pro opposition sources. But this more reliable source Elijah J. Magnier because it's not just page in Twitter the activist from social network it is page in twitter of the chief international correspondent from Kuwait news agency. Also we cant use pro-rebel amateur video for displayed success by rebels. Hanibal911 (talk) 16:50, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
Also Israeli source Mossad News reported that Hezbollah take control of Deir al-Adas.Mossad News Hanibal911 (talk) 17:11, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
SOHR report that clashes are still taking place in Deir al-Adas also confirms attacks on Qafra and Namer the issue that i opend beacause pro-regime and pro-opp twitter sources reported that rebels are fighting in outskirts of this villages.here,also al-masdar shows Mashrah in rebel control but shows also regime advances near this town so mb a red siege on these 3 villages it's more logical.here.Lindi29 (talk) 17:28, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

And someone change Deir al-Adas to ... green (83.26.143.237 (talk) 19:29, 10 February 2015 (UTC))

Archicivilians maps have been proven to be inaccurate and this can be seen by the rather small, misplaced contested line. Archicivilian has used this map for most of his changes, and he usually over exaggerates the oppo gains in addition Jumada (talk) 19:42, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
Jumada I understood, but if we have reliable info from EjmAlrai that SAA control this city and I don't see new his maps from Dara. Last from january. (83.26.143.237 (talk) 20:54, 10 February 2015 (UTC))
Several mentioned sources now mention that Deir al-Adas should be red or at least contested, Tell Qareen should be contested, Kafr Shams should be besieged or contested, Kafr Nasij should be besieged from the north and possibly from the east, Mashara should be contested or at least besieged from the north and Khan Arnabah should have the green ring removed, it's outdated. MesmerMe (talk) 20:21, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

84.31.204.109 .Go follow archicivilians map its right up your street extreme bias pro opposition .If MOSSAD news say Hizbollah have taken Deir al Adas its confirmed so stop throwing your toys out the pram and grow some ;)31.50.78.246 (talk) 20:48, 10 February 2015 (UTC)pyphon

The known vandal Alhanuty has changed Mashara to green based on a misunderstanding of an outdate source and Deir al-Adas to green without any reason. I reverted the first change but I do not want to break the 1RR rule. Can somebody revert the second? More important, can Alhanuty be blocked for the next year? He just vandalize the map. Paolowalter (talk) 21:03, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
Done XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 23:16, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

[43] This sources says the government advanced in north-western Daraa province and that the situation in Deir-Al-Adas is critical (pro-opp claim) but I also found footage from SANA [44] showing the army cleaning up Deir-al-Adas which means the rebels have lost the town. Daki122 (talk) 21:06, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Also pro-opp sources are saying rebels lost Tel Mari and the 2 villages next to it [45]. Daki122 (talk) 21:10, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

It seems Deir Al Adas is regime held. Reuters even quoted rebel sources saying Deir Maker is regime held. [46] ChrissCh94 (talk) 21:52, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Hard to say because SAA did capture Deir Adas, that's why we have those news from western medias (and Elijah). The thing is that clashes then reerupted inside the town according to SOHR and other sources. Pro-opposition channels are saying that rebels recaptured the town but of course we can't use that. For now, we can leave it to contested, as we will have a 100% confirmation in few days. DuckZz (talk) 22:21, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Nothing new that rebel source lie. Today thay said that repelled regime attack on this city and kick out regime forces, another report that they fighting inside the city, now they said that recaptured this city. It impossible win, stability, lost and win in this same time. (83.26.143.237 (talk) 22:37, 10 February 2015 (UTC))
Come to think of it, I cannot remember a time when rebels have lost a village and not claimed to have recaptured it the next day. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 23:14, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
its a pro-oppo 'moral boost' to lie about the situation on the ground; which is created to mislead their followers on facebook and twitter in an effort to reduce panic, usually the rumour is forgotten and nobody seems to care who created the rumour in the first place, by the end of it they assume they never lost a thing, this was well known for the town of Morek, long after it was lost to government forces, many spoke of a massive rebel counter attack which never came, eventually they moved on to Daraa which was seeing more action Jumada (talk) 23:37, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

XJ and all other editors SOHR has confirmed that clashes have continued in Deir Adas, so stop inventing reasons to put Deir Adas as regime-held, the regime captured happened in the afternoon, but clashes resumed in the evening, and the situation is changing, so the best thing to do is go with Hannibal's edit and keep it as contested. Alhanuty (talk) 23:59, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Does not matter. More reliable and more recent sources such as EJM and the Mossad [come on man!] have declared the town to be in SAA hands. We will not leave the town contested forever so Abdel-Rahman can play catch up. No other reliable source has reported that the rebels reentered the town. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 00:01, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

SOHR is more reliable than biased EJM, SOHR proved to be authentic for a longtime, also SOHR report has came after the previous reports. Alhanuty (talk) 00:21, 11 February 2015 (UTC) http://syriahr.com/en/2015/02/8-rebels-killed-by-an-ambush-by-regime-forces-in-dara-countryside/ http://www.syriahr.com/2015/02/%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%B4%D9%87%D8%A7%D8%AF-%D9%86%D8%AD%D9%88-10-%D9%85%D9%82%D8%A7%D8%AA%D9%84%D9%8A%D9%86-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D9%83%D9%85%D9%8A%D9%86-%D9%84%D9%82%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%86/ http://www.syriahr.com/2015/02/%D9%86%D8%AD%D9%88-20-%D8%B4%D9%87%D9%8A%D8%AF%D8%A7%D9%8B-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D9%85%D8%AD%D8%A7%D9%81%D8%B8%D8%A9-%D8%AF%D8%B1%D8%B9%D8%A7-%D8%A8%D9%8A%D9%86%D9%87%D9%85-14-%D9%85%D9%82%D8%A7%D8%AA%D9%84/

If i'm not mistaken in the translation here is even a video of the SAA touring in Deir al-Adas https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=748649765250148 Spenk01 (talk) 00:21, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Just wanted to say my part, we have been using Elijah J. Magnier's reports for a long time as a neutral source to show BOTH sides advances and he has proven reliable. If he says the town is government-held it probably is and the reported fighting is most likely taking place in the outskirts. EkoGraf (talk) 00:29, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Eko, it clearly states "clashes taking place in Der al-Adas town between regime forces backed by Hezbollah and Iranian fighters against Islamic battalions.", so i the town is clearly contested, and this report is more recent than EJM, also EJM has a biasness towards the regime. Alhanuty (talk) 00:43, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Do not lie. EJM has no bias towards the regime. He is a fully neutral, credible, and experienced reporter, unlike SOHR. SOHR never really has done a good job with its translations anyway. Since no other reliable source has reported a rebel counterattack [which would be big news], SOHR should be ignored in the face of all the sources against it such as EJM, Al-Masdar, Reuters, THE MOSSAD!!, etc. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 01:19, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

scale of miles the SOHR report is more recent than the other sources, so contested, EJM has a biasness towards the regime, and this has been seen in other situations before, he claimed that Deir Adas was taken 24 hours before the regime actually entered it, even pro-regime source leith even was skeptical on it, also Al-Masdar is a very pro-regime source and is heavily biased, and all editors know that. Alhanuty (talk) 01:22, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Deir Adas is gone, clashes are now in other towns. Just relax Alhanuty and double check your grammar to make it easy for everyone to understand what you're trying to say, thanks Jumada (talk) 02:17, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

SOHR confirmed that there is clashes inside Deir Adas. Alhanuty (talk) 02:37, 11 February 2015 (UTC) why doesn't this map have a scale of miles that would be vary helpful. Evey map should have a scale of miles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.245.243.173 (talk) 01:16, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Alhanuty Elijah J. Magnier it is reliable and neutral source and you also this previously recognized. SOHR partially biased source and it's known to all. so let's not raise this issue. Hanibal911 (talk) 06:53, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
Also many reliable sources said that SOHR it is antigovernment source and SOHR some times said that Syrian troops it is bloody murderers and this says that it is not not a neutral source. He also uses an flag of Syrian opposition on its website that confirms that SOHR support the Syrian opposition. While Elijah J. Magnier it is neutral and reliable source. As I have said earlier this is a twitter Elijah J. Magnier of a chief international correspondent from Kuwait news agency Al Rai. Hanibal911 (talk) 07:13, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
Syrian forces had captured the town of Deir al-Adas.The Daily StarMulhakAlbawabaReuters Hanibal911 (talk) 07:39, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
Here's also a video inside town of Deir al Adas although we cant use it to display success by army because this video from the pro government source SANA Hanibal911 (talk) 08:02, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
I think Dayr Makir is contested following this recent Mayadeen report [47] ChrissCh94 (talk) 08:40, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
Nevermind just saw this news on Al Mayadeen: Deir Maker is regime held. [48] ChrissCh94 (talk) 08:47, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
Just as the last nail in the coffin of the Deir Adas discussion SOHR.Paolowalter (talk) 09:32, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Maybe this article can help? http://www.qasion-news.com/en/content/regime-forces-enter-deir-adas-after-fsa%E2%80%99s-withdrawal. Regime entred Deir Al Addas, but with risk of ambushes of FSA. Can anyone tell me as what kind of source I must treat Qasion News? Raspoetin89 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:1811:A016:A800:4D72:F08B:F94C:F2D3 (talk) 10:18, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

qasion news it is pro opposition source. Hanibal911 (talk) 10:28, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
Deir al-Adas under control by Syrian troops and Hezbollah.Elijah J. Magnier Hanibal911 (talk) 10:39, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
A pro-opp map with some extra info https://twitter.com/hashtag/Daraa?src=hash. Besides news we already know, it confirms Mashara under SAA control and Himrin as well. Paolowalter (talk) 11:02, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Ok, its been confirmed by SOHR [49]. SAA has captured Deir al-Adas. EkoGraf (talk) 11:03, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Also a world news editor from Haaretz (Israeli source) Asaf Ronel confirmed that Deir al-Adas under control by Syrian troops and Hezbollah. Asaf Ronel and some other sources here also also another geopolitical and security analyst reported that after the seizure of Deir al-Adas by the Syrian troops, clashes reported in Kafr al-Shams. Michael Horowitz Hanibal911 (talk) 11:04, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
Also biased pro opposition source reported that rebels retreated this morning from Deir al-Adas.Archicivilians Hanibal911 (talk) 11:20, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
SOHR reports some SAA advance but I cannot locate the hills. Paolowalter (talk) 11:46, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
Pro opposition source confirmed that Mashara under control by army.Syrian Rebellion Observatory Hanibal911 (talk) 11:47, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
This is Tall Sarja [50] while this is Tall Arous [51]. Rebels still hold the following: Sultaniyah and Tall Sultaniyah - Sabsaba and Tal Sabsaba - Tell Qareen and KafrNasej - Kfar Shams (encircled) and Tall Antar. Clashes are now ongoing in both Tell Fatimah and Tell Alaqiyah. That is the frontline now. ChrissCh94 (talk) 12:52, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
I got this info from the local coordination committees of po-gov and pro-opp sides ChrissCh94 (talk) 12:58, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

sohr confirmed saa captured dayr makir http://www.syriahr.com/2015/02/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%B7%D8%B1%D8%A9-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%89-%D8%A8%D9%84%D8%AF%D8%A9-%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%B1-%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%83%D8%B1-%D9%85%D9%86-%D9%82%D8%A8%D9%84-%D8%AD%D8%B2%D8%A8-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%84/176.232.198.167 (talk) 13:52, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Also pro rebel source Syrian Rebellion Observatory confirmed that Dayr Makir and Deir Adas under control by Syrian troops. Syrian Rebellion Observatory Hanibal911 (talk) 15:34, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
Also another one pro opposition source confirm that regime forces Hezbollah and Shia militants recaptured villages Dayr Makir, Deir al-Adas, Danaj and Habbariyah in northern Daraa.Thomas van Linge Hanibal911 (talk) 16:15, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
According to pro opposition source heavy battle for control of Tell 'Antar & Tell Alaqiyah.here Hanibal911 (talk) 16:35, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
Rebels reported that army captured part of Kafr Nasij.here Hanibal911 (talk) 08:37, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
Also opposition ground activists confirm that rebels retreated from Deir Adas to Kafr Nasij despite denial by 1st army(FSA)here And activist reported that when 1st Army(FSA) claimed they recaptured Deir Adas and captured there regime motorcycle . Activist says it happened in Kafr Nasij.here Hanibal911 (talk) 08:45, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
Hanibal911,ChrissCh94 according to peto lucem map it shows Kfar Nasij besieged and Masharah contested or besieged on one the north side.Lindi29 (talk) 13:26, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
Lindi29 Map from Petro Luce for 10 February so this means that for the moment this map outdated. And new map from pro opposition source showed that Masharah under control by army Syrian Rebellion Observatory Also rebels reported that army captured part of Kafr Nasij.here Also reliable source reported that clashes ongoing in Kfar-Shams, Kfar-Nasej and Hamreet.Elijah J. Magnier Hanibal911 (talk) 13:44, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

I found some good maps here >>SchwarzeSun Daraa Map 12 feb 2015<< of the situation today. hope it helps Jumada (talk) 16:25, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

kobane

What's the source for isis recaptured mitras, Ziyarete, Xerab eto and many villages in south?--Creepz55 (talk) 17:18, 12 February 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepz55 (talk • contribs) 16:52, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

In fact ISIS didn't recapture anything, the real problem is that the sources that stated that YPG forces were in Ziyarete, Xerab Eto and villages around Serrin were not confirmed at all. Moreover, YPG official sources stated yesterday that YPG was clashing with ISIS in Darbazin and Miskhu, so it is not realistic that YPG controls Zirayete and Xerab Eto, that would mean that IS forces are completely surrounded and for sure we would have heard about that. For Sarrin grain Silos and near villages, the last confirmed sources showed pictures of ISIS fighters there. 8fra0 (talk) 09:38, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Sheick Miskin

From pro-opp sources [52] Sheikeh Meskin contested. In any case I have never seen convincing proof that SAA is not present anymore in the east part of the city.Paolowalter (talk) 09:51, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Clashes are on the east, in the village of Qarfa, pro-opposition are saying that Rebels are trying to advance from that village but we don't have any neutral sources showing that rebels control it. DuckZz (talk) 11:41, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

That is your interpreation not what is written in the source. Attack on Qarfa does not exclude fighting in Sheick Miksim as well.Paolowalter (talk) 14:47, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
Paolowalter Let's look at interpretations, shall we ?
1) Your reference has one sentence saying "Fierce clashes operate between FSA and regime forces in Al-Sheikeh Meskein front in Daraa."
Nothing more, nothing less. It does not define where the "front" is. Is it 10 km north of the town, 10 km east, or where ? Note that Izra is only 4 km away, to the north-east. Maybe the "front" is on the edge of Izra ?
2) You characterize the source as pro-opposition, but there is no indication of that. Since the source uses neutral language ("FSA", "regime") and provides translations in arabic, english, and kurdish, it is probably based in Syria with a neutral or moderate outlook, and unlikely strongly pro-regime or strongly pro-ISIS. (Both groups being against the kurdish language.)
3) The control of Sheikh Maskin has already been discussed with references provided, and the consensus was that it is rebel controlled. You should provide adequate references to counter this consensus. Your info is only enough to say that both sides probably have forces in proximity of the general area of the town. André437 (talk) 11:33, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Hills in Daraa

Every hill in Daraa/Quneitra has become a military base/CP. But since the countryside is rugged, we have a lot of those hills therefore a lot of those military sites. I suggest we keep the very important hills and the hills on the front-line while removing the hills that never saw action and those far from the front-line. The map in Southern Syria is too crowded. Important hills in my opinion: - Western-Eastern Tell Ahmar - Tell Jabiah - Tell Al Joumou' - Tell Krum - Tell Bzaq As well as the hills on the front-line (especially those recently mentioned such as Tell Mer'i etc. near Deir Al Adas) I also suggest we only keep the important military formations (Brigades, regiments, divisions etc.) while removing the useless housing units. Nawa and Shaykh Miskin for example are too crowded. Opinions? ChrissCh94 (talk) 14:29, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Agreed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.129.242.132 (talk) 14:49, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Agree but every time we here SAA or rebels take one of these editors will ask that they are added again .31.50.78.246 (talk) 15:11, 11 February 2015 (UTC)pyphon

I also forgot Tell Harra the biggest most important in the area. Yes but I also agree with the editors on adding back the hill IF AND ONLY IF it sees front-line action. Once it is firmly back in someone's territory we remove it IF it is not considered an important hill (such as those mentioned earlier in the post). We will therefore only keep the important hills deep inside someone's territory. ChrissCh94 (talk) 15:25, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

That would make sense ,less clutter .31.50.78.246 (talk) 15:46, 11 February 2015 (UTC)pyphon

Instead of removing icons from the map, let's just make it not display the label, by setting label_size="0". This will give us more space.
It will still show the icon, and also the label on mouseover. This also allows us to easily restore the label if/when wanted.
As well, I would suggest not displaying the label for hills. They are only important as control points to protect/attack nearby towns and bases. We should probably have a special icon for hills. I'll be working on icons tomorrow if anyone thinks it is a good idea. André437 (talk) 12:21, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

217.129.242.132, please use : for indent, not spaces, and preview your post. André437 (talk) 12:21, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Syrian army advances in Hasakah

The pro opposition source reported that after clashes against Islamic State the Syrian troops took over several villages and continued its advancement in the countryside of Hasakah province, in northeastern Syria. Also earlier the last friday Syrian troops had seized 16 villages in the countryside of the cities of Qamishli and Hasakah, following fierce clashes with militants of the Islamic State.ARA News Maybe someone of editors have more information. Hanibal911 (talk) 18:18, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Control_of_cities_during_the_Syrian_civil_war/Archive_41&oldid=1079494532"