Talk:Control of cities during the Syrian civil war

Template:Syrian Civil War sanctions

Roads

Shouldn't this map show at least the major roads and railways? After all, maneuver is critical in warfare, and that would explain more why this or that city or village is strategic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.8.182.120 (talk)

Absolutely. Someone please create a version of the base Syria location map with those features drawn. Alternatively, we need a picture file that has syria roads on it and nothing else. I can then use the "overlay_image =" parameter in the "Template:Location map+" to overlay that "road file" on top of our map. For an example of the result of this parameter, see a "Location map+" where a picture file with arrows was overlayed on top of it. Unfortunately, i don't know how to create picture files. If anyone can create such a file (same size as our map; with a transparent background) and put it in commons, then i can overlay it on top of our map. Tradedia^talk I brought this back from archives as this is still an ongoing issue. And while we are at this, it would be good to also draw Lake Jabbūl Tradedia^talk

I agree that adding some of the most important highways to the map would make it more useful. It would have to be done delicately, because it could quickly make the map very cluttered. Looking at road maps of Syria, I would suggest something showing a few major highways, along the lines of this [1] (scroll down slightly), rather than something more like this [2], which would overwhelm the map. Hulahoop122 (talk)

Good idea. Between those 2 examples, the difference seems more how the roads are drawn (thin red lines vs. wide light brown lines), than the number of roads. In some areas, there seems to be more roads on the first map with the roads in red.

Note that our map is bigger, so we could probably place more roads (if appropriate) without problem. In some areas there are many alternative roads allowing easy passage around the main routes, so it might be a good idea to indicate that.

With a good source map with the roads already on it (and not too many complicated things in the same colour), I could produce the road overlay. The colour of the roads could be changed to whatever you like.

There is a map on my computer that might be good, with many roads, except it could be as much as 20 years old. (The latest date on the map is a 1994 border treaty.) It is better to have something not long before the civil war started.

According to my map, most of lake Jabbul is dry much of the year. (All except the north-west corner.) It also has rivers and railways, which might be interesting to show. (the roads, water, and railways could be put on separate layers so as to be easier to maintain, if necessary. Not hard since they are all different colours.) André437 (talk)

If you have the skills to put that map layer together, that would be great. You could post it on a test page, just as you did with all of the conflict icons you created, and see how the community reacts. Hulahoop122 (talk)

Ok, as I have time. It could take a while, since I will have to use google maps or equivalent to fill in the few places where a small window overlay covers roads, etc in some areas, and also clean up any stray marks I find. (There are a lot of annotations, but mostly outside Syria.)

I'll also have to adjust the scale and align it, which will be the most difficult part.

I'll put the roads/water/railways in separate layers initially as well. Easy to do since they are separate colours. That way it will be really quick to modify (or remove) one without affecting the others.

That icon project helped remind me of a few tricks with the software I use. (gimp)

BTW, I have an unrelated idea for locations contested from one side only : using a semicircle open on the opposite side. And for truces, using a broken outside circle, instead of a continuous one. Just mentioning it as something to think about.

I'll keep you posted :) André437 (talk)

This section disappeared for a while and I became occupied elsewhere, but my map turned out to be so overwritten with place names so as to be almost useless. Most roads, rivers, etc were obscured in many places. It would be faster to draw features freehand using google maps in satellite mode. Not one of my talents. So I can't help much with that.

I've noticed that some waterways have been added. It looks really nice. André437 (talk)

Question on East of Damascus

Does any evidence exist showing that the khan abu shaman base and battalion 559 remain in rebel hands? These are both shown as green but the rebels have no green towns in these areas. These are directly east of damascus. Any information on this area? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.67.155 (talk) 19:35, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

They are rebel held. If regime had retaking them, at least pro-regime source would had talked about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.204.47.29 (talk) 21:08, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

The rebels no have a a full control from a single town in these areas --Pototo1 (talk) 21:43, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

so no evidence either way- nothing showing they are rebel or gov. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.3.204 (talk) 16:20, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

These are desert areas north-east of Damascus. The area has many sand dunes and similar rolling terrain, which at least partly explains why the regime has been not retaken them. They don't have any strategic value except their proximity to Damascus. And the fact that the rebels at least had a large number of captured tanks there. There are many tank shelters to hide tanks from aviation. (This info was well documented when the rebels took the area.)

Without any indication that the regime has recaptured the area, it is highly likely still rebel held. André437 (talk) 02:03, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

How do they survive out in these dunes? No towns? No sources of food? Totally surrounded? We never hear of them attacking anyone? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.67.155 (talk) 03:01, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

1-The Dailystar gives more details about base 559. It says: "After seizing military base 559 in eastern Qalamoun last week, they found themselves under air attack Friday, as the regime sought to neutralize their capture of large quantities of weapons and ammunition. In the end, the rebels claimed they made off with 35 regime tanks – the biggest such haul of the war – while 70 were destroyed by regime aircraft." Notice that it says "they made off". According to online dictionary, "made off" means: "to depart in haste; run away." So this implies that the rebels are no longer at these warehouses. They took the tanks they could, and destroyed what they could not take so that the army could not use it again (not mentioning what was destroyed by the airforce). So at this point, these warehouses are probably destroyed & empty and we do not know if they are occupied by someone, or just abandoned. In any case, they no longer have a strategic importance. Therefore, this icon should be "commented out" of the map until more clear information become available.

2-There is no information about the present status of khan abu shamat. In any case, we know that the warehouses are empty from the chemical weapons. So at this point, we do not know if they are presently occupied by rebels, or army, or just abandoned & empty. In any case, they no longer have a strategic importance. Therefore, this icon should be "commented out" of the map until more clear information become available. Tradedia^talk 01:38, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

If we are removing icons/locations from the map simply for lack of news and strategic value, then most of Tartus province should go, as should the majority of miniscule, unimportant locations - most of the remote Kurdish towns, the ridiculous density of tiny towns around Qusayr, almost all of Deir el Zor province. If that is really the logic you are imposing, do it across the board, and not just for 2 rebel locations. I'm on board, if it's applied evenly. Til then, nope. Boredwhytekid (talk) 13:38, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

No, we are not removing icons/locations from the map simply for “lack of news and strategic value”, but rather because a source (Dailystar) said rebels “made off” (= to depart in haste; run away) with the weapons & ammo. This raises “serious doubt” about the present status of these bases. Your examples are not good because there is no doubt that Tartus province is gov-held, Qusayr towns are gov-held, Deir el Zor province is ISIS-held (except in & around city where gov places are well documented). I had done the same for many red bases, a few months ago, for the same reason. Tradedia^talk 00:16, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

As-Suhknah

As-Suhknah (Near Palmyra) has suddenly turned black. Any reliable source about that? Kihtnu (talk) 07:13, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

I corrected this mistake city under control by Syrian army. This also confirmed pro opposition source here And not one of the reliable sources not said that the city is under the control of IS. Hanibal911 (talk) 08:01, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for this. Kihtnu (talk) 19:17, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Kobane / Ayn al-Arab

Seeking community opinion on proposal:

Let's add some more of the known-to-be-Kurdish/YPG-held towns. #1, right now it looks like the Kurds have nada but Kobane proper and a dozen scattered towns. #2, we'll get a step ahead of the game, because more towns in this area are bound to be in the news soon. #3, adding a handful more yellow towns would clarify the front line and true areas of control in this region.

Offhand, I propose adding the following - Dikmatash Salib Ayn al-Batt Kabbajq small Kabbajq large Qurmza

Other editors - what say you? Boredwhytekid (talk) 19:52, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. Alhanuty (talk) 20:34, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

I agree too, and some villages which we are not sure, who control them, could be shown as contested in this area.77.240.103.2 (talk) 20:45, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Hanibal911? EkoGraf? Boredwhytekid (talk) 20:48, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Contested mean "fighting" ongoing in the town. It does not mean "We don't know".

For the towns quoted no sources are mentioned. If there are sources, fine, otherwise no.Paolowalter (talk) 21:01, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

An hour ago I would agree with you Bored. However, I think we shouldn't rush it because I just read a source [3] where SOHR confirmed ISIS captured another 39 villages today, making a total of 60 now in the last three days. So in essence, we have no idea where the frontline is at the moment other than a report by the Kobane Kurdish commander saying ISIS is within 20 km from the city. P.S. I would ask all editors to try and find out the names of these 39 new villages. Thank you! EkoGraf (talk) 22:03, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

that looks to be impossible EkoGrak,too much,but looks the Battle for Ain Al-Arab(Kobani) isn't far away,unless the US Airforce strikes sooner,France 24 reported that IS fighters reached the Western Neighborhood of the city.Alhanuty (talk) 22:15, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

I also agree with the EkoGraf and Boredwhytekid. Hanibal911 (talk) 07:38, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

New map (not proposing any changes here, just found this and thought you would like to have it): https://twitter.com/abuaminah_/status/513243576667353088/photo/1--Andylee Sato (talk) 08:47, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

SOHR reported that violent clashes have erupted between IS and YPG in the village of Qarah Mog.SOHR Who knows where located this village? Hanibal911 (talk) 09:16, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

ISIS fighters armed with rockets, artillery, tanks and armored vehicles seized from the Iraqi army in Mosul had advanced to within 20 km of Kobani.The Daily Star Hanibal911 (talk) 09:49, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

New map of Kobane area. I don't think we get anything better now. What do you think? https://docs.google.com/file/d/0ByQl9HGZDeRXUXZJdkxfMDhTNTg/edit 77.240.103.2 (talk) 10:56, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Between the report that IS is within 20mi of Kobane, and the desyracuse map, we should be able to roughly approximate which towns are still Kurdish held no? The ones within 10mi of Kobane can be added with confidence

Ain al-Hand Mahmoud KolmdQurmza Kurabi Bani Saba

It's just that the map at present isn't an accurate representation - we pretty much show the Kurds pushed all the way back to Kobane already, when all reports indicate they have a 15-20mi buffer still I'm on board with using https://docs.google.com/file/d/0ByQl9HGZDeRXUXZJdkxfMDhTNTg/edit in this instance tooBoredwhytekid (talk) 15:12, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Reuters report - They are not within 15 kilometers from the city. EkoGraf (talk) 15:34, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Also IS took control of the village of Qara Moog, Bobby Hill and the village Ghareeb (20 km east of Kobane).Ara News I add the village Gharib but I dont know where located village Qara Moog(Qarah Mog) Hanibal911 (talk) 16:55, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

IS shelling areas 10mi from Kobane SOHR Boredwhytekid (talk) 18:47, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

ISIS fighters located on distance just in 10 kilometers of the strategic border town known as Ain al-Arab(Kobane).The Daily Star Hanibal911 (talk) 11:10, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Can someone locate the link of Kobane above the Kobane dot, its making it impossible to read some of the village names under it. 24.12.202.163 (talk) 16:17, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Tall Ghazal has fallen- https://news.vice.com/article/kobane-residents-remain-defiant-as-islamic-state-closes-in In addition many twitter activists are placing IS a kilometer outside of Kobane from both YPG and IS twitter feeds, so I think we should list Kurdish Villages not yet fallen as encircled and besieged/captured as more info comes in. 173.209.212.195 (talk) 11:02, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

http://s04.justpaste.it/pdf/EanArab1-justpaste-it.pdf Official IS proclamation of captures. Tal Ghazal is captured.Tgoll774 (talk) 12:00, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Can someone confirm Sheran's status. I am seeing multiple conflicting sources on who has it. Tgoll774 (talk) 16:03, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Kafr Shams

SOHR reports the air force is bombing at least parts of Kafr Shams, Daraa Boredwhytekid (talk) 18:45, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

At the moment, it is not enough that would change it to the contested but we need to closely monitor the situation in the city. Hanibal911 (talk) 18:55, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Agreed Boredwhytekid (talk) 19:02, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

I think it should be changed to contested the situation is unknown, also put a green ring around khirbet ghazala,there was clashes occuring near by it,

also there is a rebel-held zone in the western ghouta near Kiswa and A Pro-government analyst pointed it out via https://twitter.com/PetoLucem/status/513382288479256576

also there has been many SOHR reports of Air-raids on Dirkhabiyah, Zakyah, Mukaylibah, Al-Taybah, there was also may SOHR reports about clashes near Kiswah western frontier , and it is not good to keep towns under government control, if the government shells those cities.Alhanuty (talk) 19:48, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

We put green or red ring only if the city or villages is besieged! Hanibal911 (talk) 20:05, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

My gut agrees with you Alhanuty. But, let's just keep an eye on them - if the air force is truly bombing Kafr Shams, more reports will follow, and perhaps even reports of clashes on the ground, since Kafr Shams will then be the front line. What are the sources for Dirkhabiyah, Zakyah, Mukaylibah, Al-Taybah? Boredwhytekid (talk) 20:09, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

I agree with Boredwhytekid because of 13 september two pro opposition sources clear show that the city Kafr Shams under control by army here and here And there were no more reports about clashes in this city or that he was captured by the rebels. So I think that the one report about air strike on the city is not enough to change the city for the contested. Also you must provide reports from SOHR which confirm your data. Because about villages Dirkhabiyah, Zakyah, Mukaylibah, Al-Taybah only pro opposition source said that they under control by rebels.here and here Hanibal911 (talk) 20:29, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

A Pro-government source posted a map of it confirming the opposition presense,https://twitter.com/PetoLucem/status/513382288479256576.Alhanuty (talk) 22:31, 20 September 2014 (UTC) https://www.facebook.com/syriahroe/posts/583846421723700 https://www.facebook.com/syriahroe/posts/585315961576746 https://www.facebook.com/syriahroe/posts/585233134918362 http://www.syriahr.com/index.php?option=com_news&nid=23692&Itemid=2&task=displaynews#.VB4Ba_ldWSo http://www.syriahr.com/index.php?option=com_news&nid=23506&Itemid=2&task=displaynews#.VB4BqPldWSo http://www.syriahr.com/index.php?option=com_news&nid=23497&Itemid=2&task=displaynews#.VB4ByvldWSo http://www.syriahr.com/index.php?option=com_news&nid=23068&Itemid=2&task=displaynews#.VB4CGPldWSo

the sources mentioned that Taybah and Zakyah and Mukaylibah and Dirkhabiyah as bombarded with barrel bombs, i think that it should be considered to mark this rebel-held zone. there is frequent reports of Bombardment, what else has to be brought also a Pro-Government analyst PetoLucem confirmed the rebel presense,by posting a map of the rebel held area in the Western Ghouta. Alhanuty (talk) 22:42, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

and these are like four towns.

and here is another one http://syriahr.com/index.php?option=com_news&nid=23274&Itemid=2&task=displaynews#.VB4D3vldWSo. SOHR links. Alhanuty (talk) 22:31, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

I think you are right a bouta Taybah and Zakyah and Mukaylibah and Dirkhabiyah and thank you for your sources. Hanibal911 (talk) 09:56, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Add those back, as someone deleted those dots. Also, paint that area green in the Damascus and W/E Ghouta map. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.176.177.244 (talk) 20:38, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

I think it is time for a green circle around Kafr Shams. Multiple sources SOHR SOHR SOHRSyrianpersp SANA have, over the course of this month, reported skirmishes in, and barrel bombing of, Kafr Shams. Now, since there has not been any widespread media coverage of fighting IN this town, I don't think "contested" would be appropriate yet. But, there's obviously fighting around (if not in) Kafr Shams, and we've sat on this topic for over a week now Boredwhytekid (talk) 18:46, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Kobane

What in the name of fuck have you done with that? You do realize that you just gave area which includes several hundred villages to ISIS because SOHR said "60"? Goddamn, who was editing it? Fricking Chewbacca on ecstasy? EllsworthSK (talk) 09:57, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm guessing they made the edit based partially on this report [4] where yesterday a Kurdish activist said the frontline is 20 kilometers to the east and south of the town, and 25 kilometers to the west. Also, a number of sources have been put forth for the names at least 30-40 captured villages. And don't pick on Chewie, he sacrificed himself for Han's children. :( EkoGraf (talk) 11:47, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Kurdish forces have evacuated at least 100 villages on the Syrian side after the IS militants started onslaught against the Kurdish villages.Al-Akhbar Hanibal911 (talk) 12:14, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Fighting 13 kilometers from the city now [5]. EkoGraf (talk) 14:37, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

to he honest IS advance has been very shocking, and how tens of villages fell is shocking. Alhanuty (talk) 14:56, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

This entire war is shocking. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lessi94 (talk • contribs) 17:59, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

But to answer the question, all this Kurdish villages are hamlets who should not be on the map, if we were to put all the hamlets and localities, the map would be full of little dots, there has watch wikimapia.

And IS took all these hamlets after the frontline sold because of YPG fighters are under-equipped and under-trained, and YPG activists and kurd population wants to save their lives and they fled, what the terrorists rebels takfiris do not care. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lessi94 (talk • contribs) 18:20, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

64 villages, 15mi report Boredwhytekid (talk) 23:41, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Clashes continued between IS militant fighters and the Kurdish forces of the Popular Protection Units (YPG) in the vicinity of the village Mojik (about 6 km west of Kobane) and the village of Alishar (7 km east of the city).Ara News Hanibal911 (talk) 10:10, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Find those two villages, mark them on the map, add black rings around them, and that's our frontline! EkoGraf (talk) 13:15, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Redur Xelil says that "The town of Mabrouka is now under our control". Mabrouka is in Hassaka on the way to Ayn Al Arab. The source is the Washington Post [6]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.4.240.216 (talk) 14:19, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Alishar Boredwhytekid (talk) 14:40, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Also today one of pro-opposition activist reported that IS capture Tal Shair hill top overlooking on the city Kobane.here But not one reliable sources still is not confirmed this information. Hanibal911 (talk) 15:14, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

I think that we need search more information on this subject. Since it is some sources indicate that the IS insurgents are already very close to town Ayn al Arab. Because the Redur Xelil, spokesman for the main armed Kurdish group said that Syrian Kurdish fighters have halted an advance by ISIS fighters to the east of a town Ayn al Arab. And now we have conflicting accounts of how far ISIS fighters were from Kobani. Because today Redur Xelil said IS were located on distance 20-30 km (12-19 miles) away, while Abdulrahman from SOHR said they were around half that distance from the town.The Daily Star but pro opposition Kurdish source today reported that clashes continued between IS militant fighters and the Kurdish forces of the Popular Protection Units (YPG) in the vicinity of the village Mojik (about 6 km west of Kobane) and the village of Alishar (7 km east of the city).Ara News So at the moment we have a lot of conflicting data but yet we need to get to the truth. Hanibal911 (talk) 17:15, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Well, most of us have accepted SOHR as something similar to a "neutral" source, while obviusly an YPG spokesman aint a neutral source, but a partisan one, no matter in what type of media speaks. So, (according to the rules agreed here) the SOHR source is more credible than the other.--HCPUNXKID 22:08, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Here new pro opposition map which show situation in Ayn al Arab(Kobani) countryside on the 22 September. Hanibal911 (talk) 07:50, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

IS fighters had advanced to within 8 km (5 miles) from the southern periphery of Kobani - closer than they have been at any stage in the latest offensive.The Daily Star Hanibal911 (talk) 13:22, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Tal Khazne in Homs why contexted ?

Anyone got any source why this was change to red to contested ? --Pototo1 (talk) 01:29, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

I allow myself to bring this section back from archives & answer your question. Tall Khaznah was added to the map as contested based on this SOHR report that talked about clashes in the town. This was a one-time event (2 sept. 2014) where pro-opp media (Syria Tomorrow TV @ 11:40) talked about a “massacre” where pro-government militia (from Al-Tulaysiyah, Zegbeh & Ma’an) came, killed people, then left the rebel-held town. So, it is true that the clashes have stopped. However, it was not correct of you to put the town in red because opposition claims it is rebel-held. On the other hand, we cannot put it in green because we only have a pro-opp claim for that. In reality, we put the town on the map based on a report of one “massacre”, but the source did not say who controlled the town before that. There have not been reports of clashes after that. Therefore, we don’t really know who controls this town today. Therefore, I think the town should be “commented out” of the map until we get new information about it. Tradedia^talk 00:16, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

West Hama

Some info about west Hama in http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-gains-ground-west-hama-another-village-liberated/ Apparently Hamamyat is contested or red with green ring. The check point Zileen is green (with red ring). It should be north of Halfaya. Lataminah is contested. Paolowalter (talk) 21:47, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Pro opposition source clear said that rebels retreated from Hamamiyat village in N-Hamah.archicivilians Hanibal911 (talk) 06:55, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Damascus map

I see 4 green dots on Damascus map. That is against the rule. I am not questioning that these town are controlled by rebels, but such a change should be done on the Damascus map not adding dots. For one of those town a twitter pro-regime posting a TV report claims that it is going to be attacked soon https://twitter.com/2Rook14/status/514161196690206721 so it is likely to be green. As I mentioned in a previous comment, the Damascus map is not kept up to date. I (and others) suggested several changes both pro-gov and pro-rebels ans they were consistently ignored. Could somebody do something?Paolowalter (talk) 21:56, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Done--HCPUNXKID 22:35, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

First,Read the Kafr Shams section,and you will see that there is a consensus to add those towns.Alhanuty (talk) 22:19, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

First, the previous consensus was to not add dots to the city maps, so I dont consider logic or fair to break that agreement only in this particular case. That was done because if we add dots to the city maps, some of them (mostly Damascus & Aleppo) would be unreadable. And second, I find calling an agreement between only two users (when there are several more users editing this map) "consensus" at least a bit exaggerated...--HCPUNXKID 22:35, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

then i recommend kami88 to add the 4 towns into the reef dimashq map.Alhanuty (talk) 23:22, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Remove immediately these dots. Wait for the Damascus map to be updated. Paolowalter (talk) 07:09, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Then update it. That area is green as agreed in the Kafr Shams section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.204.44.51 (talk) 16:57, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Hasaka

Some info from Hasaka countryside http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-air-force-destroys-isis-supply-bridge-saa-advances-al-hasaka/ Several villages reported to be taken by YPG and SAA. Not sure where they are, close to Tal Hamis. Paolowalter (talk) 22:07, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Pro-Syrian gov. source unreliable for SAA-NDF advances.--HCPUNXKID 23:09, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

The source has proven reliable in its coverage and is not a pro-government source [any more than SOHR is a pro-opp source]. Since we make an exception for SOHR, we must also make on here since this source has proven its reliability repeatedly. 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 23:52, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

ISW-Syria has also confirmed the cooperation. ISW Malik Danno (talk) 03:07, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

In this case we have information from the pro government source which said that YPG and SAA taken several villages.Almasdar News and this data confirm the pro opposition source.ISW so that we can use this data as they have been confirmed by both parties. Hanibal911 (talk) 07:15, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

http://aranews.net/2014/09/syria-isil-islamists-attack-kurdish-border-city/ no clue where these are,or if the Arab or Kurdish name so could someone update the map. Tgoll774 (talk) 17:00, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Morek (again)

As I said some time ago Morek is contested: https://www.facebook.com/syriahroe/posts/586375511470791. Please return it to contested.Paolowalter (talk) 22:24, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

But to be precise then the SOHR likely wanted to say that clashes on east from the city Morek. Also SOHR said that Al Nusra Front and the Islamic battalions targeted Abo Shafiq checkpoint which located on the west from the town of Morek.here So maybe clashes still going outside the city. Hanibal911 (talk) 08:02, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

To the Editors

Unfortunately there is resistance for government advances change in this map and most editors are strongly Pro Opposition.It's very wrong idea that Every reports of pro government sources is non credible and needs for confirmation of Pro Opposition sources but report of SOHR or some western medias are completely true(!) and no need for confirmation However any aware person knows Western country and some Arabic countries and SOHR organization are Pro Opposition. I should add this, I have read the discussions about SOHR and I agree with some of ideas .insisting on completely true news of SOHR and ignoring the Non pro SOHR person reasons seems to be abnoraml.151.238.169.106 (talk) 10:54, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Adra Town

It's reported by Pro opposition and Pro government sources a lot of clashes happened in this city here are the sources: SOHR sample report "Rif Dimashq Province: The regime forces re- shelled areas in the town of al Teba, the city of Doma and the outskirts of al Mqelbeyyi with no information about casualties. Several shells launched by the regime forces fell onto the road of al Derkhbayyi. The regime forces launched surface-to-surface missiles on areas in the town of Ayn Terma.

The violent clashes between al Nusra Front and the islamic battalions against the regime forces have still occurred on the outskirts of al Dokhaneyyi area and in Adra area leading to kill 2 fighters at least in Adra." http://www.syrianperspective.com/2014/09/terrorist-surrounded-in-adraa-as-saa-storms-areas-of-jawbar.html151.238.169.106 (talk) 11:22, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

The latest map of Adra from pro-gov source https://twitter.com/PetoLucem/status/514453108999876608/photo/1. This map matches approximately the known status and should be used to edit the Damascus map, on the basis of the author's record of reliability.Paolowalter (talk) 19:48, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Adwan / Matallah?

Why is Adwan, next to Tasil/Tsil in Daraa, label "Matallah"? Boredwhytekid (talk) 13:02, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

I fixed this bug in according of the map. Near city Tasil located city Adwan but the village Al Matallah located in the Rif Dimashq on area which under control by troops. Hanibal911 (talk) 13:16, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Much appreciated! We might want to hold off on re-adding Matallah until we find sources - since it is located on the front line Boredwhytekid (talk) 13:24, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

No, what you brought up as Al Matallah is not really "Al Matallah". You can see clearly that there is a mistake in "geonames.org" because what is called there Al Matallah is actually "KOUKAB" (you can see the name "KOUKAB" clearly printed on the map at that location).

Actually, Al Matallah is here: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=tr&lat=32.988148&lon=36.324492&z=14&m=b&show=/25463685/al-Matallah. It should be put back in its correct place (as a green dot per the original source). Tradedia^talk 12:30, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

al-Mayadeen (Deir er zoor)

From http://www.documents.sy/news.php?id=11531&lang=en IS evacuated from al-Mayadeen. What does it mean? Should we change color? Paolowalter (talk) 20:12, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

We're going to see a lot of reports of the IS "going underground" now that coalition airstrikes have begun on both sides of the border. But, seeing as there is no other ground force assuming control, I suggest waiting until we have reports of local militias, SAA, FSA, or somebody else actually overrunning the towns/villages. I mean, the IS is still there, they're just keeping their heads down now and not being as public. Boredwhytekid (talk) 20:32, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Updated Jobar

September 19 Trush me these peto lucem maps are alaways 99% right https://twitter.com/PetoLucem/status/513035203799818241/photo/1 --Pototo1 (talk) 21:07, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Turnajah, Quneitra red why?

Can somebody provide a source for Turnajah in Quneitra being red al of the sudden? It was green only a day ago, without a new source given here. Source please, or else: back to green! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 07:54, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Anyone have an answer to this? Per the latest source this town should be green with a red concentric ring to the north and east - unless someone can provide a more recent/valid report to justify the change to red? Boredwhytekid (talk) 12:17, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

SOHR clear said that the village Turnajah still under control by troop of the 3rd battalion in the 90th brigade.source Hanibal911 (talk) 12:25, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

No, it says Turanjah hill/batallion. Not the town itself. Earlier SOHR reports clearly said that the town was under rebel control. Al-Jazeera video footage of the Quneitra front also. So: back to green with a red half circle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 12:49, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

So in the last 24hrs SOHR reports that rebels want to take some area of Turanjah, per the link Hanibal911 posted, and that there is fighting around Turanjah per the link I put up - how about we just go contested until the situation is clarified? It's a compromise, and it's not a misrepresentation of the ground situation, since fighting is ongoing RIGHT there Boredwhytekid (talk) 13:09, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

I dont agree because according to the data from SOHR we just need put a green circle around the red from the side of village Jubata al-Khashab. So for now moment this will be the best solution. Hanibal911 (talk) 13:17, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm on board with that too Boredwhytekid (talk) 13:22, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Western Ghariyyat / Western Gharya

Ok, so we have 2 relatively sizeable towns, not on our map: Western and Eastern Ghariyyat, located here just to the southeast of SAA controlled Kherbet Ghazalah. Today, SOHR reports clashes between SAA controlled Kherbet Ghazalah and ?-controlled Western Ghariyyat. There is no specific claim of who controls the Ghariyyats. But, they're large and relatively strategically important - we should reach some sort of consensus on how exactly to add them. Contested until further reports? Rebel held (like most everything below Kherbet Ghazalah) but with a red ring to the north? Most maps show these locations as rebel held.. Boredwhytekid (talk) 12:38, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

I agree with green with a red half circle. Fighting there is close range: Ghariyyat is only a few hundred meters away from Khirbet Ghazallah. But it seems both towns are rebel held, since there has been a lot of bombing going on there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 12:52, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Not so simple in this situation, and we need more data. Hanibal911 (talk) 13:04, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Literally every other maps shows them rebel held.. we seem to be a bit late to the game on this one. /https://pietervanostaeyen.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/2000px-syria7.png, even Syrian persective from last December shows the Eastern town rebel held http://www.syrianperspective.com/2013/12/updated-map-of-daraa.html, desyracuse shows the same.. Boredwhytekid (talk) 13:24, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Maybe! But at the moment we need the fresh data from a reliable source. Because we cant use this map because she is taken from the pro opposition source. But this pro government map also cant be used because its data are outdated. But I will also try find the latest information that can clarify the situation. Hanibal911 (talk) 13:40, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Kurdish source, Another SOHR post from July. Plenty of youtube evidence too - seems these 2 have been rebel held for a long time - I cannot find recent mentions Boredwhytekid (talk) 14:21, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 September 2014

Eib and Kuraym al Janubi are exactly at the same position on this map. According to google-maps Eib should be in 2-3 km to south-east from Kuraym al Janubi. 87.117.178.100 (talk) 13:04, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — LeoFrank  ^Talk 13:02, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Google-maps is not reliable source??? 87.117.178.100 (talk) 13:56, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

 Done Tradedia^talk 12:30, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Not yet done. Look carefully, settlements are yet at the same position. 87.117.178.100 (talk) 19:15, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

IS offensive in Ayn al Arab(Kobane) countryside

Here new version the pro opposition map which show progress the IS offensive from the south in toward the city Ayn al Arab(Kobane). Hanibal911 (talk) 15:02, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Daily Star from today contradicts that map - puts western front line at Siftek Boredwhytekid (talk) 15:53, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Syrian army captured Adra al-Ummaliyah (Adra industrial zone) town in eastern Ghouta

Pro-opposition source confirmed the SAA has captured the Adra industrial zone [7]. Change on Damascus map needed. EkoGraf (talk) 22:45, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure yet abaut Adra but Jobar need be updated https://twitter.com/PetoLucem/status/513035203799818241/photo/1 you are using old map https://twitter.com/PetoLucem/status/507207133772128256/photo/1 --Pototo1 (talk) 23:31, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Adra probably in SAA hands - https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/515039005910773760 . I am not sure if Adra al-ummaliyah is part of Adra or just the whole name of Adra. 109.123.211.49 (talk) 07:46, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

SOHR confirms that the Syrian army took full control of the town. http://syriahr.com/index.php?option=com_news&nid=24000&Itemid=2&task=displaynews#.VCPtnmd_uSo YasminSham88 (talk) 10:26, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Here another conrirmation that army captured Adra al-Ummaliyah.AL Jazeera Hanibal911 (talk) 10:38, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

While changing Adra to red, change the rebel pocket in Western Ghouta, as agreed before it the Kafr Shams section, to green. You added those towns like dots, but it was excluded as no dots in maps, so add it like a green pocket like agreed before — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.204.43.137 (talk) 10:50, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Syrian government troops recaptured the key rebel-held town of Adra northeast of the capital Damascus. But however, Adra's small Old City remained under rebel control.The Daily Star Hanibal911 (talk) 11:26, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

SOHR "the regular forces have taken over Adra al-Omalia completely" Boredwhytekid (talk) 12:18, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Hanibal sourfce Daily Star has been updated Army forces have taken the whole area.Daki122 (talk) 13:24, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

al-Monitor report on Damascus suburbs Boredwhytekid (talk) 13:34, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

It's not the Syrian Army are the NDF Inside Adraa https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8WyFTtLue9o --Pototo1 (talk) 17:00, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Syrian News channel with Army in Adraa. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7ms16Kg8Ew --Pototo1 (talk) 17:05, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Here another photos from Reuters inside city Adra after Syrian troops taking take control the city.herehereherehereherehere Hanibal911 (talk) 18:08, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Gov't source says Adra's Old City is still rebel-held Boredwhytekid (talk) 18:01, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Syrian government troops recaptured the key town of Adra northeast of the capital Damascus.The Daily Star Hanibal911 (talk) 11:53, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Remenber Jobar it should be updated also https://twitter.com/PetoLucem/status/513035203799818241/photo/1 --Pototo1 (talk) 20:13, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Kobane region

IS now controls 75% of the Kobane region and located on distance of 2 kilometers from city Ayn alArab(Kobane) and Kurdish forces only controls the towns Kobane and Shera and around 15 villages.Al Jazeera Hanibal911 (talk) 10:46, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Just posting the latest SOHR post about Kobane Boredwhytekid (talk) 12:17, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Here map from pro opposition source Syria Direct which show IS position near the kurdish city Ayn al Arab.here Hanibal911 (talk) 11:02, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

The Reuters correspondent said that IS insurgents appeared to have taken control of a hill from where fighters of the YPG, had been attacking them in recent days, 10 km (6 miles) west of Kobani.The Daily Star Hanibal911 (talk) 12:16, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Wadi barada

The valley Wadi Barada shows still a rebel's presence https://www.facebook.com/syriahroe/posts/587834314658244 http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=33.605756&lon=36.197720&z=15&m=b It should be on the Damascus map NW corner that should be green as I remarked already some time ago.Paolowalter (talk) 19:36, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

The SOHR facebook page is not considered as reliable, need more sources.Lessi94 (talk) 06:36, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Taldou

Pro opposition source Syria Direct reported that the city Taldou and the other rebel towns in the Houla valley now besieged the Syrian troops. www.syriadirect.org/main/30-reports/1521-north-homs-rebels-struggle-to-hold-gains Hanibal911 (talk) 11:19, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

On board with the red concentric circles. But, why did you change Ghur Gharbiyah to red? Your source does not mention that town or justify that edit.. Boredwhytekid (talk) 12:21, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Maybe you are right! Hanibal911 (talk) 12:41, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

ISIS advances in Kobane countryside - 26/09/2014

According to SOHR ISIS captured Alishar village which lies to the east of Kobane city. http://syriahr.com/index.php?option=com_news&nid=24089&Itemid=2&task=displaynews#.VCVOVGd_uSq YasminSham88 (talk) 12:27, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Done Hanibal911 (talk) 12:32, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

What do u think about getting infos from NDF FB pages - change map

I think we can use NDF (National Defence Force) FB pages to make changes. I mean they are on the ground and they know who controls what. According to them (pro gov), ISIS controls for example the villages of Abu Haniya and Qleib al-Thour (eastern Hama province) while on our wiki map it is marked that their are still clashes in that area. YasminSham88 (talk) 10:36, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

You can provide a link? And if you're right I'll change these villages on the map. Hanibal911 (talk) 10:49, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

This is the official page of the NDF forces in Syria: https://www.facebook.com/National.Defence.Forces.NDF However, there are a lot of other pages which includes for example just regions for example Salamiya in Hama' eastern countryside: https://www.facebook.com/national.defence.salmiyah which tells u who is in control of which village. YasminSham88 (talk) 12:53, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

You simply provide a link to the pro-government groups in Facebook but I asked you to provide a link to a message which said that ISIS controls the villages of Abu Haniya and Qleib al-Thour (eastern Hama province) Hanibal911 (talk) 13:00, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

I didn't found the post i think it was some weeks ago but here is a pro oppo. page which confirms that the Syrian airforce is bombarding this two villages. http://hama-r-u.net/2014/09/10/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AA%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AD%D9%82%D9%88%D9%82%D9%8A-%D9%84%D9%8A%D9%88%D9%85-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AB%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%AB%D8%A7%D8%A1-09092014-%D9%85-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85/ • قليب الثور || الريف الشرقي : قصف بالطيران الحربي • ابو حنايا || الريف الشرقي : قصف بالطيران الحربي ,قصف مدفعي YasminSham88 (talk) 13:24, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

We have noted these villages as contested on the basis of reports from SOHR. And we not use pro opposition source to display advances for all anti government forces. You initially claimed that the pro government sources confirmed that the IS controls the villages of Abu Haniya and Qleib al-Thour. But did not provide any evidence and is now you provided the pro opposition source who only speaks about the bombing of villages but does not say that they are under the control of IS. And for the future, remember that before you publish the information you need to provide a source that can confirm it. Hanibal911 (talk) 13:43, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Updated Adra and Jobar in Damascus map dude

Tons of news media are reporting now that Adra (in Damascus) is under government control. Why is this not being changed? http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2014/Sep-26/272033-syrian-army-takes-key-rebel-held-town.ashx http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/09/syrian-army-overruns-town-near-damascus-2014925141059985563.html http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2014/09/25/Source-Syria-takes-key-rebel-held-town-near-capital.html http://news.yahoo.com/syrian-army-retakes-area-northeast-damascus-al-manar-080139985.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.25.98 (talk) 16:46, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

SOHR today reported that the regime army took control over wide areas in Adra al Balad Area after two days of its control over the Labor City of Adra.source So now the whole town of Adra under army control. Hanibal911 (talk) 11:37, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Also pro opposition source claimed that all rebels retreated from all area of city Adta in E-Ghouta.Archicivilians Hanibal911 (talk) 11:39, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Common more than 72 hours and no updated................................ http://news.yahoo.com/syria-army-takes-key-rebel-held-town-near-173042630.html http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/09/syrian-army-overruns-town-near-damascus-2014925141059985563.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.211.164.252 (talk) 17:41, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Please, look at the table of contents before opening a new section. This is now the fourth section on this topic and the answer you look for can be found above. Not sure who is making the edit, but I believe it's in progress. Boredwhytekid (talk) 17:56, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Also, do the rebel pocket in Western Ghouta as agreed before. Having Adra changed to rebel hands without the Western Ghouta pocket(agreed in Kafr Shams section) would be a huge shame. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.58.117.109 (talk) 17:58, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Why would Adra be changed to rebel hands? 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 19:38, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Regime hands, sorry. But anyway, rebel pocket in Western Ghouta. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.58.117.109 (talk) 22:39, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

yes, it looks like western pocket has been expanded but adra still has not been fixed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.25.98 (talk) 02:53, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

• All Adraa Industrial City
• All Adraa al-Omalia
• All Adra al-Balad
• The Army controlled around the 30% of Jobar there is the most recent map https://twitter.com/PetoLucem/status/513035203799818241/photo/1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.203.193.18 (talk) 12:03, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

but still nobody would like to change map. if rebel capture adra this will be done in 4 hours. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.161.90.110 (talk) 12:38, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

They should fix the map. Hwinsp (talk) 13:03, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

I think Adraa Industrial city is still rebel held SAA took control over Adraa al-Omalia and Adraa al-balad — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.60.184.15 (talk) 13:31, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Industrial City Adra and was previously has been under the control of the army and now rebels retreated from all area in the city Adra to area Eastern Ghouta. So dont need publish nonsense. Hanibal911 (talk) 13:44, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Here pro opposition map dated on 20 September which clear show that Industrial City Adra which located on east from city Adra under control by army. Hanibal911 (talk) 13:57, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Rebels have been crushed in Adra and the Army took over the area. SOHR:[8]. Daki122 (talk) 15:24, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

And also fix Qaysa and Abadeh on the Damascus map.That area was never captured(it was rather just a speculation) by the rebels and yet our map is still not changed.Many users pointed out on this mistake(even me) and I also posted a reliable source from the Daily Star(it is somewhere in the archives)that the front line is the railway that passes in eastern Ghouta but nobody changed it.And now we have opposition maps showing both towns in Army hands(the map above map ) as well as pro-gov map that shows the towns in Army hands[9].Daki122 (talk) 15:54, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

I agree with daki122. Abadeh jarba qaysa and qasimiyah under saa control.source:source: http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2014/Feb-25/248401-un-resolution-brings-little-change.ashx#axzz2sk38sDRI .Source say '...railway marking the front line between Islamist fighters and Assad’s forces backed by Hezbollah...' railway frontline: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=tr&lat=33.529304&lon=36.534863&z=13&m=b&gz=0;364713478;334605896;0;0;762176;838810195.155.235.226 (talk) 16:32, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Jarba is probably still in rebel's hand from the map. No news about it changing hands. But the front line should be closer. The statement about the railway as frontline must be taken apprimately, even for Petolucem rebels control some (small) area east of the railway like Jarba.Paolowalter (talk) 19:17, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

+ pro opp orient tv confirmed rebels retreat from adra https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57vqisLjy18&feature=youtu.beHwinsp (talk) 17:12, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

If I'm not wrong these are Official TV Reports from Adra al-Balad https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYcoaa573XQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2pOdWkD2lo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7AE2XgI2hw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5I2Xokz-TA

Extensive visual evidence https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ON8zN3Owp5k

This is inside Jobar https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hx0K9xDkrE4 the Army controlled it partiality.

Adraa al-Omalia was captured before and you guys updated nothing yet......... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.203.192.159 (talk) 18:55, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

I honestly cannot believe that some would call this map a pro-regime map. The western Ghota pocket was added, but Adra was ignored?! 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 19:28, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

This discussion is out of place here, it should be done in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Rif_Damashq.svg where there is a long list of requests lining up waiting to be satisfied. The editor of this page looks extremely reluctant to perform any change.Paolowalter (talk) 20:01, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Adra was added. The other points are still open.Paolowalter (talk) 22:43, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Changes in Damascus Map = Seems you exaggerated too much the green Insurgent presence under right corner

I think you exaggerated too much the green Insurgent presence under right corner compared with previously maps.

Insurgents are too weak in this place and are no able to make these gains in South West of Damascus who you are drawing — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.203.192.159 (talk) 00:17, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

They always been there. That rebel pocket is there since like, 2012, and a pro-regime source confirmed it maybe a week ago. Yes, the rebels are weak there, that's why they do even try to push towards Damascus from there, but they are standing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.115.90.112 (talk) 14:07, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Dukhaniyya

Pro-opposition source said that the Syrian army retake Dukhaniya district.archicivilians Hanibal911 (talk) 06:37, 28 September 2014 (UTC) https://twitter.com/IvanSidorenko1/status/516004333620834304/photo/1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.161.90.110 (talk) 07:51, 28 September 2014 (UTC) Syrian army restore security at Dukhaniya : http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/breaking-al-dakhaniyya-liberated-ayn-tarma-jobar-next/ please change to red. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.161.90.110 (talk) 08:36, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

sohr says saa retake dukhaniya source: https://www.facebook.com/syriahroe/posts/589119587863050Hwinsp (talk) 08:42, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Confirmed by Elijah J Magnier: https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/516149682431860736 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 15:01, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Green towns in Raqqah

Why are all the green dots in Raqqah changed to black? There was no discussion here, no sources given. Revert :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 09:41, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Whole Raqqa-province is under IS-control,there is no FSA left! It´s even more than questionable whether nor not FSA is still between Manbij and Tishrin-dam! Most credible sources say,that this area is also under IS now! 79.233.0.170 (talk) 14:59, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

You're claiming this. I could claim that FSA units control 70% of Raqqah. You give no source. So, until a good source is found: to green. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 16:47, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Really strange situation because I also not find the sources which confirm that now IS controls 100% territory of the Raqqa province. Hanibal911 (talk) 16:54, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Nearly all sources have stated that Al-Raqqa is entirely under ISIS control. 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 16:56, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

So, give those "nearly all sources" then. Provide them. You just claim but don't show the evidence. This is Wikipedia, not a "maybe this could be true" forum sorry :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 18:35, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Source [10] rebels still control a small part of the western edge of Raqqah. EkoGraf (talk) 19:08, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Here new version of this map dated on 23 September.here Hanibal911 (talk) 19:20, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Are you out of mind? The whole area between Manbij and Raqqa, including Tishrin-dam,is under complete IS-control since april of this year! How can you map this area as FSA? You are trolls,but no neutral,realistic and serious map-makers! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.233.6.8 (talk) 21:00, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

We are not out of our minds. There is no source claiming that the FSA is totaly defeated in Raqqah, so those towns stay green until a NEUTRAL or OPPOSITION source says so. Also, mind your language. Your not a little boy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 10:17, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Don´t be childish yourself! Since april the whole area between Manbij and Raqqa is under IS-control! Including Tishrin-dam! There is no FSA left in this area! Thank you, 79.233.19.16 (talk) 17:18, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

IS does not control the entire Raqqa province.The Washington PostBBC Hanibal911 (talk) 17:38, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Useless banter based on semantics really. Just because the SAA has lost control of all of Raqqa (which is what most sources have printed), doesnt mean that ISIS controls all of it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.0.9.59 (talk) 07:23, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

I repeat again,that the whole area between Manbij and Raqqa is under IS-control since april! The fact,that the IS controls the Tishrin-dan and has laid siege around the turkish Shrine "Suleyman Bek" (to prevent a turkish intervention in Kobane) should open your eyes! No FSA left between Manbij and Raqqa! 79.233.5.40 (talk) 17:28, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Repetition will only get you blue in the face. Provide a source to justify your claims. Every map, blog, twitter, and news source that we, cumulatively, have gathered contradicts your - thus far - unsupported claims. If you can provide a reliable source, we are glad for your assistance! Boredwhytekid (talk) 17:40, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

AIRSTRIKES NEAR TISHRIN-DAM AND MANBIJ! https://www.facebook.com/syriahroe/posts/590849354356740 Last proof,that no FSA is left between Manbij and Raqqa! All Syria-maps are wrong! 217.226.66.37 (talk) 13:55, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

https://pietervanostaeyen.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/2000px-syria8.png This is a pro rebel source. If we can get another collaborating source, then the map should be updated Tgoll774 (talk) 12:28, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

North Aleppo

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BypKP6kCQAAh3z6.png:large

This pro-opposition map by Archicivilians show those Kurdish held villages west of Azaz as IS held. Also it mentions a Kurdish held regime brigade near Afrin, but that can be ignored I guess. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.115.90.112 (talk) 19:30, 28 September 2014 (UTC) https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BypKP6kCQAAh3z6.png:large Made a few changes, but the font strains my eyes too much to fix the rest. Tgoll774 (talk) 21:23, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Sawran

Saw this pro-opposition map, I guess there isn't much of info about this area. I only saw videos of rebels clashing with ISIS west of Ihtaimlat. Any source that Sawran is still under ISIS control ? I can't even remember SOHR reporting about this town at all... DuckZz (talk) 19:54, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Several points in Daraa

1. Why is Deir al-Abbas in northern Daraa contested? Rebels stormed the town and the surrounding area according to SOHR sources? 2. Why are town in southeastern Daraa along the Jordanian border not added? Some of them are large: Mitayiah, Ma'arabah and Al-Tayibbah 3. Why is the town souteast of Hirak added as contested? I have seen no source 4. Why aren't the Daraa silos/Gharaz prison added as a rebel held military base? Because that's what it was — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 12:13, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Deir al-Abbas - latest SOHR reports indicate fighting still in/around the town, no confirmation of complete rebel control, unless you can provide a source that does indicate that. Towns in southeastern Daraa - we don't/can't add towns without sources, so while these towns are deep in rebel territory and obviously rebel held, without a source explicitly naming them, they will not be added. Town southeast or Hirak - check the edit history - SOHR reported barrel-bombing of this town. 3 considerations here: no clear claim of who controlled it, the barrel bombing indicates rebel presence, and it is on the front line with a known SAA airfield. So, contested was the appropriate compromise until the situation is clarified. Boredwhytekid (talk) 14:06, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Madinat al-Ba'ath

https://twitter.com/PetoLucem/status/516345405123362816 Pro-regime source(considered by you pro-regime guys to be really reliable) says clashes happening AT the city. So contested — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.115.90.112 (talk) 00:22, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

You must be really butthurt about what is happening in Damascus. He reports both SAA and snackbar gains, and it doesn't mean the city is contested. idiot, Dokhaniya still not added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Totholio (talk • contribs) 07:51, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Does Madinat Al-Ba'ath has anything to do with Damascus? And yes, it DOES mean the city is contested, he reported clashes AT the city. And it takes takes time to add a gain on a city map like Damascus and Eastern Ghouta. By the way, there's a big chance Dokhaniya was never rebel held in this map, since they captured it like, a month ago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.181.92.110 (talk) 10:20, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

I agree. The rebels are still advancing in Daraa, but this map sadly doesn't reflect reality anymore in a lot of places ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 12:15, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

First of all AT does not mean IN.This is an insurgency war and most of the attacks that rebels do are hit and run.If rebels enter the town and clashes take place it will say that clashes took place in the town.Second the Daraa front has been stable for several weeks with neither side advancing.Only opposition accounts are claiming advances but other pro-opp accounts are saying the offensive has stalled because of fierce airstrikes.Daki122 (talk) 12:39, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

I don't care if it was a hit and run attack. There are clashes happening AT THE CITY. You guys kept Tasil as contested for a year simply because ONE SOHR post claimed a clash near the town. Who do you need to confirm a town as contested/rebel held? The Pope and Obama need to make a joint statement? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.181.92.110 (talk) 16:26, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

AT the city does not mean automatically its IN the city. Clashes on its outskirts is also considered AT the city. And if it were hit-and-run attacks than that would mean there is no more clashes AT the city, in other words they ended. A contested icon refers to a town that is actively being contested. EkoGraf (talk) 18:55, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Why are you debating with this idiot who referred to the rebels as snackbars? Ignore him and wait for an actual editor to reply to your request. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.60.184.15 (talk) 23:58, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Contested is out of the question. EkoGraf is right, "at" is not the same as "in". That being said, if we are indeed considering this a reliable pro-gov't source, then "at" does warrant a lime ring to the southwest (presumably the rebel angle of advance). Quneitra is not the same as the wastelands of Qalamoun around Assal al-Ward, where hit-and-run asymmetric warfare is the status quo; we should not write off reports of clashes in Qunietra with the assumption that they are hit and run - seeing as how most clashes in this province are more or less pitched battles. Boredwhytekid (talk) 14:31, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

OK, "in some-town" = in the location of the town, "at some-town" = at the location of the town. So how is "at" not "in" in that context ? Note also that logically, saying "at" would be more correct, in terms of a location. (Point in the universe.) In french, one would never say (the equivalent of) "in". Which probably holds true for many other languages.

This discussion sounds like grasping at straws to avoid calling a location contested. André437 (talk) 10:41, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Disagree! No longer any reports about clashes in the city so it was probably was only the a hit and run on the entrance of the city. Also for editing the city on contested is not enough only one report from the Twitter. Hanibal911 (talk) 10:53, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

My point was only about the "in/at" discussion, not any other factors.

I would even question using single unannotated maps for changes, as is often done here. Or very selectively using some aspects of rather detailed reports because the source is supposed to be pro-rebel. This results in a pro-regime map, as SANA never overtly admits setbacks and lies a lot.

BTW, there is another problem related to this map. The tables, which are supposed to document the events in the war, are no longer being updated before posting to the map. Making it next to impossible to verify the current map status, as well as making the tables virtually useless for reconstructing the history of the war. It would be a good idea to revisit your procedures. André437 (talk) 08:54, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Siege of Kobane

Here new map from BBC which show situation around city Kobane.source Map from BBC confirmed the data on this map dated on 27 September from the deSyracuse. Hanibal911 (talk) 16:59, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

ISIS advance near the Syria/Iraq border

ISIS has captured four villages after two days of fighting at al Ya’robeyyi. [11] Keep an eye out for names. EkoGraf (talk) 18:57, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

it is three villages and they are كنانا و كنهو وهمدان,those villages are near falistin sharqi.Alhanuty (talk) 02:47, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Bombing Campaign

I have an idea and I want all your opinions. Can we have a new piece for "International Bombing Targets" where we pin a targeted area with a certain image and leave it there for about 24 hours ... I feel this will be a positive contribution to the page as we hear about bombing campaigns but we don't see them here. What do all of you think? Malik Danno (talk) 05:16, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

I doubt this is going to work out. It would complicate an already complicated map. Also, bombing does not interfere that much with fighting on the ground in Syria itself. Bombings there are a lot less intense than in Iraq. I doubt we could find a way to insert the US strikes into this map the way it is right now ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 145.93.129.99 (talk) 14:50, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Damascus

Clashes happening since this morning in Arbin(Irbin):[12] Keep an eye out on the Damascus front a lot of fighting is going on around Domua,Jobar,Ain Terma,Arbin and other towns. Daki122 (talk) 12:30, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2014/Sep-30/272448-the-wars-of-the-eastern-ghouta-grind-on.ashx#axzz3Enn44sSg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boredwhytekid (talk • contribs) 12:42, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

http://www.aawsat.net/2014/09/article55337061 Boredwhytekid (talk) 14:46, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

SOHR reported that clashes continue between the two sides in al-Dokhania.source Hanibal911 (talk) 15:36, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Daily Star article is an interview with anti-regime activists so I would not take that into account as it is pretty much biased.Also Dokhaniya was never retaken by the Army from rebels but the Army cleared large parts of it and clashes are now taking place in the north of the district near Ain Terma(according to SOHR reports).Daki122 (talk) 17:10, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Buwaida and Khirbet Masanah (Hama)

According to alalam saa capture Buwaida and Khirbet Masanah https://www.facebook.com/alalamarabic/posts/802647779772039 .But I think we need to wait more source to confirmed thisHwinsp (talk) 16:27, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Isolated dots

There are some isolated places, recently changed, which are being deep into "enemy" territory:

- Al Taman'ah (East of Khan Shaykhun) as a red dot

- Khan Al-Sibel (South of Saraqib) as a red dot

- Al-Halbah (South of Palmyra) as a black dot.

Are there any reliable and neutral sources for this? Kihtnu (talk) 19:26, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Kinda curious myself. I vaguely remember seeing something about al-Halbah.. Does anyone have a definitive answer for these 3 edits? Boredwhytekid (talk) 19:54, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

I confused myself. CNN maps show NO ISIS control or support zones under Palmyra, so how come there is a random ISIS village out there? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 20:01, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Done Ok, so after poking around - Khan al-Sibel and Al Taman'ah were changed yesterday based on this article. I have changed both back to green, because the source simply states that "The Syrian regime took advantage of the blow and raided Khan al-Sibl in Saraqib suburbs and Tamana village, which is near Khan Shaykhun town." - So, both towns went red based on a reported raid/hit-and-run attack. Still not sure about al-Halbah. Cheers. Boredwhytekid (talk) 20:17, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

OK thanks. It would be good to remove Al-Halbah as well. Kihtnu (talk) 20:51, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

It is just a dot in the middle of the desert http://wikimapia.org/#lang=it&lat=34.079678&lon=38.433266&z=17&m=b. It can probably be removed, I doubt anybody can 'control' it or has any interest in doing so.Paolowalter (talk) 21:24, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

True. ISIS control does not extend that far down and I doubt they would take such a risk in order to hold a small, useless town in the middle of the desert. 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 00:02, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Village Al-Halbah was added to the map only on the basis of anti-government source Orient TV and was no longer any evidence from the reliable source. But maps from more reliable sources (BBC and The Washington Post) clear show that IS forces not present in the area to south east of the city of Palmyra.herehere So if not confirmation from the reliable sources that IS now control this village this village be removed. Hanibal911 (talk) 05:43, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Done Hanibal911 (talk) 05:55, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Firstly,Al-halbah was mentioned by multiple sources that it was bombed by the international coalition and this is significant,that is why it is added.Alhanuty (talk) 04:51, 2 October 2014 (UTC) and Al-halbah also lies in the hammad desert.Alhanuty (talk) 04:52, 2 October 2014 (UTC) and also the wall street journal shows it via http://followtheidiot.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/image23-274x300.jpg.Alhanuty (talk) 04:54, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

I am sorry but area where located the village Al-Halbah not control by IS this confrirmed pro-opposition source here and reliable sources herehere But the fact that this village is under the control of IS said only the anti-government source Orient TV and more these information not confirmed from no one of the reliable sources. Hanibal911 (talk) 20:16, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Syrian army captures al-Buwaydah and al-Masasnah in Hama province - confirmed by Al Jazeera

Syrian army captures al-Buwaydah and al-Masasnah in northern Hama province. Al-Buwaydah is already red but al-Masasnah village is not on the map.

al-Masasnah - 35°17'26.0"N 36°39'50.0"E

Line 24-25 Link (Arabic): http://www.aljazeera.net/news/arabic/2014/9/30/%D8%AA%D9%82%D8%AF%D9%85-%D9%84%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B9%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%B6%D8%A9-%D8%A8%D8%B1%D9%8A%D9%81-%D8%AF%D9%85%D8%B4%D9%82-%D9%88%D9%82%D8%AA%D9%84%D9%89-%D8%A8%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A8%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%85%D9%8A%D9%84-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%AA%D9%81%D8%AC%D8%B1%D8%A9-%D8%A8%D8%AD%D9%84%D8%A8 YasminSham88 (talk) 19:41, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

location: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=tr&lat=35.279889&lon=36.651249&z=13&m=b&gz=0;366483306;352820261;416278;366358;0;126107;112438;0;509834;190554;542449;332741;434303;377563;353622;325737Hwinsp (talk) 19:54, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

New map

A new map from an unknown source http://www.fps-predators.com/#/syriasouthern-syria/4586312496 Similar to ours but with some differences. May we use for something? Paolowalter (talk) 20:08, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

We have several editors that are complaining of the credibility of these single-man maps. To start using a new one would, in my view, be like rubbing salt on a wound. We can establish a broad consensus to allow the use of the maps from this person, but for any immediate edits, I would hold off. 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 23:59, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

I think this map is produced by looking at our own Wikipedia map. You can see the exact same towns contested and in rebel/SAA hands that we had two of three weeks ago. Minor differences, but most have later been added. I doubt this is a really valid map. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 07:54, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Can someone find the source for this map? I don't want to make any changes till its been sourced. http://oi57.tinypic.com/15wcdg3.jpg Tgoll774 (talk) 11:58, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Madajin check point

On the map just between Lataminah and Suran it is marked the Madajin check point. In this area in wikimapia there is a small village MArkabeh http://wikimapia.org/#lang=it&lat=35.317226&lon=36.669273&z=13&m=b On the other hand a check point named Madajin is marked here http://wikimapia.org/#lang=it&lat=35.258376&lon=36.665840&z=15&m=b Is it a mistake? If yes, probably the village is green and the checkpoint red.Paolowalter (talk) 21:17, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

From SOHR https://www.facebook.com/syriahroe/posts/590502561058086 it appears that SAA is attcking a few cities: Alltamneh, Kafar Zayta, Morek, Latmin, al Bwaydah, Ma’er Kebbeh and Lahaya. The situation of the first three is clear, al Bwaydah was (re)taken yesterday. I think that Latmin, Ma’er Kebbeh and Lahaya can be turned green as is expected from the position. At the same time the Madajin check point should be moved at the right position and become red.Paolowalter (talk) 15:22, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Agree! Hanibal911 (talk) 15:32, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

So if all agree, I add cities Latmin, Ma’er Kebbeh under control by rebels and also put city Lahaya to under control by rebels but leave unchanged the village Al Buwayda under army control and move the Madajin checkpoint to the right location and put him to red. Hanibal911 (talk) 15:48, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

AREA BETWEEN MANBIJ AND RAQQA UNDER IS-CONTROL! So if all agree, I add cities Latmin, Ma’er Kebbeh under control by rebels and also put city Lahaya to under control by rebels and move the Madajin checkpoint to the right location and put him to red. The FSA-pockets between Manbij and Raqqa are under IS-control for already several months! How can you ignore these facts? Tishrin-dam is under IS-control,so the rest is also under IS! All credible guys on Twitter confirm it as well! SOHR also stated,that Tishrin-dam is under IS and that whole Raqqa-province is under IS after YPG was expelled from the last area east of Kobane ten days ago! Your fantasy-map is a joke,only the reality on the ground is important and the reality is,that this area was seized by IS already in the first months of this year!79.233.63.17 (talk) 07:10, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Dear User, you provide no single source (Twitter is not a source). You just randomly claim that several villages are IS held instead of FSA. So, you give a valid source and we add. If not, don't complain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 07:58, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

AIRSTRIKES NEAR TISHRIN-DAM AND MANBIJ! https://www.facebook.com/syriahroe/posts/590849354356740 Last proof,that no FSA is left between Manbij and Raqqa! All Syria-maps are wrong! 217.226.66.37 (talk) 13:56, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Some changes

As far as I know, Deir Adas is not contested as rebels are clashing with SAA forces few kilometers to the north of the city, of course I can only provide videos but here are some SOHR statements from the town getting bombarded by regime aircrafts and barel bombs.

Also Mafkar (Hama rural) should go contested — Preceding unsigned comment added by DuckZz (talk • contribs) 09:29, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

We should also add a green ring around half of Madinat al-Bath in Quneitra. Also, we have strange red and black dot's apprearing in Syrian Kurdistan (Hasakah). Suddenly, ISIS seems to be al around Rabiah crossing, whilst that are has been under YPG control for months. Fighting is on the Iraqi side of the crossing. Also, note the red dot above Tell Brak. No source given, just randomly edited into the map. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.31.204.195 (talk) 11:25, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

But red dot to north from the city Tell Brak it is village Umm Hajarah which under control by army where army conducts raids on houses in the village and arrests of some people.SOHR Hanibal911 (talk) 11:41, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

according to sohr ,saa advancing in deir adas http://www.syriahr.com/index.php?option=com_news&nid=24324&Itemid=2&task=displaynews#.VCwY1vl_spoHwinsp (talk) 15:10, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Lattakia

There are pro-government claims that SAA took control of some villages in Lattakia countryside: Ayn Al-Joozi, Raweesa, Al-Jawa'ara, Al-Balata Kabeer,Tal Doreen and Al-Ghanama I found on wikimapia that the Tal Doreen should be approximately here http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=35.661899&lon=36.143990&z=15&m=b. Any idea on the position of the others?Paolowalter (talk) 19:51, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Confirmed by www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-arab-army-launches-offensive-rural-latakia-6-villages-captured/Paolowalter (talk) 09:01, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

There is the official Syrian Officials confirmation http://www.sana.sy/en/?p=14589 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.203.137.34 (talk) 10:03, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

i found some of them

ghanama(ghunamaiyah) : http://wikimapia.org/#lang=tr&lat=35.712336&lon=36.097770&z=16&m=b

ayn al jaws(joozi): http://wikimapia.org/#lang=tr&lat=35.657566&lon=36.196496&z=16&m=b

tel doreen: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=tr&lat=35.663294&lon=36.148582&z=15&m=b

al balata: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=tr&lat=35.646312&lon=36.170683&z=15&m=bHwinsp (talk) 12:31, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Need to provide neutral or pro-op confirmation in order to add/edit these towns.. Boredwhytekid (talk) 12:33, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

i agree with boredwhytekid.We need wait neutral sources.If neutral or pro opp sources confirm this news ,we will make this towns red — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hwinsp (talk • contribs) 12:39, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

There are multiple government videos and pictures in celebration of there victory: Part of the opperation [13] Also this coincides with reports of Jabhat al Nusra leaving [14] Idlib and other regions in the North to join ISIS in Raqqa.Daki122 (talk) 16:17, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

pro opp source syria direct says saa capture villages around doreen mountain http://us3.campaign-archive2.com/?u=de5b0724de9eafd679e2e0c36&id=bccf4d1ed1&e=145f7ae018Hwinsp (talk) 17:04, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Pro opposition source Syria Direct confirmed that army captured two villages in area rebel-held the city Salma.here and www.syriadirect.org/rss/1597-syria-direct-news-update-10-2-14 Also some the reliable sources confirmed that the Syrian troops recaptured strongholds of the rebels in the Latakia Province.Global TimesFinland Times Hanibal911 (talk) 21:19, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Khirbet Ghazaleh(Dara)

Could someone please provide a source for its change from red to green? I must have missed something. Thank you... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:660:4701:1002:2520:C3D:7238:81CA (talk) 09:16, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Take a good look at the map this town is marked under control of the army. Regards! Hanibal911 (talk) 09:19, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

the module

why is the module not updating the map.Alhanuty (talk) 15:42, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

It would be better to return who it was before when we edit map in this template.Template:Syrian Civil War detailed map Hanibal911 (talk) 16:36, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

it is impossible because the maximum space has been taken in the template,so we had to change to module.Alhanuty (talk) 17:35, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Indeed. Also, I can't find any evidence of a problem at all. A WP:BYPASS probably was all that was necessary. Jackmcbarn (talk) 22:28, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Amendment to northern Aleppo province

Personally, I think we can remove the green circle around al-Rai, and turn Tathumus and Waqf from yellow to black - I do not have sources for these proposed changes, but they seem like common sense, seeing as how the IS pushed the front line significantly to the west quite some time ago. Fellow editors, your opinions? Boredwhytekid (talk) 20:18, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Maybe you're right! But also I think that we need noted the village Kafr Ghan under control by rebels because this village located in area which under control by rebels and kurdish forces now located on the west from the city Azaz and no information that YPG forces still present in this village. Hanibal911 (talk) 20:40, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

I agree, go ahead. Paolowalter (talk) 21:14, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

So if all the editors agreed I will edit these villages. Hanibal911 (talk) 06:23, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

I agree as well. + maybe the map of Aleppo should be edited too. SAA allegedly made some progress in Handarat and took village of Sayfat according to some twitter sources, but let's wait for some confirmation.77.240.103.2 (talk) 09:45, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Done But map of Aleppo later update another editor! Hanibal911 (talk) 15:18, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

IS offensive in Ayn al Arab(Kobane) countryside

Maybe we should mark all the villages in Kobame countryside becasue some of reliable sources reported that yesterday Islamic State backed by tanks and mortars captured the final village on the outskirts of Kobani.BloombergThe Washington Post and pro opposition Kurdish source said that the amid sharp shortage of weapons the Kurdish forces of the Popular Protection Units (YPG) withdrawal from the city suburbs the city Kobane.Ara News And SOHR reported that ISIS have taken over 350 villages in the past 16 days, and now located is hundreds of meters away from Ayn al-Arab(Kobane).SOHR Hanibal911 (talk) 21:00, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Handarat Village-Handarat Hill

SOHR says saa capture handarat village and handarat hill and cut the last supply road. source: http://www.syriahr.com/index.php?option=com_news&nid=24414&Itemid=2&task=displaynews#.VC529_l_spo

location:http://wikimapia.org/#lang=tr&lat=36.293579&lon=37.152843&z=15&m=b Hwinsp (talk) 10:17, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

translation from sohr eng: https://www.facebook.com/syriahroe/posts/591394617635547 handarat village and handarat hill under SAA control Hwinsp (talk) 11:47, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

According to pro-gov and neutral twittersources Handarat north of Aleppo is controlled by SAA https://twitter.com/green_lemonnn/status/517971626844237825. SOHR confirms the advance http://syriahr.com/en/2014/10/9-combatants-were-killed-in-clashes-in-aleppo/ Exact extent of the advance to be understood (Handarat city, Handarat district, Sayfat?).Paolowalter (talk) 10:22, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

SOHR reported that the regime forces have still advanced towards Handarat area where they could control new sites in the area.SOHR Hanibal911 (talk) 11:16, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Handarat (village) sees fighting confirmed by both sides, Sifat and Dowir al-Zeitoun (http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=36.324254&lon=37.160053&z=14&m=b&search=aleppo) also contested. Source: http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2014/Oct-03/272879-syrian-army-fights-for-last-major-rebel-route-into-aleppo.ashx#axzz3EseWPTnh Regards, Ariskar (talk) 12:15, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Alepo is under siege according to SOHR [15] Army captured Handarat village and the hill with the same name. Daki122 (talk) 12:30, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

SAA also captured al-Mudafah and Sıfat . source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/10/03/us-syria-crisis-aleppo-idUSKCN0HS0ZV20141003?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNewsHwinsp (talk) 12:55, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

I think all of the gains of SAA can be outlined as follows: http://i61.tinypic.com/nn85sy.png Regards,62.231.150.132 (talk) 13:50, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Newest map from Peto Lucem(very reliable, reporting both SAA/snackbar gains) https://twitter.com/PetoLucem/status/518054882042216448/photo/1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.132.122.57 (talk) 15:15, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Siege of Aleppo is tightening. Map should be adjusted to show this: clashes ongoing in the villages of Sifat and Dowir al-Zeitoun, around eight kilometres north of Aleppo. CNN reports Handarat has fallen. blocked the road leading into Aleppo. http://english.al-akhbar.com/node/21843 http://edition.cnn.com/2014/10/03/world/meast/syria-civil-war/ Reuters reports capture of al-Mudafah in northern Aleppo: http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/10/03/us-syria-crisis-aleppo-idUSKCN0HS0ZV20141003

SAA is already at El Mallah http://wikimapia.org/#lang=hu&lat=36.280745&lon=37.130227&z=15&m=b&show=/30935720/El-Mallah&search=El%20Mallah opposition video confirms it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vwMJqyKpTA — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.132.122.57 (talk) 17:56, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Hama

The village of Zawr Mahruqah[16] has been captured by the Army and there is video evidence a government TV crew has tiured the village and the recaptured zone Video:[17].Daki122 (talk) 13:34, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

JAZAH AND RAQQA-MANBIJ!

Islamic State controls FSA-areas between Manbij and Raqqa since april 2014 and this morning they have taken Jazah in Hasakah-province,YPG retreated! Almost the whole south of Yarubiyah now under IS! 79.233.4.238 (talk) 13:41, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

yes,the Jazaa area is under IS control. Alhanuty (talk) 14:33, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Need a New color for the cities that will captured by the Turkish Army

the Turkish ground intervention in the Syrian Civil war is very imminent,so we need a new color for the dots that will be under the control of the Turkish military.Alhanuty (talk) 14:08, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Don't think turkey will actuly capture anything in Syria it will be more of cross border shelling and air strikes.79.126.229.239 (talk) 14:12, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

they are planning a buffer zone 30-35 Km deep into Syria on the entire border,which means they will be capturing alots of towns.Alhanuty (talk) 14:32, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

But this still did not happen and we should not rush in this question. Also Turkey has not yet taken a decision to use the ground force in Syria. Hanibal911 (talk) 14:37, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Also Kurdish source claim that Turkey supports the ISIS in they fight against by Kurdish forces in Syria.Firat News Hanibal911 (talk) 16:24, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

I agree with Hanibal - we'll cross this bridge when/if the time comes Boredwhytekid (talk) 16:52, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

This is just a discussion people,in case that Turkey intervenes,and it will most likely intervene with Ground force.Alhanuty (talk) 19:06, 3 October 2014 (UTC) Hannibal,the decision has be taken already so what do you editors propose it to be.Alhanuty (talk) 19:06, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

That's when it happen and only then we will think about it! Why we must rush the events especially if we, and so many topics to discuss. Because after all, choose a new colors for mark of the cities or villages this problem which have easily solved . Regards! Hanibal911 (talk) 19:36, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Syrian Army captured more Towns in North Hama

Syria TV report with subtittles. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wx-VBCu4X0

Source for Jaz'ah and surrounding villages being turned into IS controlled.

Which was the source given to do such change? SOHR only reported four villages around Tel Kocher/Yarubiya, which not included Jaz'ah, which was turned to YPG controlled a few weeks ago when YPG uploaded footage of its control of the area.

190.254.21.236 (talk) 21:42, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Jaz'ah under control by IS this confirm the pro opposition source.Ara News And this city and the many other IS-held citys and villages exposed airstrikes the international coalition. Hanibal911 (talk) 07:25, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Deir Adas

SOHR reports about barel bombs falling around the town, and that means the town itself is not contested but the area to the north. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.175.72.111 (talk) 21:54, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes, Deir Adas is fully rebel held. Also, we need to keep a eye open for the situation in Daara, many sources saying that the rebels captured Zimrin, Peto Lucem said that Opp. sources: Insurgents have captured #Zimrin village in #Daraa Governorate. Also many rebel sources claiming Um Awsaj to be captured by the rebels, and they are advancing towards Harrah. So far, no reliable sources, but keep and eye out for news. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.212.62.198 (talk) 16:17, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Pro government source Petro Lucem not confirmed that rebels captured Zimrin they only writes that this says pro opposition source. Also no need make the statements if you cant provide the reliable source that confirms your words that the rebels captured Um Awsaj. Hanibal911 (talk) 16:51, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes, just like I said, he said Opp. sources. I just pointed out we need to follow the situation closely — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.212.62.198 (talk) 17:59, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Agree! Hanibal911 (talk) 18:05, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

SOHR reported fighting on Tell Harrah yesterday, with both rebels and soldiers killed. The attack came from the west. What does that say about red towns in southern Quneitra? I think most, if not all, of those five towns are rebel held. What do you al think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 10:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Clashes in Ayn al Arab(Kobane)

According to reliable sources, the fighting is still going on the outskirts of the city Kobane but not inside it.The Daily StarNaharnetAl Arabia Hanibal911 (talk) 12:16, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Map from the reliable source clear show that IS only bombard city and Hill near Kobane but no clashes inside the city.The Times Hanibal911 (talk) 11:58, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Pro-rebel mapDuckZz (talk) 15:48, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

IS CONTROLS WHOLE RAQQA-PROVINCE!

http://justpaste.it/Taqreer000 That´s the official IS-map from early august. No FSA left between Aleppo and Raqqa! 79.233.53.154 (talk) 15:53, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

May already be enough raise this issue because we have two the reliable sources which clearly show that IS does not control the entire Raqqa province.The Washington PostBBC Regards! Hanibal911 (talk) 16:06, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

This is a big joke :,) "the official IS map says so". If that's not a biased source, than we can use an Islamic Front made map to show rebels in central Damascus pounding Assad's home with dung ... sight — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 10:10, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

The situation here is unclear but I don't think the BBC or Washington Post maps are proof of FSA control in parts of Raqqa. They simply show IS as controlling the main towns in all of their territory while not saying anything about the desert areas or small villages. On balance I would guess that IS does control all of Raqqa but it is hard to say for certain given the information available at the moment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.101.181.174 (talk) 23:14, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Al-Halbah and Dalhos

Why Al-Halbah and Dalhos were removed from the map? it's under IS control and was bombed by the colation. It's an important town to connect the Syrian and Iraq desert. 3bdulelah (talk) 18:59, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

i also wonder why they wanted to do that. Alhanuty (talk) 19:17, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Firstly on the map in the Homs province south of the city Palmyra no the town or village Dalhos. Secondly you must provide proof from a reliable source that this city under control IS. Because this information circulated only the biased anti-government source Orient TV and no one from the reliable sources. Also area where located Al-Halbah not control IS this confirmed map from the pro-opp source her and map from the reliable source The Washington Post her Hanibal911 (talk) 19:26, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Almost all sources agree that ISIS has no operational or support presence south of Palmyra, Hanbial just showed you one of them, so a village south of Palmyra that is ISIS held is impossible. 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 19:32, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

of course it's under IS control (Badyah Wilayah) and that's why it was bombed by the collation and that's why some rebel offered cease fire with IS to link the south with the north by the desert road. Rebel sources are neutral between SAA and IS. 3bdulelah (talk) 15:52, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Twitter sources claiming rebels are advancing again in Daraa/Quneitra province since two days. Seems rebels have taken over:

• Tell Kroum (near Jaba)
• Tell Harrah
• Zimrin
• Umm Awsaj
• Fighting in Harrah town

I've found the following sources: 1. http://syriahr.com/en/2014/10/clashes-in-daraa-left-18-deaths-on-al-nusra-and-rebel-battalions-side/ (half green circle around Gharagheb and Umm Awsaj contested) 2. http://syriahr.com/en/2014/10/5362/ (Othman town contested)

Also, there are numerous claims of videos from Harrah. Pro-GOV Twitter source Peto Lucem confirming Zimrin, Um Awsaj and Tell Harrah have been taken: 1. https://twitter.com/PetoLucem/status/518352785545646080 2. https://twitter.com/PetoLucem/status/518723094392078336 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 15:17, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

So sick of this technique. Peto only said that according to PRO-OPP sources, Zimrin, Um Awsaj and Tell Harrah have been taken, he is not confirming! 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 17:14, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

for the SOHR source,i would agree on those edits,put a green circle around Ghabagheb and Um Aswag.and i would keep a clear eye on Peto Lucem,since it is a pro-government source confirming a rebel advance.Alhanuty (talk) 17:01, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

We also need to debate the red/contested towns in southern Quneitra. If rebels have taken Tell Harah and are besieging Harrah town from all sides, as reports indicate, should that mean that those five towns are rebel held? It seems so since the frontlines are far away from them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 20:13, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

i agree so.Alhanuty (talk) 20:47, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

I think another good thing would be to add one army base next to Tell Hara, because I belive one checkpoint for this city is not enough as this area is one of the biggest in Daara province. The army base should be red until the entire town goes green.DuckZz (talk) 21:36, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

two israeli media reports saying nusra and fsa took over harrah hill, city and the surrounding area: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4577895,00.html http://www.kosherpress.com/nusra-front-says-it-took-over-al-harra-area-near-syrian-israeli-border/

so this would mean harrah city to green and possibly nimr south of it. Also towns west of harrah in southern quneitra to green ... the army is not there if harrah and nearby towns have fallen already. Earlier sohr reports make um awsaj contested. What about Zimrin? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Serberust (talk • contribs) 22:14, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

source for zimrin to green: http://aranews.net/2014/10/syrians-receive-eid-al-adha-mounting-death-toll/

So Zimrin, Harrah, Um Awsaj, and southern Quneitra to the rebels? Everyone agrees? It's the most logical thing, since the rebels couldn't besiege Harra before holding all the area around — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.58.251.145 (talk) 22:48, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Template and Module for Lebanon

we are going to need a template for Lebanon,to show who controls the ground in Lebanon between IS and Hezbollah and the Lebanese government.Alhanuty (talk) 17:15, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

@Alhanuty: I'll get to work on this. For now, though, since all of Lebanon is visible on the Syria map, just add the Lebanon points to Module:Syrian Civil War detailed map (but please put them all the way at the bottom of the list, so it'll be easier for me to move them when it's time). Jackmcbarn (talk) 17:48, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

I agree with Alhanuty is a great idea! This template will be a great addition and will be able to show us more detail the situation in the border area as it was in a situation with Iraq. Hanibal911 (talk) 17:52, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

daraa offensive sources

Harrah to green: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4577895,00.html

This should also make red towns in southern quneitra green as the frontline moves already towards kafr shams town.

Zimrin to green: http://aranews.net/2014/10/syrians-receive-eid-al-adha-mounting-death-toll/

Um Awsaj contested: http://syriahr.com/en/2014/10/clashes-in-daraa-left-18-deaths-on-al-nusra-and-rebel-battalions-side/

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Serberust (talk • contribs) 22:29, 5 October 2014 (UTC) 

Via all those reliable sources,Harrah and Tal Harrah and Zimrin and Um Aswaj should be put as green.Alhanuty (talk) 23:09, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Stop vandalizing this map. Your source for Al-Harrah says that AL NUSRA FRONT CLAIMED TO HAVE captured Al-Harrah, so no action there. Your other source said that rebels captured Um Awsaj checkpoint, not the town. Zimrin can go to green. 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 02:18, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

this is not vandalizing this map. We made towns near abu ad duhur contested because of reports of fighting in the area. Kobani was first made contested because is reported to be in the town. But as zoon as rebels advance we need six sources that show exactly how far they have advanced. No more .... these are all valid sources that state that rebels control a lot more than this map shows. So green. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Serberust (talk • contribs) 07:09, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

So no. You are vandalizing because you are making up information from your sources. The first one states that the Umm Aswaj checkpoint has been taken, not the town, so that source does not help you. Your other source is stating the JAN claimed to have taken Harra, and JAN claims are unreliable sources, so THAT source does not help you either. Ara news network is a pro-opp source and cannot be used, so no changes to the map. 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 19:57, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Electronic Resistance Army (pro-SAA) twitter confirming fighting in Jannuyah, Daraa, near Zimrin: https://twitter.com/ResistanceER/status/519081125223096321 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 11:40, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Al-Sulah and Kabajeb in Deir Er Zor

Official ISIS map from August 2014: http://justpaste.it/Taqreer000. These two towns are under SAA control. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 02:34, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Raqqa province

Pro opposition source Ara News said that Raqqa province is the only Syrian Province which is completely controlled by the Islamic State.source Hanibal911 (talk) 07:16, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

But I will not rush to edit the map because I want to hear the views of other editors about this. Hanibal911 (talk) 07:20, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Well, that area is really hard to know. In my opinion, the IS controls all of Raqqa, but many sources indicate otherwise. We to look for other sources I guess — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.58.251.145 (talk) 11:49, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Ok, so say we do end up changing the remaining green dots in Raqqa to black (probably a good idea); how do you propose showing the presence that the rebels still do have on the eastern bank of the Euphrates, in "the contested Tishrin Dam region"? We would have to add towns in this region - some contested, some rebel held.. Boredwhytekid (talk) 14:09, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Its a popular misconception when some say the whole Raqqah province is ISIS-held when in fact there is that small part to the west that is still rebel-held and a forgotten front. Sources [18][19][20]. Not to mention the non-existence of reports that would state the ISIS actually captured that area.EkoGraf (talk) 20:33, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Nimr, Al-Hajah, al-Dwayah, Rasm al Sayd, Rasm al Kharrar and Mamtinah

I want to raise the debate on the six towns mentioned above. All six are located in southern Quneitra province. In the past three days, rebels have taken over Harrah, Zimrin and Um Awsaj. Fighting in Quneitra itself is located near Khan Arnabah and Jaba, far from those towns. There have been no reports of fighting there, except near Nimr. Also, these five towns (excluding Nimr) can't be reinforced by the SAA, because rebels control land on all sides of those towns. It could be a Nubl and Zahra scenario, but then there would be reports of fighting (video's, twitter sources etc.). There are none. Should we make the majority of those towns green? Nimr can stay red for the time being, since a supply line could be envisioned near contested Simlin town, but the rest? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 08:53, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

For me, Al-Hajah and Al-Dwayah to green. The rest of regime held central Quneitra stay contested, and Nimer stays red. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.58.251.145 (talk) 11:48, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Why not wait a couple hours, or days? The rebel advances are very recent and rapid, so the prospect of SAA/NDF troops stuck behind enemy lines is very plausible - as is the possibility of an SAA supply line running roughly Simlin-Nimr-Hajah-Dwayah. Boredwhytekid (talk) 13:42, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Boredwhytekid, I doubt it. It seems Nimr has also been taken. Today there were twitter reports with video's and photo's of an airstrike on Nimr. Also, Simrin is contested. If you look on Wikimapia or Google Earth, you'll see that there is only a small country road leading towards Harrah and Nimr. The large road is through Zimrin, and that is rebel controlled. Of course SAA troops could be besieged, but we have no single source of information for that from either the SAA or de rebels themselves. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 17:28, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

I doubt it too haha. Just trying to make the case for patience. You're right, we have no information confirming or denying SAA/NDF troops stuck behind the rebel advance in Daraa/Qunietra. But, therein lies the problem - generally speaking, unsourced, "common sense" edits (such as this case, when it's a reasonable assumption that the gov't pulled back from those towns but no source has confirmed it) are going to require a community consensus. I think it's just a little too soon; the situation is just a little too fresh and fluid, for that consensus to materialize. However, if Nimr is confirmed fallen to the rebels by what count as reliable sources, your/this proposed change will be strengthened. Boredwhytekid (talk) 18:13, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

All of this towns(Nimr, Al-Hajah, al-Dwayah, Rasm al Sayd, Rasm al Kharrar and Mamtinah) under nusra and jihadists control.We know that SAA and NDF retreat from there.But we should fix raqqa too.source say raqqa province under is control.Rebels didnt control villages in raqqa.source: http://aranews.net/2014/10/islamic-state-militants-kidnap-100-kurdish-civilians-northern-syria/Hwinsp (talk) 18:24, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

The conversation about Raqqa has its own section. Nimr, al-Hajah, al-Dwayah, etc - provide a valid source, or get a consensus from the editors.. as are the rules with any edit, ever, always.. this isn't new stuff here. Boredwhytekid (talk) 18:33, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

You know we cant provide valid sources about this villages because rebels control this villages before the 2014 (as far as i know).I cant found this sources.But i read couple a saa sources today.Source said :' saa retreat from tell harra area to zimrin judayyah area' I give this sources if you guys want it.But i dont think we can find a valid source about this villages.Hwinsp (talk) 18:45, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Post that source, please! Even if it cannot be used by itself, it will be a point of reference, a small building block in making your case, if/when the decision is made to change the status of said villages Boredwhytekid (talk) 18:54, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Here: https://www.facebook.com/dimashq.now/posts/599180706874212 Source said saa retreat from tell harra area and installed new defensive position in zimrin area.Hwinsp (talk) 19:01, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Jafar Saeed, you are welcome to join this discussion, but changing Nimr arbitrarily and without a source is uncalled for. You cited this post, that reports the bombardment of "Nemer". There is no "Nemer" in Daraa province; SOHR has been using the name "Nemer" for the town "Namer", found here but not on our map. How can I say that SOHR is referring to Namer and not Nimr? Because SOHR has been reporting the bombardment of Namer for weeks - and Nimr's status has only been in doubt for a matter of days. Boredwhytekid (talk) 19:59, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Will someone update the Aleppo map

Will someone update the Aleppo map to show the rebel part of the city under siege government forces have captured three villages Handarat town and the hill by the same name days ago and no one has updated the map.Also update the Damascus map Jobar has been contested for the past month and on the map it is still painted as rebel held.Daki122 (talk) 13:32, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

False. Rebels have retaken rural areas north of Aleppo and control at least 50% of Handarat. Latest reports suggest the SAA has retreated from Handarat village itself. Jobar is rebel held, but some streets are taken over by the SAA. Heavy bombardment ongoing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 17:25, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

STOP LYING 84.24.43.183 and you should stop folowing archicivilians mark or vs(only that kids said rebels captured handarat). SAA official report INSIDE Handarat TODAY.source: https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=846182498747987 Reports said saa full control of handarat and Report shows saa repelled nusra attacks .And jobar should contested.ThanksHwinsp (talk) 18:05, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

And saa captures full of dukhaniya area. source: http://www.syriahr.com/index.php?option=com_news&nid=24553&Itemid=2&task=displaynews#.VDLbmPl_uQlHwinsp (talk) 18:13, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Hwsimp, you should watch a LOT less SANA. That report doesn't show anything. There have been similar opposition reporters in Handarat today. So no change without a neutral source.

Where is your source? You guys talking about half of handarat under nusra control and saa retreat.Where is your source? If you want trustable source it is the Last neutral source said handarat under SAA control: https://www.facebook.com/syriahroe/posts/591394617635547 .GIVE me one new source about saa retreat handarat.Hwinsp (talk) 18:33, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

They have already atualized the Aleppo map. And no, the rebel areas are not under full siege yet. Smaller roads still reach the city. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.58.251.145 (talk) 20:24, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Oppositions sources claiming rebel advances (except SOHR) are not taken into account due to the possibility of propaganda. Same goes for Government sources claiming army advances. Only source we agreed to use for advances and losses of both parties is SOHR due to them, even though being pro-opposition, are neutral in their reporting. This has been discussed a hundred times and always with the same result. Archicivilians is an ultra pro-opposition source, if its reporting a rebel advance it is not to be taken into account, just like we don't take into account SANA when reporting army advances. If SOHR reported the rebels recapturing Handarat than yes we would change it to rebel-held. But as of yet the last word from SOHR was that the Army captured it and that there was continuing fighting in the area (which does not necessarily mean the town itself). EkoGraf (talk) 20:27, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

"This has been discussed a hundred times and always with the same result" Yes, perhaps because you don't debate it and refer back to a consensus established years ago, which by the way, prohibits SOHR's Facebook posts. SOHR is solidly a PRO-OPP source with biased reporting. They accuse the government daily of slaughter, but when "Islamic Battalions" launch shells, they simply say that shells fell from the sky with reports of losses. The emblem is the green Syrian flag and their leader is a self-professed opposition supporter who is also a Syrian ex convict. Areas under the control of "Islamic Battalions" are referred to as liberated. The only reason other medias cite them so much is because they do not want to send reporters to Syria and SOHR conveys that Anti-Assad message they want. When you examine everything SOHR is, it seems impossible to me that some would consider it to be the "Bible" of the Syrian Civil War.2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 20:37, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Ekograf openly called SOHR an opposition source - what's with jumping down his throat? No one here will argue that SOHR is a neutral source. They are pro-op hands down. The only point of any consequence though is whether or not SOHR's reports of battlefield gains/loses prove accurate, and, they usually do - more so than any other reporting outlet on the Syrian conflict. What they report gets confirmed as correct 99% of the time. I'm not talking about "slaughters" or "liberation" or even casualty numbers. Just battlefield gains/loses - SOHR is usually accurate.. Boredwhytekid (talk) 20:53, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry about jumping down his throat. As for SOHR, how do you know that their reports are accurate? 70%-85% of all edits on this map are done through it alone. There are very few outlets on the ground actually covering the civil war independently that are reliable. Media like Reuters and BBC create reports merely quoting SOHR, so that is not confirmation. So I am confused now, how can we tell is SOHR is accurate? 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 21:36, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

I'm not referring to a consensus established years ago as you said. But instead, as I stated, I am referring to the results of discussions that happen every month or two, and every one with the same result - SOHR is an authoritative and mostly neutral source when it comes to reporting on battlefield advances/losses by both sides. And actually its not me who is calling it an authoritative source, but the reliable news media like Reuters and BBC who you said merely quote them. Reuters, BBC, AFP, CNN etc have made several articles about SOHR itself in the past where they praised its reporting as being accurate, which were pointed to in previous discussions. P.S. We don't use SOHR facebook posts (which are official SOHR english reports) only, we also use SOHR arabic reports from its main website. EkoGraf (talk) 03:11, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Eastern Ghouta updates

Looks like more adjustments must be made. Al-monitor (one of the few sources that is critical of all sides on the conflict) explains Rebels captured al-Duhanniya in eastern Ghouta last month. It adds government took back control of parts of Qalamoun hills and mountain of Ghouta. It cites government state-media as claiming Town of al-Kurdi which is southwest of Adra is under government control and that is placing more pressure on rebels with cross-fire. It also states that Harasta , 5 kilomteres north of Damascus, is under rebel control. http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2014/10/syria-regime-victory-adra-douma.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.1.105 (talk) 21:32, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

It was reported a few days ago that Al-Duhanniya was captured by the government, Al-Monitor was simply stating that the rebels initially took it over last month, not that they still have control. Also, that article seems to be old. I know it is posted under 6 October, but the capture of Adra happened a week ago, which leads me to believe that Al-Monitor was reposting an old article.2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 21:37, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

One user has added 9 "green dots" north of Busra Al Harir on 31st of July. I can't find that he have posted ANY source for that edit? If no reliable source provided, they should be deleted.