Jump to content

Talk:Control of cities during the Syrian civil war

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 85.112.86.39 (talk) at 09:45, 27 October 2014 (→Battalion 559 in Eastern Qalamoun). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Syrian Civil War sanctions


Syrian Army captured more Towns in North Hama

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

TEL AL HARRAH

According to the Jerusalem post the rebels have just taken TEL AL HARRAH signal post.That must mean the saa are still in al harrah. Once again you have presumed to much to fast https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War&action=edit&section=new# — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pyphon (talk • contribs) 16:16, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tel al Harrah may be green but Harrah is at least contested. Please change it to contested. http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/200-jabhat-al-nusra-fighters-killed-tal-hamra/ reports up to yesterday fighting in Tel al Harrah, recongnizing advance of the rebels but deniying it has been completely taken. Paolowalter (talk) 18:56, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Paolowalter and others : please don't start a line with a space, it causes special formatting. (I just fixed the format of your post.) For indentation use ":". (Multiple times for more indentation.)
Also, please use the preview button to see what your post looks like. Thanks :) André437 (talk) 23:05, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense, and an old source. Rebels control Harrah town. It was said so by multiple media outlets. In fact, rebels control Nimr and the red towns in Quneitra (south) also :) but as usual, this map is three weaks behind the actual events in Daraa and Quneitra. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 19:49, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Parrot effect, only SOHR truly reported. And do you have proof of "In fact, rebels control Nimr and the red towns in Quneitra" or are you one of those whiners that consistently complain about how the rebels have taken Damascus yet have no proof to show for it? 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 20:02, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I agree Paolowalter al harrah back to red ;)Pyphon (talk) 20:14, 11 October 2014 (UTC)pyphonhttps://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War&action=edit&section=68#[reply]
I disagree. Despite the fact that there is still fighting in Tel-Harra, I think both tel-Harra and Harra town should be contested to restore the map to normalcy after it was disrupted by what appears to have been a rebel propaganda tsunami (Nimir, Zimirin, Tell-Harra, Harra were all victims). 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 22:23, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Even Iranian Television reports Harrah is rebel held. Boredwhytekid (talk) 14:47, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

South Aleppo

Saa advancing in southern aleppo and recapture sadaya according to sohr: http://www.syriahr.com/index.php?option=com_news&nid=24851&Itemid=2&task=displaynews#.VDmPj_msWQkHwinsp (talk) 20:18, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Regime Afghan mercenaries? Seriously? Nevertheless, the "Almighty SOHR" has spoken, back to red. 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 22:26, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
More constructive commentary eh? Afghan mercenaries - Vice News al-Arabiya Washington Institute Foreign Policy Fox News Wallstreet Journal Really man, you do nothing but bash SOHR but don't even put forth the effort run a simple google search to see if there's any justification for their claims. Boredwhytekid (talk) 14:54, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

SOHR confirmed the regime to have taken all the villages they lost in the Ahrar ash-Sham offensive. http://syriahr.com/en/2014/10/regime-forces-advance-in-aleppo-countryside-and-rebels-advance-in-aleppo-city/

Also, Suleiman Halabi district need to be contested, the rebels control more then half of it already — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.181.84.171 (talk) 12:52, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Only in your dreams.... I am living in al-Midan near Sulaiman Halabi.... SAA only!--Zyzzzzzy (talk) 14:09, 12 October 2014 (UTC

And I'm living on the moon. Suleiman Halabi to contested(but it is so small I doubt it will be significant on the map).

You better to stay there.--Zyzzzzzy (talk) 04:43, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have reliable sources? If not, then no status change. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 16:26, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ALEPPO

saa repelled rebels offensive and SAA recaptures vilages in south aleppo (abu tabbah -qastunah- dıyman -barzanıyah - al zaraa -adnanıyan -umm jumm) accordin to sohr: http://syriahr.com/index.php?option=com_news&nid=24866&Itemid=2&task=displaynews#.VDpuVfmsWQlHwinsp (talk) 12:08, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

LOCATION: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=tr&lat=36.026403&lon=37.301159&z=13&m=b&gz=0;372560119;359961325;236892;705213;0;263140;259208;218017;767326;0;858306;91657;830841;284660;444602;433198;259208;731577;214576;667748Hwinsp (talk) 12:12, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

translation from sohr eng: http://syriahr.com/en/2014/10/regime-forces-advance-in-aleppo-countryside-and-rebels-advance-in-aleppo-city/Hwinsp (talk) 12:19, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done Daki122 (talk) 15:19, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That SOHR post doesn't specify a single town by name. Boredwhytekid (talk) 13:20, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

http://i.gyazo.com/60acf43a035cd97fed8734b9c8a5b5fc.png according to this map the cities of Rasm-al-safa and kafr Akkar are rebel held as well as Haddadin and al-wadihi on the border of the Aleppo map Edit: Kafr Abid and Balas are reported as theirs as well.

That is a Pro-opp map and cannot be used to turn towns green. 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 22:52, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

SOHR confirms again SAA is near Aleppo infantry school fighting at the cement factory, https://www.facebook.com/syriahroe/posts/596416670466675?fref=nf
Babinnis was taken almost a week ago https://twitter.com/PetoLucem/status/520278356412354561/photo/1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.132.122.57 (talk) 09:20, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

http://syriahr.com/en/2014/10/al-nusra-and-the-battalions-have-advanced-in-handarat-and-sifat-areas/ SOHR confirms rebels to have besieged regime fighters in Sifat and Handarat villages. Also, would you guys stop saying the regime has rebel held Aleppo under siege, because there's another road going into rebel held Aleppo, the Castello road. It's under a half-siege, because it's much harder for rebels to use the road, but it's not under full siege. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.177.197.133 (talk) 15:17, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Idiot Castello road is the main suplly route not the "another"

SOHR reported fighting in Handarat area and sifat nothing about besieged please thankyou https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War&action=edit&section=58#

Multiple sources have stated that control of Handarat for the SAA is a siege on rebel held Aleppo. Also, there is not way rebel fighters can besiege the SAA in those areas, since the SAA controls the area immediately east of them. Also your sources says "Could" cut them off. Finally, these unspecified "advances" are the essential equivalent of SANA propaganda, this time being done by SOHR in favor of the rebels. As for your arguments about other roads, you are absolutely right. The rebels could trek anywhere they wanted to to deliver supplies, they do not even have to use a road. However, the easy rebel supply line has been eliminated. The rebels can no longer obtain supplies quickly, thus placing them effectively under siege. 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 20:07, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Just because the 2 main highways from Turkey are blocked at one point (one at al-Zaraa and the another at Handarat) doesn't mean the rebels are incapable of using paved secondary roads to bypass the blockages. If the regime can do the same elsewhere (or worse, building a road through the desert to Khanisir when the rebels blocked the m5), why not the rebels ? It just means the supplies take a little longer to arrive. You just have to look at google maps (or wikimapia) to see the alternative routes. André437 (talk) 23:27, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2014/10/aleppo-syria-rebels-face-islamic-state-regime.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.102.233.227 (talk) 09:37, 15 October 2014 (UTC) http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/10/15/382338/syria-army-makes-gains-near-aleppo/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.155.46.49 (talk) 19:33, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Harrah town sources

Some pro-SAA guys have changed Harrah to contested. So here are the sources to make it nice and green again:

1. http://www.longwarjournal.org/threat-matrix/archives/2014/10/free_syrian_army_continues_to.php 2. https://www.facebook.com/syriahroe/posts/595045263937149 3. http://eaworldview.com/2014/10/syria-daily-islamic-state-takes-key-hill-near-kobane/ 4. http://sherifazuhur.wordpress.com/2013/07/27/syria-update-july-26-2013-institute-of-middle-eastern-islamic-and-strategic-studies-by-sherifa-zuhur/ 5. http://mehriran.tv/article_read.php?a=605

So :) green please. Also, we should make the two town in southern Quneitra green. There has been no report of fighting there, and its way behind SAA lines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 21:03, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All of your sources are A) Pro-Opp or B) Unknown and therefore not authoritative. Please find a neutral source. Per RT: https://twitter.com/HebaDelacres/status/520819121055756289 ongoing fighting in Tel-Harra. Area is not as rebel dominated as some pro-opp editors would like us to believe.2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 21:09, 12 October 2014 (UTC) 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 21:06, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My God ... longwarjournal is a neutral source, and we agreed to use SOHR. And you deny all that and give me a twitter source? While we all agreed not to use Twitter? This is the best joke I've seen since a few days. Maybe we should also make Jasim, Inkhil and all of Quneitra red again? The godly SAA is advancing steadily, right? I'm sure I can find a Twitter source or map claiming the SAA is already storming Israel itself :,) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 08:47, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bombardment of tel Harrah https://www.facebook.com/syriahroe/posts/595758763865799. ISW "rebel forces... seize the town of Tel al-Hara" Boredwhytekid (talk) 13:08, 13 October 2014 (UTC) Ok so tel al harrah hill is in rebel hands and the saa are bombarding hill.That means the saa must be in the area . But according to this map they are nowhere near. https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War&action=edit&section=59# — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pyphon (talk • contribs) 14:00, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Artillery shoots a long way. And "bombarding" can also mean aerial bombardment. Boredwhytekid (talk) 14:02, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Its a yery long way according to this map Kafr shams is the nearest place and as for aerial well the best the saaf has managed up to now is the odd air strike hardly a bombdardment ;)https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War&action=edit&section=59# — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pyphon (talk • contribs) 14:21, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Syria is a small country, Daara is a small province and the distance from Kafr Shams to Harrah town is, using the roads, 16km. Artillery doesn't use roads and it's not inside Kafr Shams, but on the outskirts. Most likely some 5/6km from the Harrah town, and for modern artillery, that distance is nothing — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.177.197.133 (talk) 15:11, 13 October 2014 (UTC) The report did say aerial bombard and one rebel killedPyphon (talk) 15:21, 13 October 2014 (UTC)pyphon https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War&action=edit&section=59#[reply]

After all these discussion no reliable source about Harra controlled by rebels has shown up. All sources (most unreliable) referes to Tell Harra the hill not the city. Therefore Harra stays at least contested. Do not invent a non existing consensus on Harra green, I do not agree.Paolowalter (talk) 19:12, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Even Iranian news says Harra is rebel held. Boredwhytekid (talk) 19:29, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
From the many videos available it is evident that any party that controls the base on the hill overlooking the town controls the town. The town is almost under the base. As well, there are videos showing rebels in the town. One amusing one shows rebels chasing a regime officer on foot, overtaking him just as he gets to his car. They very easily could have shot him long before he reached his car, but I guess they didn't want to waste their bullets. André437 (talk) 16:25, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You really believe every video you are fed, don't you. Remind me to show you the one where the rebels capture red square and chase Putin on foot too. 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 19:44, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like we have another Tasil situation here ;) I wonder if the pro-regime editors here think that keeping these towns red/contested will somehow help the Assad army on the battlefield... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.112.86.29 (talk) 15:44, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Daraa

Nawa is shown as contested but no reports of fighting in the town I suggest green with red circle also shak maskin to red what do you thinkPyphon (talk) 14:56, 13 October 2014 (UTC)pyphonhttps://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War&action=edit&section=new#[reply]

No, Nawa is according to many rebel and regime sources to be contested. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.177.197.133 (talk) 15:02, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can anyone post one of these sources of recent fighting in Nawa or Shak miskin I must of mist them thanksPyphon (talk) 15:14, 13 October 2014 (UTC(

Python Please put blank line between posts. Otherwise posts risk running into one another (on the same line), as happened here André437 (talk) 16:41, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Andre437 seeing as you asked so nicely I will try;) Pyphon (talk) 16:52, 13 October 2014 (UTC)pyphonhttps://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War&action=edit&section=60#[reply]
Another hint : please do not start a line with a space, it causes special formatting. Instead, use ":" for indenting, multiple times for more indenting. Also, if you use the "preview" button, you can see what your post looks like before it is posted :) André437 (talk) 16:33, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All maps (pro/opp and pro/gov) show Nawa divided between rebels and SAA. Shak miskin is largely controlled by SAA with a pocket on the north controlled by rebels. Also on this point there is a basic agreements bewtween various maps. Situation is stalled and th front lien i relatively quiet. No way important town are changed of the base of lack of infos Paolowalter (talk) 19:08, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm on board with Paolowalter's expressed opinion on this matter. Boredwhytekid (talk) 19:28, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, sources frmo last month showed west Nawa rebel-held and east Nawa government-held with the frontline in the city center. No reports since than that the situation changed. EkoGraf (talk) 03:32, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou guys for your thoughts but iam not convinced that they still are contested anyway if things change sources will be postedPyphon (talk) 14:09, 14 October 2014 (UTC)pyphon https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War&action=edit&section=59#[reply]

West Hama

Info from almansar about west Hama countryside http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/west-hama-road-liberated-tiger-forces-salma-verge-liberation/. Not easy to interpret: Al-Haweeja is here http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=35.523565&lon=36.372643&z=14&m=b&permpoly=5821924 (now is contested), Al-Jayid here http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=35.550943&lon=36.311703&z=15&m=b&permpoly=5821924 (red now), Al-Tamana’a here (I guess) http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=35.539630&lon=36.314964&z=15&m=b&show=/24199600/ar/%D8%AA%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%86%D8%B9%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%BA%D8%A7%D8%A8#lang=en&lat=35.539630&lon=36.314964&z=15&m=b (red now); I cannot locate Al-‘Aziziyyeh. Paolowalter (talk) 22:05, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Paolowalter,seriously stop your vandalism of the map,All agree that Al-Masdar is an unreliable source to report Government advance,and you are trying to enforce the government point-of-view on all the Syrian civil war articles.Alhanuty (talk) 22:29, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No "we" did not. You were already briefed on why Al-Masdar is reliable, I will not continue to spoon feed you. What about you and your Pro-opp, Pro-Kurd bias. Last I check, it was you who turned all of Al-Hasaka to yellow and Jisr Al-Shugor to green based on weak, biased sources, remember? Also, Al-Aziziyyeh is listed already. It is hidden under a nearby town. 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 23:18, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Masdar is not reliable. Look at Daara, or Aleppo. In Daara, hundreds of sources claimed rebels to have Tell Al-Harrah and Harrah town, they said the regime pushed the rebels back(look at the ammount of videos, pics and articles from reliable sources showing otherwise). In Aleppo, they denied Ahrar to have taken any villages near Safira, 5 days later reported the SAA taking them back(how can they take something back if they never lost in the first place according to them?). Or Deir Ez-Zor, where not a single source reports any significant clashes between SAA and ISIS, and they make it look like SAA is beating a assault on the airport everyday(when in fact the ISIS has not even attempted to storm the airport). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.59.83.14 (talk) 10:17, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Almost everything you just said is original research. Do you have a source saying the ISIS is not attacking the airport to prove Al-Masdar wrong? Also, in these articles -http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-reconaissance-drone-9-villages-liberated-southern-aleppo/- and \- http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-captures-west-handarat-farms-babinnis-ahrar-al-sham-offensive-safira-repelled/- it is very clearly stated that Ahrar did capture the villages, they did not deny it. They said the attack on Safira was repelled, which it was. One more thing, Videos and pics are not reliable sources. 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 19:41, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
1) You obviously don't know what "original research" means. How would the concept apply to this discussion ?
2) No other sources reporting (even much later) a major attack on a strategically important airport by the ISIS is a fair indication that it didn't happen.
3) Acknowledging losing villages close to a strategic asset only when succeeding in retaking them is typical of an unreliable source.
4) There was video evidence of rebels striking a major munitions depot, reportedly in the Safira area. Large secondary explosions don't lie. Much like the Israeli attack on the missile depot in Jaramana in 2012.
5) Video and photos can be reliable, depending on their nature. Obviously Hollywood type productions can be fakes, such as often produced by the ISIS. But videos with distinctive land marks, like from Tal Harra overlooking the town below, or a rebel commander doing a review of photos on the wall of the captured spy centre associated with Tal Harra, where each photo has an arabic caption with a russian caption underneath, leaves little room for doubt. It just takes intelligent analysis.
6) "Ipsit dixit" is not going to convince intelligent contributors. If you want to be taken seriously, try using plausible arguments. André437 (talk) 01:14, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

They said the regime repelled the offensive in the day the offensive was launched, when Ahrar held those villages for some 5/6 days. And SOHR, Elijah J Magnier and any other source considered reliable are not even reporting clashes around the Deir Ez-Zor Airport, so yes, Al-Masdar are making them up or making those clashes look bigger. They are claiming hundreds of IS fighters killed, which considering that the Islamic State has, according to the CIA, 31.000 fighters, losing hundreds as it is losing according to Masdar would make the Islamic State incapable of holding the many fronts it's fighting(Mare, Kobane, Mabrukah, Tell Hamis, Anbar, Sinjar). In Kobane, which is the biggest offensive as of now, they have lost 330+ members and that is being considered A LOT. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.59.83.14 (talk) 20:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You do realize that ISIS has recruitment right? They replace lost fighters. Besides, early on we assumed that ISIS only numbered around 15,000. Now we say 31,000. Who is to say that they do not number more. Also, about Deir-ez-Zor, you need a source stating that there is no action there. You cannot prove it is not happening because it is not reported. That, or you need a source stating ISIS advances. 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 21:28, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Clashes leaving HUNDREDS of deads are not being reported? You guys are joking right? Anyway, Al-Masdar is not reliable. It keeps making fake regime advances and adding THOUSANDS of casualties to opp fighters. I mean, Jobar is according to them on verge of the liberation in the last 2 months right(I believe it will fall, but as of now is not on the verge of falling, let alone 2 months ago when they claimed it was about to fall) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.59.83.14 (talk) 00:56, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All advances in Damascus, Hama, and Aleppo that were reported by Al-Masdar were completely real. As for this statement "It keeps making fake regime advances and adding THOUSANDS of casualties to opp fighters", you have yet to prove it [casualty figures are not reliable from any side, as they are almost always unverifiable]. Also, Do you have an article from them that is 2 months old that says, word for word, that Jobar is on the edge of liberation? The reason no one reports the Deir-Ez-Zor clashes is because they are defensive, neither side is gaining ground. 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 03:41, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Al Huwayjah

according to sohr clashes between saa and isis in huwayjah. Huwayjah should contested source: http://syriahr.com/index.php?option=com_news&nid=25018&Itemid=2&task=displaynews#.VD2EWvmsWQl location: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=tr&lat=35.454308&lon=40.034952&z=14&m=bHwinsp (talk) 20:22, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done Boredwhytekid (talk) 14:03, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kafr Shams, Darraa

Loyal sources reporting SAA attacks on Kafr Shams village in Darraa.

Also here pro-opposition map show Kafr Shams is rebel-held.

83.110.142.181 (talk) 16:02, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Are any other sources available for this specific request? We currently have Kafr Shams marked SAA held with fighting around the town. Peto Lucem is pro-gov't, but it's still just a twitter source, so you're going to encounter heavy opposition to this proposal unless neutral or pro-gov't mainstream media confirmation is forthcoming. Boredwhytekid (talk) 16:14, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That, and the source said the Kafr Shams area, not the town. 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:21ED:77A7:3E7F:8550 (talk) 17:00, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kobane

Would be interesting to upgrade the map with a Kobane city map (like the Damascus and Aleppo city maps). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.230.138.234 (talk) 22:19, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I saw this earlier by someone who i assume is Pro-ISIS http://i.imgur.com/iQAoa42.jpg


Change Menazê to contested? ANHA reporting YPG attacks ISIL in Menazê village west of Kobane.


Change Kobani to Kurdish control based on the following report: http://rudaw.net/english/middleeast/syria/17102014 Although Rudaw is Kurdish but it has proved to be reliable and the Wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Koban%C3%AE has already taken the report as valid. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.98.26.163 (talk) 19:19, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly we do not use pro Kurdish sources to display success Kurdish forces. And secondly Al Jazeera reported that ISIS by still hold around a third of the town.Al Jazeera Also another reliable source Reuters confirms that IS still present in the town Kobane.Reuters Hanibal911 (talk) 19:32, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rudaw is not a credible source and has been caught lying time and again. http://syriahr.com/en/2014/10/isis-takes-over-tal-shaer-and-advances-in-the-city-of-ein-al-arabkobane/ Tall Shair has fallen.Tgoll774 (talk) 14:29, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Al Jazeera Repport YPG took Tall Shair back again after heavy bombardment ( video and BBC news, video ) from coalition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rhocagil (talk • contribs) 15:03, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

al-Monitor summarizes events in the south

Article Boredwhytekid (talk) 12:58, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it reports on SAA units defeated at al-Harra and the fall of the very strategic fortified hill at that location, and islamist-rebel push to open route between Daraa and Quneitra

Sure they need to keep up with the snackbar losses by the hundreds in Jobar Aleppo to propaganda it and blame others before most of them defect to IS — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.132.122.57 (talk) 22:12, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also Al-monitor reported yesterday, although cannot locate now, that wadi daif SAA base near Marrat al-Nu'man has either fallen or is being battled over right now with rebels penetrating the base:

Also more on Qalamoun: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/security/2014/10/syria-zabadani-supply-outlet-route.html http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/security/2014/10/syria-jabhat-al-nusra-attack-same-as-lebanon-brital-battle.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.27.231 (talk) 18:14, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

yikes.... looking in Daraa at Nawa if the SAA doesn't take the city it will probably mean the province is lost considering the 5 units stationed around the city. If they are all put on the run the I can see the rebels moving to cut government forces in two and surround the remaining forces. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tierbook (talk • contribs) 04:11, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Latakia villages and Al-Masdar

i just want to inform the editors that editor Paolowalter used the Pro-government Source Al-Masdar to change some villages in Latakia to government control,and according to the consensus established we don't use government sources to show government advance,so i proposed to return the status of those as they where before they were changed using Al-Masdar. Alhanuty (talk) 03:18, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We did NOT establish a consensus. Do not lie to the editors. I already told you about Al-Masdar and its credibility. I propose that if you continue to lie to try and get your way that you be banned. 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 19:41, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Pro opposition map confirmed that regime forces on 1 October captured the village Ghunaymiyah and area near this village here and some areas near the city Salma. But as long as we do not have independent confirmation that the army captured the village Al Hawr. Hanibal911 (talk) 07:11, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
So if we not have a confirmation from a reliable source that army captured the village of Al Hawr we will have to put this village again to under rebel control. Hanibal911 (talk) 07:36, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Editors need to agree on a pro-gov source that can be agreed upon as reliable to balance the pro-op source of sohr . This needs to take into account that sometimes they get it wrong as does sohr but they must show rebel gains as well as saa gains .Pyphon (talk) 14:27, 17 October 2014 (UTC)pyhponhttps://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War&action=edit&section=51#[reply]

Pyphon, please don't start a line with a space. Doing so suppresses formatting, causing the whole paragraph to be on one line, so (in this case) most of your paragraph was not visible. (fixed now) ... To indent, use ":", multiple times for more indenting. It would be a good idea to use the "preview" button to see how your post will look. (I always do that, and I have written documentation on Mediawiki formatting.)
Note that the editors here agreed a long time ago that SOHR was a neutral source, not pro-opposition in its' reporting. This is admittedly rare for a source which obviously would prefer Assad gone, but the focus of SOHR is against human rights abuses, which are criticized whoever does them. Evidently the regime does a lot more abuses, as is noted by the UN.
Just yesterday (thursday 16 oct) the UN secretary general Ban Ki-Moon declared that "Syrian civilians are in imminent threat from the regime of Bashar al-Assad". More details here.

Really? then suck your NEUTRAL SOHR http://syriahr.com/en/2014/10/the-regime-army-could-seize-a-village-and-a-cement-plant-in-aleppo/ "Saa took control of Jbayleh and the cement plant in north of the Central Prison of Aleppo" neutral idiot sohr is the biggest opposition bias cutting off snackbar deaths by counting them as civilians and blaming Assad for civilians dying in government controlled ares by shelling of the beheaders — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.132.122.57 (talk) 17:12, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As for sources favouring the Assad regime that are reliable, it is doubtful that any group favouring a regime with Assad's track record of horrific human rights abuses would be reliable. That would be like trusting pro-Daesh/ISIS sources, which haven't (at least yet) come close to matching Assad's abuses. André437 (talk) 22:45, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Again, your pro-rebel bias blinds you. Your statement of the Syrian government committed more atrocities than ISIS is not supported by your linked source. Ban said that Assad was also a risk, not more so than ISIS. This "As for sources favouring the Assad regime that are reliable, it is doubtful that any group favouring a regime with Assad's track record of horrific human rights abuses would be reliable. That would be like trusting pro-Daesh/ISIS sources, which haven't (at least yet) come close to matching Assad's abuses." is nothing more than Original research which is prohibited on Wikipedia. Good job, you are 0 for 3 now in violating Wikipedia policy 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 03:02, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

this map is about who controls cities and towns not about human rights or inflated casualty figures so if a source weather it be pro-op or pro-gov show both gains and loss it should be regarded as reliablePyphon (talk) 09:33, 18 October 2014 (UTC)python[reply]

Andre sohr was not agreed as NEUTRAL but as reliable because he posted saa gains as well as rebel he is about as neutral as you arePyphon (talk) 09:42, 18 October 2014 (UTC)pyhpon[reply]

Al Masdar is a very reliable source...

@Pyphon : could you kindly explain how "neutral" in the context of reporting differs from "reliable because he posted saa gains as well as rebel" ? I'm sure we would all like to understand your logic.
Some sources still show bias in reporting despite sometimes showing opposition gains or sometimes showing regime gains. SOHR has consistently showed gains/losses from both sides. Note that since rebel gains tend to be under-reported (for various reasons), other unbiased sources (in reporting) are often called pro-rebel. André437 (talk) 07:28, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@IP6 (you really should get an account) : again you are confused about the concept of "original research", and where it applies. My statement comparing daesh/ISIS and Assad regime atrocities is based on a well known fact of the very high number of regime atrocities (you do remember the unanimous UN security council vote censoring the Assad regime for that ?), as well as the relatively small - but dramatic - number of daesh atrocities. That was only mentioned in the context of discussing the reliability of sources. You are also very confused about when sources are needed.
BTW, although any normal human being relatively aware of the facts would prefer that the Assad regime looses power, that does not in itself make me biased in my analysis of the situation. Any more than the UN, which confirms the massive Assad regime atrocities. Having successfully alienated the vast majority of the Syrian population with its' atrocities (since 1971), it shouldn't be surprising that rebel opposition is a significant threat to the regime, despite massive foreign support for the regime. Your pro-regime bias is evident, whether intended or not. André437 (talk) 07:28, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deir Ezzor

SAA forces advancing in Deir Ezzor, capturing a significant portion of Saqer Island. Corroborated by an al-Manar TV report: https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2sVtW9sTMeQ. Using Peto Lucem's map for this would be a helpful guideline: https://twitter.com/PetoLucem/status/522485278800617472 Nhauer (talk) 17:35, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly in Deir Ezzor but what about the areas to the north between the city and Hasakah like Sab'a? Most maps i've seen have them belonging to ISIS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tierbook (talk • contribs) 00:11, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Saqer island to contested http://www.albawaba.com/news/is-assad-syria-612993

Al Manar is the TV station of Hezbollah...find a neutral or pro-opp source for this change. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.112.86.29 (talk) 16:26, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hasakah region

Why change 13 villages northeast of Hasakah to ISIS control without providing any source what so ever? Please provide source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rhocagil (talk • contribs) 18:11, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's a logical move by ISIS really, if they can take that city they would cut the Kurds into 3 small areas. They probably wouldn't even need to worry about strikes from the US either as there are SAA troops in the city fighting as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tierbook (talk • contribs) 21:52, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Locations should not be changed without providing a supporting article. Ideally, it should be posted to the appropriate table before being posted to the map (as was the initial practice). André437 (talk) 12:01, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]


This article Almasdar News says YPG retreated from 4 villages, not close to the 13 that has been changed. Change back or provide source!

ISIS has recaptured Tal Brak and its region back in May 2014,but no one changed the villages near it,and here are the sources http://aranews.net/2014/09/islamic-state-militants-attack-syrias-qamishli-casualties-reported/ http://aranews.net/2014/06/we-are-all-forced-into-the-battlefield-to-protect-our-families-ypg-official/

Also,another report confirmed that ISIS was conducting arrests in its Tal Brak controlled area via http://aranews.net/2014/10/kurdish-village-evacuated-amid-attacks-militants-syrias-hasakah/

Also another report confirmed clashes north of Tal Brak Area in Tal Hamidiya and Finally the villages that ISIS has captured,Khirbat Urta and Girke kere,lie way north of the area and on the road between Qamishli and Hasakah,and ISIS was able to seize a village back in July between Hasakah city and Qamishli city via ISW.Alhanuty (talk) 16:36, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like ISIS is heading towards to the main border town over there http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/ndf-captures-3-villages-near-qamishli-ypg-withdraws-tal-harmouz/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tierbook (talk • contribs) 13:03, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pro opposition source ARA News reported that U.S.-led coalition’s fighter jets bombed IS-held locations in the town of al-Arisha in the southern countryside of Hasakah and IS-held oil wells in the Kabiba area (east of al-Arisha) Meanwhile, the coalition’s warplanes bombed IS-held sites in the town of al-Hol at the border with Iraq, targeting the charity hospital of al-Rahma, which was used by IS militants as a base.Ara News Hanibal911 (talk) 14:48, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is anybody able to locate the towns cited in the last masdar-article? I could only find Khirbet Awarti and Karaki Kree. Also Kabiba and al-Arisha seem not to be on the map... Yazid1 (talk) 13:06, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why again all this black dots over Hasakah region without providing source for it!?Rhocagil (talk) 21:36, 24 October 2014 (UTC) Source were provided check the history.Alhanuty (talk) 01:00, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

SAA offensive north of Aleppo

The syrian army has captured the village Al-Jbayleh (Jbeileh) , the cement plant and the Aleppo glas factory. Also add the Babinnis on the map!!

http://syriahr.com/en/2014/10/the-regime-army-could-seize-a-village-and-a-cement-plant-in-aleppo/ http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/battle-map-saa-captures-many-areas-aleppo/#prettyPhoto https://twitter.com/PetoLucem/status/523523707793588225 (map) http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=36.308209&lon=37.238417&z=14&m=b&show=/27503028/Jbeileh&search=Aleppo (location of Jbeileh) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:1810:2808:6100:4C2:4BAA:CC1B:2DBD (talk) 11:08, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kinana Allouche with SAA near the glass factory, confirmation pictures.

https://twitter.com/2Rook14/status/523844869526016000 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.132.122.57 (talk) 14:52, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]


SAA capturing al Muslimiyah. https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=SLshfIp111g west of the infantry school https://twitter.com/PetoLucem/status/523523707793588225/photo/1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Totholio (talk • contribs) 16:30, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

SOHR reported that clashes continued between regime troops backed by allies against the rebels in Hendarat area and Saifat northwest of the central prison of Aleppo, and in al-Hurra area near al-Maslamia village, reports of advances for regime forces in the area.source Hanibal911 (talk) 13:41, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]


As far as ISIS goes in Aleppo I feel that this map from @deSyracuse is rather unbiased http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/fr/map/desyracuse-syria-iraq-20-october-2014_19652#12/36.0775/37.3971 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tierbook (talk • contribs) 21:12, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Press TV reports that Mazra’at al-Halabi area and Madafeh Hill are under SAA control now. LINK --94.102.233.91 (talk) 08:52, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nassib border.

What's the name of the red dot located north of Nasseb ? I think Mayadin should go contested, according to SOHR, 2, 3 , amateur video, not as a source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DuckZz (talk • contribs) 14:00, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are wrong! It is a city Nassib which is located to the north of Nassib border crossing. Hanibal911 (talk) 14:20, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well then you should add Mayadin to the map, it's big enough, as this area has a bigger empty white spot.DuckZz (talk) 14:32, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This city present on a map the Battle of Daraa City. We just need ask to editor which commits update on this map that he would marked this city as contested. Hanibal911 (talk) 15:10, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Islamic fighters targeted regime bastions in al-Jomrok area near of the Jordanian border and taken control the checkpoints of al-Falahin gas station, al-Jeser and al-Ma'sara near the town Umm al-Mayaden .SOHR Hanibal911 (talk) 11:47, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The city Nassib under control by rebels.Al Jazeera Hanibal911 (talk) 17:50, 21 October 2014 (U Note , al Jazeeras report is from sohr which did not state that Nasab is rebel held . only that there was a bombardmentPyphon (talk) 08:29, 22 October 2014 (UTC)pyphon[reply]

Hanibal you are wrong ! back to red or contested https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War&action=edit&section=28# — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pyphon (talk • contribs) 08:17, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Al Khtauniyah

This is the name of the black dot town that is located near Al Hawl. https://www.google.com/maps/place/Al+Khatuniyah%D8%8C+Syria%E2%80%AD/@36.4227498,41.2223553,2507m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m2!3m1!1s0x154b7ee98f2357e5:0x884f61b7b30c66b0 Lindi29 (talk) 14:28, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Al Halabi farm & Tal Al-Mazafah

these areas near Handarat village in the north of Aleppo are under the control of SAA www.almayadeen.netMZarif (talk) 16:51, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Syrian troops begin contr-offensive in Quneitra province?

SOHR reported about clashes between a Syrian army backed by NDF against Islamic battalions and Jabhat al-Nusra around villages al-Samadania and al-Hamedia in attempt the army to regain control in this area also some reports says about of reinforcements for regime forces in the area.source Hanibal911 (talk) 10:18, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe, they tried the same in Deir al-Abas two weeks ago. Fighting has been raging near Madinat al Baath for weeks. Let's wait and see if this changes the frontlines... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.31.204.195 (talk) 10:59, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying with absolute certainty that this a counteroffensive I just trying to find data on the situation in this area. I have said many times that it would be better before editing the map try collect more data. Severe clashes occur between the Syrian Army and fighters of Islamic battalions in the town al-Hamedia of al-Qunaitera countryside, along with artillery bombardments target locations of the battalions.Documents.sy Hanibal911 (talk) 11:22, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

From http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-captures-al-samdaniyya-quneitra-rebels-capture-umm-mayaazan-daraa/ Al-Samdaniyya is taken by SAA and Al-Hamidiyya contested. (Note that the source in the same post announces an advance of the rebels)Paolowalter (talk) 20:24, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Enter Alhaunty, who will now regurgitate his defunct argument about how the editor's stance makes the source "unreliable", yet will ignore SOHR. 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:A199:9BF4:AC4E:F46F (talk) 21:13, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

SOHR is widely considered reliable by international media, Al-Masdar is not. But hey, I totally agree in changing Al-Samdaniyya and Al-Hamidiyya to contested. Since Quneitra is really small and the distance between those villages in only some dozens meters, changing them to contested is very fair. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.179.159.112 (talk) 21:37, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The criteria we use is record of accuracy, so I am told. If what the source report actually happens, it is reliable, if not, then unreliable. So far, almost every report by Al-Masdar has proven to be accurate, so they are reliable. 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:A199:9BF4:AC4E:F46F (talk) 22:05, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Masdar is unreliable and the reasons were explained,why.Alhanuty (talk) 23:25, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and your reason is defunct because of SOHR, so Al-Masdar is reliable. See how logic works now? 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:6010:12AC:15EE:B912 (talk) 00:12, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry to disappoint you but Al Masdar too biased source and clashes in the town al-Hamidiyah source and near or around Samdaniyah SOHR SOHR Hanibal911 (talk) 10:32, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And to avoid accusations that the Syrian Documents the source which I used the pro government source. I give evidence that it is not so, and furthermore, this opposition source. Firstly this source for their articles uses only the rebel video from YouTube.herehere Secondly page of this source in Twitter here or in Facebook here also clearly this source not pro government. Hanibal911 (talk) 10:53, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Team, keep up the great stuff!

The last link of the section below leads to previous Jan-Jul 2014 timeline.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War#Damascus

Can you replace it with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Syrian_Civil_War_%28August_2014%E2%80%93present%29 which includes the current and recent atmosphere.

Thanks in advance.

78.170.183.172 (talk) 08:54, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quneitra City

Quneitra city is regime held says the official Syrian Revolution page: https://www.facebook.com/Syrian.Revolution/photos/a.10150397575815727.619133.420796315726/10154916785610727/?type=1 The caption is quite clear: Quneitra City to red. ChrissCh94 (talk) 11:48, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We have stated neutral sources that Quneitra is rebel held. Including an Al-Jazeera video report from the region itself. So, it stays green. This page is a minor source, not as well documented as the SOHR. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.31.204.195 (talk) 14:03, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The page has 900k likes and SOHR states reports from activists such as those running that page. Video reports cannot be taken into consideration especially not from pro-opp sources to portray pro-opp gains. But when a pro-opp source states something related to pro-regime gain we take it into consideration Your argument is invalid. ChrissCh94 (talk) 14:38, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It would also make perfect sense given the recent failed regime attack on Hamidiyah: they want to lift the siege off Quneitra city ChrissCh94 (talk) 15:50, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ChrissCh94, your article says that after 40 shabiha were killed (in 2 villages in the province), the others (it doesn't say how many) fled to a part of the centre of the town of Quneitra. That doesn't mean they control the town; rather it indicates that they are trying to hide in the town. Probably there were few if any rebel forces in the town since it was behind the front lines. So the most you could say is that the town of Quneitra has become contested, but I would favour waiting for more info. André437 (talk) 04:18, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But in an earlier post the same page said that they had fend off an attack from many directions on Hamidiyah and I doubt that fleeing regime forces penetrated the center of a rebel-held-city such as Quneitra without resistance.. My vote goes to either contested or red it makes perfect sense. Other thoughts? ChrissCh94 (talk) 14:09, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My thoughts are you should go to sleep and stop trying to make dubious and silly changes to a town far behind rebel lines because some NDF put on civilian clothes and went into hiding there. It stays green. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.112.86.39 (talk) 13:38, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Morek

SOHR reported that the Army has taken wide areas of the town(fighting only in the north of the town) which probably means that the rebels have been pushed out to the outskirts given the experience when SOHR reported on capture of other towns [1].Daki122 (talk) 15:03, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

More info from http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/breaking-morek-syrian-arab-army-fire-control/ Some skirmish still in the outskirt. Also Al-Lataminah is contested.Paolowalter (talk) 15:18, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Opposition activits confirm the capture of Mork. https://twitter.com/archicivilians/status/525280236011655168. Also Al-lataminah to contested.

morek has just been liberated from islamists Jumada (talk) 15:25, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Regime troops and their militia allies took back total control of Morek in the north of Hama countryside, after fierce battles that have raged" since Wednesday night. The Daily Star Hanibal911 (talk) 18:43, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Latmin taken by SAA according to http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/hama-battle-map-update-syrian-army-captures-tal-itmeen/.Paolowalter (talk) 20:14, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But before edit it on map us need confirmation from more reliable source because Al Masdar too biased. Hanibal911 (talk) 20:32, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Reliable sources are based on their record of reliability, not their bias. So far, Al-Masdar has been right about almost everything it has reported. Still, I am willing to wait for more sources. 2602:30A:C01B:89F0:4C1F:A767:8E14:8CED (talk) 22:07, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Peto Lucem says that SAA captured Latmin. He is pro-Government but has a record of reliability and sometimes reports rebels advances. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.101.181.174 (talk) 23:19, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

From pro-opp https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByQl9HGZDeRXYnp3QWpLTFl6Nmc/view Lahaya red and Latmin contested. It matches Peto Lucem's map. Paolowalter (talk) 15:37, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please, notice, that there are three objects on the map named Lahaya: "dot red" at line 858, "abm-red" at line 861, and another "dot red" at line 954. Latter is obviously excessive. 87.117.178.100 (talk) 17:15, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ayn al-Arab”Kobane”

IS fighters have taken over Tal Shaer to the west of city Ein al-Arab”Kobane”, what made it able to besiege the city from 3 sides from the east, south and west.SOHR

Al Jazeera Repport YPG took Tall Shair back again after heavy bombardment ( video and BBC news, video ) from coalition.Rhocagil (talk) 15:06, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of YPG retaking the hill, and the picture posted to support that assertion is a photoshop. Livefeed shows the Hill still in IS hands.Tgoll774 (talk) 11:49, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Evidently you didn't read the article, which includes these 2 sentences : "The hill to the west of the town was retaken overnight on Thursday with the help of an air attack, said Al Jazeera's Bernard Smith, reporting from the Turkey-Syria border. Smith said the hill had been lost to the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) group on October 22, but was retaken in clashes overnight". This was also reported on some twitter posts, with photos. One report showed a series of photos of a huge bomb exploding on the hill, during Daesh/ISIS occupation. The sort of bomb regularly dropped by coalition forces. Note that many reports have shown changing control of this hill during the last few weeks.
As far as possible photoshop photos, that is something difficult to detect, but even if so, that is often done by major news medias to compensate a lack of photos of a particular event. André437 (talk) 20:35, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kanaker

Al Jazeera report saying this town under siege by the Syrian army and rebels are close to lift the siege. Well we know that's not going to happen any soon but the point is, this town is rebel held and surrounded by Hills, which may explain why the Army can't just enter that area. But maybe I'm just WRONG ... discuss .DuckZz (talk) 21:07, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Source said that city Kanaker which surrounded by hills and military barracks belonging the Syrian troops and now increased the number of army fortifications after armed opposition forces are move close to this town. But source not said that rebels are in this town.Al Jazeera report Also pro opposition map clear show that the city Kanaker under control by army.here Hanibal911 (talk) 22:03, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Remove green circles around Yabround and Al-Jebbah

This from august 2014 showing insurgents very far Away from this place https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bu6MGKyIEAA46Ji.jpg:large

--Pototo1 (talk) 01:31, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn't there a pretty major attack in that area just a few weeks ago? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tierbook (talk • contribs) 02:20, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please leave one blank line between posts to avoid them running into each other (now fixed) -- also use the preview button, to ensure your post is displayed readably. Thanks André437 (talk) 04:05, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Andre437 I have followed your advice to avoid post running into each other and previewed but when I save they still do it sometimesPyphon (talk) 07:52, 24 October 2014 (UTC)pyphon[reply]

I see, somehow many spaces are preceding many of your posts (as well of those of some others). Note that spaces may make it appear that you have left a blank line, rather than a line starting with many spaces. Try positioning your cursor at the end of the previous post and pushing return twice before starting your post. (this one fixed) André437 (talk) 20:03, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No of green circle near the city Yabroud green circle located near city Ras al Mara. Hanibal911 (talk) 07:59, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tall Qarah

This town north of the Aleppo map has a red circle around it. Source for this? I've seen nothing to suggest fighting that far north and it seems strange considering the army still hasn't taken the infantry school. Nhauer (talk) 16:40, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]


It is a bug or something. Not even biased sources reported it. SAA launched an offensive in south Aleppo, and they wouldn't go that far before establishing a proper front near Handarat — Preceding unsigned comment added by Totholio (talk • contribs) 16:52, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply] 

                                                                                                      This was a report from SANA of fight near Tal Qarah which is the next major town north of Muslimeyya but it cant be used as Sana is unreliablePyphon (talk) 11:17, 25 October 2014 (UTC)pyphon[reply]

Source: http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2014/Oct-24/275222-syrian-government-forces-shell-rebel-areas-kill-9.ashx#axzz3GfyDKRH8Ariskar (talk) 23:14, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 25 October 2014

I think kfar nubrl should be changed from contested to green a simple search on the web and you'll find that kfar nubel was one of the towns where the Syrian coalation handed fake vaccine and several childrens died so it must be rebel held Thank you. 212.36.207.3 (talk) 12:29, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is already marked as green and rebel held. ChrissCh94 (talk) 13:36, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nawa

Any source showing the Syrian army recapturing "brigade 61 base" west of Nawa ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.175.75.56 (talk) 18:11, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]


I just found this map https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B0zTxQTCEAASn8Q.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tierbook (talk • contribs) 18:14, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Being the noob I am i shall just link the twitter account this stuff is on https://twitter.com/deSyracuse — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tierbook (talk • contribs) 18:17, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone with a neutral source?

Hasakah Kurds and ISIL

I see more towns turned black every day. Towns north of Hasakah city, north of Tell Brak and towards Ras al-Ayn crossing. No discussion, nu sources given. A major offensive of ISIL like that would raise media attention, and airstrikes. So, why are they black? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.31.204.195 (talk) 15:41, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Battalion 559 in Eastern Qalamoun

I know it might be an outdated subject but my (and our) goal is an accurate map. I have found many pro-opp sources stating that rebels retreated from the warehouses after looting them and so defending empty warehouses was useless. Pro-opp sources:

http://stepagency-sy.net/%D8%B1%D9%8A%D9%81-%D8%AF%D9%85%D8%B4%D9%82-%D8%A7%D9%82%D8%AA%D8%AD%D8%A7%D9%85-%D9%85%D8%B3%D8%AA%D9%88%D8%AF%D8%B9-%D8%AF%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%AA-559-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%A8/

http://eldorar.com/node/48440

https://www.aksalser.com/?page=view_news&id=1bf19643b8e23f7cc01c87d035bfee97

http://justpaste.it/islamicfront559

http://www.syrianarmyfree.com/vb/archive/index.php/t-68912.html

So it might be a bit late but I suggest turning back the empty 559 Battalion back to red. ChrissCh94 (talk) 22:58, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It has always struck me as completely irrational that the rebels would have maintained a presence at these bases as they are basically worthless. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.101.181.174 (talk) 00:25, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So we need marked this base again under control by army. Hanibal911 (talk) 05:53, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Islamic front members are using this base as a checkpoint, it's empty but obviously not Government held. Either remove it or, but that wouldn't be a smart move as there is a noticeable number of rebels in this desert area. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DuckZz (talk • contribs) 08:57, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Provide a source that the regime re-took this area please, the days of reverting to red based on outdated sources are over.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Control_of_cities_during_the_Syrian_civil_war&oldid=631302199"