Talk:Control of cities during the Syrian civil war/Archive 48

This is an archive of past discussions about Control of cities during the Syrian civil war. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 45

Archive 46

Archive 47

→

YPG advances against ISIS in Hasakah

Pro opposition source said that that YPG announced they take control the village of Tel Majdala in the western countryside of Hasakah, after heavy clashes with the Islamic State.ARA News video report from ARA News here Also pro Kurdish source reported that the clashes, which started yesterday in the village of Salihiye to the west of Haseke, are reportedly still continuing.ANF News Hanibal911 (talk) 13:15, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

So the village of Tal Majdal goes yellow or red-yellow? Don't think it can go red-yellow given how the source used to make the edit like that blatantly backtracked, specifically saying "YPG attack":

https://twitter.com/QHTANIYEH1/status/596782195009814528

About Salihiya, does anyone knwo hwere it is located to put the contested dot?

186.119.58.15 (talk) 14:50, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

YPG sources have during this recent operation talked about two villages named Salihiya:

One west of Hasaka: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=36.506368&lon=40.393789&z=18&m=b

The other west of Tal Tamer: http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=36.601608&lon=40.093719&z=18&m=b Roboskiye (talk) 15:41, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

I turned again Tal Majdal red-yellow as agreed few days ago. If there are reliable news that it should go yellow, we can change. (Who turned it black?)Paolowalter (talk) 17:51, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal turned it black because yesterday reliable mapmaker CCNews/Cetin had it marked black in his map and IS had announced the recapture of the town while YPG retracted and said that it was contested -you can see in the Tal Tamr section above-, today YPG has again claimed it's captured and posted footage with no indication that SAA participated aside from the @QHTANIYEH1 guy who has previously claimed that both FSA and Hezbollah are present at Rasulain/Serekaniye countryside.

190.67.234.251 (talk) 18:28, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Kurdish source reported that YPG/YPJ/MFS forces have taken control over the International highway between Cizîre and Aleppo, 35 km west of Tal Tamir.Cahida Dêrsim Hanibal911 (talk) 20:29, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Also pro-IS source has claimed to take over Al Rawiya near Tal Khanzir so it should go contested? https://twitter.com/mediaactivst37/status/597504062037295105 190.67.234.251 (talk) 21:04, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Kurdish source claims YPG-YPJ captured Salihiyah west of Hasaka: https://twitter.com/curdistani/status/597519410493001728

SOHR confirms advancement for YPG in the area:

http://www.syriahr.com/2015/05/اشتباكات-عنيفة-وانفجارات-في-عدة-مناطق/

190.67.234.251 (talk) 23:43, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Pro government source also reported that YPG captured vilage of Salihiyah.here Hanibal911 (talk) 07:15, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Kurdish source reported that the Highway M4 and village of Al Salihiyah under control by YPG/YPJ.Cizire Canton News Hanibal911 (talk) 13:36, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 since when did we start using pro-kurdish and pro-opp sources in favor for kurds??? There are like 3 or 4 kurd editors who are vandalizing the map beacasue they are editing with pro-kurd sources??.Lindi29 (talk) 17:23, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Lindi29 I always was opposes such actions but some editors ignored the rules of editing map. We can use this sources if they data confirmed reliable sources or pro-ISIS in clashes against ISIS or pro opposition in clashes against rebels/JAN and pro government in clashes against Syrian troops. Hanibal911 (talk) 17:34, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 Not the first time that they are vandalizing the map,they should explain why are they editing with pro-kurd and pro-opp source to show kurds advances,if not then they should be warned or banned.Lindi29 (talk) 17:37, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Pro-oppo sources like SOHR or Qasion News are in no way pro-kurdish and I don't see why their use should be banned regarding kurdish gains which is what has been done recently, at Kobane? Maybe, but at Hasakah province where they have truces with SAA and no collaboration with rebel groups I don't see how their reports would be biased, if we ban the use of oppo sources then we would have to ban the use of govt sources (Leith Fadel reports YPG gains in a possitive light) and then only highly propagandistic (even moreso than sources from all the other parties, look at how they've falsely claimed 70% of Kweires like a week ago) IS sources would remain.

Also it would be good if you refrained from accusing others of vandalism without justification as that's clearly against Wikipedia guidelines: wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Vandalism , here are SOHR reports that confirm YPG advances: http://www.syriahr.com/2015/05/استمرار-الاشتباكات-في-ريف-تل-تمر-وقذائ/http://www.syriahr.com/2015/05/أكثر-من-43-جثة-لعناصر-تنظيم-الدولة-الإسل/

190.67.234.251 (talk) 17:58, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Hawarnews reports more villages taken over by YPG in recent hours: Tel Tal, Buwayda, Mushayrafa, Izam, Ashra, Khanat etc all of which located west of city of Hasaka:

http://hawarnews.com/%D8%AA%D8%AD%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%B1-4-%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%89-%D9%85%D9%86-%D9%85%D8%B1%D8%AA%D8%B2%D9%82%D8%A9-%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%B9%D8%B4/

http://hawarnews.com/%D8%AA%D8%AD%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%B1-%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%B9%D8%B4%D8%B1%D8%A9/ :http://hawarnews.com/%D8%AA%D9%85-%D8%AA%D8%AD%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%B1-%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%AE%D8%A7%D9%86%D8%A7%D8%AA/ Roboskiye (talk) 17:55, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Roboskiye YPG and FSA are fightning Isis together?? Am I wrong ?? Haranews is a pro-kurd and pro-opp source.SOHR doesn't mention any captured territory only fightning in that area.Lindi29 (talk) 21:53, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Jabhat al Nusra

How many times are you gonna do this? This is the third time I bring this to the discussion, after User:DuckZz and others fail to provide any evidence to support their claims that Nusra is all over the place. I am not going to repeat myself a third time, please undo your revert or I shall take this up to the administration. It is not *my* fault you lose interest in the topic quickly and move on, just don't monopolize the changes when you are not willing to prove your way. NightShadeAEB (talk) 11:01, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

For those interested, here are the previous discussions:

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War/Archive_46#Jabhat_al_Nusra

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:Cities_and_towns_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War/Archive_47#Jabhat_al_Nusra_control

NightShadeAEB (talk) 11:05, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

NightShadeAEB It's no my fault because you don't want to understand the rules. You say "Ok, i want to change this town becasue JAN is either not there or has not the upper hand", but then you change dozens of villages if favor for JAN where you change it from lime to grey or grey-lime .... doesn't make any sense right ? You have a request ? No problem, post the specific village/town here and we can disquss about that, but not dozens at the same time, you can see the previous disqussing were unreadable due to different topics at the same sections. DuckZz (talk) 11:21, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

By your own rules you do not have any proofs to keep them this way. I refuted Hannibal's methodology in discussion one, it is not my fault you are not prepared to read. I provided sources, and conducted a close reading on sources provided by Hannibal. Listen, you either involve in the discussion, or you don't involve in the reverts. There are no three ways around this. And why should I post one or two villages at a time? That's called spam. I have an issue, which is all related, and I'm tackling it. If you can't multi-task, please leave the reverts to someone who can, thank you. Again, I'm asking you to please undo your own revert, or I shall contact an admin about this. I can hardly be held accountable for someone refusing to read and engage what I post. NightShadeAEB (talk) 11:27, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

NightShadeAEB I have read the discussion again. As for me, you are free to change Mar'e and Marat Numan to joint control. DuckZz (talk) 12:14, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. What about Binnish and Ram Hamdan? Ram Hamdan was the site of the senior Ahrar al Sham meeting where all its leaders were assassinated, where one of the leaders was himself a native of Ram Hamdan. The reliance on PetoLucem's randomized maps for making Ram Hamdan a Nusra stronghold and Binnish a green stronghold is off, since there's no indication PetoLucem is even remotely accurate with his depictions on which group is where. However, since Ram Hamdan is next to other Nusra strongholds, I'd settle for keeping it joint control. As for Binnish, it was always a Nusra stronghold, and with the presence of Ahrar al Sham, Faylaq al Sham and Jaysh al Islam, should at least be joint control. Recently Nusra killed an Ahrar judge back in January, and this article says that Binnish has a "main presence" of Ahrar al Sham and Jabhat al Nusra both. [1] Another article lists Binnish as having once been the capital of Jabhat al Nusra before ISIS supplanted it. [2] Both papers are pro-rebel, but not necessarily pro-Nusra (in fact, likely hostile to Nusra, especially the Saudi owned Awsat). NightShadeAEB (talk) 15:33, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

South and east of Tall Brak

The situation of villages to the south and east of Tal Brak has many times been discussed. Numerous pro-ISIS sources confirm that YPG hold those villages, including, Rajm Tufayhi, Qobur Fazil as far south as Tal Saman and Um Ghadir. Just google these names to find out how pro-ISIS sources complain of how badly YPG treates poor villagers in those villages! This edit is very unconstructive, siting an amateur map, itself based on various versions of this wikimap!! Please be kind and revert it. Roboskiye (talk) 17:41, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Roboskiye What sources confirmed that those villages under control by YPG. Because good Kurdish source which timely make update on map. He used data from many pro Kurdish sources and some other sources. Also some other pro Kurdish sources also showed that area where located these villages for now under control of ISIS.here here here Hanibal911 (talk) 19:18, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

As if my edit was not sourced. But in any case you come usually with various amateur versions of this wikimap, often outdated, ignoring all other sources provided. Roboskiye (talk) 15:43, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Northern Aleppo Villages

Northern Aleppo Villages (Shehba, Hasin, Hassiye, Hasacik, Hoz) was captured by Jebhetu'sh Shamiiye. ISIL expelled from these villages. (Source: AA Agency, Turkey): http://www.aa.com.tr/tr/manset/508305--25-hizbullah-militani-olduruldu 212.174.38.3 (talk) 07:11, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

This data from Hüseyin Nasır from the one of the commanders rebels. Thus they need to be confirmed from other sources. Hanibal911 (talk) 07:39, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Here data from another pro opposition source said that the rebels (Levant front) allegedly captured and recaptured today 5 ISIS held villages(Al Ghuz, Haseini, Hassajir, Sab Shahba, Al Hasia) in north of Aleppo, clashes ongoing.here Hanibal911 (talk) 07:56, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

SOHR reported about clashes between rebels/Al-Nusra against Islamic State in the vicinity of Tel Mald village near city of Mare` and Dam Shahba and confirmed information on the progress of the rebels/Al-Nusra in bridging Shahba area.SOHR So that probably this is true that rebels/JAN advance in this area and take some villages. Hanibal911 (talk) 08:32, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Done I marked village of Al Ghuz as under control by rebels but four from these five villages long time marked as under control of rebels. Hanibal911 (talk) 09:22, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Pro opposition source later confirmed that the village of Al Ghuz still under control of ISIS.Archicivilians Hanibal911 (talk) 18:36, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Rebels capture Wadi Al-Azib checkpoint in north-east Hama

According to this article: http://syriadirect.org/news/rebels-assault-regime-supply-lines-in-hama-ahead-of-aleppo-showdown/ rebels captured the strategic important Wadi Al-Azib checkpoint in north-eastern Hama. The checkpoint is allready on the map, please change it to green. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.163.170.27 (talk) 20:01, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

It is a pro-opposition source, which cannot be used for pro-opp gains. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 20:03, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Thx for the reply. The article is referring to this ARA article http://aranews.org/2015/05/%D8%BA%D8%B1%D9%81%D8%A9-%D8%B9%D9%85%D9%84%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D9%81%D8%AA%D8%AD-%D8%AD%D9%84%D8%A8-%D8%AA%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%86-%D8%A8%D8%AF%D8%A1-%D9%85%D8%B9%D8%B1%D9%83%D8%A9-%D8%B7/ which is a Kurdish news site and should be neutral. Maybe someone can translate it to confirm it if its true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.163.170.27 (talk) 21:13, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Aranews is kurdish pro-oppo source specifically so I'm afraid it can't be used to display rebel successes. 190.66.148.201 (talk) 21:27, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Do not worry. The info, if true, should be confirmed by neutral sources soon. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 23:09, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Firstly in this article ARA News from pro oppowition source not said that checkpoint was captured. And secondly SyriaDirect and ARA News it is biased antigovernment sources which sometimes make fake reports and for now we not have confirmation this data from more reliable sources(a neutral sources). Hanibal911 (talk) 05:38, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Musaybeen

The Syrian Army (Regime) defense line was collapsed. The Regime forces retreated to Ariha.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdyxE7P9p40&feature=youtu.be
http://inagist.com/all/595549109974601728/
http://documents.sy/image.php?id=2291&lang=en

Buthaina hill was captured by the Opposition:
http://wikimapia.org/#lang=tr&lat=35.830792&lon=36.641250&z=15&m=b
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SoGMHgiEoA&feature=youtu.be
After liberation of Buthaina hill: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLPbrCFHnyc 212.174.38.3 (talk) 06:28, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

This just a data from pro opposition sources and we cant use him for displayed success of rebels. Need confirmation from the reliable or pro government sources. According to the rules of editing we cant use pro opposition sources and amateur video from rebels for displayed success of rebels. Hanibal911 (talk) 07:43, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

I am trying to find neutral sources. Since the news is very new, it is cumbersome.

http://www.reddit.com/r/syriancivilwar/comments/34yin7/musaybeen_is_freed_from_assad_rule_for_now_rebel/ 212.174.38.3 (talk) 08:52, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

But why you publish another data from pro opposition sources. We have enough data from the pro opposition sources and now need find confirmation from the reliable(neutral) sources. Hanibal911 (talk) 09:07, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

I cannot differentiate which source is Loyalist which one is pro-opposition. I add more since one may know/aware one of them is neutral.212.174.38.3 (talk) 09:19, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Also pro government source reported that Syrian troops control village of Musaybeen and with the support of NDF advanced to the strategic hill overlooking on this village, where they continued their counter-offensive geared to recapture the territory which they lost near the Qarmeed Camp (Brick Factory) and that this attack was successful for the Syrian troops and NDF, as they secured the hill of Tal Masayabeen.Al Masdar So at the moment we have conflicting data. So we need find confirmation from a neutral source. Hanibal911 (talk) 10:20, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Opposition conquered msibin: http://www.syriahr.com/en/2015/05/the-nusra-front-rebels-and-islamic-battalions-seizes-msibin/ 212.174.38.3 (talk) 10:00, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Al-Za'faranah

SOHR reported about clashes between rebels against ISIS in the town of Al-Za'faranah north of city Homs.SOHR But ISIS position very far away from this town so that probably here we have the same situation as in Dara or Quneitra wher some ex-rebels swore allegiance of ISIS and now they fight against former allies. Hanibal911 (talk) 06:13, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 Not related but, why did you add joint control for Musbin village if your source doesn't mention JAN at all ? DuckZz (talk) 10:35, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

DuckZz

Done I corrected my mistake! Hanibal911 (talk) 10:45, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

ISIS Daraa

Zmicier81. Remove, please, ISIS of Saham-al-Jawlan and al-Shajarah. This is an obvious misunderstanding. Shuhada-Yarmouk Brigade, which knocked out al-Nusra, forms the basis of FSA in the province of Daraa, and has nothing to do with ISIS.37.215.110.46 (talk) 12:53, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Fanar Checkpoint near Ariha

Rebels have detonated a tunnel-bomb below Fanar checkpoint south of Ariha yesterday here. Afterwards they stormed the checkpoint and reportedly took control of it (and nearby Al Jamayat checkpoint as well) here. Pro-government news site AlMasdar now acknowledges that rebels have indeed taken control of Fanar checkpoint (and parts of Misbeen as well, which already is green in the map) here. I propose to change the Fanar checkpoint to green.131.188.48.167 (talk) 13:30, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

But pro opposition source showed that for now Syrian troops launch counterattacked in this area.Syrian Rebellion Observatory and according to rebels video this checkpoint destroyed so that probably best solution just remove this checkpoint from map. Hanibal911 (talk) 14:24, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 Al Fanar is not just 1 building but refers to an specific area that overlooks the town of Ariha. This source and this video look very legit. Both rebel sources, but they look pretty convincing DuckZz (talk) 14:40, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 But you can remove it, since it's completely destroyed, including other buildings after the first blast last year, this 2nd destroyed the remainings. DuckZz (talk) 22:34, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 if we remove the checkpoint right now that means that the rebel doesn't have any presence near Ariha which they are shelling.Lindi29 (talk) 14:46, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Fanar is on a strategic hill overlooking Ariha. I agree with DuckZz. Fanar must be placed green. Buildings were destroyed but the hill on which Fanar is placed (over-looking Ariha) is just there. 88.224.205.174 (talk) 17:59, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Syrian army and Hezbollah advanced in Qalamoun.

Syrian troops and Hezbollah seize 5 strategic hills in Qalamoun.The Daily Star SOHR also reported that Syrian troops, NDF and Hezbollah take control the control of the hills near Assal al-Ward and Al-Juba after violent clashes with Al-Nusra.SOHR Also reliable source reported that Syrian troops and Hezbollah completed their control of Assal al-ward and hills on outskirts.Elijah J. Magnier Syrian troops and Hezbollah seized control of several hilltops in a mountainous area that straddles the Syria-Lebanon border. Syrian troops and allies had advanced around Assal al-Ward, a small regime-controlled village near the Lebanese border.Al Arabiya Al Arabiya Reuters The Worls Bulletin Demanjo Israel National News The National The Jerusalem Post Haaretz Hanibal911 (talk) 16:28, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

SOHR said that Hezbollah backed by Syrian forces take control strategic heights in the Syrian region of Qalamoun that abuts Lebanon's eastern border. The control of the area on the outskirts of Assal al-Wared came following heavy clashes with al-Qaida linked al-Nusra Front.Naharnet Hanibal911 (talk) 17:47, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Another article about this battle dailystar Hezbollah and Syrian troops seized five “strategic hills” in the eastern part of Qalamoun, taking control over the towns of Assal al-Ward and Al-Juba, the sources said. The Islamist militants had seized the two towns in previous battles (probably outskirts). Acording Naharnet Hezbollah and the Syrian Army succeeded in linking Syria´s Assal al Ward with Lebanon´s town of Brital and one more source sayed_ridha Hezbollah has complete control of 45km2 area in the Asal Al-Wared area. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.99.136.16 (talk) 23:02, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 where are these hills ? can they be added to map and should JAN presence icon be taken away or repositioned .86.178.102.112 (talk) 14:10, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Rebels reported that they tactical withdraw from area of Assal al Ward. And these data indirectly confirm the information on the control of the Syrian troops and Hezbollah on this area including the five hills.here Hala Jaber Hanibal911 (talk) 15:20, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Probably Amin_Akh south. 217.99.75.51 (talk) 16:28, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

According to rebel map (gyshfathqalamon) JAN has withdrawn north to the Homs border area .86.178.102.96 (talk) 16:35, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Hezb+SAA take more and more area, acording ynetnews the army and Hezbollah were in control of around 100 sq km (40 sq miles). ResistanceER said about this area: here here and here 217.99.75.51 (talk) 17:10, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

And pro gov TV video 217.99.75.51 (talk) 21:05, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Pro opposition source reported that the rebels do tactical withdrawal from their positions and that the military command of rebels decided to adhere guerrilla war and not to stay in any point, so as to avoid Syrian air strikes, and as much as possible reduce casualties.Al Araby Hanibal911 (talk) 21:13, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Map of qalamoun(pro gov)https://twitter.com/sayed_ridha/status/596654683151826944/photo/1 Talat Musa should be added, that's the most important mountain, most of the rebels/nusra is there.Totholio (talk) 08:34, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Totholio This object already present on the map. Hanibal911 (talk) 08:54, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

West to Flitah? It's not showing the name.Totholio (talk) 08:34, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Here Lebanese TV station showed that Syrian troops and Hezbollah captured 100 square km. of area in west Qalamoun.LBCI News Hanibal911 (talk) 09:03, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

According EjmAlrai and PetoLucem map: "#JN and rebels are all in Talat Musa where the biggest battle is expected in the future in #Qalamoun". In this moment rebel in Zabadani are totaly cut off from supply 217.99.75.51 (talk) 09:52, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

More and more territory take by Hezbollah + SAA here and here 217.99.75.51 (talk) 13:20, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 who changed the rural presence icon from rebel held to regime held and also removed the Isis presence icon???Here is a new map from pro-regime sources that shows that they have still presence in those areas!Lindi29 (talk) 15:30, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Lindi29 I fix this on map. Hanibal911 (talk) 16:39, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Many hill and small village capture by Hezbollah and SAA here here here and here. According this video around 150 JN fighters died in the battle of Qalamoun overall. 217.99.121.133 (talk) 13:57, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

And something about neutral source EjmAlrai Hezbollah is attacking Ras al-Maarra and extending its control over one section of Qalamoun, although d Qalamoun battle hasn't started yet 217.99.121.133 (talk) 13:59, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Source mention that they attacked rebels in area of Ras al Mara and take control this area. Because town of Ras al Mara long time is under control a Syrian troops. Hanibal911 (talk) 14:51, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

I know that, all article is not precise, because this area it is outskirt of this city/village. Another article dailystar The clashes erupted after Hezbollah and the Syrian army seized control of the Al-Barouh hill Monday morning. They are also trying to advance on a nearby hilltop known as Tallit Moussa, one of the highest positions in Qalamoun. Tallit Moussa overlooks the outskirts of Arsal, and would allow Hezbollah and the Syrian army to monitor militant movements in the area. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.99.121.133 (talk) 22:18, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Another progress dailystar Hezbollah advances and capture Mashrouh Haql Zeaiter hilltop and area of Jour Beit Abdel Haqq plus JAN declaring war on #IS in Qalam 217.99.132.128 (talk) 12:45, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Update dailystar Hezbollah and SAA captured three hills today. Jihadis fled to strategic hill Talit Moussa. Battle for Talit Moussa coming. Pro Israel source said about big progress SAA+Hezb jpost 217.99.132.128 (talk) 18:08, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

This is huge. EjmAlrai Hezbollah took full control of the strategic hill of Tallat Mussa in Qalamoun battle. 217.99.132.128 (talk) 12:24, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

dailystar and reuters confirm this. The advance pushed surviving militants towards the outskirts of Arsal, namely the areas of Wadi al-Rahwe and Wadi Hmeyed. Militants also withdrew towards Tallit Njasa, located on the outskirts of the Lebanese town of Ras Baalbek. 217.99.132.128 (talk) 13:51, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

According EjmAlrai Fierce battle ongoing between Hezbollah and JN in Flita outskirt NOW. Many rebels wounded reached Arsal hospital Lebanon and EjmAlrai Hezbollah completed control of around 6sqkm Dahr al-Hawa hill overlooking Arsal & Yanoun outskirts tt was under JN. 217.99.132.128 (talk) 15:48, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

According dailystar Hezbollah and the Syrian army seized full control from jihadis Friday of Jabal al-Barouh in the Qalamoun region overlooking the highway linking Damascus to Homs 217.99.132.128 (talk) 09:39, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Another progres here and here and here and the most important here 217.99.132.128 (talk) 18:28, 15 May 2015

According ResistanceER Hezbollah liberates 'Tal Majnabat' north of 'Talet Mousa' 217.99.132.128 (talk) 23:01, 16 May 2015

SAA and Hezbollah take conrol more ground ResistanceER Hezbollah liberate; 'Akbat alFasakh', 'Jabal Shams alHasaan', 'Qarnat alMash' and 'Qarnat alTool' in Flita-Qalamoun ResistanceER Hezbollah advance in Flita outskirts liberating 'Qarnat Shaab alHankal', 'alJamediyeh', 'Qarnat Najas alMubaraka' almasdar Syrian Army and Hezbollah Capture Jabal Shameesah. According dailystar Hezbollah fighters and the Syrian army wrested control over the Shmeis al-Hisan area that overlooks routes used by the rebels, between the outskirts of Jarajeer and the outskirts of Flita 217.99.132.128 (talk) 12:16, 20 May 2015

Kufayr

Why is Kufayr shown regime held? According to a pro-regime source ? Al-Masdar.

According to sohr arabic report (1 hour ago) Kufayr under SAA control http://www.syriahr.com/2015/05/%D9%85%D8%AD%D9%8A%D8%B7-%D8%AC%D8%B3%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B4%D8%BA%D9%88%D8%B1-%D9%8A%D8%B4%D9%87%D8%AF-%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%AA%D9%85%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%B4%D8%AA%D8%A8%D8%A7%D9%83/Hwinsp (talk) 13:11, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Hwinsp the source is saying about clashes in the town,but pro-opp sources are denying the capture of the town here.Lindi29 (talk) 13:40, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Opposition source showed that Kufayr under control by Syrian troops.here Hanibal911 (talk) 13:54, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Lindi29 SOHR clear said that violent clashes are still continuing in the vicinity the village of Kufayr controlled by the regime forces after midnight and which is located a few hundred meters to the south of the Jisr al Shughur National Hospital.SOHR So that SOHR clear said that the village under control by Syrian troops. Hanibal911 (talk) 13:59, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Ok Hanibal911,then put a semicircle north of the town.Lindi29 (talk) 14:47, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

here is proassad source about kufayr :http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-army-recaptures-strategic-checkpoint-in-idlib/

Despite their success at the Ariha front, the SAA’s 87th Brigade and the NDF were unable to maintain full control of Kufayr after

capturing this village 24 hours before their withdrawal on Thursday; this retreat was due to the militants of Harakat Ahrar Al-Sham controlling the surrounding hills around Kufayr.

According to a military source in the Idlib province, the SAA’s 87th Brigade and the NDF have regrouped south the village, where they are preparing for counter-assault on the militants from Harakat Ahrar Al-Sham.

please put in green ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.192.192.17 (talk) 11:33, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Done Hanibal911 (talk) 15:54, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Arabic sources

I am raising this issue beacause many of editors are editing with arabic sources,as we know this is not arabic wikipedia so the sources need to be in english not in arabic beacause there are editors who doesn't understand arabic and doubt if it is the truth.All of these arabic sources have english version.So i propose to use only english sources for editing the map and arabic sources as a back up.Lindi29 (talk) 14:54, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

We use all sources. But we agreed not use English version SOHR because reports from the SOHR which is was translated on English are often distorted and dont correspond to the original. Also we use all source on english,Arabic and some other languages. But exception is only SOHR. Many times it was proved that the reports from SOHR in English contain many errors and they contain are not correct data. But we cant prohibit the use of sources in other languages if there is a possibility do translate data from these sources on the english. Hanibal911 (talk) 15:14, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 this is english wikipedia you know,but I am not saying not to use arabic sources but them to have as a back up which means if you dont have an english report how can an editor read that source if he doesn't speak arabic??If you provide an arabic source than you have to provide the english one to beacasue this wiki is based on english language.So are you against or pro.Lindi29 (talk) 17:00, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 Why is the entire Qalamun marked in red ? Government sources are used DuckZz (talk) 18:05, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Lindi29 I support use sources on english but against use reports from SOHR on english which is incorrect. And we all agreed use reports from SOHR only on Arabic. DuckZz I not marked all hills under control by Syrian troops although this confirm many reliable sources. Hanibal911 (talk) 18:44, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

DuckZzRead this arcticle.Qalamoun offensive (May 2015) Hanibal911 (talk) 18:46, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

DuckZz You are wrong. Area between the hills it is still under the control JAN, but day by day they lost teritory.These hills are the most important points in this area. Sometime SOHR said about Hezbollah progress and fighting in this area. At the beginning of the fighting opposition source said dozens of Hezbollah killed and then fell silent. On the other hand, we have information from neutral sources: EjmAlrai, Dailystar, reuters, pro israels source and all said of progress SAA + Hezb 217.99.132.128 (talk) 18:54, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 Every pro-regime user can edit wikipedia maps. We don't have any neutral sources showing Jabal Manar under SAA control. And rebels need a rural presence icon there, i mean i don't know how much soldiers they have there but they certainly didn't lost 1000 members DuckZz (talk) 19:03, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

DuckZz Most rebels retreated to Lebanon where they control some area near border. All source said that they lost almost all area (including all strategic Hills) in west Qalamoun but maybe Jabal al Mara still control Al Nusra/rebels. But we cant put icon for rebels in this area because most area under control of Hezbollah and troops. And not need blame that all editors which edit this area pro government. Hanibal911 (talk) 19:21, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 Here SOHR says that rebels are still there. You need to think of something to add on the map, or change

But pro gov source said and show that jan + rebel there are still present PetoLucem map but lost about 80% territory. 2 week ago Nursa start their offensive and this is result here and pro rebel map confirm this here 217.99.132.128 (talk) 12:40, 16 May 2015

SAA-IS clashes at Deir Ezzor city

According to reliable pro-govt source Hassan Ridha clashes ongoing in the Sinaa neighborhood of Deir Ezzor:

https://twitter.com/sayed_ridha/status/596227607164661760

SOHR also reports about it:

http://www.syriahr.com/en/2015/05/ypg-advances-in-northwest-of-tal-tamer-and-4-regimes-members-killed-in-deir-ezzor-city/

So would it be ok to change the area to contested in detailed map? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.32.116.216 (talk) 11:15, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

But for now on detailed map the Al-Hawiqah marked as contested and part of Al-Sina'ah also marked as contested. Hanibal911 (talk) 11:33, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HL7VI8H6Q4Y&feature=youtu.be IS vid documenting their gains in Deir Ezzor. Tgoll774 (talk) 22:39, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8iWfaWs28yGRXRqTFFCTjN3ZXM/view Neutral source. Tgoll774 (talk) 02:12, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

JN head choppers have more territory then marked on this map

See map here put out by ISW (posted on business insider) it shows where the head choppers of JN have control/governance and where they have major activities "permissive terrain": http://www.businessinsider.com/what-happens-next-in-syria-2015-5 The permissive terrain areas should be green/grey to show JN. The "control/governance" should be marked as JN areas. ISW is a highly respected US think tank with high quality access and information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.26.77 (talk) 17:28, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

The point is: They have a presence in all of rebel held territories, excluding Kurdish areas. BUT we only mark villages/towns under their control when they have full control over that area. For me, we wouldn't even mark them of separate colors, because their villages and towns under full control have a strong presence of other terrorist Islamic groups such as Ahrar. IMO the Nusra color is simply unecessary — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.157.16.202 (talk) 19:44, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

ISIL capture Sukhnah and amiriyah

Sukhnah and amiriya in the Homs desert capture by ISIL sources below

http://slnnews.co/?p=23711

{Jack6780 (talk) 12:12, 13 May 2015 (UTC)}

In this pro opposition source was said that ISIS announced that they captured Sukhna and amiriyah. SOHR said about 30 government soldiers and 20 Islamic State militants were killed in the fighting in and around the town of al-Sukhna, some 300 km (190 miles) northeast of Damascus. And military source said Syrian troops repelled the attack in places and were still fighting in others. "(The army) repelled the attack in areas, there are areas where it is still ongoing." Reuters and another reliable source reported that fierce battle between Syrian troops and ISIS in al-Ameriya, north of Palmyra.Elijah J. Magnier So for now only ISIS claim that town Al Sukhna under their control. SOHR also earlier said that ISIS captured most part town but clashes continued. But all reliable sources not said that town was totally captured by ISIS. Hanibal911 (talk) 12:32, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

I am back,okay,but what if it is confirmed that ISIS controls Sukhna,what about the other villages surrounding it.Alhanuty (talk) 12:56, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

We mark him as under control of ISIS and nothing more. We can edit other villages only if reliable source confirmed that these villages also under control ISIS. We not edit on the basis of assumptions. Hanibal911 (talk) 13:03, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

I marked two villages to north Sukhna as under ISIS becasue they located on road from the villages which is held ISIS. Although such my actions not a lot broke the rules of editing. And if some one think that I was not right he can fix this. Hanibal911 (talk) 13:09, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Here is the ISIL video inside Al Sukhna

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mc2seZqBn0c&feature=youtu.be

{Jack6780 (talk) 19:31, 13 May 2015 (UTC)}

We cant use amateur video from ISIS to displayed success of ISIS. Hanibal911 (talk) 19:41, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

A'Maq isn't an amateur video producer and if we accept SyAA videos at times, we have to accept A'Maq. https://a3maqagency.wordpress.com/2015/05/13/%D9%85%D9%82%D8%A7%D8%AA%D9%84%D9%88-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AF%D9%88%D9%84%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A5%D8%B3%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%85%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D9%8A%D8%AA%D9%85%D8%AF%D8%AF%D9%88%D9%86-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D8%B1%D9%8A/ Further reports from A'Maq Tgoll774 (talk) 19:57, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Wow hanibal you are still not convinced ? Pro opp, Anti Opp , Pro ISIL anti ISil every one convinced that Sukhnah has fallen but somehow you still think its contested? here is one anti IS source

https://twitter.com/PalmyraRev1/status/598366226457305088

The Fight has moved on to Palmyra where ISIL claimed they control entire eastern part of tadmur and you still debating whether sukhnah has fallen {Jack6780 (talk) 20:12, 13 May 2015 (UTC)}

I marked town of Sukhna as under control of ISIS according to data from the SOHR and pro government source. But not according to some fantasy a pro ISIS or the antigovernment activists. But dont need provide pro ISIS or the antigovernment sources because they all opposes to Syrian troops and we cant use him for displayed success of ISIS. And also we not use video from pro government sources for displayed success of Syrian troops because we cant use pro government sources for displayed success of Syrian troops. Hanibal911 (talk) 20:45, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 if you use pro-opp source against Isis to show the advance for the SAA then it means that we can use it on the other way to.Logical.46.99.77.119 (talk) 21:14, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Hannibal used backing from a pro-gov source. Normally, NO anti-assad source may be used to show pro-opp and pro-ISIS gains. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 23:06, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

The status of Palmyra according to SAA is https://twitter.com/leithfadel/status/598583163862974464 and http://www.sana.sy/en/?p=40426. Let us wait and see.Paolowalter (talk) 21:47, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

According to Al Masdar [3] Palmyra is again unde rSAA control. Fighting is moving to Al Sukhna. Same statements from pro-SAA [4].Paolowalter (talk) 06:36, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Why are the the towns east of T3 IS held? I've seen no reliable sources on these changes.MesmerMe (talk) 12:09, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

XJ-0461 v2 stop lying he used a pro-opp facebook source,Hanibal911 look i told you that ayyash is still contested and Huwajyah is Isis held.Al-Masdar.Lindi29 (talk) 12:26, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Ivan is a pro-opp source, really? Come on, get your act together. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 19:57, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

https://twitter.com/Syria_Rebel_Obs/status/598791328990928896/photo/1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yGujgLPAGA&feature=youtu.be (Allegedly showing airstrikes on Radio Tower Hill outside Tadmur), http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=34.561107&lon=38.252120&z=15&m=b Radio Station is here. In all, it looks like a near total collapse of SAA forces Tgoll774 (talk) 12:45, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

according to sohr arabic Palmyra city under still under SAA control and clashes still ongoing around the city http://www.syriahr.com/2015/05/%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%AA%D9%85%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%B4%D8%AA%D8%A8%D8%A7%D9%83%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D9%86%D9%8A%D9%81%D8%A9-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D8%A3%D8%B7%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%81-%D9%85/Hwinsp (talk) 13:13, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

According to this report amiriya and surrounding gas station and check points are in ISIL control

https://now.mmedia.me/lb/en/NewsReports/565265-syrias-ancient-city-of-palmyra-in-danger

Now the fight is going on in Palmyra According to Hannibals Favourite Pro Shia Militia , Pro Hizbollah Elijah Magnier

https://twitter.com/EjmAlrai/status/598844352463527936

{Jack6780 (talk) 14:03, 14 May 2015 (UTC)}

He not said that the clashes inside city Palmyra.Elijah J. Magnier And this relaible source he is Chief International Correspondent of AL Rai. But all data in NOW news from Pro-opposition Al-Souria Net which is cited a report by the Syrian Revolution General Commission (SRGC). But this is biased source. Hanibal911 (talk) 14:18, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

SOHR also clear said that clashes still near the city of Palmyra.SOHR Hanibal911 (talk) 14:22, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

According to pro Kurdish source clashes near the city of Palmyra.Rudawa Hanibal911 (talk) 15:07, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

jack6780 .Some information for you .These conflicts in Iraq and Syria are not about SUNNI or SHIA but about political control in the middle east .Many SUNNI are fighting ISIL as they regard them as evil bad SUNNI and they fight along side SHIA armies and as for Elijah Magnier I believe he is SUNNI .86.178.102.96 (talk) 16:57, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Pro-IS https://twitter.com/activistmedia57/status/598968341353594883/photo/1 Gives a better look. Tgoll774 (talk) 23:08, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Problem is most ISIS sources are delusional/borderline insane. Also, is it just me, or does that map depict Tadmor as being surrounded by ISIS? XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 00:00, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Some more news about Palmyra from al Masdar [5].Paolowalter (talk) 06:48, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Clashes on distance of 2km from city of Palmyra. SOHR said the city was “under threat” as fierce fighting and shelling continued on eastern outskirts of Palmyra amid a regime counteroffensive.The Daily Star Hanibal911 (talk) 08:38, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Castle overlooking Tadmur is being fought over https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oKKyFd5H-I&feature=youtu.be Tgoll774 (talk) 20:33, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

All reports say fighting outside of city ,so why is it contested .86.178.102.96 (talk) 19:43, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

SOHR confirms http://www.syriahr.com/en/2015/05/clashes-continue-in-tadmur-city-al-hasakah-and-aleppo/. Palmyra was changed back to redPaolowalter (talk) 21:54, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Serious revision needs to be made.

The more detailed map, and the savable file on the Syrian Civil War page have serious differences. The more detailed map shows three towns South of the Sukhna gas field, to the East of Palmyra/Tadmur being under the control of the Islamic State, as well as the areas South and East of the T3 Pumping Station, however, the savable file shows the areas South and East of the station under the control of the Syrian military, and shows the areas around the Sukhna Gas Field as being under the control of Jabhat al-Nusra.

This means that either one of the two maps is horribly wrong, or the Islamic State and al-Nusra are no longer adversaries, AND one of the maps is wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DaJesuZ (talk • contribs) 03:57, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't get it. Wikipedia usually does a good job at representing the situation for what it is, but they really screwed up badly with this map. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.126.188.171 (talk) 06:47, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I can get this whole thing of denying legitimacy to IS, but the change in the most recent map is absurd. It takes the anti-IS bias to such an extreme, that it outright misrepresents what's going on in the Palmyra desert. Not only were the people making the map give an absolute minimum territory to IS (way below what it should be), but most of that territory they did give, they falsely attributed to Jabhat al-Nusra. I'm not a fan of IS, but misrepresenting the situation for what it actually is really is not the way to go. So somebody really should attribute the land taken by IS in Eastern Homs to IS as well as giving them more territory in general, since the SAA has undoubtedly had to cede some of the desert to IS as well.

Magog the Ogre updated the .png map making the change in question. They happen to be an administrator on English Wikipedia and an administrator and checkuser on wikipedia commons. Their update did not reflect how the map looked at the time it was made and provided no source, and was reverted. Coincidentally, this user also runs two of the most helpful bots on Wikipedia commons, Ogrebot and Ogrebot2. Also, I think this is the first time I've seen someone accuse an administrator of any kind of vandalism (revert summary began with "POV Vandalism"). Banak (talk) 09:17, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

I misunderstood; I thought white was fog of war, not al-Nusra. The original map I updated did not provide any description for al-Nusra. I was working based off what I could, which admittedly was pretty poor for an English-speaker. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 03:09, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

No harm done, updated the key. Was hoping you could provide us with a source for the gov advance you added, so we can update this map. Banak (talk) 08:51, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Palmyra

We should stop switching Palmyra between red (maybe with a black ring north) and contested. Im my understanding, the core of the city has always been under SAA control, but ISIS and SAA clashed in the outskirts and maybe some points in the outskirts were taken by ISIS. According to [6] and [7] states that the city is under government control. Even if these sources are partisam, Al Masdar has always reported attacks and advances from ISIS. Same source report the following maphttp://www.almasdarnews.com/article/battle-map-update-from-palmyra-front/. If we take these map seriously, it woule mean Palmyta red with black ring north, that is now the most realstica statement we can do.Paolowalter (talk) 09:38, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Also a neutral source [yahoo http://news.yahoo.com/dozens-dead-fighting-ancient-syrian-city-palmyra-082617643.html] confirm this.Paolowalter (talk) 09:44, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Another neutral source reported that the Syrian troops pushes back ISIS from city of Palmyra.Agence France Presse Business Day and this also confirmed Israeli source Israel National News also earlier Lebanese TV channel of Al Mayadeen reported that the ISIS forces withdraw from the city Palmyra in the convoy with 80 vehicles, and that this convoy was the target of the Airforce the correspondent reported that the ISIS lost 100 militants during the withdrawal from the city of Palmyra. And this is was after as the Syrian troops after violent confrontations recaptured the radio and television center on the hill on western entrance to the city of Palmyra And that after the arrival of reinforcements, the army was able to secure the castle ruin on the distance of two kilometers from city.Al Mayadeen Hanibal911 (talk) 11:46, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Pro opposition source also reported that ISIS withdraw their forces and that Syrian flag again reised on the building on which yesterday was put ISIS flag. The situation in the city gradually normalized and some stores again opened. here Hanibal911 (talk) 12:15, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Pro opposition source Qasion News reported that the ISIL withdrew to north toward the Amiriya.Qasion News Hanibal911 (talk) 12:35, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

SOHR said Islamic State fighters had pulled out of northern areas of the city taken on Saturday but still held a village to the north of Palmyra.Reuters Hanibal911 (talk) 12:39, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Also reliable source confirmed that the Syrian troops regained control of the Palmyra archaeological site and the hill of SyriaTel after 16 air strikes on ISIS positions.Elijah J. Magnier Hanibal911 (talk) 13:12, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Pro government source reported that the Syrian Airforce continues to strike ISIS convoys retreating from Palmyra to the town of al-Sukhna.here Hanibal911 (talk) 13:22, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Based off this map from Peto Lucem T3 should probably be surrounded https://twitter.com/PetoLucem/status/599993307989684225/photo/1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:0:5280:449:8D12:EF37:CFB1:C53 (talk) 18:15, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

SOHR reported that the Syrian troops progress in the northern outskirts of the city of Palmyra.SOHR Hanibal911 (talk) 21:32, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Al Masdar is claiming that ISIS controls the Pumping station http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/ancient-city-of-palmyra-under-complete-control-of-the-syrian-army/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:0:5280:449:8D12:EF37:CFB1:C53 (talk) 22:31, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

According to data from the author of the antigovernment source (YallaSouriya) Syrian troops recaptured T3 Pumping Station here here Hanibal911 (talk) 16:43, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Also author of this article here from Al Masdar also confirmed that in this article he is noted that the Syrian troops still control T3 Pumping Station not ISIS.here Hanibal911 (talk) 16:52, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Palmyra contested?

http://syrian-mirror.net/en/cat/syria-mirror/isis-tighten-control-over-the-northern-district-of-palmyra-amid-dire-living-conditions/ Tgoll774 (talk) 03:56, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

This biased antigovernment source. SOHR and all relaible sources clear said that clashes outside the city. Hanibal911 (talk) 06:30, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

SOHR clear said that the clashes between Syrian troops and their allies on the one hand, and elements of the "Islamic State" on the other hand near of the city of Palmyra.SOHR Clashes between ISIS against pro-government forces north of the city of Palmyra. Earlier regime forces pushed ISIS out of northern neighbourhoods of Palmyra. Further north, fighting between IS jihadists and government forces continued outside Palmyra.France 24 I24 News The Daily Star Also we cant used biased antigovernment sources against Syrian troops. Hanibal911 (talk) 06:49, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Despite all the propaganda statements that make pro ISIS activits or pro ISIS sources relaible sources clear said that the clashes still ongoing near the city of Palmyra.The Guardian The Daily Star SOHR Naharnet Hanibal911 (talk) 10:44, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911, Naharnet says ISIS took one third of Palmyra. Daily Star says ISIS took the north part. SOHR says clashes in the surrounding areas, but also in the prison and the political security building. If you understand Arabic, that's pretty clear that the clashes are inside the city. Please stop trying to use semantics to minimize regime losses, you made Ziyara and Qastoun contested on far less. NightShadeAEB (talk) 13:58, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

NightShadeAEB Yes they take 30% of city. Hanibal911 (talk) 14:29, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

BBC states ISIS has taken the northern part of Palmyra here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-32807858 Alastairjc (talk) 14:36, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

ISIS take 30% of the city Palmyra.Charles Lister Hanibal911 (talk) 14:44, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Pro-regime source says the city has fallen (although opposition sources deny the airport and prison fell). You know the rules. https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=837292089682576&id=834837069928078 NightShadeAEB (talk) 18:13, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

SOHR said that they still fighting http://www.syriahr.com/2015/05/%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%AA%D9%85%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%B4%D8%AA%D8%A8%D8%A7%D9%83%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D9%86%D9%8A%D9%81%D8%A9-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D8%AA%D8%AF%D9%85%D8%B1-%D8%A8%D8%B9/ 217.99.132.128 (talk) 18:34, 20 May 2015

More reliable source SOHR reported that the violent clashes are still continuing between Syrian troops and ISIS in the city of Palmyra and its outskirts.SOHR And pro government source aslo reported that the city not fallen.here Hanibal911 (talk) 18:35, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Leith fadel claiming SAA left https://twitter.com/leithfadel/status/601104187120816128 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:0:5280:449:8D12:EF37:CFB1:C53 (talk) 19:30, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

North-West & South-West corner of Damascus map need to be changed

I have a question about the sliver of green/rebel land at the top left hand corner of the 'Damascus map', which includes the town of Wadi Barada. According to the recent detailed study put out by Christopher Kozak of the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) this area has a ceasefire agreement with the government. If this is accurate then that area should be changed to purple. See the map on page 24 of the ISW report: http://understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/An%20Army%20in%20All%20Corners%20by%20Chris%20Kozak%201.pdf Does anyone have further information about this area?

A small clarification: this the antigovernment source and we cant use him data against the Syrian troops and data from this source cant be use for displayed success of all troops which against Syrian troops. Only for displayed success of army and Kurdish forces. Source named the Syrian troops as regime troops or Assad troops and sometime Assad forces. And named governement as regime or Assad regime. But this not neutral providing information. We made only one exception for SOHR because his data uses many reliable sources. Hanibal911 (talk) 16:18, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it is an anti-government source. However, currently that area is marked Green. So this is an anti-government source that would verifying that the area is not green but is actually purple (a truce area), so that would actually be an improvement for the government. It is an antigovernment source showing a gain for the government as a truce has been achieved. ISW is closely linked with US foreign policy and military establishment, if it shows a gain for the Assad government that should be taken seriously. Remember the wiki rules - anti-governemnt or neutral sources to show government gains, anti-rebel or neutral sources to show rebel gains.

I agree with the suggestion. I always suspected that this area was on truce. There have been little or no clashes since a long time.Paolowalter (talk) 20:46, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

That map also indicates that the left bottom green area south of Khan al Shih is fully Government held, with exception of the town itself.MesmerMe (talk) 21:20, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

The Damascus map is outdated because SOHR, Al Masdar etc have already reported about rebel advances near the 39.brigade, Haws Farah, north of Madaya etc, but that's old and if you edit the map now it will look like rebels are besieged near these bases ... DuckZz (talk) 11:35, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Then fix the map. The whole point of this map is to reflect the actual changes taking place on the ground. Also you do not address the urgent need to change the top left corner that includes Wadi Barada. This area is in cease fire but it is painted green. It has been painted green for far too long. Rebel area in south-west corner also should seriously shrunken , as shown on that map. Is this going to be changed? ISW study (close with US power establishment,pentagon,etc) shows this to be true. Why is not being fixed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.159.206 (talk) 20:59, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

It has not been changed (or had not been, not checked if it has) because it requires knowledge of editing .svg files to edit, which not many of us are used to doing. In fact, one edit has done most of the updates to it. Has someone asked the usual guy to do it? Banak (talk) 20:31, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Tadmur seized by IS

https://twitter.com/leithfadel/status/601104187120816128

http://www.syriahr.com/2015/05/%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%87%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%B1-%D9%82%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%86%D8%B8%D8%A7%D9%85-%D8%A3%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%85-%D8%AA%D9%86%D8%B8%D9%8A%D9%85-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AF%D9%88%D9%84%D8%A9-%D8%A7/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.126.188.171 (talk) 19:53, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

And here is a pro-Regime source saying that IS at the very least has taken about 3/4s of the city. (3 hours ago) https://www.facebook.com/IslamicWorldNews.En/posts/827457690662030

And yet another source. https://twitter.com/Flea1337/status/601082986851885056

How are the oil fields west of the city? I've heard Jabal has already fallen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:0:5280:449:8D12:EF37:CFB1:C53 (talk) 21:45, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

IS supporters are saying this place fell to IS http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=34.228587&lon=38.023896&z=16&m=b https://twitter.com/AdamThActivist/status/601422127498174464 Tgoll774 (talk) 16:58, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Syrian troops try to retake Palmyra.CNTV Hanibal911 (talk) 17:16, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

That is odd. No word from Pro-Gov sources.XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 01:07, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

XJ-0461 v2 Syrian Armed Forces Prepare for Counter-Assault at Palmyra.Al Masdar Hanibal911 (talk) 06:41, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

That article also states that the regime has been securing the perimeter of T4 airbase, so I think that there won't be a counter assault. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.126.188.171 (talk) 08:31, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Source said that Syrian troops just fortified the perimeter of Air Base to avoid the situation that occurred in the city of Palmyra. When the army of poorly consolidated its position and it allowed ISIS make sudden attack and capture the city. Hanibal911 (talk) 09:05, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Almasdar News

They used the map without source, http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/complete-battle-map-of-syria//, Omega933 (talk) 07:07, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

And your point is? MesmerMe (talk) 11:22, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Mastumah

Opposition conquered Mastumah (northest of Ariha), so it must be green: http://suriyedenhaber.blogspot.com.tr/

Opposition operations:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=i2SPh-mBHBA&app=desktop
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0LLkCIGjbE&feature=youtu.be 212.174.38.3 (talk) 07:04, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

This only data from pro opposition sources and we cant use this data fro displayed success of rebels. Need confirmation from the pro government or neutral sources. Also pro government source confirmed that the rebels captured hill of Tall Mastoumah here So I marked this hill as under control by rebels. Hanibal911 (talk) 07:13, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

And pro opposition source said that Mastumah it is a Assad stronghold.here Hanibal911 (talk) 07:24, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Reliable source (in the comment) said that SAA still controls the factory area, which is at least 50% of Mastumah town, and the Baath Camp in the south. Contested until further. Hanibal911 Also rebels said yesterday that they first captured Muqbilah before heading to Mastumah. This report from today is pretty obvious to me DuckZz (talk) 09:02, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

DuckZz You probably kidding! This is pro opposition sources BosnoSinj here So need confirmation from neutral sources. Hanibal911 (talk) 09:10, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

please put al- Moqbila (near mastuma) en green, source: The Islamic faction take control over al- Moqbili town and advance towards al- Mastomi town Idlib. http://www.syriahr.com/en/2015/05/the-islamic-faction-take-control-over-al-moqbili-town-and-advance-towards-al-mostomi-town-idlib/

We use only original reports from SOHR(on Arabic) But for now I try find original report and when I find him I will update map. Hanibal911 (talk) 13:37, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Original report from SOHR said that rebels captured some positions inside the town of Matsuma and its surroundings .SOHR So that original report is indirectly confirmed this information. Hanibal911 (talk) 13:51, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Done Hanibal911 (talk) 13:55, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 For the Kurdish edit. I used a reliable Reporter source but posted a rebel source because it has more details. But both sources mentioned the same villages, so it can be used. Also this map can also be used DuckZz (talk) 14:23, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

DuckZz He is freelance Journalist from Kobani. He is partialy pro Kurdish source. He clear supports a Kurdish forces(YPG). But also I try find more confirmations of this data from other sources. Hanibal911 (talk) 14:50, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

DuckZz Pro Kurdish source reported that the Kurdish forces capture Güris Cement Plant east of Kobane.here so maybe YPG/rebels for now still in this area. But I search more data. Hanibal911 (talk) 15:13, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Rebels today took Baath Vanguard Camp just south of Mastumah; it is already green in the map. Supposedly they also took nearby Nahlaya as well as Kafr Najd (pro-opposition map). However, there is conflicting information about Nahlaya and Kafr Najd, so we need to wait for further information / confirmation by neutral or pro-government sources.131.188.48.167 (talk) 18:10, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Pro opposition source clear showed that the village of Kafr Najd still under control by Syrian troops.Syrian Rebellion Observatory and SOHR also not confirmed that the vullage Kafr Najd was taken by rebels. Hanibal911 (talk) 18:35, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

And this pro opposition source also later reaffirmed that the village of Kafr Najd still under control by Syrian troops.Syrian Rebellion Observatory Hanibal911 (talk) 21:40, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 You probably know what I'm going to ask you know, in related to Al Mastumah control ... lol. Yes i know what SOHR said but i have no idea why did they say Al Nusra. If they had part of this, then ok, but their members didn't even participate in taking Mastumah & area. There was no statement on twitter/facebook like they usually do when capturing a town or capturing with other forces. The main force was Jaish Fatah (Al Nusra is only part of them, we already know that 6 other groups are in it too). Ok now, for some sources. Reporter Hadi Abdalah says that Al Mastumah was captured by Jund Aqsa & Jaish Sunna (part of Jaish Fateh). Other reporter Abdul Oman says the same on 0:53.

Orient News reporter says the same. All these groups (IF, Jund Aqsa, Jaish Sunna, Faylaq Sham) were posting pictures/videos, but Al Nusra channels did not, only reports that "Mujahedins entering Al Mastumah", and that's about it.

We both know that SOHR makes small mistakes in their reports, sometimes switching between names and puts Al Nusra instead of ISIS etc... what do you think ? DuckZz (talk) 00:14, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

DuckZzAl Nusrah and its allies in the Jaysh al Fateh coalition are claiming to have completely overrun the Assad regime’s forces at the Al Mastoumah military camp in Idlib.The Long War Journal Rebels including Al-Qaeda’s local affiliate seized the Syrian regime’s largest remaining military base in northwestern Idlib province.he Daily Star So we know that fighters from Al Nusra also participated in the capture of the city, and we just do not have to ignore this fact. Nonetheless we marked all villages and military objects which also was taken the under control by moderate rebels. And in order to mark part of Al Nusra we mark under jointly control the town of Al Matsuma. Hanibal911 (talk) 06:23, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Just for information: The rebels claim to have taken Jawma Checkpoint directly northeast of Ariha (map) - (tweet) - (video). We clearly have to wait for further information from neutral or pro-government sources, but the video seems to be genuine.131.188.48.167 (talk) 16:34, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Is this here a reliable / neutral source? It states that Rebels took al Jumah Checkpoint. 131.188.48.167 (talk) 12:47, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Source sometimes publishes not correct data. Source said that according to data from SOHR that the rebels had been engaged in clashes with regime forces in the village of Kafr Najd, southwest of Ariha but in report which source provide SOHR not said about clashes in this village.SOHR Hanibal911 (talk) 12:57, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

And according to antigovernment source the village of Kafr Najd still control Syrian troops.here Hanibal911 (talk) 13:06, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Sheikh Najjar Industrial City

https://twitter.com/AdamThActivist/status/601417059529039873 Claims Assad is being fought by IS in this outskirt of Aleppo. Pro-FSA sources are saying the same thing such as Malcomite https://twitter.com/Malcolmite/status/601429620148305921 Leave it to the usual to see what the Arabic sources say. Tgoll774 (talk) 17:03, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

First source (pro ISIS) and secondly just biased antigovernemnt source. Need data from more reliable sources. Hanibal911 (talk) 17:13, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

a pro-government source is saying something about it https://twitter.com/DerekBisaccio/status/601433206626320384.Alhanuty (talk) 17:16, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

This is pro gov? 99% news i pro opp source 217.99.132.128 (talk) 17:28, 20 May 2015 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:25AA:1:4004:0:0:0:6E (talk)

Alhanuty Firstly this not pro government source. Need provide link to pro government source. Because any source can said that this data from the pro government source but not provide links on these sources. Hanibal911 (talk) 17:41, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Pro government source said that the Syrian soldier inside 3rd zone of Sheikh Najjar. And that Sheikh Najjar still under control of Syrian troops.here Hanibal911 (talk) 18:39, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Neutral source also reporting IS took two villages east of Sheikh Najjar (not specified, but must be Muqbalah/Suran/Shamir) and is on the outskirts [8].Nhauer (talk) 21:05, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

ISW is not a neutral source.XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 21:12, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Crikey, you guys can't even find a source that you agree presents accurate battlefield reports. No wonder everyone over there is killing each other. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 00:05, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Guys,it's just a matter of time till the confirmation will be announced from reliable source, beacause pro-gov sources are figuring it out how to waste time with their propaganda on this case 1 day mb 2??,just like the case in Palmyra,Hanibal911 you see what did i tell you.Lindi29 (talk) 00:39, 22 May 2015 (UTC).

Interestingly, ISIS has no boarder with the Industrial area, that is rebel controlled. Interesting how ISIS appeared out of nowhere. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 00:57, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

This not neutral source this antigovernment sourceISW and pro govevernment source clear said that ISIS assault was repelled by the Syrian troops after the fierce clashes erupted at the 3rd Zone in the southeastern part of the Industrial District.here Hanibal911 (talk) 06:14, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Why is it that 90% of the time here the 'pro-government source' is Al-Masdar, which is run by Leith Fadel, is incredibly unreliable/biased and has been even worse than normal since the fall of Idlib? There's a reason this map is falling behind others in terms of updating and is seen as pro-regime by a lot of people, because if you have to wait until Leith personally approves info to include it on the map then you will always have a biased picture of the situation. This was evident with Palmyra where this map had Amiriya marked as under SAA control (based on Leith) when in fact ISIS had never withdrawn from there, only the city itself. Al-Masdar is straight up regime propaganda a lot of the time and really shouldn't be used at all, I am not pro-rebel but SOHR is much more accurate when reporting territorial gains for any side in this war.Nhauer (talk) 11:44, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Wha are you talking about??? If anything this map has been more biased toward promoting the jihadist/islamist rebels. Just look at the map of Damascus. The top left corner has been in ceasefire for a while now but it remains painted green. The bottom left hand corner is controlled by government, but has remained painted green. This according to Pentagon connected Think Tank with detailed information on the war. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.26.212 (talk) 14:31, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Also SOHR not said that ISIS captured part of Sheikh Najjar. And this blog is a biased antigovernment source which is a long time opposes to Syrian government.ISW Hanibal911 (talk) 12:38, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 here is a reliable source who confrims that.here,and again XJ-0461 v2 this confrims the propaganda of leith fadel he said first there are no Isis there now it says the attack is replled,just like the case in Palmyra where he tweted "Palmyra has not fallen stop the propaganda" then 1 hour late "The army has withdrawn from Palmyra".Lindi29 (talk) 14:20, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

So it took an extra day to fix the map in Palmyra. So what. The map in damascus has been wrong and slanted toward the religious fanatic rebels for months- even while top and bottom left hand corners should not be green. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.26.212 (talk) 14:32, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Lindi29 But for now not one reliable source not confirmed that ISIS captured part of Sheikh Najjar including SOHR. Hanibal911 (talk) 15:27, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Kafr Najd, Idlib

There have been many reports on the Ariha-front lines in Idlib province. The Jaysh al-Fatah army has taken over Mastumah and nearby towns last week. I have found this article which details the fall of the Jisr ash-Shugur Hospital. It also mentions clashes in the village of Kafr Najd and around checkpoints west of Ariha. So that would mean: Kafr Najd to contested, and a green semi-ring around Ma'ataram west of Ariha. Everybody agreed? Report: https://now.mmedia.me/lb/en/NewsReports/565321-regimes-idlib-front-collapsing — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.24.43.183 (talk) 14:39, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

This source made mistake when he said that clashes in Kafr Najd. Because he provide because he provide link on this report from SOHR here but this report not said that clashes in this village. Also many data in this source from pro oppositions sources. I only marked according to this source as under control of rebels Jawma checkpoint. And according to antigovernment source the village of Kafr Najd still control Syrian troops.here Hanibal911 (talk) 15:23, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

SOHR clear said that the clashes between Syrian troops and their allies against Islamic factions in the vicinity of the town of Kafr Najd to south-west of the city of Ariha. So SOHR cleas said that no clashes in Kafr Najd only near this town.SOHR So that source distort data from SOHR in his article. Hanibal911 (talk) 15:33, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

YPG advances against ISIS

SOHR reported that the violent clashes are still continuing between ISIS and YPG in the rural area between the town of Tell Tamer and countryside of city Ras al-Ain where YPG take control of the two villages.SOHR Hanibal911 (talk) 18:12, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Several villages have been taken by YPG last week, our map looks very outdated, especially around Manajir. These are the names of the villages taken today: https://twitter.com/issa_kobani/status/600376344833294336 https://twitter.com/issa_kobani/status/600377317953773568 https://twitter.com/issa_kobani/status/600377889767432192 https://twitter.com/issa_kobani/status/600378496003788800 Of course this is a kurdish source, but I think that the last numerous SOHR reports are corroborating this kurdish reports, even if SOHR doesn't tell nothing about the names of the villages. --8fra0 (talk) 19:27, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

There are dozens of sources which confirm YPG advance, sweeping ISIS of the southern villages of Tal Tamer, advancing towards Mount Abdalaziz (Mount Kizwan):

Roboskiye stop using arabic sources and pro-kurd sources this goes for 8fra0 you are just vandalizing the map if 1 or 2 villages are confirmed captured by reliable source you go and add or change 7-10 villages at once without any confrimation.Lindi29 (talk) 13:07, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

SOHR reported that in the last 48 hours the YPG take control over about 20 villages in the west, southeast, south and northwest of the province of Hasakah province.SOHR SOHR Hanibal911 (talk) 20:16, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

http://www.agathocledesyracuse.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Hasakah-western-front-19-May-2015.jpg YPG made modest advances and has a pocket in its rear. Tgoll774 (talk) 22:53, 19 May 2015 (UTC) the map is accurate,i recommend the hasakah section of the wikipedia map to be updated to agathocle's map.Alhanuty (talk) 01:14, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Update: YPG takes over control of the radio tower (communication facilities) on Mount Abdalaziz http://www.alahednews.com.lb/fastnews/272737/-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%88%D8%AD%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%B1%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%AA%D9%8F%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%B7%D8%B1-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%89-%D9%82%D9%85%D8%A9-%D8%AC%D8%A8%D9%84-%D8%B9%D8%A8%D8%AF%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%B2%D9%8A%D8%B2-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D8%B1%D9%8A%D9%81-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AD%D8%B3%D9%83%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B4%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%8A-%D8%A8%D8%B9%D8%AF-%D8%A7%D8%B4%D8%AA%D8%A8%D8%A7%D9%83%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D9%85%D8%B9#.VVwyk_mqqko . YPG controls now the mountain + cut the eastern and western roads to villages north of it. Roboskiye (talk) 07:14, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Visual evidence for YPG in control of communication facilities on top of Mount Abdalazi (Mount Kizwan):

Some more villages have been taken by YPG yesterday and today: http://anfenglish.com/kurdistan/ypg-15-villages-liberated 8fra0 (talk) 14:03, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

SOHR also reported about clashes continued between YPG and ISIS in the south-western countryside to the city of Ras Al Ain wher YPG take control at least the two villages also clashes took place between YPG with support Syrian Army against ISIS in the rural area between the town Tel Tamer and Mountain area Abdel-Aziz.SOHR Hanibal911 (talk) 20:02, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

We should remove IS supply route to Hama/Homs now

Capture of al-Jazl gives them a direct road connection via Palmyra. Thus we can remove that superfluous dot collection Tgoll774 (talk) 18:03, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

When did ISIS take those 3 bases north of Palmyra? I thought they were holding out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:0:5280:449:8D12:EF37:CFB1:C53 (talk) 20:04, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Also, when did IS take the Jazal Oilfields? Pro SAA reports still report fighting there. MesmerMe (talk) 10:49, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Syrian troops advances against ISIS south of Hasakah

SOHR reported about clashes between NDF against ISIS in white area in the south-western countryside of Hasaka where the Syrian troops during the past two days of advances against ISIS and take control of the some areas that earlier were controlled by the "Islamic state".SOHR And pro government source reported that Syrian troops advanced in the direction city of Shaddadeh.here Hanibal911 (talk) 13:22, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Syrian troops backed by NDF made gains in Hasakah Province, where they retook several areas from the ISIS in the western and southwestern regions this province.Press TV Hanibal911 (talk) 13:46, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Pro opposition source said that the Syrian troops take control village of Tall Baroud in Hasaka countryside, after severe clashes with Islamic State.Documents.Sy Hanibal911 (talk) 14:25, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 this were 3 pro-gov source,except from SOHR.Lindi29 (talk) 16:14, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Lindi29Documents.Sy this pro opposition source source he just use Syrian flag but he is not support Syrian government as SOHR use opposition flag on his web site but we use him as a neutral. This source many times uses as a sources videos from the rebels.here here He just not called the Syrian troops as "regime forces" as this do SOHR. But many times was confirmed that this antigovernment source. And I know that both these sources sources (Press TV and here) I just provide data from the pro opposition source from pro government sources and from SOHR. Hanibal911 (talk) 16:36, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Lindi29 are you ISIL supporter ? you always try to prove ISIL advances and try to stop ISIL defeats .86.135.157.236 (talk) 18:36, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Stop Ad hominem attacks. --햄방이 (talk) 18:45, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Ip I am neutral editor I dont support any of this factions,The offenisve against Isis in the Tall Tamer and Ras al Rayn are true I am not trying to stop they defeats SOHR confirms that but editors alleged pro-kurd ones are editing with pro-kurd sources and arabic which is against the rules and are vandalizing the map if you see,If you pay attention to the rules than you will understand in this case that i replied to Hanibal911 i just mentioned only that he provided 3 pro-gov sources,exepct from SOHR i was having problem with the Documents.sy source beacause all pro-opp sources use other flag they dont use the one that Assad Faction,it's really suspicious to me.If you have doubt that what I was talking than ask Hanibal911 about the rules of editing with a reliable source and pro-side source.Lindi29 (talk) 13:43, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

This source(Documents.Sy) long time opposes against Syrian government and mainly publishes data about success of the rebels in the fight against the Syrian army. But he just use official Syrian flag on main page because this flag still is the official a flag of Syrian republic but this not said that this pro government source. SOHR uses flag of Syrian opposition but we use him as a neutral source. Hanibal911 (talk) 15:13, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Damascus map still needs updating

Top left hand corner of the 'Damascus map', which includes the town of Wadi Barada is in peace treaty and the left bottom green area south of Khan al Shih is fully Government held. This, according to anti-government researcher Christopher Kozak & the pentagon connected Institute for the Study of War (ISW). See Page 24 of the ISW report: http://understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/An%20Army%20in%20All%20Corners%20by%20Chris%20Kozak%201.pdf Is the map going to be fixed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.102.129.170 (talk) 22:17, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

MrPenguin20 is the guy who normally sorts out the SVG maps. I'll give it a go if it's not done in a week. Banak (talk) 22:34, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

On it! MrPenguin20 (talk) 21:12, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Updated. Kozak seems to have mislabeled Artouz (where I don't think there is much opposition presence) as Khan al-Shih (where there is). I've updated the map though to show the general gist of what he's saying - that the extent of opposition control around Khan al-Shih is limited. Also updated Wadi Barada area. MrPenguin20 (talk) 02:09, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Sarrin and Nearby area

I found out that the Islamic State's positions in Dar Kharab and Khirbat al Burj are fully surrounded by Kurdish and Free Syrian Army. Furthermore pro-Kurdish forces showed Sarrin is under the Islamic State control, but Kurds are near to there. # --햄방이 (talk) 16:41, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

You are wrong because you provide outdated source for 14 May. Also more detailed maps from pro Kurdish source clear showed that the city of Sarrin long time contested.for 26 April for 3 May for 10 May for 19 May Hanibal911 (talk) 17:28, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

New pro Kurdish source also clear showed that the city of Sarrin still contested.here Hanibal911 (talk) 13:14, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

https://7496bff410df41fc380ad565a50f607d4b1e8372.googledrive.com/host/0BzN49CdHSAwmcGU4eEI5dVBGZXM/KobaniCantonKU-2015-05-25.png Shows a IS counter attack has linked Khirbat al-Furj with Sarrin and taken a stretch of M4. http://sfha.li/nasit/ This clearly shows IS holding an open air market on the Outskirts of Sarrin where YPG says they are. Obviously YPG isn't there. Sarrin must go to black. Tgoll774 (talk) 13:52, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Rebels/Al Nusrs offensive against Liwa Shuhada al-Yarmouk(pro ISIS) in Daraa

Pro opposition source Syrian Rebellion Observatory reported that after weeks of tension, FSA, Ahrar ash-Sham, Jaysh al-Islam, Al Nusra begun offensive against Liwa Shuhada al-Yarmouk in Daraa.here Also this source reported that the (ex-rebels and for now pro ISIS) Liwa Shuhada al-Yarmouk present in nearly 10 villages/strategic hills in west part of Daraa province. And that they have hundreds of fighters and dozens tanks.here Also pro thid source reported that after the fourteen hours the battles against Liwa Shuhada al-Yarmouk the Ahrar ash-Sham entered in the two town Bakker and Saham al-Jawlan.here and pro government source also reported that the rebels have retaking towns Saham AL-Jawlan and Bakkar after clashes with Yarmouk Martyrs Brigade (pro ISIS)here Hanibal911 (talk) 19:59, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Hanibal911. Please consider using line breaks and bullets to separate out different points. This makes it much easier for us to read. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 20:47, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

SOHR wrote something about this. DuckZz (talk) 21:59, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

SOHR reported that the violent clashes continued between brigade Martyrs Yarmouk fighters and Al-Nusra, Islamic factions in the town of Saham Al-Jawlan and its surrounding countryside west of Daraa, amid mutual bombardment of the parties, which managed the victory of progress and control over large parts of the region of the town of Saham Al-Jawlan.SOHR SOHR Hanibal911 (talk) 07:06, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Any reason that entire corner of the map is counted as ISIS? Up from like 3 villages earlier? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:0:5280:449:8D12:EF37:CFB1:C53 (talk) 02:51, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Qalamoun offensive

Syrian troops and Hezbollah taken control of most of Qalamoun, rebels fleeing north toward the outskirts of Arsal(Lebanon)The Dailt Star Hanibal911 (talk) 15:56, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

According sayed_ridha Hezbollah takes control of Talet Sadr Al-Bustan (2601m) which is north of Talet Musa 217.99.132.128 (talk) 09:32, 23 May 2015

Here this hill on map Talet Sadr Al-Bustan Hanibal911 (talk) 11:43, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

SOHR also reported about clashes between Islamic fighters and Al-Nusra against Hezbollah/NDF in Jarrod Kalamoon in Lebanon and said about progress of Hezbollah and NDF against Al Nusra in this area.SOHR So that SOHR also indirectly confirmed this data. Hanibal911 (talk) 14:09, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Another advace almasdar Hezbollah Captures the Western Hills of Tal Thaljah in the Qalamoun Mountains and almasdar Hezbollah Captures Al-Qaba’ and Al-Niqar on the border of Nahleh dailystar confirm this. 217.99.132.128 (talk) 12:52, 25 May 2015

Hanibal911 There should be a rural presence icon, clashes are still reported DuckZz (talk) 14:55, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

DuckZz Reliable source two days ago clear said that Syrian army and Hezbollah taken most of Qalamoun and rebels fleeing toward outskirts of Arsal and some rebels retreated to border where still ongoing sporadic clashes.The Daily Star So that for now mainly clashes going on territory Lebanon and in some areas near border. But this to small area and we cant put this icon. Now the main battles in the area of Qalamoun but on Lebanese territory. Becasue most part of area which earlier was taken by rebels/Al Nusra is located on Lebanon territory. Also for now some reliable sources clear said that for now the troops and Hezbollah advance and take new area in north part Qalamoun wher still present ISIS fighters and some fightrers from Al Nusra which earlier retreated from most part Qalamoun. Hanibal911 (talk) 15:34, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Also today the reliable source clear said that the Syrian troops backed by Hezbollah fighters, launched an offensive in Qalamoun earlier this month, capturing dozens of rebel bases and driving their north toward the outskirts of Lebanon's Arsal.The Daily Star Hanibal911 (talk) 08:45, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Palmyra neighborood

Why all locations around Palmyra has been turned black? There are sources reporting SAA presence not far from Palmyra..Paolowalter (talk) 14:36, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

SOHR source from today. DuckZz (talk) 14:56, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

This information apperas to be unfounded. Never heard by any other source. Including pro-rebel. They cannot be taken seriously.Paolowalter (talk) 21:58, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

：I suspect that SOHR gets its information regarding ISIS straight from ISIS in SAA vs ISIS situations.If you notice, the casualties are always much higher and more skewed in SAA vs ISIS than SAA vs Rebels.However, when the kurds fight ISIS, the death toll is almost 2 or 3:1 in favor of the kurds, how strange. Nevertheless, the pro-gov sources still seem adament about a coming counterattack, so we should leave the map as is for now. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 22:14, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Interesing news here and here This is pro gov source but mayby SAA not so far from Palmyra as on the map 217.99.132.128 (talk) 22:30, 25 May 2015 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:25AA:1:4004:0:0:0:6E (talk)

No one is denying that the SAA may be to the west of Palmyra, I doubt they are a mile from the city but they control the road at least up to Al-qalbiya, To the South is where the route has been seen though. Speaking of which Pro-opp source stating ISIS has the Al-Busayri https://twitter.com/TaziMorocco/status/602863618565234692 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:0:5280:449:8D12:EF37:CFB1:C53 (talk) 23:27, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

This guy a antigovernment dreamer and his information should not even be considered. He wrote a few weeks ago that the rebels captured the almost entire plain of Al Ghab and the troops retreated from this area and many other not a true data. Hanibal911 (talk) 06:43, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

But Iranian channel Press TV(pro government) showed that army still located near city of Palmyra.here So for now we have data from pro government source and from antigovernment source. But we need data from a reliable(a neutral) source. And SOHR reported that ISIS captured some areas around city and south from city including several gas fields and T3 Pumping station. So let's not argue and just wait more information from reliable sources. Hanibal911 (talk) 06:53, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

From http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/east-homs-erupts-with-violence-isis-attacking-multiple-areas/ it appears that SAA in still close to Palmyra and in other location in this area. SOHR info looks totally unreliable.Paolowalter (talk) 07:00, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Paolowalter As I said early Al Masdar make many mistaked in their reports so I can't said that this source reliable on 100%. But Iranian source Press TV(pro governement) said that the according to data from a military source the Syrian army has launched the major offensive against the ISIL who recently overran the city of Palmyra in central Homs province. "The Syrian air force struck more than 160 (ISIL) targets, killing and wounding terrorists and destroying weapons and vehicles equipped with machine-guns" on the outskirts of Palmyra and elsewhere in the province. Various military operations are also being carried out in the areas around the al-Suknah, the Arak, and al-Hail gas fields and all the roads leading to Palmyra.Press TV But as I said earlier it is only data from the pro government source and we must wait confirmation from the neutral sources. Hanibal911 (talk) 09:08, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Aleppo map needs updating

In addition to Damascus map needing update, the Aleppo map also needs update. According to both pro-opp & now pro-gov sources the IS head choppers have overcome some of the red and green areas in eastern Aleppo- see this map: http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/battle-map-of-the-sheikh-najjar-industrial-district-of-aleppo/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.231.26.212 (talk) 17:01, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

MrPenguin20 is the guy who normally sorts out the SVG maps.Lindi29 (talk) 17:08, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Updated to show advance. I'll try and work out where the boundary between non-ISIS opposition and ISIS lies. MrPenguin20 (talk) 02:46, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 The village of Sheikh Muhammed is really small, as you can see here. Instead of that, we can remove this village and add Rasm Kabahar on the same spot because rebels should control this village because it's on the same road as Rashidiyah, probably from where of they started the attacks, because it's not possible to control Rashidiyah without Rasm Kabahar. DuckZz (talk) 12:28, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

DuckZz As I said early we edit only on based data from reliable sources but not on the basis of assumptions. So that SOHR said that rebels captured Sheikh Muhammed and Rashidiyah and we markd this villages as under control by rebels and it is all. Also attack on the village can not only from the road. But if a reliable source confirmed this data, we will do so. Otherwise these changes on the basis of assumptions will be repeated so some villages will be marked wrong only on the basis of assumptions. I hope for your understanding. Hanibal911 (talk) 12:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

DuckZz Also SOHR and pro oppositions source reported that later the Syrain troops recaptured village of Rashidiyah.SOHR Step News Agency also another pro opposition source said that the Syrian troops recaptured villages of Jub Awad and Qurbatia.here and also said that the rebels withdrew with captured weapons from village of Rashidiyah and from surrounding areas after counterattack the Syrian troops.here Hanibal911 (talk) 19:54, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Hanibal911 You probably don't understand the difference between being pro-opposition and being reliable. For example, Eliah Magnier is pro-government orianted, but he's reliable, so we use him as a source. This dude BosnoSin writes mostly about rebel stuff, but there's a difference because he is reliable, while not being pro-rebel (being pro-rebel means that he writes about regime, Bashar and other stuff not realated to the situation on the ground). There's not a single post by him that was actually wrong, so he has a 100% accuracy, which means he's realiable. DuckZz (talk) 20:15, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

I am so confused. How could you possibly think EJM is pro Syrian Government? It is not like he ignores rebel victories or says "long live Assad " all day long. XJ-0461 v2 (talk) 22:17, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

DuckZ you failed once again. Bosnosin calls al nusra beheaders "rebels" and reported Rashidiya captured without any evidence meanwhile it was not even half captured. 100% accuracy LOL Totholio (talk) 21:19, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

DuckZz Stop talking nonsense this guy on 100% pro opposition activist he basicly said about rebels advnces and many times he writes misinformation that troops are going to retreat from the city Araiha or even from the Idlib province trying to exaggerate the successes of the rebels. If he writes Srian army this not said that hisr a neutral(reliable) becasue he basicly writes about rebels victory and republishes data from pro-IF source and some other rebel sources. So stop said that he is a neutral. But Eliah Magnier it is a neutral source he is a chief international correspondent of AL Rai(the Kuwaiti newspaper) and this confirmed very relaible source British national morning newspaper The Independent This source clar said "Elijah J Magnier, the chief international correspondent for Al-Rai Media" Hanibal911 (talk) 06:37, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

And opposition source reported that the Syrian troops retake villages of Rashadiyah and Sheikh Mohamed near the town of Khanasir.Archicivilians Hanibal911 (talk) 12:52, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Jazal Oilfields

Why are the Jazal Oilfields IS held, when pro gov sources tell that it was never lost. I know we're not supposed to use information from the same side of the bias of the source, but this change shouldn't have happened i the first place.MesmerMe (talk) 08:56, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Additional info from Al Masdar http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/the-syrian-army-finally-ousts-isis-from-the-al-shaar-mountains/. In my understanding Jazal oil filed and village should go red and Sha'er gas field should have the black hal ring removed. Furthermore it states again that SAA is not far from Palmyra, on the west side I guess.Paolowalter (talk) 21:10, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi! I just want to say that there is a huge phosphate mine in the direct vincinity of Khunayfis. It is even bigger than the one in As Sawwanah Al-Sharqiyah to the east. You can easily see it on Google Maps. SOHR said it has been captured by ISIL, so could someone please add the icon there? Kolya60 (talk) 13:11, 26 May 2015 (GMT)

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2015/05/26/ISIS-militants-advance-towards-Damascus.html More confirmation. Looks like IS is looking to break south to the Suweida Pocket and grab the Dumayr Plains in preparation for attacking Damascus Tgoll774 (talk) 12:28, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Al Arabiya it is a Saudi TV Channel but Saudi Arabia stronge opposes to Syrian government and support all forces which fight against Syrian troops so we cant use all Saudi sources against Syrian troops also as we cant use all Iranian sources for success of Syrian troops. Hanibal911 (talk) 12:39, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

And source Al Arabiya only said that said that ISIS has made further progress on the highway Tadmor-Damascus and grabbed the Khnaifess phosphate mines and nearby houses about 70 kilometers south of Palmyra.here And this data also confirm pro government source. But source not said that ISIS advanced to Suwayda or Rif Dimashq source clear said that clashes still going in Homs province. Hanibal911 (talk) 12:47, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

IS control near golan heights

This looks wrong. I heard something about al-Nusra operating there. But if we had IS bordering Israel, I imagine we'd be hearing a little about it. Banak (talk) 20:11, 26 May 2015 (UTC) [[User:Banak|Banak] According to the data of the Israeli source pro-ISIS ex-rebel groups control some towns near Golan Heights.(Jamlah, ash-Shajarah, Bakkar, and Ain Dhakar) Also source said that according to the Free Syrian Army spokesman, the number of fighters from Al Nusra in the provinces of Quneitra and Daraa, adjacent to the Israeli and Jordanian borders, has diminished in recent weeks from 3,000 to no more than 700 fighters and that the 80-90% of al-Nusra’s fighters are locals who share the basic goals of the other rebel units, differentiating the group from the Islamic State which is more active in the north and is mostly composed of foreign fighters.The Times of Israel and earlier pro opposition source Syrian Rebellion Observatory said that the Liwa Shuhada al-Yarmouk(pro ISIS) is based in nearly 10 villages and strategic hills in west Rif Daraa.here Hanibal911 (talk) 11:08, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Pro-Government source reports dual IS and Rebel offensives to cut off Aleppo.

https://twitter.com/moscow_ghost/status/603221347167272960

From this map's description, the Rebels are trying to go for Khanasir, and IS is going for Ithriya. Peto Lucem retweeted it, so this map seems to be at least somewhat accepted news in the pro-Government media camp. So what I'm proposing is for that the "Army presence East of Khanisir (or whatever" marker should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.126.188.171 (talk) 04:19, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

This map from pro opposition source.here And if someone copied it does not mean that it has become the pro government map. Hanibal911 (talk) 05:29, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Maybe you have a point. We should wait until pro-Government sources confirm this. But I am actually seeing more and more (pro-Opposition) sources depicting that Aleppo is either cut off or nearly cut off. Let's see how time goes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.126.188.171 (talk) 08:38, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Rebels two days ago try advances toward Khanasser and captured two villages but Syrian troops counterattacked regain control of these villages and captured another two villages.Archicivilians SOHR Step News Agency here here Hanibal911 (talk) 14:30, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Mabrukah

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CGAXp4WW0AAaw7Z.png Pro-IS and from ANHA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6eo3sYm9QI&feature=youtu.be Its clear IS still holds it otherwise It wouldn't be getting lit up like the fourth of July. Tgoll774 (talk) 11:57, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Another youtube video that could have been filmed anytime , anywhere .86.135.155.156 (talk) 13:01, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

SOHR clear said that the town of Mabrukah under control by Kurdish forces.SOHR Hanibal911 (talk) 14:00, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Kurdish militia took control of the strategic village of Al-Mabrukah. Over the course of 20 days, YPG seized control of 4,000 square kilometers of territory from ISIS in Hasakah province.The Daily Star Hanibal911 (talk) 14:11, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Kurdish media, unlike jihadist media, never lies. Here are video footage of YPG inside :

http://hawarnews.com/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B4%D8%A7%D9%87%D8%AF-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A3%D9%88%D9%84%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D9%85%D9%86-%D8%A8%D9%84%D8%AF%D8%A9-%D9%85%D8%A8%D8%B1%D9%88%D9%83%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%AD%D8%B1%D8%B1/

http://hawarnews.com/%D9%83%D9%8A%D9%81-%D8%AA%D9%85-%D8%B7%D8%B1%D8%AF-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B1%D8%AA%D8%B2%D9%82%D8%A9-%D9%85%D9%86-%D9%85%D8%A8%D8%B1%D9%88%D9%83%D8%A9/ Roboskiye (talk) 15:08, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

the fall of the town was honestly shocking,now there is no barrier for the kurdish forces to reach Slouk.Alhanuty (talk) 17:59, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Many reliable sources said that for now Kurdish forces can advance from Kobane and from Mabroukah toward the town of Tall Abyad. And pro Kurdish source showed on map how they will do this.here Hanibal911 (talk) 18:19, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Syrian troops counterattacked near Palmyra

SOHR reported that the now clashes between Syrian troops and ISIS in the vicinity of Jazal oil field and that the Syrian troops advance in this area.SOHR Also yesterday the map from the antigovernment source also showed that the positions of Syrian troops still located near the Jazal oil field.here Hanibal911 (talk) 10:17, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Jazal shouldn't have made IS held in the first place. MesmerMe (talk) 13:12, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Kind of related since it's in the same general area but should we switch Ithriya on the government route to Aleppo to ISIS controlled? Or at least get rid of SAA control to the east of it in the desert — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:0:5280:449:1957:3627:557F:9929 (talk) 17:55, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

We can't do this on based data from the pro-ISIS sources or according to the data from biased antigovernment activists from Twitter. Hanibal911 (talk) 18:09, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Is archivillains considered a good source? His most recent map shows that ISIS is in control of all of those mounts in the desert south of Palmyra https://archicivilians.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/desert-i.png It also states that the SAA has almost no presence in the Damascus desert either though..... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:0:5280:449:1957:3627:557F:9929 (talk) 18:52, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

This source clear opposes to Syrian governement so it is will not correct use him against Syrian troops. Also we agreed not use all pro government sources against Syrian rebels and also not use pro opposition sources against Syrian troops. This source long time opposes to Syrian troops and we can't use data from biased antigovernment source against Syrian troops. Also many opposition sources support ISIS in their fight against Syrian troops. Also almost two years ago when ISIS jointly fight against Syrian troops all pro opposition sources supported the ISIS. We need data from the neutral sources. Hanibal911 (talk) 19:04, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

SOHR reported about clashes between Srian troops and ISIS in the vicinity of the village Khunayfis.SOHR Hanibal911 (talk) 13:46, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Pro ISIS source also said that clashes in Jazal and in vicinity of village Khunayfis.here Hanibal911 (talk) 15:10, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Ariha

SAA Forces have retreated from Ariha per Pro Gov Source. MesmerMe (talk) 18:17, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Revert own edit

Yesterday I reverted some YPG advantages west of Serekaniye, because the pro-Kurdish mapper @CizireCanton had it as ISIS' territory.[9] Now he shows it as YPG controlled[10], and thats why I want to revert by edit. But is it okay to do that, when its a pro-Kurdish source?

I'd say yes, because it's likely a mistake or the older version being outdated (or using outdated info), assuming nothing was wrong with the YPG advances before you reverted them. Banak (talk) 23:10, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

I thought we weren't allowed to use Pro-etc sources for etc gains. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:0:5280:449:4D1:FC23:D49B:D14A (talk) 23:24, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

2 conflicting sources, one of them no longer says what it did, surely we go with the other? It's more reverting using the pro-Kurdish source for IS gains in my opinion. If your only reason for doing something is a source, and then that source changes so that reasoning no longer holds up and you have no other sources in the mean time, it seems obvious to me that you should undo your change. I don't know the ins and outs of whether this is technically in accordance with the rules, but it seems to be in the spirit of them, as well as being good for accuracy. I guess you could argue the source wasn't accurate/reliable enough so shouldn't have been used in the first place, or something about it being in effect unsourced content. Or just Wikipedia:Ignore_all_rules in regards to improving accuracy and therefore the encyclopaedia. Banak (talk) 23:47, 28 May 2015 (UTC)