Talk:Northwestern Syria offensive (April–June 2015)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Northwestern Syria offensive (April–June 2015) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Military history: Middle East / Post-Cold War Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Middle Eastern military history task force
	Post-Cold War task force

Syria Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Syria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Syria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SyriaWikipedia:WikiProject SyriaTemplate:WikiProject SyriaSyria
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Involved groups

Which coalition is involved in the offensive? According to the Long War Journal [1], the groups involved are a separate coalition from the Army of Conquest. David O. Johnson (talk) 22:09, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be strong evidence that the Battle of Victory group is separate from the Army of Conquest (for example, each group has its own logo). [2] David O. Johnson (talk) 22:43, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There are 3 different offensives going on simultaneously in the region, each with a different collection of groups. Jaish al-Fateh is involved in the fight for Ariha and Matsumeh and as far as I have been able to tell no involvement in the Jisr al-Shughur offensive. Jisr al-Shughar involves Latakia factions, mainly Ansar al-Sham, Ahrar al-Sham, Nusra, Junud al-Sham and some FSA groups. Gazkthul (talk) 13:17, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Army of Conquest shouldn't be in the info box then. The cited source for its involvement is from a month before this offensive even started.David O. Johnson (talk) 22:26, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Victory is not a group. It has been cited as the name of the offensive [3][4] and the name of the operations room from which the battle is directed. As for the ones leading the charge, the Army of Conquest has been cited in this regard as seen here [5][6] (sources are from 2 days ago, and not from a month ago). EkoGraf (talk) 23:55, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Institute for the Study of War has come out with an in-depth look at this and related offensives [7]. We likely need to either rename this article or create new ones, as it is broader than just Jisr al-Shughur:

The operation was commanded and controlled through a newly established operations room, which coordinated the involvement of JN, Ahrar al-Sham (HASI), Jaysh al-Islam, Ansar al-Sham, and the jihadist Jabhat Ansar al-Din coalition. The offensive also included participation from the primarily Chechen jihadist group Junud al-Sham in addition to the Turkistan Islamic Party in Syria. Two FSA-affiliated groups, the First Coastal Division and 13th Division, also participated, according to videos uploaded to YouTube of the groups firing TOW anti-tank missiles near the city...As JN and rebels consolidate in Jisr al-Shughour, two additional offensives are still ongoing. The first, undertaken by the Jaysh al-Fatah operations room, seeks to seize control of remaining regime strongholds south of Idlib City...Meanwhile, HASI, Ajnad al-Sham, and other rebel groups continue the “Battle to Free Sahel al-Ghab” to push north through the al-Gahb plain in an attempt to eliminate a regime-held “buffer zone” that separates rebel-held terrain in Hama and Idlib Provinces from the Alawite-majority province of Latakia Gazkthul (talk) 01:30, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree to some kind of name change of the article. But not to some POV name given by the rebels, a neutral name would be appropriate. EkoGraf (talk) 11:05, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A map its needed,

Given the scale of men/losses and its strategic importante the article should have a small map of the Theather of Operations.Mr.User200 (talk) 12:55, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Split

Al-Mastumah military camp, Qarmeed Brick Factory base, Ariha, Musabeen, Nihlya and other viliges have nothing to do with Jisr al-Shughur offensive! This is a completely different offensive. I'm proposing a split of the two offensive. 3bdulelah (talk) 13:03, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would support splitting the article, as it contains different simultaneous offensives. I would also propose it be merged into the 2015 Idlib offensive page. Gazkthul (talk) 23:10, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose They are not separate offensives. As the sources in the article describe in detail, it is one complex three-pronged (Jisr al-Shughur, Mastouma, al-Ghab) offensive. Even the rebels themselves collectively call this large offensive taking place in three areas Battle of victory, so its one operation. However, I would support the renaming of this article to Idlib and Hama offensive (April–May 2015), or something along those lines. But calling it two or three separate offensives is incorrect and not in line with the sources. As for the offensive that resulted in the capture of Idlib city, that was a separate operation that ended almost three weeks earlier. EkoGraf (talk) 12:52, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of victory is the name of operation room in jisr al-Shughur while Jaysh al-Fateh is the operation room in Idlib, Qarmeed, Mastumah and now in Ariha. In Ghab there is "battle of al-Ghab plain" operation room. I would agree that we only rename this article but we need a separate article for the battle of jisr al-Shughur city because it was a major battle that deserve its own article 3bdulelah (talk) 19:01, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It may be the name of the operation room but its also the name of the collective offensive per the sources [8][9][10]. Jaish al-Fatah has evolved into a coalition, no longer a simple operations room, and has branches throughout Idlib, and even in Hama, Latakia and Qalamoun. There was no major battle of Jisr al-Shughur. Fighting lasted three days, for the most part outside the town, while in the town the fighting lasted only a few hours. What HAS been notable and somewhat major is the siege of the National Hospital, but not enough in my opinion to warrant its own article. EkoGraf (talk) 23:31, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you can read Arabic please read the official account of battle of Victory. They are complaining about media who are confusing between them and Jaysh al-fateh. also you can find the logo of the battle in rebel videos from jist al-shughur while in Idlib you see Jaysh al-fateh's logo. I know that there is a lot of confusion in the media between the two battles. Regarding jisr al-shughur battle having its own article, the length of the battle is not a factor. the battle was in length close to battle of Idlib which has its own article. Moreover, we have a lot of articles for short battles. Jisr al-shughur is an important city and we already have an article for its first battle (June 2011 Jisr ash-Shugur operation). anyway the most important thing is that we change the title here because Mastuma and Qarmeed camps are not in Jisr al-shughur area. 3bdulelah (talk) 01:01, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We rely on what sources say. And they call Jaysh al-fateh a rebel coalition and Battle of victory the name of the operation. Rebel videos are not accepted as sources by Wikipedia. And the battle for Idlib city was more notable than the battle for Jisr al-shughur city. What was notable was the overall offensive throughout the three fronts (that's why we have this article). In any case, that's not important right now like you say. Lets settle on the name. Like I said before, proposal - Idlib and Hama offensive (April–May 2015) or maybe 2015 northeastern Syria offensive. Both would be in line with already established template names we have with other articles. I would go with the second one, since it seems the rebel offensive via Hama has been mostly repelled and died out weeks ago. EkoGraf (talk) 09:34, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You mean northwestern not northeastern. Yes I would go with "2015 Northwestern Syria offensive" 3bdulelah (talk) 14:38, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, sorry meant nortwestern hehehe. My bad. :P EkoGraf (talk) 17:25, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree with changing to 2015 Northwestern Syria offensive as a better name than the current. Gazkthul (talk) 22:43, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok lets change it now. 3bdulelah (talk) 17:24, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free image use

The following non-free images used in the infobox do not have the separate, specific non-free rationale required by WP:NFCC#10c for use in this particular article.Therefore, I have removed them per WP:NFCCE and the discussion at WP:NFCR#2015 Jisr al-Shughur offensive. These images should not be re-added until a non-free use rationale for this article which satisfies all 10 of the criteria listed atWP:NFCCP has been added respectively for each image. The images which I removed are as follows:

- Marchjuly (talk) 00:40, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rebel support

The infobox says that the rebels are supported by Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar. As far as I know, the support to the rebels is general material support. Saying that the rebels are supported by Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar in this battle, while technically not wrong, seems irrelevant, unless Saudi jets were flying over Idlib or there were Turkish tanks in Jisr ash-Shughour that I don't know about. I've seen this on a lot of the articles pertaining to this war, and I think we should start trying to fix it unless Turkish/Saudi/Qatari forces are actually in a given battle and fighting with or otherwise supporting the rebs. Utahwriter14 (talk) 21:26, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]