Talk:Syrian civil war

FAQ: infobox

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Question

Why is the infobox short? Where is the information about belligerents and other information commonly seen in an infobox?

Answer

The Syrian civil war is an ongoing multi-sided conflict in Syria involving various state-sponsored and non-state actors. [From the opening sentence of the lead]

Previously, this article had a very long infobox, which attempted to capture the complex relationships between the many belligerent parties in this civil war and present other information such as strengths and casualties.

An RfC was held proposing a substantially shorter version as we now see (Talk:Syrian civil war/Archive 51#RfC on infobox).

To summarise some key points, an infobox is a simple, at-a-glance summary of key points from the article. It is unsuited to capturing nuance and complex information. Quoting from MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE:

The less information that an infobox contains, the more effectively it serves its purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance.

The consensus of the RfC was for the substantially shorter version of the infobox.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Issues

The whole article needs a rewrite, it for example lists allied forces as bellingerents. And it's locked so that nobody can actually do anything to deal with its problems.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.78.207.102 (talk) 07:02, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

I suppose that just as consensus can change, so can allies change. Feel free to use {{Edit semi-protected}} here to suggest specific edits. – wbm1058 (talk) 01:13, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Indeed, needs to be re-written. Starting with the title that reads "CIVIL" war. When foreign forces unlawfully invade and annihilate your country, it is not a civil war. It is a hostile and aggressive attack we call today terror. Calling it a "civil" war is a misleading political statement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.70.29.185 (talk) 09:22, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

It's quite common for foreign forces to intervene in a civil war. That doesn't (necessarily) change the internal aspect of the war. — kwami (talk) 08:19, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

I would support the notion that this was not a civil war but a proxy war. Mercenaries, foreign or national, fighting a proxy war for foreign powers, paid, armed and guided by those foreign powers, among which the CIA, do not qualify as a local uprising and part of a civil war. Mregelsberger (talk) 17:04, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

For the people who are defending USA and NATO, USA with the help of turkey, they posioned syrian civillians by dropping posion gas from airplanes. If that is not a war crime then I do not know what is. 155.4.141.62 (talk) 21:09, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

I think that even the title - Syrian Civil War - is misleading and should be changed. This is corroborated by people here and by information, that is increasingly available, not least the continuation of the proxy war between the USA and Russia in Ukraine. A proxy war opposing armed gangs managed by foreign powers and a national army is not a civil war, even though it apparently is among national parties. The "conflict in Ukraine" as it is called by the OHCHR is quite similar and is named on Wikipedia as "War in Donbas" described, without further proof as follows: "The war in Donbas, or Donbas war was a phase of the Russo-Ukrainian War in the Donbas region of Ukraine." This could also be said of the war in Syria, which could be named the "War in Syria", a "phase of the proxy war of the USA and Russia, opposing US mercenary groups assisted by US and US ally troupes and the Syrian army with Syrian allies (Russia, Iran, Hezbollah)". The war in Syria actually is not over, with the USA illegally occupying the north-eastern part of the country, i.e. the oil fields of Syria, producing oil on its own account without permission from the national government. Nothing is "civil" there. Wikipedia shouldn't get involved in politics and have only one standard, in this case applied to all conflicts alike, without distinction of who is waging them. Mregelsberger (talk) 10:08, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Agreed. There is a sentence in there saying that the Syrian Civil War "...started nine years ago..." This page needs work. Livepsycle (talk) 04:53, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Well said. Spiralwhats in your boxCox (talk) 11:27, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

References

second cold war in infobox

the conflict isn’t even well defined Bte3000 (talk) 04:20, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

I agree, the Second Cold War is not a conflict yet. So it should probably be removed from the list of related conflicts. 2600:1702:5870:5930:50C1:FBB6:27DD:284F (talk) 23:31, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Status of War RFC

Is the Syrian civil war over? 207.96.32.81 (talk) 00:52, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

No. I'm pretty sure what's happening right now is still civil war material, mostly due to ISIS and the Kurds. Although, my question is, is this the end of this FIRST Syrian civil war, and a new one began? Or is it just a new phase? Zabezt (talk) 00:56, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

I would say no. There is no end in sight for violence in Syria, especially with the ongoing fight for Manbij, and it remains to be seen if the new government will actually be stable enough not to immediately descend into civil war once again. I’m not sure who edited the article to say it ended today, but I’d wait until a stable government has been established before any drastic changes are made. DarthTFalls12 (talk) 01:00, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. And I reverted the inaccuracy on the infobox, it's way too early to tell. Zabezt (talk) 01:19, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

As of this comment, the result parameter is used not status parameter for template:Infobox_military_conflict See this edit - [1]207.96.32.81 (talk) 03:48, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

I would disagree theres no end in sight, given Assad has fallen there is very much an end in sight if the rebel groups can come to agreement. But I do think its too early to say its over now GothicGolem29 (talk) 01:41, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

No. The rebels might start fighting each other so for now its still going GothicGolem29 (talk) 01:40, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Comment (not a vote): I don't know a whole lot about the war myself, but if it now only involves people from other/outside countries, then wouldn't this technically be no longer a civil war (i.e. "just a war")? — AP 499D25 (talk) 03:40, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

It is not over YET. Hinga toka (talk) 03:50, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

an important competitor in the Syrian civil war which is rojava does still exist and still fighting in manbaj so it should be ongoing but with adding the information that says Assad regime has fallen or maybe as long nothing is clear for the aftermath of this offensive let's just leave it empty untill something happens 81.215.194.128 (talk) 06:34, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

• Basically Not Yet - We rushed to announce the war in Afghanistan as being over and that was a mistake (albeit one that ultimately didn't make too much difference). I'm of the same opinion here: let's have some reliable sources saying it's over before we declare it over based on our own assessments. FOARP (talk) 13:26, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
• Not over. I agree it is not over. if the various opposition groups, factions, and militias do not have any conflicts at all after today, it will be a miracle. i think we need to keep covering this for a while.*:Sm8900 (talk) 14:32, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes. The war aim is to overthrow Assad regime since the beginning. It should be declared as over on December 8, 2024. For post-war conflicts, a new article should be created (e.g. Syrian crisis (2011-present)) like Afghanistan conflict and Libyan crisis (2011–present). CobsonEnjoyer (talk) 01:40, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

the war aim for each group in a war, is to win the war. the different factions are already fighting to win power from the others. Sm8900 (talk) 02:38, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

• This is becoming an issue. People are inserting into the info box "Syrian Opposition victory" despite the infobox claiming the war is ongoing. Fantastic Mr. Fox (talk) 19:05, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

  That may be appropriate for Fall of Damascus but on this page is the open question. 207.96.32.81 (talk) 20:19, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

No. There is still fighting between HTS and SDF. In any case we shouldn't hurry but rather wait for RS to assert this. Alaexis_¿question? 21:04, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

• Not over - Initially, the civil war was only against Bashar al-Assad but there are too many factions for years now who are currently almost as dominant as Assad's regime once was. - Ratnahastin (talk) 03:58, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Wait we can’t say for sure yet The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 05:33, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

• Not yet Per the title, the scope of the article is civil warring in Syria. While/if internal fighting continues between different factions after the fall of the Assad government, then ipso facto the civil warring continues. The lead tells us that such factional fighting is within the scope of the article. Most crucially though, the civil war is over when good quality sources explicitly tell us it is - noting that WP:NEWSORG sources are qualified as sources (see also WP:RSBREAKING). Cinderella157 (talk) 02:13, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

• No, there's still fighting between various Islamist forces and Kurdish forces.

Sarrotrkux (talk) 21:16, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Russian military bases

The term "Russian military bases" will suffice, It's not an occupation at the moment. Zyxrq (talk) 08:12, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Actually because the other countries use “occupation” I do think it’s appropriate. Zyxrq (talk) 09:48, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

It wasn't an occupation under Assad since they were there with the government's approval. Whether it's an occupation or not in the future will depend on whether whatever future government agrees to Russian bases or not. If it was called an "occupation" when Assad was in power, I agree that it was wrong wording. Sarrotrkux (talk) 21:20, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

THIS MAP IS A MESS. OUTDATED

PLEASE CHANGE THIS MAP FAST. 2409:40D0:1019:31DC:BD6B:4255:19C8:4A0 (talk) 00:51, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

• Delete the map - There is no way of sourcing a reliable up-to-the-moment accurate war map and any attempt runs immediately in to WP:OR/WP:SYNTH issues. FOARP (talk) 09:28, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Are you kidding us?! Just follow the live news of reliable sources like the BBC. What a lame excuse. 46.31.118.94 (talk) 12:29, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Is it possible to construct a map covering the whole of Syria based on individual reports typically sourced to videos/official statements/etc., one that's accurate for the time it's published, by collating different reports at different times from different sources according to different standards? No. The massive debate that's occurring on this page demonstrates why. FOARP (talk) 13:54, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

We werent sure before either. We can see different sources imply bigger changes, for instance see bbc: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c2ex7ek9pyeo.

What we do know:

• Israel incursions at leadt into UN buffer zone
• Opposition forces have taken Deir ez zor, pushing SDF over the Euphrates at least in that directorate.
• Manbij has fallen to SNA, pushing SDF east of Euphrates.

Also, i motion to merge Southern Operations Room, HTS and Syrian Free Army into the Military Operations Department (as is used by Syriahr.com etc.)

leaving SNA as a separate force, alongside the SDF, USA, Russia, Israel. 2A02:A460:301E:1:92F1:6370:F48F:2859 (talk) 16:25, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

• Delete the map - per FOARP. Most of the talk page is about this issue, and it would help to remove the map until things have settled down a little and we have a clearer understanding of who controls which territory. Lenovya (talk) 13:44, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
• Make the map reliable again The map should be deleted if it is not based on reliable sources, however, it is better to make it reliable as it was for many years in the past (see my comment at the section above "Military Situation Map is Inaccurate"). In any case, the map file is now protected and cannot be edited for 2 days. In the meantime, I propose we all work on the template map and make it what we want based on discussions, consensus, and reliable sources. After we are done with this and we are satisfied with it, someone will create a picture map based on copy-paste-edit the template map. That created picture map will then be posted on this article. This is how we did it for years without any problems.

We cannot keep creating maps each on his own, and then edit war to push his own map onto this article. Map creation (like everything else on Wikipedia) is a team project. The "template" framework was created to facilitate collaboration on creating a map. Tradedia^talk 19:45, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

The "template framework" is a recipe for creating a WP:SYNTH based on unreliable sources. FOARP (talk) 22:47, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

• Delete Per heavy original research problems. Ecrusized (talk) 11:06, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Collage instead of map

After the fall of Damascus, a map is not as immediately informative or relevant as a collage. Therefore, I would support readdition of the collage with which @Chessrat replaced the map in the infobox of this article. –Gluonz ^{talk contribs} 22:38, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

I would like to add that the specific images in the collage should probably be changed (specifically the one of celebrations of the fall of the regime was the only one available on Commons, but better alternatives would be good). Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 22:44, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

A collage of what? How exactly would this work? Because if you can’t determine who controls what at a glance, then it can’t really replace a map. Besides, how does the fall of Damascus make the map less informative/relevant than it was before?

(Also apologies if there’s a glitch or something on my end because I don’t see the replacement that you’re talking about.) LordOfWalruses (talk) 22:44, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Permalink to version being discussed, for reference: https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Template%3ASyrian_civil_war_infobox&diff=1262517152&oldid=1262457970

Compare to the infobox of Iraq War. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 22:47, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Yeah this is absolutely not the right way forward: we need to be able to know who controls what given that Syria is still controlled by many different groups. LordOfWalruses (talk) 23:13, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

• Support collage - The answer to the map not being reliably sourced is to use photos of the conflict, which are anyway way more illustrative than a map with a bunch of totally illegible symbols and text on it. FOARP (talk) 22:52, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

  Not reliably sourced? The Wikipedia community has been working on this map for years with sources and a consensus that make sure that each change is accurate. There were even talks to verify claims made by the map whilst Assad’s regime was falling, and if you still feel like there’s an inaccuracy, then just make a talk page on it and the map can be changed.

  The map may have issues, but those issues don’t outweigh the information that the map provides, which is very legible and I don’t see any reason why it is not. Besides, what information does a photo provide other than tiny tidbits of obvious information? “Wow, the war is deadly.” “Wow, soldiers fought in the war.” “Wow, the rebels won: I totally needed a photo for that.” The map shows us what faction controls what, and there’s no way a photo collage can replace that. Besides, don’t the same issues with the map apply to the photos? How can you tell if a photo is mislabeled or fabricated?

  Sorry if this is a bit long and/or condescending. I just really dislike this idea and I don’t think solves anything at all. LordOfWalruses (talk) 23:20, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

  It definitely solves the problem of having a map generated entirely out of original research. WP:EFFORT isn't a good argument for keeping something. FOARP (talk) 10:27, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

  By just getting rid of the information entirely instead of improving it, finding another source to verify the map, or just putting an “original research” disclaimer? Even if this map isn’t very reliable, it still provides more useful information than just a collage of photos that barely say anything about the reality of the conflict. LordOfWalruses (talk) 14:13, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

  1) The information will still be hosted on Commons. It just won't be carried by EN Wikipedia.

  2) English Wikipedia is not original research. That's one of our most basic rules. If you have to label it "original research", then it's something we shouldn't have. FOARP (talk) 14:41, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

  I am not saying that we should use English Wikipedia as a source, and if this map is based on original research, we can still disclaim it in the same way we do for weasel words or lack of citations. LordOfWalruses (talk) 15:36, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

  When you talk about "... community has been working on this map for years with sources and a consensus that make sure that each change is accurate", you are talking about the past. Back when the map was based on the template map (which has strict rules concerning reliable sources). Today on the other hand, the map is based on liveuamap, which is an unreliable source (and that is when the map is not just updated without any source). Tradedia^talk 14:36, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Dude we already voted on this on both sides and unanimously voted to keep the current style of map. The issue RN is no one has actually updated it 2604:3D09:1F7F:8B00:D835:80B7:4E9C:7C07 (talk) 23:09, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

who participated in this vote?

Sanad real (talk) 23:56, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

They probably mean the Wikipedia community on this article. I think they’re right since there already has been many discussions about ditching the map and the map hasn’t been ditched (as of now). LordOfWalruses (talk) 01:10, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

The Afghanistan map was ditched for the exact reason this one should be ditched: it’s original research. WP:Effort isn’t an argument for keeping something. FOARP (talk) 10:20, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Just because one map was ditched doesn’t mean this one should be as well, and that still doesn’t change the fact that we already had a vote about changing the map and we said no. Maybe we can do another map in a month or two if there’s a significant change in opinions or if there’s significant updates and/or unsolved problems, but trying to do another vote just to get what you want is not fair. LordOfWalruses (talk) 14:16, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Again, when these discussions about ditching the map took place, the map was based on the template map and not on liveuamap. Tradedia^talk 14:36, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

@2604:3D09:1F7F:8B00:D835:80B7:4E9C:7C07: That vote is no longer unanimous in this section or in this one. –Gluonz ^{talk contribs} 13:45, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Nevertheless, a vote has already happened, there’s still significant opposition, and doing another vote to nullify the results of the previous vote so quickly is unfair. LordOfWalruses (talk) 14:11, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

@LordOfWalruses: This vote does not nullify the results of those ones. Those votes are about whether factions in the images should be displayed as unified or as separated. This section discusses whether the image should be displayed in the infobox of this article. –Gluonz ^{talk contribs} 14:51, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose Per WP:COLLAGE: Collages and montages are single images that illustrate multiple closely related concepts, where overlapping or similar careful placement of component images is necessary to illustrate a point in an encyclopedic way [emphasis added]. It is also inconsistent with WP:LEADIMAGE. What amounts to a photo essay is inconsistent with MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE - we don't try to write the article in the infobox. WP is not a picture encyclopedia. Cinderella157 (talk) 01:51, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

  So you support the present map? I'm not exactly sure how a map cobbled together by editors apparently out of Twitter reports matches the requirement for high-quality sourcing in the Infobox that we've discussed elsewhere. FOARP (talk) 10:18, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

  Did I say that?. Cinderella157 (talk) 04:55, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

  It's a question. You're opposing the use of collages which is an odd position, since nearly every war article on Wikipedia has such a collage (see World War I, World War II, Gulf War, Iraq War, War in Afghanistan (2001–2021), Yom Kippur War, Iran-Iraq War, Falklands War, etc. etc. etc.) based on a interpretation of a single word in WP:COLLAGE, so I have to ask what exactly it is you prefer? The present map, which is literally based on random Twitter accounts? FOARP (talk) 10:29, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

  The options are not binary - map or collage. My opposition to a collage is not just based on a single word but that word is very compelling and WP:OTHERCONTENT arguments have little weight by themself. It is a matter of whether such other content represents best practice. I am seeing a growing awareness that it probably doesn't. What I prefer is a single representative image per WP:LEADIMAGE. A map is going to be the best option IMO but it doesn't have to be. There are reasonable concerns regarding sourcing for a map. Other concerns regarding currency fall to WP:NOTNEWS. I perceive some unreasonable expectations as to the degree of detail to be expected. As to whether the current map is acceptable (current as of when - it keeps changing) - I'm basically staying out of this particular shit fight (at least for now). Cinderella157 (talk) 11:14, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

  When the WP:OTHERCONTENT includes probably the highest-consensus article we have, I'm pretty happy relying on WP:OTHERCONTENT. That said I'm perfectly OK with a single image as well: what needs to be gone is the map generated through WP:OR, and I agree also a WP:NOTNEWS violation. FOARP (talk) 12:40, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

  yeah and that's the problem maps are much more useful than random images Sanad real (talk) 01:32, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

So does the war count as ongoing?

I noticed civilian casualties but those are more like leftover skirmishes which are usually detailed separately in Wikipedia. Israel's invasion for a buffer state counts as a separate war by most Wikipedia precedent. I'm not making an argument here, I'm asking why do we not consider it over? There's a established government now and the SDF to my knowledge isn't attempting any major offensives, so the fighting would count as aftermath skirmishes, and I'm unaware of any media sources that describe such things as serious battles, the definition difference of which is admittedly subjective.

Nonetheless, does it count as a civil war until all sides declare it over? That's fine but we don't do that all the time using that standard. I'm fine with it being seen as ongoing, as long as we have a clear idea of when we Mark it as over and the aftermath become considered separate conflicts. I'd just like a broad idea so I know what to look for. GrandPeople44 (talk) 01:15, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Well the SDF and the SNA are still at war, so until they and all parties are at peace, then the war is still ongoing. LordOfWalruses (talk) 02:11, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

There's been ongoing conflicts like that where it's not counted as a civil war despite being a legacy of those conflicts so this isn't uniquely qualifying in comparison to precedent, but alright let's wait. GrandPeople44 (talk) 19:53, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Any examples? Because I have an idea of what you’re talking about, but since the SDF-SNA was still a part of the standard conflict, it is arguably still part of the current conflict. Maybe we could do something where we could have a “Phase 1” (3/15/11 to 12/8/24) labeled as “opposition victory” and a “Phase 2” (12/8/24 to present) be labeled as “ongoing.” LordOfWalruses (talk) 22:57, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

@LordOfWalruses maybe i can do one better....

Main Phase: 3/15/11 to 2020; 11/27/24 to 12/8/24

???? Phase: 2020 to 11/26/24; 12/8/24 to present Foxy Husky (talk) 00:54, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Yeah I think three phases of the war with a “frozen period” in between the first two would work. LordOfWalruses (talk) 00:55, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

@LordOfWalruses so we gonna put it as

Main Phase 1: 3/15/11 to 2020

Main Phase 2: 11/27/24 to 12/8/24

Post-main Phase: 12/8/24 to present

is that correct formula or nah? Foxy Husky (talk) 01:18, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Sounds good, though a “stalemate” period (from 2020 to 11/27/24) should also be added. LordOfWalruses (talk) 03:41, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

i dont think "stalemate" period should be added into infobox dude @LordOfWalruses Foxy Husky (talk) 06:02, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Well it’s very distinct from the other phases of the conflict, so the info box should probably have at least something to mark that phase of the conflict. Maybe the “ongoing” section could have a line in the bullet point list that says something like “stalemate from 2020-11/27/24.” LordOfWalruses (talk) 14:06, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Really Wikipedia should rely on reliable sources to decide when the war is over rather than deciding for ourselves. And I think the reason why reliable sources haven't decided yet, is that it is too early to know. It has only been a week since the Assad government collapsed. Things seem mostly peaceful at the moment, but we don't know how long that mostly peaceful state will last. If it endures for a significant period, RS will likely declare the war over. If there is a massive outbreak of hostilities next week or next month (rebel infighting, Kurd vs Arab, whatever), RS may say it is continuing in a new form. Give it a few weeks to months, RS will decide and then the article can reflect their consensus decision. SomethingForDeletion (talk) 00:35, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

There are many RS that state that the war ended, see section End of the War on this discussion page Gehirnstein (talk) 19:31, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

While it's not perfect, the new map is a great place to start and I think it's the best step forward for now

Good job to whoever did that, bravo, thanks for ending that effective deadline. I'll gather up some sources to expand the map a bit, but for now, thank you. 2604:3D09:1F7F:8B00:5FC:46A4:2010:88C5 (talk) 22:44, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

The map looks good, but what’s the deal with that blue semicircle near the SFA area? I assume that’s where the American base is, but we should put that in the legend if that’s the case. LordOfWalruses (talk) 23:43, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

It's like a protection no touching zone around the base, it's the reason the RCA survived at all they were hiding out in Al-Tanf there. (So it should probably be marked with stripy lines as it's kind of both of theres...that zone was the ONLY RCA territory on the map for years, they only broke out to Palmyra in the last week). Or just honestly give it to RCA on the map as if we split this then some of the Turkey/SNA stuff could get messy in the north....

Anyway I'm working on collecting notes and sources to reduce the amount of grey/unclear area on the map 2604:3D09:1F7F:8B00:5FC:46A4:2010:88C5 (talk) 00:00, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

I see: thanks for the explanation. Reducing the grey area also sounds great. LordOfWalruses (talk) 00:38, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

I think I'm gonna ignore the North West for now as that sector is still actively evolving, and between the SNA attacks north of Maskanah and the Raaqa defections to the HTS it might simplify itself in a grim manner.

The coast is the simplest. There are no other rebel groups that COULD get there simply due to the way things unfolded. You could mark the Russian bases or maybe that group of Baathist Loyalists held up in a cave under a farm, but the HTS is the only rebel group there to control it. 2604:3D09:1F7F:8B00:A11B:91:DD25:46C (talk) 05:57, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

I found some sources with maps that could hopefully help

• [2]
  • WSJs Map of the conflict
• [3]
  • Another Version of the map, probably the most recent and best reflection of the situation
• [4]
• [5]

Whats also could be important for the future is that the SDF started hissing the flag of the opposition in it's territories.

• [6]
  • As rebels led by Islamist group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) seized power, ousting president Bashar al-Assad, the Kurdish authorities in northeastern Syria have multiplied overtures to the new leaders, like adopting the three-starred flag used by the opposition.

Gehirnstein (talk) 15:52, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Also very grateful. The longer misinformation remains on Wikipedia, the higher of a chance it has to spread. Glad someone rectified it, even if only partially. KeysofDreams (talk) 01:20, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

That was already an issue yeah, Reddit and YouTube.

FSA should be Revolutionary Commando Army though. I think FSA is more of a generic term and the Southern Command and even the SNA have used it sometimes. The RCA was the group at Al-Tanf 2001:56A:6FD2:40DC:A9F9:ECCA:4A87:3F98 (talk) 02:31, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

I believe the current name for the rebel group is “Syrian Free Army” (SFA), though I may be wrong on that. LordOfWalruses (talk) 03:44, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

@LordOfWalruses. Yes, you are right. The rebels are named the "Free Syrian Army". (FSA). Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 03:47, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

The “official” name of the revolutionary commando army is the Syrian free army which is why ts called such. The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 03:57, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes you are right. My bad. (I can't keep up with the names). Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 04:00, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

I honestly can’t blame you for that: the group’s name has changed so many times, and it’s only one of many Syrian rebel groups. LordOfWalruses (talk) 04:16, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

You're welcome. Kaliper1 (talk) 10:27, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you.

I've tried to add what I can in suggestion with what sourcing I can in the images Discussion page. Honestly I think the old map(all factions version) more or less had the Southern Front(pink) group practically perfect, it lines up with everything I've found while digging. It just gave way way too much to the FSA(Who's eastern Border is basically perfect on the new map, they just need the grey zone between them and the Southern Front in the West filled in and their assault along the highways towards Douma marked). And the newer sources about the HTS's advance to Damascus cited in the current map are also all mostly fine, albeit they seem to disagree on the exact southern border and I think our map goes too far south(We know Douma was reached by the FSA/RCA via the highways and we know the Southern Rebels reached the southern outskirts of the city first, so Damascus should be marked with all 3 colors just like on the old map). Also Daara is Southern Front. HTS is allowed to move through and operate there similar to the old SDF/SAA agreements, but there's dozens of sources indicating their uprising took it back first, that's their home turf.

Outside of that corner, the bulk of the grey zone is pretty obviously HTS. The one Area I'd leave the Grey zone is the stretch between Raqqa and Aleppo where the SDF and SNA have skirmished and it's left the situation kind of vague, made worse by the defections. 2604:3D09:1F7F:8B00:9D1D:61B6:2AED:6B57 (talk) 20:55, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

@Pruehito: Regarding your recent edit to the infobox- reliable sources describe the Southern Operations Room as being part of the HTS-led Military Operations Command. See, for example, this Guardian article- "With HTS’s help, an operations room was founded, bringing together the commanders of around 25 rebel groups in the south, who would each coordinate their fighters’ movements with one another and with HTS in the north. The goal was for HTS and its allies to approach from the north and the southern operation room from the south, both meeting in the capital city." So I'm not sure where the claim that the Southern Operations Room is somehow independent from the Syrian government is coming from. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 15:41, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Using official names: Ayn al-Arab vs. Kobani

We're supposed to use official names. Kobani is the colloquial name for Ayn al-Arab. Heck, the district is even called Ayn al-Arab District. Consider replacing Kobani with the official name of Ayn al-Arab in updated maps. 46.31.112.221 (talk) 13:01, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: (Sorry for the late reply.) In this Wikipedia guideline article, we don't have to use the official name all the time. Sometimes, we can use its common name like in this case; Ayn al-Arab's common name is Kobani. Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 16:41, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

The blue circle on the map/unclaimed land

What is the reason for having the blue circle on the map, should it not be controlled by dark green faction like it was in older map? Also, why is there still unclaimed land on the map wasn’t all of that taken over by rebels? 2600:1702:5870:5930:187F:3142:B66B:712C (talk) 22:19, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Pretty sure that's the American presence around the Al-Tanf Base KeysofDreams (talk) 22:40, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

That sounds about right according to the key since that’s the case it should be colored dark green. 2600:1702:5870:5930:F12F:3AE6:41BA:5D72 (talk) 22:58, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 December 2024

There is a grammar error in the title "Syrian civil war". The first letters of the words "civil war" need to be capitalized because it is the title. For example, the title should be "Syrian Civil War". 63.225.192.8 (talk) 23:51, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

 Not done Per MOS:CAPS capitalisation is determined by consistent use in sources. It is not consistently capitalised in sources.

Wikipedia:Media copyright questions#Map used at Template:Syrian civil war infobox

Please see subject discussion. Cinderella157 (talk) 03:22, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Legend in infobox

A recent edit (since amended) has changed the format of the legend in an attempt to group together the various groups. It is trying to capture a degree of detail for which the infobox is unsuited and which is not supported by the body of the article nor by sources cited - ie it groups Tahrir al-Sham and Southern Operations Room under Syrian transitional government. Indications are that the Syrian transitional government is an extension of the Syrian Salvation Government. While and Tahrir al-Sham and Southern Operations Room may be/have been allies in recent events It does not follow that they are part of/support the transitional government. Such a claim is not supported by the body of the article. We need to go back to the simpler representation of the legend and write detail in prose in the body of the article - not the infobox. Cinderella157 (talk) 03:47, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 December 2024

Please change the map and make HTS and unknown and SFA controlled territory under one Syrian Transitional Government headed by Mohammed Al-Bashir 2409:40D0:103D:FB1:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 05:28, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 19:05, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Map Change

The map should be changed based on this article - sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2024/12/3/syria-tracker-maps-and-charts&ved=2ahUKEwj-p4ihyaaKAxXPqVYBHdVRCSQQyM8BKAB6BAgMEAE&usg=AOvVaw0Ft-4ppjCIv98L8TZDFC21. I don't know how to edit maps so I am requesting to someone who knows DitorWiki (talk) 06:02, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

It says page not found.78.211.200.166 (talk) 09:03, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

I found some sources with maps that could maybe help.

• [7]
• [8]

Another Version of the map, probably the most recent and best reflection of the situation

• [9]
• [10]

Whats also could be important for the future is that the SDF started hissing the flag of the opposition in it's territories: [11]

• As rebels led by Islamist group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) seized power, ousting president Bashar al-Assad, the Kurdish authorities in northeastern Syria have multiplied overtures to the new leaders, like adopting the three-starred flag used by the opposition.

Gehirnstein (talk) 19:45, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

End of the War

We should rely on reliable sources to decide when the war is over rather than deciding it ourselves. Now many reliable sources state that the war is over. Its also very like the situation in Libya in 2020, the civil war was over but the Libyan Crisis continued.

• [12]
  • This marks Jolani's first public statement to an international broadcaster since the fall of the Assad regime.

"People are exhausted from war. So the country isn't ready for another one, and it's not going to get into another one," he continued.

• [13]
  • A new dawn: reflections on the end of the Syrian war

• [14]
  • The rebel sweep ends a war that killed hundreds of thousands, caused one of the biggest refugee crises of modern times and left cities bombed to rubble, countryside depopulated and the economy hollowed out by global sanctions.
• [15]
  • Syrian Rebels Rewrite History: How 13-Years Of Civil War Ended In Just 13 Days
• [16]
  • End Of Syrian Civil War: What It Means For India, Russia, Israel & America
• [17]
  • Syria’s civil war ends, new history begins - Breaking News - Aaj News
• [18]
  • Now, in the very same spot, he tells chief international correspondent Bel Trew about the years-long war – and his role in bringing it to an end
• [19]
  • Monday briefing: How the decade-long war in Syria ended almost overnight
• [20]
  • The United Nations Security Council met behind closed doors late on Monday, and diplomats said they were still in shock at how quickly Assad's overthrow unfolded over 12 days, after a 13-year civil war that was locked in stalemate for years.
• [21]
  • The United Nations Security Council met behind closed doors late on Monday, and diplomats said they were still in shock at how quickly Assad’s overthrow unfolded over 12 days, after a 13-year civil war that was locked in stalemate for years. (Two differnet sources same sentence)
• [22]
  • Rapid advances by Syrian opposition forces end a war that began with peaceful protests before spiralling out of control.

Gehirnstein (talk) 15:38, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

I would agree the dates of the war should be March 15, 2011- December 8, 2024. All of the other conflicts that are related should be put into another article titled “Aftermath of the Syrian civil war”. Unless that page already exists. Also, all post-civil war related articles needed cleaned up. 2600:1702:5870:5930:0:0:0:47 (talk) 15:53, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Granted it seems like things have settled down for now, there still isn't a formal government and this could still devolve into a Libya-like situation it's to soon to say anything. Plus deciding when wars are over is not really the job of Wikipedia, that and I think that there is an internal policy on this kind of thing: "not a crystal ball" or something like that. I don't think there is anything wrong with waiting to see what happens before we say anything on this matter. 2601:406:8500:D790:8A5:2508:DE78:5C9F (talk) 16:12, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

There is still heavy fighting ongoing in the north, and several HTS fighters were just killed in an attack by pro-Assad remnants in Latakia. The war is certainly not over. You cannot say "all of the other conflicts that are related" as if this has nothing to do with the Syrian Civil War, because the conflict between the SNA and Turkey against the SDF in the north did not just begin after the civil war but was an integral part of the civil war itself. In addition, if we're going to have a subsection in the infobox for "Assad regime involvement," there shouldn't be a break between March 2020 and November 2024. While there weren't any territorial changes in the northwest, the Syrian government was still actively involved in fighting. There was repeated back and forth shelling between the opposition and the Syrian state in the northwest, and pro-Assad forces were actively involved in ground battles in other areas of the country, most notably the Daara clashes of 2021 and the Battle of Qamishli that same year. The dates for the Assad regime's participation should run continuously until December 2024. Display name 99 (talk) 21:14, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Give the Sources. Someone12732 (talk) 00:48, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

As the first sentence of this article states - "The Syrian civil war is an ongoing multi-sided conflict in Syria involving various state-sponsored and non-state actors." The Assad vs rebels conflict might have ended, as well as the ISIS vs everyone else conflict for the most part (although insurgency ongoing), but the SNA vs SDF conflict (which is one part of this multi-sided civil war) is still ongoing. EkoGraf (talk) 16:26, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

The proper government is supposed to be formed in March 2025

How about when that happened we look over the situation and how calm it's been and see if that happens before we decide when/if this war ended? That seems like a decent point to check in and decide 2604:3D09:1F7F:8B00:75C7:9F6F:1C89:6ED2 (talk) 22:27, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

(Not saying we'd mark it as ended then, just that's when we can review and come to a final call. 2604:3D09:1F7F:8B00:75C7:9F6F:1C89:6ED2 (talk) 22:39, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

We can add an aftermath section. Someone12732 (talk) 02:34, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Syrian war is Over OVER! Is that true? Healing say december end is that right?

Is ti OVER?! Is it OVER!? 88.212.19.151 (talk) 16:13, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

As of right now, not yet Ulysses S. Grant III (talk) 16:31, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes, Syrian Civil war is over. In latest Al-Jazeera article it shows that Schools have reopened in Syria Someone12732 (talk) 00:44, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

That’s another part of the puzzle. But I agree with the other comments about waiting until later. 2600:1702:5870:5930:0:0:0:40 (talk) 01:11, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Merry Christmas - War is (not yet) Over! 2.30.22.205 (talk) 12:21, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Active Russian base in Qamishli not displayed as Russian

ISW-CTP's most recent update as of posting this displays the Russian Qamishli base as currently active. While stating that the HTS-RF agreement in the works probably won't include it if it is ratified and that other bases have been abandoned it is currently still active according to ISW-CTP.

If there is another source that states otherwise please correct me but if not can this be corrected? Smol2204 (talk) 08:29, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

 Done - You are correct, a new update to the map has been uploaded to correct this. Thank you. Kaliper1 (talk) 01:09, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

2024 Turkey/SNA offensive against Rojava

In case anyone's searching, we have 2024 Kobani offensive for one component of the current Turkish/SNA attack on Rojava, and a deletion discussion regarding the 2024 Al-Mustariha massacre. Boud (talk) 14:10, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

War is over, write it down

Claiming that "civil war is ongoing" is just cope at this point for the Russian-Shiite axis of evil.

Whichever date Baath was deposed (Dec 8?) should mark the end. 178.253.192.224 (talk) 23:22, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Not yet there are still battles going on. 2600:1702:5870:5930:181D:1FD0:4EF:39E7 (talk) 23:55, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Source? 42.108.76.242 (talk) 10:56, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, but is not hoping that the Syrian Civil War is over little more than wishful thinking on the part of the Neo-CONs? For, with all the Israeli bombing and terror groups still causing chaos, has not the conflict some time to go? 2.30.22.205 (talk) 12:14, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

source:

"In December 2024, the factions supported by Turkey announced they would discontinue the ceasefire with groups supported by the US, such as Syrian Democratic Forces. One news article noted: "The SNA, an umbrella of several armed factions, informed the SDF on Monday that it would be returning to 'a state of combat against us,' one of the sources briefing Al-Monitor said. The sources said negotiations between the SDF and the SNA had 'failed' and that 'significant military buildups' in areas east and west of the Kurdish town of Kobani on the Turkish border were being observed." Sm8900 (talk) 15:45, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

As the first sentence of this article states - "The Syrian civil war is an ongoing multi-sided conflict in Syria involving various state-sponsored and non-state actors." The Assad vs rebels conflict might have ended, as well as the ISIS vs everyone else conflict for the most part (although insurgency ongoing), but the SNA vs SDF conflict (which is one part of this multi-sided civil war) is still ongoing. EkoGraf (talk) 16:25, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

References

Updating the status info

Do we know besides the Golan Heights and Eastern Syria battles. What else is going on in particular with the rebel groups? 2600:1702:5870:5930:F827:9139:1D2B:5CD2 (talk) 00:02, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

In December 2024, the factions supported by Turkey announced they would discontinue the ceasefire with groups supported by the US, such as Syrian Democratic Forces. One news article noted: "The SNA, an umbrella of several armed factions, informed the SDF on Monday that it would be returning to 'a state of combat against us,' one of the sources briefing Al-Monitor said. The sources said negotiations between the SDF and the SNA had 'failed' and that 'significant military buildups' in areas east and west of the Kurdish town of Kobani on the Turkish border were being observed." Sm8900 (talk) 15:44, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

References

SDF-controlled area should NOT be marked with “and American occupation”

Yes, US forces have assisted the SDF, but that’s mostly with coordinated operations against ISIS rather than any attempt to hold onto territory long-term. As such, this area should not be marked partially as “American occupation,” especially given how wide of an area (not under American occupation) that term describes. LordOfWalruses (talk) 14:26, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Some parts of Kobani are de facto occupied by the international coalition Waleed (talk) 17:26, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Well shouldn’t we have a (slightly) different color to mark those parts (separate from the rest of Rojava territory)? LordOfWalruses (talk) 21:53, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Qamishli Helicopter base has been evacuated by the Russians

As of the most recent report by ISW-CTP Qamishli Helicopter base has been evacuated. Shown as still occupied by Russia in the Wikipedia version. Smol2204 (talk) 05:33, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

 Done Nice catch again Smol2204. Another fix should be out. Kaliper1 (talk) 13:21, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

@Kaliper1 seems whoever updates the map doesn't check the section specifically about Russian bases, Which is fair I only noticed these because I read the whole thing Smol2204 (talk) 13:48, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

@Smol2204 As long as you are an auto-confirmed user, you are welcome to contribute and update the map as well. Since currently, the responsibility for updating the map lies solely with one individual in commons, who has been managing this task thus far. Please remember that behind every user is a person with their own life and responsibilities, and their time does not solely revolve around reviewing and analyzing reports, then updating through old SVG software. Kaliper1 (talk) 14:07, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

@Kaliper1 Sadly, I am only aware of raster mapping, not sure as to how vector files work. Smol2204 (talk) 14:13, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

The Rebels are supposedly merging

According to Reuters, “Ahmed al-Sharaa reached an agreement on Tuesday with former rebel faction chiefs to dissolve all groups and consolidate them under the defence ministry, according to a statement from the new administration”. (https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/syrias-al-sharaa-agrees-with-ex-rebel-factions-merge-under-defence-ministry-2024-12-24/)

Let’s keep an eye on this development because multiple pages will be affected. 2600:1702:5870:5930:1507:A848:29A6:8847 (talk) 20:14, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

@2600:1702:5870:5930:1507:A848:29A6:8847 ISW-CTP has mentioned this too, it is specifically stated that it seems that the HTS has only had talks with the SNA for sure and there haven't been any concrete steps taken towards unification. As of now they are all still Seperate. Smol2204 (talk) 07:06, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes, both groups are still separate which will probably be the case for a while until a permanent merger happens. This is a wait and see development. 2600:1702:5870:5930:2DC1:290:4A:19F8 (talk) 14:40, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 December 2024

Dear Wikipedia Editors,

I am writing to request a correction to the map featured in the Syriab Civil War article (https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Syrian_civil_war). Upon reviewing the current map, I noticed that it contains inaccuracies that misrepresent Syria’s political boundaries.

Issue with the Current Map: The map inaccurately depicts certain borders that do not align with official sources, such as the United Nations or other credible geopolitical references. This could lead to misunderstandings about the Syrian factions' territorial boundaries.

Proposed Solution: I suggest replacing the current map with one that reflects accurate and up-to-date information. For reference, I recommend using maps from reliable sources, such as:

("https://syria.liveuamap.com" “UN Cartographic Section,” “The CIA World Factbook,” etc.)

Importance of This Correction: Accuracy: Ensuring that the map reflects reliable data is crucial for maintaining Wikipedia’s credibility. Neutrality: An accurate map helps present a fair and balanced view of Syria, avoiding potential biases. Educational Value: Many students, researchers, and readers rely on Wikipedia for factual information. Correcting the map ensures they are not misinformed. I am happy to assist by providing additional resources or supporting documentation to facilitate this update. Please feel free to reach out if further clarification is needed.

Thank you for considering this request and for your dedication to keeping Wikipedia accurate and reliable.

Planotap (talk) 14:23, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

@Planotap Our old source was liveuamap, our current source is ISW-CTP which was debated on and considered to be the superior source in a previous talk page. The map is mostly accurate from what I can see and would like to ask what specific thing you consider inaccurate? Smol2204 (talk) 07:04, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

There is a new map update from ISW-CTP (https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/iran-update-december-26-2024).

Also, I should bring up that I am seeing news channels use the “united rebels” map. At some point we probably should reconsider the overall stance on the current map. 2600:1702:5870:5930:0:0:0:3C (talk) 16:33, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

@2600:1702:5870:5930:0:0:0:3C

This conversation has already been had, we all decided that ISW-CTP is the best source as of now and it will stay as the source for now

It takes a while for Wikipedia editors to update the map, please be patient as they have lives and things to do outside of Wikipedia. Smol2204 (talk) 20:25, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

@2600:1702:5870:5930:0:0:0:3C

This conversation has already been had, we all decided that ISW-CTP is the best source as of now and it will stay as the source for now

It takes a while for Wikipedia editors to update the map, please be patient as they have lives and things to do outside of Wikipedia. Smol2204 (talk) 20:25, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Inclusion of ISIS?

I recently found a fairly well sourced video of where ISIS is present if people think its inclusion is still important. I would like to state that it is PRESENCE and not occupation and as such should preferably be displayed with lines rather than a solid colour. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HeUWgvyKUk

most of the territory they are present in is an empty desert with little to nothing to occupy. Smol2204 (talk) 07:02, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 December 2024

Change Full-Blown to Large-Scale as it sounds for professional and not written by someone of a younger age or lower education 180.150.38.178 (talk) 12:37, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: "Full-blown" and "Large scale" have different meanings. Full-blown fits that sentence better. [23][24] Ultraodan (talk) 15:29, 27 December 2024 (UTC)