Jump to content

Talk:Syrian civil war

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In the newsOn this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 17, 2012Peer reviewReviewed
In the news News items involving this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on March 20, 2011, March 26, 2011, March 31, 2011, April 9, 2011, April 21, 2011, April 23, 2011, April 26, 2011, November 13, 2011, July 16, 2012, May 6, 2013, and July 25, 2018.
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on March 15, 2016, and March 15, 2019.


FAQ: infobox

[edit]

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

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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[1] 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)[reply]
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)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Conflict-related civilian casualties in Ukraine" (PDF). Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. 27 January 2022. Retrieved 22 November 2023.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)

Requesting changing the colours of the free army and/or the interim goverment on the map table

[edit]

The two groups colours on the map given by the table are both mildly different shades of green and they are genuinely hard for me to tell the difference. I am having issues seeing the difference then i believe others are too, espically those who may be colour blind. i don't know how to change it, i would if i could so instead i am asking that one or both be changed. I propose changing the Syrian Interim Government's (SNA) colours to blue as it would would contrast nicely against the yellow of the AANES and SAAF yellow and red respectively 92.236.211.53 (talk) 22:35, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New fights around Aleppo

[edit]

https://levant24.com/news/2024/11/cmos-repelling-the-aggression-operation-gains-ground-against-assad-regime-forces/ 2A02:3032:14:3509:C85A:47D1:3E37:124F (talk) 14:25, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Map needs to be updated

[edit]

https://syria.liveuamap.com/ Arye Bernshtein (talk) 23:36, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aleppo

[edit]

The battles in Aleppo should be added 88.236.189.163 (talk) 10:50, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hama

[edit]

Hama has been retaken by SAA map should be changed Mayukh Mitra 123 (talk) 21:03, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are there multiple WP:RS for intra-Syrian-govt fighting/attempted coup d'etat in Damascus?

[edit]

Question started at: Talk:Northwestern Syria offensive (2024)#Any sources for intra-Syrian-govt fighting in Damascus? Boud (talk) 00:46, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Map Accuracy and Projection

[edit]

We need to way out the current map and wait for things to settle, as it seems that the Syrian Interim Government under the Free Syrian Army occupies many areas around the Lake strategic eastern of Aleppo, as they also carried out the operations to occupy it. It is in no way deemable to assume this is part of the HTS (in white). The sources must be syria.liveuamap.com, but they are coloring all the new occupied Territories the same color, so we do not know the exact borders of which group owns what. DerEchteJoan (talk) 22:27, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I want to add to that, that the Syrian Free Army controls areas west of the lake aswell, which the HTS did not take. 79.247.24.147 (talk) 08:17, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Currently they control the whole lake Sabkhat al-Jabbul, and areas surrounding it. In the current version of the map, HTS and the Syrian Army still control it 79.247.24.147 (talk) 09:12, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Still is severely outdated; as uncertain as things are right now, we need to change the detailed map to reflect what we do know is happening. LordOfWalruses (talk) 03:28, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. This is one of the most complicated armed conflicts, not much is known. Things need to settle out. DerEchteJoan (talk) 05:30, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So, currently syria.livuamap.com is reporting, that the HTS and the NLF (part of the SNA) are currently both attacking Assad Forces in the same places, which must implicate joint control. We need to find a solution to this problem, as it is impossible under the current circumstances to show accurate projections of HTS and SNA control. One solution may be, that we group the Rebel Forces together. 89.244.83.56 (talk) 16:00, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We could do that, or we could have a separate coloration for “HTS-SNA joint control.” LordOfWalruses (talk) 20:19, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Black shading over zoomed in map.

[edit]

When you click on the map in the infobox showing the War Map, some black lines appear over parts of the map that aren't there before. This could be because it's an SVG and chooses not to show those lines until you zoom in, I don't know.

But it's still very strange and I'm not sure what it's supposed to be or if it's even intentional, especially since these black lines even go over Raqqa, which is firmly under SDF control.

My best guess is that it represents renewed ISIS activity, but if so, this hasn't been mentioned anywhere else I can find on any Wikipedia article, so for that to only appear on the map is strange.

And either way, the fact that they onlt appear when the image is clicked on is very strange and I think that should be fixed. Taiyaki Schizo (talk) 10:21, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

“Territorial changes” section outdated

[edit]

The source is from the beginning of 2023 and major changes have been made since the rebel offensive of 2024: an updated source should be found for this section (if possible). LordOfWalruses (talk) 17:21, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]