![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Reuters writes: "A prominent Alawite cleric, Muwaffaq Ghazal, was also seized by rebels from the al Qaeda-linked Nusra Front, who were seeking an exchange for captured fighters, activists said." [1] That is incorrect, it is Badr el-Ghazal, so do not add it here. Watch out for similar hyperbole. Regime body counts are likely exaggerated as well. FunkMonk ( talk) 16:59, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
An unregisted user is making wrong claims without any proof. He is saying that the aricle is promoting rebel propaganda and he called the rebels as "scum". The thing is not about what he views the FSA as scums the things is that it is he who actually seems biased against the rebels. I ask how is he saying that some of the edits are promoting rebel propaganda? What proof does he have? Who does he think is editing the article in favour of the rebels or is promoting rebel propaganda? If he knows then he should say who other user is. I am an uninvolved user here but I advice the user to stop making wrong claims about other users if he doesn't have any proof because it is a personal insult according to Wikipedia policies and also stop portraying himself as an editor who is trying to Wikipedia neutral. TransVannian ( talk) 13:46, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
They are demands of Syrian government on sana.sy but the editor prefers to ignore them and take information from the rebels only: I don't call that neutrality....— Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.212.10.234 ( talk) 11:18, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
You are totally dumb, Wikipedia use pro-rebel source and still do! You are far away from being neutral and tray to reject your fault on SANA,but you are nothing but insane and a rebel's dog who make propaganda for the rebel!!!SOHR has been know to promate the propaganda of the Syrian rebels. We,on Wikipedia are not bound to agree to their demands and repeat all their propaganda. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.123.254.25 ( talk) 15:29, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
Alright that's enough. You make propaganda for rebels and you have the courage to denied it!!!!!!Try and I report you for at ANI for propaganda,insult and Violation of Wikipedia's rules!!!!!AND it YOU who be blocked Mr KahnJohn27 the idiot!!!!!!!And one other thing:i deleted your last paragraph because you say nothing else but a non-sense or propaganda!!!!!You need to apologize to my immediately,You rebel scum and imposter!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.123.26.231 ( talk) 15:29, 15:19, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
This user must be blocked for his propaganda for rebels and denied the Syrian army victory and the rebels lost of the five village at least two day ago and the lost of the rebels offensive today on august,the 19th — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.123.30.222 ( talk) 11:36, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Ekograff navigate the Syrian war articles to change info for rebel propaganda purposes. There is a big difference between the casualties aftermath, rebel losses are calculated until a date and regime losses over 4 days after. I know its already specified but is not balanced. 200.48.214.19 ( talk) 18:06, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
EkoGraf ( Personal attack removed) tell me why government's source aren't not a valiable source?? ( Personal attack removed) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.123.30.222 ( talk) 14:00, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Huh??? You are aware that I added a Reuters source confirming your earlier unsourced assertions and added a paragraph that the military recaptured all of the military observation posts and most, except two, villages? It was also me that added sources and the paragraph about the rebel loss of those villages two days ago. I only reverted you because your edit was unsourced, that is, you didn't provide a source. It was up to me to find a reliable source to confirm your edit. Wikipedia is based on neutrality. So please, its bad enough that I have to contend with heavily pro-opposition editors like Sopher that I now have to argue with a pro-government editor. For Wikipedia to be neutral reliable sources must be provided and the wording must be neutral and not biased against ether side. Wikipedia works with facts, not claims or fiction. I have argued on occasion FOR the inclusion of government sources like SANA due to pro-opposition editors including sources like the opposition SOHR. So there would be a balance between the two. However, Wikipedia administration made the ultimate decision that SANA government reports are not reliable so they can not be used. I never said I personally regard government sources as totally unreliable, its that Wikipedia regards them as such. So I stick to Wikipedia procedure and try to the best of my abilities to keep a neutral balance in the articles. As for your comments that I am scum, insane, racist and an SOB, well...that talks more about yourself than me. EkoGraf ( talk) 14:08, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Don't try to pass yourself as innocent; you're are a pro-opposition editors!Do you think that someone trust you lies?!!!Anybody who can read the history of the page will see that you are pro-rebels and trying to erase my text and pretended that there are not source!!!!You're insane if you think what you write!!!!!The truth is here : The rebels run always like French and coward!!!!!And the rebels lied on pretended that there are continuous fighting!!!!If you can understand that , I have nothing to talk you about.Dumb! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.123.30.222 ( talk) 14:34, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
I'm in france now and the Balkan should know how French army are cowards??If you says that French are not coward....even pro-rebel are going to laufff until dead.....Your IP doesn't interest me, and as a good Christian, I says sorry about or father but even with that, ( Personal attack removed): you says that you hate the west but you write pro-rebels source so..... ( Personal attack removed) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.123.30.222 ( talk) 14:55, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
I didn't say French are not cowards, what you said was just funny to me coming from a French guy like yourself. And I am not insane at all. I didn't say I hate the West, I said I don't have any love for the West, there is a big difference. I simply don't give any significance to the West. I look at the whole situation in Syria realisticaly, philosophicaly and from a neutral stand point, and not conservativaly and full of hate like you would. I try to record here on Wikipedia the events that are unfolding in Syria from a realistic point of view and try to ward of attempts by both pro-government and anti-government editors who try to impose their POVs, especially if they do not provide any concrete evidence. If you think Reuters or AFP, one of the oldest and most reliable news agencies in the world, are pro-rebel, than whatever. Peace go with you mate! Cheers! EkoGraf ( talk) 15:07, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
You would not be able to fulfill all of Changes on the situation in the province of Latakia here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Syrian_civil_war_detailed_map Destroyer1812 ( talk) 14:17, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Didn't understand you Destroyer? EkoGraf ( talk) 14:26, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
change the villages are marked as under the control of FSA to change the government-controlled Destroyer1812 ( talk) 14:29, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Oh that, most of them have already been turned to red (government). Only Salma and two more are marked as rebel-held. I wouldn't change the other two just yet since Reuters reported fighting was still ongoing in two more villages (maybe those two being the two). If Reuters or someone other reports by tomorrow all except Salma are back under government control I'll change it. EkoGraf ( talk) 14:45, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
OK! can then select them as the contested. Destroyer1812 ( talk) 14:50, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I agree. EkoGraf ( talk) 14:54, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
I understand why you are pro-rebel now........exile by Serbian government or you want the Serbian in the EUROPEAN UNION???? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
82.123.30.222 (
talk)
14:57, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha you really made me laugh now hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Exile by Serbian government? What do you think? That we are living in a dictatorship here? Hahahahahaha. God, the misconception that you western guys have of us. I have lived in Serbia my whole life and will live my whole life. And me wanting Serbia in the Europian Union??? Hahahahahaha. I'm a communist marxist and an atheist man, we are anti-EU. Hahahahaha. And its my guys who are currently part of the government here as of last year after we kicked the Democrats out in the elections. So, for the last time, I'm not pro-rebel, I'm neutral. And if you are one of those guys that say If you are not with us than you are against us, than there is nothing I can say to you. Live long and prosper! XD EkoGraf ( talk) 15:12, 19 August 2013 (UTC) Only a fool could listen to you......Long Live the Serbia !!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.123.30.222 ( talk) 16:49, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
And thank you for listening! :D EkoGraf ( talk) 17:52, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Sorry that is not on! But how to change the map of the fighting in Aleppo, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Battle_of_Aleppo_map.svg there simply is not accurate Destroyer1812 ( talk) 18:33, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, but that I don't know. I usually just watch if anybody makes an unsourced change and revert them. But to make changes myself I don't know how. EkoGraf ( talk) 18:54, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
you can hide the defeat of the rebels!!!!!!!!you propagandist for the rebels!!! — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
86.212.15.176 (
talk)
12:13, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Whatever. :P I haven't made any propaganda comments or insults at all unlike you and haven't hidden anything. I will gladly welcome the Syrian Army victory in the Latakia countryside when it happens, due to the rebels admittedly holding 400 Alawite villagers as hostages. Those people did nothing wrong and should be freed. The Army victory will most likely come in the next few days after the last two villages are captured. The Army will more than likely continue with their offensive though in an attempt to capture Salma, which would do them good in securing the northern border area with Turkey. EkoGraf ( talk) 12:57, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Why are rebels sources saying that the rebels still hold 2 villages more believed than governement sources saying that they retook all the villages? At this point, governement sources are more reliable for this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MFDGJomon ( talk • contribs) 20:43, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
I've created a map to try and better help readers understand the course of the offensive and ensuing counterattack. I've tried to keep it as accurate as possible, but naturally I'm also quite aware that there will be errors and it'll likely have to be updated as the campaign progresses. Any help in identifying current problems with the map would be appreciated, and naturally I'd invite everyone interested to help edit it to keep it as accurate and current as possible. Thanks. MrPenguin20 ( talk) 01:06, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
Map looks great! EkoGraf ( talk) 07:35, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
How many villages the rebels taken in this offensive? This info of SOHR is troubling about the number of villages [1] Rogal Dorm ( talk) 12:14, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
Only Salma and two other villages are still in rebel control everything else is back in government control after the army counter attack and now they have Salma and the area around it under heavy bombardment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.126.177.109 ( talk) 12:11, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
Salma has been under rebel control since last year. The only initial rebel gains that are left are the two villages. And those were reported to be contested. In any case, the rebel offensive has for the large part been negated and the battle lines are back to what they were previously. There has been no fighting in Latakia for a week now. So this is a Syrian Army victory for the most part. EkoGraf ( talk) 12:34, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
This al-Jazeera article mentions 11 villages instead of 13, and says that they were all recaptured by the regime within the span of 48 hours. I guess it's a mistake? It also seems to say that the FSA wasn't involved in the battle (if I'm reading correctly), so should it be in the infobox? Esn ( talk) 18:05, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on 2013 Latakia offensive. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:03, 25 September 2016 (UTC)