Editors who violate any listed restrictions may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense.
An editor must be
aware before they can be sanctioned.
With respect to any reverting restrictions:
Edits made solely to enforce any clearly established consensus are exempt from all edit-warring restrictions. In order to be considered "clearly established" the consensus must be proven by prior talk-page discussion.
Edits made which remove or otherwise change any material placed by clearly established consensus, without first obtaining consensus to do so, may be treated in the same manner as clear vandalism.
Clear vandalism of any origin may be reverted without restriction.
Reverts of edits made by anonymous (IP) editors that are not vandalism are exempt from the 1RR but are subject to
the usual rules on edit warring. If you are in doubt, contact an administrator for assistance.
If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. Remember: When in doubt, don't revert!
Page views of this article over the last 90 days:
Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on
Phabricator and on
MediaWiki.org.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following
WikiProjects:
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 articles
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 articles
Is this the best infobox for the group? It would seem to me that the due to the strong organisation and links to the government the NDF is more tantamount to a territorial force, rather than some kind of militia or faction, especially when you consider the groups that the page compares it to - the Swedish Home Guard or the American National Guard. Thoughts?
MrPenguin20 (
talk)
18:14, 20 January 2014 (UTC)reply
It has been stated very clear in
several sources (neutral,
pro-opposition and
pro-government ones) that the NDF is a militia, and a force separated from the Syrian Army. The comparison of the NDF with the Swedish Home Guard or the American National Guard can only be attributed to a personal bias from some user, as that units are part of their respective armies, while the NDF is not part of the Syrian Army. The Syrian Republican Guard could be compared with the Swedish or American corps, but not the NDF. Unless other users had sources wich indicates that NDF is part of the Syrian Army, please stop adding the military unit infobox, as that one is used for military units part of an army, something the NDF is clearly not.--HCPUNXKID 16:04, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
your own sources are proof it's a hastily trained citizen force. it's not an insurgent/rebel unit with an ideology. it takes orders from the government and has an infantry/support role, Similar to other government sanctioned part time citizen forces. It's a separate branch of the Syrian ARMED FORCES not SYRIAN ARAB ARMY. big difference. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
85.186.19.222 (
talk)
19:53, 15 February 2014 (UTC)reply
First, please sign your posts. Then, take a look at in what cases is the
Template:Infobox_military_unit used, and realize that it cannot be used for the NDF. IT IS NOT A BRANCH OF THE SYRIAN ARMED FORCES, IT IS STATED CLEARLY IN THE SOURCES GIVEN. If, for example, as in one source is stated, they dont have to wait from orders from Damascus (as the SAA has to) is because they arent part of the army, but a militia, with their a chain of command different from the Armed Forces. And finally, as you mentioned the Syrian Armed Forces, that shows you're wrong, as you claim that NDF is a branch of them. Well, the
Syrian Armed Forces article states very clearly that it has only 3 branches: Army, Navy and Air Force. No mention of NDF as part of it, as no sources affirm that. And about the ideology, sources says that they have it, Syrian nationalism and Secularism. So please, leave you POV aside and accept the fact exposed by the sources, the military infobox is used only for units from an army, and the NDF is not an army unit.--
HCPUNXKID20:15, 15 February 2014 (UTC)reply
It's a fairly new construct. Besides, the information about the SAA isn't always accurate for ex, the 80th brigade has been called 80th battalion(in your source), the 17th division has been mistaken for the 2nd armored(which does not exist), etc. Other militias like the US national guard isn't part of the active US armed forces either, but it's obviously part of the US military. Same with the Swedish Home Guard (on the swedish page). The points that make it a military organization are, it's militarily trained, popular insurgency is not, it is on government payroll, popular militia is not. But most importantly, it is SANCTIONED by the government, which give it legality. It is a military unit IMO.
85.186.19.222 (
talk)
22:50, 15 February 2014 (UTC)reply
I have just added archive links to one external link on
National Defence Forces (Syria). Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.