Module talk:Iraqi insurgency detailed map/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Initial Steps

Thank you for your help getting this project started! The 3-way also has a green colour in it. There is no green (rebels in Syrian Civil War Detailed Map) in this map. Is it at all possible to change the green to black for this map? Also, I am finding out that the coordinates (longitude and latitude) are moving with the screen ... for example if I make the screen smaller the map stays the same size, but all the add-ons (cities/bases etc.) move according to how I move my browser size. Malik Danno (talk) 21:39, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

I will try to find a replacement for that.Daki122 (talk) 00:38, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

I think we should here (as we have end doing on Syria's Map) make a clear difference between "Islamic State" and non related to Al Qaeda insurgents.Oussj (talk) 19:48, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

No, there wasn't any iraqi force involved in securing the mall that was attacked by Islamic terrorist. The city of Kerkuk is under peshmerga control and they don't allow any other security forces there. You really don't know anything about Iraq and its been a quite wile since I posted here, haven't you at least gathered some information? About the Christian militia, as I sad before: there isn't any Christian militia in Iraq. If you claim that there is one then you also have to prove it. Who are they? How many are there? who is there leader? And why hasn't iraqi military attacked them? Because that's what should happened if there was an militia in there territory. This map is a joke and the blue dots should be removed. But its up to you if you want a real map or a fantasy map. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.254.5 (talk) 22:30, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

this is the second time you posted this ... look at the bottom discussion and the sources provided about the militia there ... Malik Danno (talk) 23:09, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Disputed Territories

I am having issue with finding sources on who truly has security over disputed territories (Tel Afar, Sinjar, Nineveh Plain, Tuz Khumato, Kirkuk etc.) I know many of them are local security militas, but any sources would help. Malik Danno (talk) 01:46, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Maliki controls Kirkuk for sure,and tel afar also,there is ISIL presence in Nineveh plain.Alhanuty (talk) 03:33, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

In Nineveh Plain? I never heard of that?! do you know exactly which villages? Malik Danno (talk) 03:48, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

This is a rather bad map in my opinion. Instead of provinces it should be based on districts and sub-districts, because then its much more easier to to fill out the map whit all the different factions and there possession in the disputed territories. Malik Danno, if you want information about the disputed territories then you can find it in a report called "Iraq’s Disputed Territories" by Sean Kane. Then I just want to clarify some things. Iraq's military isn't in the city of Kerkuk and the Kurdish peshmerga have the military control of the city. The iraqi forces are stationed in a another city outside of and south of Kerkuk. The second thing that is of importance is that there isnt any Assyrian or Christian militia in Iraq. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.254.5 (talk) 18:26, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

I agree that this map could be better. But 1) There is no map on wikipedia that is divided amoungst sub-districts for us to use, so we have to use this. 2) Thank you, I will look at that article, but we need contemporary news on disputed regions 3) I am not too sure abour Kirkuk, but there has been some discussion on it and in recent Islamist takeover of the mall, it was both Iraqi central forces and peshmergaga cleared it together 4) There is a christian militia in Nineveh Plain see: CBN videoreportreport 2 Malik Danno (talk) 15:52, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Sources?

Shouldn't there be sources cited for the status of towns on the map? For example, I haven't been able to find sources for any of the supposedly ISIS controlled/contested locations except for in eastern Anbar. GeoEvan (talk) 17:18, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

@GeoEvan: Sources are usually provided in the edit summaries. Check "View History".--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 02:36, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Tikrit has fallen to "Islamic State"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/mundo/ultimas_noticias/2014/06/140611_ultnot_toman_tikrit_irak_ch.shtml — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.53.133.154 (talk) 13:58, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

I have just made tikrit contested based on some reports that reported that part of tikrit have fallen in the hand of "Islamic State" but i think the situation will be clear in a few hour (Ali bachir (talk) 14:12, 11 June 2014 (UTC)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ali bachir (talk • contribs) 14:05, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Mousel city

شاری مه‌لعون و مولحیده‌کان ،، هه‌ر قابیلی ئه‌وه‌یه‌ بۆ داعش بێ ،، توخوا ئه‌وه‌ شاره‌ به‌ 12 سه‌عات بگیرێت ئه‌گه‌ر خه‌ڵکه‌که‌ی هه‌مووی داعش نه‌بێ ،، خوایه‌ ئاگریان به‌سه‌ردا ببارێنی This city is contested by this source:http://www.alalam.ir/news/1601861MZarif (talk) 16:19, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

This source only claim that there are troups outside the city of maousel so that means it remain fully under isis controll (213.204.127.13 (talk) 18:49, 11 June 2014 (UTC))

Al-Alam, Al-Minar, Press-tv, Al-Mayadeen and sources like these are extremely biased to government and are not reliable sources. Please if you had any news from these kind of sites, provide other reliable sources and then manipulate the template map.

Eastern Mosul is still under Kurdish control & Kurdish forces have captured Mosul airport (not militairy) almost a week ago Should I make of Mosul contested because of the eastern side? [1] [2]

Benjamin 145 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 18:53, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

There seems to have been fighting around the airport but following most of the (English) Kurdish news, there is no explicit statement about Mossul at all. The only specifics I have read are that the Peshmerga roadblocks are on the approach to the eastern half of Mossul. And it all isn't helped by the confusion about whether the eastern half is or is not Mossul. I'll have another look but I feel that Mossul is not being contested by the Peshmerga for now. Akerbeltz (talk) 19:03, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

There is the statement by the KRG that Kurdish Peshmerga forces will not help Iraq's army retake the city of Mosul so we can infere that the Peshmerge are not actively contesting it for now. [3] Akerbeltz (talk) 19:07, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes indeed, the Western part of Mosul, which is by far the biggest and most important part of the city. All important buildings were on the Western side. Benjamin 145 (talk) 19:44, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Media Is Exaggerating the situation in Iraq

I personally view it as a ploy similar to what William Randolph Hearst used to gain readers during the Spanish American War. Iraq Nina News has already confirmed Baiji and Tikrut have already been recaptured, though cleanup operations are still ongoing in the area surrounding Tikrut.[[4]] Even Euro News is willing to admit that Baiji has been retaken.[[5]]75.72.33.166 (talk) 01:47, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Baiji, Samarra and Tikrit have been retaken by Iraqi Security Forces

The new is confirmed with both Iraq Nina News [6] Iraqi News[7], and, in Baiji's case, Euro News. Baiji had been retaken yesterday, with reliable reporting suggesting further attacks today, and attacks on Samarra and Tikrit had been repelled today.75.72.33.166 (talk) 19:18, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

I can find no news sources from outside Iraq or Iran that support the claims from iraqinews and NINA. You do realize both of these sources are fed information from the Iraqi government directly? However, I can find dozens of sources (plus dozens of twitter accounts) that say Iraqi government forces either fled or were captured in Tikrit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snd0 (talk • contribs) 20:46, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. MrPenguin20 (talk) 21:01, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Euro New is very much outside Iraq. Here's a Wall Street Journal article noting how Iran helped Iraqi Security Forces recapture 85 percent of Tikrit.[8] Though 85 percent is not 100 percent, there is also the possibility that the Iraqi forces may have recaptured the remaining 15 percent on their own. Twitter is also not a reliable resource.75.72.33.166 (talk) 23:12, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

It's simply very difficult to believe statements like "...but Revolutionary Guard and Iraqi troops overtook 85 percent of the city on Thursday, Iraqi and Iranian security forces told the paper" [9], regardless of the source, because there's every incentive to lie. That was my reference to Twitter. But I understand unbiased sources are difficult to find. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snd0 (talk • contribs) 01:50, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

NY Times article

This article contains a lot of info to update on the map.Alhanuty (talk) 22:33, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/13/world/middleeast/iraq.html?_r=1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alhanuty (talk • contribs) 22:33, 12 June 2014

Balad and the Beiji Refinery Are Still Under Iraqi Control

There were still Americans in the area today and the base is being easily evacuated for only emergency purposes in case there is an attack or ISIS advance. The Beiji refinery under government control as well. Please read these two recent articles written by Fox News and Reuters for yourself.[10][11] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.72.33.166 (talk) 23:25, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

But Baiji oil refinery is surrounded by ISIS troops, so black circle added around it.--HCPUNXKID 14:54, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Sources & changes

I see that some users add towns or infrastructure or change the status of that sites without giving a single source. Wikipedia's content is always based on sources, so if you dont have a reliable source to back your changes, please dont do them.--HCPUNXKID 15:09, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Jalaula and Sadiya

There was some clashes today in the southern district of Jalaula (Celewla), called Tajnid, but the town is now fully under KRG control: Link 1, link 2. The situation in Sadiya is different as ISIS is inside the town and KRG forces are besieging it. Roboskiye (talk) 17:49, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

There are no clashes in the city of Khanaqin. The source Hanibal is referring to is pointing to the Saadiya town of 'Khanaqin district' where there are heavy fightings. Roboskiye (talk) 14:07, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Sources clearly say that: parts of Khanaqin, located 150 kilometres (95 miles) northeast of the Iraqi capital, were held by militants while others were controlled by Kurdistan's Peshmerga forces.Yahoo NewsNaharnetHurriyet Daily NewsNOW NewsKurd Net Hanibal911 (talk) 14:22, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

These are by no means accurate. There are dozens of local sources which clearly indicate that the clashes are inside Saadiya. Demographically, Khanaqin is almost completely Kurdish-inhabited while Saadiya has a mixed population and there lives a significant number of Sunni Arabs who support the Sunni insurgents. I would rather to suggest to mark Saadiya as 3-way contested, since the rebels are inside, Shia army in south and KRG forces are positioned east of the town. Roboskiye (talk) 14:35, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

OK! I agree with you. So now you can do this. Hanibal911 (talk) 14:40, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

BBC reports that there still is fighting between Peshmerga and some ISIS leftovers in Jalula. [http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-27897648#TWEET1160471 --Ahmetyal (talk) 10:48, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Okay Jalala is not under Kurdish control [12], but Saadiya isn't. --Ahmetyal (talk) 12:01, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Just read the link. I think you mistyped there, you probably meant 'is now' rather than 'is not'? Akerbeltz (talk) 13:46, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I mean't now! --Ahmetyal (talk) 13:47, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Both Jalawla & Saadiya are under Kurdish control again. there were heavy clashes between ISIS militants and Kurdish forces indeed, but it is back under Kurdish control. [13] Benjamin 145 (talk)

The mayor of Jalawla though is here [14] stating that it will take a long time to flush out pockets of ISIS in the city so I think leaving it as contested for now might be a fair assessement. Akerbeltz (talk) 19:53, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Suleiman Beg and Shawarah

Does anyone know the situation in those towns? Can't find anything on the web, but I search in English. So maybe Kurdish or Arabic sources have more info? - NadaCambia

Still under ISIS control Link. Roboskiye (talk) 16:12, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Recent map

Institute for the study of war maps 6/15/14 http://www.understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/2014-06-15%20Situation%20Report.pdf http://www.understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/2014-06-14%20Situation%20Report%20FINAL11.pdf Boredwhytekid (talk) 13:39, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Syrian perspective (pro Assad/gov't source) http://www.syrianperspective.com/2014/06/map-of-baghdad-and-sourrounding-areas-in-iraq.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boredwhytekid (talk • contribs) 14:13, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

BBC https://twitter.com/hashtag/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AF%D9%88%D9%84%D8%A9_%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A5%D8%B3%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%85%D9%8A%D8%A9?src=hash http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-27838034 Boredwhytekid (talk) 18:31, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Mandali and Badra

Should Mandali be red? PUKmedia is reporting they repelled ISIS from Mandali [15] Akerbeltz (talk) 21:46, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

• It is still unclear which army is in control of Mandali. Most likely Peshmerga are positioned just outside the town, while inside the town is controlled by by local police forces. Though. the other Kurdish towns further south such as Badra, Jassan and Zurbatiya etc are under Maliki control. Read this link. Roboskiye (talk) 09:26, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Albu Hassan, Birwajli, Bastamli, Salaheddin province

This al-Jaz article claims rebels have seized these three villages http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/06/iraq-asks-us-air-strikes-isil-rebels-201461815413488674.html Couldn't find the latter two. Albu Hassan in wikimapia pops up here http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=33.967011&lon=44.404455&z=14&m=b&search=albu%20hassan Boredwhytekid (talk) 17:18, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Bastamli is a Turkmen village in the Tuz Khormato district of Saladin Province according to this source [16] though no idea where it is exactly. Can't find Birwajli. Akerbeltz (talk) 20:05, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Tuz Khurmatu & Suleiman Beg

I saw that someone had edited the map, so it looked like Iraqi Turkmen militia's control Tuz Khurmatu. However, these armed Turkmen fighters, who can be seen as the militairy wing of The Iraqi Turkmen Front (ITF) are only being "active" in Kerkûk, however active is not the right word as Kurdish forces control the whole city. For Suleiman Beg: It is also under Kurdish control, not longer ISIS control. [17]

Benjamin 145 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 18:47, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

But more reliable source confirmed that the city Suleiman Beg under ISIS control.BBC Hanibal911 (talk) 19:15, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

There is even footage from Kurdish tv inside Suleiman Beg [18] You cleary see the Kurdistan tv sign & if you understand Kurdish you'll hear saying them 'We are in Suleiman beg and have captured the city after ISIS militants fled' Benjamin 145 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 19:27, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

But my source is newer and also if you dont know we do not use for editing on the map pro Kurdish sources to display the Kurds advances but we also do not use data from government sources to display the progress of the government army. And we do not use sources of ISIS to display success ISIS. Hanibal911 (talk) 19:54, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

This REPORT states that Turkmen Militia is in control of Tuz Khurmatu because there are no ISF or Peshmerga present. Malik Danno (talk) 21:20, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Confirmed also by this news report.--HCPUNXKID 22:54, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

You cannot use a pro-turk source for turkish rumors; Period. There are a lot of third party sources confirming Yuz under KRG control, such as this LINK. Roboskiye (talk) 23:25, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

They have armed theirself, not captured the city. I have family memberrs who are deployed in Tuz Khurmatu as part of the Pêşmerge and they say everything is ukder their control, however, there was some ISIS presence to the West & South of it. But I'll give you sources as Turkmens don't control the city. [19] [20] [21] "The flags of Federal Kurdistan Region is waving in the town. On the other hand, Peshmerga forces set checkpoints in the entrances and exits of the town to control the town. The Kurdish Peshmerga said a security belt they have created on the southern edges of Tuz Khurmatu has prevented the gangs of the Islamic State of Iraq and Sham (ISIS) from bringing their fight to the Kurdish areas." Benjamin 145 (talk) 21:40, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Tuz Khurmatu is under firm Kurdish control; every inch of it. Even the DailySabah (Turkish source) clearly states Peshmerga took Tuz after Iraqi army fled. Small local Turkmen (as well as local Kurdish groups) are just assisting Peshmerga. Period. Roboskiye (talk) 21:55, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

False, Daily Sabah reports that Iraqi Turkmen are in control of Tuz Khormato.--HCPUNXKID 22:54, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

DailySabah which is pro-Turk mentions the withdrawal of Iraqi army from Tuz, then states that a small group of locals tried to defend the city against ISIL, also admits that Peshmerga army took the city after the Iraqi army fled. Roboskiye (talk) 23:06, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

I've looked and can't find more than a few reports about the situation in Tuz Khurmatu from the past 24 hours. Peshmerga Control All Kurdish Territories in Iraq <-- when you find articles with titles like that and then look at their sources . . . it's clear all the information available is biased. The icon could be colored purple indicating "We don't know" and it would be just as meaningful.Snd0 (talk) 23:25, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Well, Peshmerga has been in control of Tuz since about a week ago (after Iraqi army escaped), not just during the past 24 hours. Roboskiye (talk) 23:32, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

You cannot accuse the other sources of being biased when all the sources you give are kurdish ones (Rudaw, Dicle...), so as biased as the pro-turkish one. As a compromise solution, and due to the conflicting accounts by different sources, I will put the town on the 3 nested circles option, meaning mixed control with stable situation, at least until the issue can be clarified.--HCPUNXKID 22:03, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Compromise?! who said it's a compromise?

Secondly; why add a new color based on ethnicity of government forces?! If so which color towns like Karbala, Baghdad, Badra and Mandali etc should be marked in, since there are government forces of different ethnicity/sects? And what about different Sunni groups? The conflict in Iraq is three-folded: Sunni vs Shia vs KRG. Roboskiye (talk) 22:34, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure if there's a general policy applicable here beyond 'reliable sources' but I'm a little torn over this 'you can't use a pro-X site to ref X news'. In a sense, everyone has a stake/POV, on that basis we could argue CNN is predisposed to reporting one way or the BBC the other (who, in my view, seem to be oddly reluctant to report anything pro-Kurdish) and that Jazeera is likely to be pro-Arab. Would a better measure not be the perceived reliability of the source rather than who's side they're on? Akerbeltz (talk) 10:56, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

I know but apparently HCpunxKID strongly insist on that. Roboskiye (talk) 07:02, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

User HCpunxKID is also insisting on puting Tuz Khurmatu in 3 nested circles with blue, based on an apparent presence of some random small pro-government militia somewhere, who happen to be of turkman ethnic origin. By this logic one could put Baghdad and much of eastern towns on the Iranian border in 3 nested circles regarding the fact that large numbers of Feyli Kurds (many of them pro-government) have organised armed brigades across those cities/towns.

Taking an example is the similar map for Syria where towns like Ma'loula is controlled by Christian pro-gov militia but still no 3 nested circles, or the whole province of Suwayda which is controlled by Druz militia but it's still in red because they are pro-gov and do not form a belligerent on their own. Roboskiye (talk) 07:02, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

The Iraqi city of Tuz Khurmatu under control Kurdish forces.The Daily Star Hanibal911 (talk) 09:04, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Fine, reliable sources it is :) Akerbeltz (talk) 11:31, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

 Comment:-First, the issue of not using sources aligned with one of the parts involved in the clashes is not a decision of mine, but a agreement made by other users (not me) in the Syrian civil war map. Unless you have a good reason to explain why that must be applied there but not here, that another example of the non-sense that sometimes storm WP. And secondly, it seems that for some of you it bothers very much adding the Iraqi Turkmen colour to the map with sources to back its inclusion, claiming that there must be only 3 sides (btw, who decides that?), but at the same time you dont have any problem with the inclusion of the Qaraqosh committee colour, wich is in the same situation as the Turkmen. Smells like hypocrisy, dont you think so?. So unless you have a good argument to it, I will remove also the Qaraqosh colour, per logic.--HCPUNXKID 22:33, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Tel Afar

Al Mayadeen News Station just reported that Tel Afar was recaptured by ISF with help from Shi'a locals. Any other sources about this? http://www.almayadeen.net/ar/news/iraq-lIUHrxy7,kKxzqNOAE6h7w/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AC%D9%8A%D8%B4-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%82%D9%8A-%D9%8A%D9%82%D8%B5%D9%81-%D8%AA%D8%AC%D9%85%D8%B9%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D9%84%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%B9%D8%B4-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D8%AA%D9%84%D8%B9%D9%81%D8%B1 Malik Danno (talk) 21:06, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Accoring to Rudaw, Iraqi soldiers around Talafar have left the front, taking refuge in Peshmerga-controlled area of Sinjar. Roboskiye (talk) 18:58, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Pictures of commander of the Nineveh operations taking refuge in Kurdish region. Roboskiye (talk) 19:46, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Qarah Tabbah (Kirkuk) and Qara Tapa (Diyala)

Is there two towns named Carah Tabbah and Qara Tapa, or is it a mistake? One of them is west of Kirkuk, while the other is west of Jalala --Ahmetyal (talk) 10:38, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm currently a bit puzzled over that too. The place name seems to be common-ish but it's the one near Kirkuk that has a puzzling location. According to Mapquest, there is one near Tal Afar [22] and one near Kirkuk but the one 'near' Kirkuk is half way between Tuz Khurma and Jalaula [23]. Do we know where the current map ref comes from that places it just outside Kirkuk? I can't find any settlement there with a name even vaguely similar. Akerbeltz (talk) 10:42, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I found a Qarrah Tabbah near Kumbetler, Kirkuk [24]. However the question is, if it also is under Peshmerga control. --Ahmetyal (talk) 10:50, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Ah very well spotted, thank you! As for who marked it as yellow, I'm not sure, I assume there is a source. But it's most likely right, the Kurds seem to have a deathgrip on anything around Kirkuk and I have not seen any reports of fights that close to the city. Akerbeltz (talk) 11:12, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

---

Qara tabba and surrouding villigaes now 100% free from IS using a push by both Iraqi Security Forces and the Peshmerga source: http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/world/2014-11/26/c_133816415.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.111.184.18 (talk • contribs) 16:33, 26 November 2014

Black town in Wasit

The black dot in the Wasit governorate, which seems way into shia territory, is it supposed to be Black? An Numaniyah seems to be pretty far in shia so should this be red?—SPESH531Other 21:03, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

It is An Numaniyah. I fixed the label but can't say anythign about the status. Akerbeltz (talk) 21:16, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Informative Maps from Institute for the Study of War

Current holdings (June 19th 2014): http://iswiraq.blogspot.ca/2014/06/control-of-terrain-in-iraq-june-19-2014.html Occurrences on June 18th 2014: http://iswiraq.blogspot.ca/2014/06/iraq-situation-report-june-18-2014.html

This source can really help us in the future. What do you guys think? Malik Danno (talk) 02:48, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

al-Qaim Border Crossing Seized by ISIS

"The officials said Saturday that the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant and allied militants seized the crossing near the border town of Qaim, about 320 kilometers (200 miles) west of Baghdad, after battling Iraqi troops throughout the previous day." AP Link --99.160.184.97 (talk) 07:18, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

ISIS internal fighting?

According to the SZ (southern Germany's biggest newspaper) [25] Isis and JRTN have starting fighting amongst each other leading to 17 dead so far. Do we need a rebel-on-rebel colour? Akerbeltz (talk) 00:13, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Rutbah, Anbar Province Seized by ISIS

"BAGHDAD: Iraqi officials say Sunni militants have seized another town in Iraq's western Anbar province, the fourth to fall in their hands since Friday.

They said the militants captured Rutba, about 150 kilometers east of the Jordanian border, late Saturday. Residents were negotiating Sunday with the militants to leave after an army unit on the town's outskirts threatened to start shelling." link--99.160.184.97 (talk) 08:31, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

I've already noted this town in black color and added a red circle around the city because the army is on the outskirts of town. Hanibal911 (talk) 09:00, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Clashes between sunni insurgents

I think that we need to better understand the situation and find out who among Sunni militants seized control of the city in the Iraqi province of Anbar, Ninawa, Salah ad Din and Kirkuk. Because at the moment there are reports of fighting between warring Sunni insurgency against the government of Iraq. Here the source says that: on Sunday morning, clashes raged for a third day between ISIL and Sunni tribes backed by the Naqshbandi Army, a group led by former army officers and Baathists, around Hawija, southwest of Kirkuk, local security sources and tribal leaders said. More than 10 people were killed in clashes, the sources said. On Friday, ISIL and Naqshbandi fighters began fighting each other in Hawija. Iraqi and Western officials have argued that ISIL and other Sunni factions may turn on each other after capturing territory.Reuters Hanibal911 (talk) 13:12, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

al-Othaim ,Al-Walid & Trebil border crossing & Tal-afar

The news confirm that al-Othaim ,Tal-afar, Trebil border crossing is under the Iraq government & Fallujeh is contested I think this map have some problem in sources like BBC because in these days they say some false news about Iraq happenings. http://www.presstv.com/detail/2014/06/23/368287/iraqi-forces-recapture-border-crossings/ http://www.presstv.com/section/3510202.html in this source the fall of Tal-afar is denied by Iraq Army http://www.almayadeen.net/ar/news/iraq-K9FCSr85SEec,aNTANaUbw/الجيش-العراقي-ينفي-سقوط-تلعفر-بيد-داعش 151.238.174.52 (talk) 15:33, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

al-Waleed border crossing

Iraqi security forces regained control of the Al-Waleed border crossing between Iraq and Syria after Sunni Arab militants briefly seized it.sourcesourcesource Hanibal911 (talk) 21:19, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

A lot of different sources are saying different things, including about the Baiji Oil Refinery and what not else. There seems to be a fair amount of fog of war at work here, which is not surprising, given the rapidity of events source source. A lot of the "confirmation" is coming from government and military officials, which seem to be notoriously unreliable and contradictory at times, and there has been little to no independent verification it seems. Let's not jump the gun and keep editing everything until we have a better idea what's going on. 74.102.14.175 (talk) 11:33, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Your source in which it was said about the capture of the al Waleed border crossing reported on the situation on the 23 June but my source said today that troops retook it is border crossing.sourcesource and here is the source which confirms that the army repulsed all the attacks on the Baiji oil refinery.source source Hanibal911 (talk) 12:28, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

New York times said that both Trebil and Walled are contested. Baiji is most likey under IS control with all part of the refinery. Government sources are unreliable. In Tikrit they said they are in control of the city, then only the university is under their control and they are clearing the rest of the city, then they said university was just hit and run drop and they did not intend to stay there. all these are conflicting statements that puts their credibility into question. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/06/12/world/middleeast/the-iraq-isis-conflict-in-maps-photos-and-video.html?module=Search&mabReward=relbias%3Ar — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.208.35.223 (talk) 22:39, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Trebil border crossing,Al-Ramadi & Fallujeh situation

By this source this border crossing is under the control of Iraq government,this source also shows that Al-ramadi is under the control of Government and Fallujeh is contested.

http://www.almayadeen.net/ar/news/iraq-i6ngjhLiA0GdBaNUAVc8bQ/العراق-الجيش-يقصف-تجمعات-لداعش-في-الفلوجة-والأنبار-ويستعيد-م151.238.148.40 (talk) 14:56, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

if you watch video of this link it'll give you situation about "Neinava" and "Salaheddin" province. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.238.148.40 (talk) 15:04, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Trebil and the nearby border crossing still appear contested in the map, between IS and Iraqi government. No info on any fighting in the area since June though, according to all info area remains under government control. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.42.32.43 (talk) 16:14, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Al-Mayadeen, Al-Alam, Al-Minar and PressTV reliability

Some news televisions and sites such as Al-Mayadeen, Al-Alam, Al-Minra, PressTV, IraqiNews or sources like these are completely biased to Iraqi government and cannot be considered as reliable sources. A little search about Iraq news in past few days in the archive of these news agencies shows how void and invalid are the broadcasted news by these sits. If anyone has any news from these kind of sites, additional reliable sources should be taken into account and then manipulation in the template map should take place. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.177.0.67 (talk) 19:41, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Same could be applied to all that Kurdish press agencies (Rudaw, Dina, etc...), wich are clearly biased towards the peshmerga forces.--HCPUNXKID 22:48, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Unreliable sources are twitter or facebook, yet I found that twitter is a good source to grab Breaking news or HOT news, which is later confirmed by the channels you named, and only confirmed hours later by other news agencies. The map is modified as news come in, and it is sometimes reverted. Its not a big deal, the most important thing is that we have people who double check and revert any vandalism/misinformation . Jumada (talk) 22:21, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Karbala, Najaf, Al Hilla

I will be adding towns, villages, and other strategic locations to the map around Najaf, karbala and Al Hilla. I have already added some to Najaf since ISIS/militants are getting closer to that area, I will add another batch in my next run.

One of the map sources that I use: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/96/1980_Iraq_Tourist_Map.jpg

Jumada (talk) 22:16, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

in karbal two cleric sections have clashed. fighters loyal to sarkhy against government police members whom are loyal to sistani. I would add that too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.146.218.171 (talk • contribs) 11:49, 2 July 2014

ISIS Closing in on Haditha Dam

"The ISIS militants advancing on the Euphrates River dam, about 120 miles northwest of Baghdad, were coming from the north, the northeast and the northwest. The fighters had already reached Burwana, on the eastern side of Haditha, and government forces were fighting to halt their advance, security officials said." by nytimes LINK--99.160.184.97 (talk) 02:09, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Bakhdida Update

Bakhdida (Qaraqosh of Al-Hamdaniya) was attacked by ISIS yesterday and local Christian force and Peshmerga repelled the attack. ISIS gave the Peshmerga forces an ultimatum to retreat by 5 oclock Iraq Time or else .... I'm posting this just as a heads up to keep listening for news about Bakhdida (Qaraqosh/Hamdaniya) in the upcoming hours for a new ISIS offensive. Malik Danno (talk) 03:55, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Much Of The Information is Still Not Backed By Reliable, Updated Resources

This article still lacks good updates and reliable input. While we cannot always predict a current event, we can try to find consensusJoetheMoe25 (talk) 21:18, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

No explanation given about the add of that template, so removed until a proper explanation with reasons is given.--HCPUNXKID 22:21, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

The explanation is quite simple. The information is not neutral because it is a current event that is backed through any up-to-the-minute sources and sources which are possibly sensationalistic in manners which resemble the inspirational war coverage which William Randolph Hearst presented in order to build attention towards the Cuban War of Independence. It should also be included that the situation is a current event and that the situation within Iraq's borders can change at any given time.JoetheMoe25 (talk) 23:15, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

There are a large number of edits to both this and the 2014 Northern Iraq offensive article that are based on what is most likely propaganda from all sides (e.g., the ISF being in "full control" of Baiji refinery... then later we find that troops were actually just trapped inside). It's impossible to avoid, especially when certain outlets simply regurgitate that information. As long as it's all checked on a regular basis for better/more recent sources, it seems okay. Snd0 (talk) 00:05, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

I fundamentally disagree with the proposition that this is neither refd nor updated up. Ok, let me rephrase that, in both respects it is as reliable as the sources will allow. How odd is that? We can only work with this page with the sources we have so if Reuters says one thing and CNN another because the situation on the ground is unclear, then that is not a fault of us not trying to use sources, it is an inherent problem in the event. This isn't some scuffle in Belgium where there would be hundreds of reporters on the ground you know...

It's also the nature of the/a map that we can't ref it the same way we ref a text page but in my experience of having joined this map project relatively late, it is pretty well checked and up to date and does not - largely - contradict maps other major news outlets produce.

You might argue indeed that the status of Chardaghli is so far back that we should update it - I'd love to but it was mentioned once in the news about 10 days ago an not since. So the best we can do is to have it on the last know status. Akerbeltz (talk) 11:06, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Qaraqosh Protection Committee & Turkmen Front

So recently there has been a back and forth between HCPUNXKID and myself about Qaraqosh Protection Committee. He states that because editors refused to include Turkmen Front Militia in Kirkuk, so the same should happen to Qaraqosh Protection Committee (QPC). He says how they are both militias and that they are both working with Peshmerga and are both fighting ISIS and he claims that there is a double standard occurring. BUT this is why they are different. QPC existed since 2008 TF militia only sprang up after ISIS offensive. QPC are recognized by the central and Kurdistan governments as being the police/security force for some villages along Nineveh Plain since 2008, TF militia is not recognized by neither the central nor Kurdish governments as a security force of a given section of Iraqi land. QPC obtained their income directly from the government, TF militia dont. For those reasons, I believe HCPUNXKID's claim that QPC and TF militia are similar is not true and his vandalism needs to stop! I have reverted his last edit to the page Malik Danno (talk) 02:17, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

So your only point is that the QPC was active previous to the actual events. Wow. No matter that both are militias (aint that true?), no matter that both are wether working with or under Kurdish peshmerga forces, no matter that QPC aint a different body or side of the conflict, but part of the Kurdish side. And then, to made your position stronger, you call me vandal, very nice. Just only one question, QPC are an independent side of the conflict or not? If they're, OK, let's give them a colour. But if not, if they are subordinated or allied to the Kurdish Peshmerga or to the Iraqi Army, they must be removed.--HCPUNXKID 01:27, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Also, note the new sources I brought stating Kurdish Peshmerga control of Bartella: "Of course, we're worried. But Kurdish forces are here," he adds, referring to fighters known as Peshmerga who have long guarded the town. "They will protect us." and Kurdish Peshmerga control of Qaraqosh: "With the collapse of the Iraqi army in Mosul earlier this month, the only armed defenders of Qaraqosh are members of the Kurdish Pershmerga militia.". That reliable sources (unless you have newer sources, from 26 June onwards) are crystal-clear proof of Kurdish Peshmerga control of that towns, so QPC removed. Regards,--HCPUNXKID 01:41, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Peshmerga forces are working with ISF forces as well ... why are they not all coloured red as well, your point about cooperation is invalid. QPC are a different body than the Peshmerga, they are not under the Peshmerga forces, but are working with them ... that is a clear distinction. Saying "Kurdish forces are here" doesn't mean that Christian militia are there either, and your article clearly shows Christian militia operating in Bartella. Here is another article of 600 NON-PESHMERGA members defending Bartella: http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/asia/item/18579-christians-in-mosul-iraq-pay-protection-tax. Also Vice News report (Dispatch 5) about Bakhdida (Qaraqosh): https://news.vice.com/video/the-battle-for-iraq-dispatch-5 Shows militiamen protecting churches IN Bakhdida itself. STOP VANDALIZING! Take your Turkmen Front Militia battle elsewhere! Malik Danno (talk) 03:23, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Here's another source for Bakhdida: "The Kurdish forces, fighting alongside local Christian militiamen, appear to have kept the attackers from entering the city, but the fighting provoked many of Qaraqosh’s residents to flee. " http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/globe-in-iraq-desperate-exodus-in-search-of-safe-ground/article19357002/?page=all Malik Danno (talk) 03:36, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

First, Peshmerga aint working as a part of the ISF, or even coordinated with the ISF, they have their own agenda, so please dont make desperate non-sense comparisons...http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/asia/item/18579-christians-in-mosul-iraq-pay-protection-tax article cites another article from JUNE 21 (so older than the one I brought) about presence of Christian militias in Bartella. So, as long that JUNE 21 is earlier than JUNE 26, that source is older, so cannot overwrite the source I gave, so Bartella to. And in https://news.vice.com/video/the-battle-for-iraq-dispatch-5, I can only see Kurdish peshmerga forces in uniform, and when the people on the video talk, they talk about Kurdish peshmerga against ISIS, not a single citation of the Qaraqosh Protection Committee. So, are you really saying that 2 persons on plain civilian clothes with kalashnikovs (thats what the video shows) are proof of any type of control of QPC over Bakhdida/Qaraqosh? Seriously? Come on, stop your blatant SECTARIAN POV-PUSHING (Me, differently than yours -as I told you before, but it seems you dont want to hear it- dont have any problem with Assyrians, Turkmens, Kurds, etc...), please...--HCPUNXKID 00:43, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Im gonna maintain Qaraqosh/Bakhdida because this source you brought (as its from JUNE 26 also), but I'm gonna turn Bartella to yellow again per newer source I brought, unless you can take here a newer source stating QPC control in Bartella.--HCPUNXKID 00:43, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

This article talks about the 600 Christian militiamen in Bartella, so, at that point it on July 21st there were 600 Christian militiamen ... we agree about that. Your article only says ""Of course, we're worried. But Kurdish forces are here," he adds, referring to fighters known as Peshmerga who have long guarded the town. "They will protect us."" ... there is no mention of 600 militiamen. I am not saying there are no peshmerga in Bartella, as there clearly are. BUT I have provided proof that on the 21st there were 600 Christian militiamen in Bartella. It is now on you to prove that there are now no more (0) Christian militiamen in Bartella left. THAT MEANS, you need to provide a source saying there are NONE left. If you provide a source saying that Peshmerga are there ... that doesn't disprove the existence of Christian militiamen in the town. Therefore, the burden of proof is on you to prove that the 600 have disbanded or fled ... and so far you haven't done that. Malik Danno (talk) 00:22, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Following that line of thought, I had provided proof that Iraqi Turkmen militiamen were deployed in Tuz Khurmatu, but another user removed them claiming that Peshmerga were in control. Of course, that user had not provided any type of proof of Turkmen militiamen withdrawing from Tuz Khurmatu. As I stated before, Im not against Assyrians, Kurds, Turkmen or any other ethnic group, but against evident double-standards. So clearly, unless you are biased or sectarian, both militias (Assyrians & Turkmens) must be included or removed, because what doesnt have any sense (unless we want to POV-push in favour of one side) is to add one while removing the other. Regards,--HCPUNXKID 16:55, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

AHA so the truth comes out. Listen I said it before, just because your lobbying for the Turkmen Front militia to be incorporated into this map didn't go according to plan, doesn't mean you can vandalize others. They are two different cases and they should be treated as such. I have a suggestion, instead of focusing on the QPC, why don't you focus on lobbying for the Turkmen Militia Front more so. Malik Danno (talk) 06:21, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Dude, this is now disgusting, wich part of, quoting myself: "As I stated before, Im not against Assyrians, Kurds, Turkmen or any other ethnic group, but against evident double-standards." you dont understand?. I dont want to take it personal, but its you who have started the accusations of vandalism, lobbying, etc...Because if you really want to talk about users here lobbying and POV-pushing you are clearly one of the most prominent candidates, as your edits are mostly in favour of the side (Assyrians) wich clearly you support. In comparison, I have added sourced content about the real 3-sides of the conflict (Kurds, Iraqi government & Islamic state). Following your line of though, it seems Im lobbying for the Iraqi Army, Kurdish Peshmerga & ISIS at the same time, huh?. You still claim that the cases of Assyrians & Turkmen are different, but your only argument to support that claim is the date of creation of the militias, a very weak argument (for example, Hizbullah was created many years before the Syrian civil war, and are totally differenced from the Syrian Army, but in the Syrian civil war map template they dont have a different colour, although many experts said they control towns and land there). Your unwillingness to compromise and evident double-standards leave me with little options, so to avoid an edit war, I've had to add the NPOV & Unbalanced tags to the template until this issue is settled.--HCPUNXKID 16:47, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps a generic icon for unspecified non-isis forces? That would help when there's a disambiguation and if IDF/KRG actually hold an area together. Atomicdryad (talk) 18:25, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Tikrit Airport

Who now controls the Tikrit Airport? I will appreciate any information. Hanibal911 (talk) 18:41, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

HCPUNXKID

Does anyone else want to report User:HCPUNXKID from this template so he can no longer vandalize this page. When I started this template, I wanted to get a clear picture of what was happening on the ground ... but clearly you have some users who are using their own personal grievances (rejection of Turkmen Front Militia incorporation) as a way to downplay the editing process of this page. I feel that his contributions are no longer needed. Anyone else agree? Malik Danno (talk) 03:01, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Well, I feel that your "contributions" are a crystal-clear example of POV-pushing, as your edits are always one-way, trying to magnify the Assyrian militiamen (QPC) role, as much as portraying them as a 4th side of the conflict, differenced from ISF, Peshmergas & ISIS.--HCPUNXKID 01:06, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

HCPUNXKID has been vandalising this page for a while, he first undid an edit by another user who added Kurdish towns North of Erbil, HCPUNXKID cited that there was no sources given, yet there needed be no sources because everyone knows the towns were deeply within Kurdish territory and have been under Kurdish control since 2005, the other user was merely adding towns on the map to help expand this template as he does on the Syrian Civil war map template, he Also removed towns south of Iraq, deeply within Iraqi strongholds over the same reason:lack of sources. This sort of behaviour continued, HCPUNXKID removed over 3mbs worth of information over the following days. At one point, he undid an edit, citing that it was unreliable (due to the fact that the source was twitter) yet he overlooked the fact that theguardian and radaw amongst other news outlets have reported on the towns status 24 hours after it was reported on twitter, the problem here is that he did not wish to confirm the news by googling the towns name (which should have taken no longer than 5 minutes via google news search) and whats worse than that, he did not start a discussion on the talk page regarding the issue, instead he undid the changes without checking. If this user does not wish to double check or research to help improve the article by contributing then he's simply vandalising. There is a reason for a talk page and its for research and discussion regarding such issues. Jumada (talk) 00:10, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Look, I dont have to confirm anything, ITS YOU WHO HAVE TO GAVE RELIABLE PROOF BACKING YOUR EDITS, LEARN HOW WIKIPEDIA WORKS, DUDE. And as far as I know, a tweet aint a reliable source here. Oh, and if you want to talk about Vandalism definitions in WP, one of them in adding content without any type of source, as you did here repeatedly. And finally, as you talk about the Syrian civil war map template, you should learn that there you cannot add towns unless you have specific citation of the towns and who controls them, so there editors would have acted like me here, as you aint provided any source backing your claim of inclusion of that towns.--HCPUNXKID 01:06, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Given that this map looks - in a broad sense - very similar to those published by most sources, there doesn't seem to be a fundamental problem with editing. We all know that every side is going to systemically lie, even playing video from years before on state TV to "confirm" control (i.e., Baiji). If you think an edit is potentially contentious, just give the two most recent independent sources. If it's true, there'll be more than one source. Snd0 (talk) 09:32, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

I think it will be best to ban HCPUNXKID until he folow the rules of posting 86.150.247.128 (talk) 14:00, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Could you show me what are those "rules of posting"?. Perhaps adding the towns you want without giving a single source?. Because that's what some users are doing here against major WP rules, something you seems to ignore...--HCPUNXKID 17:00, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

who ever putted al awja as gov held twenty days ago was committing vandalism,because the village fell today,so i suggest that the duwar and the other one be put as ISIS held http://www.businessinsider.com/the-iraqi-army-just-retook-saddam-husseins-birthplace--a-huge-symbolic-and-tactical-victory-2014-7 Alhanuty (talk) 18:07, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Al Awja is a tiny village which is near impossible to defend by either side, the town is pro-saddam. It didnt just fall today, it was reported to have fell 3 days ago:

http://al-shorfa.com/en_GB/articles/meii/newsbriefs/2014/07/01/newsbrief-05

and

http://www.3news.co.nz/Kurdish-chief-calls-for-independence/tabid/417/articleID/351326/Default.aspx

and

http://www.telegraaf.nl/buitenland/22796775/__Iraaks_leger_herovert_Al-Awja__.html

and today it is also reported to have fallen. It was reported to have fallen numerous times, So no it didnt fall today, and if it did then that only means the Iraqi security occupy it during the day and retreat at night leaving it for local tribes or IS fighters. When the time comes for a press conference, The iraqi spokesman repeats the capture of the village for news outlets like its breaking news Jumada (talk) 18:39, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

http://online.wsj.com/articles/saddams-birthplace-retaken-iraqi-army-says-1404492797 Alhanuty (talk) 04:36, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Tikrit Situation

This source shows Tikrit city is contestedMZarif (talk) 06:16, 5 July 2014 (UTC)http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/10935094/Iraq-fights-to-seize-back-territory-from-Islamic-State.html

Sources frmo later in the day stated the offensive had been repelled. not to mention the fighting had actually not even reach inside the city but was limited to the outskirts. Also, there have been no new reports of fighting in Tikrit for the last 12 days. The closes fighting has happened at Saddam's home village, 10 milies from Tikrit. EkoGraf (talk) 06:48, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Here is the other source which confirms that this city is contested http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/10967766/Iraqi-troops-in-fight-to-retake-Tikrit-from-jihadists.html I don't know who are the admins of this map I should remain that every change needs source.Can any body say that Biji refinery ,Trebil board crossing,Tikrit,rutabah & Nukhayb on the which source is under the control of ISIS?!MZarif (talk) 11:23, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

The article, dated 15 July 2014, is from the Daily Telegraph and is clearly sourced to Reuters. By the 16 July 2014, Reuters were reporting "Iraqi forces withdrawn from militant-held Tikrit"[26] PhilKnight (talk) 16:23, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

1RR due to WP:SCWGS

I would like to put your attention that this template is marked as WP:SCWGS - subject to sanctions on all Syrian Civil War topic articles. Editors are allowed to make no more than 1 revert per 24-hours; reverts of IPs do not count for that matter. Please retain civil and follow WP:BRD.GreyShark (dibra) 14:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Thurai Airport?

What is this? Any proof of that infrastructure existing? Because I couldnt find anything about it on Google...--HCPUNXKID 16:51, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=35.864013&lon=42.148361&z=11&m=b&show=/5558586/ar/مطار-ثري

it sits in the centre of small villages but I think nobody uses it anymore, could be a base of operation for IS. 86.26.230.122 (talk) 22:55, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

google comes with nothing, remove it as there is no information about it 86.26.230.122 (talk) 22:56, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Amirli under local Turkmen control

Washington Institute claims (16 July 2014) that the subdistrict of Amerli is under local Turkmen control. [27]. Should we add a new icon? --Ahmetyal (talk) 09:56, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

I agree, and it has already been done. Thanks Malik Danno (talk) 00:09, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

COB Speicher Contested/Unclear as of 20/21 July 2014

As [28] among other articles reports, Iraqi government personnel claiming to be stationed at the base state that it is still under government control, albeit continually under attack.
There has yet to emerge clear video or photo proof that IS(IS) has actually taken control of the base, rather than just constantly attacking it and possibly penetrating far enough to damage some aircraft and/or facilities before tactically retreating.
Yes a number of generally reliable media sources (notably the McClatchy news service whose [report] has been repeated by many of its affiliate newspapers and Long War Journal, etc.) have reported that the base has indeed been captured, but in none of the reports I've read so far has the author actually claimed to have seen clear evidence of the base's capture firsthand; rather they're based on statements from ISIS itself, from ostensible residents of the city of Tikrit, and from an ostensible Kurdish peshmerga officer who formerly operated with a central-government special forces unit, but who is not claimed to actually be on the ground in the Tikrit region.
In my judgment the base should be considered contested and the icon changed to government-position-under-attack (red within black circle) or incomplete-control/actively-contested/currently-unclear (square halved into red and black by quarters).
Accordingly I have made an edit changing the icon to the latter (i.e. alternating red and black squares).
I'm not going to start edit-warring if someone reverts to ISIS-controlled but I hope if one does so the change is supported by more-indisputable evidence than has yet come to light, preferably government admission of a capture or unambiguous photography/video.
Riyuky (talk) 01:25, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Updates 7/21

Recently I saw news reports that Christians seeking refuge in the Mar Behnam Monastery were expelled. The Wikipedia article on the Monastery references a Vatican Insider article from June 11 which also mentions the Monastery being under the control of ISIL. Seeing as the Monastery is literally next to the town of Al Khidir the map should mark Al-Khidir as being under ISIL control. As for arguments about militias, nobody who is viewing this map cares. The map should reflect the different blocs in this conflict. It is already assumed that any militia consisting of Turkmens, Assyrians, Shabak, Yezidis or any other minority in northern Iraq is allied with the Kurds simply by virtue of the fact that none of the minority groups I mentioned have anywhere near the capability of taking on ISIL alone or any desire to live under their rule. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.97.30.242 (talk • contribs) 21:38, 21 July 2014

Speicher reset to ISIS/antigovernment control 24 July without new justifying information

As the title says no sources were provided to justify the change back to antigovernment control from contested / government-position-under-attack. I am resetting the icon to contested and hope that if someone subsequently changes it back they'll provide supporting sources here on the Talk page.
The edit summary provided by User:Alhanuty states in full "sources from the north iraq offensive article and via the source that EkoGrak (sic ; I believe what's meant is User:EkoGraf) brought confirms that the base fell", but it is not clear which sources are actually being referred to. I could not find any reference in the 2014_Northern_Iraq_offensive article relating to the current conflict over the facility following the second failed attempt by government forces to retake Tikrit. It's possible that I just missed it but if so please provide the link here. Similarly I don't know which source mentioned by EkoGraf is being referred to.
Obviously edit summaries have a low character limit but the sources can be specified here on the Talk page at the time of an edit.
The sources on which my judgment that "contested" is the most appropriate status are primarily:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/07/20/the-iraqi-army_s-alamo--standoff-in-tikrit.html
http://online.wsj.com/articles/iraqi-forces-take-military-base-in-fight-with-islamist-militants-1405892675
The video footage mentioned in the Wall Street Journal article, (at least some of) which is available online for example here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78pYqRqTQ-Q .
The base is quite large, and it's possible that ISIS/insurgent forces have managed to hold on to some portion of it. However the government claims it still controls the entire base and has provided plausible video evidence for its control of at least one major runway complex, while I'm not aware of any recent imagery showing insurgent control inside the base (whether in the same or in a different area from that of the government video).
Regrettably my knowledge of Arabic is close to zero so I'm not sure whether those heard speaking on the video are stating the date for the purpose of verification, but they're obviously at one of the runway complexes at Speicher and show a number of combatant corpses.
If the speakers don't mention the date (or perhaps even if they do, given the possibility, however remote, of quick audio-track editing that's nonetheless sophisticated enough to be undetectable) I guess one can theorize that this is footage from the aftermath of a prior assault in which antigovernment forces failed to capture the base and that it was held onto for release just in case the base fell for the purpose of disinformation.
But the same can be theorized about any proof-of-control footage, and given their overall performance during the current phase of conflict and ability to reinforce Camp Speicher via air and overland from south of Tikrit, I think it's just as likely that government forces still hold at least a large part of base.
Riyuky (talk) 00:07, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

The most recent sources point to the base not being contested, but besieged with fighting around it on its outskirts. Sources here [29][30][31]. The insurgents did attack the base, but apparently, after temporarily breaching it, they were repelled back outside the wire. In any case, contested or not, the standard template for bases that we have been using here and over at the Syria war map is, colored dot (defenders), with a ring around it (attackers). And at this point, sources point to the Army being the defenders, and ISIS attackers. EkoGraf (talk) 00:11, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

• Yes I'm similarly inclined to believe the situation is that it's government-held albeit probably still under periodic attack, given that even if at one point insurgents had established a foothold in some section of the base which ground forces couldn't quickly recapture, such a position would become a high priority for attack by government air assets. I was objecting to the recent revert back to ISIS/insurgent control and think the "contested" status/icon might be the best way to forestall an edit war until more info emerges which leaves no reasonable doubt that government forces control the entire base. But gov't-control/under-attack is not inappropriate in my estimation.
  Riyuky (talk) 07:25, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Thing is why I'm insisting on a dot with a ring around it is because the standard template before here and at the Syria map was even if a base was contested we used a dot and a ring, not a blinking light. EkoGraf (talk) 09:11, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Main roads and provincial borders

Main roads should be added to the map. Provincial borders are irrelevant and should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.114.91.228 (talk) 21:23, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

IS taking over Sinjar and Mosul Dam

IS took over Mosul Dam http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/iraq-conflict-isis-fighters-seize-mosul-dam-oilfield-and-3-towns-1.2726684 http://en.shafaqna.com/topnews/item/30743-daesh-isil-seizes-iraq%E2%80%99s-dam-oilfield.html. If you make any changes provide a source please. Thanks to all editors

IS did not take Mosul Dam. http://edition.cnn.com/2014/08/04/world/meast/iraq-crisis/index.html?c=world — Preceding unsigned comment added by VisvambaNathan (talk • contribs) 06:46, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Mosul, Tikrit and Fallujah remain as contested or ISIS/IE controled on Iraq, its seems that despite the ISIS advances in some Areas they are being beated back here.200.48.214.19 (talk) 14:01, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

IS did attack Mosul Dam but the attack was repelled by Kurdish Peshmerga, the Dam remains under Kurdish control. http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2014/Aug-07/266369-kurds-say-repelled-jihadist-attack-on-mosul-dam.ashx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gilgameshh (talk • contribs) 03:44, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Bashiqah

I read on Twitter that Bashiqah was captured by IS and many Yezidis fled. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.42.96.49 (talk • contribs) 01:36, 5 August 2014

ISIS offensive against Kurds

Hi all

"Qaraqosh, Tal Kayf, Bartella and Karamlesh" are under control of ISIS and this article confirms that Sinjar are under ISIS control Per: http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2014/Aug-07/266347-isis-captures-iraqs-largest-christian-town.ashx#axzz39hEYyhTo

And, according to a french newspaper:

Makhmour, Tal Kayf and Al Kouair are under control of ISIS

Per: http://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-actu/2014/08/07/97001-20140807FILWWW00093-irak-les-djihadistes-s-emparent-de-trois-nouvelles-villes-dans-le-nord-du-pays.php

Rogal Dorm (talk) 09:30, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

New article per french press:

http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/2014/08/07/01003-20140807ARTFIG00119-la-plus-grande-ville-chretienne-d-irak-tombe-aux-mains-des-djihadistes.php

Rogal Dorm (talk) 10:12, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

the offensive is simultaneous with the attack against the YPG in Northern Syria. We need a page Islamic State-Kurdish conflict for sure--93.140.164.225 (talk) 17:01, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

I agree. Roboskiye (talk) 19:42, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Christian villages

There are dozens of independent and non-independent Kurdish news agencies who closely monitor the situation with great degrees of accuracy. But today no Kurdish source has so far reported any ISIS advances east or north of Mosul and advancing in Christian towns. On the contrary, some days ago there was some east- and northwards advancements of ISIS in Christian villages which was soon countered by massive Peshmerga attacks and Peshmerga advanced as far as eastern and northern suburbs of the city such as Gogjali, Qahira, Rahira, Arabia, Sade, Bawiza etc. Are we reflecting an outdated news with a few days delay? or am I mistaken? Roboskiye (talk) 19:42, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Kurdish media sources are unreliable in such cases. Media are not only to report news in war times, there is also a need of propaganda. After IS advancement in August 3 and the promises of retaliation and counter attack, they simply couldn't report an even bigger IS advancement 4 days later. 185.42.32.43 (talk) 01:16, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Mosul Dam is under ISIS Control

Mosul Dam needs to be changed back to ISIS control or User:Gilgameshh or User:Treyneon need to discuss their sources for not doing so. -- Veggies (talk) 12:44, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Per report from last night [32], dam ISIS-controlled. EkoGraf (talk) 14:18, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Mosul Dam needs to be changed to contested as latest reports http://news.yahoo.com/us-confirms-airstrikes-near-arbil-mosul-dam-222300685.html the area is not secured yet, only the eastern side. The Dam itself is still under IS control. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.20.122.52 (talk) 16:21, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/latest-round-of-us-airstrikes-aimed-at-helping-iraqis-reclaim-mosul-dams/article20091967/ Mosul Dam is still contested. Is not secured. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.12.202.163 (talk) 21:11, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

http://www.voanews.com/content/us-expands-air-strikes-to-help-iraqi-forces-retake-mosul-dam/2416767.html Dam is still being contested with the regulatory dam and a hill still under IS control, and parts of it still not cleared. Unless we want to add the regulatory Dam to the map, the dam should be listed as contested. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.20.122.52 (talk) 13:15, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

http://www.dailysabah.com/mideast/2014/08/18/kurdish-military-says-peshmerga-forces-in-full-control-of-mosul-dam "An employee at the site, however, said ISIS militants still held the Mosul Dam, giving them control over power and water supplies and where any breach of the vulnerable structure would threaten thousands of lives.

U.S. fighter, bomber and drone aircraft took part in the strikes on ISIS positions near the dam, the Pentagon said. The strikes damaged or destroyed six armed vehicles, a light armoured vehicle and other equipment.

The U.S. military said it believed the air strikes around the dam had been effective in holding Islamic State militants in place so Iraqi and Kurdish forces could manoeuvre against them.

But Army Colonel Steve Warren, a Pentagon spokesman, said operations around the dam were "ongoing" and he was not prepared yet to say whether it had been retaken by Iraqi forces."

Mosul Dam should definitely be listed as contested till video evidence arrives showing the facility in Iraqi Hands. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.20.122.52 (talk) 13:20, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

http://news.sky.com/story/1321234/iraq-conflict-fighting-resumes-at-mosul-damhttp://news.sky.com/story/1321234/iraq-conflict-fighting-resumes-at-mosul-dam

Fighting is still going on in the Mosul Dam. It needs to switch to contested — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.20.122.52 (talk) 16:30, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-28858601 Still fighting around the Dam, it should also read as joint ISF/Peshmerga as Golden Division is present and performing the actual fighting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.20.122.52 (talk) 15:09, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/afp/140819/state-play-iraqs-main-frontlines Still fighting around Mosul Dam. Needs to change to contested or the Regulatory Dam added otherwise the map is not accurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tgoll774 (talk • contribs) 20:59, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2014/Aug-21/267925-scene-of-fighting-mosul-dam-always-beset-with-problems.ashx http://www.mycentraloregon.com/2014/08/20/us-military-conducts-more-airstrikes-near-mosul-dam/ The Dam is not secured and is still being fought for and is in danger of collapsing Tgoll774 (talk) 15:29, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/middle-east/us-air-strikes-on-islamic-militants-continue-in-defence-of-mosul-dam-1.1904195 Dam is still being fought over. It needs to change to contested. Tgoll774 (talk) 14:38, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Makmoor village source

Per [33] there is fighting in the village. -- Veggies (talk) 14:03, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Both the town and the refugee camp are still seeing fights but in both cases inside is controlled by IS according to Kurdish info, not the opposite as shown in map. Town per [34], refugee camp per [35] 185.42.32.43 (talk) 01:34, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Al-Munthiriyah border crossing

Is Al-Munthiriyah border crossing really under government control? I cant find any english sources for this. --Ahmetyal (talk) 16:18, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Kalak Situation

[36] US Air strikes on ISIS positions outside of Kalak. We can discuss if it merits an icon change. -- Veggies (talk) 16:46, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

No repors of fighting taking plase inside Kalak as of now, IS forces are obviously very close but village is yet under Kurdish control, not contested. 185.42.32.43 (talk) 00:27, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Status of Alqosh

I have seen conflicting reports about Alqosh everywhere, in the news, on twitter, I cannot make head or tails of what is happening there. Are there any reliable sources regarding the situation in Alqosh? Should it be marked as contested? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.233.156.121 (talk) 19:31, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

I haven't seen any info of fighting in Alqosh, if you have any links that support it's contested do share. Alqosh fallen on Thursday, there were reports that Peshmerga forces retreat from there, followed by reports that a number of IS fighters arrived and taken control. Didn't notice anything new since.. Constantinos7 (talk) 23:29, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

I do not have any sources and you will not see one about such a small town. However, I have come in contact with residents of Alqosh and they have said that the town is empty of Assyrians, but there remains about 30 Assyrian youth protecting the city from thieves etc. Outside of the town behind the town of Tel Isqof is the Peshmerga line while on the other side of Tel Isqof is the ISIS line. Malik Danno (talk) 01:38, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Batnaya and Telkeffe are still under IS control. there are vedio showing IS Flag in the The twons https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ua46jxHTI4E — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.208.239.127 (talk) 00:32, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Jalawla fallen to IS

Clashes all day per [37] IS announced captured: [38], confirmed by [39]Constantinos7 (talk) 00:28, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Yellow Dots

It seems that unimportant yellow dots keep popping in the map. It feels like everytime IS advances and takes Kurdish areas, new dots are added to show that the Kurds still control a lot. Currently there are more dots in Kurdish territory than in the rest of Iraq.

Main problem when no significance dots are added is that no one will ever bother reporting any change to them. Take the fall of Jalawla for example. Several sources (incl Reuters) confirmed that two nearby villages were also captured by IS. No change in our map since we don't know which villages, as they are not important enough to be mentioned by name by any media. One of them might be Sayyid Ahmad near Jalawla but we can't know for sure. Some info online seem to suggest that this village might even be abandoned, still, it found it's way to this map. Constantinos7 (talk) 23:19, 11 August 2014 (UTC) I agree with Cosntantinos. Snunny and khannasour been changed to yellow with out anysources. I hope if someone changes the color of a village to add the sources. YPG is reported to have presence in the Areas north of Sinjar, if someone has sources about that, please add here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.208.239.127 (talk) 01:00, 13 August 2014 (UTC) khannasour and Snunny must be under ypg/ybs control because the yezidi are fleeing through a corridor to syria if these towns werent in controll of pg it were impossible for corridor — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.134.183.10 (talk) 01:27, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

"Haditha" in "Anbar" fully secured.

Hi, the city "Haditha" in "Anbar" is now fully secured under the Iraqi Security Forces the link is from an official Iraqi news site. Here is the link: http://www.iraqinews.com/iraq-war/anbar-police-dept-announces-haditha-city-as-quot-secured-quot/ Many thanks, Ali4lfie0 Ali4life0 (talk) 12:01, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Kojo

Reports of 80 men killed and 100 women captured by ISIS in Kojo, 20 kilometers (12 miles) south of Sinjar. ISIS surrounded for days and preached convert or die. The claims come from the Kurds. [Link] and other media. I can't change map. Legacypac (talk) 23:13, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Islahi

The village of Islahi near Diyala is captured by Peshmerga[40]. If anyone knows where this village is, please add it. --Ahmetyal (talk) 17:18, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Tikrit city

The news from different sources confirm that Tikrit City is contested. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/11042922/Iraqi-forces-launch-assault-on-Saddam-Husseins-hometown-Tikrit.html http://en.alalam.ir/news/1624275 the recent news by Almayadeen.net opposed that Iraq army clashed in south of Tikrit and now they're got to central zone of this city.MZarif (talk) 15:56, 19 August 2014 (UTC) dfgdfgdfg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.170.156.192 (talk) 00:48, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

If you don't like to change this please say your reason!MZarif (talk) 13:53, 2 September 2014 (UTC) there is conflict in this city Here is another source:http://www.iraqinews.com/iraq-war/military-operation-to-liberate-tikrit-starts/ http://www.iraqinews.com/iraq-war/iraqi-security-forces-battle-isis-near-tikrit-university/MZarif (talk) 12:12, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Ramadi still Contested

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/afp/140819/state-play-iraqs-main-frontlines. Ramadi has not been retaken by ISF — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tgoll774 (talk • contribs) 21:03, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Amerli

Shia Militas and PUK claimed they are inside the twom while IS has videos of fighting in the outskirts. any one has more sources — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.208.239.127 (talk) 21:21, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Al-Zaab

The news confirm that IS troops get out of Al-Zaab city in the west of Kirkuk here is the source:http://www.almayadeen.net/news in "آخرالاخبار" part.MZarif (talk) 13:53, 2 September 2014 (UTC) If you don't like to change this please say your reason!

Because Zaab is behind the Front lines(Hweija) and it is a Sunni Arabs. The fight is More intense at Amerli and Salman-Bek. and the source is not just pro-government source. it government itself which makes it biased. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.208.239.127 (talk) 01:05, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Batnaya still apparently Kurdish controlled as of 3 September 2014

Batnaya was recaptured by Kurdish forces 18/19 August during the offensive that retook Mosul Dam and several surrounding areas, according to http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2014/0818/As-US-steps-up-air-campaign-in-Iraq-Kurdish-forces-seize-strategic-dam-video , http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/8/18/mosul-dam-iraq.html , and other comparatively reliable sources.
Of course it's possible there's other evidence that Batnaya is not currently under Kurdish control but I haven't found it yet with some cursory searching.
But in any case the Institute for the Study of War analysts are not making such a claim (or if they are they're writing with such a lack of clarity as to give the opposite impression), by stating in their infographic (i.e. "Iraq Situation Report: September 1-2, 2014" at iswiraq.blogspot.com , iswiraq.blogspot.ca , etc; http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-wxyqewzo_0Y/VAY5MpwOiII/AAAAAAAABy0/_UKG3hEfw9k/s1600/2014-09-02%2BSituation%2BReport%2BHIGH-01.png ) that: "Meanwhile an officer in the Iraqi Kurdish forces stated that U.S. airstrikes targeted two ISIS vehicles in Tilkif [Tel Keppe], northeast of Mosul, while Peshmerga forces prepared to launch an assault on the area from Batnaya, 7km. north of Tilkif."
I think that the vast majority of the time expressions like "planning to attack Position A from Position B" are meant to indicate that the latter position is the area where the attacking forces are currently located/assembling, which implies said forces have effective control of the area.
If ISW meant to imply that Batnaya would have to be captured before proceeding to Tilkif/Tel Keppe I'd think they'd say something to the effect of "Advancing from [one or more forward Kurdish-held positions] through Batnaya to Tilkif".
Riyuky (talk) 04:02, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Reported encirclement of IS(IS) forces at "Anjanah"; adding apparent location to map

According to the Insitute for the Study of War's "Iraq Situation Report: August 29-31, 2014" ( http://iswiraq.blogspot.com/2014/08/iraq-situation-report-august-29-31-2014.html ):
"On August 29 forces from the 5th IA division reportedly started a siege of ISIS forces in Anjanah, northern Diyala area. According to Khalis's mayor, Uday al-Khaddran, Anjanah is the last ISIS stronghold in the area and controls an important point on the Baghdad-Kirkuk road on the border between Diyala and Salah ad-Din provinces."
While I'm not sufficiently familiar with the geography of the area firsthand, the wikimapia.org and Google Maps databases (one of which might of course be sourced from the other) depict a town named Anjanah (or similar transliteration) at approximately 34.541°N, 44.647°E .
From the low-resolution satellite photography available on the aforementioned map databases, the town appears to be quite a small hillside settlement only about 800 meters from the A3 highway, which runs from Baghdad through Khalis, Tuz Khormatu, etc, to Kirkuk.
The apparent lack of physical and population cover and its proximity to the increasingly government/Kurdish-controlled highway makes it hardly an ideal location for the retreat of a large IS force so whatever contingent has been surrounded there almost certainly isn't of much strategic significance. Continued unconventional/distributed IS presence from Dhuluiyah through Adhaim and its environs and north to the area southwest of Tuz Khormato will probably continue to pose a threat to government-aligned forces' control along this stretch of the A3.
Nonetheless I think it might as well be depicted. =>.>=
Riyuky (talk) 06:32, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

this source (http://slabnews.com/article/110188) reported on August 30 that Anjana was liberated by the Iraqi Army Roy9955 (talk) 08:24, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Write KURDISH NAMES of citirs and villiges!

Since the official languages in Iraq are both Arabic and Kurdish, should cities and villiges in Kurdistan region or that have a predominantly Kurdish population, the names should also be in Kurdish.öFor example Sulaymaniya (Silêmanî), Erbil (Hewlêr), Kirkuk (Kerkûk), Halabja (Helebce), Sinjar (Şingal), Dohuk (Duhok), Tuz khurmatu ( Xurmatû), Khamaqım (Xaneqîn) and so on. Thank you! --Shwan00 (talk) 07:37, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Template:Syrian and Iraqi insurgency detailed map

I've just set up Template:Syrian and Iraqi insurgency detailed map. It shares its points with Module:Syrian Civil War detailed map and Module:Iraqi insurgency detailed map, so any changes to either of those will also update it automatically. Jackmcbarn (talk) 00:41, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Good Idea — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.208.239.127 (talk) 00:33, 11 September 2014‎ (UTC)

Mikeshifa near Balad and Dhuluia near Baghdad

There are clashes between IS and Shiite Militias in Mikeshifa, in Dhuluia IS is fihgting conbination of Iraqi Army and Shiite militia. Can some one add them to the map please — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.208.239.127 (talk) 00:33, 11 September 2014‎ (UTC)

Zumar

Peshmergas withdraw from Zumar. It is back under IS control http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9eJG9B8NGEE — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.208.239.127 (talk) 00:36, 11 September 2014‎ (UTC)

This is dated september 1st while the sources that were given to put Zumar in kurds control is dated september 3rd Roy9955 (talk) 18:11, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/the-zummar-eleven-will-wait-forever-for-their-loved-ones-return-700e43a465b8 Confirmed Zumar under IS control, though spelled as Zummar, not unusual as these northern towns have different names by locals. Tgoll774 (talk) 17:47, 17 September 2014 (UTC) http://www.understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/2014-09-28%20Situation%20Report.pdf Confirms Zumar under IS control.Tgoll774 (talk) 12:57, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

http://www.ninanews.com/english/News_Details.asp?ar95_VQ=HHEIGK Zumar is clearly not under Peshmerga control. Switch it back to IS control and don't take Peshmerga releases seriously. Tgoll774 (talk) 14:54, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Christian villages

Kurdish peshmerga forces recaptured four Christian villages (Hassan al-Sham, Syudan, Bahra and Jisr al-Khadhr) in northern Iraq west of the Kurdish capital Arbil.Naharnet But I cant find these villages on the map maybe someone of editors know where located of these villages. Hanibal911 (talk) 17:33, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Al-Khadhr seems to be 'Al Khidir' in this map.

Hassan Al-Sham is this one Also according to understaing war Ain Minae, was attacked by ISIS. Here is the village. 46.239.121.121 (talk) 19:47, 8 December 2014 (UTC)