Talk:Battle of Qnat

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: rejected by BorgQueen (talk) 18:50, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that a group of 44 Phalangist resistance fighters led by Samir Geagea killed hundreds of Syrian special units in the Battle of Qnat? Source: https://www.lebanese-forces.com/2014/12/05/knat-battle-pierre-jabboor/

(translated) purging the town of the remnants of the Syrian special units led by Dr. Samir Geagea. After the dust settled, hundreds of Syrian special units were killed.

• • ALT1: ... that a group of 44 Phalangist resistance fighters led by Samir Geagea stood up to a 3,000 strong Syrian battalion in the Battle of Qnat? Source: https://www.lebanese-forces.com/2014/12/05/knat-battle-pierre-jabboor/
  • ALT2: ... that the Battle of Qnat elevated Samir Geagea, the son of a peasant, to the ranks of the Maronite community's new elite? Source: https://repository.library.northeastern.edu/files/neu:1850/fulltext.pdf Page 75
  • Reviewed:

Created by PalauanReich (talk). Self-nominated at 01:35, 24 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Battle of Qnat; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• The claims about the number of dead Syrians, and ALT2 as well, are attributed here to Lebanese-forces.com, which appears to be the Kataeb's own puffery (don't get me wrong, I hold nothing against the Kataeb, but this sort of thing doesn't fly as far as WP:RS goes). Mind you, the same source is not cited in the article, which has no direct citation for the claim that hundreds of Syrians died etc. What is worse: a claim that 400+ Syrians may have died is placed somewhere else in the article, with a citation to a 1980 article in the Washington Post, though that source makes no such claim. At first glance, the entry appears to be performing this sort of, well, trickery rather systematically, and makes additional editorial claims (such as this being a "seen by many as a David v Goliath struggle") with absolutely no citation to back the claim. Emphatically no, not in the current state of the article. Dahn (talk) 10:54, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
• A ping to PalauanReich, if they would like to attempt to address the issues raised. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 02:31, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Infobox "Result"

Please note that Template:Infobox military conflict#Parameters states against "result" that "this parameter may use one of two standard terms: "X victory" or "Inconclusive"." The infobox has been amended to reflect this. Please read the template "result" guidance in full before amending or reverting. It would probably be best to discuss any proposed change here first to seek consensus. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:48, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

Numbers of combatants and human losses

@Dahn As far as I can tell, no reliable source in the article mentions that there were 3000 Syrian fighters in this battle, nor is there one that mentions hundreds of losses on the Syrian side. Many of the claims in this article are badly sourced and clearly doesn’t comply with WP:NOR . Therefore, these claims should be removed, or do you suggest something else? Whatsupkarren (talk) 09:49, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

• Hi, Whatsupkarren. I think the person to tag here is PalauanLibertarian. I simply reviewed this article for DYK, a long while back, and, just like you, considered it atrociously sourced. Dahn (talk) 17:36, 3 October 2024 (UTC)