Talk:Deir ez-Zor clashes (2011–2014)

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

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Middle Eastern military history task force

Syria

	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 has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

File:Mosque of Ottoman in Deir ez Zor.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

An image used in this article, File:Mosque of Ottoman in Deir ez Zor.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations

What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Mosque of Ottoman in Deir ez Zor.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:20, 5 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

Al-Nusra Front/Al Quada

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

There seems to be some differing opinions on whether it's Al-Quada or Al-Nusra that's involved here. The Guardian article refers to the organisation that Abu Khader is a member of as the Jabhat al Nusra (the Al Nusra Front)

"After the bombing, Abu Khuder split with the FSA and pledged allegiance to al-Qaida's organisation in Syria, the Jabhat al Nusra or Solidarity Front." - 14th paragraph

The full Arabic name of the Al-Nusra front is "jabhat al-nusra li-ahl al-sham," with the shorthand as "jabhat al-nusra"

The Al-Nusra Front wiki page even refers to the collusion between Al-Quada in Iraq & the Front

"Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari said that al-Qaeda in Iraq members have gone to Syria, where the militants previously received support and weapons.[3] The al-Qaeda in Iraq members seem to be joining the al-Nusra Front, according to Zebari. [4]"

I'd therefore recommend that the infobox either refer solely to Al-Nusra under the Mujahideen category, or refer to both Al-Nusra and AQ in Iraq.

MrPenguin20 (talk) 18:59, 31 July 2012 (UTC)Reply

Al-Qaeda

Latest comment: 12 years ago9 comments3 people in discussion

"The Guardian's Ghaith Abdul-Ahad has met men in Deir el-Zour fighting for al-Qaida alongside the Free Syrian Army."

- http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jul/31/syria-aleppo-fighting-goes-on-live

Clear enaugh. --Wustenfuchs 01:35, 6 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

You know, EllsworthSK, take the problem to the talk page. You are currently edit warring. I think this sentence above says clearly who is fighting there in Dez-el Zor. --Wustenfuchs 15:50, 6 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Why don´t you look a little bit above where you have everything explained by MrPenguin20? The members the journalist met are from al-Nusra, which according to this source is a branch of AQ (at least that is what I make of it). That can be very well used on their very own page, what could explain a thing or two, however he met members of one organization, not two. EllsworthSK (talk) 20:17, 6 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

We can add both, al-Nusra and al-Qaeda. The most optimal soulution. --Wustenfuchs 20:36, 6 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

To be honest I would simply edit the al-Nusra page and recognized them as branch of AQ. The Guardian article supports that. Than I would use them as reference for AQ in Syria. To be clear with my reasons - Al Queda in Iraq is popular name, but not official. Officially these folks are called Tanzim Qaidat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn, but they are Iraqi division of AQ Shura in Quetta, Pakistan. It seems to me that in similar manner jabhat al-nusra li-ahl al-sham is Syrian division of AQ. It would also make no need to have AQI there anymore, because you´d already have AQ represented in form of al-Nusra. EllsworthSK (talk) 21:00, 6 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

I could be mistaken but I thought I had read on the syria page that you were arguing the contrary. --DanielUmel (talk) 21:05, 6 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Nope. I was always arguing about AQI organization in Syria as no relevant documents can support that. I have nothing about including Jabhat al-Nusra as an ally, associate, linked to AQ. This Guardian source makes it clear. Not crystal clear, some analysis from some institutes would come in handy, but there are previous sources which supports that like for example [1] [2] [3] [4]

And also this stuff is extremely shady. Few sources, many of them contradicting, not giving any clear picture about who is who. Trying to find out the truth in that mess is a killer. Now I don´t know where the heck the truth lies, it will take some serious analytic sources to figure that out and they are not here yet but it seems to me that many times when media talks about AQ, they talk about these chaps. And these chaps do not even try to hide how big buddies they are with AQ. EllsworthSK (talk) 21:20, 6 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Well, Wikipedia has a polocy called WP:COMMONNAME. To tell the truth, it's about article naming, but I think we should stick to it while refering to al-Nusra. Use their most common name, whatever it is. You can easly check that simply using google books and see the number of results. --Wustenfuchs 22:59, 6 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Not really my point. Common name of Al-Nusra is Al-Nusra, no need to change much in that regard. What I am interested is their relation to Al Queda. EllsworthSK (talk) 08:24, 7 August 2012 (UTC)Reply