Talk:First Battle of Tikrit

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

As [1] 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.
Riyuky (talk) 01:31, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned references in First Battle of Tikrit

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of First Battle of Tikrit's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "nyt":

• From Yemeni Civil War (2015): "Affiliate of Al Qaeda Seizes Major Yemeni City, Driving Out the Military". The New York Times. 3 April 2015. Retrieved 4 April 2015.
• From Northern Iraq offensive (June 2014): Fahim, Kareem; Al-Salhy, Suadad (10 June 2014). "Sunni Militants Drive Iraqi Army Out of Mosul". The New York Times. Retrieved 10 June 2014.
• From Sinai insurgency: "Bombing of Tourist Bus Kills at Least Three in Sinai". The New York Times. 16 February 2014.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 09:06, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on First Battle of Tikrit. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140716103851/http://arabic.cnn.com/middleeast/2014/07/16/iraq-security-tikrit to http://arabic.cnn.com/middleeast/2014/07/16/iraq-security-tikrit

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:38, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on First Battle of Tikrit. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.avrupagazete.com/editorun-sectikleri/79562-isid-nedir-isid-in-hedefi-nedir-isid-i-kimler-destekliyor.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141021090245/http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/xinhua-news-agency/140630/iraq-army-tug-war-fights-sunni-militants to http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/xinhua-news-agency/140630/iraq-army-tug-war-fights-sunni-militants

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:44, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

GAR

First Battle of Tikrit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: I am also surprised how small the article is, and surely there are more sources available now after the battle. Steelkamp (talk) 05:46, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

GA from 2015. I do not think that this article is broad enough. It has been eight years since the battle took place. Yet, there's no aftermath section, a seemingly small background, and pretty small article in general. Considering how long it's been, it can probably be expanded on with scholarly sources. Onegreatjoke (talk) 20:28, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.