Talk:Marib campaign

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ma'rib Campaign. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20150326221558/http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/saudi-arabia-has-150000-troops-for-yemen-operation-report/article23628188/ to https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/saudi-arabia-has-150000-troops-for-yemen-operation-report/article23628188/

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) 03:59, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Neutrality

The way this article is written reflects only one point of view, which is the Houthi one. Also, many sources used here are clearly biased. For example, Islamic World News and Al-Masdar are Pro-Iranian Scores. OKMG-1200 (talk) 09:52, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

This article is mainly construed as a timeline. There is no huge bias, as far as I can see. If the Houthi side reports the recent capture of the base of Maas, I can understand why there is no Saudi report denying or corroborating that. So the best we can do is attributing the little bit of available information to the side that published it. Wakari07 (talk) 23:34, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

This article is since 2020 a timeline regarding Houthi advances made on Marib. The fact that Saudi Arabia does not deny or report relevant information regarding the current fighting does not means it is Biased, and please avoid using that tags on articles without reading the sources and discussing to other editors.Mr.User200 (talk) 01:15, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

OKMG-1200 you should stop pushing for a Pro Saudi POV in your edits. All your edits are uncorroborated claims made by Hadi government forces of Houthi casualties in the article. Something that could not be corroborated and don't change the outcome of the article, per WP:WEIGHT and WP:PARTISAN the best criteria is to place territorial gains and losses when they refer to themselves of overweighting evidence like footage.Mr.User200 (talk) 12:11, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

I don't see how Islamic World News is biased. They report on both Houthi wins and defeats. Wowzers122 (talk) 12:46, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Friendly Fire

@Mr.User200:,the events of the Saudi-led coalition strike on Hadi forces is highly disputed. some sources says it was a Houthi drone attack. Also, Hadi officials denied any friendly fire. the number of deaths is significantly different from other reports that came from neutral sources like Al-Jazeera check this. OKMG-1200 (talk) 15:54, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

That s Debriefer a Anti-Houthi web cite, not Aljazeera. And it says (Hadi) National Army losses are "not known".Mr.User200 (talk) 16:48, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

@Mr.User200:, sorry I ment check this. OKMG-1200 (talk) 17:15, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

A Aljazerra reporter posting that on Facebook does not means the event have been denied officialy. We need a source of Hadi Government officials denying this, a RS BTW.Mr.User200 (talk) 17:19, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

@Mr.User200:, then check this. OKMG-1200 (talk) 18:28, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Done added.Mr.User200 (talk) 18:36, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

False Events

@Mr.User200:, the claims that Houthi forces are close to Sahn al jin camp on 2 march is completely False and based on very biased pro-Houthi sources. But most importantly contradicted by the Iranian Islamic World News map of Marib Campaign!!! check this. I belive these events must be removed from the article. OKMG-1200 (talk) 16:13, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Ok try to have your ideas better ordered next time you lauch accusations on another fellow editors, The fact that some regional media and Yemeni local sources say something and it is not the same as Islamic World News says in the same day, does not means is false. Current maps show Houthis more closer to Marib and Marib Dam that those territorial advances depicted on 2 March.Mr.User200 (talk) 16:45, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

@Mr.User200:, Can you support your claims with any Neutral sources??? we are on 9 March 2021. No other source has reported any of your claims, including IWN. OKMG-1200 (talk) 17:15, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

"On 2 March, Yemeni local sources close to Houthis, reported heavy fighting on the outskirts of northwest Marib city with Houthi forces advancing towards the area of Sahn al-Jan camp, that overlooks Marib city". Nothing wrong here.Mr.User200 (talk) 17:20, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Houhti fighters/rebels at Marib Dam and fighting reported at his vencinity, by Islamic World News.Mr.User200 (talk) 17:23, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

@Mr.User200:, what are you talking about? Sahn al-Jan camp is not even mentioned in IWN report. OKMG-1200 (talk) 17:40, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

No, but other Houthi rebels advances are reported as the time goes by, the fact that a enemy report is not denied by the opp force, does not means its false. Unless a RS clearly denied it; or maybe other sources contradict the claim. As we speak there is not a counter source for that claim. Note that the 2 MArch entry clearly says "advancing toward", not taking, Sahn al-Jan camp.Mr.User200 (talk) 17:45, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

@Mr.User200: seriously, you think the news takes 7 days to reach the IWN staff!!! I don't know what to say? I don't know why an experienced editor like you is defending False claims like these? again, do you have any Neutral sources to support your claims? IWN is an Iranian real-time news website. They don't hesitate one moment to report any Houthi advances.OKMG-1200 (talk) 17:58, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Yes, seriously, two wrongs don't make a right. IWN could be all the Iranian you want, but the fact that they dont report a Houthi advance, "because you want", does not means the opposite is false or not. Yemen Press Agency and Hodhod news are regional media that report Houthis advances in this battle just like Debriefer is close to Hadi officials.Mr.User200 (talk) 18:06, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

@Mr.User200:First, Debriefer is a Canadian website not Yemeni or Saudi. Second, the fact is this: Yemen Press Agency and Hodhod news are Houthi-run sources that are clearly biased. they support their Information war, this is completely normal because Hadi forces have their own news outlets. Yet, it is not right to use them as sources for Wikipedia when they are completely contradicted by another source, especially when it happens to be a pro-Houthi one. the reason that IWN did not report it because thier staff wright in an academic manner, not because they are Neutral or they don't know what happened 7 days ago. Now, let me ask you for the third time, do you have any Neutral and Independent Sources to support your claims? OKMG-1200 (talk) 18:24, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Debriefer is a pro-Hadi webcite doesnt matter from what country is based. Nothing extrange, just as other media support Houhtis or STC. I dont need a source to back that entry since there is no other source denying it, is a report. You are leaning toward a side in this topic and is clear just look at your edits and this article talk page. Stop errasing and reverting other editors work and provide sources like you did before to back your claims.Mr.User200 (talk) 18:41, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Come on, we can not add only pro Saudi sources. If pro Saudi sources says something else we can add that to. Shadow4dark (talk) 23:28, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

@Shadow4dark: it is not about using a pro-Saudi or Pro-Iranian source, my friend. it is about writing Wikipedia in an academic manner. Mr.User has used two pro-Houthi biased propaganda sources ( Yemen Press Agency and Hodhod news). these two sources alleged that Houthis are near the Sahn al-Jan camp on 2 March 2021. Yet, these claims are contradicted by the Iranian Islamic World News which is an Iranian and pro-Houthi source!!! check this. The problem is that Mr. User200 came up with an explanation that I personally can't believe. He said, "The fact that some regional media and Yemeni local sources say something and it is not the same as Islamic World News says in the same day, does not means is false". But we are not on 2 March 2021, we are on 10 March 2021!!! How Islamic World News (IWN) staff didn't know about these events 8 days ago?!!! I doubt if Mr. User200 knows where Sahn al-Jan camp. because if he looked at Template:Yemeni Civil War detailed map he will find out that this camp is north of the city, and if he compared that with the events reported by IWN, he will find that Houthi claims are impossible. because IWN reported a Houthi retreat on the northwestern front (Asdas front) on 2 March. OKMG-1200 (talk) 07:21, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Turkish Involvement

there is no any source that confirmes the presence of any Turkish or pro-Turkey forces in Marib except the Yemen Press Agency which is loyal and close to Houthis, so I will add Allegedly by Houthi Media until there is a Neutral and reliable source that confirms this information. OKMG-1200 (talk) 07:06, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

There is no need to keep ading info here since there is a new article regarding the Houthi offensive to take the city at Battle of Ma'rib (2021), also the claim made by Houhtis is only cited in YPA no other source elaborate that further, Turkey have already supplied KSA with drones since some years ago. Nothing new, too Exceptional WP:EXCEPTIONAL.Mr.User200 (talk) 00:13, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

@Mr.User200: First, why didn't move the edits that I made to Battle of Marib article? being an administrator doesn't give you the right to change the article as you like. Second, I am talking about Houthis media claims about Turkish and Syrian mercenaries. If Turkey supplied KSA with drones years ago then the US, UK, France, Spain and many countries that sold KSA weapons all these years should be there.OKMG-1200 (talk) 18:35, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

YPA media is the only Pro-Houthi media citing that Exceptional claim. Also your edit changed the format of the table. Thats why I reverted to the last version, regarding your edits on Houthi losses, just moved all the content to the new article. Were there are already detailed Pro Hadi goverment claims of hundred of killed. There is no need to keep repeating on the article content reports of alleged Houthi losses every day or week. Thats not the scope of a article.Mr.User200 (talk) 19:18, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

@Mr.User200: You must be kidding!!!! How YPA can be a pro-Hadi media while it has a special section called The American-Saudi Aggression War on its contents bar.OKMG-1200 (talk) 19:26, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Read again my preceding comment.Mr.User200 (talk) 19:37, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Should put a headline that the article is out of date and a lot of events have occurred that require and are not specified in it

For example, the expulsion of the Houthis from the city of Merib in early 2022. As written on the Battle of Marib page עילי שריקי (talk) 03:38, 2 March 2022 (UTC)