Talk:Syrian National Army/Archive 1

Archive 1

Who are the sub groups in the TFSA?

If someone knows the sub groups in the TFSA, would be good to add them in. Article could do with more references. Deathlibrarian (talk) 04:35, 19 February 2017 (UTC) This article lists the subgroups in TFSA but it is a little old, so would be good to see an update Sirwan Kajjo VOA "Who are the Turkey backed Syrian Rebels?"http://www.voanews.com/a/backed-turkey-syrian-rebels-take-fight-islamic-state-kurds/3481582.html August 25, 2016

Naming

Is "Turkish Free Syrian Army" really the more common name for these groups? "Turkey-backed Free Syrian Army" seems the more common title. MrPenguin20 (talk) 17:16, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Turkish-backed Free Syrian Army

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 Turkish-backed Free Syrian Army'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 "twitter.com":

• From Al-Nusra Front: "Al Maqalaat Pubs on Twitter".
• From Syrian Democratic Forces: "Syrian Rebellion Obs on Twitter: "#SRO - EXCLUSIVE SRO - Former leader of the main #Tabqa #FSA factions, Liwa Owais al-Qarni, entered Northern Federation days ago (1)."". Twitter. 6 November 2016. Retrieved 4 December 2016.
• From 2015–16 Latakia offensive: "Caleb Weiss". Twitter. Retrieved 4 January 2016.
• From Sham Legion: "فيلق الشام on Twitter".
• From Levant Front: "Charles Lister on Twitter". Twitter.
• From Daraa offensive (February–April 2017): "Коуди Роша on Twitter".
• From Ansar al-Sharia (Syria): "Peto Lucem". Twitter.
• From Ahrar al-Sham: "izat on Twitter".
• From Hawar Kilis Operations Room: "Hassan Ridha on Twitter".
• From Suqour al-Sham Brigade: https://twitter.com/Syria_Rebel_Obs/status/824416935211397127
• From Battle of al-Bab: "Новости Абхазия on Twitter". Retrieved 24 February 2017.
• From East Ghouta inter-rebel conflict (April–May 2017): "Joško Barić on Twitter".
• From List of armed groups in the Syrian Civil War: "لواء فرسان الثورة (@FursanAlthawra) - Twitter".
• From Nour al-Din al-Zenki Movement: "Mark on Twitter". Retrieved 24 January 2017.
• From Turkish military intervention in Syria: [6] FSA Suqur al-Shmal commander Ahmad Kheiriye was killed in clashes with IS in north Aleppo #EuphratesShield
• From Jabhat Thuwar al-Raqqa: "Syrian Rebellion Obs on Twitter".

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⚡ 14:04, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Turkish-backed Free Syrian Army

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 Turkish-backed Free Syrian Army'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 "direct":

• From April 2017 Turkish airstrikes in Syria and Iraq: Mohammad Abdulssattar Ibrahim; Maria Nelson (25 April 2017). "Deadly Turkish airstrikes hit US-supported Kurdish militia in Syria's northeast". Syria:direct.
• From Liwa Assad Allah al-Ghalib fi al-Iraq wa al-Sham: "Regime edges closer to taking key East Ghouta town". Syria Direct. 29 May 2014. Retrieved 17 September 2016.
• From Al-Mu'tasim Brigade: "'Not just talk': New north Aleppo rebel alliance breaks Islamic State blockade". Syria:direct. 9 June 2016.
• From Liwa Ahfad Saladin: "Commander of Kurdish FSA brigade: 'Federalism is not an effective system for Syria'". Syria:direct. 11 April 2016.
• From Northern al-Bab offensive (September 2016): "Turkish-backed FSA rebels set their sights on last IS Aleppo stronghold after border victory". Syria:direct. 5 September 2016.
• From Wadi Barada offensive (2016–17): "Wadi Barada uses water spring to keep regime invasion at bay". Syria:direct. 20 November 2013.
• From Battle of Qamishli (April 2016): "Two days of bloodshed in Qamishli as Kurds battle regime forces". Syria:direct. 21 April 2016.

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⚡ 18:58, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 31 January 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 19:45, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

---

Turkish-backed Free Syrian Army → Syrian National Army – TFSA is a name invented by Redditors. We should call as the groups what they call themselves. Syrian National Army is an umbrella term like Syrian Democratic Forces. Nowadays these rebel groups, backed by Turkey, calling themselves "جيش الوطني السوري" which means "Syrian National Army". More info can be found here. Beshogur (talk) 16:03, 31 January 2018 (UTC)--Relisting. –Ammarpad (talk) 17:40, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

• But "Syrian national army" could mean the army of any nation called Syria. A disambiguator is needed. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:48, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

We can add "(rebel group)" if that's possible? Beshogur (talk) 09:30, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

I am not so sure about this. As far as I know, the formation of the "Syrian National Army" is not yet concluded, as most militias within it still have a separate identity. Do you have a source that confirms that the TFSA is now truely and absolutely operating as a single formation (that is not biased for or against Turkey)? Applodion (talk) 10:26, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Look at the link above. "The National Army is a new army composed of 36 different opposition groups under the umbrella of the Free Syrian Army (FSA), which has divided into three army corps. Currently, it is in its first phase, which includes about 10,000 troops primarily from the Euphrates Shield region." Beshogur (talk) 17:46, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Isn't TRT World pro-Turkish? I asked for a neutral source... Applodion (talk) 18:25, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

There are several others 1, 2, 3. Beshogur (talk) 10:33, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

These articles either report plans or that they have started to organize the national army, not that it already exists in its planned form. My point is that even reports about the current Afrin operation say that the militias still operate as before, with more cooperation and a unified leadership, yes, but not as united army. Just recently some militias among the TFSA reportedly left for Idlib. As long as the TFSA is not a unfified army, I think that changing its name to "Syrian National Army" is premature. Applodion (talk) 12:25, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

That report about Idlib is not confirmed. Since Afrin operation, rebels are organized under three blocs/divisions as it mentioned in the articles. Beshogur (talk) 21:54, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose. When the Syrian National Army will be finally established, then a new article about the new entity must be written, with TFSA being its pre-history. Staszek Lem (talk) 18:32, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Request for Comment on Foreign involvement in Syrian Civil War

Hello, there is an RfC on Foreign involvement in the Syrian Civil War which folks here are invited to weigh in on. Thanks, GPRamirez5 (talk) 17:29, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Afrin captured (18-03-2018).jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:21, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Should this article's title be changed to "Syrian National Army"

I suggest this because, a) It is the official name of the group. b) Turkish-backed Free Syrian Army is a original research name not mentioned under sources. c) Since the merger with National Front for Liberation on October 4 2019, the groups majority is made up of rebels in Idlib governorate. A4516416 (talk) 11:38, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Btw, "Syrian" was never dropped from their name. Where did you even get this from? The SNA was established in December 2017, not yesterday. It just expanded yesterday. Of course, many people do simply refer to them as "the National Army", but many Syrians also refer to the Syrian Arab Army as "the Army", Americans refers to the United States Army as "the Army", and so on. There isn't a need to mention and emphasize the shortened name for obvious reasons. 𝓛𝓲𝓰𝓱𝓽𝓼𝓹𝓮𝓬𝓼 (talk) 12:00, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Can you stick the to question please? And to answer your question, the Turkish sources stated that after merging with NLF, SNA had taken the name National Army. It still could need better verification so I changed the name change suggestion into SNA, as you can see. A4516416 (talk) 12:11, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

"National Army" has been used to refer to the SNA since 2017, before the merger, as well. It's just a shortened form, you're looking too much into it. TRT even said that the group 'renamed itself as the "Syrian National Army"'. The press announcement made by Abdurrahman Mustafa did only say "National Army", but as a Syrian it made sense for him to not emphasize nationality. 𝓛𝓲𝓰𝓱𝓽𝓼𝓹𝓮𝓬𝓼 (talk) 12:23, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Why are you repeating what you just said? I said yes there isn't enough evidence on that, and what does this have to do with the current topic? I told you in the last edit to stick to the question too... A4516416 (talk) 12:25, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

• Procedural comment this RfC has been improperly filed, as it does not open with a neutral statement. I would suggest something like Should this article's title be changed to "Syrian National Army". Then put your arguments in a survey section below. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:44, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

  Changed it. A4516416 (talk) 05:50, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

• Procedural comment see last bullet of WP:RFCNOT: What not to use the RfC process for ... Renaming pages (other than categories) – follow the procedures described at Moving a page or Requested moves, therefore this RfC is inappropriate. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:29, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

@Redrose64: Should I delete this and start a new one then? A4516416 (talk) 07:32, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

@Redrose64: OK, nevermind I see what you mean, this should be a move request rather than an RfC. A4516416 (talk) 07:44, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Number of troops.

I think this claimed 100,000 number needs a much better source. These are the same guys that fought for Turkey in Operation Olive Branch and during that operation they claimed just 25,000.[7] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.97.18.220 (talk) 07:12, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

You are probably not aware that they merged with a major rebel group 2 days ago, which claims to have 70,000 fighters. A4516416 (talk) 07:24, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Yes I am aware of that, both of these groups fought in Op. Olive Branch. That 70,000 claim for NFL is also very dubious considering they could not put up much of a fight against HTS and they have only half that number.

It is dubious, yet it is only source we have. Saying they are half that number is original research and guesstimate. A4516416 (talk) 07:33, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

That NFL source claims "Moderate opposition: the main force in Idlib" which was shortly thereafter disproven on the ground, so it is a very bad source. I'm not saying we should just put up a guess, but that 100,000 number should be regarded as highly dubious until better sources are available. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.97.18.220 (talk) 07:44, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

I've added a better source bracet. A4516416 (talk) 07:50, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm not really that much into Wikipedia editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.97.18.220 (talk) 07:52, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

I have taken out the and added a second source which also claims the ~100,000 range. A4516416 (talk) 07:54, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

I've seen this before and it states that the 100k number is an exaggeration, and that the integration of the NFL will cover the salaries of 30k troops. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.97.18.220 (talk) 08:03, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

When translated the article says: "... opposition leaders say the number is up to 100,000 fighters will be divided into seven corps. This number is exaggerated, but could reach 150,000 fighters in record time if Turkey supports the Ministry of Defense with the payment of salaries, as there are large numbers of unemployed young people who want to work in the ranks of the "National Army" if there are attractive and regular salaries". I am assuming the exaggeration is referring to 150,000, since another source also claims NFL having 70,000 - pre merger. A4516416 (talk) 08:08, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

I think the exaggeration is the 100K number, this source states 80K after merger.[8] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.97.18.220 (talk) 08:31, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

I've added the source into the article. A4516416 (talk) 08:36, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Here they claim 30-40,000,[9] and here 60,000 [10]

Requested move 6 October 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

---

Turkish-backed Free Syrian Army → Syrian National Army – I suggest this because, a) It is the official name of the group. b) Turkish-backed Free Syrian Army is a original research name not mentioned under sources. c) Since the merger with National Front for Liberation on October 4 2019, the groups majority is made up of rebels in Idlib governorate. A4516416 (talk) 07:46, 6 October 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. Sceptre (talk) 18:34, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

"Turkish-backed Free Syrian Army" is NOT an original research name. In fact, this was discussed before. "TFSA" is a widely used name, and gets over 18.000 hits on Google. Furthermore, point c) does not mean that the group has stopped being Turkish-backed; the NFL was also supported by Turkey. Anyway, as I have said before, renaming the article appears to be premature. We do not know whether the merger will actually be successful - If the Idlib rebels, including the lower ranks, actually acknowledged the new high command of the National Army, then I would support a rename. As longer as such a widespread support is not confirmed, I would oppose a rename because it is equally likely that the TFSA and NFL factually remain separate entities (only nominally united; just as the Supreme Military Council (Syria) claimed the command the FSA, while the FSA ignored them). The power of the common fighters to decide the course of their militias should not be ignored. Applodion (talk) 14:40, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

What about the fact that it's their official name? TFSA is a nickname not used among the ranks of the group. Also I know it is not enough but there is chatter on Twitter that the NFL fighters in Idlib are heading to Turkey to participate in the possible upcoming operation against Rojava, this just raises the odds that the merger is indeed real. A4516416 (talk) 15:17, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Also are we calling Hayat Tahrir al-Sham with a nickname such as Syrian al-Qaeda? Or ISIS with the nickname of Daesh? This should be the same case with the group Syrian National Army, it doesn't fit to call them Turkish-Backed Free Syrian Army, the TFSA name should be used in the article but not in the title. And one last note in which source is the group being referred to as TFSA? Like I said, it is non official similar to name Daesh (used for ISIS, made up by media). A4516416 (talk) 15:25, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Actually, ISIL is an example for a non-official name being used, as the organization calls itself the "Islamic State" and has officially disavowed the "ISIL" monicker just as much as the "Deash" one. Furthermore, HTS is actually a very unified organization in sharp contrast to the newly unified National Army. "Al Qaeda in Syria" would also be a misnomer for HTS, as the latter has distanced itself from al Qaeda to such a degree that al Qaeda hardliners even split off (see Guardians of Religion Organization). Applodion (talk) 15:35, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

"National Army" is, simply put, less often used in English media than TFSA or similar nicknames. As this is the English Wikipedia, we usually follow English naming conventions. Applodion (talk) 15:37, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

The difference between IS and ISIS compared to SNA and TFSA is much smaller. IS did use the name ISIS before, and it is still widely used due to the name IS being controversial (implies that they are the sole and true Islamic state, while they are the most hated by the world and rest of the Muslim countries). But let's just forgo all that, are we suppose to use the name that the media has given to the group? TFSA is non official. Where SNA is official. A4516416 (talk) 15:55, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

I propose to you to still keep the name TFSA inside the article since media so commonly uses it but change the title into SNA since that's the official name of the group. A4516416 (talk) 15:55, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

The name Turkish-Backed FSA comes from the period prior to the FSA groups supported by the Turkish Military unifying into a single organization, the Syrian National Army. As this article is mainly on the organization, the Syrian National Army, rather than on the set of FSA groups backed by the Turkish Military, I Support Move. -Thespündragon 20:10, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

I agree the article should not be called Turkish-backed Free Syrian Army, it does have a certain POV sound to it, and this is aside the fact the name is extremely long and doesn't work well or fit well in infoboxes, and the only reason the media uses terms like "TFSA" and "Turkish-backed Free Syrian Army" is because outlets such as ourselves here on wikipedia perpetuate it and make it almost legitimate to use in the manner that it is. It would only be proper to call the article by what it actually is, some people who don't follow the conflict may not even know the name "SNA" or "Syrian National Army" because they have little to no point of reference of it, due to the lack of the usage of its name, and we must remember often times wikipedia is the first place to look up and discover such information. Nearly every other group is referred to by its official name, aside from ISIS and that is because of controversy surrounding its name, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham's page is correctly called "Hayat Tahrir al-Sham", the SDF page is correctly called the "Syrian Democratic Forces", and so on. Takinginterest01 (talk) 02:53, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Oppose as per Applodion. As per Wikipedia's policy, we go with the common name, and in this case its the Turkish-backed Free Syrian Army. EkoGraf (talk) 20:19, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Support Move. Most here seem to be misguided. A name being "common" does not rank higher than the one that is official, especially if it doesn't contradict other organizations' names that may cause controversy like the "SNA" name we got here, SNA is relatively a new name. If the article should keep the old name "TFSA" like some said, it should just be merged into the article "Free Syrian Army" with a seperated section about Turkish backed groups that fight under the banner of the original Free Syrian Army. I strongly support a move instantly to avoid more confusion to readers. 2402:800:4157:4F1E:E5DC:6FAA:D0F1:450B (talk) 09:29, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

The "Free Syrian Army" and the "Turkish-backed Free Syrian Army" are two different entities. EkoGraf (talk) 22:29, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Different how? They all called themselves FSA. They didn't call themselves TFSA as it is the title being forced upon. The only difference are the groups in northern Syria being supported by Turkey but if so, other groups are also backed by other entities then should we call them US-backed, French-backed, Saudi-backed,...etc ?2402:800:4188:F8FA:62B9:EFD:9B69:7311 (talk) 05:53, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

The difference is that the FSA groups, despite all the foreign influences and support, were still mostly independent - They often did things that were opposed by their foreign supporters, such as stating that they would kill all Alawites, launched attacks during UN-backed brokered ceasefires, and so on. In contrast, the TFSA is de facto under Turkish control, and generally follows Turkish orders. Sure, they still do stuff Turkey does not like (such as chanting ISIL slogans, smuggling, and murdering civilians), but on average the TFSA acts as auxiliary army. Applodion (talk) 10:38, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

They are "often" independent? What does often mean here? And what sources do you have that they are independent? Since you said that this group does stuff that are not liked by Turkey, then it's the same thing!.--SharabSalam (talk) 11:35, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

It is not the same, as there is a difference between openly disobeying important policy and military decisions by outside powers (FSA) and small-scale disobidience (TFSA). As for sources, just read the FSA wiki page and its references. Applodion (talk) 11:54, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

• Support "Turkish-backed" is not the commonly used name(Google hits don't count". The official name is preferred.--SharabSalam (talk) 11:03, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
• Support move per Thespündragon. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Don't forget to share a Thanks ♥) 22:45, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
• Support move Common name shouldn’t necessarily be chosen as the main title of the article, especially in this case where it is controversial and could even be false (we don’t everything and anything is possible). I think in this case it is better to go with the official name. Keivan.f^Talk 22:56, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

• common name should always be used not the official name.--SharabSalam (talk) 10:00, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

• Comment. I also support own request for reasons stated above. A4516416 (talk) 06:50, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Nomination itself indicates your support. P. I. Ellsworth, ed. ^put'r there 14:20, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

@ST47: Request this be closed and moved now that it's been 8 days. A4516416 (talk) 06:53, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose because the name Syrian National Army suggest that this is a regular military of the Syrian government. The redirect Syrian National Army should be to Syrian Army not this one so we should open a discussion about this redirect and maybe change it to disambiguation page. Closure should be aware of these misleading terms. The arguments about support are weak and subjective and the current title is not okay, I would suggest "Turkish-aligned" instead of "Turkish-backed" to distinguish between them and the FSA and to determine the type of relationship between Turkey and this group instead of the vague "Turkish-backed" which has many implications.--SharabSalam (talk) 09:57, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Do you have any sources available using 'Syrian National Army' to refer to the Syrian Arab Army? I have only seen Syrian Army or Syrian Arab Army used to refer to the SAA. -Thespündragon 20:28, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

​ National Army:

The term national army typically means the lawful army of the state as distinct from rebel armies or private armies that may operate there.

Yet, the redirect "Syrian national army" redirect to this rebel group. Totally misleading.--SharabSalam (talk) 21:22, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Note the "typically" there. In the context of this conflict, the National Army is a rebel group made up of various FSA factions. I have not seen the term "Syrian National Army" used to refer to the Syrian Arab Army. -Thespündragon 21:36, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Survey of recent sources to determine Common Name: Recent sources regarding the present offensive against the SDF, or the merger with the NFL, tend to use "Syrian National Army" or "National Army" rather than "Turkish-backed Free Syrian Army". If "Turkish-backed Free Syrian Army" is used, the Turkish-backed is never a part of the name, only a descriptor of Free Syrian Army

• New York Times: uses Free Syrian Army to refer to the overall side in war, uses National Army to refer to the group in present offensive
• New York Post: "Syrian National Army, known as Free Syrian Army"
• Al-Monitor: uses Syrian National Army exclusively
• Foreign Policy: uses Turkish-Supported Opposition and Free Syrian Army interchangably
• CNN 1: uses Free Syrian Army, Turkish-backed not a part of the name, but a descriptor. Says the Free Syrian Army is also known as the Syrian National Army
• CNN 2: says that Syrian National Army is a group made up of Turkish-backed Free Syrian Army factions, does not appear to identify TFSA as a group
• VOA: uses Syrian National Army exclusively
• Defense Post: uses Syrian National Army exclusively, or National Army as short form
• Recent Turkish sources exclusively use Syrian National Army or National Army AA Daily Sabah
• Recent pro-SDF sources use "Mercenaries" ANF ANHA

-Thespündragon 21:06, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Support There are literally dozens of international sources who calls it like that. BBC, HaberTürk, The Independent, OdaTV, Euronews So it's obvious that they're under interim government control. T-FSA is not a name of the group. It would be not fair by calling a group not by it's name what they're calling itself. Beshogur (talk) 19:29, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

References

​All of these sources you provided are in Turkish language. WP:COMMONNAME is about English commonly recognizable name not Turkish. We don't necessarily use official names.--SharabSalam (talk) 13:58, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

@ Admins @ST47:@El C: Can this be moved already? It's been 10 days and there is a clear consensus. A4516416 (talk) 08:39, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

• Support. The BBC certainly now calls it the Syrian National Army. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:21, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose Its not even clear all the TFSA groups are part of the SNA, and TFSA appears to be the common name. Deathlibrarian (talk) 13:43, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
• Support There is a quite similar case: look at this article Vietnamese National Army. This military organization was extensively backed by France. No one called it French-backed Vietnamese Army or something like that.Trung tá Moore (talk) 14:49, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

• Just a note: this is a newly created account who's first edit is this vote.-SharabSalam (talk) 15:24, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

@Admins, please move this page already its been 11 days. @ST47:,@SQL: @Bbb23:@Bradv: A4516416 (talk) 07:51, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Still no consensus. You can't close the discussion like this LOL. Non-involved editor can close the discussion.--SharabSalam (talk) 09:25, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

There is consensus, 8 support move while 4 oppose. And time has run out. I will just ping more admins until someone moves this if I can't. This was opened 11 days ago. Admins: Please give an explanation why this isn't moved or just move it, thanks.@Abecedare: @Acalamari: @Acroterion: @Ad Orientem:. A4516416 (talk) 10:39, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia is actually not a democracy (see WP:NOTDEMOCRACY). Consensus on Wikipedia, as stated by policy, involves "an effort to incorporate all editors' legitimate concerns, while respecting Wikipedia's policies and guidelines". EkoGraf (talk) 20:33, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Agreed. Nearly two-week old conversation and this still hasn't been moved? Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Don't forget to share a Thanks ♥) 21:17, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

• Support Official name and used by sources. Tan Khaerr (talk) 11:29, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
• Support Its the official name, its used by media sources, and in general, articles written about the group are shifting from TFSA to SNA. Purijj (talk) 20:55, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose mostly per Applodion. This is premature. "Official name" just means that's what they call themselves. It's confusing to name the article Syrian National Army (because it's not the army of the government of Syria), even if that's what they call themselves. TFSA is at least a natural disambiguator, but I also think it's still the common name. – Levivich 01:47, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

@– Levivich The Syrian Army is officially called the Syrian Arab Army. I think that article ought to go after that name instead of simply Syrian Army. "National" might just be about ideology.Trung tá Moore (talk) 06:57, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose primarily because there's reason to believe that "Turkish-backed" is part of the WP:COMMONNAME among English language sources, and many of the sources provided to demonstrate the opposite were Turkish-language. Even when sources referred to it as the "Free Syrian Army" they used the qualifier that it was "backed by Turkey", and in the headlines sources tend to simply refer to the entity as the "Turkish-backed forces." I found the following in a matter of seconds: The New York Times today: "Turkish-backed", Vice today: "Turkish backed", The Telegraph today: "Turkish-backed", Foreign Policy Magazine today: "Turkish-backed", etc. If a consensus exists for the proposed name, some of the more problematic !votes (particularly one from an anonymous IP editor which read "A name being 'common' does not rank higher than the one that is official") shouldn't be considered part of that consensus.  Vanilla  Wizard  💙 22:18, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 15 May 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved (non-admin closure) buidhe 04:11, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

---

Turkish-backed Free Syrian Army → Syrian National Army – It's that time of the year again. I had a look at the previous discussions and summarized it in 4 bullet points:

• WP:COMMONNAME. Both SNA and TFSA are the common name. Some examples of sources that refer to the group as SNA: Washinton Post Reuters Al Jazeera RT New York Times Clingendael Institute Al-Monitor VOA News. So both names get "1 point" when it commes to WP:COMMON. It's not significant to look at the amount hits on Google because the names started being used in different years and in different websites. Thus we have to look at other criteria:

• SNA gets one extra point for being the official name, without being in violation of WP:OFFICIALNAMES.

• WP:NPOVNAME. In somewhat equal cases, we should strive for the neutral point of view naming. I'm not saying it sounds the same as a "Russian-backed Syrian Arab Army", but it does create some undue weight.

• Some argued that the name SNA can be confusing to which army it is refering to, but this seems more a case of WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Wikipedias goal is not to choose the least confusing name, or to choose the most descriptive name to prevent every confusion there is. In addition to that, the name SNA is already redirecting to this page. Randam (talk) 00:02, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

• Move to SNA, Turkish backed FSA is an old term that was used during "Operation Euphrates Shield". 3bdulelah (talk) 02:35, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose due to common name. Even when SNA is being used its almost always referred to being Turkish backed even though with different wording. Washinton Post "Turkish-allied", Reuters "Syrian National Army, a Turkey backed rebel group." RT ""Syrian National Army", an alliance of Turkey-backed rebel groups" etc.. Limghadar (talk) 12:33, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

@Limghadar. This isn't the common name, up until now, or at least no proof of it being used widely the "common name" at the moment. The references you talked about in the articles: Those are adjectives (Turkish-allied, Turkish-backed,...) used to describe the nature of the army, not a part of the name itself.Pestick (talk) 15:42, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

@Limghadar. You seem to confuse "name" with "descriptions". Those examples you mentioned have the combination: , an. So, a comma followed by indefinite article (a/an). This is used in English for descriptions. But fine, here are some examples that doesn't use aforementioned descriptions: CNN The Guardian BBC DW The Independent Telegraph AA France24 Al Jazeera. Also what do you think of my argument mentioned in the beginning that commonname should not form the base for the decision, because the group has multiple commonnames. Randam (talk) 05:17, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

• Support move: this's gone quiet long. The subject matter is of debate due to the majority of conflicting individuals who couldn't handle personal bias and prejudice. At the moment, not many seems to be interested in the subject matter so it's a suitable time to decide.Pestick (talk) 12:43, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
• Reluctant Support move, I feel that raising a move request just 6 months after the last discussion on the matter is improper. We cannot endlessly raise the same move requests to satisfy the desires of editors at the time. Not much has actually changed on the ground with respect to these rebel groups in terms of their structure and heirachy from what I can see. A closed move request should really be the final matter on the discussion till something changes in the real world. The contituant groups are also still relatively autonomous from each other, notably after the inclusion of the "National Front for Liberation" in October 2019. After performing a google trends search comparision between any usage of "Free Syrian Army" and "Syrian National Army" ([11]) I notice a distinct lack of usage for both terms. I think distinguishing between the two names which is most WP:COMMONNAME cannot be determined by search results here, since it cannot be acertained as to which term is in the clear majority. Therefore I feel the matter must reflect the available sources and the available sources alone. Thus far I have been unable to see any clear usage of "Turkish Free Syrian Army" or "Turkish-backed Free Syrian Army", or even just "Free Syrian Army" in media to refer to this group, post-merger. All I can find in media/sources is "Syrian National Army" when not refering to the overall group in a past-tense form. I know that this would be primarily be due to the media preferring offical name usage over common name usage (unlike here on en.wikipedia). However, with the absence of any other information, I feel we must stick to the sources on this matter, and the sources are quite clear. Therefore I must support the move, but I feel it really should have waited at least another couple of months to more clearly distance the discussion from the last identical one. - Wiz9999 (talk) 20:16, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
• Support as before. Clear common name in reliable sources. -- Necrothesp (talk) 22:33, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
• Support per WP:COMMONNAME.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 23:48, 21 May 2020 (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.

Flag

An anon editor has removed the flag with the justification "Violating NPOV, not the official flag, just commonly used does not qualified it to be presented as the heading symbol". I don't know enough to know if this is true or not, but the edit removed sourced material. Can people have a look? BobFromBrockley (talk) 09:28, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

This is basically vandalism. The entire issue was discussed before, and reference have been added in the article to showcase the use of the flag in official contexts by SNA troops. Applodion (talk) 10:05, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Resignation of Salim Idris

Hello everybody,

I've replaced Salim Idris as MoD & CoS as vacant, due to his resignation earlier this september. So far, the Interim Gov. has not named a successor. As soon as one is defined I will update the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22Chev22 (talk • contribs) 10:33, 8 November 2021 (UTC)