Talk:Hezbollah involvement in the Syrian civil war

ISIL, is designated by the community as a contentious topic. The current restrictions are: Limit of one revert in 24 hours: This article is under WP:1RR (one revert per editor per article per 24-hour period) Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be sanctioned. Remedy instructions and exemptions Enforcement procedures: Violations of any restrictions (excluding 1RR/reverting violations) and other conduct issues should be reported to the administrators' incidents noticeboard. Violations of revert restrictions should be reported to the administrators' edit warring noticeboard. Editors who violate any listed restrictions may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense. An editor must be aware before they can be sanctioned. With respect to any reverting restrictions: Edits made solely to enforce any clearly established consensus are exempt from all edit-warring restrictions. In order to be considered "clearly established" the consensus must be proven by prior talk-page discussion. Edits made which remove or otherwise change any material placed by clearly established consensus, without first obtaining consensus to do so, may be treated in the same manner as clear vandalism. Clear vandalism of any origin may be reverted without restriction. Reverts of edits made by anonymous (IP) editors that are not vandalism are exempt from the 1RR but are subject to the usual rules on edit warring. If you are in doubt, contact an administrator for assistance. If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. Remember: When in doubt, don't revert!

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hezbollah involvement in the Syrian civil war article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Syria Low‑importance 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Military history: Middle East C‑class 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 C This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale. 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

The contents of the April 2017 Rif Dimashq airstrike page were its talk page .

Propose to merge

The article is ridiculously small and is not evidently passing WP:NOTABLE criteria - we have only sources from the days of the event, indicating WP:NOTNEWS is relevant.GreyShark (dibra) 05:20, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. While the article should optimally be expanded, it basically covers the event based on reliable sources. The incident was indeed notable and has been covered by international media, not restricted to news reports, but also including commentary from highly relevant sources such as al-Jazeera, The Economist, and the NZZ. Finally, the fact that Israel outright denies any involvement doesn't affect its noteworthiness, at least not negatively. --PanchoS (talk) 11:21, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

all sources are from the date of the event, making it eligible for WP:NOTNEWS.GreyShark (dibra) 18:06, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I just want to note that all the sources for this piece come from media that is awoedly hostile to Hezbollah: Israeli and US newspapers, Saudi TV and a couple of Lebanese sources that are aligned with Hezbollah's rivals in Lebanon. I'm not saying that what they say can't be true but shouldn't the piece, in the name of balance, mention the other side of the story so we can judge? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.174.185.156 (talk) 18:07, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you have rs, feel free to use them. GAB^Hello! 18:09, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources can be POV and hostile to each other. As long as they are reliable. POV source can be reliable if it stands to reliability standards (board review for instance). Actually Hezbollah affiliated sources are typically not reliable in this sense, as they don't have a review board.GreyShark (dibra) 07:44, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on

for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150811051905/http://www.syriahr.com/en/2015/08/shells-target-the-capital-wound-in-a-shelling-by-the-regime-forces-on-darayya-city-and-violet-clashes-in-the-area-and-al-zabadani-city/ to http://www.syriahr.com/en/2015/08/shells-target-the-capital-wound-in-a-shelling-by-the-regime-forces-on-darayya-city-and-violet-clashes-in-the-area-and-al-zabadani-city/

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.

}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 23:42, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Propose to merge

]

 DoneGreyShark (dibra) 17:53, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I check pages listed in

'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 "AJ":

• From Aref Dalila: "Profiles: Syrian opposition figures". Al Jazeera. 27 June 2011. Retrieved 19 July 2012.
• From
  Al Jazeera
  . Retrieved 27 April 2017.
• From Abdulbaset Sieda: "Profile: Syria's Abdulbaset Sieda". Al Jazeera English. 10 June 2012.
• From 2015 Beirut bombings: "Day of mourning in Lebanon after deadly Beirut bombings". Al Jazeera. 13 November 2015. Retrieved 15 November 2015.

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⚡ 19:11, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Where to begin...the entire article is a great example of the Wikipedia model's shortcomings. Poorly written and referenced with a pro-Western bias, a rather common state of affairs at Wikipedia. It also uses at least one non-reliable source to prop up a dubious claim. If someone wants to try fixing it, good luck to you. The tenacity of the trolls and propagandists who stink up political Wikipedia make efforts to maintain a NPOV thankless and, unless you have unlimited time on your hands and no life, ultimately futile.User2346 (talk) 11:04, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why not add the better source tag to problematic sources? BobFromBrockley (talk) 12:13, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]