Talk:Operation Spring Shield

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Operation Spring Shield 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.

Article policies

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

WARNING: ACTIVE COMMUNITY SANCTIONS

The article Operation Spring Shield, along with other pages relating to the Syrian Civil War and 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!

Military history: Middle East / Post-Cold War

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 met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Middle Eastern military history task force
	Post-Cold War task force

Syria Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Turkey Mid‑importance

	Turkey portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics 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.TurkeyWikipedia:WikiProject TurkeyTemplate:WikiProject TurkeyTurkey articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Reference errors

This discussion has been disrupted by block evasion, ban evasion, or sockpuppetry from the following user:

Maistara (talk · contribs · block log · spi)

Comments from this user should be excluded from assessments of consensus.

@Maistara: Your edits today have created several referencing errors, mainly references that you've invoked without defining. Could you please resolve those? —Granger (talk · contribs) 22:26, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

~~@Granger: Oh I got it, I will fix it soon Maistara (talk) 23:01, 19 June 2020 (UTC)~~[reply]

Thanks! —Granger (talk · contribs) 23:33, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Changes made on 20 June.

This discussion has been disrupted by block evasion, ban evasion, or sockpuppetry from the following user:

Maistara (talk · contribs · block log · spi)

Comments from this user should be excluded from assessments of consensus.

Please, improve Grammar, Vocabulary in further edits. The current version of the article was unreadable and not improving the article. Specially at the 1 March events. Mr.User200 (talk) 23:58, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes and I was working on it, that does not give you the right to revert all my edits! Why do you remove so much sourced content without discussing it on the talk page? What you just did is very wrong and I’am asking you to either revert your last edits back or I will do it. You can’t just remove everything and use the ‘’grammar’’ as an excuse. Thats something you can and should improve as well, not just removing everything Maistara (talk) 07:08, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

~~Also the parts you just removed were not copyrighted! You are deliberately removing/vandalizing this page and not improving it at all Maistara (talk) 08:22, 21 June 2020 (UTC)~~[reply]

Why is Turkish patton tank losses deleted?

Why? Shadow4dark (talk) 04:45, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted by a Sockpuppet. He said it was before Op. Start at Feb 27. Mr.User200 (talk) 01:00, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet SalahGood was right. Those tanks were lost two on 20 Feb and 1 on 3 Feb, before the Operation. However 3 APC were destroyed during Op.Mr.User200 (talk) 01:08, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sock is right, maybe we can add this in Turkish involvement in the Syrian Civil War Shadow4dark (talk) 08:43, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

.Done.Mr.User200 (talk) 13:41, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 September 2020

This discussion has been disrupted by block evasion, ban evasion, or sockpuppetry from the following user:

31.21.68.15 (talk · contribs · block log · spi)

Comments from this user should be excluded from assessments of consensus.

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Syria 3,159 killed wounded and captured

8 helicopters
2 SU-24 type aircraft
1 L-39 type aircraft^[1]
3 UAVs
151 tanks
51 other armored vehicles
54 MLRS
49 Artillery
4 Mortars
34 technicals
60 other military vehicles
8 air defense systems (1 SA-17, 2 SA-22)
12 ATGMs
10 ammunition storages
1 chemical weapon facility destroyed^[2]

| casualties3 = | notes =

}} 31.21.68.15 (talk) 14:13, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: Source provided is Partisan and for Weight, a claim by Turkey without photographic evidence could not be considered in the Battlebox. In short that claim was political statement to keep the public in a calmed mood by Turkey officials. Most sources agree with the number of Syrian destroyed equiptement currently on the Infobox. Also, you are a Sockpuppet that pushes to a certain POV this articles.Mr.User200 (talk) 16:56, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The 'released' drone footages alone, clearly show there have been far more than 170 killed. SOHR is not a reliable source, he is but a one person living in London. He changed Afrin casualities of pkk from ~200 to 1000 in a single day after Turkey captured the city center.

Drone strikes complation during the operation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Li3N1rQBGvQ

And we know that not all drone footages are released, and not all deaths in the opposing party caused merely by drones. There were Turkish soldiers on the ground, Syrian rebels, artillery strikes, airstrikes with jets, and rocket strikes. 88.230.168.151 (talk) 09:37, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A youtube video compilation is not a Reliable Source Per se. To avoid this type of personal asumptions (POV) we only use Realiable Sources and most agree on that number. Other version of the article showed 197 SAA and allies killed but that was in all Syria during that period of time.Mr.User200 (talk) 21:54, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Our Bureau (2020-03-03). "Turkish F-16 Shoots Down Syria's L-39 Warplane". Defense World.
^ Rejimin kimyasal depoları böyle vuruldu

It doesn't even make sense to add all these equipment:

-45 Tanks 33 Artillery 33 Vehicles 20 IFVs 5 AA guns and SAM systems 3 Mortars-

Then saying the other side had only 200 casualities. The equipment loss is almost equal to militia/soldier loss which is absurd. Numbers are also possibly only counted out from RELEASED drone strikes and not any other means, not artillery, not airstrikes, not rebel kills, as it doesn't even count the 2 jets downed by TAF which is mentioned literally in the article itself. The hypocrisy and misinformation is unbelievable on this site.

rebels

user:Mr.User200 hezbollah which is syrias ally included then why is sna which is turkeys ally not included?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.55.55.100 (talk) 11:48, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The scope of the current article is Turkey Operation aganist SAA and allies (following Baylun airstrikes) inside the Northern Syrian Offensive.Mr.User200 (talk) 21:51, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Syrian losses

Please avoid placing Turkish claims of Syrian losses at the Battle box, that figure correspond to inflated numbers more close to WP:PROPAGANDA than to encyclopedic information, there is no way to corroborate that claimed number of vehicles destroyed. Also multiple independent sources, some reliable like SOHR and others have already hinted the number of Syrian servicemen dead and equipment destroyed with photographic evidence.Mr.User200 (talk) 17:38, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We have a source in the infobox (Middle east institute) that claims that 405 pro regime fighters were killed by Turkish drone and artillery strikes, alongside rebel fighters. Since MEI is already used as a source we can use their casualties figures in the infobox. Needbrains (talk) 16:06, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, however I will change the name from regime to goverment since is a more neutral tone.Mr.User200 (talk) 15:05, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We should include these, because according to this logic we should delete info about combatants giving their enemies casualties in every article because "propoganda" Peanut funi xd (talk) 17:44, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Our Bureau (2020-03-03). "Turkish F-16 Shoots Down Syria's L-39 Warplane". Defense World.

[2] Rejimin kimyasal depoları böyle vuruldu

[1]

[2]