User talk:Rogal Dorm

Wadi Daif and Hamadiyah bases

I agree about the Maarrat al-Nu'man bases and I have already been thinking something about that for some time. I will try and do something about it soon. EkoGraf (talk) 21:02, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Homs countryside.

No, for now there is no need for an article. There have been multiple government and rebel offensives around al-Qousseir in the last two years. Unless this one becomes highly notable its no different from the others. EkoGraf (talk) 13:08, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

They have actually captured two towns and that hill last week in coordination with Hezbollah. If the Army captures another town or launches another assault near Qusayr in the coming days I will create an article. EkoGraf (talk) 14:31, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Qusayr offensive. EkoGraf (talk) 16:08, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Baniyas

We see how the situation develops. If the fighting in the villages in Baniyas becomes more notable in the international media by tomorrow I will create an article. But it seems it will since the opposition is once again yelling massacre. EkoGraf (talk) 19:48, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Halfaya

I would more call it another massacre, as the rebels would put it, or just one specific attack because there is no battle for the town just the one artillery strike that left 25 people dead like last time in December when the rebs took over the town. EkoGraf (talk) 19:17, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I noticed you are active on the al-qusayr offensive page, I have found an interesting article here wich show that the Syrian Army lifted the siege on a christian town that was besieged by the rebels near Qusayr. Not sure how it could be integrated. https://now.mmedia.me/lb/en/nowsyrialatestnews/syria-christian-village-breathes-easier-as-army-advances — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nolan's Batman (talk • contribs) 11:42, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Two articles

What do you think of the idea to separate part of the information in the Qusayr offensive article into a separate one? My idea is to close the Qusayr offensive article, because in essence the aim of the offensive was to capture the countryside and villages around Qusayr, so they could ultimately attack the city itself. They have already done that, they have secured for the most part the countryside. We than create an article which covers the battle for the city itself. I am putting this idea forward because the current battle that started yesterday is I think notable enough to have its own article. What you think? EkoGraf (talk) 14:18, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Aleppo

I'll check it out. EkoGraf (talk) 14:47, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If the Army-Hezbollah offensive north of Aleppo expands in the coming days I will create an article. But I am really amazed (in respect to their skill) how they managed to slip 2,000 Hezbollah fighters past rebel lines into the northern areas of Aleppo. EkoGraf (talk) 19:45, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Most likely by helicopter transporting Alhanuty (talk) 03:02, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Qusayr offensive

If the fighting around the two villages continues we reopen the article. But I think this is the end, its mopping up operations from here. EkoGraf (talk) 14:28, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Buwaydah, the last Qusayr village, has fallen. Confirmed by opposition activists themselves. I changed the end date of the offensive to today, 8 June. EkoGraf (talk) 14:01, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Aleppo operation

Not yet, there is no need to create an article until something notable as part of the offensive has happened. EkoGraf (talk) 14:16, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Talkalakh

Not yet, lets see if it becomes more notable in the coming few days. EkoGraf (talk) 20:24, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Daraya

I think they ment that just the Shwaqa area of the al-Ghouta al-Gharbiya area of the city is under Army control. EkoGraf (talk) 13:47, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Operation al-Shabah

Hey there! I noticed you made some edits to Operation al-Shabah, which is great because we need more people to take care of the article anyway. I would like to point out a few things to keep in mind for future edits, though - most importantly, before posting something check your grammar and spelling, there were quite a few mistakes, including some mechanical ones. Secondly, please use proper and full reference tags, or if you don't have the time for that, at least put the news title and the publishing news agency together with the ref tags, as I did now over your last edits. Lastly, Iraqi border guards work as a part of the Iraqi Police, so in the casualty box the two should be combined - I've already done this with your last edit. Thanks for your edits and time, hope this helps! Skycycle (talk) 14:36, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2013 Al-Hasakah offensive, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page YPG (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:53, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

August 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Casualties of the Syrian civil war may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

402317196543291 Final death toll for Saturday 3/8/2013: More than 150 people killed yesterday.]</ref> || - || - || - || - || - || - || - || - || - || - || - || - || - || - || - || - || - || - ||

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:39, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous guys

What is the problem of those anonymous guys? Don't they have anything better to do than spout conspiracy theories? EkoGraf (talk) 09:28, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rif Dimashq offensive (March 2013–present)

I am considering if we should close the article Rif Dimashq offensive (March 2013–present) as a Partial Syrian Army victory or just Syrian Army victory, due to the fact that for two weeks all offensive operations by the Army ceased after the gas attacks and during the threat of air-strikes by the West. Before that for five months all operations by the military were continues. If major offensive operations by ether side are launched once again we open up a new article. Would you agree? EkoGraf (talk) 12:29, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alawite villages

Jabhat al-Nusra said in a statement posted online that its fighters attacked the predominantly Alawite villages of Maksar al-Hasan, Jab al-Jarrah and al-Massoudiyeh in Homs province on Tuesday. It said it seized Maksar al-Hasan for 10 hours before being forced to withdraw. http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2013/Sep-16/231480-al-qaida-linked-rebels-claim-syria-killings.ashx#axzz2f7sFMFEh — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.178.4.252 (talk) 06:56, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Azaz

Lets wait one more day to see how the situation develops before deciding on a creation for an article. EkoGraf (talk) 12:56, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure yet about that rebel offensive on the highway. Will need to wait a bit more to see what happens. EkoGraf (talk) 13:50, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that Azaz should be marked as disputed because of the fighting between the FSA and ISIS. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/02/us-syria-crisis-azaz-idUSBRE9910GJ20131002 https://now.mmedia.me/lb/en/nowsyrialatestnews/syria-jihadists-advance-toward-turkey-border-post-ngo-says 95.135.242.157 (talk) 19:42, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) took control of two strategic city of Azaz and Al Bab in the north of the province of Aleppo, not far from the border with Turkey. https://now.mmedia.me/lb/en/commentaryanalysis/all-against-all-in-syria — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.55.208.218 (talk) 06:33, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Inkhil (Darra) disputed

Areas in the al-Na'ima town and Ankhel city were bombarded by regular forces which led to the death of a child from Ankhel, several injuries and material losses, along with violent clashes between rebel and regular forces in the eastern side of Ankhel. Regular forces detained 2 young men from the Deir A'das town on the Kafrshams checkpoint, based on activists from the area.http://syriahr.com/en/index.php?option=com_news&nid=886&Itemid=2&task=displaynews#.Uk04BqDd03Q 37.52.28.177 (talk) 10:28, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2013 Aleppo offensive, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page National Defense Force (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:36, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sayyidah Zaynab

Sayyidah Zaynab under the control of the army, and Sopher99 changed it without any foundation and origin of which he said indicated that this area was the scene of battles before, and no mention of the fact that now there are fights.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/04/us-syria-crisis-iran-idUSBRE9A30H620131104 37.52.30.225 (talk) 17:47, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

November 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Rif Dimashq offensive (September 2013–present) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

On 10 November, the Syrian army backed by Hezbollah and the Al-Abbas brigade and the [[National Defense Force (Syria)|National Defense Force] launched an attack against Hejeira and A'

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:06, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rif Dimashq offensive (September 2013–present)

My changes are explained and according to Wikipedia rules, see WP:FACEBOOK & WP:BLOGS. These sources cannot be used, WP is very clear about it. The other sources deleted were partisan ones from both sides, so unreliable sources. Please do not engage in edit-warring or i'll report you to the administrators board.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 01:01, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Use of Facebook page

See WP:RSN#Syrian Observatory for Human Rights being used as an RS for Syrian Kurdish–Islamist conflict (2013-present). Dougweller (talk) 20:08, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of terrorist incidents, 2015, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kida. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Southern Yemen offensive

Thanks for the heads-up -- it appears an editor took it upon themselves to blank the page and redirect it despite opposition on the Talk page. I have reverted the blanking and hopefully it won't happen again, at least without consensus. -Kudzu1 (talk) 14:54, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of wars and battles involving al-Qaeda, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page FSA. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:06, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Revert

Why did you revert my edit where I added a 3rd source (The Independent) for the capture of Handarat and also added the part about the attack on Kindi Hospital? EkoGraf (talk) 13:14, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Saw your cancellation of your revert. Never mind. :) EkoGraf (talk) 13:14, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. EkoGraf (talk) 13:26, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Turkish Armed Forces casualties in Syria, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page SDF. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:16, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Rogal Dorm. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Campaignbox Islamic terrorism in Europe (2014–present)

Template:Campaignbox Islamic terrorism in Europe (2014–present) has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Sport and politics (talk) 10:46, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Rogal Dorm. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]