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

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.

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Afrin District. 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/20151208115353/http://www.cbssyr.sy/General%20census/census%202004/pop-man.pdf to http://www.cbssyr.sy/General%20census/census%202004/pop-man.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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) 18:30, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, you take it to talk. I removed an addition by a POV pushing sockpuppet. If you want to add the content yourself, you need to seek consensus. From the history of edits of article, there is no consensus (others have already reverted the sockpuppet edit). The content is based on biased sources that provide no evidence of what is claimed. The Independent is owned by Russian oligarch and former KGB Officer Alexander Lebedev so it is not neutral. Also, Israel media is not neutral with respect to Turkey. missingafrinwomen.org, anfenglishmobile.com are not reliable sources, etc... Tradedia^talk 22:15, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

First, Konli17 didn't make such a large edit. Then the ones who revered him are now both topic banned on Kurds and Kurdistan. That the Israeli press is biased in general and the Independent, too is a bit a wild accusation. Some sources are clearly pro-Kurdish, which can be discussed and replaced, I agree on that. But to remove two sections on humans rights violations for being of a sockpuppet, that's a bit a questionable attitude I would say. There are other sources (from VOA and HRW) which describe human rights violations in Afrin. Like here, here and here even the UN demanded an investigation into the Human rights violations and then also reported on the investigation. Duvar also reported on the dire situation and specially also on the lack of press coverage on the situation.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 23:45, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Konli17 did make the large edit (see his edit here). The accusations i make are not wild. The Independent is indeed owned by Russian oligarch and former KGB Officer Alexander Lebedev. So it cannot be neutral with respect to the rebels and their Turkish allies. Also, we know that Israel is allied with the Kurds. We should only rely on neutral reliable sources and not extrapolate what they are saying. When you look at the reliable sources you linked, you see a different picture from the text that is written in our Wikipedia article. There are suspicions of violations, but no evidence and nothing large that is different from what has happened everywhere in Syria. It is also nothing worse that what the Kurd armed groups have done themselves.

So duvarenglish.com titles its article : "NYT coverage of Afrin is not only incomplete, but troubling." So who are we going to believe? duvarenglish.com (an obviously biased unreliable source) or the New York Times? The reality is that there is not much evidence of large violations but rather a lot of propaganda, rumors and fake news. By the way, one of the sources you link (The Human Rights Organization – Afrin) is not a reliable source since this is just a Kurdish organization. Also, we should keep in mind that the head of the Syrian Organization of Human Rights (SOHR) is anti-Turkish. The reliable sources talk about evidence of minor violations like Kurdish houses being seized to house soldiers, etc. None of the reliable sources talk about evidence of kidnapped women or killings. We should write what the reliable sources say exactly and nothing more. Expressing concern is not the same thing as finding evidence. There is no evidence that what happened in Afrin is any different from what happened in all civil war areas of Syria. There should not be undue weight given to it. Tradedia^talk 19:44, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Konli17s edit is 2000+ bytes, you remove 4000+ bytes. How is this the same edit? On the Independent there was a discussion at the WP:RS noticeboard, and there the community ruling was rather clear that it is reliable. They might get some infos wrong but then there are others which inform on a similar event, then it should probably be accepted. There was not only one article of the independent sourcing some info on Afrin. Others were The Jerusalem Post and Al Monitor. I'd like to differ that Duvar is unreliable in regards to Turkey. Anyway, I am going to re-add most of the info supported by additional sources. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 21:43, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The 2 sub-sections that I removed were entirely added by Konli17. The reason Konli17s edit is 2000+ bytes, and my edit removed 4000+ bytes is because Konli17s edit was not just adding the 2 sub-sections (he also removed some text). Compare his edit to mine and you will see that the 2 sub-sections that I removed were entirely added by Konli17.

I am not saying that The Independent is unreliable in general. However, notice that in the WP:RS noticeboard you linked, most voted “Generally reliable”. I will cite the comment of user:Blueboar that wrote: “…It Depends… context matters. Generally, it is reliable, but that does not mean it is universally reliable …” As I pointed out, The Independent is owned by Russian oligarch and former KGB Officer Alexander Lebedev. This means that we have to question its neutrality with respect to issues relating to the Syria war. Similarly, I am not saying Jpost of Israel is unreliable in general. However, we have to question its neutrality with respect to issues relating to the Turkish government...

Concerning Duvar, Wikipedia says that “… Several Academics for Peace who were dismissed from their work figure among its authors. Other journalists recruited were formerly employed by other Turkish media but dismissed due to their articles which criticized the Turkish Government. Duvar is known for its articles criticizing the Turkish Government” You can also look at the titles of the article in the present issue. You will see that it is all articles against the government. Therefore, they are biased and not neutral with respect to the actions of the Turkish government.

Again, I think that we should say only what neutral sources say and make sure we don’t give undue weight. Tradedia^talk 15:28, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On Duvar...If some academics ask for peace or journalists do their work, they are biased? What? Bring a better argument here. And read the WP:RSN ruling again, it was closed down per WP:Snowball clause, it is pretty clear that currently there is no argument for a removal for biased here. With the Jewish sources as well. You can't just call all sources biased which report on a Turkish human rights violations in Syria. There is VOA, Al Monitor and Opendemocracy as well. I'll back up the info with additional sources.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 08:43, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Duvar is clearly an opposition media. It is against the Turkish government. So it is biased. You say they are "...journalists doing their work"  but that is just your opinion and is not objective.

With respect to The Independent, it is not black or white. Most editors voted «Generally Reliable» and one editor rightfuly said "... It Depends… context matters. Generally, it is reliable, but that does not mean it is universally reliable ..."  The fact that it is owned by a Russian oligarch does make it not neutral with respect to the Syria war. Also, it is well known that Israel is allied with the Kurds.

If there are significant human rights violations, then where are the large media from the large countries ? Why not have sources like New York Times, Washington Post, Reuters, Agence France Press, major media in Germany, Spain, etc... ? Because the New York Times did not find significant human rights violations, Duvar titled its article : "NYT coverage of Afrin is not only incomplete, but troubling." So who are we going to believe? Duvar or the New York Times? The takeover of Afrin was in all the big media. After a while after the takeover, where is evidence of significant human rights violations ? I have no problem we write about it, as long as it is based on major reliable sources and we say only what the sources say and nothing more. Suspicion is not evidence. Also, we should not give undue weight. The Kurds have also committed human rights violations. The size of text on Turkish human rights violations should not be disproportionate to that of text on Kurdish human rights violations. Tradedia^talk 00:15, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article is very unbalanced. Many details about alleged Turkish human rights violations. On the other hand, no mention of the Kurdish human rights violations that are written in the article Afrin, Syria.

Specifically, the sub-section “Human rights violations” is undue weight. Nowhere in the source does it say that 150 women were kidnapped. These sources do not say the violations happened. They say that there are allegations by Kurdish groups (some of which are based on YouTube type videos). The sentence “The region has seen human rights abuses, including kidnappings ethnic cleansing, torture, forced evictions and killings since the start of Turkish occupation in Afrin.” is enough summary. So I have moved the sources to this sentence. If this is reverted, then to reinstate balance I will be adding the Kurdish human rights violations that are written in the article Afrin, Syria with as much details as for the Turkish human rights violations… As a reminder, below is the text from Afrin, Syria article along with sources:

Between 2012 and 2018, the YPG, the official defence force of the canton, was criticized for recruiting child soldiers, committing arbitrary arrests and failing to address unsolved killings and disappearances. According to the reports, the YPG and Asayish were also accused of forcibly recruiting civilians, arresting political activists and displacing Arabs whose homes were later stolen and looted. Displaced Arabs accused the Kurdish security forces of imposing taxes and restrictions on the population in order to force them to leave and change the demography.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://sn4hr.org/blog/2016/04/06/20310/ |title=Archived copy |access-date=15 December 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181216031548/http://sn4hr.org/blog/2016/04/06/20310/ |archive-date=16 December 2018 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.refworld.org/pdfid/54fd6c884.pdf |title=Archived copy |access-date=15 December 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190628225920/https://www.refworld.org/pdfid/54fd6c884.pdf |archive-date=28 June 2019 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=https://setav.org/en/assets/uploads/2018/10/45_Analysis.pdf |title=Archived copy |access-date=15 December 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181216031815/https://setav.org/en/assets/uploads/2018/10/45_Analysis.pdf |archive-date=16 December 2018 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=https://rsf.org/en/news/how-kurdistans-pyd-keeps-media-and-news-providers-line |title=Archived copy |access-date=15 December 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181216031449/https://rsf.org/en/news/how-kurdistans-pyd-keeps-media-and-news-providers-line |archive-date=16 December 2018 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite book |author=Human Rights Watch |title=World report 2016: events of 2015. |date=2016 |publisher=Policy Press |isbn=9781447325505 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=4fOfCwAAQBAJ&pg=PT564 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181220230542/https://books.google.fi/books?id=4fOfCwAAQBAJ&pg=PT564&lpg=PT564 |archive-date=20 December 2018 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.thenational.ae/world/mena/syria-in-afrin-offensive-some-see-turkey-as-liberator-1.713029 |title=Archived copy |access-date=16 December 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181217062728/https://www.thenational.ae/world/mena/syria-in-afrin-offensive-some-see-turkey-as-liberator-1.713029 |archive-date=17 December 2018 |url-status=live }}</ref> Tradedia^talk 10:12, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's best to deal with each contentious edit and source case by case, ideally in different sections here, to reach consensus. Apart from the sources being discussed at the RSN, which passages is there still disagreement over? BobFromBrockley (talk) 14:16, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]