Talk:December 2014 Sinjar offensive

Update

• §2.1.2 (18 December 2014): corrected, from given ref source ‘Independent’ 19 Dec. (‘Retaking Mount Sinjar’);
• §2.1.3: correcting in accordance with corrected §2.1.2 (retaking of Mount Sinjar); adding the Peshmerga offensive on to Tal Afar (19–21 Dec);
• §2.1.4: some details on the stalling of the Tal Afar advance; adapted the subsection heading accordingly. --Corriebertus (talk) 16:13, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Source makes no mention of a retaking of Mount Sinjar. The source actually says, as its title, they broke the siege of Mount Sinjar. Saying they retook Mount Sinjar implies ISIL was in control of it, which they weren't, they only surrounded it. EkoGraf (talk) 19:18, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

‘Fought their way’ from Zumar to Sinjar mountain

EkoGraf, in his edit of 26 April, wrote that Peshmerga on 18 December ‘broke the siege of Mount Sinjar’. As motivation/explanation in his posting here on Talk page on 26 April, he referred to source The Independent 19Dec, which says that (A) peshmerga “fought their way” from Zumar to Sinjar mountain, (B) freed people trapped there by ISIL according to a Kurdish leader, and (C) calls that: ‘breaking the siege of Mount Sinjar’. Part (A) is a straightforward presentation of battlefield events. Part (B) is dubious: we have no previous information of ‘people trapped there by ISIL’, but nevertheless we can harmlessly enter that in our article if we clearly specify that it was a statement of ‘a Kurdish leader’. Part (C) is really a problem: for a siege to be broken, it would first have to really exist, and our article does not yet say or show that a siege existed there in December. (It says in § Background that in October ISIL surrounded those mountains, but while they did not have an apparent plan to conquer them, that situation was no ‘siege’.) I don’t know why The Independent would want to pretend or contend that a siege there had existed, but frankly that is their business. Our business is that our Wikipedia article should be consistent. And as long as our article doesn’t state that before 18 December a siege existed, it logically can’t contend that it got broken on 18 December. --Corriebertus (talk) 13:16, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

First, its not just the independent, you have multiple other sources that clearly say [1][2][3] they broke a siege. Your personal interpretation of what a siege is does not count if that's what reliable sources call it. A new siege had already been instituted since October of that year per the sources [4][5]. EkoGraf (talk) 17:01, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Fair enough, source McClatchy 22Dec2014 calls the situation since October 2014 a 'partial siege'. I can agree to copy that term of his in our article (I've given the renewed web address for it in our article, now), provided it is put in inverted commas, because (1) he is the only one calling it so, and (2) we all know and agree that 'partial siege' is a contradiction in terms. --Corriebertus (talk) 13:26, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Combination of Peshmerga and YPG offensives

The article, in section 2 ‘Offensive’, clearly covers offensives of both the (Kurdish) Peshmerga and the (Kurdish) YPG (People's Protection Units). Also the Infobox already clearly summarizes offensives of those two Kurdish groups. The lead section should always summarize the main lines of the article, so in this article it should accordingly speak of ‘…a combination of operations of the Kurdish Peshmerga forces and the Kurdish YPG forces…’, et cetera. --Corriebertus (talk) 13:17, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Barzani in section 2.1, not in lead

The Peshmerga offensive was reportedly directed by Barzani (but ofcourse not the YPG offensive). I’ve added that information to section 2.1: ‘Peshmerga offensive’. Also, I’ve removed mentioning Barzani from the lead section. Firstly: the lead must display, shortly, only the main line of the topic, and I see no reason why mr. Barzani – I have nothing against him, by the way – should be mentioned in this lead. Secondly: if colleagues see inexorable need to mention Barzani in the lead, then please do it in such a way that it pertains only the peshmerga offensive and not also the YPG offensive. --Corriebertus (talk) 13:18, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Merge

The following discussion 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.

---

The November and December offensives' pages are not too large to just have different sections for it. The infobox can highlight the different dates too. Not much of a difference per se, except the outcome.Lihaas (talk) 08:19, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose, sorry. They are not too long, but are distinct enough to be kept separate. Note that the one is in December 2014, the other in November 2015. Rather than merging the articles I would create an umbrella article covering the whole Battle of Sinjar though (compare fr:Bataille de Sinjar) with the two offensives as specific sub-topics. PanchoS (talk) 13:12, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose They're distinctly different events. Make an umbrella or disambiguation page that includes the 2 offensives, the Northern Iraq offensive (August 2014) & possibly the Sinjar massacre. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 22:59, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
• Update - I converted "Battle of Sinjar" to a disambiguation page for now. Umbrella article suggestion is still open. George Ho (talk) 00:45, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose They are different offensives and thus need separate articles. EkoGraf (talk) 17:25, 15 November 2015 (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.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on December 2014 Sinjar offensive. 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/20150128055019/http://en.firatnews.com/news/news/mlkp-fighter-we-will-be-at-the-front-until-sinjar-is-liberated.htm to http://en.firatnews.com/news/news/mlkp-fighter-we-will-be-at-the-front-until-sinjar-is-liberated.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150128070705/http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/12/22/250901_islamic-state-counterattacks-refinery.html?&rh=1 to http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/12/22/250901_islamic-state-counterattacks-refinery.html?&rh=1
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150104064128/http://www.dpa-international.com/news/international/iraqs-kurds-press-offensive-against-islamic-state-in-sinjar-a-43622773.html to http://www.dpa-international.com/news/international/iraqs-kurds-press-offensive-against-islamic-state-in-sinjar-a-43622773.html?
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150128070705/http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/12/22/250901_islamic-state-counterattacks-refinery.html?&rh=1 to http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/12/22/250901_islamic-state-counterattacks-refinery.html?&rh=1
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150324140710/http://www.defense.gov/home/features/2014/0814_iraq/Airstrikes6.html to http://www.defense.gov/home/features/2014/0814_iraq/Airstrikes6.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 22:40, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on December 2014 Sinjar offensive. 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/20141231105406/http://basnews.com/news/2014/12/22/%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%B3%D9%86%DB%8C%D9%88%D8%B2-%DA%98%D9%85%D8%A7%D8%B1%DB%95%DB%8C-%D9%83%D9%88%DA%98%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%86%DB%8C-%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%B9%D8%B4-%D9%84%DB%95-%D8%B4%D9%86%DA%AF%D8%A7/ to http://basnews.com/news/2014/12/22/%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%B3%D9%86%DB%8C%D9%88%D8%B2-%DA%98%D9%85%D8%A7%D8%B1%DB%95%DB%8C-%D9%83%D9%88%DA%98%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%86%DB%8C-%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%B9%D8%B4-%D9%84%DB%95-%D8%B4%D9%86%DA%AF%D8%A7/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151117021143/http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/world/middle-east/article24777757.html to http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/world/middle-east/article24777757.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150123090056/http://www.dpa-international.com/news/international/nine-mass-graves-of-iraqs-yezidis-found-in-sinjar-official-says-a-43747921.html to http://www.dpa-international.com/news/international/nine-mass-graves-of-iraqs-yezidis-found-in-sinjar-official-says-a-43747921.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150402095106/http://syriahr.com/en/2015/03/isis-executes-own-fighters-for-allegedly-texting-kurds-to-surrender-in-ongoing-islamic-state-battle-for-iraq/ to http://syriahr.com/en/2015/03/isis-executes-own-fighters-for-allegedly-texting-kurds-to-surrender-in-ongoing-islamic-state-battle-for-iraq/

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. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 19:27, 7 September 2017 (UTC)