Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Al-Tabqa Dam (2017)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Kurykh (talk) 00:45, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Al-Tabqa Dam (2017)[edit]

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

The article was recently created by User:Deathlibrarian. Most of the article is not even about the topic "battle", except maybe the last sentence. What is more, about half of the article is unsourced. Even where sources are used, they cannot be called reliable or neutral. Kurdistan24 is a pro-Kurdish source, South Front although not pro-Kurdish is pro-Russian and anti-ISIL. Also a Twitter handle of a little-known source is used. Most of the stuff isn't even about battle, it's just unsourced and needlessly overbloated non-battle stuff of information about the dam or poorly sourced non-battle info about what the two sides have done. This article didn't even need to be created. Battle of al-Tabqa Dam could easily be covered in Raqqa offensive (2016–present). The capture of the dam is part of the offensive. And there isn't enough sognificant and large information that there will be need for a separate article. This article should therefore be deleted. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 22:03, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks (talk) I've removed the twitter reference and added some more, to make sure it is better referenced. This is actually a larger city, bigger than for instance Al-Bab. It's a major operation, involving securing a dam, and involves US air support, and both US special forces and SDF special forces. It's also an example of a rare amphibous operation in Syria. Deathlibrarian (talk) 22:18, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, the situation is ongoing. Please let the author some time to work peacefully. --Yug (talk) 22:49, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

~~Wait~~, I agree with Yug. This might end up being a big battle, for which a seperate article would be fitting. I think, however, that in this case the article should be renamed "Battle of Al-Tabqa/al-Thawra" to include both the fighting for the dam as well as the nearby city. Applodion (talk) 23:14, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: By now I has become clar that for the time being no major battle will take place at al-Thawra. Applodion (talk) 16:17, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

All I notice in form of real "conflict" is US airstrikes and ISIL releasing the water (which actually doesn't fall under the word conflict). The Twitter reference isn't the only one. 3 sources are still biased and somewhat unreliable: Kurdistan24, Al-Masdar News and South Front. One is ok, but three? Especially I haven't seen anyone using Kurdistan24. The attack on the dam as well as the city can easily be covered under the offensive and most of the article doesn't even seem about any actual conflict. About half is unsourced. And the article as a whole seems poorly written. The lede should briefly detail the battle, instead it is talking about the dam. There isn't even any infobox. Please bring this article to the proper standards and rewrite it properly quickly, otherwise there is no reason to keep it. I am ok with it if this ends up being a big and significant battle. But right now it hardly is in the beginning stages. Regardless, if this article is properly rewritten, then I'll consider withdrawing the deletion proposal. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 23:19, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:04, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:04, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently the SDF and the US have a media blackout on the op, so there isn't as much news on it as could be (clearly it was a suprise operation, there was nothing about it from official channels, just locals and third party news sources). There *is* actual fighting going on, according to the sources, with US special forces and SDF troops fighting ISIS in "the first quarter" of the town. As people have said, situation is ongoing, but probably another 12 hours will give us a more clearer picture. Deathlibrarian (talk) 01:36, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deathlibrarian, per your latest additions, although unsourced, SDF already withdrew from their attacking positions after ISIL released water from the dam. If so, there is no more need for this article as it doesn't have any significant content, the "battle" lasted for only a short while, if it can be described a battle that is. Besides the ISIL counterattack was in SDF-control areas in noryh of Euphrates river aka Raqqa's western countryside, not in Tabqa or the dam. (http://www.syriahr.com/en/?p=59764) I don't see any reason at all now to keep the article. I think it is better the article is deleted now. If there is a significant battle in the future, then we'll create it again.

MonsterHunter32 (talk) 01:31, 25 January 2017 (UTC) It's a bit confusing, but from Southfront and other sources, it would seem there *was* a battle in the town. According to this article, https://southfront.org/us-special-forces-ypg-units-conduct-saboteur-raid-against-isis-in-tabqa/ US special forces and the SDF crossed the river and attacked the town - but they appear to have retreated. Whether it was a probe attack, recon, or seizeing individuals, it's hard to say. There was then a counterattack by IS. So this seems to be early stages of the battle. I think as others have said, best to wait to see what the next stage of this battle is, but as it is a large town, and would seem to be fairly fortified, it's certainly not just 20 guys taking a village. Deathlibrarian (talk) 08:17, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 12:00, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: There were 3 interpretations going the rounds: 1) nothing happened (it was nothing but rumours); 2) there was a commando raid aimed at ISIS commanders and records; 3) there was a landing between Tabqa and the dam in an attempt to take the dam from both sides. The last was reported to come from an official Raqqa Hawks source, but in the absence of subsequent reports it seems likely that they were inaccurate. The second (and especially the first) doesn't qualify as a battle, and there don't seem to be reliable sources for it either. Lavateraguy (talk) 13:21, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: By now it's apparent that no major battle took place. This should be merged into the Raqqa offensive page. Editor abcdef (talk) 00:25, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.