Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eastern Syria insurgency

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 keep. Daniel (talk) 03:49, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Eastern Syria insurgency[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

The article is WP:OR as there are no sources for a “east syria insurgency” and combines multiple incidents into one conflict rather as a part of the broader syrian civil war. Ridax2020 (talk) 09:35, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this was copied from Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2021 March 6, where it was mistakenly listed initially. Daniel (talk) 23:47, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:52, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:52, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Syria-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:52, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Literally what? The article cites dozens of sources. Of course there is an insurgency. Multiple violent "incidents" - as you call it - do literally constitute an insurgency. For example, this article clearly describes that an ISIL insurgency continues in SDF-held areas, with the SDF and aligned groups waging a counter-insurgency campaign. Applodion (talk) 01:23, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- You made no points, i never denied that there were incidents in this conflict. But I denied the fact that there’s a separate conflict called the “Eastern Syria Insurgency”, can you give me a source that calls it that? Using your logic the Franco–Turkish proxy conflict article shouldn’t have been removed. Bringing multiple incidents into a conflict of one person’s original thoughts is WP:OR. Ridax2020 (talk) 09:30, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - I still have to ask: What? You know that a conflict can have sub-conflicts such as campaigns, battles, and insurgencies? The article I cited literally says that there is an insurgency. Applodion (talk) 23:55, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I think that the nominator is saying that breaking the overall Syrian Civil War into separate regional conflicts is what they consider original research. I think that the multiple sources disagree with the nominator. But I think that is what the nominator is saying. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:20, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Multiple sources that are clearly WP:RS. This is clearly not WP:OR. SunDawn (talk) 10:22, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- You failed to prove to me that there’s an ongoing conflict called the “Eastern Syrian insurgency” though, I never denied there being incidents I just think that bringing multiple incidents into one article of a person’s original thoughts is literally original research and no article talks about a “Eastern Syrian Insurgency”. Ridax2020 (talk) 09:30, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As per all above. Pilean (talk) 16:44, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Restructure There is this very real issue with the all "insurgency" articles in how they all combine multiple different conflicts into one which isn't substantiated by reliable resources and is indeed original research. Placing all the different "insurgent" groups on one side is definitely original research and pushing an original POV. The only insurgency and counter-insurgency in eastern Syria as reported by reliable sources is the IS one. Attacks by pro-government and pro-Turkey insurgents have been reported by these resources but as individual attacks only, not as part of a greater insurgency and especially not as part of the same insurgency as the IS one. Lightspecs (talk) 02:31, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep i can find easy sources about this https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2020/05/isis-airstrikes-deir-ez-zor-syria-coalition-jaburi.amp.html?skipWem=1 this is not OR. But main groups and sources talks about mostly isis insurgency Shadow4dark (talk) 16:32, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep as per all above and for obvious reasons. There is an active ISIL insurgency in eastern Syria, as the group was forced underground after they lost their physical territory in the Battle of Baghuz. The U.S. in particular acknowledge there's a continued ISIL presence in the region and even the Trump administration cited ISIL's lingering post-territorial, tangential presence in Eastern Syria for why they're "protecting the oil fields" and re positioned its forces there and are still cooperating with the SDF, so deleting this article meant to cover that area of importance would be a disservice to readers and anyone involved in the ongoing attacks in that area and would make it appear no one is dying and the SDF is doing nothing. Even the Syrian government is still fighting ISIL in its own campaign in the very nearby Syrian Desert, with the help of Russia.
ISIL is conducting a similar insurgency in Iraq, so if this article is deleted, what what makes that article different? You seem to not understand that conflicts can have their own sub-conflicts and overlapping areas of operation, because real life is complex and you don't need a formal declaration of a specifically named "insurgency" by some official body to determine what's practically, observably happening on the ground (an unnamed "low-level insurgency", which is a real term cited by RS's) where people are dying and SDF COIN operations are conducted. Especially for a complex, multi-sided war like the Syrian Civil War. Aren't most insurgencies unnamed anyway? Furthermore, the article is well-sourced by RS's (for the most part) and does not currently meet the criteria for WP:OR from what I see. RopeTricks (talk) 12:36, 13 March 2021 (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.