Talk:Tell Abyad

Ethnic composition numbers

@Gesture, it's interesting how you treat your source claiming that Kurds represent 40-45% of the population as a fact, when it's an opinion article by some unknown writer. On the other hand, you use the word "claimed" for numbers provided by a Turkish official (Governor of Urfa situation across the border from Tell Abyad). Nice standards!! Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 04:38, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Kurdish Accusation

User:Multi-gesture, the last sentence you added had nothing to do with Tel-Abyad, or the Kurds percentage or the Governor ! This is considered WP:SYNTH.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 18:33, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

But it had a lot of information about Turkish govrnment (which the governor is part of it), and the relations between ISIS and this government, and the fact that the governor's words are not apropriate references to use in these articles. Also it tells us about Turkish government-Kurdish relations which is necessary for these kind of articles. --Multi-gesture (talk) 19:16, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

This article is about a city. Those information belong in the Tel-Abyad campaign article or Kurdish-Turkish relations article (if it exist). As for the governor, he didnt make his "claims" because the Kurds are accusing turkey of helping ISIS. The connection between his words and Kurdish accusations is not established by source. The governor words or a columnist words are both not the highest quality sources. We need official sources and according to the CIA factbook maps, Tel-Abyad have Arab majority [1].--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 19:21, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

The accusations was not made only by Kurds, review the references. Also, when an independent columnist says something in a well-known website, it's acceptable but, what about a Turkish official's propaganda which is made for many obvious reasons. By the way, if you have any higher quality official references, I would be glad to see them in the article.--Multi-gesture (talk) 19:59, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Well, I would suggest that we only mention that the majority are Arabs with a considerable Kurdish minority and stay away from being very specific in regard to percentages since we dont have any official census. But thats up to you.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 20:03, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

I agree, do this in both Tel Abyad city and district.--Multi-gesture (talk) 20:11, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Attar, the word majority might mean 51% or 90%. I still think the numbers are important, while indicating who said what to give full context. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 18:02, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Population

The source doesn't say that only 10% Tell Abyad population are Kurds. This is the source says:

The newly captured areas around the city is only ten percent Kurdish. Ferakp (talk) 09:28, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Another problem, the source is not a reliable source, it is widely discussed in Rojava's talk page.Ferakp (talk) 10:09, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

The 30% to 45% are absolutely no option. Of course, these under two 2% are absolutely not reliable, but neither are the 45%. Furthermore, that's the sense of the following sentences: To say that the composition of the population is completely unclear and that the thematic is ethnically charged.

Regarding the recent accusation against you, you should be really much more careful with your edits. Just because some are blackwashing articles, whitewashing is absolutely not better. And more important, that's not what Wikipedia is supposed to be. It's supposed to be neutral!

Please revert you last edit.--Ermanarich (talk) 14:27, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Reversed change

@عمرو بن كلثوم: You edit[2] was reversed.

Reasons why I reverted your edits:
1. You removed sourceddetails (55%) without any reason.
2. The Kurdwatch is not Kurdish and it is not human rights group. It is just an internet portal as they say here, [3].
3. It doesn't confirm anything, it claims and it has no statistical or original studies. It is just an internet portal.
4. The Kurds consist 10% of the population of newly captured areas in Tel Abyad, not the whole Tel Abyad.
Ferakp (talk) 05:00, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

@Ermanarich: Thanks for your intervention here. BTW, the proportions for Turkmen and Kurds are switched in your edit, should be 15% Turkmen and 10% Kurds, according to KurdWatch, not the other way around. I still don't agree with the 55% number, and as you had said before this is obviously WRONG and extremely exaggerated, and it is not mentioned in the al-monitor story (30-45%). Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 23:05, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

@عمرو بن كلثوم: Thanks for saying. In fact I changed the numbers accidentally. The 55% are mentioned in this source: http://www.vdc-sy.info/pdf/reports/talabyad-English.pdf at page three. It's definitely as wrong as the turkish statement. So either we take out both or let them both there.--Ermanarich (talk) 00:22, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Confirming vs claiming

Confirm is a strong word and should not be used without any court decision, especially if a source is not a reliable and strong. In case of Kurdwatch, it's nothing else than a claim, since it has itself said that they aren't responsible for their reports/news and their accuracy.Ferakp (talk) 05:22, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Tell Abyad. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.basnews.com/en/news/2015/06/13/us-expresses-concerns-about-pyd-human-rights-violations-in-syrian-kurdistan/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.basnews.com/en/news/2015/06/13/us-expresses-concerns-about-pyd-human-rights-violations-in-syrian-kurdistan/

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:22, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Stop removing content massively!

Hello Attar-Aram and 2A1ZA,

I don't have much time now, but I'm very angry about your edits here. The things you removed without anything even close to a discussion was reached after intense discussion. It was definitely no propaganda as you, 2A1ZA, said, in contrary. It only shows the different claims and points out that we currently haven't official numbers. It was clearly mentioned that they aren't official. So: revert all of your disruptive edits you made here today! I'm quite angry about this!--Ermanarich (talk) 12:16, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Angry!! wow, you should really not be this connected to Wikipedia dear. Plus, Wikipedia dont care about your feelings whether you are angry or satisfied as your feelings arent a criteria for Wikipedia's articles.

Can you take a look at the edits before mentioning me ? I removed nothing, but if ferakp wants to remove all the estimations calling them propaganda then Al-monitor estimations should go as well. On a different note, we dont need a section for the estimations. No one knows sh.. about the actual numbers.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 12:44, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Please see the section below. I do not think that half the article should be presentation of into-the-blue claims of what would or would not have been the ethnic share of population of the town a decade ago. If someone wants to improve the article, there would be many other aspects of Tell Abyad to tell, which do not appear in the article at all. -- 2A1ZA (talk) 13:07, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Well, your 30-45% "neutral" number is also an into the blue claim. No percentages or all of them.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 13:09, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

My preference would clearly be to state no percentages and no claims about majority at all, just mention the ethnicities present, Arab and Kurd larger and Turkmen and Armenian smaller, and that's it. However, my point is that all this issue of ethnic composition (including all the equally baseless claims concerning majorities and percentages) should be in one or two brief sentences in the "Demographics" section, not extensively and dramaturgically narrated throughout the article. -- 2A1ZA (talk) 16:57, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

The city have an Arab majority, this is known and even you know it. Its important to state this in the face of the claims of Kurdish nationalists thinking they will establish the great Kurdistan empire. Even the CIA maps shows the area as having a Kurdish minority. No percentages or all of them.. this is the neutrality. Otherwise, keep it as it is.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 18:35, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

I understand what you say, but the fact that some editors highly interested in the topic of competing quantifications of ethnic composition have reached a equilibrium, which in turn makes half the article discuss this topic, invites some idea of improvement of the article. Can't one simply but this equilibrium into one or two brief sentences in the "Demographics" section? -- 2A1ZA (talk) 17:05, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

@Attar-Aram syria: Well, if you would have taken a look at this talk page and at the articles' history, you would maybe stop making fun of me. It was a bunch of work to get the Users Ferakp and Amr ibn Kulthoum to a acceptable compromise. And because I saw you complaining some times that 2A1ZA would be a sockpuppet of Ferakp: He's definitely not, since his English is much better. Apart from that, Ferakp isn't even a blocked User.

@both: Well then, let's take out any numbers from this article. It wouldn't ever stop to lead to tensions between Arab and Kurdish nationalists anyway. I tried hard to make this article better and I still think that to show the different numbers and adding the comment, that the true ethnic cmoposition remains unclear is the best. But since I'm not even close to the mood for being a adjustor between two completely opposed views again, I'll leave it up to you. Cheers, Ermanarich (talk) 18:23, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

One more thing. This counts for the allegiations of Kurdwatch as well. This section now leaves some facts away(and this even if this report clearly isn't anti-Kurdish). But I guess I'm talking against a wall right here.--Ermanarich (talk) 18:32, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

I guess I was rude. No hard feelings I hope. As for ferakp, I already have evidence.... I just genuinely dont want him blocked. He is not bad and better than multi-Gesture who I fought and blocked. Im just collecting evidence now. I wont open an investigation now cause we need a Kurdish voice on those articles and that guy isnt a rock head like many Kurdish nationalists Ive met (though he think anyone who doesnt agree with him to be a supremacist).--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 19:01, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Formulation concerning ethnic demographic composition

Kurdish-inhabited area by CIA (1992)

There was and is high emotion concerning the formulation of the ethnic composition. Current state is:

Before the Syrian Civil War, Tell Abyad had a population of 14,825. Sources often claim that the majority or plurality of the inhabitants were ethnic Arab, suggest around 30 to 45 percent ethnic Kurdish, and a smaller share of ethnic Turkmen and ethnic Armenian population.

I consider this the most neutral that is possible and achieved yet. If you want to change, please explain here. -- 2A1ZA (talk) 13:01, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

You consider??? no one care. I consider the 10% kurdish percentage the most neutral... also no one care.

If you will mention percentages then mention them all or none--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 13:04, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Please try to use a mature language of cooperation towards a good article. I do not care at all which of these equally baseless claims are mentioned in the aricle. Due to the fact that there was and is no serious census about the issue, due to the fact that the assymetrical definition of "Kurd" and "Arab" makes a considerable part of the population fall under both definitions anyway, due to the fact that the population was and is highly fluent, all of them have few or probably rather zero value, which the article at least explicitly states in the last paragraph. My point is that all these equally baseless claims should be in one or two brief sentences in the "Demographics" section, not extensively and dramaturgically narrated throughout the article. -- 2A1ZA (talk) 16:51, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

The CIA doesnt have baseless information. It isnt baseless that this isnt a Kurdish majority area.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 18:31, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Well, and now? That map isn't only old, it's also very inaccurate. This one of Syria is much better and it is actually from a reliable project of the american Columbia University: http://gulf2000.columbia.edu/images/maps/Syria_Ethnic_Detailed_lg.png --Ermanarich (talk) 18:35, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

And according to the map you removed now in favor for anotherone, the Kurd Mountains around Afrin wouldn't even have Kurds in it. Reliable or accurate? Definitely not.--Ermanarich (talk) 18:38, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

I removed cause it was from 1992 while this from 2002. Your map is by Izady, the guy claiming the Kurds are the grandsons of Halaf cultures 6000 BC....... That should be enough to talk about this man. By the way, his map shows that Kurds live in tel abyad not that they are majority. He also put a lot of Armenians in Deir ezzor but we know they are not a majority.. It also miss the Armenians in Kassab.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 18:42, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

True... By the way, I didn't want to prove that Tall Abyad has a Kurdish majority (Because it definitely haven't). I only wanted to say that the map of the CIA doesn't proof anything as well. The beginning of the Kurd mountains is also shown there, but it shows no Kurds there, as well as is Shehba area north of Aleppo, where several villages with a Kurdish majority can be found, like Dudiyan or Aktharin.--Ermanarich (talk) 18:53, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Order of the page, including information that is unrelated to who-is-ethnic-majority wars

After one user reverted all updates to the page and any inclusion of content unrelated to ethnic-majority wars, I will now make a second attempt. However important these who-is-ethnic-majority wars may appear to some, it cannot be that this article does prohibit any other informatuion on Tell Abyad. I will for now in Edit: CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER leave all content concerning the who-is-ethnic-majority wars untouched, just make the order of the history section chronological rather than dramaturgical as it is now, add new information unrelated to who-is-ethnic-majority wars, and delete one sentence about government which is onviously outdated. If you have an issue with this, please talk about it here rather than reverting without reason. -- 2A1ZA (talk) 16:29, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Removing the "Kurdwatch" Junk

"Kurdwatch" is not a serious source. Currently, this article gives extreme weight to a quote from that "Kurdwatch" website, without there being any reason to do so, as all the content of that quote already is in the article, and if one would want to elaborate, there would be many much more serious sources around for each and every point mentioned. I strongly suggest to either completely remove the "Kurdwatch" part or at least cook it down to one sentence. Suggestion for cooking down:

Kurdwatch, a Germany based internet portal, suggested displacements, no large-scale ethnically motivated expulsions, repressive measures against persons with ties to ISIL, ethnic discrimination based on the fact that only Kurds from Tall Abyad could act as a guarantor for refugees so that they can return to Tall Abyad from Turkey.

This would also serve the aim to correct the overall balance of the article, which gives absurd undue weight to this one issue. And it would serve the aim of embarrassing Wikipedia less by less presenting this "internet portal" as an alleged quotable source. -- 2A1ZA (talk) 17:25, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Kurdwatch is a serious source. It already went to the reliable sources portal.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 18:29, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Self-administration within Kobanî Canton

I kindly ask Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) to stop vandalizing the "Self-administration within Kobanî Canton" section by deleting highly relevant, informative and well-sourced content without any discernable reason or explanation. -- 2A1ZA (talk) 10:48, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Actually the word vandalizing applies to your actions more than anyone else. You deleted my Washington Post story, which is a source more reliable than any of the sources you use. I will revert that, and then come up with a serious source for your kobani story. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 00:36, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

OK, the Reuters reference is good. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 18:45, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Dear Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم, the Reuters reference was part of the concerning text section all the time, including at the time when you deleted it entirely. And your accusation "you deleted my Washington Post story" is plain false. I kindly ask you to either provide proof for that accusation or apologize. -- 2A1ZA (talk) 13:56, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes, the Washington Post story is still there. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 02:25, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Kurdish and Turkmen community

Since both Kurds and Turkmen are significant minorities in Tell Abyad, consisting of 10-30% and 15% of the town's population, respectively, Tell Abyad would be listed both as a Kurdish community and a Turkmen community in Syria. Please don't remove either category without a clear consensus. Editor abcdef (talk) 02:25, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

According to all sources, Tel Abyad has an overwhelming Arab majority, so if any of those ethnic categories are to be used, it should be Arab communities in Syria. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 02:47, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Can't we use all 3 categories? if these communities are attested for at the town, then why not? I just saw that there isn't an "Arab communities in Syria" category, which I guess makes sense as all towns have significant Arab communities. I don't object to having the categories for Turkmen/Kurds as per categories for religious minorities. See: Category:Druze communities in Syria, and Category:Christian communities in Syria. Yazan (talk) 08:56, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Then, that would be misleading to have categories for Kurdish and Turkmen communities since they are minorities here. This might lead people to think/claim there are no Arabs here. It's different for christian and druze communities, as these would usualyy be uniformly christian or druze. See my point?? Cheers, Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 03:07, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Amr. Let's agree that there are no "pure" ethnic/religious towns in Syria (not yet anyway), and so you'll always find significant minorities of one ethnicity or another in a town that might be dominated by another community (e.g., Yabrud, or even Maaloula). And since Arab communities (and in a similar way, but to a slightly lesser extent - Sunni Islam communities) are almost ubiquitous in all towns, I doubt whether it makes sense to categorise them as such (the category becomes almost redundant). Adding a "community" category actually means that it is present in the town, rather than that the town is "exclusively" made up of such and such community. That's my rationale. But if you decide to create an all-encompassing category of "Arab communities", then I wouldn't object either - so long as all attested different communities in town foo are also categorise. Otherwise, we'd be be sacrificing the usefulness of the encyclopaedia to POV-warriors/ethno-religious ideologues - never-mind the practical impossibility of actually establishing which is the largest community in one town (especially in such terrible times of demographic shifts). Best, Yazan (talk) 07:27, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Recent reverts

عمرو بن كلثوم, my recent edit in the SCW section was made to avoid redirects and repetition, link relevant articles, arrange the information in a logical sequence, introduce a more NPOV, and improve the English. Why are you reverting me? Konli17 (talk) 02:01, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

I duly explained why I reverted your edit in my edit summary; again because you were trying to sneak in removal of sourced content under your claimed cleaning/sequence/English summary. Your edit summary is simply not true and not innocent. You insistently removed the Washington Post paragraph below, which is very important ton understand some of the recent events in the city:

The Kurds formally renamed Tal Abyad with a Kurdish name, "Gire Spi", and proclaim its new identity in signs throughout the town — written in the Latin script used by Turkish Kurds but not readily understood by Syrian Kurds or Arabs. They have also unilaterally detached it from the existing Syrian province of Raqqa and made it a part of their newly formed autonomous enclave, carved from areas traditionally inhabited by Kurds but steadily encroaching also on territories that were historically Arab.

I hope in the future you work collaboratively with other editors, and do not insist on unilateral unjustified content removal. You are welcome to do the other Engish/sequence edits without content removal. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 02:20, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

You don't hope in vain. The quote doesn't make a lot of sense, especially given the content in the article's next section which describes the four years Tell Abyad was in the AANES. This part of this section only describes the period from June-October 2015. There was no formal renaming; there were no political structures in place to effect this until October. The Kurdish signs were a display of Kurdish identity, which had been illegal under the regime and an invitation to violence from the jihadists who succeeded them. There's no evidence that Arabic signs were removed, and road signs with both Arabic and Latin script are common throughout Syria. The only detachment of Tell Abyad from the province of Raqqa had been military; at this point Raqqa was still the caliphate's capital. They certainly made it a part of the AANES, but most Tell Abyad residents seem to have preferred this to being part of the Islamic State. Why do you believe this misreading of events in a four-month period in 2015 is more important for understanding recent events, than the four-year period that followed it? Konli17 (talk) 05:34, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

I don't care what you think about the WP article. Obviously we have very different opinions on this. Still, this is a widely respected media outlet and the text is well sourced, so you simply can't remove it because you disagree. I hope this is clear now. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 05:32, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

If you really believe in working collaboratively with other editors, please address the issues I raised. Konli17 (talk) 05:42, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

I explained my edit in detail, and asked you just one question. Will you answer it? Konli17 (talk) 14:44, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Konli17, you seem to be missing the point if Wikipedia. This is not a forum for your opinions and interpretations. You are making up "facts" by saying "most Tell Abyad residents seem to have preferred this to being part of the Islamic State", and theis clearly shows your POV pushing. It's not your business who the residents prefer. If you have reliable, SOURCED information then bring it up. Otherwise, stop your vandalism and nationalistic zeal to change facts. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 18:26, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

You haven't addressed any of the points I raised, nor answered my question. Konli17 (talk) 19:31, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

City is under control of Turkish armed forces and Free Syrian Army. Officialy Turkish,FSA and EVEN KURDISH SOURCES call city Tell abyad. It is weird as changing name of New York to New amsterdam. Tell Abyad is ruled by FSA and even Kurdish newspapers call city Tell Abyad. Police station to goverment buildings inside also Tell Abyad. It is weird calling somewhere not even in control not officialy to gri spi. Name can stay but official and main name is Tell Abyad. Here recent news about city 1)https://www.kurdistan24.net/en/news/095a0270-9e50-4025-9232-cd516a79e35c 2)https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2020/06/turkey-uscrif-syria-maenza-kurds-yazidis-christians-religion.html 3)https://www.aa.com.tr/en/turkey/turkish-red-crescent-delivers-ramadan-aid-in-n-syria/1819011 4)https://www.trthaber.com/haber/dunya/tel-abyadin-guvenligi-turkiyenin-egittigi-yerel-polislere-emanet-453889.html 5)https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/turkiye/tel-abyad-nufus-mudurlugu-hizmete-girdi-/1857827 6)https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/dunya/tel-abyadda-smo-aracina-bombali-saldiri/1871349 7)https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/turkiye/tel-abyad-ve-rasulaynda-yillar-sonra-huzurlu-bayram-sevinci-/1852157 8)https://www.ahaber.com.tr/video/yasam-videolari/tel-abyada-iki-turk-bayragi-asildi HERE IS OFFICIAL POLICE STATION = https://iasbh.tmgrup.com.tr/67c29c/752/395/0/75/1108/658?u=https://isbh.tmgrup.com.tr/sbh/2019/12/04/turkiyenin-egittigi-polisler-devrede-1575489605182.jpeg

Road Signs: https://ahvalnews.com/sites/default/files/styles/is_article_featured_top_1200x550/public/2020-01/20191025133235afpp--afp_1lq4gt.h.jpg?h=7fe56d7b&itok=K0xI94Uc Local court : https://www.bik.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Tel-Abyad%C4%B1n-g%C3%BCvenli%C4%9Fi-T%C3%BCrkiyenin-e%C4%9Fitti%C4%9Fi-askeri-polislere-emanet-16.jpg Cengizsogutlu (talk) 20:30, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Ok, I read the Washington Post article and I support the removal of a Washington Post quote, which states the YPG has unilaterally detached Tel Abyad from the Raqqa Governorate in 2015. It is simply not true, impossible that there are reliable sources that state the SDF/YPG had a governing alliance with the Islamic State, who governed Raqqa until 2017. And it is also normal to write the Kurdish name that was formerly forbidden. Makes sense to me. The other parts of the contested Washington Post quote can be sourced also with other sources.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 00:02, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Paradise Chronicle, you are cherry picking here. The WP story is balanced and presents both sides of the story. It seems this is something you and some other pro-YPG editors here cannot tolerate. Well, this is Wikipedia, not a Kurdish propaganda forum, so the story is sourced and presents an accurate depiction of the situation. As for the name, I will go with the consensus, although I am not convinced why we should put a recently-invented Kurdish name for a town that has no, or very few Kurds. May be we should then add Ukranian, Urdu, and Chinese names for the town. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 00:30, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

10–30% of the town's population isn't "no, or very few Kurds". No one is suggesting we rename the article to Girê Spî‎ or something. Cengizsogutlu is presenting a strawman. All we're saying is that we should keep the Kurdish, Turkish, Armenian, and Syriac names in the lead and in the infobox, as these are the recognized minority populations after Arabs. The Arabic name, Tell Abyad, should still be the article name and it should still be listed first in both the lead and the infobox. How are you objecting to this? Lightspecs (talk) 00:44, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

It is simply not true that any Kurdish entity detached Tell Abyad unilaterally from the Raqqa Governorate in 2015. It can say who ever says it, it is not true and Konli was right to remove the quote. And this quote is the only thing you talk about here. I think you are cherry picking here. Raqqa Governorate was in a vast majority part of the Islamic State until 2017 and also today a minor part is governed by Assad. The SDF did not act "unilaterally". How is this article a reliable source? I haven't seen any Gire Spi signs on my search to source the display the name of Gire spi throughout the town. Not even from ANF.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 01:22, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Here is a sign saying Gire Spi traffic police (written in both Latin and Arabic scripts). I hope that convinces you. The Washington Post story is 100X more credible than all your sources. I am sure you would rather use ANF News, Kurdistan24, Hawar, ARA News. If people want to talk about sources and reliability, then let's start with the latter ones. BTW, this MEE source claiming that 30% of Tel Abyad population is Kurdish is garbage, and cites no sources for its claims. It obviously 100% adopts the Kurdish narration starting from city names (Serekaniye instead of the centuries-old name Ras al-Ayn, and Qamislo instead of Qamishli)!!! They should be kidding!!! We should look into all the sources used in everything related to northeastern Syria articles. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 01:36, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

I support Amr and this should not be deleted. Washington Post is a reliable source wich is not blacklisted in wikipedia. Shadow4dark (talk) 02:44, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

It doesn't make any sense what you two say. There are multiple Wikipedia articles saying that the Raqqa Governorate was not under the control by the SDF in 2015. If you deny this, this is POV pushing. You have one article claiming Tell Abyad was separated unilaterally from the Raqqa Governorate, and there are thousands saying otherwise. WP:UNDUE. Also, on your twitter "source" you say both names are listed, in Arabic as well as Kurdish. So it is clear that Arabic was still present and not removed, just Kurdish was allowed then, too, which before it was not. The city was not "renamed" on a Kurdish name as stated in the Washington Post.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 03:20, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Are you serious that Kurds did not separate Tel Abyad from Raqqa? This very same page reads under (Rule of the northeastern administration) section: "As a community in Kobanê Canton, the town enjoyed self-governance in the Democratic Confederalist system of Rojava". Your Kurdish propaganda is full of this claim and were celebrating kurdifying the region and annexing it to Ayn al-Arab (what you like to call kobani). You are choosing to be ignore what your pro-YPG editor group have already written. So, which one do you want me to believe now; Tel Abyad made part of Kobani by SDF or your claim now that it was never detached from Raqqa govornorate? Also, you are choosing to misunderstand what I said about the name above. I clearly said the Kurdish name Gire spi is written in two scripts, and the Arabic name is not written anywhere on that sign. When are you going to be a little reasonable? Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 05:50, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Yeah what do you want, that the SDF should have delivered Tell Abyad to the Islamic State who governed a Raqqa Wilayat in 2015? A Syrian Raqqa Governorate wasn't even governing at the time. And ok, I was mistaken with the arabic script, as I can't read Arabic script, but you also just wrote in latin and Arabic script not Kurdish language. It still doesn't show that it was "formally" renamed into Gire Spi. Then all the Tell Abyad signs wouldn't be there at ANF. And the SDF/SDC hasn't detached Tell Abyad "unilaterally"! from the Raqqah Governorate in 2015 as stated by the Washington Post. It is just not true.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 10:01, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

I have debunked all your arguments with evidence and pictures, and you still argue the story is not true. You can the horse to the river but you can't make it drink. Doesn't attaching Tel Abyad to the so-called "kobani canton" (in Aleppo Governorate) mean it was detached from Raqqa govornorate". What does ISIL have to do with this? Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 19:41, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Look here EWEN PYD CLAIMS IT AS Gire Spi....... Next time do not call me pov pusher i am not Konli17. Shadow4dark (talk) 07:55, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Shadow4dark has shown an article from the PYD spelling the Kurdish name. That's all. And Amr presented a "private" twitter source... this is not debunking. I show you the welcome plate at Tell Abyad how is shown in an article of 2 January 2020 after the Turkish capture of the city, then one of September 2019 shortly before the capture of the city and in an article of 2015 which all show the same plate depicting welcome to Tell Abyad. Of course the Kurds allowed to use the name Gire Spi, this is not disputed by me. But they didn't rename the city from Tell Abyad to Gire Spi, they just allowed the Kurdish name to be used as well.

Then I do also not challenge that it was separated from the Raqqa Governorate, as it is a fact that the Raqqa Governorate as it was under Assad doesn't exist anymore. But I am challenging that it was the Kurds who have "unilaterally" done so, as this is a not a neutral term in this context. The Raqqa Governorate as it was known under Assad, didn't exist at the time, its territory was mainly controlled by the Islamic State. So therefore they didn't act "unilaterally", but it was done in order to structure the areas being able to be governed by the governing body. Al-Nusra, the Islamic State, the Turkish Gov. and Assad have done so, too as they didn't control the whole Raqqa Governorate.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 11:37, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Amr, could you answer my question now? Konli17 (talk) 23:28, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Paradise chronicle, you are going against the consensus and continuing the edit-war of Konli17. If all my arguments have not convinced you so far, then you won't be convinced. It's not up to you to Konli to judge which story to include and which one to not include. The Washington Post story has more credibility than most of the pro-YPG sources used across wikipedia. You revert once again and I'll report you. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 17:13, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Amr, could you answer my question now? Konli17 (talk) 17:27, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, what is your question? 18:03, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Why do you believe this misreading of events in a four-month period in 2015 is more important for understanding recent events, than the four-year period that followed it? Konli17 (talk) 18:15, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Amr? Konli17 (talk) 11:40, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Konli, I am not sure what you are asking, but I can simply say that you can have one week with important events that needs to be documented more than five years with no events. While I understand your feelings and enthusiasm for the Kurdish question, if you think the Kurdish administration is utopia you will really be disappointed. Read this for example. Cheers my friend. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 08:30, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

If these were such important issues, why do I find no evidence of them in the following section, which covers the years TA was in the AANES? Surely such important issues, that cut right to the heart of the Arab and Syrian identity of the town's majority, must have been repeatedly raised in the following years? Konli17 (talk) 09:26, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Amr? Konli17 (talk) 06:08, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Amr? Konli17 (talk) 23:54, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Amr? Konli17 (talk) 21:44, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Amr? Konli17 (talk) 23:26, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

I did revert you because you only delete all kurdish war crimes, how is this balanced or NPOV? Shadow4dark (talk) 14:32, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

I've requested a Dispute resolution at the DRN, but I've not included all the involved ones in the discussion. I thought I mention/bother the ones active (more than 1 edit) in the discussion. But of course all can join and add their name. Maybe this brings in some movement in the DRN since our dispute hasn't been edited by a volunteer for 7 days.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 10:45, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Because it has encyclopedic and NPOV value. If we delete them it goes to one viewpoint and loss of good detailed sourced content. Shadow4dark (talk) 12:02, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

References

Sources and quotes

There are included for now two quotes in dispute. The WaPo quote and the Balanche quote. While it is normal that an article sometimes isn't accurate in the facts represented, it is questionable if a quote representing a contradiction to various phrases in the article, should be included. If we find something useful in the WaPo and Balanche article, great, but then we could just use it a source for the events that are represented in the majority of the sources and not just this one WaPo or Balanche source. But include a quote where unilaterally detached is included is just a POV and not an actual fact, as the Tell Abyad wasn't part of the "existing" Syrian Raqqa Governorate anymore, and this is shown in numerous articles about the Raqqa Offensive or the Tabqa Offensive to name just two. And calling Balanche a Syrian Civil War "expert" who ignores the existence of the Tell Abyad Canton and the Tell Abyad Civil council is utterly weird, let alone quote him of such findings. It is not fair for the Tell Abyad article nor for Balanche.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 18:47, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Your statement: "the Tell Abyad wasn't part of the "existing" Syrian Raqqa Governorate anymore" is simply OR. The WaPo story and the Balanche story are duely sourced and present facts, rather than opinions like yours. BTW, Balanche writings are used to support pro-YPG narrations in multiple places in rojava-related articles. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 19:08, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Anadolu Agency is formed even beginning of Turkish Republic ( April 6, 1920; 100+ years ago) With this logic we should never mention ANF, kurdistan24 or Rudaw even The Washington Times or The Guardian on articles.. Again, we see a method that the Kurdish diaspora found to write articles by their own heads now ridiculously not even counting sources... If you want we can use only PKK sources that claiming everyday killing 20+ soldiers btw not even injured reported.. I invite you to be logical You just lowering yourself into a funny situation sir..Cengizsogutlu (talk) 19:00, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

check theWP:Quotations and my comment at the DNR to the quotations. I have removed the quotations as per WP:quotations.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 12:40, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Sorry but you just seeking new excuses. And you even ignore warning from a admin [4] Shadow4dark (talk) 18:39, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi I make a last try to achieve a consensus here before going to the NPOV noticeboard. At Wikipedia:Quotations/2 it is stated that quotes should come from outlets and persons in direct relevance to the article.

"Quotes generally should come from notable sources or entities directly of some relevance to an article. The policy WP:UNDUE applies. If the source of the quote is neither notable nor otherwise important to the article, then there's no reason to be using a quote in the first place. Relevant sources need not be notable - for example, in an article about a murder, a sentence by a neighbor may be well worth quoting directly. Naming of such sources should follow notability and BLP. Quotations should not be represented out of context or in articles where they are not relevant to the overall topic; i.e. an article on the Pentagon doesn't include Washington's warning about standing armies."

Other arguments were already presented with WP:Quotations and MOS:QUOTE.

To the Kurdwatch quote: Kurdwatchs authors are not made known to the public, therefore it is not notable, and the content managers were Eva Savelsberg and Siamend Hajo who are closely linked to the ENKS, and have very few hits on google. Both were invited to a SETA forum together with Kyle Orton. Siamends Hajos membership of the ENKS was then suspended. This quote is sure a POV quote.

To the Balanche quote: Besides the facts that he ignores the Civil council consisting of an Arab Majority also mentioned in the WaPo article by Liz Sly, and the Tell Abyad canton mentioned in numerous sources, it has no direct relevance to the article. Balanche has no widely known connection to Tell Abyad, nor has the Washington Institute.

To the quote attributed to Liz Sly from the WaPo: The arguments about notability are similar to the one from Balanche. Then it also ignores opposing information, and therefore the quote is a point of view (POV).Paradise Chronicle (talk) 00:09, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Here we go again, how many times do we have to discuss this? The only person with POV here is you, given that you won't back off despite all the evidence I ahve been presenting to you.

1. Kurdwatch is a human rights organization with no political affiliation, unlike the Kurdish sources you prefer to use (ANF, Hawar, Rudaw, Kurdistan24, you name it..). Their coverage was fair and balanced, including covering YPG human rights violations, hence YPG supporters don't like them. Whether you know their sources r not is irrelevant, and is typical of the work of human rights organizations that try to protect their sources for fear of retribution. I didn't think I would need to explain this to you.
2. Balanche, a professor of history and fellow with The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, is an established expert in the Syrian civil war and author of the reference work Sectarianism of Syria's civil war, and possibly the most informed person about the ethnic/sectarian details of the civil war. He is quoted across WP and elsewhere. He [here accurately and meticulously described the Arab population of Tel Abyad], and the Arab tribes geographical distribution and relations with the government, opposition, YPG, and you still claim he has no connection to Tel Abyad. Who do you want to quote? Yourself, sitting somewhere in Europe or the Kurdish propaganda websites defending YPG?
3. Washington Post reporter Liz Sly is in Akcakale, 1 km away from Tel Abyad interviewing refugees from Tel Abyad. So, your claim she is not relevant is so funny.
4. The fact that the Balanche and WaPo quotes share so many points make them even more credible and more relevant for this article. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 04:54, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Does anyone still question the inclusionnof the Kurdwatch quote? Other wise I'd remove it. The KurdWatch quote is really just of a minor institution, and sincerely, I have not yet found a quote of any newspaper, also not of important ones, on Wikipedia. I might be wrong, though. But prove me otherwiseParadise Chronicle (talk) 20:14, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

I cite the WP:Quotatons also the WP:cite. According to this at least two of the quotations should be [Wikipedia:UNDUE]]. If we find any other (reliable) sources who represent those infos, we could add them, but so far they are just the only ones, and therefore, not enoughParadise Chronicle (talk) 23:09, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

No objection on Kurdwatch quote renoval. But don't touch the Washington Post qute. Shadow4dark (talk) 23:26, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

What does the Washington Post quote in the Tell Abyad article which makes it so indispensable? Is it the source? Washington Post has not any significant unique connection to Tell Abyad. Show me any other quote on Wikipedia by Washington Post. There isn't, and if, they'd quote the person who said the phrase, but not just say: Washington Post said...Paradise Chronicle (talk) 01:23, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

I am not really sure I agree with your reasoning for the removal of the Kurdwatch quote, but just as a token of good will, I'll live with the removal, but as Shadow4dark said, don't touch any of the other quotes please since they are very important to explain events in the town during the last few years. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 02:03, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

to User:Shadow4dark and Ibn Amr (sorry, just can't write your arabic name in the English wikipedia): Can you also reason according to wikipedia guidelines that apply to the quote or can you just write about what you think?Paradise Chronicle (talk) 02:45, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Amr, why do you reject the use of a reference from Fabrice Balanche at Kurds in Syria but promote him here? Konli17 (talk) 06:10, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Amr? Konli17 (talk) 15:48, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Amr? Konli17 (talk) 15:38, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

You added it and it is there in the Kurds in Syria article, although he is the only one claiming 16% Kurds in Syria, while all other refernces put thenumber under 10%. This is to show you that I am not a POV-pusher like you. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 17:30, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure you deleting that reference showed that. Konli17 (talk) 19:10, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

References

Removing quotes

@Paradise Chronicle:, you did not like the Talk here and all the facts I presented to you supporting the WaPost quote. You opened the request at DRN, and then you didn't like the suggestion of the volunteer there (user Nightenbelle) that a quote is a quote and you can't change it, and didn't like the extra evidence we presented there. You have decided to resume your edit war and remove not only the one quote in dispute but the two quotes that go against your POV, in addition to the Kurdwatch story that I don't care about. I will give you one hour to revert yourself before I report you. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 17:36, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

@EdJohnston: You have followed this article for a bit in the near past, and might have noticed the DRN user Paradise Chronicle opened. This user has not liked the suggestion of volunteer user Nightenbelle, and decided to remove the SOURCED Washington Post material and Washington Institute material. Thanks for looking into this, Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 20:54, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Just look at WP:quotations: Quotations are used to show what someone well known said or wrote about what is described in the article. Then check at MOS:Quote (right below WP:quotations): the quotations are way too long to be included. And under section MOS:QUOTEPOV: Quotations should be used, with attribution, to present emotive opinions that cannot be expressed in Wikipedia's own voice, but never to present cultural norms as simply opinional.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 22:37, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

So now this is your new pretext to push your POV!? OK, I'll bear with you. Per WP:Quotes: "Recommended use: In some instances, quotations are preferred to text. For example:

• When dealing with a controversial subject. As per the WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV policy, biased statements of opinion can only be presented with attribution. Quotations are the simplest form of attribution. Editors of controversial subjects should quote the actual spoken or written words to refer to the most controversial ideas. Controversial ideas must never appear to be "from Wikipedia".
• When using a unique phrase or term created by a given author."

I guess one or both criteria above are relevant to the dispute we are talking about here. You deemed the quotations as long (based on your opinion), which is another new pretext, since in the past you were only complaining about the word "unilateral" in the Wa Post quote. However, WP:Quotes calls for "Long quotations may be hidden in the reference as a WP:FOOTNOTE to facilitate verification by other editors without sacrificing readability", which you didn't bother to suggest or do instead of entirely removing the quotes. BTW, your claim that this is a cultural dispute is simply not true, it is clearly a political dispute (hence the Syrian Civil War sanctions), and both quotes talk clearly about the political situation. Again, I invite an Admin to look into this. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 23:42, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Quotations should be included of people close to the topic described in the article and the Washington Post, the Washington Institute are both across the ocean and Kurdwatch from Germany, and are all far away from Tell Abyad. Besides, they should really just be brief, well known and have a historical relevance. Don't know what Liz Sly, Kurdwatch or Balanche's strong connection with Tell Abyad is, but if Tell Abyad certainly played a role in their existence/life, it should be well known, and their quote as well. The quote of a Mayor of Tell Abyad has more relevance for the article than any of these quotes. And regarding my arguments before, they also still count.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 09:22, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Syrian Observatory for Human Rights is in UK but all our news sources are mostly from SOHR. Your argument is not valid Shadow4dark (talk) 20:28, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Please focus on the topic, which is quotations/quotes. Do we include quotes by SOHR in the Tell Abyad article? No. And there are just two sources of 52 sources of SOHR included in the article. This is not most.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 23:32, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

I have reported the topic of the Quotes at the NPOV notice board, I just informed the really involved ones about the discussion, but all who are interested about the quality of the article are welcome to join. Here is the link to it.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 17:30, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

I will file an RfC for the discussion at the NPOV noticeboard, a similar one like the archdukes discussion had one.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 06:49, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Removing 2 quotes by user Paradise on 3 August 2020

@Paradise Chronicle: You just removed the two quotes that were the subject of our discussion in July and a RFC. We had agreed to take out the Kurdwatch quote as a compromise, but you are now coming back and removing the same quotes for which removal you were blocked last time. I kindly ask that you revert you removal before I report that. Thanks, Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 16:55, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Answer first the questions me and Konli had to you first. Then also answer to the WP:undue to which you have not yet answered. Then the block was due to a misunderstanding you caused with reporting in the first place. Try it again, I'll defend myself well.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 17:23, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

I already explained above, if you delete them it goes one pov point. Shadow4dark (talk) 06:14, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Will you answer, Amr? Konli17 (talk) 22:02, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Why does Amr defend the inclusion of a quote by someone like Balanche while dismiss him as such at Kurds in Syria? Should a quote not have some relevance to the article? I mean anything a mayor of Tell Abyad or the co-chair of of the civil council (doesn't exist as per Balanche quote) has more relevance to the article than what Balanche has to say. And what's his unique relevance to Tell Abyad to make him relevant enough to include quotes by him in a city. And what is the unique relevance to Tell Abyad of Liz Sly? Both Quotes are WP:UNDUE. Balanche writes clearly in opposition to the governing body if you read the whole article. And Liz Sly is even of less relevance as she hasn't produced any research in the field and makes several heavily disputed statements in the Quote in dispute. And the term unilaterally has never been really addressed in the dispute so far. How is it an unilaterally action to form a separate governing body aside from ISIL if the city was before in possession of ISIL and the majority of the Raqqa Governorate was also Governed by ISIL until October 2017? Both Quotes are WP:UNDUE.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 10:07, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Balanche in the number estimate was going against all other estimates putting the percentage of Kurds at 5-10%. Still, the reference has been there for weeks, and I didn't remove it. The situation here is different, and the two quotes you are trying to remove confirm the exact same thing, Kurdification efforts carried out by YPG, which is a very important and serious accusation. I hope you will let this go now and stop the edit-warring. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 06:20, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

You didn't address the points I raised. Nor concerning the relevance of the two authors to the town and also not to the term "unilaterally". Also not to WP:UNDUE. We also don't dispute the Kurdificaction accusation, but that the quotes a presented in a POV way. Both sources were also not removed, just the quotes. The Kurdifification accusation was included in the article at all times during the current dispute.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 11:24, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

I agree with Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم Cengizsogutlu (talk) 13:25, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Cengizsogutlu, About what? That Amr ignores the discussion at the talk page? No answer to WP:UNDUE, no answer to the term unilaterally since May 2020. No answer also to the relevance of the authors of the quotes. Amr called Balanche an opinion in Kurds in Syria, why is he an expert here? And what about a Liz Sly? What is here unique connection to Tell Abyad which is worth of one of two quotes in the article?Paradise Chronicle (talk) 14:34, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Removing quotes

Does anyone oppose the removal of the two quotes of Liz Sly and Fabrice Balanche on other grounds as that they are sourced with high quality sources? I have brought numerous arguments up of which several were undressed since May 2020 when the dispute began. Two of the editors who wanted to include the quotes have since been topic banned on Kurds and Kurdistan On the First Quote of Liz Sly of The Washington Post:

Number 1: Tell Abyad was liberated from ISIL and therefore it could not possibly have been "unilaterally" detached from the Raqqa Governorate by "the Kurds". The Raqqa Governorate (Called Raqqa Wilaya by ISIL) was still Administered by ISIL in large parts until late 2016, while Raqqa itself only fell in October 2017.

Number 2: Tell Abyad was not "formally" renamed into a Kurdish name. The new Administration just allowed the Kurdish name as well. The SDF itself levied a Military council of Tell Abyad in June 2019 well ahead of the capture of Tell Abyad through the Turkish lead forces.

Number 3: Latin and Arab script were both known also before the capture of Tell Abyad by the YPG as it is shown in images of Syrian traffic signs in Wikipedia Commons.

Number 4 Then Liz Sly is also not a prominent figure from Tell Abyad

I agree on that they were accused of Kurdifying the city, but to present several inaccuracies in the prominent fashion of a Quote is not NPOV.

On the second quote: WINEP is not a reliable source according to WP:RS archive No.48

Then the Tell Abyad Canton was established in 2015 existed until it was captured during the Turkish invasion into North and East Syria and therefore it couldn't be a part of Kobane Canton as claimed by Fabrice Balanche. Then Tell Abyad also had a culturally mixed civil council which included several ethnicities. That an author ignores such info and then his text is presented in a prominent fashion of a quote is not NPOV or contrary to MOS:QUOTEPOV and MOS:SCAREQUOTES.

Any suggestions how to present such info other than I did it before?Paradise Chronicle (talk) 06:00, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

WINEP is an advocacy org and thus not an RS. WaPo shouldn't be used for this per WP:SCHOLARSHIP because there is scholarship available about the liberation from ISIL and the alleged Kurdification of the city, or, more generally, about ethnic conflict and changes in government during the civil war (how's that for a euphemism :-) ). So I wouldn't include either of these sources at all. Levivich ^harass/_hound 06:07, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Yea, as Levivich said. Yet there were alot of accusations of Kurdification, so would you replace these quotes with NPOV scholarship investigating these?--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 08:38, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

About Liz Sly, Syria is a warzone and we lack good independence sources. Did she spread fake news or do you just dont like her? Shadow4dark (talk) 08:55, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@Shadow4Dark, Liz Slys statements are contradictory to several easily to verify info as explained by me at the beginning of the discussion. To @Attar Aram syria, also I see the Kurdification accusation as an important info to include in the article. This is not in dispute.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 11:48, 27 February 2021 (UTC)