Talk:Issam Zahreddine

Human rights watch has been proven to be a very pro FSA source. because we do not use biased sources at the map either i recommend we remove the source from this page too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spenk01 (talk • contribs) 09:10, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Issam Zahreddine. 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.syrianhr.org/reports/syrian-network-for-human-rights-report-09-04-2013-3.pdf

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} 03:04, 1 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Folks, instead of edit warring over the page, please discuss here and let's reach consensus. The article currently lists three nicknames: "Lion of the Republican Guard"[http:da//heavy.com/news/2016/11/isis-islamic-state-militants-killed-dead-corpses-major-general-issam-zahreddine-syrian-republican-guard-srg-wilayt-deir-ez-zor-syria-twitter-video/], “The butcher of Deir Ezzor”[1][2], "The Druze Beast"[3]. All of these are arguably problematic. Two of the nicknames are derogatory and one of them is positive.

• The positive one, "Lion of the Republican Guard" is sourced to Heavy.com, which isn't ideal, but it's probably OK - maybe we'd need to check other sources? Proposal: find and add one other reliable source.
• “The butcher of Deir Ezzor” has two sources, Muftah (which is quite commonly used as a source on WP; it has a very distinguished editorial board, presumably a RS), and Al-Dorar Al-Shamia (an independent pro-opposition media organisation that is quite commonly cited on WP) - is that enough to establish that this is a nickname used widely (e.g. by pro-opposition Syrians)? Those are both arguably pro-opposition sources (one more than the other), but what they are being used as a source for here is the views of opposition people, so I think they are OK. Proposal: leave as is, probably remove better source tag.
• The third nickname, "The Druze Butcher", is described as a nickname used by opposition people too, but the source given is neither a neutral reliable source nor a pro-opposition one, but a pro-government one, Al-Masdar News. I have looked for other decent sources saying the opposition use this name for Zahreddine, and I can't, suggesting that it is being used to support a narrative that the opposition are anti-Druze sectarians. I don't speak Arabic, but I think the Arabic for "Druze Butcher" is "جزار الدروز" and I can't find a single source using that term for Zahreddine. My proposal: delete.

BobFromBrockley (talk) 11:58, 23 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

How much times must it be said, Just because there are 2 Biased sites calling him something, does not make it a nickname, They used it as a insult, not a nickname, if we had to use every source for every insult/nickname that was thrown out there we would have a infinite list of nicknames used for people, we don't use insults as other articles nicknames, why should we here, because a highly biased source said it, by this I could make a news side and call someone a name and use it as a source. Please stop this, we need to follow how other articles are done. Furthermore, that source has no legitimacy, he fought against ISIS for 3 years and it is claiming him to be "Murderer of Deir ezzor" without any proof, this is a highly biased source and should not be taken in account for using nicknames. Anon551055 (talk) 12:10, 23 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

Furthermore by your guidelines that means if we find a Biased news site calling someone something derogatory we should put this on Wikipedia and also put a tag there, but we don't do it, because this is not the correct practice Anon551055 (talk) 12:15, 23 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

As an example, many news sites(Much more then 2) have called Hillary Clinton "Crooked Hillary", and by your guidelines, is that enough to establish that this nickname is used widely(By Pro-Trump Americans)? and they are being used as a source for the views of the Pro-Trump people, But it is not okay to be used as a nickname, These sites are biased, and insult based, and we don't use this as a nickname for her article. Anon551055 (talk) 12:20, 23 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

Anon, first, as I keep saying in my edit summaries, your edits are deleting references that are elsewhere in the article, so they created orphaned links. I see you are quite new to Wikipedia, so I'm not trying to be contrary by undoing your edits; you need to understand that your edits have a bigger impact than just on the nickname issue, otherwise I would not revert. So far, there is no consensus for removal or inclusion (two editors, me and @Applodion: have argued for inclusion of the Butcher, you and an editor Kimo2255 (who seems to have joined WP last week just to edit this page) have argued against); we need to reach consensus before we started deleting references. So, I am restoring what you removed, and if you edit again PLEASE make sure you move the citation material properly before you do anything and not simply revert. I don't actually feel strongly about the nicknames - I don't mind us getting rid of all of them, let's see what other editors say - but if we do we need to make sure the other refs remain intact. BobFromBrockley (talk) 13:28, 23 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

I deleted the sources in the nicknames, but the references through out the article are still there, which part of it are you talking about, the references just changed numbers but are still there throughout the article. there is no consensus needed, if you want a consensus on this issue then this issue has to be for the thousands of other articles on people who have "Nicknames". We cant just make this article different then the rest. and If you read further down on the changes, you will find more people agreeing with removing the other nicknames by the way Anon551055 (talk) 13:55, 23 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

The article contained a lengthy chunk of text devoted to the Homs siege and reporter Marie Colvin's death there. This is not an article about the Homs siege or Marie Colvin and I have removed the extraneous text. I have also removed the part about a lawsuit filed against the Syrian government on behalf of Colvin and her cameraman. Contrary to the disingenuous claims made by the editor who included that bit, Zahreddine was not named in that suit. I checked both the source articles he or she referenced and Zahreddine was not mentioned in either. Please do not shorehorn propaganda into Wikipedia articles.User2346 (talk) 01:06, 2 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Here is the deleted text:

He was sent in early 2012 to Homs where the SAA offensive against rebel groups was culminating in the siege and Battle of Baba Amr, in which his troops surrounded the neighbourhood, blocked supply routes and shelled it.^[1] Many civilians were trapped, and dozens were killed in the attacks. On 21 February the government intercepted a call by famous war reporter Marie Colvin: "The [SAA] is simply shelling a city of cold, starving civilians".^[2] In a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Colvin's family provided evidence that the Syrian government had tracked Colvin from Lebanon, triangulated the call to the Homs Media Center, and confirmed her location with a local informant, and that then, under orders from Maher al-Assad, the Homs units of the Syrian Republican Guard and Special Forces targeted her location, using a method known as bracketing, where multiple rockets were launched to either side, drawing closer with each round, before hitting it directly.^[3][4] The lawsuit alleged that Zahreddine planned the artillery attack along with Ali Mamluk, Director of Syria’s National Intelligence Bureau and Rafiq Shahadah, former Director of Military Intelligence.^[5][6] French photographer Remi Ochlik was killed and British photographer Paul Conroy, French reporter Edith Bouvier, and Syrian interpreter Wael al-Omar were wounded in the same attack.^[4]

It's clearly about Zahreddine. The lawsuit alleged that it was him that planned it. Fine to trim it to make sure every statement is relevant, but deleting something that is highly notable about him has got to be wrong. BobFromBrockley (talk) 10:06, 2 February 2018 (UTC)Reply