Talk:Kurds in Syria

Biased

Article is one sided and should undergo major improvement. --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 17:51, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

No evidence is provided for the one-sidedness claim.Heja Helweda 01:06, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Hmm? The people who have been arbitrarily denied the right to Syrian nationality in violation of international law. part is one. Who says this violates international law? Its strtictly a domestic issue. Factual acuracy can be disputed too, actulay.

A neutral tone would not be "Kurdish human rights activists are mistreated and persecuted" but would be "AmnestyUSA claims Kurdish human rights activists are mistreated and persecuted."

--Cool Cat^Talk|@ 23:01, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I can list examples line by line: Suppression of ethnic identity of Kurds in Syria include.... Who says this is suppresion? --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 23:10, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

It seems that your concern is on wording of the article not the content because there are already many neutral and relaible references in the article. I'm not sure but just suggesting: Is not this tag better? {{POV-check}}. Diyako Talk 00:08, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

What? I did not pay attention that time. Human Rights watch says it is Suppression! Sorry. Xebat Talk 20:44, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Why is there no mention that the Kurds in Syria are Marxists? https://www.marxist.com/turkey-attacks-afrin.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hpfeil (talk • contribs) 23:22, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't think a generalization like that would help this encyclopedia. --Ahmedo Semsurî (talk) 01:33, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Category: Kurdish Inhabited Region

The catgeory does not apply to this article as Kurds in Syria is about a group of people not a region.Heja Helweda 03:30, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Neutralized article

I just finished removing bias from this article. It is notable that almost all of the article was violating copyrights. I rewrote the article and neutralized it. The claims of suppression are not facts, they are claims fro certain organizations and that should be always noted. The background of the citizenship controversy was included; it is clear that the creator of the article, or the section, presented the issue in an anti-Syrian, one-sided way. Please discuss any changes here before making them. Regards, Anas ^talk? 15:15, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

There is no "Syrian Kurdistan", you are inventing it!!!

Who said that northeastern Syria is called Syrian Kurdistan?!! When you say so, you give the impression that Kurds are the only inhabitants of that region, which is completely untrue. I live in northeastern Syria and particularly in Hassakeh and Kurds are not the only inhabitants of this region nor they form the majority there. There are other ethnicities like Armenians, Chaldeans, Syriacs, Assyrians and Arabs or Shawaya as we call them here. Unfortunately I don’t have a reliable reference to include but I LIVE THERE and this is a live testimony. You are an encyclopedia, that means that you have to be neutral and away from any political agenda. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.178.224.165 (talk) 11:47, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Is it called Syrian Kurdistan, of course not by the Arabs! This article is about the term "Syrian Kurdistan" not just "Kurds in Syria" it's about the land since ancient times not only people, whether its official or not, and yes there are other ethnics just like anywhere in the world but the majority are Kurds. Tittle change request to Syria Kurdistan.

There is no area named "Syrian Kurdistan", not now, or any time in history. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 19:46, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

The term does exist. Suppport a name change. Any dissenting views, such as the personal beliefs of SD (supposted by RS of couse, e.g. Anthony Hyman), can be included within the article. Chesdovi (talk) 20:56, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

There are many "terms" that exits, but a "Syrian Kurdistan" does not exist and has never existed. "Kurds in Syria" on the other hand do exit. This is not my personal believe, but something factual. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 21:00, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

You may be of the opinion that as a geographical region "Syrian Kurdistan" "does not exist and has never existed", but that does not matter. The term does exist, as Anthony Hyman has written in Elusive Kurdistan, the struggle for recognition, pg. 11:

"Thus it is not so much "Syrian Kurdistan" which exists, as a variety of distinct Kurdish regions in Syria." Chesdovi (talk) 22:57, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

As I said, many "terms" exist, this doesn't mean that they exist in reality. The majority of Kurds in Syria are newly arrived from Turkey, see this source p 475: [1]. Should the "Europe" article be renamed to "Eurabia" just because some extreme minority people call it that? "Eurabia" is not a real location that exists in reality, same thing with the extreme minority people who call a region in Syria: "Syrian Kurdistan". The scope of this article and how it was started was about the Kurdish people in Syria. Neither "Eurabia" or "Syrian Kurdistan" can be found in the CIA factbook. This is because they do not exist in reality, and never has. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 23:41, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

I think you're missing the point Eurabia may not be a phyisical, real entitiy, but the term exists and has a encylopeadic meaning. Same with SK. Chesdovi (talk) 01:48, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't think you understood what the guy above wrote, but just in case you missed it I will put it here for you again (You may be of the opinion that as a geographical region "Syrian Kurdistan does not exist and has never existed". The term does exist, as Anthony Hyman has written in Elusive Kurdistan, the struggle for recognition). Why there isn't any "Arabs in Syria" page? First of all the Kurds are native ethnic in Syria, they're not immigrants, secondly we're not talking about how big the land or the population is to tell me that "Most" of them are from Turkey. The Truth is Syria's Kurdistan does exist, and I know it's small. — Preceding unsigned comment added by XxDestinyxX (talk • contribs) 18:51, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I suggest we change this page back to Syrian Kurdistan. Chesdovi (talk) 14:25, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

As I said above, the scope of this article and how it was started was about the Kurdish people in Syria. It was only recently renamed to "Syrian Kurdistan". "Kurds in Syria" gets 160 000 google hits compared to the term "Syrian Kurdistan" that gets 7 020. This shows what the name of the article is the most appropriate. There is also already an article about the term Kurdistan. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 22:39, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

You're joking, right? "Kurds in Syria gets 160 000 Google hits compared to the term Syrian Kurdistan", do you realize that these two terms mean different things? You can't rename "Saudi Arabia" to "Arabs" just because you will get more hits on Google and call most appropriate. You're saying that the article was about the Kurds in Syria, at this point we would like to create a new page about Syrian Kurdistan. But it is not necessary if you rename this back to Syrian Kurdistan so we can merge both. If you don't like it just tell me so I won't bother you.

The original article was about Kurds in Syria and it was only recently changed and an unsourced lead added. There are also Kurds in several parts of Syria, not only the part you refer to as "Syrian Kurdistan" so then a new article called "Kurds in Syria" would have to be created, wouldn't it? There is also already a Kurdistan article.--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 21:35, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Migrated to North eastern Syria from Turkey??

It says in the demographics that the kurds in Syrian kurdistan came from Turkey. Thats not true the kurds is Syrian kurdistan has always been there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrkurdistan (talk • contribs) 05:35, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

I know and I agree with you. I told the moderator about this once.

Source says the majority of Kurds in Syria came from Turkey.--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 21:25, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

What sources Supreme Deliciousness?. Those who say that kurds does not exist, does who says that there is no kurdistan and kurds are only foreigners in their own lands???. doent you see that Wikipedia is only trying to get rid of kurdish culture, tradion and language and everything that the kurds are about. Know that the kurds have always been in Kurdistan and Kurdistan is only ours.Peace — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrkurdistan (talk • contribs) 01:01, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

The source is Youssef M. Choueiri (2005). A companion to the history of the Middle East (Hardcover ed.). Wiley-Blackwell. p. 475. ISBN 1405106816. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 10:35, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Removal of well sourced facts

In this edit: [2], an IP removes "The majority of Kurds in Syria originally came from Turkey in the 1920s." and its source with the edit summary: "false assertion made by unreliable source"

The source is Youssef M. Choueiri (2005). A companion to the history of the Middle East (Hardcover ed.). Wiley-Blackwell. p. 475. ISBN 1405106816.

Dr. Choueiri: BA (American University of Beirut), MSc (SOAS, University of London) PhD (Corpus Christi College, University of Cambridge), Reader In Islamic Studies at the University of Manchester: [3]

Book is published by: Wiley-Blackwell: "Wiley-Blackwell is the international scientific, technical, medical, and scholarly publishing business of John Wiley & Sons, with strengths in every major academic and professional field and partnerships with many of the world's leading societies. Wiley-Blackwell publishes nearly 1,500 peer-reviewed journals and 1,500 new books annually in print and online, as well as databases, major reference works and laboratory protocols." [4]

This demonstrates that the source is reliable and the argument that its a "false assertion" is not backed up by anything. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 15:21, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Advertisements

I removed this piece from the article for a very simple reason. It doesn't state anything important. It is a political message for a party in Syria/Syrian Kurdistan.

Piece: "Kurdistan National Assembly of Syria Kurdistan National Assembly of Syria an umbrella organization for Syrian Kurdistan Region that seeks freedom, peace, and democracy for Syria. In addition, it seeks a federal system for Syria where Kurds would be granted their national rights to govern themselves. Our vision to have a new Federal government in Syria. The new Syrian government should be modeled after, but not a direct copy of, the principles of freedom and the model of government both set forth by the United States and its democratic republic form of government. For a peaceful and free Syria to be established, it must be founded upon a Constitution and a Bill of Rights to ensure individual rights as well as a stable democratic republic. The new federal form of government in Syria should be one which does not provide for majority or minority rule, but rather a form of government that can work only with the cooperation of all citizens of a free society. The local governments must have rights in order to better serve their populace, but still restricted by the federal Constitution and Bill of Rights. The best form of government is one in which the bargaining table is used to further freedoms rather than restrict them. The following must be ensured if Syria is to remain a peaceful state free from a totalitarian government: Individual freedoms Democratic process Federal system to guarantee rights of Kurds as second largest ethnic group Guarantee of rights of minorities from ethnic and religious minorities No monopoly by any ethnic or religious group Freedom of religions Separation of power between the branches of government Separation of religion from government Civilian rule and neutrality of military Guarantee of rights of non-religious from majority religious Equality of men and women"

Flag of Syrian Kurdistan

The new flag that has been placed in the article is not the flag of Syrian Kurdistan. It is the flag of the PYD political party which is affiliated with the PKK. See the following discussion [5]. This is the one solid reliable source that I was able to find that indicates that the added flag is a PKK affiliated flag [6]. Most protest images from the Kurdish region of Syria indicate that the flag with the sun is the flag most identified with Syrian Kurdistan. Also, I believe this article [7] explains why there are two competing flags in different images at the moment. Guest2625 (talk) 03:00, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

In the Rudaw article it says that "The national flag of Kurdistan and the flag of the PKK – which the PYD is affiliated with -- are now being raised over the majority of government and public buildings." The PKK flag is this [8] whereas the flag being used in the photos I provided is this [9]. Furthermore the flag being shown in the Rudaw article about the flag being used by the PYD shows the PKK flag.

Yeah I saw that forum post when I was looking around for information on the use of the flag. However even on the forum there's disagreement between whether or not it's purely a PYD flag or whether it's actually a flag for West Kurdistan. It's possible that the use of both is West Kurdish flag along with the Kurdish flag is portraying both a regional Kurdish identity as well as a greater pan-Kurdish identity. Also, to put it a bit bluntly, it's possible the reason that the people on the Kurdish website (who seem to be rather nationalistic) prefer to portray the Yellow-Red-Green flag as a party flag is to underplay the regional differences between Kurds. Of course it's equally possible those playing up the flag as a West Kurdish flag are doing so because of their PYD/PKK sympathies.

Also here[10] the leader of the PYD can be seen standing in front of a flag with the PYD logo on it, instead of standing in front of the Yellow-Red-Green flag (which you'd expect him to if that was the PYD flag). I also can't really find the use of the flag on the PYD's website - [11] - but instead you can see some flags with the PYD logo on it, similar to the one that Salih Muslim is standing in front of in the rudaw.net source above.

This uncertainty isn't helped by the fact that on the wiki commons link for the Yellow-Red-Green flag the sources are pretty poor (none actually source the flag!), whilst the flag is listed in English as that of West Kurdistan as opposed to being the PYD flag. Further research into the subject for me is hard because my Kurdish is pretty poor and so some of the more plentiful Kurdish sources are pretty hard to read.

In the mean time we could list the flag as being a flag used by Kurds in Syria, without stressing too strongly what it's official status is. This would help for people seeing the flag in articles and non understanding it's relation to Syria. Hopefully then in time better sources will come out in English that can clear this up. - MrPenguin20 (talk) 18:25, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm not completely sure who that flag represents. According to the only reliable source [12], it's a PKK affiliated flag. I don't feel comfortable saying much else since it would involve speculation. The PKK and its affiliates I believe have multiple flags which you can see by doing a google image search [13]. Also, to state that it is the flag of Syrian Kurdistan I think would be deceptive since that flag only began to appear in images once armed action began in the Kurdish areas. Currently, the strongest fighting force among the Syrian Kurds are PKK related fighters and that's why their affiliated flag I believe is beginning to appear. When there were only peaceful protests in the area, which large segments of the Syrian Kurdish population participated in, there were only flags with the sun being displayed [14]. However, it should be noted that in the NPR story the image does show people with red, yellow and green head bands. Without more reliable sources, it's going to be hard to figure who that flag represents and how to label it. The flag with the sun, however, from numerous earlier protest images indicates Syrian Kurds identify with it. Guest2625 (talk) 02:36, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah that Hurriyet source really makes it sound like it's a PYD party flag, and you're certainly right about a lot of these parties using lots of different flags. Since it's really probably our best source I agree we should go with it. Hopefully we'll get more sources in future to either corroborate it as a PYD flag or tell us its actual purpose, but for now I'll move the flag to the PYD page. MrPenguin20 (talk) 16:46, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Falsehoods

User Guest2625 has repeatedly added to the article that the areas where Kurds live in are "Kurdish areas". They are not. These claims are not in any way following real history and instead going by Kurdish narrative propaganda that is not following real history or factual events. Those ares has never in history "been Kurdish" or been part of any made up name "Syrian Kurdistan" or "Kurdistan". --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 12:49, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, for pointing out the poor wording. I changed it to inhabited to reflect the wording of the BBC report. Guest2625 (talk) 13:18, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

No kidding. Guest2625 - if you want to make a point, you must be able to complete a thought. Let me clear it up for you. Kurds do exist. FACT. Kurds do exist in Syria, Turkey, Iraq. FACT. Kurds had a history of making all 3 of those countries what they are. FACT. Kurds have been persecuted by the very countries they helped defend. FACT. The Kurds deserve a piece of this world to call their own, a piece of land that is theirs and no other country can claim. They have been screwed by every country they have trusted, including America, and they deserve a small piece of land to call their own. The Kurds are deserving of support from America after the screwing they got from us during the Trump withdrawl.

I think it's funny when 300 Russian troops with 300 Syrian fighters attacked a station of 500 Marines in Syria, almost no news organizations even reported it. Odd? Those 500 Marines were there to support Kurdish troops in the north of Syria. When attacked, the Marines killed every Russian and Syrian attacker. No Americans were killed. There were a few minor injuries.

Russia was so shocked by how badly their troops performed; they deny it ever happened. A week later Trump pulled all US troops out of Syria and abandoned our Kurdish allies.

Are the Kurds a perfect people? I'm gonna say no, Are American's a perfect people? I'm gonna say no. All cultures, all peoples - have made mistakes. But as getting screwed, the Kurds have to get the award for trusting people who screw u in the ass.

I think the major assholes (Syria, Turkey, Iraq) can kick in a bit of land and finally give the Kurds a homeland. Only fair since each country used them when it benefited them, then persecuted them once they were no longer useful.

Requested move for page 'Syrian Kurdistan' to 'Rojava', 18 January 2015

Hi!

I'm inviting editors to participate in the discussion to move the article 'Syrian Kurdistan' to 'Rojava'. My rationale is: This article is about a region governed by the PYD, which calls the area Rojava. Foreign press also uses this term, for example [15] (BBC) [16] (Guardian) [17] (Independent) [18] (VICE). Other examples on Wikipedia such as Kosovo (not South Serbia), Catalonia (not Catalonian Spain) or Scotland (not Scottish United Kingdom) indicate this article should be called Rojava as per convention. Thanks Genjix (talk) 19:04, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Deleted statement related to the Assyrians.

This statement was deleted: Kurds were responsible for most of the atrocities against Assyrians, and Kurdish expansion happened at the expense of Assyrians.

First of all, this statement is against WP:NEUTRAL, this is because Kurdish expansion happened at the expense is absolutely not neutral and not confirmed by the source which were added (The second source is dead). Also, the first source is not reliable source, read the Assyrian Genocide article, there is reliable sources and the article with its content is against the claim that Kurds were responsible... According to the Assyrian genocide article and its sources, the Kurds were not responsible for most of the atrocities. Ferakp (talk) 18:00, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Enough Ferakp !!!! this has gone too far. You dont decide what is reliable. You dont just insert a link tho the reliable wiki pegae, you should tell exactly why its not reliable and refer to the paragraph that support your claim from the reliable page. Second, read the source 1. In urmia some Persian tribes attacked the assyrians but the source is very clear that the majority of actions were committed by kurds and ottomans. Stop trying to make other people share this Genocidal burden.

As for Amuda, how the hell are the kurdish tribes led by said Agha Dakkuri are Arab nationalists and why his name was deleted ? it is restored now. Those 500 who attacked Amuda had no Arabs with them--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 19:42, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

• • The statement does not have to be "neutral" only factual. The source is very reliable, much more reliable than other sources in the article. See a book review. You cannot claim other wikipedia articles as a reliable source. --92.106.112.233 (talk) 19:50, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

This is first time I am editing this article and you are saying enough? Blogspot is not a reliable source and that's it, whether you accept or not. Wikipedia is not an Arab encyclopedia, sorry to say this. The paragraph is related to Armenian and Assyrian genocide in the Upper Mesopotamia. Did Arabs, Circassians, Persians and Kurds participate? Yes, they did. So why you keep Kurds and remove Arabs? Clearly Cherry picking and nothing else. I will restore it. About the second one, they sided with Damascus, Arab nationalists as source clearly say. The Kurds didn't alone attack the Amude, also Arab tribes joined them. Whether it was lead by the Kurds is another thing.Ferakp (talk) 19:55, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Maybe cause you edit Rojava for breakfast I got confused. We had the discussion about Arabs in Rojava here.. Damn Arabs dont live where the genocide happened. Did Arabs, Circassians, Persians and Kurds participated ?? NO... the Majority were Kurds, the Hamydiey troops. ring a bill ? You wont restore a thing this time. Go bring a source that says there were arabs with saied Agha.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 19:58, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Please, stop. You are making me laughing. What are you talking about,Hamidiye (cavalry)? Are you serious? Have you ever read books related to the Armenian and Assyrian genocide? Arabs participated in the genocide, whether you accept it or not. The Arabs attacked them in Syria and thus they are also mentioned in the genocide. Just read the Assyrian genocide article and check sources. Keeping Kurds and removing Arabs, Circassians and Persians is nothing else than cherry picking, especially when there is sources to confirm this. Do you have any good reason why Arabs should not be mentioned? The role of Hamidiye Cavalry is just not even siginificant if you read the Armenian genocide books (Not Arab or Turkish books, only Western and Armenian publications).Ferakp (talk) 20:03, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Oh please dont laugh -_-

do you know the difference between ethnic cleansing and attacking for the sake of steeling ??? Hamidiye made the cleansing for Assyrians (Armenians were left for the turks) where no Arabs lives. read the former discussion you yourself had if your memory is so weak a here. Do you actually want to give the impression that Kurds share an equal amount of responsibility as Persians ?? Do you really think that an Arab mob aiming at refugees are the same as Kurdish militias actually ethnic cleansing Assyrians ???--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 20:08, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

The paragraph is related to both genocides. The holocaust victims were mainly killed in Poland, should we blame Polish people because there were no Germans? According to your logic, yes, but in reality, absolutely no. As I said, read the Assyrian genocide article and you will see that the Arabs and Circassians are mentioned. The Arabs killed a lot of Assyrians and it affected their immigration, which I see the main point of the paragraph in this article, otherwise why Armenian and Assyrians genocide are mentioned ? It doesn't matter did Arab stole them and did Kurds carry out ethnic cleansing or helped Turks in everything. The main point here is that the Turks (Ottomans) are main architectures like Nazis(Germans) in Holocaust and if you mention other people who helped them like the Kurds, then mention all of them. Otherwise, it is clearly cherry picking and WP:NPOV.

You have three choices here (I offer). The first choice is that you will remove the whole paragraph, the second choice is that you will mention all sides and the last choice is that you will edit paragraph so that you won't mention any people and let users to read their articles and learn themselves.Ferakp (talk) 20:21, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your generous offer. This isnt a bazaar !!! Now we will repeat our old discussion that we had months ago. The paragraph is mentioned to explain why did Assyrians appeared in Syrian Jazira. Every thing will remain the same but you can add that some arabs attacked the refugees who arrived in Syria although this had nothing to do with the migration caused by Kurds !! it isnt like the Kurds were acting as faithful servants and had no interest in the genocide :) start being faithful to the sources.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 20:25, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Do you any idea what happened in those genocides? Did you know that they were a lot of Arabs in Hamidiye cavalry and that many Assyrians were killed in Syria and this led them to fled further?Ferakp (talk) 20:29, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

fled further where -_- they settled in Jazira for god sake. see the Hamidiye article and take a look at the names of tribes. Im sure they are more familiar to you than to me since Im not an Arab and have no tribe. Please, its time for some sources about the Assyrians killed in Syria by Arabs. Just tell me tha name of one massacre or one village or one event and bring a source.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 20:32, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

The statement

• Kurds were responsible for most of the atrocities against Assyrians, and Kurdish expansion happened at the expense of Assyrians.

is confirmed by the source on page 199. The fact does not have to be "neutral", it has only to be sourced correctly. The publication itself is even much more scholarly than most of the other sources used in this article! See a book review. --92.106.112.233 (talk) 19:42, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Maybe @Attar-Aram syria:@LouisAragon:@GGT:@Shmayo: can comment too?

Read the Assyrian genocide article and its sources. Sources that are used there are clearly against your source and thus there is a conflict. If you read the talk page of the Assyrian genocide, you will realize that your source and two other sources that were used in this article are marked as unreliable. Also, what does source means with "..Kurdish expansion happened at the expense of Assyrians.."? If it is related to the Assyrian genocide then it does not belong to this article. This article is related to the Kurds in Syria generally.Ferakp (talk) 19:49, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Again, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid argument. Other wikipedia articles cannot be used as reliable sources! Please link to the discussion, or the argument. There is nothing unreliable with this source here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.106.112.233 (talk) 19:52, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Ok, I have checked again, the source says "Relations between the two main ethno-linguistic groups in northern Iraq, Assyrians and Kurds, are marked by a bitter history: Kurdish tribal chiefs in southeastern Turkey, northeastern Syria, and northwest Iran conducted regular raids against their Christian neighbors, raids that eventually turned into para-military assaults during WWI when Turkey conducted ethnic cleansing of its Christian population. Kurds were responsible for most of the atrocities committed against the Assyrians in particular, due to proximity and a long tradition of perceived Kurdish rights to pillage Assyrian Christians and carry away women and goods."

So the source is not only about Syria, so much is correct, and much of the rest of the article focuses on Iraq. Your other arguments are wrong, but it is correct that the source has more to do with Iraq. --92.106.112.233 (talk) 20:16, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

As I said above, the main problem of your source is that your source is not a reliable source. Not because it is full of crap, it is because newest sources are against your source. If your source says "A said B" and newest source says "A said E", then there is a conflict and when I told you to read the Assyrian Genocide article, I wanted to you know that they have other sources, not your source. This means that they either saw your source as unreliable or they have some sources which show that your source is not actually reliable. Ferakp (talk) 00:23, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

How many times do I have to repeat the same thing to you? The other article Assyrian Genocide is utterly irrelevant, you cannot claim other wikipedia articles as reliable sources! And newer sources does not mean better, there are many other variables that come into play than just the publication year. The older source could be more detailed, more scholarly... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.106.112.233 (talk) 08:35, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

References

As-Safir

Following statements were removed:

Kurdish tribes attacked and sacked Assyrian and Armenian villages in Albaq District immdeiately to the north of Hakkari mountains, killing large numbers of villagers. Syriacs began to immigrate from Syria after the Amuda massacre of August 9, 1937. This massacre, carried out by the Kurd Saeed Agha, emptied the city of its Syriac population, and the town became completely Kurdish.

In 1941, the Assyrian community of al-Malikiyah was subjected to a vicious assault. Even though the assault failed, Assyrians were terrorized and left in large numbers, and the immigration of Kurds from Turkey to the area have resulted in a Kurdish majority in Amuda, al-Malikiyah, and al-Darbasiyah.

Problems and reasons why they were removed:
1. As-Safir newspapers articles are not reliable, per WP:REALIABLE. 2. Blogspot is used as as sources, it is not a reliable source, per WP:REALIABLE. 3. Kurdish tribes attacked and sacked Assyrian... has nothing to do with the article and its content. Adding attacks on specific people to another people is not a good idea, I believe German, Turkish, Arab articles will be full of those details if we go with such logic. Also, it is not related to even another paragraph. Reasons why they were deleted were because of WP:FAKE, WP:REALIABLE, Cherry picking, WP:NPOV and WP:ORIGINAL.Ferakp (talk) 18:23, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

• Why is As-Safir not reliable? It is the leading newspaper in Lebanon. If it was a Western newspaper, we would call it reliable. This is racist against Lebanese. Secondly, the article is also in the book referenced on the website. And the article is only copied to the website "blogspot", but the real source is As Safir and/or the book.
• The history of Kurds in Syria is very related to this article, if you like or not. --92.106.112.233 (talk) 22:16, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

As-Safir is biased, check its ideology, pan-Arabism. That tell all about the newspaper.

Blogspot is not a reliable source, whether you have another book added to the blog or article copied to it. You need to find a original source, check is it realible or not and then you can add it to the article.Ferakp (talk) 01:17, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

And what is the issue with this?: Kurdish tribes attacked and sacked Assyrian and Armenian villages in Albaq District immdeiately to the north of Hakkari mountains, killing large numbers of villagers.

The quote is factual and sourced to page 19f. of the book. --92.106.112.233 (talk) 20:49, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

It doesn't say so, it is clearly cherry picking. However, I read the source and you can add this statement:

During the great war, Kurdish tribes attacked and sacked and villages in Albaq District immediately to the north of Hakkari mountains. According to lieutenant Ronald Sempill Stafford, a large numbers of Assyrians and Armenians were killed. Ferakp (talk) 01:17, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

References

Balance discussion in "Human rights in Rojava"

Dear editors interested in the topic, there is a ongoing discussion on balance and deletion of content in the Human rights in Rojava article. It would be appreciated if some of you would be willing to contribute to solving issues, concerning deletions of material in the article as well as not least in the talk page discussion. -- 2A1ZA (talk) 15:21, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Abandoned by government

The claim that it has been abandoned by the government is a serious claim that need several reliable sources. The government had abandoned only a few towns and cities but never completely abandoned them as it is still there. The vast majority of Rojava territory has been captured from ISIS with the support of coalition.Ferakp (talk) 18:51, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Not relevant sections

This article is about the Kurds in Syria, not Rojava or Northern Syria. There were too much information which weren't relevant at all. They were related to the demographics of some cities and towns. Also, some sections had too much details that didn't really help the article at all.Ferakp (talk) 08:38, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

It seems that anything related to atrocities committed by Kurds is irrelevant to you, while atrocities committed against them is so relevant. Please do not arbitrary delete information that were discussed before then demand others to use the talk page. It goes the other way around: first you get a consensus, then you make your edits.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 09:07, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

If that was my point, I'd have added Kurdish sources where they tell their own stories about mentioned incidents in this article where Kurds are doomed to be "responsible" by Arab nationalists. How burning village and similar area-related history/information have to do with the Kurds in Syria? Check other similar articles, they haven't written similar incidents. Ferakp (talk) 14:53, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

None of the sources is made by "Arab nationalists". Just like the Baasthist atrocities have something to do with the Kurds, what happened in Amuda have something to do with the Kurds in Syria. 1- it helped them expand and made the town Kurdish. 2- It is part of their history in Syria, their political history to be precise. This paragraph you are trying to delete is not different from paragraphs listing the discrimination against Kurds (just in reverse) and hiding it have only one purpose: whit washing. This paragraph was also discussed before, and it cant be deleted like this.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 15:06, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Yep, whenever I try to neutralize article it's "whiteashing". I got your feedback. There is difference between "Baathists" and "Kurds".Ferakp (talk) 17:14, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Kurds in Syria. 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/20071018024743/http://modersmal.skolutveckling.se/nordkurdiska/kurdmap/pages/Geographic Distribution of Kurdish and other Iranic Languages_jpg_gif.htm to http://modersmal.skolutveckling.se/nordkurdiska/kurdmap/pages/Geographic Distribution of Kurdish and other Iranic Languages_jpg_gif.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120723012730/http://www.rudaw.net/english/news/syria/4964.html to http://www.rudaw.net/english/news/syria/4964.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120801020239/http://www.rudaw.net/english/news/syria/5010.html to http://www.rudaw.net/english/news/syria/5010.html
• Added archive http://webarchive.loc.gov/all/20080914200349/http://voanews.com/english/archive/2005-09/2005-09-02-voa15.cfm?CFID=46444555&CFTOKEN=26238763 to http://voanews.com/english/archive/2005-09/2005-09-02-voa15.cfm?CFID=46444555&CFTOKEN=26238763

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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) 23:51, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

No ethnic galleries

As stated at WP:NOETHNICGALLERIES, Articles about ethnic groups or similarly large human populations should not be illustrated by a photomontage or gallery of images of group members. Strawberry4Ever (talk) 12:28, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Kurds in Syria. 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/20160304001038/http://www.kurdipedia.org/books/74488.pdf to http://www.kurdipedia.org/books/74488.PDF
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304001038/http://www.kurdipedia.org/books/74488.pdf to http://www.kurdipedia.org/books/74488.PDF
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120321195743/http://www.mesop.de/2010/12/14/memorandum-of-kurds-in-syria/ to http://www.mesop.de/2010/12/14/memorandum-of-kurds-in-syria/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070310231931/http://www.amnestyusa.org/regions/middleeast/document.do?id=80256DD400782B8480256F63006435DB to http://www.amnestyusa.org/regions/middleeast/document.do?id=80256DD400782B8480256F63006435DB
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.rudaw.net/english/news/syria/4003.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111005094231/http://sana.sy/eng/21/2011/04/08/pr-340560.htm to http://sana.sy/eng/21/2011/04/08/pr-340560.htm

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) 13:19, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Rojava being traditional, and Western Kurdistan

It was claimed that removing the word "traditional" as a description for the name Rojava is original research. Also, it was claimed that mentioning that Kurdish nationalists consider the Kurdish inhabited regions of Syria part of Kurdistan is original research. Therefore, I ask for reliable academic sources attesting: 1- the usage of the name Rojava since a period long enough for it to be considered traditional (I know that it came to use after the war, so 7 years ago, hardly long enough for it to be traditional) 2- A source listing those regions as part of proper Kurdistan according to non Kurdish official authorities or renowned historians.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 16:21, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

I think by 'traditional' the editor who added the word meant that 'Rojava' was used by the local Kurds way before the war (thus 'traditionally'). I've added a source for that now. --Ahmedo Semsurî (talk) 18:03, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

if they used the name way before, then a reliable source should be provided. Anyway, your last edit is appropriate (not the one before it where u reverted me to restore a status quo that was based on sensetional claims lacking any sources).--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 18:11, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Distribution

Amr, you seem to be labouring under a misapprehension. The reference doesn't say that 40% of the population of Aleppo Governorate are Kurds, rather that 40% of Syrian Kurds live there. Konli17 (talk) 19:13, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

May I ask why do you insist on editing highly contested pages without using the talk page first? You do that in several places, leaving the summary: tidy, and NPOV, or revert POV.... yet most editors who edit those articles are here to push a POV, you included (and I excluded since Im not editing those articles). Naturally, edit wars then take place. It is in the editing policies that you seek a consensus on the talk page if you know you are inserting claims that will be contested, and I really urge you to do this. As for your latest edit: the language you used indicate that you mean 40% of Aleppo is Kurdish inhabited, and its not hard to clarify what you mean by adjusting the wording. Second, I have a problem with you writing that Kurds live in the geo-cultural region of Syrian Kurdistan. This is obviously what you and many Kurds believe in, but thats up for debate. I would be okay if you write that Kurds live in a geo-cultural region in North Syria designated by many of them as Syrian Kurdistan.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 11:00, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

That's quite unfair Attar, for a number of reasons. Firstly, I initiated this discussion. Secondly, it's quite clear to me that the 40% figure refers to Afrin's 30% plus Aleppo city's 10%; if you believe this could be made clearer, you could have edited the text instead of blanking it. Thirdly, the version of the article you reverted to still describes a geocultural region, as this is what it said before I edited it. Konli17 (talk) 15:22, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

I wouldn’t say its unfair. The pages you are interested in are contested, and you and Amr revert each other several times a day. Yet you sometimes change an article fundamentally without seeking consensus (not only you of course: most of the editors in the Syrian Kurds circus are doing it, and by circus I mean the situation of the articles here which constantly under edit wars, not the Syrian Kurds themselves). It would be easier for everyone to have a consensus. No one like to see that red notification saying that your edit was reverted (I know I hate it, and I dont edit those article to keep myself out of this). I edited the article and restored your edits with modification (clarified that its 40% of the Kurdish population and not of Aleppo's population, and added that Syrian Kurdistan is a designation accepted by many Kurds, not universal). If you dont think this is good, then revert, and then Amr will revert you, then you will revert him, and the show will go on (sadly). Btw, you are using this source: sahipkiran.org- Does it satisfy the rules for reliable sources of News Organization mentioned here?--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 23:05, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

OK, I agree with a lot of what you say. I came across the source when it was referenced in a book, The Kurds of Northern Syria by Wladimir van Wilgenburg and Harriet Allsop. I'm quite happy with your effort to find a middle ground; that's been pretty rare in my recent experience, so thank you. I've just edited the lede, please let me know what you think. Konli17 (talk) 00:43, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Alright for the source. It wouldnt be hard for all of us to reach a middle ground, we just need to be reasonable, which I understand can be hard when the topic is as sensitive as identity, ethnicity, and land. Cheers.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 11:17, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

POV-pushing

I'm at somewhat of a loss, as an edit of mine has been reverted seemingly because it included the sentence "Many Kurds seek political autonomy for what they regard as Western Kurdistan". This is being described as POV-pushing. Can anyone tell me what POV they believe this sentence pushes? Konli17 (talk) 20:23, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Sanctions violation

Amr, you've reverted more than once on this page today, violating the sanctions in place over Syrian war-related articles. Best revert back before you attract the attention of anyone inclined to apply those sanctions. Engage here instead. Konli17 (talk) 18:34, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Sourced material/edit summaries

Amr, I've no objection to a discussion of the different estimates of Kurdistan's Syrian population, but the lede isn't the place for that. Also, please read WP:VANDALISM and stop referring to my edits as such. Konli17 (talk) 20:03, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

I am open to working with you on editing the lede. However, on top of your previous problematic edits, your last edit here is changing facts. For example, replacing "many" by "some", removing "no more than" before the 10% number and "at most" before the number of villages, and replacing "Syria" by "Jazira" and "encouraging" by "allowing". All these "minor" edits change the meaning and are considered OR or faking the source content. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 20:23, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Those changes were necessary because of WP:POINT. Was there migration from Northern Kurdistan to parts of Western Kurdistan apart from the Jazira in the 1920s and 30s? The text refers only to the Jazira. Konli17 (talk) 20:39, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Stop saying western Kurdistan, this only exists in your imagination. The content you have changed uses Syria and Turkey. Anything else is fake

or being made up by you,and the nature of your edits shows your POV spirit and motivation. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 23:01, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

You're quite wrong, about pretty much everything. Will you answer my question? Konli17 (talk) 23:21, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

YES, there WAS kurdish immigration to other parts of Syria. In the 1930s Kurdish Alevis fled the persecution of the Turkish Army during the Dersim Massacre, settled in Mabeta. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 04:30, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

I can't access that. Does it give any idea about numbers? Konli17 (talk) 11:58, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

References

Incorrect information

The CIA map is incorrect. The Kurdish population is not represented well for example in Syria. Here for one example: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tell_Hamis You can clearly see that Kurds do not make up majority in all of this region, its actually about half. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:EmilePersaud 02:23, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Kurdish languages map.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:53, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Copy editing badly needed

Extremely badly written 5.173.41.41 (talk) 00:48, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

One sentence is falsely presented

The second sentence in the lede reads: "A portion of Syrian Kurds are originally Turkish Kurds who have crossed the border during different events in the 20th century.<ref name="Storm">". This is incorrect, since the Storm states the following (on P475): "The majority of the Kurds in Syria are originally Turkish Kurds, who left Turkey in the 1920s in order to escape the harsh repression of the Kurds in that country." So, changing "The majority" to "A portion" is at least misleading. The page is protected so I was not able to modify it myself. New Aramean (talk) 21:45, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Fixed the inaccuracy. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 00:23, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Questioning Unsupported Claim about Syrian Kurdish Origins

Hello all,

I'd like to raise a concern regarding a statement in the article asserting that "The majority of Syrian Kurds are originally Turkish Kurds who have crossed the border during different events in the 20th century." This claim, solely supported by a single, weak source with limited coverage, warrants a closer look.

The credibility of a claim of this nature hinges on robust evidence. The current claim is backed by a solitary source that appears to be inadequately substantiated. A single, unsupported source does not adequately establish a generalization about the origins of Syrian Kurds. (And there has been issues with this bit of text before, it is quite a serious claim.)

Furthermore, it's vital to recognize that the provided source appears to be confined to a single page. Attempting to encapsulate the complex origins of a significant population within a single page lacks the depth required to provide a well-rounded understanding. For such a significant claim, it is imperative that we gather a diverse array of well-established sources. This includes consulting in-depth studies and scholarly works that delve into the complexities of Kurdish migration and settlement.

In light of these considerations, I propose a reevaluation of the claim in the article. A more comprehensive and well-supported analysis of Syrian Kurdish origins would greatly enhance the accuracy and depth of the information we present. Krqftan (talk) 05:03, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

The sentence has a reliable source, so it is not unsupported.--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 05:34, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

It's not good enough. I viewed the book. A singular page with just some sentances about this topic. It's not enough to back up this serious claim. Many might've crossed the border, but definitely not "a majority". This undermines the significance of the then Syrian Kurds. You can not possibly think this. If the claim is deemed true, then provide with more sources. Krqftan (talk) 05:48, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Are you saying that the sentence is not supported by the source? Can you ad the text from the book here? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 06:14, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

@Supreme Deliciousness: I think he meant that there is only one source supporting the sentence, especially with the lack of studies supporting that claim. So i suggest to add "According to Youssef M. Choueiri, The majority of Syrian Kurds are originally Turkish Kurds who have crossed the border during different events in the 20th century."Sulaimanl (talk) 18:06, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

@Supreme Deliciousness This claim is clearly not true and should be corrected. Many Syrian Kurds are from Turkish Kurdistan, but there is no study to determine how many are from Turkey to confirm if they form the majority 185.187.78.36 (talk) 17:38, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

The only thing that matters is what reliable source say. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 08:11, 19 September 2024 (UTC)