Template talk:Campaignbox Spillover of the Syrian Civil War

Israeli airstrikes

The edits to this section to remove fairly fundamental descriptive words ('israel', 'airstrike') are difficult to understand. It's a list of Israeli airstrikes, in the template for foreign involvement in syria, the israel section, about airstrikes, because that's the articled isreali involvement. It's not complicated. 78.144.20.105 (talk) 12:33, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Whether Israeli or not, those alleged events (half of which are also claimed by various rebels) are not spillovers and hence do not belong to this campaignbox.GreyShark (dibra) 17:49, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Naming of this box

@EkoGraf: Your behaviour here has some bad faith pattern - you are changing the article name, its content and title - just the way you like with no appreciation of others' efforts to make Wikipedia better. I'm afraid this is a WP:OWN behaviour, thus please refrain from edit-warring with unilateral changes like you have done earlier. Come on - let's find a solution here to satisfy us both. What do you say?GreyShark (dibra) 17:53, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

It's not the way I like it. Its simply how we have used this section since the start of the war four years ago. This section was always dedicated to cross-border and international incidents related to the conflict. EkoGraf (talk) 20:02, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Please, explain those edits [1],[2],[3]. I find it hard to deal with the fact that such a great editor like you is falling into this inappropriateness. If you started an article named foreign involvement, you cannot change topic and title without discussion. This is a typical WP:OWN.GreyShark (dibra) 21:17, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Its not a matter of inappropriateness. At the time, I honestly didn't even think the title of the template mattered since the section in the main war campaignbox it replaced was always dedicated to cross-border and international incidents related to the conflict. And also since at the top it said Syrian War spillover and international incidents like it did before in the said section when there was only the main Syrian war campaignbox. If you want I can change the title of the box/template to the full title of Spillover and international incidents of the Syrian Civil War (although I think its too long). PS I have no objections to the Foreign involvement box you created and added to the main war box and I think its great. EkoGraf (talk) 22:46, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply and the WP:GF; i really appreciate it. I think that with the Syrian conflict becoming so widespread and internationally affecting, it is logical to relate separately to foreign involvement and spillover (which we agree to be separate topics). I've recently taken an initiative to make some order in the Foreign involvement in the Syrian Civil War article and in the Spillover of the Syrian Civil War in order to reduce overlapping, effectively concentrating all border incidents in the "spillover" article, while keeping foreign involvement topics like rebel/gov-t support and foreign airstrikes in the "foreign involvement" article. Do you agree with such an order?GreyShark (dibra) 13:53, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

I did not see your message at the talk page here because you yourself did not respond to my message for a week and I simply stopped checking the talk page. I could compromise for the moving of the Israeli air-strikes and US operation to the foreign involvement box and for us to only leave any border incidents in this box. However, that means for us to leave the Turkish air-strike and Mazraat Amal incident because they both happened on the border. EkoGraf (talk) 14:33, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Going back to the original problem - please stop changing the heading title of the box! it should correspond to the title of the article, otherwise it creates troubles and misunderstandings. If you want to change one of those please make a suggestion and let's discuss, otherwise it's a a mess.GreyShark (dibra) 06:07, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

@Greyshark09: I already told you several times. This box was made to reflect the section of the original campaignbox for the war which covered all border incidents. I really do not get why you are making such a big deal over the name of the template. But in any case, at this point, I don't really care about the name anymore. However, with your last revert, you did not just change the title, you removed two border incidents without any explanation. I am not going to change the title again, but I am going to reinsert the two incidents which are clearly border incidents. I think I have already compromised a lot on this issue (removal of Israeli strikes and US operation and not touching the title) and have been, and still trying to be, understanding. And your assertion that I am making changes without discussing is untrue because I have been discussing this issue on this talk page for more than a month now. EkoGraf (talk) 07:06, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Removal of Hezbollah involvement from campaignbox

@EkoGraf: the removal of Hezbollah (one of the most involved foreign parties in the Syrian Civil War) from the campaignbox may be interpreted as a pure WP:POV act. Deliberately not mentioning Hezbollah is basically undermining the conventions of specifying belligerents at template:Syrian Civil War infobox. Please readd Hezbollah at once.GreyShark (dibra) 17:52, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

@Greyshark09: Huh??? I really don't understand what you are talking about? I'm not sure even of what box you are talking about? Syrian Civil War infobox has Hezbollah as a belligerent in it (hasn't been removed). This box (of this talk page) never had Hezbollah. If you are referring to the campaignbox on Foreign involvement that you created that's another matter. I removed the Hezbollah involvement link because it was improperly placed. It was placed in such a way that all of the sub-articles (individual incidents) being exclusively Israeli air-strikes against both Hezbollah and non-Hezbollah (SAA) targets. So please refrain from accusing me of a POV act, otherwise I could say that omitting the fact all of those incidents were Israeli air-strikes (Israeli involvement) was a POV act. Now, back to the matter at hand. If you are referring to THAT box, than I will re-add the Hezbollah involvement link (didn't think it would bother you so much) but the overhead for all of those air-strikes being Israeli air-strikes stays. I think that's fair. Besides, it was how we arranged it in the first place in the original civil war campaignbox with consensus from other editors years ago. EkoGraf (talk) 23:31, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 July 2020

Please add a link labelled "Israeli involvement" using this: Israeli involvement in the Syrian Civil War. Considering the multitude of Israeli strikes in the country during the war, I believe Israel deserves at least a mention. 2601:85:C101:BA30:C17F:3BBF:929F:6EFA (talk) 18:46, 10 July 2020 (UTC) 2601:85:C101:BA30:C17F:3BBF:929F:6EFA (talk) 18:46, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

 Additional information needed Please tell where you would like to see that link. Also, I don't think that would be appropriate. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 20:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Wrong talkpage, whoops. Look at the foreign involvement part for the syrian civil war. I'll post a request there. 2601:85:C101:BA30:C17F:3BBF:929F:6EFA (talk) 20:27, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Wait, this is the right page. I mean this campaignbox page :Template:Campaignbox Foreign involvement in the Syrian Civil War. I request that the Israeli involvement in the Syrian Civil War article be put into this campaignbox, just as there is Iranian involvement in the Syrian Civil War and American-led intervention in the Syrian Civil War. That is totally appropriate, there are no POV issues about this. 2601:85:C101:BA30:C17F:3BBF:929F:6EFA (talk) 20:34, 10 July 2020 (UTC)