The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep, with a distinct possibility of a merge. A merge discussion can continue on an article talk page. (Non-administrator closure.) Northamerica1000(talk) 09:30, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Syriac Military Council

Syriac Military Council (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I did a google search and found almost no sources; the results that do exist are spin-offs from the wikipedia page. It also does not meet wp:notability. Pass a Method talk 01:51, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Syria-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:05, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:05, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:05, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep mostly on an WP:IAR basis. This organisation does exist and is currently active, with a growing fighting contingent large enough to control territory. That it is sparsely mentioned in mainstream media is probably more indicative of the generally abysmal news coverage of this part of Syria, combined with the group's own information security. Better sources for this group will absolutely emerge in the near future, I have no doubt, and it'd be best to keep this around rather than recreate it. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 16:24, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge I added this to clarify my position. Similar content already exists on the "Assyrian people" page at the end of the history section. I don't see why (if any new sources pop up) content cannot be added to that page rather than have a seperate article. there are literally hundreds of rebel groups in the Syrian war. there are scores/dozens with much more memebers than the Syriac Military Council. if we set a precedent and allow this to stay as a stand-alone page, then we'll have to do the same with many more articles - a nasty slippery slope we shouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole. If this is kept, then what about equally sized groups like Gamloon Warriors Brigades, Slaves of the Merciful Brigades, Murabiteen Brigades, Bedouin Brigades, Sunnah Supporters Brigades, Ahul ul Bayt Brigades, Martyrs of Atarib Brigades, Coastal Defense Brigades, Ain Jalout Brigades, Tawheed Supporters Platoons, Mujahideen Platoons etc? This seems like promotion/favouratism to me. Pass a Method talk 16:47, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Saying we should shunt this into Assyrian people makes as much sense as saying that we should include information on those other groups in Arab people. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 22:47, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The Syriac Military Council is not just 10 troops, they are fighting along the YPG against al-Qaida Terrorists in Northeastern Syria. They have have several battalions.

https://www.facebook.com/SYRIACMILITARYCOUNCIL?ref=ts&fref=ts http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wW4un8kx1ZM Elvis214 (talk) 21:21, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep It seems to be a growing force and quite frankly (WP:SNOW), there are many more less important in this conflict who have their own wikipage. They are also part of ongoing YPG offensive in Tal Hamis as reported by pro-PKK Qandil Post [1] so I do not know how they do not meet notability criteria. They are established in Syriac areas of Hasakah province, they take part in combat and policing of their community. I don´t really see why not have them. EllsworthSK (talk) 13:13, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment from what I understand from my personal contacts in Syria that group seem to be nothing than more than Facebook activism. They do have a few people with guns on the ground but so do tens of groups in Qamishli, I'm not sure whether they pass WP:ORG.--Kathovo talk 17:09, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kathovo, if you would know the Dawronoye movement you would know that this group is not just facebook activism. The facebook page has been made a few weeks ago, but this group is fighting on the front against al-qaida terrorists, and every day more and more are joining the SMC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHjLsXhtpvA Your cntacts in Syria are im sure ADO loyalists which spread fake propaganda against the Dawronoye. But the people are tired of party and organisations who only speak and do nothing. Elvis214 (talk) 23:08, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That could be the case. It might also be that they are not active in Qamishli where my informants live. Anyway, this is all speculation and that's why I couldn't give my opinion here.--Kathovo talk 14:42, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, I don't think they have much of a presence in Qamishli city; as far as I am aware, the only major Assyrian/Syriac group there is a splinter branch of the Sutoro which the Syriac Union Party has apparently disowned due to perceived infiltration by the government. The MFS operates alongside the YPG in Assyrian/Syriac areas around Qahtaniyah, Malikiyah, and Tal Ma'ruf, and the YPG reportedly turns over security and administration of Assyrian/Syriac villages to MFS and Sutoro units once the frontline shifts far enough away. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 22:55, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wouldn't necessarily have to be merged. The statement issued by the MFS as well as other sources suggests that the MFS will retain its organisational structures even within the YPG. Just as we have United States Army as well as United States Army Central, we can still have a separate article for this unit as a distinct subdivision of the YPG. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 13:43, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The Syriac Military Council did not "joined" the YPG, but began a cooperation with it. It is a wrong translation, the SMC did not "joined" the YPG, the SMC joined the FIGHT of the YPG against al-Qaida and allies in Northeastern Syria. The SMC is not under the command or under the control of the YPG. The SMC is autonomous and independent.Elvis214 (talk) 19:19, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't know about that. After the unveiling of the interim constitution for Rojava, the MFS issued a press release which strongly suggests that they have become operationally part of the YPG. At this point it seems as though it will be treated as a distinct branch which will be specifically responsible for Syriac matters—kind of like the British Army has the Scottish Division or the Brigade of Gurkhas, though MFS will probably retain more autonomy. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 13:43, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Allikas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Syriac_Military_Council
No tags for this post.