Talk:Syria

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 August 2026

change the section of culture in the media category where it says that most media is state owned by the military intelligence directorate to the state of who owns the media currently since the directorate has been dissolved under the fall of the Assad family ~2026-42997-89 (talk) 07:43, 4 August 2026 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please detail the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Mathglot (talk) 19:12, 4 August 2026 (UTC)

Fixed Hi there! I understood your request well enough, and I wrote a paragraph about the new situation both here and in Media in Syria. Lova Falk (talk) 08:22, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

RFC: Kurdish on the Infobox (second round)

I'm starting a second RfC on this issue because the second discussion is going chaotic and isn't solving anything; let alone that it has not received a reply since five days ago. This RfC is a partial continuation of the first RfC that received no consensus between options A and D (now 1 and 2 respectively) that was conducted between 18 January and 18 March 2026.

Which one should be implemented?

Option 1 - Kurdish is displayed on both the top and the recognized national languages section of the infobox
Option 2 - Kurdish is displayed on the recognized national languages section of the infobox, but is not displayed on the top of the infobox.

Syrian Arab Republic اَلْجُمْهُورِيَّةُ ٱلْعَرَبِيَّةُ ٱلْسُوْرِيَّة (Arabic) al-Jumhūriyyah al-ʿArabiyyah as-Sūriyyah Komara Erebî ya Sûriyê (Kurdish) Option 1

Syrian Arab Republic اَلْجُمْهُورِيَّةُ ٱلْعَرَبِيَّةُ ٱلْسُوْرِيَّة (Arabic) al-Jumhūriyyah al-ʿArabiyyah as-Sūriyyah Option 2

FYI, see the most previous relevant discussion for more information. Anyone from the previous discussions are welcome to participate. ^NeoSyria\Freedoxm (talk · contribs) 13:40, 10 August 2026 (UTC)

Survey

• Option 1 as it reflects the current ground realities. NomanPK44 (talk) 16:14, 21 August 2026 (UTC)
• Option 1 for multiple reasons. Regarding it not being an "official language": Kurdish being a "national language" vs. "official language" is a minor detail as for as these kinds of decisions within Wikipedia are concerned. Official formalities are not the most important decision point for Wikipedia, what's is more important is Kurdish is the second most spoken language in the country and the language's association with the country is well established in reliable sources. Following the Iraq example, we should display how to say the country's name in its second most spoken language in the infobox. This detail is of sufficient interest to the Wikipedia readers to justify having it in the infobox. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 15:37, 22 August 2026 (UTC)
• Option 2. If Kurdish is already listed in the dedicated recognized national languages field, repeating it at the top of the infobox is unnecessary and gives it a prominence not implied by that status. The lead portion of the infobox should remain reserved for the principal nationwide/official designation, while recognized languages are better presented in their specifically designated field. Mr.Eslam (talk) 06:56, 25 August 2026 (UTC)
• Option 2. Kurdish is already appropriately represented in the infobox under the recognized national languages field. The question here is whether its country name should be given equal prominence as Arabic, which remains the sole official language.

MOS:INFOBOX is intended to summarize the most pertinent information about the subject, and giving it equal prominence with the Arabic name risks implying a status that the sources and the infobox's own categorization do not establish, causing WP:UNDUE. There is also no source that this name is used in general Syrian bureaucracy unlike Arabic. The comparison with Iraq isn't applicable, because Kurdish has official-language status there, whereas the situation in Syria is different (recognized national language). The reason it is listed on Iraq's infobox is not because it is the second most spoken language but has official status, e.g. compare to Pakistan where Urdu is a minority language. Claiming this is a minor detail that should be disregarded in exchange for something of interest does not align with WP:NPOV or any Wikipedia policy and twists facts per personal preference. If this distinction is a minor detail, then why should we pay attention to that status at all, and instead solely consider the role of Arabic, which is the mother tongue of 80 to 90% of Syria, which makes undue weight even more of a problem. Aintabli (talk) 01:11, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

Edit warring

Whoever is edit warring, please be careful. I think you undid some of my cite fixes, which take a bit of time to do correctly to ensure things are properly cited. ← Metallurgist (talk) 06:17, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

Note [b] should be removed

Description of suggested change: The note [b] on the infobox should be removed, as the article that is cited fails to prove the actual note itself. The article makes no mention of the Golan Heights, and the current Syrian government has not changed its stance in regards to its soverignity over the Golan Heights.

Chxeese (talk) 07:32, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

 Done NomanPK44 (talk) 16:10, 21 August 2026 (UTC)