" 

  
 == Not justified editings! == 

 So as earlier I said that I am neutral editor then I want ask why the cities Al Hirak and Al Zabadani which earlier was marked as contested but today have been marked under control of army. If there is no data from reliable sources that those cities under control of army they should again be marked as disputed.    
 : I have changed both cities to contested. No source for the changes were provided.   
 Al Zabadani is the biggest rebel stronghold in Al Qalamun. There are dozens of pictures posted only this year from opposition activists from inside the city. Rebels are clashing west of the city with SAA forces where SOHR reported that they managed to destroy 1 tank and kill dozens of Government foces. The city is controled by rebels and SOHR and other channels are reporting heavy airstrikes and barel bombardment on the city every few days.    
 :""they managed to destroy 1 tank and kill dozens of Government forces"" Right, sure they did, but the SAA just uses its 3D printer to make more fighters. Zabadani is not fully rebel controlled, there is a strong SAA presence inside the city, that is how the rebels keep attacking checkpoints in the city, so it should go back to contested.    
 :: Agreed SOHR did mention before attacks on CP's inside the city. Zabadani back to contested since Bloudan is so close and somewhat part of it and is entirely gov-held.    
 I did Google News checks on both of these locations. Where is this information coming from that there is ongoing fighting at either of these locations? Isn't SOHR just a single guy in the UK?    
 : Do you have a specific article/statement saying that the areas are government held? If not, then we cannot change it. As for SOHR, you are completely right, it is one guy in the UK claiming to receive phone calls from people in Syria. He is, however, considered a reliable source with corroboration, and there are other sources confirming fighting in Zabadani such as Al-Masdar news.    
 ::OK, where can I find the links to Al-Masdar news? I went to the relevant Wikipedia articles and looked at the entries in the big table, but found nothing like this.    
 ::: Sure, here is the link describing fighting in Zabadani as of January 4 of this year: http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/rif-dimashq-al-nusra-front-forced-withdraw-felita/    
 ::::Thanks, this helps me understand where the info is coming from    

 ::A critical reading of that lamasdarnews article  
 ::1) It generally just echos regime news reports, as it does in this case, so it must be considered pro-regime. 
 ::2) Al-Zabadani town is the main population centre of al-Zabadani district.  Bloudan is a small suburb of the town in the same district, at a somewhat higher altitude in the mountains.  The news report referred to a regime presence in the district, which we already acknowledge in calling Bloudan regime controlled. 
 ::3) Al-Zabadani town was under truce several times in the past, truces broken by regime bombardment.  As far as I know, the regime has not been able to make significant (if any) inroads into the town, which is in a high mountain valley.  The regime gained control of the much smaller Bloudan when the rebels there surrendered.  (If I remember correctly, it was reported because of a food and ammunition shortage.)  The regime must be supplying Bloudan by helicopter, since the only land route out is by al-Zabadani town. 
 ::4) Around al-Zabadani town there are regime checkpoints, which would be in the al-Zabadani district. 
 ::5) This almasdarnews report is from 2 weeks ago.  There have been regime bombardments on al-Zabadani reported most weeks in the last few years, even when it was under formal truce. 
 ::6) So I would say that al-Zabadani is most probably still besieged as it was when the last truce was broken, and not contested.  It is highly unlikely regime controlled.  Considering that the tables on the main page are not being maintained, it is probably a little difficult to verify this.  ([[User talk:An