Wikipedia

Talk:Prelude to the Russian invasion of Ukraine/Archive 2

< Talk:Prelude to the Russian invasion of Ukraine
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Community Tech bot in topic A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
Archive 1Archive 2

Merger discussion

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I have suggested a proposal to merge the section of 2021–2022_Russo-Ukrainian_crisis#Reactions into the article Reactions to the 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis, it is meaningless to create a new page spliting from the main article but the main article still exists repetitive information of the same topic. LVTW2 (talk) 05:47, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Hatnotes and similar articles

Latest comment: 2 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I disagree with Thrakkx's reversions (Special:Diff/1073860003 & Special:Diff/1073860372), as I think it's highly likely readers could be searching for any of these titles while trying to find the appropriate destination article (and therefore WP:RELATED, Tharkkx's rationale for the removal, wouldn't apply). I've restored the hatnote at Russo-Ukrainian War as I think it's a particularly clear case of where readers may be seeking the article on the current invasoin. I'd also support restoring the hatnote here, but would like to seek other editors' views. Jr8825 • Talk 02:28, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

I do not think you are interpreting WP:RELATED correctly. We only use hatnotes at the top of a page for articles with very similar titles (redirects included), not to account for the differences in language our readers may use when searching. Thinking about the Russo–Ukrainian War: if the 2022 invasion and the 2021–2022 crisis are that important to connect (and they are) we would be sure to link to them in the first paragraph (and we do). That is why these links do not belong in a hatnote at the top of the page. Thrakkx (talk) 02:38, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
@Jr8825: I'd also like to point out that another editor seems to agree with my reasoning and has manually undone your revert on Russo-Ukrainian War. Thrakkx (talk) 00:51, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Discussion on impact of the crisis on African and Indian immigrants in Ukraine.

Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Several reputable sources have mentioned that the Ukrainian officials have discriminated African and Indian students in Ukraine from a safe passage. The following news sources highlight these concerns in detail:

There are several more reports and videos that show these incidents are factual. I believe this must be added to the 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis/conflict entry. Distincta (talk) 20:43, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the heads-up. I think that this has to be added in the article of the war, instead of this one, which covers the lead-up to the war (i.e. up to 24 February). I suggest you to put your request in the discussion page of that article. P1221 (talk) 08:18, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Russian claims of nuclear armament

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

2/27/22 the russians have stated that they will be arming nukes[1] should we add this? Diepanzerwaffles (talk) 17:21, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Putin puts Russia's nuclear forces on alert as fighting in Ukraine continues". www.cbsnews.com. Retrieved 2022-03-01.

War

Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

This isnt a crisis its a war. You are being used by kremlin to spread their propaganda by not calling it an invasion 109.173.217.77 (talk) 20:45, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@109.173.217.77: You're looking at the wrong article. You want either Russo-Ukrainian War or 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. — Czello 20:52, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Crisis?

Latest comment: 2 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion

What would have to happen to call this conflict a war instead of a "crisis"? Matrek (talk) 17:15, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

@Matrek Then it won't fit the description of the events. A war is an intense armed conflict: this crisis is not. There are no formal territorial incursions by the Russian forces. PenangLion (talk) 17:18, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
Excuse me? There is no what? No Russian military incursion on Ukrainian territory? Or just "no formal"? What does that mean? Russian tanks and infantry around Kyiv and shelling civilian areas in the city are what, sightseeing trip? Matrek (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 17:43, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
I guess you have not realized that there are at least 28 articles covering the entire topic. Look at the infobox, look at the dates. PenangLion (talk) 12:40, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
@Matrek See the move request above. There is an article for both the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine and the overall Russian-Ukrainian War. I do agree, however, that a better, more neutral name is needed.Kehkou (talk) 22:29, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 24 February 2022

Latest comment: 2 years ago106 comments80 people in discussion
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Consensus could not be achieved to move this article to the proposed title. Some editors cited WP:CRYSTAL, some cited the fact that 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine had already been created to document the events post-24th February. Some editors put forth a proposal to move this to "Run-up/Leadup to the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine" instead and continue to add details about the invasion to the aforementioned article. However, the proposal failed to garner attention and as a result support. Anyway, the vast majority of arguments were made a week ago, and since then, the quickly changing circumstances have made the opinions presented then stale. It would be futile to ping every involved editor and ask them to reaffirm or to allow them to change their opinion after the events of the past week. As such, it's pointless to keep this request opened for any longer, and better to open up this space and let the community determine the future of this article as it sees fit. Regards, (closed by non-admin page mover) ---CX Zoom(he/him) (let's talk|contribs) 13:56, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis → 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian conflict – 'Conflict' more precisely describes the situation, being the type of crisis Kehkou (talk) 01:30, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

This is not a merger request! There will still be two separate articles, so "separation of articles" is not a valid argument here (and should not be counted toward consensus). I see now that maybe Leadup/Prelude to the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine is a much better name than "conflict" but I think it is too late to change that. We would have to hold a whole new discussion. This is not a response to any particular editor, but rather of the recent trends here. Kehkou (talk) 06:06, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

It's been war for Ukraine since 2014...I guess people don't remember. RGloucester — ☎ 03:10, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
They just hit Kharkiv with missiles.--Garmin21 (talk) 03:32, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
  • Support move to "2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine" Breaking: massive explosions just now in Kramatorsk. At least four. Very big. [1] And from two WaPo reporters: Russian President Vladimir Putin announced that Russia is undertaking a "special military operation" in Ukraine saying his goal is to demilitarize and denazify the country but not occupy it. [2] I’m hearing booms in Kharkiv. [3] XOR'easter (talk) 03:12, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
  • ALT1: support move to Leadup to the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine - The complementary/sub- article 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine already exists based on rough consensus by active editors for a split; some non-so-active contributors to the article want to wait a week for formal consensus on a split and one editor has hit the WP:3RR limit there. Better un-redirect that article if there is sufficient support rather than start a new article. Renaming this article to Leadup to the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine and doing some transfers of material would make sense in terms of WP:RS, theme and WP:SIZESPLIT. (The Kalanchak border post appears to have been overrun and the webcam went offline; not a WP:RS, though. Another non-WP:RS, Bryce Wilson, based in Kramatorsk, claims that "Kramatorsk has been attacked".) Boud (talk) 03:13, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
Casting WP:ASPERSIONS, and for what. That's fine. I spent years contributing to these articles, from the moment this nonsense started in 2014. I am trying to get people stop and think before they proceed, and to follow Wikipedia guidelines. But if you want to forge ahead and create a mess, that's your prerogative. Enjoy. RGloucester — ☎ 03:16, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
@RGloucester: My apology - I only meant to refer to this particular article. I don't have an overview of the older articles since 2014. Boud (talk) 03:24, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
Endorse ALT1 as alternate namespace if the final state of consensus warrants it. -Kehkou (talk) 10:21, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
But, if that were the case, the word we'd want is 'war', not the euphemism 'conflict'. All the more reason to wait. RGloucester — ☎ 03:38, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
  • Wait A conflict implies that there is fighting from both sides. Ukraine has not, to my knowledge, returned any artillery fire or made assaults on Russian garrisons in Donetsk or Luhansk. Mebigrouxboy (talk) 03:38, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine exists. Reuters. UN Security Council live. Boud (talk) 03:47, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
  • Comment As this article is about the buildup primarily, and the invasion began only in 2022. Should this article stay as the lead up and a seperate article be devoted to the actual war/invasion? Strong Oppose Clearly invasion article is devoted to the conflict and this is just the prelude events prior to 2/24. Yeoutie (talk) 03:51, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
There is a big organisational problem. We have Russo-Ukrainian War, this article, 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. There will need to be a major restructuring, but we are not in a position to do this now. RGloucester — ☎ 03:55, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
@RGloucester Personally I find it pretty conflicting. It will be likely merged upon a newer consensus like the example you stated earlier (Donbas). Hope everything goes smoothly with the articles. Cheers, PenangLion (talk) 04:04, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
  • Support Putin declare war... OspreyPL 03:54, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
  • Support: The U.N. Security Council's emergency security meeting is convening; France's representative called Russian's actions "war". Conflict is certainly warranted. Will likely be need to be adjusted as more information develops. Svenskbygderna (talk) 04:01, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose this article should continue to be described as a crisis and should not include events past the 24th of February. instead it should remain as a description of the events leading up to the subsequent invasion, like the July crisis was for WW1 IAmSeamonkey (talk) 04:09, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose wp:CRYSTAL applies; active combat has not started. Let's not jump the gun. 142.157.192.122 (talk) 04:23, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
Changed to Wait, as it appears that there are possibly signs of a conflict being reflected in RS, on both the russian, and the ukrainian sides, ie TASS, informburo ukrainy. 142.157.192.122 (talk) 05:05, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
Rather, along the lines of Lead-up to the Iraq War. For there is no history books with the set name for this series of events.Axxxion (talk) 05:08, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
I feel this idea could work as well, but uncertainties certainly hindered the decisions. PenangLion (talk) 05:30, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
Putin's removal from office would be a political solution, but anyways. GoodDay (talk) 16:19, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
Crisis has become conflict - I would now say Support or Merge. A normal peep (talk) 12:35, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
Yeah, and for events from 24.02.2022 onwards we have 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. The invasion isn't the scope of this article. Super Ψ Dro 09:59, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
This is not a merger request! There will still be two separate articles, so "separation of articles" is not a valid argument here (and should not be counted toward consensus). I see now that maybe Leadup/Prelude to the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine is a much better name than "conflict" but I think it is too late to change that. We would have to hold a whole new discussion. This is not a response to any particular editor, but rather of the recent trends here. Kehkou (talk) 06:06, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
  • Close as stale / no consensus - the situation has changed so much since this discussion opened that most of the comments older than ~3 days are out of date. A new discussion can be opened if a new title is still deemed necessary. Ibadibam (talk) 19:40, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
I agree, older ones are OoD and newer ones miss the point entirely. Kehkou (talk) 22:12, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
Agree per Khekou. PenangLion (talk) 12:35, 4 March 2022 (UTC)


The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

EU sent military equipment

Latest comment: 2 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

There is an error in that table. The EU and other nations mentioned (including Italy) are sending military equipment to Ukraine, I have sources confirming it.-Karma1998 (talk) 14:48, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

@Karma1998 Pay attention, Italy decided to send arms after the war started. This article lists the event up to 23 February, so very probably your request has to do with the article covering the war. P1221 (talk) 20:34, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 4 March 2022

Latest comment: 2 years ago26 comments20 people in discussion
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. There is clear consensus that this article needs to be moved, with the majority of editors saying the new title would less vague and easier to understand. ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 15:35, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis → Prelude to the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine – Following the closure of the old RM above, and given we've had more time to process what's going on, I'd like to propose a new move. I think we all agree that the present title is insufficient. I therefore would like to propose a move to Prelude to the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, which adequately situates the article as it should be situated, and militates against any possibility for confusion or overlap. This would be similar to Prelude to the Warsaw Uprising. What say you, Wikipedians all? RGloucester — ☎ 14:33, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Do you have evidence that reliable sources use this terminology? --Jayron32 14:35, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
I am proposing this as a descriptive title under WP:NDESC, given that it is much too early to be looking for an established common name in RS. The goal of this proposal is to prevent confusion. At present, numerous people come to this page for information about the current invasion, not knowing that that's out of the scope of this article. You can see evidence of this by looking at the number of talk sections made by people complaining about the title above, and comments made in the previous RM. A move to the proposed title would solve this problem, clearly defining the scope of the article. RGloucester — ☎ 14:37, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
I think of Russo-Ukrainian War as the parent WP:SUMMARY article, and of these two articles as being children, with this one chronologically preceding the invasion article. This is how they are being treated in practice now, hence my proposal here. I don't know if anyone has any other ideas about how this should be arranged, but it seems logical for the time being, anyhow. RGloucester — ☎ 02:09, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
  • Neutral, but leaning towards Oppose. Titling this article Prelude to... implies that it's all of the build-up to the full invasion. However, there are other events, not covered in this article, that could also, in the light of history, be argued were part of the prelude. The (parent) Russo-Ukrainian War#History section consists of the following sub-sections: 1. Annexation of Crimea; 2. War in Donbas; 3. Frozen Conflict; 4. 'Russian military build-up', with this article that sub-section's 'main article'; 5. Full invasion. So I see Annexation of Crimea, War in Donbas and Frozen Conflict as also part of the prelude to invasion. I like having 2021-2022 at the start of this article's title, as it makes clear the earlier events are not part of this particular article. How about titling this article 2021-2022 Prelude to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. I know it's more clumsy, but might be more accurate. Mmitchell10 (talk) 08:42, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
    I like 2021-2022 Prelude to the Russian invasion of Ukraine too. Thus I support both Prelude to the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine and 2021-2022 Prelude to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Both these are better than current title. --Olchug (talk) 08:57, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
The word 'prelude' quite specifically precludes reference to a long, eight-year span of events. It refers to a short, introductory phase. If the article were to be titled Background of the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, then I think you'd have a point. Rather than produce a clumsy title, I think this can easily be solved through the content of the article. As you can see, it already explains in its background section that there is a longer series of previous events, with links to our articles on them, negating any possibility for confusion. RGloucester — ☎ 14:08, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
OK, fair enough :-) Mmitchell10 (talk) 07:32, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
Support dropping the use of euphemisms in favour of a more timely and straightforward title. –Turaids (talk) 15:01, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
  • Support. Since there is already an article entitled Russo-Ukrainian War, it makes perfect sense to change the title of this article to something remotely different. However, one problem that still remains is that the suggested new title would make it sound as if there had not yet been a war that was raging in Ukraine.Davidbena (talk) 19:33, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
Support per nom. -- HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith (talk) 22:53, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
Support, however I also think we should keep this page as a redirect to the new name - DG745 (talk) 01:07, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
Strong support - Very clear and easy to remember/reference. CR-1-AB (talk) 13:50, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 March 2022

Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

From: Continued violence and escalation To: Continued escalation

From: The next day, the mission confirmed the death of a child in Russian-occupied Donbas, but failed to establish a link between the purported "Ukrainian drone strike" and the child's death.[107]

To: The next day, the mission confirmed the death of a child in Russian-occupied Donbas, but failed to establish a link between the purported "Ukrainian drone strike" and the child's death.[107]. Russian media had previously fabricated a story of child getting killed by Ukranian shelling in 2015[1] VainiusI (talk) 21:58, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/04/08/russian-media-fabricated-story-about-a-child-getting-killed-by-ukrainian-shelling-the-bbc-says/
  Not done: That would be WP:SYNTH. Find a source comparing the two events. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:41, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Shouldn't the map reflect the situation before the invasion?

Latest comment: 2 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

As in the title, I was thinking about a thing. Since this article is about the crisis and the situation before the start of the invasion, shouldn't the map provided represent the situation as it was, at most, on 23 February, the day before the invasion started, and not a map which represents the situation as it is currently?94.38.150.134 (talk) 17:51, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

I've removed the current map. The image of the build up on Ukraine's borders will suffice for now. Hopefully someone can make a more detailed map of the situation before the invasion. RGloucester — ☎ 14:41, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
I was concerned about that issue for some time now. Thanks @RGloucester for responding. Much appreciated. PenangLion (talk) 14:59, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

"Reactions", possibly including "effect on migration", could be made into it's own article

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

As this article is very very long, I suggest we make a page titled "International Reactions to" the conflict, or something similar. BetweenCupsOfTea (talk) 04:12, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Sweden and equipment

Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Sweden didn’t just send non lethal equipment they sent their own anti tank weapons which are definitely lethal 2A02:AA1:1621:A21B:85FF:F0EA:365D:F947 (talk) 04:27, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

reference? Elinruby (talk) 09:42, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Conducted major trimming

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Removed all but the Russian and Ukrainian reactions in #Reactions, as a more detailed, separate reactions article is already available. Also removed some details on "International sanctions on Russia," partly to remove some bloat, and also because almost all of the citations were about sanctions that came after the invasion happened, not before. I also removed the extra Template:Campaignbox Russo-Ukrainian War sidebar lower down the article to trim down on bloat.


If there's anything crucial to this page that you believe I deleted too hastily, you can look at the edit history (the big, red, bold -100,000 number), and add it back in if you wish. DJ (talk) 03:57, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

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

Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:52, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

EU response to Lavrov’s letters

Latest comment: 2 years ago3 comments1 person in discussion

This is missing from the article. https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/russia-statement-high-representative-eu-response-minister-lavrov%E2%80%99s-letters_en Kaihsu (talk) 20:40, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

I suggest adding this episode to the “Diplomatic negotiations” section.

Added. Kaihsu (talk) 20:02, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Prelude_to_the_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine/Archive_2&oldid=1184416958"