Talk:Transfiguration Cathedral in Odesa

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 July 2023

Remove false statement that the cathedral was partially damaged by a russian missile as this is not true and has no basis in factual evidence that shows it wasnt a russian missile! 110.141.227.17 (talk) 04:50, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

It was Russia according to the city authorities. https://t.me/odesacityofficial/19560 https://kyivindependent.com/russian-missile-attack-destroys-odesas-transfiguration-cathedral/ 80.62.29.143 (talk) 05:24, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

City authorities are not a trustworthy source and their statement should be considered as a claim not as proof of fact.

Beside that there's a videos with the moment of the hit and explosion that strongl6indicate it was air defence missile just launched from the city. 92.34.244.162 (talk) 06:44, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

The city authorities are not fully reliable. There's video evidence an Ukrainian S-300 missile failed and crashed there. Please stop blindly trusting everything the authorities are saying. AyazKader (talk) 06:46, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

The article you refer to shares preliminary reports. There is a video evidence it was a SAM missile. Wording should be corrected to something like "destroyed during Russian attack on Odessa" Mikr80 (talk) 06:50, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

According to the Russian Ministry it was Ukrainian.

the point is neither is independent ally verified as laid out by NYT and Reuters

neutrality calls for both perspectives/claims as Reuters does

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russias-attack-odesa-kills-one-injures-18-ukraine-officials-2023-07-23/ 2600:1700:7820:4E20:2C1F:27A8:ED47:4381 (talk) 11:09, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

NYT relying on Reuters for their report so when the source material lays out both viewpoints so should Wikipedia

also is RBK a reliable source? 2600:1700:7820:4E20:2C1F:27A8:ED47:4381 (talk) 11:21, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Reuters reports Russian Ministry: “ Ukrainian reports of a Russian strike on the cathedral were false, and its targets in Odesa were located "a safe distance" from the cathedral complex. It said the "probable cause" of the damage to the cathedral was a Ukrainian anti-aircraft missile.”

reuters is a trustworthy new sight so should be in controversial to add both sides in a neutral way the same as Reuters (and NYTimes btw) does as both admit it can’t be verified

Read WP:FALSEBALANCE. 93.72.49.123 (talk) 13:17, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. 93.72.49.123 (talk) 09:28, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Quite ridiculous to ask for a reliable source to disprove a claim made by an unreliable source. Video of the explosion clearly showing that the missile was UA SAM is available but it will never be published in a "reliable source" in forseable future. 92.34.244.162 (talk) 12:10, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

CBS News, The New York Times, CNN, Associated Press et al. are reliable sources. WP:OR of random videos is not. So it goes. 93.72.49.123 (talk) 12:58, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

And those "reputable sources" are all quoting UA officials which may have ulterior motives to make such claims. Meanwhile RU ministry of defense released a statement claiming that it was not a Russian missile. https://tass.com/defense/1650679

I see no reason why NYTimes quoting UA officials is more reputable than Tass quoting RU officials, thus article should be changed to reflect that "Russian missile damaged the cathedral" is a claim, not a fact. 92.34.244.162 (talk) 16:09, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

As opposed to the wholly honest and unbiased Russian officials (who also claim that Ukraine is developing bioweapons that specifically target Russians, and other such paranoid schizophrenia). WP:CIR. 93.72.49.123 (talk) 17:23, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

TASS is not a reliable source

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#TASS DerElektriker (talk) 17:23, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

How convenient that Tass is unreliable because is biased towards Ru but NYTimes is obviously not biased towards Ukraine/against Russia because potato.

This whole subject is a total joke 92.34.244.162 (talk) 18:09, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

It's preposterous to put a privately owned newspaper in a non-belligerent state and a news agency directly controlled by one of the belligerents on equal footing. 93.72.49.123 (talk) 07:29, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Why would it not just say "Moscow claims Ukraine responsible"?

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 July 2023

The article states incorrectly a Russian missile damaged the cathedral when in fact a a Ukrainian air-defence weapon caused the damage. 122.60.130.100 (talk) 04:39, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. 93.72.49.123 (talk) 07:29, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 July 2023 (2)

Add c:Category:Transfiguration Cathedral, Odesa to external links. 93.72.49.123 (talk) 12:04, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

•  Done ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 16:14, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia edit preceded the event?

I've come across a claim by Larry Johnson that this article was edited to note the missile strike on the church "about thirty minutes, an hour, before that strike took place". Can anyone help set out the evidence for and against this claim?

The edit in question, dated 23:22, 22 July 2023, appears to be "Destroyed by russian forces at July 23, 2023."

Johnson's claim is on the Judge Napolitano channel on Youtube (time stamped): https://www.youtube.com/live/P6I78iocaiY?feature=share&t=954 Shtove (talk) 08:09, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia uses the UTC timezone for timestamps, which is three hours behind the EEST timezone currently used in Odesa. 93.72.49.123 (talk) 11:14, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Has the EES time of the strike on the 23rd been reported? Shtove (talk) 19:37, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Oleh Kiper first wrote of the attack at 23:08 UTC [1]. 93.72.49.123 (talk) 09:47, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

It doesn't seem to identify the cathedral, and it's time-stamped Jul 23 at 00:08, which I assume is EEST. If it does refer to this strike, Johnson's claim is refuted, but better to have a reliable source that clearly states the time - I can't find one. Shtove (talk) 06:58, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Which other religious institutions were damaged that day? And yes, it was posted at 23:08 UTC; you can check this for example by opening the page's source code, where it says <time datetime="2023-07-22T23:08:49+00:00" class="time">23:08</time>. 93.72.49.123 (talk) 10:17, 28 July 2023 (UTC)