Talk:Russo-Ukrainian War/Archive 19

Archive 15

←

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

Semi-protected edit request on 26 February 2022

Add Chechnya (Kadyrovtsy) to the Belligerents,Units involved and update their strength. Doyle79 (talk) 13:39, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide a reliable source for the changes you want made. >>> Ingenuity.talk(); 13:41, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Kazakhstan

I don’t think Kazakhstan should be here as supporting Ukraine. They denied troops to Russia, but that does not necessarily mean a pro-Ukraine stance. Blackout8771 (talk) 14:53, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Agree, the source does not say they support Ukraine. I've removed them. — Czello 15:05, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Pakistan does not support Russia in the conflict.

The PM of Pakistan only visited Russia for economic reasons and has not shown support for neither Ukraine or Russia but has awaited a peaceful end to the conflict. 80.5.199.172 (talk) 16:42, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

I've removed Pakistan as the source didn't support the claim at all. — Czello 16:52, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Agreed. Pakistan has adopted a neutral stance and wished for conflict to be resolved through talks. Source: "PM Imran regrets Ukraine-Russia tensions, says conflict not in anyone’s interest". Pakistan also supports Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. So it will be wrong to say that Pakistan supports Russia. Source: "Pakistan reaffirmed support for Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity on Monday ahead of Prime Minister Imran Khan's impending visit to Moscow". 5.36.9.139 (talk) 18:18, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Ukraine has conscripts.

Simple edit and simple addition of information. Zelensky intends on ending it in 2024 however. JasonMoore (talk) 22:02, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

added Mexico Argentina Guatemala

added Mexico Argentina Guatemala Jonathan555568 (talk) 23:37, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Undid Mexico Guatemala Ecuador Argentina

Undid Mexico Guatemala Ecuador Argentina Jonathan555568 (talk) 23:38, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 February 2022

I would like to add a final sentence to the introduction paragraph to reflect the recent advancements in Ukraine....

The current version is:

"In February 2022, the crisis deepened, and diplomatic talks to subdue Russia failed; this culminated in Russia moving forces into the separatist controlled regions on 22 February 2022."

... I would like to change it to:

"In February 2022, the crisis deepened, and diplomatic talks to subdue Russia failed; leading to Russia moving forces into the separatist controlled regions starting on the 22 February and culminating with the Russian invasion of Ukraine on 23 February."

I believe this new version will more accurately portray the series of events, as opposed to the current version which leaves out the critical detail of the Russian occupation in Ukraine. Dreadknoght (talk) 02:25, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

@Dreadknoght: What you said is the current version is not anywhere in the article, but the introduction paragraph already mentions the invasion on the 24th. ― Tuna ^No_SurprisesPlease 02:40, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Remove Israel as a supporter

Israel has only rescued Ukrainian Jews due to their religion and has not shown support for either side as it doesn’t want US sanctions ; neither does it want to damage its friendship with Russia. 80.5.199.172 (talk) 16:49, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Entire support infobox is redundant. JasonMoore (talk) 08:55, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Belligerents missing Wagner Group

It seems the Wagner Group ain't listed over belligerents on the aggressor side, I would suggest Wagner Group Sure the Nazi German flag is a bit misleading, but I don't know what else symbol to use for an Russian nationalistic private created by a Neo-Nazi.

Former servicemen and civilian personnel getting new employment should not count under casualties. After the german unification most members of the NVA started working in the Bundeswehr. That doesn't mean the NVA took "casualties". Even if we count them as casualties we should count all who worked for the Russian Armed Forces not just those that got granted Russian citizenship. 145.224.73.80 (talk) 10:07, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Serbia & Montenegro

Serbia & Montenegro do not support Ukraine

Serbia & Montenegro have said they support Ukraine’s sovereignty but are not against Russia in sanctions or any matter

Please change this false information 94.204.55.67 (talk) 12:10, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Edit add supported Albania Argentina Bosnia and Herzegovina Brazil Bulgaria Canada France Germany Greece Turkey

Edit add supported Albania Argentina Bosnia and Herzegovina Brazil Bulgaria Canada Cyprus Colombia France Germany Greece Turkey United States United Kingdom Taiwan Vatican City Finland Jonathan555568 (talk) 23:42, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

I have some dilemmas about Bosnia, since they have 3 presidents (Bosniak, Croat, and Serbian), and all 3 need to agree for Bosnia to officially condemn Russia and support Ukraine. As expected, Bosniaks and Croats support Ukraine, while Serbs support Russia. Article from Deutsche Welle (in Croatian language) about this problem: https://www.dw.com/hr/bosna-i-hercegovina-nesložna-i-oko-ukrajine/a-60933125

Of course, I will not change anything on the main page (I like the idea that Bosnia is on the list), but we should be aware of this problem. 46.188.161.254 (talk) 12:11, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

World war lll as already started is it.

Off-topic discussion. Jr8825 • Talk 13:49, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Wat do you think of this! 197.239.4.250 (talk) 05:16, 27 February 2022 (UTC) Absolutely not. "World" war implies the involvement of a large portion of the War. That is simply not the case. The only major players in this so far are Russia and Ukraine. That's two countries.User7355608 (talk) 08:10, 27 February 2022 (UTC) Also, it's irrelevant how many countries are involved really. If WP:RS aren't calling it World War III, Wikipedia shouldn't be calling it World War III. John Bullock (talk) 11:43, 27 February 2022 (UTC) Absolutely not. Do not let the support infobox fool you. It’s less than 3 countries in total that are in a genuine physical altercation. JasonMoore (talk) 08:54, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Medvedev and Kadyrov in the info boxes

Medvedev is listed as 2014-20, but he is the deputy chairman (chairman is Putin) of the security council (relevant to the conflict as they were discussing the recognition of the DPR/LPR). Also, he was talking about sanctioning Western countries https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2022/2/26/senior-russian-security-official-issues-stark-threats-to-the-west

Kadyrov is listed with the Chechen flag, probably as he is the leader of the Chechen Republic, which has sent troops, but Chechnya is a part of Russia. Aksonov of Crimea, for example, has the Russian flag not the Crimean oneAngele201002 (talk) 14:04, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

RfC - Should NATO be displayed in the infobox as a support belligerent providing indirect military aid?

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine#RfC_-_Should_NATO_be_displayed_in_the_infobox_as_a_support_belligerent_providing_indirect_military_aid%3F

Maxorazon (talk) 09:51, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

I agree that this seems like a good idea. Flecktyphus (talk) 14:58, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

No. NATO is not providing aid. Aid is provided by individual countries, and providing aid is not being a belligerent anyway. The only belligerent may be Belarus, if it sends its troops to Ukraine. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 15:02, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Why isn't the alternative title of "Russia–Ukraine War" getting a run?

Why isn't the alternative title of "Russia–Ukraine War" getting a run?

About nine out of ten media outlets are calling it as such, yet my edit gets reverted. I don't understand why having a secondary title by this name is even the slightest bit controversial. After all, it's purely semantic.

I don't know what "getting a run" means, but the phrase Russia-Ukraine War means the exact same thing as Russo-Ukrainian War. It's redundant to include it in the article. ― Tuna ^No_SurprisesPlease 02:08, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

I don't see it as redundant, since not everybody knows Russo means Russia. Having an alternate title—especially since it is most commonly used in the media—would be helpful, I think. Electricmaster (talk) 16:20, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

This should have stayed split!

The other article was better, people need information about the war that is happening now, not about the old part of the war.

I want to see a death tally at the moment, in terms of who's winning. The totals are from the beginning of the conflict.

Merging the two articles was a BAD idea! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.166.137.1 (talk) 18:38, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

"Supported by" country lists in the infobox

Its seems bit silly to list countries as supporting either Russia or Ukraine based on statements they've made about the conflict, especially given that "supporting" a belligerent in war implies military assistance. I looked at the statements used to justify listing some countries as supporting one or the other and even then some of the statements don't actually indicate any support. Recommend excluding any country that isn't supporting either side militarily. To my knowledge, Russia has not received military assistance from any of the nations listed as supporting it (perhaps with the exception of Belarus) and Ukraine has not received any military assistance from any non-NATO country.216.169.22.237 (talk) 00:50, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Agreed Washing Machine (talk) 18:21, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, this is egregiously misleading. Many of these don't even have sources. The Cuba source is pretty much unrelated to the conflict, and doesn't suggest support in any meaningful way for this action. "Support" needs to mean sending military supplies or at a bare minimum, sanctions. Zellfire999 (talk) 02:23, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Non-NATO states have sent military support. I can think of Australia, and Japan has offered loans in view of the buildup a week or two ago, and now announced sanctions. NATO states have offered support outside the NATO framework, and so should be listed separately. —Michael Z. 03:04, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Agreed, the Belligerents list in the infobox is a mess and could do with a cleanup. Jr8825 • Talk 04:12, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

• @Marqwezzuh: please justify your reversion. As others have said, the list of statements of support in the infobox is potentially misleading, and not what the belligerents section should be used for. Jr8825 • Talk 00:12, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Came here to say this, no other conflict follows this pattern. KostaKusta (talk) 19:59, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

• I've removed the lists of countries for a second time, as @Marqwezzuh: hasn't joined the discussion here. Several editors have been warring it back in. It'd be helpful if they could join this discussion. As can be seen below, a lot of new editors have been appearing asking for their countries to be added to the list of Ukrainian "supporters" – this isn't what the combatant section of the military conflict infobox is supposed to be for. The guidance can be found here {{Infobox military conflict}}. Jr8825 • Talk 00:31, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Based on what other's have said on this talk page, I went and found several sources that list what countries are directly supporting Ukraine, as it seems this is what was wanted out of the "Supported by:" list. However, I'm not sure how to go about citing these sources, as they all list the same few countries, but it wouldn't make sense to put several citations on each country listed. How should I go about doing this? ― Tuna ^No_SurprisesPlease 19:15, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

WP:Common name and WP:POVNAME

Rename the article to Russian military intervention in Ukraine or the Russo-Ukrainian conflict. Most sources don’t call it the Russo-Ukrainian War. Please read WP:Common name, and also WP:POVNAME. The article was originally titled the Russian military intervention in Ukraine (2014–present), but in June 2020 it was changed to the Russo-Ukrainian War—the proposer of this page move was sockpuppet of User:Dolyn. Perhaps someone could make another move request. -- Tobby72 (talk) 13:05, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Please see the history of move requests near the top of this talk page. There isn’t a single name that most sources use. This name is in use by reliable sources, and many close variations like Russia–Ukraine war, Russia’s war in Ukraine, Russian war in Ukraine, etcetera. The name is also controversial as the subject of war propaganda by which one side denies its role. If you would like to try again, go ahead and file a formal move request, but I suggest you collect some convincing evidence that your choice is an improvement, with specific reference to Wikipedia naming guidelines. —Michael Z. 20:08, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Yeah as it stands right now this articles' title is extremely embarrassing for the entire Wikipedia, literally not a single source outside of Ukrainian right-leaning media or pro-NATO sources would ever refer to "Russo-Ukrainian War", this is why no one believes that Wikipedia is a reliable source of information. An article describing Russian military intervention in Ukraine would be genuinely worthwhile and interesting but now this is merely a propaganda piece. Juihuhuiytfdtry (talk) 23:02, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

The first mention of the name is followed by a note listing literally three sources, none of them being “right-leaning” Ukrainians (nudge, wink, know what you mean). But “Russo-Ukrainian war” appears in more sources from 2014 to 2019 than “Russian military intervention in Ukraine” by 1,940 to 952 Why don’t you propose a better name and post a convincing move request? —Michael Z. 00:03, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Timothy Snyder is extremely well-known for his explicit pro-Western take on issues in Eastern Europe, and the following two articles are written by individuals either affiliated with Ukrainian state-sponsored academic political science research institutions, Canadian/American Ukrainian diaspora or by institutions affiliated with Western military financing - Joshua P. Multer is literally a member of US Army. It takes few seconds of pondering to realize that these takes are unrepresentative of perspective sub specie aeternitatis as a whole, it just makes no sense to look at an article written by a US military member and proclaim "look, our take is objective, Russo-Ukrainian War it is!". I mean, have you even read the articles before making this comment? The links you show me are broken for me but it is obvious that popularity isn't an indication of objectivity of material written (especially given that we're talking about sources here written in English), and it's a no-brainer that 5-word 13-syllable name would appear more often in both biased and non-partisan material than a 3-word 6-syllable one, people have an innate tendency to save cognitive resources even when it comes at expense of tracking truth. All of this strikes me as so blatantly obvious that I see no reason to "state my case" or "give a convincing argument" - a website so poorly moderated to avoid pure propaganda pieces as its article name is past all hope, that's like arguing with people believing that Navalny was not poisoned by the Russian government, with people who think that Moon landing was a hoax or with people who believe that the Earth is flat.Juihuhuiytfdtry (talk) 20:28, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Your arguments hold no validity until you can bring sources that support your personal opinions. You've recently deleted/renamed this account to 'Bound Variable,' so I'm assuming you've dropped the stick ... 50.111.6.149 (talk) 10:52, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

This page should be re-named. This is completely absurd. No country has declared war. Only Wikipedia has, it seems. Michaelwuzthere (talk) 22:52, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

@Michaelwuzthere: please see AlexEng's message under "This event never occured". ― Tuna ^No_SurprisesPlease 22:58, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

This page should be deleted or renamed. Niether Ukraine nor Russia declared war. Ukraine trading with Russia, fight to transport russian natural gas to Europe. Russia is not take part of the war in Donbass in the main documents signed by Ukraine, Germany, France and Russia - Minsk protocol (it's agreement between Ukraine and separatists). This article is definitely not neutral and is provocative to say the least. And most likely it can be seen as pro-Ukrainian propaganda. AstroAntares (talk) 11:42, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Please read the discussions above and at #This_event_never_occured where this has been discussed endlessly. — Czello 12:42, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

This article is definitely does not comply with the "Neutral point of view" policy. The source(#60) of this term is written by Demian Shevko, "political science researcher" from Ukraine. This is a politically argued article with a politically argued non-existent term. AstroAntares (talk) 08:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Russia has officially completely invaded ALL of Ukraine, I think the question of whether to call it the "Russo-Ukrainian War" is moot. "Russian military intervention" is much less of a NPOV than Russo-Ukrainian War. 12:12, 24 February 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bkdb44 (talk • contribs)

I strongly suggest that the Wikipedia support a name for this war/conflict that accurately describes the aggressor, Vladimir Putin. Whether the label is the "Putin-Ukrainian War" or "Putin's Ukraine War," it's clear that the aggressor is not the Russian people who lack a voice in their non-democratic and autocratic government. Note the commentary of the Atlantic Council, "Until Vladimir Putin launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in the early hours of February 24"–it does not say, "until the Russian people launched a full-scale invasion." --Jastighe (talk) 20:48, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

References

Countries list

Can someone bring back the list of countries that supported both Ukraine & Russia? Tikdaldo (talk) 15:15, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

• I agree, why still someone removing it? All flags has source. Ukraine has support of whole World, they are not alone. Wikipedia supporting Putin and Russia or what? Peter11700 (talk) 18:44, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

  It's pretty silly to have the list there. It should just be those who are helping with the war, but that's just my opinion. It just shows that pretty much the entire world stands with Ukraine, plus there's already a video about it Washing Machine (talk) 18:55, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

• Please see Talk:Russo-Ukrainian War#"Supported by" country lists in the infobox. Jr8825 • Talk 18:56, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
  • @Jr8825:Ok, but there should be at least, list of countries which supporting Ukraine by arms, aid and sanctions, dont need to add countries which just talking about moral support. Peter11700 (talk) 21:39, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Doesn’t read properly and check your history.

This is poorly written, it’s no readable in a flowing way whatsoever and you might want to check your history. 70.68.64.98 (talk) 06:14, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Totals

Can someone do a total number for the strength card please? Also for the casualties card. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.166.137.174 (talk) 19:36, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Is there a clearer way of displaying the casualties lists? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.244.210.117 (talk) 08:21, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

General Sanctions.

Canada has also indeed put economic sanctions on Russia. 173.212.118.37 (talk) 23:04, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Has Russia been expelled from the International Olympic Committee?

Has Russia been expelled from FIFA and UEFA?

The United Nations Charter contains a clause whereby a member state may be expelled from the organization. Is this being considered?

It has been reported that the computer hackers' group "Anonymous" is waging a cyberwar against the Russian government, particularly the Kremlin websites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.244.210.117 (talk) 08:37, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Anonymous listed as "cyber support"

I don't think that Anonymous should be listed in any of the support sections since it isn't a country nor a group of countries. It's the same as including smaller nations, like Chechnya, on either side. They're not relevant enough to include. ― Tuna ^No_SurprisesPlease 16:54, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Chechnya is not a nation, it is part of Russia. But we do list two non nations as supporting Russia. Slatersteven (talk) 16:56, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

I agree. NATO and the EU are not comparable to Anonymous. 7szz (talk) 17:30, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 February 2022

Add Anonymous in cyber support section. Breakinger (talk) 18:19, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. See discussion above ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:10, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Add Monaco to countries imposing economic sanctions on Russia

According to https://www.reuters.com/business/wealth-hub-monaco-also-clamping-down-russian-assets-following-ukraine-invasion-2022-02-28/ 79.65.25.177 (talk) 19:38, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Add a photo collage

The page could do with a collage of photos above the map like in similar articles such as the Iraq War, to demonstrate the significance of the conflict. I'm thinking of a photo to represent the annexation of Crimea; one of trenches in the Donbas; one of Kharkiv burning and one of civilians taking shelter in the Kyiv metro. It's important to state the earlier stages of the conflict as well as the recent developments.Adartho (talk) 20:07, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Cyber Group “ANONYMOUS”

The decentralized hacker group known as “Anonymous” have condemned and digitally attacked the Russian government. Shouldn’t this group be considered as an ally belligerent for Ukraine under the “Cyber Support” section of the article? MateoFrayo (talk) 20:04, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

I agree, they should be there, based on their Facebook page, they fighting online more then any other country against Russia. Peter11700 (talk) 21:06, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

9,268 servicemen defected to Russia

Under casualties there are 9,268 serviceman listed that joined Russia after the annexation. The source writes about how that number of former (!) servicemen, active members of the UAF and civilian (!) employees got the Russian citizenship after being employed on a contract basis with the Russian armed forces. The source says actually employed were 16,000.

yeah what's up with that? confusing and irrelevant at best, misleading at worst, not sure why it's included, source seems lacking too Truelico (talk) 23:19, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 February 2022 (2)

Cyber Allies of ukraine: ANONYMOUS 2A02:2F08:B20D:2B00:D1C8:5FD4:A306:F20F (talk) 20:44, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.  melecie  t - 00:10, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Arms suppliers section is irrelevant.

It is used only for propaganda. For example Karabagh war, Israel propaganda.

Nowadays nations have all kinds of origins of weapons, from all over the world. Pretty much no nation has weapons from a single source. Plus, they are mostly sold. Not "supplied".

So arms supplies section is irrelevant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.230.176.216 (talk) 00:07, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

That’s true, but the section in the article is for countries that are supplying Ukraine with more than the usual amount of armaments for no cost to help with the war effort. ― Tuna ^No_SurprisesPlease 00:24, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Why was the flight between ukraine and russia and nato Has

F 2409:4053:2E8D:6064:0:0:A58A:5F10 (talk) 03:03, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

The Bear bites

Seeing as Russia has now invaded Ukraine. This article needs some updating. GoodDay (talk) 04:33, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Has any psychological profile study been made with regards to Vladimir Putin's state of mind? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.244.210.117 (talk) 08:05, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Has the International War Crimes Commission issued International Arrest Warrants against Putin, the Russian military and the oligarchs for war crimes? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.244.210.117 (talk) 07:21, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Not as far as any RS have reported. Slatersteven (talk) 13:47, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Is Russia planning an invasion of Europe (based on the 2017 "Zapad" military exercise)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.244.210.117 (talk) 13:44, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

If you have RS speculating they might we can add this. Slatersteven (talk) 13:46, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

The Russian government is not beholden to the ICC just like the US government isn’t. They are not signatores of the institution. (I.e see list of USA war crimes) JasonMoore (talk) 20:08, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

European history has witnessed the consequences of NOT stopping a dictator within living memory. Will Vladimir Putin be stopped? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.244.210.117 (talk) 06:53, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Is Russia the world most powerful country ?

Please use the reference desk for factual queries. Talk pages are for discussions about improving the article. Jr8825 • Talk 12:59, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Why aren't other countries trying to stop them or Russians nucleat weapons are much advance and they are not either no a match for Russia no more... the same as for Korea and USA they could not be stopped. Freddy Kabeya (talk) 12:45, 1 March 2022 (UTC) Well we would need RS discussing this, not your kind of answer your own Query, they are no more powerful than North Korea or the USA. Slatersteven (talk) 12:48, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 March 2022

Saddam Hussein.101 (talk) 15:29, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

I would like to edit this pages information since I have noticed that according to reliable sources, some information on this website is vague or wrong.

To edit the page, you must have extended confirmed rights. Furthermore, if you want an edit made, then please make the request in the format "change x to y." ― Tuna ^No_SurprisesPlease 15:32, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:33, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Aftermath

Will Ukraine become Russia's "Vietnam" / "Afgyhanistan" ?

Afghanistan was Russia's Afghanistan.

Anyways, I don't see the parallel here since Russia is a direct instigator of this fight and not a third party like the US was in those wars. Icepunchies (talk) 09:35, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

PLease read wp:forum. Slatersteven (talk) 10:34, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Rename the article into Slavic War 🇧🇾🇺🇦🇷🇺

Now that Belarus is joining attack forces, the title “Russo-Ukrainian War” give Belarusians a get-out-of-jail card and is therefore misleading. These three countries—Russia, Ukraine and Belarus—are the biggest East Slavic countries. The war evolved; so should the title accordingly, to keep at the pace. Peace. ToniTurunen (talk) 07:23, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Negative. No reliable source gives equal weight to Belarus, nor do they emphasize "Slavic" factor. 07:34, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Not equal but still quite significant. “Slavic” is the common denominator between “Russo-Ukrainian” and “Belarusian”. Or to be more precise, “East Slavic”. The current name, “Russo-Ukrainian War”, is based on information prior to Belarus's involvement which is bound to increase. If you study how historical wars have been named, “(East) Slavic War” makes sense. ToniTurunen (talk) 11:38, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

This article should be exist yet

This really shouldn’t exist yet. There isn’t enough accurate information for this to made accurate, it’s an ongoing conflict, you can’t possibly make an accurate article with correct information and sources about a conflict which kicked off in full force a few days ago. That and the amount of trolls who will come here is going to make it hell to keep this article anywhere close to accurate. Please, just keep the bare bones information about the conflict and wait for more accurate information which you can use as sources (Russian and Ukrainian casualty reports when they come out). 64.8.171.250 (talk) 17:29, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Casualties

In the casualties section, this has been posted “ 9,268 joined Russian forces after annexation[105]” the linked source is very clearly referring to the 2014 annexation however, which is not relevant to the casualties or losses in this war.

The whole casualties section seems to have a lot of spurious information but the above mentioned problem clearly serves to misinform readers. 2607:FEA8:C320:DB50:F158:F1BB:36FE:C320 (talk) 03:04, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Tass.com (not currently cited in article) places the date of this action in mid April 2014, indeed just after annexation. This article however opens by saying in the second sentence that "Conflict began in February 2014...". So the dates and interested parties line up to include this event as part of this conflict. The currently cited source makes clear "The Russian citizenship was given to 9,268 former servicemen and personnel of the Ukrainian armed forces..." indicating that these servicemen were indeed "lost" to the Ukrainian armed forces. I think under the section "Casualties and losses" this is appropriately clarified to show this is not a casualty statistic. According to WP:RSPSS, both the current source and Tass.com haven't reached broad consensus on reliability but may be used where appropriate. If there's something else here that's misleading or confusing, I'm missing it. --N8 04:51, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Would it make sense to remove the casualties section altogether? At the time I'm writing this (1st March), the references don't justify the numbers quoted and any numbers available anywhere from either side are propagandistic and speculative. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C8:75A2:B01:4CEA:6198:50B2:A759 (talk) 18:11, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 March 2022 (2)

add the UK as an arms supplier. 2.101.185.27 (talk) 21:15, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

The UK is a NATO member. ― Tuna ^No_SurprisesPlease 21:20, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Boycotts

Please add all the cultural boycotts made. From USA today: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2022/02/28/sanctions-bans-boycotts-russia/9322671002/ Sports: FIFA and UEFA announced the decision to ban Russian national and club soccer teams from competing in any competitions indefinitely, putting the men's national team in jeopardy of not qualifying for the 2022 World Cup set to begin in November. This comes after Poland, Sweden and Czech Republic men's teams announced they would refuse to play Russia in upcoming scheduled matches. The International Olympic Committee also recommended that any international event organizers not invite Russian athletes to compete in events, as well as athletes from Belarus since the country has aided Russia during its invasion of Ukraine. The British Olympic Association went a step further and demanded the two countries be banned from all international sports. The International Skating Union, the body that runs the sport around the world, said no athletes from Russia or Belarus “shall be invited or allowed to participate” in events until further notice. NHL suspending partnerships with Russian businesses and the league no longer considering playing any game in Russia in the future.

Financial: Restrictions on Russia's two largest banks and Russian elites and their families. Nearly 80% of banking assets in the country were targeted, meaning Russia has been blocked from the global financial system which could impact the country's economy for years. The U.S. and its allies banned Russia from SWIFT, the global financial messaging system.

Products: Vodka has been banned by the governors of Texas, Ohio and New Hampshire, who ordered businesses to remove the spirit as a form of protest. Despite most bottles of vodka not coming from Russia, the boycott remains ongoing since the spirit has long been associated with Russia.

Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds ordered the Iowa Alcoholic Beverages Division to remove all Russian-produced alcoholic drinks from wholesale purchasing. The same has also been done in North Carolina. Evening Entertainment Group, which owns 17 bars, restaurants and nightclubs across Arizona, Texas and Florida, pulled Russian vodka from their menus.

Airspace: The European Union, United Kingdom and Baltic countries of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania decided to close their airspace to all Russian airlines. Meanwhile, Delta Air Lines suspended its codesharing partnership with Russian national airline Aeroflo.

"We have removed our code from Aeroflot-operated services beyond Moscow's Sheremetyevo Airport and removed Aeroflot's code from Delta-operated services from Los Angeles and New York-JFK," Delta said in a statement.

Cyberattacks/Help: Anonymous, the international hacker activist group behind various cyberattacks, announced they would be launching "unprecedented cyberattacks" against Putin, declaring war on his regime. The group said they already have hacked a Russian military database and published data online, as well as disabling websites of media outlets in Russia. Elon Musk has activated free SpaceX Starlink satellite internet service in Ukraine — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.69.240.144 (talk) 21:26, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Moratorium on changes

This article is about a war which started in February 2014 and which is ongoing, up to and including the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. The current events are largely being covered there. Given that this is the parent article for the current events, the risk is for coverage in this article to become disproportionately affected by recentism, particularly in the infobox. The rapidly changing present situation compounds the issues. Consequently, both this article and a couple of others have become "unstable". There has also been some content forking that has resulted in significant overlap.

The aim of this article is to summarise the most recent events within the overall scope of the article since 2014. For detailed coverage, it should defer to articles intended to give more detailed coverage of the recent events and avoid becoming a parallel content fork.

To this end, I would suggest what might be described as a "moratorium on changes" relating to the most recent events at least until we see some stabilisation. Rather than trying to incorporate the rapidly unfolding events here, this article would explicitly defer to the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Cinderella157 (talk) 05:04, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 March 2022

Viktor Yanukovych is not fighting on behalf of Ukrainians. He lives in exile, in Russia. 150.135.162.132 (talk) 05:48, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: His name is qualified with "(February 2014)". ― Tartan357 ^Talk 06:07, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Add link to the current events in hatnote

This was brought up on my talk page but "This guideline does not discourage the use of disambiguation hatnotes in a situation where separate topics are related, but could nonetheless be referred to by the same title and would thus qualify for disambiguation". We need a link up there so this page can be more easily found.

Spelling check

Under the heading Russian financing of militias and the Glazyev tapes on the third paragraph on the first line in a quote is a 't by its self which I believe should be dosen't

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 March 2022

Change any instances of “the Ukraine” to “Ukraine”. 2607:FEA8:2A9F:1D00:55FF:8D8A:630D:40EF (talk) 04:17, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

• I had a look and didn't find any instances. Done. Ganesha811 (talk) 04:43, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 March 2022 (2)

The date is incorrect. change "Military situation, as of 1 March 2022," to "Military situation, as of 3 March 2022," EditsNotByCWC (talk) 04:36, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

• Done. Thanks for the suggestion. Ganesha811 (talk) 04:44, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 March 2022 (3)

@Ganesha811: I had previously requested instances of “the Ukraine” be changed to “Ukraine”. Under “supported by”:

“For countries supporting ——the Ukraine—— during the 2022 invasion, see 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine#Foreign military support to Ukraine“

Thanks in advance 2607:FEA8:2A9F:1D00:55FF:8D8A:630D:40EF (talk) 04:48, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

 Done. For those wondering, the usage of "the Ukraine" is said to have stemmed from either "the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic" being shortened to just "the Ukraine", or from the eymology of the name Ukraine, which comes from the Slavic word ukraina, meaning "borderlands". Hence, "the borderlands", or "the Ukraine". However, just Ukraine is correct, according to the Ukrainian constitution. ― Tuna ^No_SurprisesPlease 04:58, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Proves that German really support Ukraine?

Needs a facts not a claims of politics, that worth nothing.

Technically Russia is financed by German. Ukraine don’t getting any support from German. 8.28.81.21 (talk) 02:29, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Your English is so poor I have no idea of what you are trying to say, let alone see you bringing any RS to the table for the discussion of how to improve the article.50.111.40.110 (talk) 20:54, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Sounds like Germany is listed as a Ukraine supporter in the infobox, but its status is debatable. Germany has given Ukraine a lot of civil support, and mediated in the Minsk agreements, but it has also allowed construction of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, widely considered to destabilize the Ukraine–Russia relationship, and now we know it has blocked NATO military aid to Ukraine. So it’s reasonable to ask for some secondary sources that define Germany as a Ukraine supporter in this conflict. —Michael Z. 00:15, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

They've partially backtracked on that: https://112.international/ukraine-top-news/during-merkels-rule-germany-in-nato-vetoed-supply-of-weapons-to-ukraine-67717.html , and Ukraine is purchasing what it needs directly from NATO members U.S., UK, etc.: https://euromaidanpress.com/2021/12/13/germany-blocks-ukraines-arms-purchase-from-nato-as-unofficial-arms-embargo-on-ukraine-continues/ 50.111.34.214 (talk) 15:30, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Well half the anti-drone systems were eventually allowed, so that qualifies as aid from NATO and Lithuania, not from Germany.

Relevant that some states, including Germany,[1] continued to honour pre-2014 contracts for the Russian Federation’s military capability, while banning arms and other military sales and aid to Ukraine. The second article quotes the Ukrainian defence minister in December 2021: “You’ve got interesting things out there: you supply weapons, military equipment and technology to the aggressor country, while Ukraine has been banned from military supplies since 2008 and from any contacts of a military-technical nature. This was then an implicit embargo on Ukraine, as Ukraine supplied arms to Georgia during the Georgian-Russian war. Nothing has changed since then: Europe — I mean Western Europe — does not supply us (Ukraine, – Ed.) with anything of this kind.”

We need a definition of what qualifies a state to be listed in “supported by” in the infobox. I’ve been entering states that provide military aid, including training, equipment, and weapons. I believe Germany may have provided medical supplies or hospital care for wounded Ukrainian soldiers, but I’m not sure about that. —Michael Z. 21:11, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Yes Solowax (talk) 13:14, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Response of the 'German Ministry of Defense' to an inquiry from a public television station ('Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen', March 2, 2022, translated from German): Germany's announced arms deliveries for Ukraine have arrived. The material has been handed over to the Ukrainian side, a spokeswoman for the German Defense Ministry said Wednesday in response to a request. The German government had announced over the weekend that it would deliver 1,000 anti-tank weapons and 500 surface-to-air missiles. Source (German): https://www.zdf.de/nachrichten/politik/cherson-kiew-russland-ukraine-krieg-100.html Regards --Eneliting (talk) 03:34, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Addition: Russia has previously announced its intention to continue negotiations in March in the Normandy format. It is not good style to negotiate diplomatically and at the same time supply weapons to Ukraine. The promise to negotiate was broken, instead Ukraine was attacked. Weapons are now also being supplied from Germany. The last surface-to-air missiles that Germany has delivered are of the Stinger type. Today the following was reported (translated from German public news channel, "Tagesschau", ARD. 3 March 2022): War in Ukraine Germany supplies anti-aircraft missiles Germany apparently wants to deliver more weapons to Ukraine. The Ministry of Economy approved the delivery of 2700 "Strela" anti-aircraft missiles from former NVA stocks. Source (German): https://web.archive.org/web/20220303074922/https://www.tagesschau.de/ Best

Anti-Semitic motives

Is the Russian military deliberately targeting Ukrainian Jews because President Zelenskyy is Jewish? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.244.210.117 (talk) 12:07, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Are they, source? Slatersteven (talk) 12:14, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

There has now been a lot written on Putin’s motivations, ideology, and intentions related to the war, which seems to be generally lacking in this article, and some of it related to his antisemitism and propaganda misuse of accusations of nazism and genocide, and the memory of the Holocaust.[2][3][4][5] Ukraine has filed suit in the ICJ over Putin’s misuse of “genocide” as a propaganda tool.[6] There have also been relevant political statements.[7][8][9][10][11]

And there is outrage over Russian shelling that affected the Babyn Yar Holocaust memorial site, which is mentioned in Battle of Kyiv (2022), and may not need to be in this much broader article. —Michael Z. 15:10, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 3 March 2022

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: Not moved per WP:SNOW (non-admin closure). — csc^-1 01:58, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

---

Russo-Ukrainian War → Russian military intervention in Ukraine (2014–2022) – (Note: you could suggest a different article name)
OKAY, since it’s been 8 days since the REAL Russia-Ukraine War begun, can we please finally agree this time with sources and move this article so we can prevent wikipedia from being an unreliable site? According to ALL NEWS ARTICLES, the “Russia-Ukraine War” is said to have begun in February 24 and here are some sources from extremely popular news pages to help prove this:

• These articles all either clearly hint, or call the ongoing conflict the “Russia-Ukraine War” (not “Russo-Ukrainian”, btw).
  
• For those who don’t understand how wikipedia works (with no offense), according to wp:CRITERIA, the article name needs “Naturalness” meaning that “The title is one that readers are likely to look or search for” and most people searching the “Russia-Ukraine War” are looking for the ongoing invasion which everybody, every analyst and every news site use the Russia-Ukraine war name for. Literally not a single news page calls this the Russia-Ukraine War besides a bunch of random books and a reference from a completely irrelevant source that some editors unfortunately thought were smart enough to put in the intro of the article before reading the rules for wikipedia. 99% of this article is just mixing the Annexation of Crimea with the War in Donbass into one scope which violates WP:OR (original research). Also please read Please read WP:Common name, and also WP:POVNAME.
  
• Moreover, out of the 13,300 total killed in this 8-year so-called “Russo-Ukrainian War”, only 400-500 were Russian troops and most Ukrainian troops were killed by rebels (no I’m not an evil Putin supporter that’s trying to downplay Russia’s actions in Ukraine, saying this in case I receive personal attacks instead of points). And if you bring a source from 2014-2022 that uses the “conflict” naming then you didn’t prove anything right because the name of this article is Russo-Ukrainian War, not Russo-Ukrainian conflict.
  
• Another important point is that the article was changed to the Russo-Ukrainian War in June 2020—and the proposer of this page move was sockpuppet of User:Dolyn.
  
• Now can we please change this article’s name and simply place “also known as Russia-Ukraine War” in the header for the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine? Yes there has been a full-scale war between the two countries, but it has been since February 24. Wikiman92783 (talk) 19:17, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Wikiman92783 (talk) 19:26, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

• Strong Oppose – This war has been going on since 2014, and the present invasion is not the first to have happened during this conflict. This is WP:RECENTISM pure and simple. Who are you to say that the Ukrainian soldiers dying for eight years along the line of contact were not fighting a 'real' war? Any change to the title should WAIT until scholarly sources come to a conclusion about how to categorise this conflict historiographically, and our decision should not be based on news jargon or live reporting (we are WP:NOTNEWS), but on scholarly sources. In the meantime, this article serves as a WP:SUMMARY article for the 8-year long war between Russia and Ukraine, and we should not artificially create a cut-off in the conflict where one does not exist. Examples of scholarly sources using the present title include: Non-State Actors in the Russo-Ukrainian War, The exploitation of cyber domain as part of warfare: Russo-Ukrainian war, Girls cutting their locks: A book of memories / the Russo-Ukrainian War, Lessons Learned from the Russo-Ukrainian War, and Virtual Warfare: Masculinity, Sexuality, and Propaganda in the Russo-Ukrainian War. RGloucester — ☎ 19:39, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

THIS article doubles the scope of War in Donbass and therefore these deaths apply to that war and not this false war. Also please bring with you better and more reliable sources next time instead of whatever irrelevant sites those are. Seriously. Wikiman92783 (talk) 19:46, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Again, this article is a WP:SUMMARY article. Crimea and Donbas are different phases of the conflict, and the new invasion is another phase. Nothing is 'duplicated'. You might note our article on World War II has numerous sub-articles, like Pacific War. The principle is the same. Apparently, scholarly books and journals are not good enough for you, but in any event, a quick look at common journalistic coverage of the current invasion suggests you are quite wrong. American CBS says the invasion "marked the start of a grim new chapter in, and a major expansion of an eight-year war in the country's east that has already claimed thousands of lives". A woman in Ukraine interviewed by The New York Times says "We’ve lived eight years of unending war", and CNBC writes "Russia has been waging war on Ukraine for eight years now and further incursions are very possible, said Sonia Mycak of the Australian National University’s Centre for European Studies". A 'fake' war, you say? It is clear you are WP:NOTHERE to build an encyclopaedia, but to make a WP:POINT. RGloucester — ☎ 19:54, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

206.174.216.170 (talk) 19:52, 3 March 2022 (UTC) I'd suggest instead "2014-present Russo-Ukrainian Conflict", with the term 'war' saved for "War in Donbas" and "Russo-Ukrainian War 2022"

'Conflict' is just a WP:EUPHEMISM for 'war', and we don't use euphemisms here. RGloucester — ☎ 19:57, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose Current title is fine as is (i.e. see guidelines regarding concision, notably; and regarding naming stuff for what it is). The comparison to WW2 by Gloucester nicely illustrates this; on top of that this war has been ongoing for a while before the Russians launched a "formal" invasion. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 19:58, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

• Comment – Please also note that the OP made a similar request on 24 February, Talk:Russo-Ukrainian War/Archive 18#Requested move 24 February 2022. This new request strikes me as part of a pattern of disruption. RGloucester — ☎ 20:07, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

References

• Oppose  At the moment I don’t have the energy to address the proposal point by point or copy-paste from previous move requests. But the gist is that it’s uncontroversially been a war for eight years: including an international invasion and occupation, a period of maneuvre war/“hot war” involving more than a handful of Russian battalion tactical groups and displacing about two million in 2014–15, then an extended semi-frozen conflict during which more than half of the casualties occurred (totalling about 15k killed and 30k wounded). In 2016 the International Criminal Court found that this is likely an international conflict.[12] A dramatically larger new offensive doesn’t just turn all of that suddenly into a “not-REAL” war. The idea represents WP:RECENTISM. —Michael Z. 20:34, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose, the Russo-Ukrainian War has different parts: Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation, 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, War in Donbas, 2018 Moscow–Constantinople schism etc. Heanor (talk) 20:55, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose The annexation of Crimea makes the conflict more than just an "intervention". Besides, the term "war" can be used even if two parties do not formally declare war (eg. war on terror). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Curiocity1 (talk • contribs) 21:33, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose for all the same reasons as last time. ― Tuna ^No_SurprisesPlease 21:58, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose I am pretty sure Russia declared war on Ukraine. [13][14][15] - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 22:53, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose Apart from the book evidence above, I am seeing enough hits from Google Scholar that it is commonly being referred to as a war and as the Russo-Ukrainian War. The basis of the argument is WP:RECENTISM and is rejected accordingly. There might be a sourced based argument for calling it a conflict but that is not the proposal here and present events make such a change moot. Cinderella157 (talk) 23:49, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose "Military intervention" is WP:EUPHEMISM, the relevant definition by Merriam-Webster of intervention is "the interference of a country in the affairs of another country for the purpose of compelling it to do or forbear doing certain acts." [16]. The word "war" is far more direct and accurate - "a state of usually open and declared armed hostile conflict between states or nations" [17] and events prior to February 24, 2022 already match the well-supported scholarly term Hybrid warfare. AlternateCurrent (talk) 00:07, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

• Strong oppose – per above. Cheers The man from Gianyar (talk) 00:12, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose Simply unnecessary and adds fluff. The current title is fine as it is. Liamyangll (talk to me!) 00:33, 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.