Talk:Russian invasion of Ukraine/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 February 2022 (5)

There has been confirmed 57 ukrainians killed and 169 wounded and a lot more armored vehicles 2001:14BB:692:47E9:DD19:3E9D:311E:6E94 (talk) 20:53, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Melmann 21:01, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 February 2022 (2)

It has been confirmed that therew 7 planes shot down and 2 helicopters 2001:14BB:69B:D67:F5E3:4A47:56C8:3CA5 (talk) 11:25, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

If a claim has been made please give the media source where it's been made. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:31, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. sl (talk) 11:40, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 February 2022

For the attempting to restore the Russian Empire/Soviet Union, you could put a link to "Russian irredentism" 67.40.197.159 (talk) 07:27, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

 Done--Krutarth (talk) 07:49, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 February 2022 (4)

(0 days) Ynada999 (talk) 17:42, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

You do need to actualy say what edit you want to be done.Slatersteven (talk) 17:45, 24 February 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. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:06, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 February 2022 (3)

Ukrainian ministry of health says 57 Ukrainians killed and 169 injured. Please put it in casualties report if it gets accepted. 173.56.20.40 (talk) 20:18, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

The infobox now states this. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 20:28, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Sourcing for Belarusian involvement

Information on Belarussian support added to the article with sourcing as of closing. [1] Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 22:44, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Do we have sourcing for Belarusian support for the invasion now? 166.181.80.2 (talk) 05:29, 24 February 2022 (UTC) CNN and Fox reported that the Ukraine gov't has reported combined Belarus and Russian attacks on northern border. 50.111.36.47 (talk) 05:42, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Most recent from CNN says: "The US Department of Defense is tracking the reported incursion of troops from Belarus into Ukraine, a US defense official said Thursday. It was not clear if the troops were only Russian or also Belarusian, the source said." See here. Gazelle55 (talk) 06:04, 24 February 2022 (UTC) At the very least, Belarus is allowing invasion forces from its territory. That counts as support for sure. Juxlos (talk) 06:05, 24 February 2022 (UTC) It is absolutely notable and it is support, but at a well-developed page like Syrian civil war, support is indicated separately from actual belligerents. Gazelle55 (talk) 06:12, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Situation is still developing rapidly and is very new, let’s just wait a little bit to see Blackout8771 (talk) 06:39, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Agree with Juxlos they're literally invading from Belarus that absolutely is support. Alcibiades979 (talk) 09:40, 24 February 2022 (UTC) It is literally an act of war on the part of Belarus to allow Russian troops to enter Ukraine from Belarus — Preceding unsigned comment added by 675930s (talk • contribs) 10:06, 24 February 2022 (UTC) I agree with Gazelle55 and others that it can be considered non-combatant support, and I have made the addition. Definitely too early to be saying Belarusian forces are involved. ― Tartan357 Talk 11:05, 24 February 2022 (UTC) From what I understand, the military of Belarus is not involved. It's way too early to tell if they are or will get involved militarily Brookline Fire buff (talk) 21:53, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Termage

WP:SNOW closing, unlikely that this proposal will result in changes. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 22:05, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
It is highly disturbing to see Wikipedia referring to this peace keeping mission as an invasion. A vote should be had to get a more realistic language used. 120.22.6.85 (talk) 12:22, 24 February 2022 (UTC) The consensus across all media outlets is that this is an invasion. Alextheconservative (talk) 12:28, 24 February 2022 (UTC) You can have that vote if you want, but even if you enlist an WP:SPA Russian bot account army, it is not going to go the way you want. Kingsif (talk) 12:41, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Sarcasm or trolling - either way, a TP violation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.111.36.47 (talk) 12:53, 24 February 2022 (UTC) RS disagree.Slatersteven (talk) 13:22, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Strongly disagree. RoyalObserver (talk) 13:33, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Why is misinformation in the "see also section?"

The "see also" section no longer appears to contain what was described as misinformation. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 22:07, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Why is misinformation in there? It doesn't seem relavent to the article. I would just remove it but idk if I am missing something here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChicagoTaco (talk • contribs) 12:33, 24 February 2022 (UTC) I've removed it and Invasion. Kleinpecan (talk) 12:40, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Two references sections

There is currently only one reference section at the time of closing, issue fixed. [2] Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 22:04, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The page somehow ended up with two references sections. Can the middle one be moved/removed? --Posted by Pikamander2 (Talk) at 09:20, 24 February 2022 (UTC) I think my manual reversion should have fixed this? Reyne2 (talk) 09:34, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Two Russian soldiers captured

Probably needs a better source than Facebook. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 22:40, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Posted by the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Can anyone confirm its reliability please? https://www.facebook.com/CinCAFU/posts/254659590162867 119.74.177.38 (talk) 11:20, 24 February 2022 (UTC) I know you're just posting for confirmation, but considering the context–that is, Russia's sophisticated ability to create disinformation campaigns–I'd be very wary of adding any information on military efforts that isn't confirmed by multiple HQRS. I think this stuff automatically goes into the WP:EXCEPTIONAL basket. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:46, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Kudos

You're welcome! Closing this section as this is a very active talk page. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 22:09, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Thanks for updating and maintaining the article! CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 13:32, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

"Control" vs "Occupation" in infobox

Isn't this a bit biased?--47.33.186.77 (talk) 05:45, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Not at all. It is always used whenever a foreign force militarily controls a sovereign territory --MrMineHeads (talk) 06:01, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

No evidence of invasion yet

We don't need to argue about this any further. WP:SNOW closing. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 22:18, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
No real source or evidence of invasion have been provided, missiles strikes are not invading. Where are the actual evidence (footage, etc) of Russian troops in Ukraine outside of Donbass? Nebakin (talk) 06:06, 24 February 2022 (UTC) You are being ridiculous. This sort of talk is not constructive to the improvement of the article - grind your axe elsewhere.50.111.36.47 (talk) 06:47, 24 February 2022 (UTC) How not? Why are you afraid of people calling for concrete evidence? Go grind your axe somewhere else, your harassment have been reported. Nebakin (talk) 06:56, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Nobody "harassed" you - you were wasting bits here - there is OVERWHELMING news reports that this invasion is happening. Wasting people's time to respond to you is not constructive.50.111.36.47 (talk) 07:01, 24 February 2022 (UTC) News reports from biased sources. Also, stop harassing me. Nebakin (talk) 07:02, 24 February 2022 (UTC) There are already reports of ground forces invading, for example from Belarus. Mellk (talk) 06:09, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Reports are not concrete evidence, without supporting evidence it's just hearsay. There needs to be clear enough pictures and videos of Russian troops in Ukraine. Nebakin (talk) 06:16, 24 February 2022 (UTC) CNN has video at a border crossing with a column of AFVs crossing into Ukraine, on the road to Kiev. Not that we require video. Reports from reliable sources are sufficient. -- GreenC 06:36, 24 February 2022 (UTC) we do for such huge claims and ongoing events. Anyways Russia have only admitted movement into Donbass. Nebakin (talk) 06:56, 24 February 2022 (UTC) only admitted movement into Donbass, you believe that Donbass -- GreenC 07:17, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Yes, with all the evidence from neutral sources (which BBC, CNN, etc are not), the only admitted Russia movement is in Donbass, and I didn't mean the 2 republics, i meant the areas under Ukrainian control. Also, it doesn't matter what I believe, i was just pointing out the available evidence at the time was insufficient to prove it is an invasion. Nebakin (talk) 07:25, 24 February 2022 (UTC) I'm just curious, what resources are neutral (and reliable) in your opinion? @Nebakin? Evanluxzenburg (talk) 12:57, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Something that isn't so openly russophobic. CTGN is actually very neutral on such things and mainly just retrieves info from Ukrainian, Russian and western media together on their livefeed. They only publish stuff that is confirm, or if not, provide a view into claims on both sides Nebakin (talk) 13:04, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Okay so CTGN a Chinse media outlet is more neutral than Western-European or American media outlets? Evanluxzenburg (talk) 13:48, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Did you mean to type CGTN, China Global Television Network, which is under the Propaganda Department of the Chinese Communist Party? Also, South China Morning Post reported that Russian troops entered Ukraine through Crimea, of which The Hindu has provided video. Jade Ten (talk) 15:17, 24 February 2022 (UTC) There is no visual confirmation as of yet, CNN is not always reliable, especially not in dynamic situations. Dawit S Gondaria (talk) 06:50, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Of course there is. Many news channels are showing live feeds of artillery and missile attacks. This is just obtuse. 50.111.36.47 (talk) 07:02, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Looks pretty well confirmed to me by lots of sources. You don't think it's confirmed? What's your source? --GreenC 07:05, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Guardian says (10 minutes ago) (and kindly sources the claim) "More on the still unconfirmed Russian ground invasion in the east: Reuters is citing the Ukrainian border guard as saying separate Russian military columns have crossed the Ukrainian border into Chernihiv, Kharkiv and Luhansk regions." I have a feeling this link will quickly change content: https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2022/feb/24/russia-invades-ukraine-declares-war-latest-news-live-updates-russian-invasion-vladimir-putin-explosions-bombing-kyiv-kharkiv Jd2718 (talk) 07:49, 24 February 2022 (UTC) MoD of Russia claims no resistance by Ukrainian border forces (Interfax). Mellk (talk) 07:04, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Of course they're going to say that though, they want to demoralize the Ukrainian Army. Also I agree with ip user, there is overwhelming evidence that Russia has invaded Ukraine and Nebakin's contention of this is not constructive. Alcibiades979 (talk) 08:10, 24 February 2022 (UTC) I know, I mentioned that because Nebakin said there was no evidence of invasion, while Russian MoD itself issued statement about lack of resistance by Ukrainian border forces. Mellk (talk) 08:15, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Look at the time when i posted this, there was zero concrete evidence of invasion at that point, only evidence of missile strikes, which is not an invasion on its own. Nebakin (talk) 08:27, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Ahh, sorry about that, just woke up and didn't sleep so well to begin with. I think he's just doing a bit of trolling. Alcibiades979 (talk) 08:19, 24 February 2022 (UTC) That's OK. I'm not sure if he has been convinced yet, but of course now details are scarce. Mellk (talk) 08:22, 24 February 2022 (UTC) NYTimes is [www.nytimes.com/live/2022/02/24/world/russia-ukraine-putin/footage-shows-russian-troops-entering-ukraine reporting] Russian troops invading from Crimea. Alcibiades979 (talk) 08:30, 24 February 2022 (UTC) There are cctv footages of tanks crossing the ukranian border. It's only been 15 hours since invasion, remember that. I'm sure in the coming days and weeks, videos and pictures of the invasion will start to filter out. (JayPlaysStuff | talk to me | What I've been up to) 19:15, 24 February 2022 (UTC) There are cctv footages of tanks crossing the ukranian border. It's only been 15 hours since invasion, remember that. I'm sure in the coming days and weeks, videos and pictures of the invasion will start to filter out. (JayPlaysStuff | talk to me | What I've been up to) 19:15, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Are we literally arguing whether the invasion has started or not? Holy shit Hen2014 (talk) 20:31, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Could some add the reaction of France?

At the time of archiving, article mentions that France has condemned the invasion. [3] Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 22:02, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
France has condemned the invasion but I don't have edit permissions. Source: https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2022/feb/24/russia-invades-ukraine-declares-war-latest-news-live-updates-russian-invasion-vladimir-putin-explosions-bombing-kyiv-kharkiv BioTorus (talk) 07:34, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Two Sections Titled Invasion

The first section titled invasion talks more about the prelude than the second section, so maybe just tack it onto the prelude section? 2600:100F:B138:F078:40DD:C98F:6196:AFEC (talk) 09:33, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Anonymous addition

Anonymous has officially declared Cyberwar on Russia. They should be added as a co-belligerent on the side of Ukraine. 86.19.183.42 (talk) 00:41, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Misuse of the word invasion

WP:NOTFORUM

Under International Law an invasion requires a State to attack a hostile nation on the latter's territory. The attacks in Ukraine is, at the moment, contained in Donetsk and Luhansk, both recognized by Russia as sovereign allied republics. Since these two republics are allied to Russia the operation cannot be classified as an invasion. Acording to Russia it is only defending these allied republics against Ukrainian aggression. China has even explicitly stated the attacks are not an invasion at the moment, putting in evidence the possible wester bias in the term. As such, the use of the word invasion instead of the official term "special military operation" or just operation is pobabably inapropriate. Calling it not an invasion may also be biased, but the only official terminology currently available is "special military operation" and it is also more neutral, so this term probably should be used instead. 2804:14D:7684:8D24:F97A:A1E8:3FC:4D42 (talk) 08:29, 24 February 2022 (UTC) There have been witnessed attacks in the mainland of Ukraine too, for example close to Kiev. So it is indeed Russian invasion. Mlliarm (talk) 08:32, 24 February 2022 (UTC) The DPR and LPR are under international law part of Ukraine; and there are many sources listing acts of military attacks by Russian forces all over Ukraine. This is a descriptive term and the term used by many reliable sources. For the international legal definition, see crime of aggression. Many of the Russian attacks will quite likely also qualify as war crimes, and possibly crimes against humanity if the specific "kill" lists are acted on. Boud (talk) 09:22, 24 February 2022 (UTC) No, Ukraine attacked first and thus this is all legal attack. War crime would be a nuke (not simple fire bombs) strike on Kiev. 2A00:1370:8184:C98D:9FC:4353:3766:5704 (talk) 10:19, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Will an Admin please block this troll? It was requested earlier on the previous article pre-invasion. There is nothing constructive coming from this person and only WP:FORUM/SOAPish comments. -HammerFilmFan Do you have evidence of Ukraine attacking Russia? In my eyes, this is an obvious invasion, as many people before have mentioned. They also have sources to back them up. Niobian (talk) 10:59, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Of course the Russians (including their IP editors) will assert nonsense to "justify" their invasion. WWGB (talk) 11:06, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Here goes couple cents, food for thought. There were those 2 rabel regions in Ukraine where Ukraine military murdered over 10000 civilians over 8 years. They say it was Russian invasion and that they're winning, however failed to present a single body of a dead Russian soldier or burned down vehicle. After Ukraine publicly refused to go with Minsk agreements about a week ago, Putin recognizes their independence plus sings a defensive treaty with them. And guess what? Ukraine does not stop the artillery barage of the rebel regions, despite several warnings. The rebel regions ask for military help and Putin grants. So there is less grould to call it an invasion than NATO bombing Yugoslavia or Libya. All verifyable. Not on CNN and the like, tough. Did you notice how not a single "free media" report what Putin actually said? I condemn Putin policies, mind, but these total lies simply push Russians towards him. @WWGB calling people inferior based on their nationality is called "Nazism", buddy. Try thinking about that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.104.198.233 (talk) 12:06, 24 February 2022 (UTC) I never called anyone “inferior”. And thanks for demonstrating Godwin’s law. WWGB (talk) 12:34, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Aw really? So, by "Of course the Russians (including their IP editors) will assert nonsense" you mean that Russians are superior to non Russians and thier word should be trusted? Your wording is very deceptive, please change and i will apologize for this honest mistake about Nazi.95.104.198.233 (talk) 13:19, 24 February 2022 (UTC) WP:NOTAFORUM. Bonoahx (talk) 15:27, 24 February 2022 (UTC) People often use "the Russians", "the Germans", "the Saudis" etc. to refer to the governments of those countries. It's imprecise and can be misread (as you are, assuming you are being genuine in your reactions). —AFreshStart (talk) 17:21, 24 February 2022 (UTC) RS call, it an invasion, and so we do.Slatersteven (talk) 13:21, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Abbreviations

Please don't assume the average reader knows anything but the most common abbreviations such as UN Humphrey Tribble (talk) 12:49, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

• Even then, introduce "United Nations (UN)" before repeating the acronym. Kingsif (talk) 12:58, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 February 2022 (3)

Change Per Ukraine: 57 killed in total to Per Ukraine: 137 killed in total as updated by BBC News. 2A02:C7F:149B:1A00:28D2:1DDD:AE10:6A00 (talk) 23:16, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

 Done by another user. —AFreshStart (talk) 23:22, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 February 2022 (6)

Change "curfew lasting from 22:00 to 7:00" to "curfew lasting from 22:00 to 07:00" Cyrobyte (talk) 22:34, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

@Cyrobyte:  Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 22:35, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

What source could you possibly want to change 7:00 to 07:00, Chess? Mr rnddude (talk) 22:53, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

 Done for consistency. Mr rnddude (talk) 22:56, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

@Mr rnddude and Cyrobyte: I misread the edit request and thought the request actually changed the time. I apologize. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 22:59, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Map of territorial disputes

The relevance needs to be explained in the text, but if we do keep it Moldovia and Transnistria should be added to it. BilledMammal (talk) 04:16, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Indeed, perhaps all the 14 former Soviet republics, besides Russia itself :( GoodDay (talk) 04:19, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Moldovia and Transnistria because they are the only frozen conflict involving Russia that is not currently included on the map. I'm not sure we need the other former Soviet republics, as most of them don't add useful information to the map. BilledMammal (talk) 04:42, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

I've removed it from the article while its relevance is not explained; while the frozen conflicts are likely to be relevant, and the expansion of NATO is relevant, it needs to be explained in the text - and I'm not sure that the chosen map is ideal to demonstrate the latter, as it doesn't demonstrate the change over time. Further, I don't believe the members of the CSTO are relevant; only Russia and Belarus are. BilledMammal (talk) 04:49, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 February 2022

Per the Ukrainian Ministry of Internal Affairs, all men aged 18-60 are prohibited from leaving Ukraine for the duration of the martial law period. Source: https://mvs.gov.ua/uk/news/shhodo-obmezen-v-peretini-kordonu-na-viyizd-z-ukrayini-okremoyu-kategorijeyu-gromadyan (in Ukrainian)

Please add this information following "died on the first day of the invasion." at the end of the February 24 subsection of the "Invasion" heading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SrikTLG (talk • contribs) 00:31, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

 Done Benica11 (talk) 00:57, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Add this Wikisource page

This Wikisource page should be added to the page, either in External Links or in the part about Zelensky's speech to the Russian people against war.

97.107.179.62 (talk) 03:26, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

 Done Benica11 (talk) 03:39, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 February 2022 (3)

Can we get an update on the casualties? Per the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine: https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1497037374571917344

🔊 Deputy Minister of Defense of Ukraine Hanna Malyar informs:

Estimated losses of the enemy as of 03:00 25.02.2022
Aircraft 7 units
Helicopters 6 units
Tanks - more than 30 units.
BBM - 130 units.

The loss of enemy personnel is approximately (to be specified) 800 people. 2601:881:8401:27D0:B5F9:A62D:9400:AB6F (talk) 03:30, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Can you provide a more reliable source for the casualties? A tweet isn't considered very reliable. >>> Ingenuity.talk(); 03:43, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

This tweet is from an account that is pointed to by the official page of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine. See the upper right corner of the page. https://www.mil.gov.ua/en/ Scatophaga (talk) 04:20, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

 Done userdude 04:43, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 February 2022 (3)

At protests section :

Pro-Ukrainian protests have occurred at several of Russia's embassies abroad, including those in Armenia,[291] Bulgaria,[292] Belgium,[293] Hungary,[294] Iceland,[295] Ireland,[296] Moldova,[297] the Netherlands,[298] Romania,[299] the United Kingdom,[300] and the United States.[301]

There's no Germany, whilst the picture depicting a protest in Berlin. Also, available source to cite: https://www.dw.com/en/ukraine-russia-conflict-protests-in-berlin/g-60885890 FeliciaKrismanta (talk) 03:36, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

 Done >>> Ingenuity.talk(); 03:46, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 February 2022 (4)

Around 4AM local time on February 25, Kyiv was rocked with two explosions. https://www.twitter.com/AFP/status/1497039378778320896

Ukrainian Interior Ministry official Anton Herashchenko relayed via Telegram that those explosions were cruise and ballistic missiles being targeted at Kyiv once more. https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1497044255864688640

Requesting these additions to the February 25th subsection of "Invasion." SrikTLG (talk) 03:47, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

@SrikTLG can you provide a more reliable source than Twitter? If you can find a news source then I'll add it. >>> Ingenuity.talk(); 03:49, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Yep, here: https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/24/europe/ukraine-russia-invasion-friday-intl-hnk/index.html This CNN report also provides information that Russian forces entering from Belarus are less than 20 miles from Kyiv. SrikTLG (talk) 03:55, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

 Done >>> Ingenuity.talk(); 04:01, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 February 2022 (4)

Around 4AM local time on February 25, Kyiv was rocked with two explosions. https://www.twitter.com/AFP/status/1497039378778320896

Ukrainian Interior Ministry official Anton Herashchenko relayed via Telegram that those explosions were cruise and ballistic missiles being targeted at Kyiv once more. https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1497044255864688640

Requesting these additions to the February 25th subsection of "Invasion." SrikTLG (talk) 03:47, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

@SrikTLG can you provide a more reliable source than Twitter? If you can find a news source then I'll add it. >>> Ingenuity.talk(); 03:49, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Yep, here: https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/24/europe/ukraine-russia-invasion-friday-intl-hnk/index.html This CNN report also provides information that Russian forces entering from Belarus are less than 20 miles from Kyiv. SrikTLG (talk) 03:55, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

 Done >>> Ingenuity.talk(); 04:01, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 February 2022 (2)

I'd like to edit the Invasion section where CNN called Putin's claims baseless. I'd like to point out that this ins't only CNN, it's a consensus that Putin's claims are completely false and unfounded. Please change it to point that out. skelter (talk) 19:40, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

@Lucidum Hydra: If you wish someone to make this change, you'll need to provide the exact wording you wish them to use, with suitable citation(s). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:54, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 February 2022 (5)

There is Bosnia in Non-lethal military supporters X THE HERO x (talk) 22:13, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

@X THE HERO x Exactly what do you want to be changed? SwanX1 (talk) 22:28, 24 February 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. BSMRD (talk) 22:31, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 February 2022 (2)

Changing the number of tanks, armoured vehicles and helicopters destroyed as reported by the ukrainian military TheHaloVeteran2 (talk) 00:56, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Got a source? ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 01:16, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 02:42, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Grammar edit request on first sentence of first paragraph.

In the first sentence of the first paragraph, "On 24 February 2022" should be corrected to "On the 24th of February, 2022" Bucket of Lard (talk) 03:21, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done this article uses dmy format so it is correct. >>> Ingenuity.talk(); 03:42, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Re-organize sanctions section?

Should we move the sanctions from before the invasion into the "Prelude" section and then turn the remainder of the "Sanctions" section into a "Reactions" section? This seems like the more standard organization for such a page. Thanks, Gazelle55 (talk) 06:11, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Yes, that would be apt Abheygpt1 (talk) 06:49, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Time zone for 24 Feb

Do we want Moscow Time = UTC+3 or Time in Ukraine = UTC+2 or a mix depending on whether we're talking about statements by Putin or actions in Ukraine? Boud (talk) 06:47, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Having a single time zone by default, throughout the section, (with optionally another one in brackets) would make things simpler. Boud (talk) 06:48, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

MOS:TIMEZONE Give priority to the place at which the event had its most significant effects; for example, if a [cr]acker in Monaco attacked a Pentagon computer in the US, use the time zone for the Pentagon, where the attack had its effect. Putin is like the hypothetical cracker here, so Ukrainian time (UTC+2) would make sense as the default. Boud (talk) 06:52, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Archived sources

Live news sources without web archives are not useful as WP:RS, because their content is volatile - after a few hours they will not show the information summarised from their content. If you think that a live source will qualify as a WP:RS, then at least archive it and include that in the reference. Boud (talk) 06:57, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Reactions in Poland

The Polish president Andrzej Duda twitted (in Polish, below my own rather direct/word-for-word translation): "Despite the efforts of the international community, Ukraine has fallen victim of a brutal, unprovoced and unjustified Russian assault. We act together with our allies in NATO and the EU, together we will respond to the Russian brutal aggression and we will not leave Ukraine without support." Source: https://twitter.com/AndrzejDuda/status/1496713699515584512

Follow-up tweet from Duda (in Polish, below my own rather direct/word-for-word translation): "Today at 5.48 [Polish time (?)] I spoke with the President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy @ZelenskyyUa. It has come to a Russian invasion of Ukraine. Its scale is most probably wide. This is an unprecedented act of rape on the norms of international law. Russia excludes itself from the international community." Source: https://twitter.com/AndrzejDuda/status/1495910765177577484

The Polish prime minister Mateusz Morawiecki twitted (in English): "We must immediately respond to Russia's criminal aggression on Ukraine. Europe and the free world has to stop Putin. Today's European Council should approve fiercest possible sanctions. Our support for Ukraine must be real." Source: https://twitter.com/MorawieckiM/status/1496721904551579649 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ngfio (talk • contribs) 08:40, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

@Ngfio Twitter isn't an official source. SwanX1 (talk) 08:42, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

@SwanX1The tweet is from the official account of Mateusz Morawiecki. So I'd say it's a pretty good source. Mlliarm (talk) 08:45, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

I don't know the official Wikipedia policies concerning twitter, but both tweets has been cited by the Polish Press Agency, [4] and [5] Ngfio (talk) 09:04, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Great find sl (talk) 08:55, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Broken edit?

An edit [6] by User:Orbitz_stop_st_ro increased the size of the article by about 50% while cutting out a large amount of existing content (e.g. almost all of the details in the invasion section are gone - it looks like it may have rolled back edits to the previous day.) Can you try to fix what you were apparently trying to do, User:Orbitz_stop_st_ro, or otherwise, can someone fix the article or restore the removed changes? Reyne2 (talk) 09:24, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

I thought this too, but there was very little content cut, it's just after the massive reference section in the middle of the article you have to scroll past. The article is really broken at the moment. 〈 Forbes₇₂ | Talk 〉 09:32, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

I manually reverted to right before the giant change. Reyne2 (talk) 09:32, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

The second reference section was causing reFill to malfunction. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 09:34, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks I was trying to make this change as well due to the duplicated article from two different revisions. -- Rauisuchian (talk) 09:36, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

It looks like it was reverted manually by someone else for some reason... I guess this was technically an edit war, but hopefully it's not an issue due to the pressing need of the situation, and I'll recuse myself from editing the article now. Reyne2 (talk) 09:39, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

You guys keep reverting other ppl's edit in the process as well, including mine-AINH (talk) 09:40, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Why is this called Russian invasion

WP:NOTFORUM

Why is this called Russian invasion, when Saudi invasion of Yemen is called intervention? 72.255.58.60 (talk) 11:35, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Because the lawful Yemen president asked the Saudis and others to assist his government. Ukraine did not "ask" Russia to invade it. WWGB (talk) 11:40, 24 February 2022 (UTC) If you think the Wikipedia coverage of the Saudi action in Yemen should be changed, go make that suggestion there. That has nothing to do with what we say here. Bondegezou (talk) 11:48, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Sourcing

Just a reminder that the bulk of this article should be sourced to independent reliable sources that have independently verified the information; any disputed/unconfirmed/unverified/etc. claims, of course, can use partial sources attributed inline (e.g. "Ukraine says, Russia says"). In fact, in-line attribution may be safe for anything that could be challenged. Kingsif (talk) 12:28, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

The German chancellor did not shelved Nord Stream 2 because of an ongoing Russian advance into Ukraine

HeyRauisuchian,

today the Russian military made advancements into Ukrainian territory. If the decision from Scholz was on the day before yesterday, how was his decision based on today's Russian advancement?

https://www.politico.eu/article/germany-to-stop-nord-stream-2/

The source doesn't support your conclusion, please revert your edit.

Regards, --Da Vinci Nanjing (talk) 11:44, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

I've reverted, as I agree with your reasoning. Germany's shelving of Nord Stream 2 was not a response to the campaign started 24 February (the current article does not seem to classify the Donbas intervention as being part of the invasion, rather being part of the prelude to the invasion, and I think that's correct from a presentational standpoint). ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:50, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

To be clear though, I think the rest of the paragraph should also go. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:55, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Makes sense, however background about the existing sanctions after 21 February is relevant, as a background to the international response from 24 February, if stated as such. Could be moved rather than removed, but future news articles will likely contextualize and repeat the same info when additional sanctions are reported. Rauisuchian (talk) 12:35, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Putin prepared for invasion in advance

I think it should be expressed in article.

1. In 2021, the process of formation reserve military units manned by voluntary reservists has intensified. Here is the article by Alexander Golts, journalist and military columnist Analyzing numerous scattered reports of regional media, he believes that it involves the formation of several full-stregth corps in each military districts, and it is unprecedented number. The exact number of reserve troops is classified. Usually, individual training of reservists takes 6 month (2-3 days a month), and only then field maneuvers of reserve military units start (as a rule in summer). However, in autumn and winter 2021, new reservists were sent for maneuvers immediately after signing contracts. Not typical rush.

2. On 18 February 2022, Putin signed the Decree on drafting of citizens who had demobbed earlier and had not signed contracts to perform reserve military service (non-reservists). The exact number of drafted non-reservists is classified.

3. According Russian law, conscripts not completed a general four-month military training course should not be used in war zone. In fact, they are used.

All indications are that Putin is going All-In. K8M8S8 (talk) 14:51, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Maybe, but we need RS saying it, not our wp:or saying it.Slatersteven (talk) 14:54, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

I can recommend the following two analyses: [7][8]. They have in-depth description of some background, Putin's political objectives, and military options. They have both predicted pretty much what's going on right now, including the offensives on Kyiv (with an explanation why Russia deems that necessary). These two sources can also be used to start the "Military analysis" section. --Mindaur (talk) 15:05, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

References

Map of invasion is POV

There is no legend for Crimea, or is it considered Russian? 82.37.67.151 (talk) 14:57, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Is there any fighting there?Slatersteven (talk) 15:07, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Is this the map in the infobox? I don't think it's POV, but it could do with a legend explaining what the shading means for Crimea and the eastern Donbass, and indeed for Transnistria. It could also do with a legend explaining "NATO" and "CSTO". I would be tempted to remove the references to NATO given NATO is not involved in the fighting. Bondegezou (talk) 15:10, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

I don’t mean the first map, I mean the one under Invasion header. Crimea seems to be labelled as Russian. Also, Ukraine is not only the green. Super POV. --82.37.67.151 (talk) 15:14, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Ahh, yes I think we need a map that makes it clear these are occupied by Russia.Slatersteven (talk) 15:17, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

The map is as neutral as possible. It doesn't even specify if the territories are contested or occupied at present. Distrait cognizance (talk) 15:52, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

The map literally calls the red part ‘occupied’. --Damián A. Fernández Beanato (talk) 16:04, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

The green should say Rest of Ukraine, or unoccupied Ukraine.--Damián A. Fernández Beanato (talk) 16:14, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

That is odd I could have sworn when I posted it did not say occupied.Slatersteven (talk) 16:18, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

The author changed it I think, but they still need to change the legend for the green. --Damián A. Fernández Beanato (talk) 16:21, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Reactions and ramifications

Was: "Reactions and ramifications" lacking large European nations and lack of UN mentions. (Possibly partially outdated - the article keeps updating) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:54, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Why are mentions of Indonesia and India in the same paragraph? They deserve separate ones.

As for the prominence, I find it strange that a statement from the Croatian Prime Minister is so high up in the list, though it does somewhat fit there thematically to round out the European responses. I'd prefer something from Spain or Italy, as more relevant, as it seems a lot of space to give to a small nation with a strong response to the crisis. Moldova makes sense, as it's on their border, but Croatia is a bit weird to find there among the rest. Maybe it's there for how clear the condemnation is? That might make sense.

What's strange is that stuff like Spain, Italy and France were missing, but Croatia was on the list?

Similarly, calling China "Other reactions" in such a charged topic carries connotations of only two sides. Especially when "Other reactions" only contains Russia and China. English is weird that way. I mean come on, I'm sure all of English wikipedia can find reactions that aren't from the West, or Russia or China.

Like here: [9]

WHO response, Turkey response that can be added to the condemnation list, Hungary, Bulgaria, Australia, Spain, Italy, Greece, Finland, Sweeden, Canada, there are plenty of reaction over there that could be added to the page. Why haven't they? I have to ask, because the page is locked, and I can't edit it myself. At least add more nations beyond NATO, Europe, and China. Like Japan and South Korea. Finding that wasn't hard, and we can take Italy and Spain from it, to put into the article.

Also, does anyone have any links for what India and Brazil are saying? Apart from "closely following the development of events in the region"?

As well, in the lead in to the article, it should be mentioned that the invasion started without UN approval, which is another violation of the UN charter, Chapter VII. That mention and reference should probably contain a link to other recent examples of such violations, since Russian media are still using that reference and justifications springing from those violations.

A link for possible addition to the article for a column by Masha Gessen: [10]

PS: The article keeps changing, and some of my initial concerns have been cleared up, on the US, UK, Spain, Italy and such. But some stuff is still missing.

Keep up the good work! Primemountain (talk) 16:39, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

"Russian invasion of Ukraine" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Russian invasion of Ukraine and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 24#Russian invasion of Ukraine until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 17:09, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Spain sends warships to Black Sea

Source: https://www.reuters.com/world/spain-sends-warships-black-sea-considers-sending-warplanes-2022-01-20/ -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by ExoQuest (talk • contribs) 17:24, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Are they shooting? Slatersteven (talk) 17:27, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

clarification of post-Soviet context needed

In 2009, Romanian analyst Iulian Chifu and his co-authors opined that in regard to Ukraine, Russia has pursued an updated version of the Brezhnev Doctrine, which dictates that the sovereignty of Ukraine cannot be larger than that of the Warsaw Pact's member states prior to the collapse of the Soviet sphere of influence during the late-1980s and early-1990s.

I have read and reread this statement, and I cannot fathom its meaning. What does "larger" mean in the context of "sovereignty?" I implore any editor with a better understanding of the context to rewrite this using clearer metaphor, if any at all.--~TPW 16:51, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Also what relevance does it have, as it is not going to increase in size from the late-1980s anyway, even if all the Rusian-occupied land is returned, it will be the same size.Slatersteven (talk) 16:56, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

It appears to me that 'larger' here means that the sovereignty (or degree of sovereignty) enjoyed by Ukraine cannot be greater than what is used to enjoy when it was a member of the Warsaw pact.Lone Warrior 007 (talk) 17:20, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

I'm hoping someone with the appropriate knowledge will update the article with better wording.~TPW 18:27, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Cyber warfare

I believe that Russia’s reported use of cyber attacks on Ukraine is notable enough to be included in this article, would love to hear feedback. 69.5.138.1 (talk) 16:30, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Given that reliable sources can be found, I agree that it should be mentioned in the body of the article, even if it is mentioned in the Template:Russo-Ukrainian War. For now however, the article 2022 Ukraine cyberattacks needs updating. Somers-all-the-time (talk) 18:32, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Date edit

Was it no Feb 22nd 2022 (11pm CST) that he first recognized and mobilized troops? And Feb 24th is when force started to be used. Should the date be edited to the start of mobilization? If so what time zone should we recognize the official news break so we can decide Feb 23rd or Feb 22nd to be the start? Or are we using Feb 24th as the official date due to use of force? 2600:1014:B02C:489D:D1D6:21BC:4A3A:5C7F (talk) 18:43, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 February 2022 (4)

On sanctions, mention the following

British prime minister Boris Johnson stated that Russian flag carrier Aeroflot was banned from flying to the United Kingdom, which affected flights from Moscow to London. This also lead to Manchester United cutting their sponsorship ties with the company. 76.82.51.127 (talk) 17:37, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

I do not think we need every sanction, as it happens. We can just say "as the conflict continued the UK increased its economic sanctions against Russia", and that covers us.Slatersteven (talk) 17:40, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:50, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Media could be migrated

These appear to be made by VOA, as employees of US GOVT they are Public Domain:

• https://www.voanews.com/a/russia-launches-invasion-of-ukraine-with-multiple-cities-hit-in-initial-missile-strikes/6456841.html
• https://www.voanews.com/a/6457336.html

Victor Grigas (talk) 18:56, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 February 2022 - Minor edit suggestion: link between article

Minor edit suggestion: At the leader section, the President of Russia is linked, but Ukrainian President is not. Suggested page to link: President of Ukraine -- FeliciaKrismanta (talk) 10:56, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Done Laurel Lodged (talk) 10:59, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Give THIS the Russo-Ukrainian War title, change the other one to skirmishes or something

2604:3D09:1F80:CA00:48F7:77BC:3B5:6E9B (talk) 03:52, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

AFAIK, there's been no Ukrainian military resistance. GoodDay (talk) 04:17, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

2604:3D09:1F80:CA00:B49C:49F7:E426:DECC (talk) 04:34, 24 February 2022 (UTC) https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/t010lw/gunfire_between_russian_and_ukrainian_forces_in/ gunfighting. They are fighting back

Russo-Ukrainian War is the overview article, which remains valid. This article is on the 2022 phase, which is an invasion of Ukraine by Russia according to almost all reliable sources. There are no serious sources claiming that Ukrainian forces have attacked any internationally recognised Russian territory (apart from Disinformation in the 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis). Boud (talk) 04:58, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Except there hasn't been a war until now. This isn't a "phase" of some war that's been ongoing, this is the beginning of the war. --eduardog3000 (talk) 20:18, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

There was plenty of Russo-Ukrainian War back in 2014-2015 and low-level violence since. Jsnider3 (talk) 00:11, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

No, the Russo ukranian war is a protracted conflict since 2014. The past few months have been an escalation of tensions, culminating in a large scale Russian offensive. (JayPlaysStuff | talk to me | What I've been up to) 06:02, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Russo-Ukrainian War article should be renamed to Ukrainian Crisis — Preceding unsigned comment added by 675930s (talk • contribs) 10:08, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Seeing as Ukraine is putting up a good amount of resistance and taking some territory back, I think it should be called a war. Blackout8771 (talk) 00:07, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Change the page name to Russian conquest of Ukraine. Banga03 (talk) 07:09, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Detailed map

Is a detailed war map for this invasion necessary? I just made the template and module as quick as I could due to current attention, however I would have no time to populate this map as I am very busy with college and life. MarioJump83! 13:28, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

I'm sure there's somebody on here that has the time and patience to actually update the map. Toast (talk) 13:31, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I appreciate you making the template. I'll do my best to update it to keep up with events. So far I've partially updated the map and its related articles to keep up with events. If you have any questions or suggestions feel free to leave a comment below here or on my talk page. Colin dm (talk) 22:34, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Timeline needed

Separate timeline article now exists at Timeline of the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Further discussion can occur there. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 22:11, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
If there is one thing that is learned from the Covid-19 article series, it is that there is need for a timeline of events. Is anyone quickly able to whip one up? Distrait cognizance (talk) 14:21, 24 February 2022 (UTC) the I began Timeline of the COVID-19 pandemic in January 2020, and too the Timeline of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant (I forget exactly when), so I'll just on it. kencf0618 (talk) 16:13, 24 February 2022 (UTC) It's up: Timeline of the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine (typos are neurological). kencf0618 (talk) 16:34, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Market reaction - add Dow?

The DOW opened 800 points lower than it closed yesterday. 134.167.1.1 (talk) 14:34, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

It's not just the DOW that's lower today -- it's almost every market worldwide. Maybe a section on financial impacts, but not just on the DOW index/American markets. >>> Ingenuity.talk(); 14:36, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Yes, it's important enough to include the reaction by the financial markets. Along with the large fall in stock market indices, the prices of gold & oil increased sharply. Jim Michael (talk) 15:17, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

US Market reaction today is pretty muted. S&P had already been correcting due to rising interest rates, and is down only 50 points, or 1.2% ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Alcibiades979 (talk) 16:09, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

I propose we axe the Stock Market reaction aside from the RTS plunging. A. newspapers are generally less than reliable when reporting on why the stock market did x, y, or z; also I'm not really sure how relevant it is what markets did in New Zealand. What's more is that it creates a POV problem. Hang Seng Index is down so it gets written about, but NASDAQ is flat, so it doesn't get written about. The three prices that actually are important are wheat, natural gas, and oil. But even then it's quite early to draw any conclusions about the latter two. Plus this isn't an article about finance or dissecting price movements its an article on Russia invading Ukraine. Alcibiades979 (talk) 18:34, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

What is RTS? Please minimize abbreviations. Humphrey Tribble (talk) 21:10, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

RTS Index is an index that tracks the Russian stock market like the SP does for the American markets or the FTSE does for British markets. Alcibiades979 (talk) 09:30, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Link order of battle page in the infobox

Order of battle is now linked in the infobox as of closing. [11] Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 22:13, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Here is link Order of battle for the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. It will include all individual units participating. This is standard for many wiki articles on wars and conflicts, especially those in Syrian civil war, Libyan civil warm etc. --PanNostraticism (talk) 16:51, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Transninstria uses rocket warfare to attack Ukraine

As of closing, Transnistria was added to the infobox as a country that was alleged to have supported Russia along with a source. [12] Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 22:15, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Transninstria should be added to the nations supporting Russia. Bilikon (talk) 16:52, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Source?Slatersteven (talk) 16:54, 24 February 2022 (UTC) All of these are unconfirmed reports. The only new thing that happened was that Transnistrian forces made another exercise again. Super Ψ Dro 17:03, 24 February 2022 (UTC) I am sorry. I didn't no it's only claims, I've been hearing this all day on TV. I didn't know it's propaganda/unconfirmed. Bilikon (talk) 18:43, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

British English or American English?

Since I'm seeing both versions of "-ise" and "-ize" being used in this article, I'm wondering if there is a preferred spelling. Alpha Piscis Austrini (talk) 16:55, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

I would support American one. AXONOV (talk) ⚑ 17:22, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Ah. I already switched the "ize" to "ise". But if you want to switch it back to "ize" then I wouldn't mind either. Alpha Piscis Austrini (talk) 17:25, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Per WP:COFAQ#ENGLISH, we should strive for consistency of spelling. Since this is not an American or British related article, it's up to you to choose, and hope others follow suit. Deathstar3548 (talk) 17:08, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Technically speaking, -ize is British English too - see Oxford spelling. But Deathstar is right, we should seek consistency here... —AFreshStart (talk) 17:23, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Fair enough. I switched "ize" to "ise" before seeing this comment. But if it switches back then no biggie. I'll just make it consistent then. Alpha Piscis Austrini (talk) 17:25, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! I generally prefer British English on European-related WP articles (I may be biased as I'm from the UK), unless there is good reason to use US English, but I'm aware it's not Wikipedia policy. —AFreshStart (talk) 17:30, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Yeah I switched it to "ise" because that was the variation used in the first paragraph and was the first variation I saw. Alpha Piscis Austrini (talk) 17:32, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

I also prefer using British English in Europe, MENA, and Africa-related articles. WhisperToMe (talk) 01:24, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

British English seems the correct one, as the original revision was forked from 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis which is in BE. I added a banner to the top. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 01:22, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Arms suppliers and non lethal military aid providers to Ukraine

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Duplicate discussion at § Belligerent. Jr8825 • Talk 02:45, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

---

Can these countries be removed from the infobox please? They are all dated past the invasion and are not involved with it. Viewsridge (talk) 16:58, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

My understanding is that those countries provided things in anticipation of the invasion. BeŻet (talk) 17:01, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

I can still see why this is not support now the war has started.Slatersteven (talk) 17:03, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Yes and those weapons are literally, as we speak, are being used by Ukraine to defend itself. --Mindaur (talk) 17:04, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Correct. The supplied are used by Ukranian military to defend themselves. I would support keeping it as long as sources are given. AXONOV (talk) ⚑ 17:21, 24 February 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.

Reactions and ramifications

This has already been done at time of closing. Section is already split up between countries and organizations. [13] Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 22:30, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
I propose to split this section further into sanctions by countries or/and unions. AXONOV (talk) ⚑ 17:21, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

It actually started 7 years ago, Russia has funded the separatist terrorist groups in Ukraine

WP:SNOW closing this. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 22:20, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Maybe do more drepper research. You make it seem, like Russia hasn't been weakening their army for the last 7 years. Thats why so much US hardware has increased in volume the last 7 years. Personally thought it was gonna happen two years ago. 2600:100E:B03D:F435:42C3:89B7:6495:9196 (talk) 17:34, 24 February 2022 (UTC) This is about this invasion, not the wider conflict.Slatersteven (talk) 17:39, 24 February 2022 (UTC) 1. Like the above comment said, this is the invasion. And 2. what does US hardware have to do with this? Alpha Piscis Austrini (talk) 17:37, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Suggested addition: NATO's reaction

NATO's reaction has been added at time of archiving in the "international organizations" section. [14] Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 22:24, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Since the issue of Ukraine - NATO involvement is one of Russia's justification for the escalation of conflict before the invasion, I think NATO's reaction deserves its own section. Some articles of interest to begin with: - https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/nato-has-no-plans-send-troops-into-ukraine-stoltenberg-says-2022-02-24/ - https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_192401.htm FeliciaKrismanta (talk) 17:40, 24 February 2022 (UTC) References

"Invasion" in the title needs to be capitalized.

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (capitalization) is clear on this. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 06:08, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Titles look more sophisticated and better for readers when words are capitalized in it. "Of" is not a word in titles that should be capitalized, but "Invasion" is. Fadedmax (talk) 17:51, 24 February 2022 (UTC) please read wp:mos, it does not look more sophisticated.Slatersteven (talk) 17:52, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Please see Wikipedia:Naming conventions (capitalization) which discusses the issue in detail. ‡ El cid, el campeador talk 17:54, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

The time for the fall of Chernobyl doesn't make sense

Misunderstanding of time zones. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 06:10, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Under the invasion section, it says: "At 18:20 (UTC+2) it was confirmed by Ukrainian officials that Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant had fallen under the control of the Russians." At time of posting this discussion, it is 18:09 UTC. I don't understand how Chernobyl could have fallen already if it's listed as having fallen 10+ minutes in the future. I could be completely mistaken. This could have been a typo. This could've been a lot of things, but I know it's not 18:20 UTC on Feb 24 or later. 2601:18A:C080:8530:D418:2DE2:8EE6:32AA (talk) 18:09, 24 February 2022 (UTC) I think UTC+2 means its not 18:20 UTC.Slatersteven (talk) 18:12, 24 February 2022 (UTC) I guess the 18:20 time is in the UTC+2 timezone (so 16:20 in UTC+0). Kleinpecan (talk) 18:21, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Time on target?

There are multiple reports of simultaneous multiple explosions at sites across Ukraine minutes after Putin's televised speech. Keep a watch out for Time on target citations. If that is in fact the case, I don't think it's ever been done on this scale, at least not at the start of war. kencf0618 (talk) 18:50, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Biden's speech today said "moments" after Putin's speech - so that's one reported RS as far as what the U.S. President claimed. Whatever his sources are, I'm sure some dedicated editors will pursue ... 50.111.36.47 (talk) 20:16, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Edit conflicts...

... continue to be a big issue. The UI is a mess to figure things out, so I presume people just save, and then other people edit, and now regardless of where you revert to a lot of edits are lost. Not sure if there's any better ways to manage this problem on highly edited articles? ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 18:51, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Yes its called wp:notnews we can wait, we do not need a live up dates. We can wait a day or a week.Slatersteven (talk) 18:53, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Well, there's extended confirmed protection for a year now, probably resolving at least a part of the issues. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:53, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict)the irony:A reminder to users to try to edit in specific sections where possible, rather than editing the main article as a whole. That reduces edit conflicts. — Czello 18:54, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

No, this is the Wiki interface. It sucks. Will probably take many many man hours of development time on the MediaWiki end. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 06:12, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 February 2022

Change “4 tanks destroyed” under Ukrainian claims section of Casualties and losses to “15+ tanks neutralized”

Source verified Ukrainian newspaper posting citing official state release: https://twitter.com/kyivpost/status/1496856597418725376?s=21 Markwardlaw (talk) 19:09, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

I would rather we waitSlatersteven (talk) 19:16, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Needs to have a reliable source. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 20:56, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

US deployments

As of archiving, information is already included about US troops deploying to nearby countries. [15] Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 06:15, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
yeah someone add something about this https://time.com/6150266/troop-movements-ukraine-russia/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Perfofficial (talk • contribs) 19:40, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Ukrainian casualties

According to CNN (link), Ukraine's Minister of Healthcare Viktor Lyashko has confirmed at least 57 killed and 169 injured (combatants and non-combatants). Thanks, EDG 543 ^{(message me)} 20:02, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft started

Moot discussion, draft is now the article List of military engagements during the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine and a talk page notification of that has been posted here. [16] Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 23:01, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
I started a draft for the Draft:List of military engagements during the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, similarly to the WW1/WW2 ones. Elijahandskip (talk) 20:08, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Request for editing? Trying to add information about the Turkish ship hit by Russian bomb a few hours ago WikiEditorPublicGood999 (talk) 20:15, 24 February 2022 (UTC) WikiEditorPublicGood999, you are free to add it. The list has no page protection. Elijahandskip (talk) 21:47, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Update on losses?1

Please update, thiz s is a n extremely terrible situation. Are there any sources that have an updated loss statistic? god save ukraine — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thegoodguyas (talk • contribs) 20:50, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

The number of destroyed vehicles

No sources means we can't do anything. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 06:16, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
There has been MUCH more armored vehicles destroyed on both sides, i know that its hard to find info on that but please do something about it, according to the ukrainians they destroyed 15 t72 tanks 2001:14BB:692:47E9:DD19:3E9D:311E:6E94 (talk) 20:57, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Please provide a reliable source. Melmann 21:02, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Conflicting times in various paragraphs

Issue seems to be fixed. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 06:18, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
In the intro paragraph: "At about 03:00 UTC (06:00 Moscow time, UTC+3) ... Putin announced a military operation" Later, in the Invasion section: "Shortly before 04:00 Moscow Time (UTC+3) on 24 February, Putin announced ... a military operation" So, when did it happen? At 03:00 UTC or 01:00 UTC? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2610:148:610:2B0C:0:0:0:57 (talk) 21:03, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Looks like around 06:00. Thanks for bringing this up Benica11 (talk) 21:13, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Casualties

https://twitter.com/olex_scherba/status/1496947501626454017?s=21 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wasakianox (talk • contribs) 21:19, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

A tweet by Ukraine's Ambassador to Austria (2014-2021). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:42, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Not a government source (anymore) and not a journalist. IMO, not a WP:RS. Melmann 21:46, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Should pages for individual battles be created?

While the invasion itself is rather new, there have bene various battles in Kharkiv, Chernobyl, Hostomel Airport, etc which I would consider worthy of their own pages even though there is scarce and developing info on them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jebiguess (talk • contribs) 19:15, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

I would rather we wait, and not have 15 live news feeds running at once.Slatersteven (talk) 19:16, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

We are already having a substantial duplication of content problem. Pruning and splitting can be done later, after the events come to some kind of conclusion or denouement. There is no WP:HASTE. Focus on content here. I hoped I'd never have to revive this, but please see WP:FORK FORK. RGloucester — ☎ 19:22, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

I'd agree, but not yet. Many current sources are inaccurate or contradicting each other. Lots of info aren't confirmed yet as well. Super Ψ Dro 19:27, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

There Needs to be an article made for the Airborne landing in Hostomel at least — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noaboatx (talk • contribs) 19:45, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Transnistria .

Discussion would be better suited to Template talk:Transnistria note. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 22:47, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
transnistria is recognized by south ossetia, abkhazia and artsakh (non recognized states), change the transnistria note thing to reflect that. EpicWikiLad (talk) 21:41, 24 February 2022 (UTC) That text is actually transcluded from Template:Transnistria note. You should probably take this up on that template's talk page. HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith (talk) 22:45, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

“Russian aggression” in infobox

"Aggression" changed to "advancement" at time of closing.[17] This is more or less an edit request without a template so closing to declutter talk page. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 23:09, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
That seems quite biased, change it to “invasion” instead of aggression — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vanished User 2157280005 (talk • contribs) 22:32, 24 February 2022 (UTC) @Vanished User 2157280005 If it quacks like a duck, swims like a duck, and walks like a duck, it's probably a duck. Sarcasticeinstein (talk) 22:41, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Not sure what you mean given that the word "aggression" isn't in the infobox. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 22:46, 24 February 2022 (UTC) It was just changed a few minutes ago. https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine&diff=1073835256&oldid=1073835240 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vanished User 2157280005 (talk • contribs) 22:49, 24 February 2022 (UTC) @Vanished User 2157280005: Makes sense, I'm going to close this thread as the issue seems to be resolved. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 23:07, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

List of military engagements during the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine

Just so people are aware, the list article has been started and articles for three battles exist: Battle of Chernobyl, Battle of Snake Island & Battle of Antonov Airport. All three are stubs currently. Elijahandskip (talk) 22:54, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

@Elijahandskip Wikipedia has moved faster than the Russian army. Sarcasticeinstein (talk) 22:57, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

ISS

Unclear what this proposal actually is. Hatting because "Russia Cosmonaut said the ISS could felt see" has WP:SNOW chance of making it into the article and the info on Joe Biden sanctioning "corrupt billionaires" is already in the article. [18] Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 06:42, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Just please include USA President threated the Billionaires of Russia, and Russia Cosmonaut said the ISS could felt see https://www.abendblatt.de/ratgeber/wissen/article234665831/Russland-warnt-USA-Wer-wird-ISS-vor-Absturz-bewahren.html --90.186.219.179 (talk) 00:00, 25 February 2022 (UTC) Sanctions are not threats. The ISS comment is not germaine to the invasion of Ukraine.50.111.36.47 (talk) 05:06, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Add to Italian Wikipedia

Please add http://it.m.wiki.x.io/wiki/Invasione_russa_dell%27Ucraina_del_2022 this element to this Wikipedia. 5.91.57.224 (talk) 02:16, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

What? It's unclear what you want to be done to this article on this Wikipedia. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 02:47, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Italian Wiki's voice was deleted because the event is too recent. Italian Wikipedia doesn't like recent events... P1221 (talk) 09:06, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Date invasion started not the 24th

Article starts by noting that invasion began in the 24th but it began days earlier when Russia entered eastern Ukraine and simply kept going. This is not two offensives separated by time but rather all one move. Russia identifying parts of Ukraine independent does *not* make them no longer Ukraine. Invasion began the moment troops crossed the Russian boarder, not when it was announced that the troops would continue west. 69.36.65.254 (talk) 02:27, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

The invasion began on the 24th per Ukraine, Russia, and every other source. Lightspecs (talk) 02:35, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Most WP:reliable sources describe it as beginning on the 24th. We can't substitute our own judgement for theirs. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 02:48, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

The war in Donbas has been going on for quite some time - the invasion proper describes Russian forces entering the remainder of the country for the first time in this ongoing tragedy. 50.111.36.47 (talk) 05:03, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

4:24 explosions seen and heard in Kiev

25th February, 4:24 local time (UTC+2): for several minutes explosions could be seen and heard via fourth camera on live stream on YT: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIPNVm6lNfM

Some livestream isn't a reliable source. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 06:20, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Tanks and armored vehicles lost?

Can you say anything about the vehicles lost? 2601:18A:1:7580:3DBA:7B26:C914:664D (talk) 03:33, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

If there is a Reliable Source with the figures ... 50.111.36.47 (talk) 05:00, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 February 2022 - Naming inconsistencies at Invasion section

At --Invasion-- section, there are several variations when naming the President of Ukraine.
- before 07:00 (UTC+2), President Zelenskyy
- At 16:00 (UTC+2) President Zelenskyy
- Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky stated that 137 Ukrainian citizens
- President Zelenskyy banned all male Ukrainian citizens
- By 01:24 (UTC+2), President Volodymyr Zelensky
- Sumy.[172] Zelenskyy's press service

Also when mentioning the name of the President of Russia, the "President" part is mostly removed. Might worth considering when deciding on the inconsistencies of the President of Ukraine's name.
Are these inconsistencies intended?
FeliciaKrismanta (talk) 05:18, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Good writing practice would provide his full name and title (i.e. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy) at the first instance and the simply Zelenskyy thereafter. Same for Vladimir Putin. Mr rnddude (talk) 05:31, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

FeliciaKrismanta Answered, prefer "Zelenskyy" at later mentions of him. Thanks for your suggestions. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 06:18, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

intelligence

WP:NOTFORUM Melmann 10:04, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
Have Russian diplomatic staff in the western countries been placed under surveillance by the western intelligence security services? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.244.210.117 (talk) 07:18, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 February 2022 - Minor edit suggestion: link between article (2)

Minor edit suggestion (2): at the "protests" section, all of the countries have links toward their respective Russia-[country] relations with the exceptions of the UK and the US.
Suggested pages to link: Russia–United Kingdom relations and Russia–United States relations

small note: Sorry, unsure if I should reopen the last request since this one is similar in nature, but it is already closed.-- FeliciaKrismanta (talk) 11:12, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Will fix, changing all to the direct country pages. Seems like a WP:EGG issue. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:17, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 February 2022 (2)

Change dashes around "Vladimir Putin", "Kyiv" and "Volodymyr Zelenskyy" to commas. N1g7t74wk3 (talk) 12:17, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

 Done I removed the dashes, commas might not be required in that sentence. P1221 (talk) 12:22, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Typo in second paragraph , first line

First line of 2nd paragraph of page: change "President of RussiaVladimir Putin" to "President of Russia Vladimir Putin" 78.19.85.80 (talk) 12:26, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Done. With en dash. Laurel Lodged (talk) 12:29, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 February 2022

Russian forces have already began a battle in kyiv 78.145.173.180 (talk) 07:23, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

. Juxlos (talk) 07:30, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Please supply reliable source(s). Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:28, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

The Ghost of Kyiv?

I think we should try and confirm or deny this rumor. Sarcasticeinstein (talk) 15:49, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

This is already discussed in a thread above (Talk:2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine#Ghost of Kiev?????). Please do not duplicate the discussions. P1221 (talk) 15:54, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! Sarcasticeinstein (talk) 15:57, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 February 2022 (3)

On reactions state the following:

The IOC condemned the invasion, stating that it was a violation of the Olympic Truce, which was supposed to last until March 20. The International Olympic Truce Foundation and International Olympic Truce Center later stated that it would send humanitarian aid to Ukraine. 76.82.51.127 (talk) 17:28, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Source?Slatersteven (talk) 17:33, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

A quick search gives me at least three articles right off the bat: https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2022/02/24/ioc-strongly-condemns-russia-for-violating-olympic-truce-by-invading-ukraine/?sh=80c13c87c64d, https://www.foxnews.com/sports/ioc-condemns-russia-breach-olympic-truce-invasion-ukraine-give-peace-chance and https://www.reuters.com/lifestyle/sports/ioc-condemns-breach-olympic-truce-after-russia-invades-ukraine-2022-02-24/. Of these, not sure which ones are reliable and which ones aren't though. Alpha Piscis Austrini (talk) 17:35, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Nah their good enough I think.Slatersteven (talk) 17:36, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:49, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

• Primary source at IOC website: IOC STRONGLY CONDEMNS THE BREACH OF THE OLYMPIC TRUCE. Alexcalamaro (talk) 19:53, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 February 2022 (7)

In the "Protests" area of this page, i would like to add that Portugal also had protests and manifestations against the war in front of the russian embassy: https://expresso.pt/sociedade/manifestacao-em-lisboa-frente-a-embaixada-da-federacao-russa-queremos-armas/ Mikegdrum97 (talk) 15:52, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

 Done >>> Ingenuity.talk(); 15:55, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 February 2022 (6)

• Kindly Change "Per Ukraine: 1,800 killed" -> "Per Ukraine: 800 killed" inside the infobox.
• Both the cited sources claim the number to be 800, not 1800

Extorc (talk) 14:12, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Looks like someone's already changed that. >>> Ingenuity.talk(); 14:17, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

References

• They are updating the numbers every few hours. The source is Ukrainian Ministry of Defence. Newest numbers were posted 30 minutes ago: https://www.facebook.com/MinistryofDefence.UA/posts/264102712568855

 Tanks up to 80
 Armored cars 516
 Airplanes 10
 Helicopters 7
 People 2800  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.255.76.147 (talk) 14:35, 25 February 2022 (UTC) 

Change losses

Oryx blog is making a comprehensive list of all Russian and Ukrainian losses in the war. I believe this should be added because it's hundreds times more reliable than unproven and unverifiable Ukrainian claims because it includes visual proof. Rob Lee also has a good ongoing thread as always if anyone is interested. Links:

https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html

https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1496752076335947778?t=jFTpRnS3LvcXi2clboRRNg&s=19 IdkIdc12345 (talk) 12:35, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Are either reliable sources, per our criteria? Independent, verified, expert? Unless Rob Lee recently quit an important media outlet on moral grounds, if he is any kind of reliable source for this, why is no news agency carrying his information? As I mentioned above, where we cannot have verified sources (e.g. for losses), then the next best is to use the partial-but-official sources and attribute the information to let our readers decide how to take it. Kingsif (talk) 12:40, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Yes they are. Everything posted by Oryx in confirmed. At least don't be lazy and click the link

Photos from a single, not (enough ?) reputable source, are not a valid proof. On the Web we receive digital photos which can be easily retouched. --Robertiki (talk) 11:51, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Being "confirmed" by Oryx, which doesn't have an about page to tell us who they are, how they get their info, etc. and which is covered by/discussed in exactly zero other sources, let alone reliable ones (their collages of images stolen from other random Twitter users' "research" has been used by Vice and that is too recent), and which hasn't even got a cult following on social media (only retweets, again, other random "research"), means nothing at all. It could be your mate's blog reposting every photo they find that claims to be from Ukraine for all we know. You have found a guy trying to be Bellingcat, but whoever Oryx is has no reputation. Kingsif (talk) 11:58, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Casualties list..

Dont just show Ukrainian claims on casualties and kills show russian claims too all of the claims of russian side 2601:589:80:5ED0:B05F:55B9:392:B38E (talk) 12:44, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Russian claims would have to be reported via a Reliable Source. Gov't controlled outlets would be completely unreliable. 50.111.36.47 (talk) 12:47, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

So far it looks like the Russian claims regarding their losses are simply that Ukraine's claims are wrong. What would be put besides a giant question mark? Kingsif (talk) 13:05, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

I think we should use neither and use only visually confirmed stuff https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html IdkIdc12345 (talk) 12:46, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

That is a form of WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. I.e. if the information is not significant enough to be carried by mainstream secondary sources, it is not significant enough for Wikipedia; if it cannot be verified by such sources, it is not reliable enough for Wikipedia. It is also using unverified primary reports, so basically the same as the official reports, but with less accountability: who is to say that images and videos, not independently verified by reliable experts, are showing a full or correct picture - and it is not like we can say "according to X" for attribution when X is an unknown quantity, leaving readers in the dark. We might as well just ask Wikipedians in Ukraine what is happening and take their word for it instead of using sources. Kingsif (talk) 12:55, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

We should put that number as "Unknown Number of combatants". Toast (talk) 15:26, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Let's leave it out until we know for sure.Slatersteven (talk) 16:39, 24 February 2022 (UTC) https://www.news2sea.com/yasa-jupiter-belonging-to-yasa-denizcilik-was-hit-in-odessa/ turks ship was hit not sunk. It continued its voyage after — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.157.81.28 (talk) 20:10, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Neo-Nazism in Ukraine

In the section on Prelude > Russian accusations, the last paragraph is grossly biased, one-sided, and without proper citation or research. It currently reads:

• In a nationalistic speech on 21 February, Putin also alleged that "Ukrainian society" had become "neo-Nazi" without evidence.[67][68] According to Jonathan Allen, there is no evidence for such far-right nationalism in the government, military or electorate. Ukraine's President Zelenskyy is Jewish, and three of his family members died in the Holocaust.[68]

Three of these 4 citations are to the New York Times and NBC. The biggest richest most consistently pro-intervention corporate news outlets in the USA, sharing their opinions on one of their country's fiercest enemies, is not actually an unbiased survey of journalistic and academic material on the subject. If we look beyond the absurdly narrow purview -- not even far, just say, elsewhere on Wikipedia itself, we can see our own website's well-sourced article on the Azov Battalion, which is described in the very first sentence of the Wikipedia introduction as "Neo-Nazi Ukrainian National Guard unit", followed by 6 citations, including numerous major American news sources themselves, who clearly did slightly more diligence than those cited in the article at hand. This is one example of something that bas been pointed out repeatedly by news and academics in the west and east. This section has to be expanded and rewritten at once or else marked NPOV. 2001:56B:3FF7:2BDF:980F:6418:E781:D50 (talk) 14:16, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Greetings IP. This is a very heated topic, and you are probably aware of this. But we volunteers at Wikipedia aim to provide as unbiased articles as possible. So, I'm listening to your concerns.

You point to the Azov Battalion article, which is indeed about a neo-Nazi organization. There's also for example a political party in Ukraine, National Corps, that is described as neo-Nazi. However, I fail to see how this contradicts this article: It is stated here that the claims that "Ukrainian society and government" had become neo-Nazi are baseless. One battalion is not Ukrainian society, and one party that holds zero seats in the parliament is not the government. And since multiple reliable sources (yes, NYT and NBC might be American, but they are reliable) report that the claim about society and government is baseless, we have that in the article.

In order to get a more balanced view, since I can't find them: Can you please link to the sources that support your viewpoint? I promise we will take a look and include them – if they are reliable. --LordPeterII (talk) 14:33, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

I'll just leave this here and back away slowly: 14th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS (1st Galician)#Legacy ^Zera/_talk 14:43, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

I don't think anyone is seriously saying that the Azov Battalion is not a neo-Nazi group (their founder literally called the group "crusade[rs] against the Semite-led Untermenschen"). But using this as to say all of Ukrainian society is suddenly neo-Nazi (rather than this being an issue among a certain sect of Ukrainian nationalism), and therefore in need of a Russian invasion for "denazification" is disingenuous and alarming, to say the least. —AFreshStart (talk) 14:55, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

No, don't just leave it there and back away. If the implication is that one march organized by a fringe group of nationalists points to a 'Neo Nazi' society & government, that's ridiculous. ― TaltosKieronTalk 15:09, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Ditto, after all, Russia has a neo-Nazio party Russian National Unity, does that mean Russia is Neo-Nazi?Slatersteven (talk) 14:35, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Fascism fits. Alcibiades979 (talk) 16:17, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Fits what?Slatersteven (talk) 18:33, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

We should include the context of lionizing Stepan Bandera since that is a big example of this in Eastern Europe. Its a well documented problem and can be discussed at length. Alternatively there are the nazi summer camps and other things that could be brought up, although they are less of an institutional issue and more like the azov battalion, nazis being public but no indication of degree of support. Bgrus22 (talk) 18:25, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

A lot of this is overed at Neo-Nazism#Ukraine, but if there is anything relevant and due to add to this page then I agree it should be added. —AFreshStart (talk) 19:57, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

"alleged without evidence" is WP:WTW and isn't neutral. We should just say that he "said that Ukrainian society had become neo-Nazi" and put Jonathan Allen's refutation in the next sentence. So:

In a nationalistic speech on 21 February, Putin also said that Ukrainian society had become neo-Nazi.[67][68] According to Jonathan Allen, there is no evidence for such far-right nationalism in the government, military or electorate. Ukraine's President Zelenskyy is Jewish, and three of his family members died in the Holocaust.[68]

Cut the scare quotes, cut out the judgemental word in "alleged", and don't go on about how there's "no evidence" in two separate sentences. I'm sure our readers have the ability to decide for themselves if the Jewish president of Ukraine is a neo-Nazi. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 06:31, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

I added that the Prime Minister is Jewish as well. I guess I understand your point, but we could also put less distance between the accusation and that the President is Jewish such as "Putin accused Ukraine's Jewish President of being a neo-Nazi." Alcibiades979 (talk) 15:01, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Agreed with the idea of less distance between the accusation and its direct refutation. Otherwise good sourcing etc. Rauisuchian (talk) 20:07, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

At 16:02, the user "My very best wishes" deleted "While the National Guard of Ukraine is home to the neo-Nazi Azov Battalion, part of the press noted that they found no widespread support for Nazi ideology in the government, military, or electorate, and that in the 2019 parliamentary elections, Nazi candidates failed to win ...". Can someone reinclude that? I think it is relevant that Ukraine does not prosecute these men in the National Guard. Furthermore, Putin did not say that Selensky is personally a Neo-Nazi, but he said the country is generally run by Neo-Nazis that don't stop Neo-Nazi soldiers from killing people in Luhansk and Donetsk. He accused them of being crypto-fascist. I do not think that pointing out the fact that he is Jewish refutes that. If anything, that makes him worse for not prosecuting Neo-Nazis in the National Guard. Neither is it justified including the section about how weak Neo-Nazi parties are. That should actually make it easier to take them down for the Ukrainian government. Please change some of these arguments. Junkönig (talk) 17:24, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Do you have any Reliable Source that you can provide that back this? Otherwise it seems that the totality of currently available Reliable Sources strongly refute the idea that Ukraine is somehow fascist or neo-Nazi. Alcibiades979 (talk) 18:18, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

I don't believe Putin's accusations. But the two arguments (1. Selesky is a Jew and 2. Nazis lose elections) mentioned in the article are not realiable, either. Furthermore, Ukraine still won't expell the Azov Battalion from the National Guard and someone should reinclude this fact. So, please do that. Junkönig (talk) 18:40, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

The consensus of reliable sources state the accusation is groundless, baseless, unsubstantiated etc. As it is not relevant in context, Putin's accusation does not have anything to do with the facts in Ukraine, so gathering additional original research to support the propaganda claim is not in line with encyclopedic policies. Very few of the sources mention the Azov Battalion at all for this specific invasion without extensive other explanation so mentioning it is WP:UNDUE with the current length of the background section. None of the reliable sources see the fringe Azov Battalion as justifying Putin's accusations against Ukrainian people and Ukraine's democratically elected and Jewish President, so presenting this view as a viable side in WP:FALSEBALANCE, is twisting the sources. We shouldn't feed the trolls, especially IP's that don't reply and users who were dormant single-purpose-accounts for years to pop up suddenly. Rauisuchian (talk) 20:29, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Reactions from Online

Should someone add another section to the reactions concerning reactions of people on social media and in formal media, as a catch all for the reactions of non-official entities that are still of cultural significance? Could also include the market as in the DOW etc. Brandonazz (talk) 14:37, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Cab give some examples of RS commenting on this?Slatersteven (talk) 14:38, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

"Cultural significance" is highly dependent on location. The opinions of a former leader of a country may be irrelevant to everyone else, what is the criteria for significance? _TheKuygerian^contribs
_userpage 17:25, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Tons of random people have commented on social media. Even Ja Rule has chimed in. [19] If some social media commentator reacts to this I'd like to see RSes covering that reaction before we add it. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 06:35, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

No actual official declaration of war by Russia?

Is that mostly just clickbait by news articles then? Yourlocallordandsavior (talk) 18:18, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

What is?Slatersteven (talk) 18:22, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Potaytoe, Potahtoh - Putin's speech about him ordering military action is the 'declaration of war' for all practical purposes. 50.111.36.47 (talk) 20:18, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

By this logic, the U.S. has never declared war since the Second World War. The wars in Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan and many more all wouldn't count under this logic. —AFreshStart (talk) 23:03, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

please familiarize yourself with WP:FORUM, and refer to the various subject articles to see how the U.S. Congress was involved in each of those decisions — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.111.36.47 (talk) 14:21, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 February 2022 (4)

Describe Dotnesk and Luhansk as breakaway regions of Ukraine in the introduction (basically change "Russia recognised the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic and the Luhansk People's Republic" to "Russia recognised the self-proclaimed *breakaway regions* or *breakaway states* of Donetsk People's Republic and the Luhansk People's Republic") David Jiang (talk) 20:26, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Oppose - 'Self-proclaimed' has a similar meaning, and there's something to be said for brevity. Melmann 20:58, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Needs discussion so request template disabled. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:44, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Polish Border

I heard (from an unreliable source) that Poland has opened its border with Ukraine completely, to everyone with a passport or not. Can someone look into this and add information to the page if needed? SwanX1 (talk) 21:38, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

On the official government website of Poland it says Ukrainian nationals can enter on the basis of visa-free movement: https://www.gov.pl/web/udsc/ukraina-en. The Polish version specifically mentions that the visa-free movement is allowed for owners of biometric passports (paszport biometryczny): https://www.gov.pl/web/udsc/ukraina2. Those without a passport need a permit or a visa, or a consent from the Commander in Chief of the Polish Border Guard, but this seems to be limited to short stays (15 days) based on this law https://lexlege.pl/ustawa-o-cudzoziemcach/art-32/. Swetroniusz (talk) 22:29, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Should be worth pointing out that the Slovak border is also open to those fleeing from Ukraine, including those without documentation, as seen on this official government website: https://www.minv.sk/?tlacove-spravy-2&sprava=aktualizacia-situacia-na-hranicnych-priechodoch-s-ukrajinou-hp-velke-slemence-v-prevadzke-od-piatka-od-8-hodiny. Rough translation from Slovak (via Google Translate) is "We allow entry to all people fleeing the war. After individual assessment, we will also allow entry to the territory of the Slovak Republic to persons who do not have a valid travel document" Junferno (talk) 00:30, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Government websites are primary sources - seems like the media rooms are already on fire trying to figure out what is happening. Are there any information for the borders with Hungary, Romania and Moldova? Juxlos (talk) 01:07, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Bloated "See also" section

The "see also" section is very bloated. I recommend removing "Invasion of Kuwait" and the articles regarding the equipment of the armies. Nordostsüdwest (talk) 23:20, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Article title

Before I start a big RM about this, is there a reason why the word Russian is needed in the title? That seems like an unnecessary disambiguation, as there has been no other invasion of Ukraine in 2022. (Note: 2022 invasion of Ukraine currently redirects here.) InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:38, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

I'd imagine it's for consistency with the other entries at List of invasions and occupations of Ukraine. Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 02:45, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia generally follows the sources and uses that name as its article title - Common Name applies here. 50.111.36.47 (talk) 05:08, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

I think it's very relevant to point out who the invader is in the title. — Golden ^{call me maybe?} 06:46, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Outdated

Someone fucking update this page, it is many hours out of date, nothing matches current reports. 98.167.54.3 (talk) 00:09, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Is there anything particular that should be updated? Editors here try to keep it up to date but this type of comment is less-than-helpful. Elli (talk | contribs) 00:11, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Current reports on social media or a ticker website are not entirely reliable. It’s better to be 24 hours late than to be wrong. A lot of social media reports were confidently talking about an amphibious landing in Odessa or a mass paratrooper drop near Kiev (well there’s that helicopter assault I guess). Juxlos (talk) 01:30, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Can you be more specific about what those reports are? Chess (talk) (please use {{reply to|Chess}} on reply) 02:43, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Please read wp:notnews, we do not need to have a live update, and in fact would rather we waited longer than a week before adding any claims. Slatersteven (talk) 12:26, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Anonymous Involvement

Anonymous has declared cyberwar on Russia, therefore should be added as a billegerent 86.19.183.42 (talk) 01:38, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

@86.19.183.42 Anonymous is the pinnacle of chaotic good. Sarcasticeinstein (talk) 01:42, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

A couple guys hacking Russian frontend websites and listening into radio broadcasts anyone with basic equipment can get isn’t a material addition. Check again if anonymous manages to crash a few russian jets. Juxlos (talk) 01:43, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

I also declared war on Russia why aren't I listed as a belligerent?Majortarkin(talk) — Preceding undated comment added 04:01, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

You're not listed as a belligerent because you're an individual, not a country, and you also don't meet Wikipedia notability guidelines. A diehard editor Editing Wikipedia too much rn, talk to me here, bruh. 04:10, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

List of cities occupied by Russia

Hi

Do you have the full list? We could show the list here or create a category.--Panam2014 (talk) 02:13, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

There is this Cities and towns during the Russo-Ukrainian War -- FeliciaKrismanta (talk) 05:06, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

In the meantime Pakistan PM Imran Khan met Russian President Vladimir Putin

Some details here: What the Russia-Ukraine Crisis Means for South Asia

Ignisāra (talk) 03:07, 25 February 2022 (UTC)