Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Grnrchst (talk | contribs) at 13:52, 21 September 2023 (→Women in Green's 5th Edit-a-thon: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Ukraine Project‑class

This page is within the scope of WikiProject Ukraine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ukraine on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.UkraineWikipedia:WikiProject UkraineTemplate:WikiProject UkraineUkraine Project This page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

This WikiProject has been mentioned by a media organization: Annie Rauwerda (21 October 2022). "Russian Oligarchs Keep Dying in Suspicious Ways. Misplaced Pages Is Keeping a List". Slate (magazine). English-language Misplaced Pages is documenting the crisis, too: Fifty-eight editors have joined the English-language WikiProject Ukraine group, and thousands of others are contributing to their projects. They've tallied the journalists killed in Russia, built a thorough daily timeline, and debated whether the mass graves in the Ukrainian city of Izium should be called a "massacre." (After a few days and 8,000 words, they reached no consensus.)

On 7 February 2023, it was proposed that this page be moved to Jungsturm (Kharkiv). The result of the discussion was not moved.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

Help requests

You can leave your requests here. Please add new sections at the bottom with your signature so that the request will have the date included.

Occupation in infobox for localities affected by the ongoing military conflict 2: Crimea

Back in February, there was a consensus established to not include occupied status of Ukrainian settlements in the infobox. See Misplaced Pages:Village pump (policy)/Archive 179#RFC: Occupation in infobox for localities affected by the ongoing military conflict.

This decision was made after some editors had been adding things like “Country: Ukraine (de jure), Russia (de facto)” or otherwise messing with the infobox fields that are meant to show the country-province-district (specifically country-oblast-raion) hierarchy that contains a settlement.

The proposal by @Ymblanter then was to make a decision and apply it to “clear cut cases,” and not to articles on settlements in Crimea, because they were “really administered by Russia.”

But the Crimea distinction was not a real one, and if it weren’t so clear in the past, it is more obvious now. Russia has “annexed” not only Crimea, but also the four other regions where it occupies cities, towns, and villages: in the Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, and Zaporizhzhia oblasts. At the same time, the Crimean peninsula has become more clearly part of the war zone, as Russian military targets there are hit by Ukrainian artillery, missiles, and drones. More importantly, there’s no reason in any guidelines or consensus to treat Russian occupation in Crimea as special.

We should either A) apply this decision uniformly throughout the occupied territories of Ukraine, and remove occupied status from inboxes, while ensuring that it is properly covered in article text; or B) decide to hold another RFC to rescind the decision, figure out a scheme for representing occupied status throughout settlement infoboxes (in Ukraine and more broadly), and resolve to update it as localities are occupied and liberated in Ukraine.  —Michael Z. 03:28, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

I posted a link to this discussion at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (policy)#Occupation in infobox for localities affected by the ongoing military conflict 2: Crimea. —Michael Z. 03:40, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

There is still a pretty clear difference between Crimea/Sevastopol and Donetsk / Luhansk/ Zaporizhzhia/ Kherson/ Kharkiv Oblasts. Ymblanter (talk) 03:35, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Settlements in the former were occupied for longer. What else are you thinking of?  —Michael Z. 03:38, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

My thought would be this is premature since there is no early prospect of any part of Crimea being other than Russian-administered and thus there's been no real change from the recent RFC (March 2023). The occasional drone/bomb/other sea or air delivered device has been going on since before then and doesn't seem to affect who controls the land.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:51, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

You’re saying Crimea has no “early prospect” but southeastern Ukraine does. Is that not WP:CRYSTAL? Can you describe this in concrete terms based on RS and related to our guidelines?

1) There was no consensus to believe anything significant about early or late prospects when that consensus was reached, and 2) since then the Russians have built and are expanding defensive lines in Crimea in anticipation of a Ukrainian advance into the peninsula, the Ukrainians have increased attacks and put Russian ground lines of communication into and out of Crimea under fire, the Russians have evacuated submarines and ships from Sevastopol, and the Ukrainians have just now conducted another commando op into Crimea.

The situation of conflict and occupation after sham referendums is the same in all parts of Russian-occupied Ukraine, differing only in details, like the specific date of a settlement’s occupation. There is no reason to privilege the Russian occupation of the one over the other by subverting the subdivision fields in infobox templates.

The consensus was intended “in principle” to apply generally to infoboxes in articles on occupied settlements anywhere. Settlements in southeastern Ukraine were seen as a field where this disruptive form of non-NPOV data in infoboxes was spreading and urgently needed to be dealt with. Now that that is stably resolved, we should deal with the same situation in articles on settlements in Crimea, because there is no NPOV reason to treat it differently.  —Michael Z. 20:54, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

The other oblasts are active war zones with part controlled by each side in each case. It makes sense for the sake of stability not to go back and forth depending on who controls it. Crimea and Sebastopol may soon fall into that category, or may not, but do not now, and Russian control is nine years old. Without showing disrespect to anyone, it makes sense to list in the infobox details of the present administration by Russia as reflecting the situation as it is, and not as we might like it to be. As you say, we cannot predict the future per WP:CRYSTAL. Accordingly, we should not anticipate what the fortunes of war may bring, and there is time enough to do it later. At the present time the existing consensus governs, and there has not been time or reason to disturb it. Wehwalt (talk) 15:46, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Parts of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts have also been occupied for over nine years, and Crimea is part of the active war zone with strikes on a daily basis and part of Russian forces already driven out, so these are not qualitative, substantial distinctions.  —Michael Z. 22:55, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Note that, unlike Crimea, these territories were not formally annexed by Russia until much later. I'm not sure if this matters for the discussion though. MarioGom (talk) 08:26, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Russian laws are implemented in Crimea, they are not implemented in Donetsk. There is freedom of movement between Crimea and RUssia, there is no freedom of movement between Russia and LUhansk. There are people who moved from Russia to Crimea, there are no people who moved from Russia to the occupied areas of Kherson Oblast unless they are military personnel or are on a temporrary mission and get moved back after the mission is deemed to expire (some of them do not even move and stay in Moscow while formally being in Berdiansk. Ymblanter (talk) 01:41, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Russia is resettling all of the occupied territories: it is settling Russians in Mariupol and elsewhere as they had already been doing in Crimea, and forcibly deporting Ukrainians from all of these regions. And also changing the population by forcing Russian passports onto Ukrainians, everywhere it can. I don’t know why “people moved” should affect displaying occupied status in the infobox anyway.

You’ll have to explain this about Russian law, and why should matter more than, for example, Russian propaganda, because both are things the Kremlin makes up, amends, enforces, and violates selectively and arbitrarily. And I don’t even know what you mean by implemented here but not there, because what’s “annexed,” i.e. where Russian law supposedly is in force, is much greater than what’s occupied, only aspirational, and actually illegal (and probably technically violates Russia’s constitution).

I don’t think Russian law should dictate what we put into infoboxes.

Unlike those things, there is a significant de facto distinction between what’s occupied by Russian forces and what’s not, and that is what this discussion is about: “occupation in infobox.”  —Michael Z. 23:08, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Tram networks in Ukraine : check needed

Hello, just wondering if this list of still-working tram networks in the country is still OK ? https://w.wiki/7Kth Thanks Bouzinac (talk) 17:23, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Wolfsangel or Idea of a Nation

What is this WikiProject's opinion on the naming of a symbol used in several far-right Ukrainian political groups' logos? Is the symbol seen at eg. Azov Brigade or Social-National Party of Ukraine a Wolfsangel or a similar but unrelated symbol named "Idea of a Nation"? This has been the topic of dozens of disputes and edit wars, and I think at this point there should be a real consensus about this.

The resemblance is obvious, and foreign sources like The Telegraph say it's a Wolfsangel. It has also been used as a symbol by unquestionably neo-Nazi groups like Aryan Nations. On the other hand, the Azov brigade itself says it's simply a monogram created by putting the letters I and N together.

Andreas Umland has said the Wolfsangel itself is not considered a fascist symbol in Ukraine. If so, is it still considered distinct from the NI-symbol used by the Azov brigade and such? And if they are considered separate symbols, do they still have the same connotation? Should the Misplaced Pages articles that include the symbol(s) be changed to reflect this cultural difference? This is not something I know much about, so I decided to ask here before starting an RfC. HansVonStuttgart (talk) 09:13, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

I suggest you discuss specific potentially controversial changes to article text where you intend to make them. Trying to create an official Wiki consensus on a controversial topic could lead to a lot of WP:NOTCHAT and very little progress in building the encyclopedia.  —Michael Z. 16:34, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

By the way, the topic falls under WP:GS/RUSUKR, and non-extended-confirmed users are not permitted to make edits in articles or discussions on it, with a few exceptions.  —Michael Z. 16:37, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

I posted here and not in an article talk because the issue is relevant to several different articles. What do you mean by WP:NOTCHAT, if I may ask? Misplaced Pages has discussions like this all the time, right?

Anyway, I won't discuss the Wolfsangel thing anymore. Thanks for alerting me to the GS. HansVonStuttgart (talk) 10:57, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

I meant that this could launch a huge, wide-ranging discussion that consumes a lot of energy and generates a lot of heat, but doesn’t necessarily lead directly to any improvement in articles’ text. Already there’s a single comment below that addresses the naming of all similar symbols in the full context of history rather than even in the scope of the articles you mentioned, and gets us no closer to any specific text changes. Even if the scope is several articles, better to quote the text from them that would be affected, than to ask for the extremely broad and open “this WikiProject's opinion on the naming of a symbol.”  —Michael Z. 19:53, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

All reliable sources are calling it Wolfsangel, pointing out obvious WW2 and Nazi connotations, the "Idea of Nation" version emerged much later, and it's accepted basically only by the sources related to Azov Marcelus (talk) 17:23, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Are you implying Andreas Umland is "related to Azov"? Because I'm pretty sure WP:BLP applies to talk pages too. TylerBurden (talk) 23:01, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Post-Soviet transition in Ukraine#Requested move 19 August 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Post-Soviet transition in Ukraine#Requested move 19 August 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. —usernamekiran (talk) 06:51, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:First Battle of Lyman#Requested move 28 August 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:First Battle of Lyman#Requested move 28 August 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 15:01, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

FoP in Ukraine and the war

I was just thinking that while Russia is trying to destroy Ukrainian culture etc. through military means, we help due to combination of meta:copyright paranoia and bad Ukrainian law (no freedom of panorama). See commons:Category:Ukrainian FOP cases. I know Ukrainian gov't is busy, well, fightign for survival and such, but maybe it is also good time to try to encourage them to change this law so we can help preserve Ukrainian cultural heritage? Is there anyone here who could reach out to Ukranian Wikimedia chapter and suggest this may be time to do this? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:30, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

WM Ukraine is aware of this and, as far as I know, they think it is not possible at the moment. Ymblanter (talk) 12:31, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Wagner Line#Requested move 31 August 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Wagner Line#Requested move 31 August 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ❯❯❯ Raydann 16:25, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Input needed at Talk:Ukrainian language#Little Russian language

There is currently a dispute about whether verifiable references to Ivan Kotliarevsky, Ivan Vahylevych, Pylyp Morachevskyi (and possibly others) calling the language Little Russian before the 1860s should be included in the article, or excluded. Crash48 (talk) 16:46, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Women in Green's 5th Edit-a-thon

Hello WikiProject Ukraine:

WikiProject Women in Green is holding a month-long Good Article Edit-a-thon event in October 2023!

Running from October 1 to 31, 2023, WikiProject Women in Green (WiG) is hosting a Good Article (GA) edit-a-thon event with the theme Around the World in 31 Days! All experience levels welcome. Never worked on a GA project before? We'll teach you how to get started. Or maybe you're an old hand at GAs – we'd love to have you involved! Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to women and women's works (e.g., books, films) during the event period. We hope to collectively cover article subjects from at least 31 countries (or broader international articles) by month's end. GA resources and one-on-one support will be provided by experienced GA editors, and participants will have the opportunity to earn a special WiG barnstar for their efforts.

We hope to see you there!

• Project-Class Ukraine pages
• NA-importance Ukraine pages
• WikiProject Ukraine articles
• Misplaced Pages pages referenced by the press