For the record (and laughs), here are sections of the Talk page on the "Russo-Ukrainian War" article.
Opening sentence of lead[edit]
The opening sentence of the lead is a bit misleading:
The Russo-Ukrainian War is an ongoing war primarily involving Russia, pro-Russian forces, and Belarus on one side, and Ukraine and its international supporters on the other.
[emphasis added]
It would imply that Belarus is a belligerent and not just a non-belligerent supporter. It tends to also suggests that the international supporters have a belligerent involvement since while we (WP editors) may know that we don't mean that they are belligerents, our readers don't necessarily know this - that the support is indirect. The sentence needs to be cleaned-up/clarified to remove the ambiguity/lack of clarity. Suggest:
The Russo-Ukrainian War is an ongoing war primarily involving Russia and pro-Russian forces on one side, and Ukraine on the other.
This is simple and accurate. If it is absolutely necessary to add more words than the proposal, then it might be something like: "Many countries have provided various levels of support to Ukraine short of becoming belligerents in the war while Belarus (also not a belligerent) has provided Russian forces territorial access for the 2022 invasion." Cinderella157 (talk) 01:34, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- I've already removed Belarus from that sentence once as I agree there's ambiguity over whether Belarus is a full participant. I didn't notice when/why I was reverted. Jr8825 • Talk 12:45, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Jr8825, I am still not comfortable with how the unqualified "supported by" is being used for both Belarus and the "international supporters". It does not distinguish that both are non-belligerents. I have added a note using the above text. However, I would be more comfortable with this version or as a second choice, this version. In the second choice, I think the added words break a more natural flow. Thoughts? Cinderella157 (talk) 02:25, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- addition of "international supporters" is flat out wrong. Take it out. They are not involved in the war, not a single soldier or squadron. Charliestalnaker (talk) 03:07, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Jr8825, I am still not comfortable with how the unqualified "supported by" is being used for both Belarus and the "international supporters". It does not distinguish that both are non-belligerents. I have added a note using the above text. However, I would be more comfortable with this version or as a second choice, this version. In the second choice, I think the added words break a more natural flow. Thoughts? Cinderella157 (talk) 02:25, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Done. Cinderella157 (talk) 05:49, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Cinderella157: thanks for removing the supporters from the first sentence, I was also thinking of doing the same as I also wasn't content with my earlier compromise text. I've reworded the sentence further today. Jr8825 • Talk 13:23, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Jr8825, I think that the main sentence:
... is an ongoing war primarily involving Russia and pro-Russian separatist forces on one side, and Ukraine.
is clearer (IMHO) than... is an ongoing war between Russia, together with pro-Russian separatist forces, and Ukraine.
However, we don't need to say "primarily" in the first version. Or perhaps:... is an ongoing war between Russia (together with pro-Russian separatist forces) and Ukraine.
Changes to the note are fine. Cinderella157 (talk) 00:59, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- Jr8825, I think that the main sentence:
Endgame[edit]
Taking into account as to what is currently happening inside Russia, what are the chances of Vladimir Putin and Alexander Lukashenko ending up like Nicolae Ceausescu and/or the Romanovs?
- Please read wp:crystal and wp:forum. Slatersteven (talk) 13:31, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
Russia[edit]
Russo-Ukrainian War[21][d] is an ongoing war primarily involving Russia, pro-Russian forces, and Belarus on one side, and Ukraine and its international supporters on the other. Conflict began in February 2014 following the Revolution of Dignity, and focused on the status of Crimea and parts of the Donbas, internationally recognised as part of Ukraine. The conflict includes the Russian annexation of Crimea (2014), the war in Donbas (2014–present), naval incidents, cyberwarfare, and political tensions. 160.238.74.91 (talk) 00:38, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Don't know what we are supposed to do with this? Cinderella157 (talk) 01:06, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Or to out it another wat, what are you asking? Slatersteven (talk) 12:37, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
Can it be confirmed whether a Russian army general was assassinated by a sniper during a parade in Russia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.244.210.117 (talk) 12:32, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Do you have any sources? Slatersteven (talk) 12:37, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
Ukranians that make war (against) Bulgaria and Bulgarian-Russian people[edit]
I think it should be fairly stated that Ukrainians although having supporters in Bulgaria are leading a war here with making war crimes as killing people, taking over companies without any law stoppage and that Poland too is into this, and these too take over communications and computing in either friendly or unfriendly manner, with life or rape threats, and various other feeling protected by EP because EU would not recognize officially that Ukraine is leading a war against Bulgaria.
This, again, started with Rusdo-Polish and later Russo-Ukrainian conflicts that hit even on medical studies, that is the most embracing after all but even continues?
As Polish and Ukrainians tend to interfere wherever medical research is done in Bulgaria even if this is for a while (not state regulated, or thinly state subsidated) or in company (Telenor Bulgaria).
While previous times Ukraine was simply seeking and finding some support here, after some acknowledgement of what this is used for major support was refused but yet, a Ukrainian rep was elected and he without any remouses is leading war in Bulgaria naming it "war against Russia", this includes cars fights, street fights and treats, embeselment of state and private communications (making joke of the pro-medical company Telenor), attempts for humiliating medical researchers, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Medupdate (talk • contribs) 15:11, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- OK, I am gonna be super nice and not delete this as wp:soapboxing, and just tell you that to add anything about this you need wp:rs to say Ukraine is at war with Bulgaria. Slatersteven (talk) 15:14, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 March 2022[edit]
 | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Zelenskyy to Zelensky 2607:FEA8:E3A1:2800:424:20AD:2D01:931 (talk) 13:29, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
Not doneExtended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 March 2022 (2)[edit]
| This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
| commander1 =
2607:FEA8:E3A1:2800:424:20AD:2D01:931 (talk) 13:36, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
Not done: Zelenskyy's name is transliterated in several different ways. Zelenskyy is the transliteration on his passport, and his administration has used it since he assumed presidency in 2019
ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:44, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
Spillover into Belarus[edit]
I'd like to propose adding spillover into Belarus with this as a source. While there is dispute over who exactly is responsible, it does appear this is spillover from this conflict. Not adding the edit myself as I'm <500 contributions and I'm curious if this is WP:TOOSOON U-dble (talk) 18:13, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- Doubtful, as it seems to be a bit murky. Slatersteven (talk) 18:19, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
France24's OSINT program provides a verified and valid sources for events in the war[edit]
Currently this article is behind on the information, thus proposing to utilize the sources from https://observers.france24.com/en/tv-shows/the-observers/20220309-ukraine-russia-osint-amateur-images-map-geolocation to keep up with the info.. Kreyren (talk) 00:29, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
***
As the reader can plainly see, en.Wikipedia is no longer an encyclopedia, where topics are written about after they happen and all sides are consulted. Now it's some sort of oddball "late news" website where ongoing issues are written about as they are happening and any lies, omissions, obvious propaganda is deleted later. The Encyclopaedia Britannica did not have a full writeup of World War I incorporated into it until 1929; additional volumes covered the war 1914 to 1918. Time will tell if Wikipedia are the reality of this recent conflict will completely jibe.
No comments:
Post a Comment