Talk:Ukraine

If you are here to discuss Kiev vs. Kyiv please click here

Islam

Why is Islam not in the demographics? it's the second largest religion. it shows data for hinduism, budhism but not Islam in the graph

Maidan = square

As noted here: "The Euromaidan (Ukrainian: Євромайдан, literally "Eurosquare")" "maidan" is Ukrainian for the English "square."

Hence, "Maidan Nezalezhnosti square" later on belongs in the Department of Redundancy Department. It should read "Maidan Nezalezhnosti (Nezalezhnosti square)." I didn't notice if that mistake was made other places, but it should be corrected. Thanks.

Minor: link to Wikipedia Podzol page in soil section.

In the soil section podzolized soil is mentioned. Might it not be reasonable to link podzolized to the Podzol Wikipedia page as it is an obscure reference.

"Disputed" territories? I'm pretty sure everyone but Russia calls them "occupied"

Change "disputed" to "occupied". 2A02:2F07:B313:1800:F5A6:3139:6D40:BB73 (talk) 12:03, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

That still makes it disputed. --Khajidha (talk) 14:21, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Not all of them. Lughansk and Donetsk are not officially claimed by Russia. Gerard von Hebel (talk) 01:33, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Alter grammar tense

This sentence here should be past tense: From "On 4 March 2020, The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine accepts the resignation of the Honcharuk Government and begins the formation of the Shmyhal Government" to "On 4 March 2020, The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine accepted the resignation of the Honcharuk Government and the Shmyhal Government was formed." Gemini.skywalker (talk) 12:29, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

"Kiev compromise" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Kiev compromise and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 December 21#Kiev compromise until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Jay (talk) 20:17, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 January 2022

In the "Recognised regional languages" section of the infobox, please change the Wikitext [[Greek language|Greek]] to [[Modern Greek|Greek]] and [[Hebrew language|Hebrew]] to [[Modern Hebrew|Hebrew]] as these are the languages spoken in Ukraine today, not their ancient variants. Joesom333 (talk) 16:59, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

 Done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:39, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 January 2022

Change: "The vast majority of the fighting in World War II took place on the Eastern Front.[114] By some estimates, 93% of all German casualties took place there."

To: "The majority of the deaths in the European theater of World War II took place on the Eastern Front.[114] By one man's estimate, 93% of all German casualties took place there, but this is easily disproved by readily available statistical WWII data." (Source below)

NOTE------------------------- Citations 114 and 115 are rather Euro/Ruso centric and easily disproved. 85 million people died in WWII, no one will support half of those were on the easternfront. Additionally the second source for 115 is nothing more than a man's name and not an actual work. It's preposterous to say that 93% of German casualties were on the Eastern front and then disregard that the US took nearly 8 million German Prisoners. Both of those numbers cannot be simultaneously accurate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_casualties_in_World_War_II#United_States_Army_Figures_for_German_and_Italian_Losses 192.63.67.46 (talk) 03:21, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

1) If it were really that easy to disprove, we wouldn't change it to such a condescending sentence, we would simply remove it. 2) What does the number of prisoners have to do with casualties? Casualties are those killed or injured. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 05:43, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:05, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

What's happening in Ukraine?

This article contains nothing about the current (late 2021-early 2022) Russian military build-up on Ukraine's border which has dominated international news for the past month. It would be good to at least mention it. Fuzzypeg★ 05:37, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Agreed. I came to the article to check when exactly the recent Russian military encirclement of Ukraine began and I am unable to comprehend why there is no reference at all to such a major geopolitical event which has dominated the news for a month, or is it even more? This is precisely what I came here to find out. O'Dea (talk) 13:36, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

It is not mentioned for the simple reason that no one has added it. You seem interested in the topic and apparently have access to sources, so why haven't you added it? --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 16:36, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

I have time to perform only quick hit and run edits at the moment. The story of the progressive encirclement of Ukraine and of the long and detailed progress of multilateral diplomatic efforts is a large story requiring the discovery of many sources and the ordering of the narrative, requiring time I don't have.

Your glib reply ("no one has added it") merely repeats what's in my question and doesn't address the fact that this is the biggest geopolitical story in the world for over a month and it's extraordinary that has not been added to the article. O'Dea (talk) 16:20, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

It could be the biggest story since the cruxifiction, but if no one bothers to write it up it won't be here. There is no campaign to keep it off of here, but no one seems to care enough to add it. We're all volunteers here, we don't write articles just because you want to read them. You're the only one that you can make write the articles that you want to read. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 16:58, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Add "surreptitious occupation"

Crimea was not simply annexed. It was insidiously occupied by force prior to this. I suggest we modify the following (add capitalized text) "These events formed the background for the ILLEGAL, SURREPTITIOUS OCCUPATION and annexation of Crimea by Russia in March 2014" 172.58.102.207 (talk) 13:16, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Provide some reliable sources to back that up, and someone might do what you suggest. Uporządnicki (talk) 12:55, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

If a bully comes into my home with a gun...

and claims it's his house and his family, the word "disputed" is absurdly understating the situation, so much so that it is practically incorrect. The "dispute" and "occupation" are TWO DIFFERENT topics, yet they should be simultaneously mentioned. Russia can DISPUTE Ukraine's claim without occupying their territory. If we must be unbiased, "illegally occupied by Russia and disputed" would be far more correct. I'm sure the UN would categorize this occupation as illegal. 172.58.102.207 (talk) 13:29, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Still a territorial dispute. See: List of territorial disputes#Europe. Mellk (talk) 06:52, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

"in Europe after Russia" phrase = disinformative

"in Europe after Russia" The above phrase appears repeatedly in the article and falsely suggests that Russia is a part of Europe. This needs to be fixed. 190.42.225.31 (talk) 00:29, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Russia is in Europe, so what needs to be fixed? The country of Russia spans Europe and Asia. Jeppiz (talk) 02:10, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

The name of the country/state is the Russian Federation, a multi-national state of Russians, Asians, etc. - "Russia" is the wholly European historic territory west of the Urals that constitutes the homeland of Russian-native people. Technically speaking.50.111.34.214 (talk) 19:24, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Do you seriously think you can achieve your goal with nonsensical trolling like this? You're contradicting yourself here, too. Mspriz (talk) 09:09, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Not sure why such users wish to demonstrate complete lack of basic geographical knowledge. See: European Russia and Europe. Mellk (talk) 06:49, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Mspriz, maybe I've misunderstood you, but it looks to me like you're mistaken in your statement about "contradicting" oneself. IF the first posting here and the third posting were submitted by the same User, then that User would indeed be contradicting him/herself. But I don't think that's the case. It looks like the two postings were submitted by two different Users. In that case, the third posting is contradicting the first--showing that User where s/he is mistaken. Uporządnicki (talk) 17:56, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Very inadequate sourcing

For an article topic this fundamental, controversial and important, the sourcing is shockingly poor, far below Wikipedia's citing sources and reliable sources standards, in my humble opinion.

A brief scan of the References list seems to show an absolutely overwhelming use of WP:PRIMARY sources. In very many situations, the primary sources are not backed up by any independent source.

In fact, a disturbingly high percentage of significant statements in the article are supported by only one source -- often a soft or dubious source. And some of the statements bear little clear resemblance to the facts, even as reported in the source cited. For example, in the Wikipedia article, in the (urgently timely and sensitive) section on "Civil unrest, Russian intervention, and annexation of Crimea," a whole paragraph, citing only one source, says:

"...Poroshenko negotiated a ceasefire with the separatist troops. ... It... included conditions such as Ukrainian control of the border with Russia in 2015 and the withdrawal of all foreign troops from Ukrainian territory."

...stating, in essence, then, that the agreement was to "the withdrawal of all foreign troops from Ukrainian territory," despite the fact that Ukrainian territory of Crimea was, implicitly, not part of that agreement, despite the fact that Crimea (by prevailing international interpretation) is Russian-occupied Ukrainian territory. That incomplete (and thus colossally inaccurate) Wikipedia paragraph was a blatant misrepresentation of the (single) cited source, which stated exactly:

"A separate document signed by the three presidents and the chancellor committed Putin to respecting Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, although clearly last year’s Russian annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea peninsula will be ignored here."[1]

Too often a highly partisan publication -- (for instance: The arch-conservative (London Daily) Telegraph, or the arch-liberal (formerly Manchester) Guardian) -- is the sole cited source for a significant statement (even a whole paragraph), without any corroboration from an opposing-bias source (nor even a comparatively neutral source). While I use these sources, myself, often -- and sometimes as sole sources -- I generally refrain from citing them as sole sources on matters of global gravity and controversy (and, right now, that's just about everything about Ukraine).

Further, many of the sources cited are relatively soft, and not commonly used in English-language Wikipedia -- including, apparently, non-English sources and sources in countries where there is little or no freedom of the press (including, apparently, Ukraine's arch-enemy, Russia).

Finally, the list of books and papers cited does not (generally) list their publishers -- just their authors. In an article this important, controversial and sensitive, it is very important to identify publishers. There's a huge difference in credibility between a book published by the Oxford University Press and one published by Pravda. I urge editors, as their time permits, to prioritize correcting these omissions.

Given the urgent global importance of Ukraine, today -- and the complex and sensitive controversies surrounding it -- this is presently one of the most important articles on Wikipedia.

I urge serious, responsible editors to review as much of this article as possible, to evaluate the sources, and their content, against the prevailing evidence in commonly-accepted WP:RS sources, and correct where appropriate -- and to augment the current cited sources with additional reference citations from other, more reliable (or competing), recognized sources.

Respectfully, ~ Penlite (talk) 08:33, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Given the current dispute, it would be helpful to detail what Ukraine was politically before WorldWar I. This part of the history in the article is very sketchy, so it was difficult to understand who ruled Ukraine at that time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.181.193.59 (talk) 21:35, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

It s not the second-largest country by area after russia. France os largest

Change 2001:8A0:E390:6300:3CF8:83DD:4935:F9EE (talk) 23:39, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Only if you consider all of France, anywhere in the world. If you consider only France in Europe, Ukraine is larger. Uporządnicki (talk) 01:12, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

As I've said before, the wording of that sentence is ambiguous. What it is meant to say is that Ukraine's European territory is larger than that of any country other than Russia. Which is true. But it could also be read as saying that it is the second largest European country in absolute terms. Which is not true. Why bother mentioning it if it is only going to be second best AND is open to confusion? Why not just state that it is the largest country whose territory is completely in Europe? That is true and unambiguous. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 03:05, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

User:Khajidha Well, if there were a country whose territory in Europe was larger than Ukraine, BUT that country also had territory outside of Europe, then your proposed statement would technically still be true. Uporządnicki (talk) 10:38, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

As such a country does not exist, that is irrelevant. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 10:46, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Irrelevant IF you're only telling people who already know. Someone who doesn't know could be left wondering. You spoke of ambiguity. Precision is important. I had some ideas for fixing this. Now I've seen, there's a note that should clarify things. But for some reason, there are two sets of notes. AND the note that should clarify it seems to be linked to nowhere. When I have some time, I hope to get in and figure that out. Uporządnicki (talk) 12:52, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 February 2022

There is an obvious mistake in lede. Where it says "After World War II, the western part of Ukraine merged into the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, and the whole country became a part of the Soviet Union. Ukraine regained its independence in 1991, following the dissolution of the Soviet Union."... it should say World War I, since Ukraine became part of the Soviet Union after the FIRST World War, not the second one.

 Done Cannolis (talk) 12:22, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Wrong. See Talk:Ukraine/Archive_9#Historical_inaccuracies. Whilst UkrSSR was indeed a founding member of the USSR, western Ukraine became a part of the Soviet territory only in 1940s. Ukrainian SSR of 1922 comprised only a part of present-day Ukraine. Hence "the whole country became a part of the Soviet Union" (emphasis mine). I clarified that a bit, so this shouldn't confuse any longer. Bests, Seryo93 (talk) 19:53, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

I don't think such details belong to lede, but maybe someone could clarify that Eastern Ukraine became part of the USSR after WWI instead of having a parenthesis?Dalaufer (talk) 09:16, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Khrushchovka

This File:Kryvyi Rih - apartment building2.jpg is not a khrushchovka but this File:Хрущовка.JPG is khrushchovka. So you need to change the photo File:Kryvyi Rih - apartment building2.jpg to File:Хрущовка.JPG and the text should not be "An example of a Khrushchyovka in Kryvyi Rih", but it should be "An example of a Khrushchyovka in Kyiv". Blast furnace chip worker (talk) 19:09, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

 Done (CC) Tbhotch^™ 19:31, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Small correction

The text currently reads: thus making the whole country (rather than only eastern part of it)

The article THE is missing: rather than only THE eastern part of it.

It is in the second paragraph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.41.129.20 (talk) 14:50, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 February 2022

Change Rasetrelli to Rastrelli, the name of this architect is Rastrelli and it is misspelled in at least one occurrence on this page. Tmargaria (talk) 16:07, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 February 2022 (2)

1922 treaty to create USSR is not mentioned This is a key part of Ukraine history missing 1922-1991

It should be included in two places In the timeline list titled formation 1917 1922 dissolve independence with treaty to create USSR 1991

ALSO in the intro paragraph (after the pre-amble section) The run on sentence

In the aftermath of the Russian Revolution, a Ukrainian national movement for self-determination emerged, and the internationally recognized Ukrainian People's Republic was declared on 23 June 1917.  Ukraine regained its independence in 1991, following the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

Should have “In 1922 Ukraine dissolved by Treaty into creating the USSR.

This is then followed by: Ukraine regained its independence in 1991, following the dissolution of the Soviet Union. 2605:8D80:32C:9A15:2D4B:9E6D:4631:C103 (talk) 22:55, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

In the aftermath of the Russian Revolution, a Ukrainian national movement for self-determination emerged, and the internationally recognized Ukrainian People's Republic was declared on 23 June 1917.

In 1922, Ukraine dissolved by Treaty into creating the USSR. Ukraine regained its independence in 1991, following the dissolution of the Soviet Union. RoseEatsRice (talk) 22:59, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Who disputes Donbas region is part of Ukraine?

No government disputes that this region is part of Ukraine.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2022/feb/20/ukraine-crisis-russia-plans-biggest-war-since-1945-says-johnson-zelenskiy-calls-for-sanctions-now-live

Antonov (Russian ambassador) also stated that Moscow considered the Donbas region “as part of Ukraine.” 2A04:4A43:4DAF:D0CB:88E5:F359:4810:88CD (talk) 17:54, 20 February 2022 (UTC)