Jump to content

Talk:War in Donbas

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 90.244.7.59 (talk) at 19:43, 29 June 2014 (→‎Requested move 22 June 2014). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

To do list

To get this draft in shape, we need to do the following:

  • Expand the Mariupol section. I know more happened there, so let's fill it out.
  • Grammar and fact checking
  • Addition of an infobox (civil or military conflict?)
  • Fixing of references

RGloucester — ☎ 16:22, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I expanded the Mariupol section--Arbutus the tree (talk) 00:49, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
More information about the Ukrainian side as well as what's happening in Lugansk is definitely needed. Elaboration of the refugee situation is also a good point. Lunch for Two (talk) 04:15, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Move

Maybe this should be moved to 2014 insurgency in East Ukraine? The current title is too long imho. Lunch for Two (talk) 14:36, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We need to be WP:PRECISE. The insurgency isn't in Kharkiv, which is part of eastern Ukraine. RGloucester — ☎ 14:59, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
WP:PRECISE says an article name should be precise but not too precise. East Ukraine is precise. Donestsk and Luhansk is too precise. World War II had very little fighting in South America, for example. This doesn't mean we can't call it a world war. So why should Kharkiv not being in an insurgency mean we can't say 2014 insurgency in East Ukraine? DylanLacey (talk) 11:10, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Because it doesn't encompass fighting in Kharkiv, and to title it with "eastern Ukraine" would be misleading, blowing the conflict out of proportion. RGloucester — ☎ 20:48, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You didn't really address my point. Not being excessively precise doesn't mislead. By your logic shouldn't World War II be renamed War in Asia, Africa, Europe and the Pacific II? DylanLacey (talk) 02:26, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's different, because it is a common name. This is a WP:NDESC title. RGloucester — ☎ 02:48, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
'East Ukraine' unambiguously defines the topical scope of the article without being too precise. What could 2014 insurgency in East Ukraine reasonably be confused with? It's already plenty precise. There are no other unrelated 2014 insurgencies in Ukraine, let alone in East Ukraine. Also, if you wish to discuss the common name issue, it is worthwhile to point out that the majority of media outlets refer to the location as East Ukraine, not Donetsk and Luhansk - in their titles. Donetsk and Luhansk can be referred to in the first sentence of the article, there's nothing wrong with that. The current title is unnecessarily long and doesn't reflect the common name. DylanLacey (talk) 08:09, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We don't use "common names", or "journalist shorthand" if they are misleading. We use WP:NDESC, which is what this is. RGloucester — ☎ 16:35, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The thing is, Eastern Ukraine is made up of the provinces of Luhansk, Kharkiv, and Donetsk. The insurgency is only taking place in Luhansk and Donetsk, but there have been important incidents in Kharkiv, such as the RSA storming and eviction, and the assassination atempt if Gennady Kernes.—Arbutus the tree (talk) 16:07, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This article is only about the insurgency. There is no insurgency in Kharkiv. Hence, it is wrong to say "eastern Ukraine". Perhaps "Donets Basin" might be more concise, but I think that's less WP:NATURAL to English speakers.RGloucester — ☎ 16:35, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We could rename the article to "Insurgency in the Donets Basin"--Arbutus the tree (talk) 19:33, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The title doesn't seem too long to me, and it is better able to identify the subject in being more descriptive the way I see it. Dustin (talk) 16:30, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Since you claim you want to be precise…the insurgency does not take place in Donetsk and Lugansk...but in Donetsk oblast and Lugansk oblast...so either add this to the title or just rename it as insurgency in Donbas — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.73.220.119 (talk) 23:43, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In English, it is called Donets Basin, not "Donbas". RGloucester — ☎ 00:13, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'd also like to point out that there is no such thing as "East Ukraine". The proper term is eastern Ukraine. RGloucester — ☎ 04:41, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Since you once again claim that there is no 'Donbas' in English...perhaps DW http://www.dw.de/separatists-cause-economic-slump-in-donbas/a-17724764 ,Kyiv Post http://www.kyivpost.com/multimedia/photo/donbas-battalion-trains-for-war-as-newest-members-of-ukrainian-national-guard-351182.html ,ITAR-TASS http://en.itar-tass.com/world/737239 , BBC http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-27483719 and several other major or minor media network should hire you to teach them proper English...Also, do not forget to edit this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_Donbass_Liberators ...to Donets Basin Liberators...oh my God — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.73.220.119 (talk) 12:59, 22 June 2014 (UTC) I had initially posted the above comment in the context of a draft page and I had not intended for it to be a proposal that people intended on voting on, but debate has started and all debate is healthy. The emphasis on Kharkiv's non-involvement in the insurgency is excessive in my opinion and I can't see why this in particular should be a reason not to use something like "East(ern) Ukraine" as a descriptor. I personally think that the title is overly precise and it would appear that many of the sources we have on this topic discuss it in terms of it being an East Ukrainian issue, even if there is no insurgency in Kharkiv oblast. I am however happy to wait for the dust to settle on this one, and as at Federal State of Novorossiya and Lugansk People's Republic, WP:COMMONNAME can be difficult to resolve, especially as many of sources relied upon use inconsistent naming practices themselves. Lunch for Two (talk) 13:09, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Don't even bring up the "Federal State of Novorossiya"... we do not need to end up with a not-so-good means of determining consensus like was done there. @Lunch for Two: Thanks for at least attempting to provide reasoning without using certain pieces such as "oh my God" (quoted from 85.73.220.119). Another thing I will add is that it is not always preferable to choose the most concise name; sometimes, that allows for the most arguing and bad-resolution outcomes (not saying that this will necessarily happen here, though). I will still remain open to persuasion, but certain persuasion such as by the aforementioned IP will fail with me. Dustin (talk) 13:41, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, these name debates can have a snowball type effect which means that people simply forget about improving the quality of the article and instead focus on who can collect highest number of favourable URLs. @Dustin V. S.: Lunch for Two (talk) 13:49, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I would not be opposed to "2014 insurgency in Donbass", "2014 conflict in Donbass", with the caveat that this should mean that the article Donets Basin should move to Donbass for consistency. As far as eastern Ukraine is concerned, I remain opposed. RGloucester — ☎ 16:18, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Undefined references

@RGloucester: I notice that some of the references apparently are invoked, but never defined, meaning you say <ref name="foo">. Since you appear to be the one who added the references (or I guess you could have segmented certain things from other articles)... In any case, it would be nice if I could just know the URLs, otherwise, it will be necessary to hunt for new sources. Thanks. Dustin (talk) 14:48, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll transfer them. They came from the DPR article. RGloucester — ☎ 14:58, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Okay; thanks! That will be helpful. Dustin (talk) 15:00, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Towns and Cities

I have recently created a map that clearly shows cities under DPR, LPR and Ukrainian Control. I used a wikimedia commons image of the donetsk oblast nad labeled the cities in gimp, the file on commons says it is public domain and not copyrighted. Is this okay? Or do we already have stuff about this?--Arbutus the tree (talk) 00:13, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you can present a reliable source for your map then I am happy to update the map I uploaded in May as it is currently used on a number of wiki pages. Lunch for Two (talk) 16:45, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some sources Lunch for Two: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-27018199 And other ones I used were the Kyiv Post, Al Jazzeria, BBC, CNN, Euronews, Globe and Mail, and CTV. --Arbutus the tree (talk) 20:23, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the map if you want to see more: https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Situation_in_the_Donetsk_Oblast.png

/response to the previous comment/ It's rather hard to illustrate current state of affairs. You'll need to update this map daily, as situation is changing every day, for example the map as of today - it's in Ukrainian, but hopefully understandable: http://www.slovoidilo.ua/uploads/news/ff8969658b1da527c9e50048a5dfea5b.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.172.136.199 (talk) 12:00, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I can understand the map. Northern Luhansk, Southern and Eastern Donetsk are under Ukrainian control, while central, most of northern donetsk, and southern luhansk is under separtist control.--Arbutus the tree (talk) 15:05, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Everything is up to date. Could it be used in the section "Donetsk Oblast" or at the top of the infobox at the beginning of the page. I am also creating one in the Lugansk (Luhansk) Oblast--Arbutus the tree (talk) 18:05, 20 June 2014 (UTC).[reply]

I will fix up the maps to reflect these recent developments. Lunch for Two (talk) 02:39, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I saw the Lugansk map, however, a strip of land in the south is under Ukrainian control, according to the wall street journal--Arbutus the tree (talk) 18:58, 22 June 2014 (UTC).[reply]
Post the source on here and I will change it. Lunch for Two (talk) 02:55, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Here it is:http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/WO-AS758_UKRAIN_G_20140620174804.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arbutus the tree (talk • contribs) 15:02, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 22 June 2014

2014 insurgency in Donetsk and Luhansk → 2014 insurgency in Eastern Ukraine – Insurgency not only in Lugansk and Donetsk, but in Luhansk Oblast and Donetsk Oblast also, generally in Eastern Ukraine. Confirmed by different reliable sources in the article. NickSt (talk) 17:00, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
There is no insurgency outside these two regions. RGloucester — ☎ 20:06, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The current name doesn't refer to the "cities only", which you'd know if you read the article. Donetsk and Luhansk are the common names for the regions in English. RGloucester — ☎ 17:36, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No. Donetsk and Luhansk are cities. Regions are Donetsk Oblast and Luhansk Oblast. Read Administrative divisions of Ukraine. NickSt (talk) 18:04, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, they are cities. The oblasts take their names from the cities, hence they are usually called "Donetsk and Luhansk". RGloucester — ☎ 18:07, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose major actions are only taking place In the Lugansk province and Donetsk province.--Arbutus the tree (talk) 18:57, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral - disadvantage of the current name: "Donetsk and Luhansk" are only the cities; disadvantage of "Donbass": it also includes the Rostov Oblast in Russia; disadvantage of "Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts": it's a bit too long. Nevertheless, this one would be the most correct name, in my opinion.Mondolkiri1 (talk) 19:10, 22 June 2014 (UTC)Mondolkiri1 (talk) 19:11, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rostov is actually somewhat involved, if we include the Rostov Battalion and Don Cossacks, and apparent spillovers of violence into that region. Regardless, "Donbass" commonly is used to refer to the Ukrainian part. RGloucester — ☎ 19:15, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Somewhat NeutralDonetsk and Lugansk are the administrative centers of the regions. An oblast in named after the administrative center, but since it is spilling over into the Rostov Oblast, maybe it could be Donbass Insurgency or Insurgency in Eastern Ukraine--Arbutus the tree (talk) 20:44, 22 June 2014 (UTC).[reply]

Support The current name is a little too precise - it's not what the average person would say, and it's not an established technical terminology. I would prefer Eastern Ukraine. Gabrielthursday (talk) 08:18, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Eastern Ukraine consists of the three oblasts of Donetsk, Luhansk, and Kharkiv.
Areas with insurgency are coloured in orange.
This is a map of the "Donbass" area within Ukraine. Note that it corresponds with areas that have an insurgency.
It doesn't matter what the average person would say if what the average person says would be misleading. Note these two maps that I'll provide. "eastern Ukraine" is a defined geographic area (yes, "technical terminology") that includes Kharkiv. Kharkiv is outside the scope of this article, as there is no insurgency there. Therefore, this falls under WP:PRECISE. Titles must "unambiguously defined the scope of the article". "Eastern Ukraine" does not do this, as the scope does not include Kharkiv. Furthermore, WP:UCN says "Ambiguous or inaccurate names for the article subject, as determined in reliable sources, are often avoided even though they may be more frequently used by reliable sources". We have no need to be inaccurate by using "eastern Ukraine". "Eastern Ukraine" gives WP:UNDUE weight to a potential insurgency in Kharkiv which doesn't and hasn't existed. There is no way that we can use "eastern Ukraine" in the title of this article. As I've said, if we want a slightly more WP:CONCISE title, "2014 insurgency in Donbass" would serve properly, as the Ukrainian Donbass consists of Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts. RGloucester — ☎ 15:37, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The title "2014 insurgency in Eastern Ukraine" would not be misleading. Such a title does not imply that the insurgency encompasses every inch of such territory, any more than the current title does (the insurgency has not encompassed the entirety of Donetsk & Luhansk). If you follow your own argument, the current title is misleading. Moreover, the current title suffers from being ambiguous, since it could as easily mean "The insurgency in two cities" as "The insurgencies in two oblasts". Apply WP:UCN which you helpfully highlight: we should avoid ambiguous titles. While the current title, under its intended interpretation is admittedly more precise, WP:PRECISE is intended to prevent confusion and distinctly identify the topic of the article. Given the equivocal nature of the current title, we clearly cannot say it is more precise than the alternative. The suggested "Donbass" variant suffers from the fact that not all the insurgent-affected areas of Eastern Ukraine are actually in the Donbass (the Donbass is only certain areas of the two oblasts and of Rostov oblast in Russia). As for your WP:UNDUE argument, I submit that isn't really an issue - what you point to is an implication nobody would actually take from such a title. One further problem with the current title is that, for those without an uncommon knowledge of Ukrainian geography, it doesn't actually signal what the subject of the article is. The proposed title does away with that problem. Gabrielthursday (talk) 21:23, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, it doesn't. It misleads the reader. Our job is to inform, not to mislead. Therefore, we must be precise. Please tell the Donbass People's Militia about problems with the word "Donbass". I'm sure they'll be happy to change their name to Eastern Ukrainian People's Militia. That'd mean that they'd be claiming more territory, so why not? It is not unlike Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, which uses those words as an aspiration, rather than as a fact of their actual control. No wonder they chose the broad "Levant" instead of the narrow "Syria". The insurgency is not in eastern Ukraine. The insurgency is in two oblasts of Ukraine, which have active separatist republics which claim those two oblasts, and no more territory than those two oblasts. These two entities are the Lugansk People's Republic in Luhansk Oblast and the Donetsk People's Republic in Donetsk Oblast. They do not claim an "Eastern Ukraine", they do not claim Kharkiv, they have nothing to with Kharkiv, nor with "Eastern Ukraine". Only Luhansk and Donetsk. I'm not opposed to adding "oblast" if it is necessary. "Eastern Ukraine" is potentially the worst possible title. RGloucester — ☎ 21:45, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"No, it doesn't" is not an argument, but a bare assertion. The insurgency is in Eastern Ukraine. More particularly, it is in two oblasts of Eastern Ukraine. This isn't terribly difficult logic.
Most people know of Ukraine. Most people do not know Donetsk and Luhansk are places in Ukraine. It would be better to have a title where those who are not already familiar with the topic will understand what it pertains to. My preferences would be "Eastern Ukraine" followed by "Donbass" followed by "Luhansk and Donetsk Oblasts". Gabrielthursday (talk) 23:44, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Except that "eastern Ukraine" does not tell the reader what the topic pertains to. The topic doesn't pertain to eastern Ukraine. It pertains to Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts, commonly known in Russian and sometimes in English as the "Donbass" area of Ukraine. Eastern Ukraine includes Kharkiv. Kharkiv is outside the scope of this article. Therefore, "eastern Ukraine" is misleading, and implies to readers that "eastern Ukraine" as an area is in the midst of conflict. This is not true. Kharkiv is not part of the conflict. RGloucester — ☎ 00:17, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's true in most ways, because Kharkiv hasn't seen as much violence as compared to others, and there isn't any insurgency. But in the beginning of this, the RSA was occupied by protests who would be evicted later, and clashes braking out on April 13 and later. Other important events likes the shooting of the Kharkiv mayor are also important too. It still has a large pro-Russian population as well.--Arbutus the tree (talk) 00:21, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Arbutus, you are well aware that that is already covered in the 2014 pro-Russian unrest in Ukraine article. It isn't in the scope of this article. This article only deals with armed conflict, not with the protests and RSA occupations, which are dealt with elsewhere. Those events are NOT in the scope of this article. NOT. This article is only meant for what one could call the "conflict in Donbass", as I hear some Russians calling it. RGloucester — ☎ 00:24, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I see what's going on. Well in that case then, probably the "Donbass Insurgency" "Insurgency in Eastern Ukraine" or the "Donbass Conflict" might be the best titles.--Arbutus the tree (talk) 00:33, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral: Perhaps there could be a section in this article called "spillover into Russia"?--Arbutus the tree (talk) 00:21, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support: Change to "2014 insurgency in Donbas" (or Donbass) IF readers looking for insurgency in "Eastern Ukraine" or "Donetsk" and "Luhansk" can be redirected to that article, since a lot of readers are not familiarized with the term "Donbas" or "Donbass". (though Donbass as I said also includes the Rostov or part of the Rostov Oblast in Russia, but I nevertheless consider it acceptable, following RGloucester argument, following my previous post).Mondolkiri1 (talk) 16:39, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As I've said, I'll support a change to "insurgency in Donbass". RGloucester — ☎ 18:21, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think that for now "insurgency in donbass" is the best option.--Arbutus the tree (talk) 19:08, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support "Insurgency in Donbass" as well. Seryo93 (talk) 19:12, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Qualified Support I don't think it's a huge improvement, but it is an improvement over the current title. Gabrielthursday (talk) 19:57, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
May I request that we support "conflict in Donbass", as opposed to "insurgency"? It seems people are confused over the nature of this article, and I think it makes more sense to use "conflict". RGloucester — ☎ 16:05, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you may, but I think it would be useful that people looking for "Eastern Ukraine", "Donetsk" and "Luhansk" could be redirected or (in any other way) easily find the article, because I guess that most people are not familiarized with the term "Donbass" (though it's the most correct term).Mondolkiri1 (talk) 18:40, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid that "conflict" is less descriptive than "insurgency". Conflict is not necessarily military; an insurgency is. If you want a synonym, maybe "insurrection" would be appropriate? Gabrielthursday (talk) 18:43, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, that's why I initially organised the article with "insurgency" (and prefer that title). However, people are clamouring for "conflict" over at Talk:2014 pro-Russian conflict in Ukraine. "Insurrection", I believe, falls under WP:LABEL. RGloucester — ☎ 19:12, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Insurgency is more accurate, but conflict also describes the situation, in my opinion. My support was more directed to renaming it as "in Donbass" instead as of "in Donetsk and Luhansk", with the precautions that I've expressed.Mondolkiri1 (talk) 19:18, 25 June 2014 (UTC)Mondolkiri1 (talk) 19:19, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Concerning to the confusion about the term "insurgency", I honestly don't understand what may be causing that eventual confusion, since it's a very common word. Is it being described in the media more often as a conflict or as an insurgency? It's important to pay attention to that, before we assume that there may be a generalized confusion about the term insurgency to describe the situation.Mondolkiri1 (talk) 19:28, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Conflict is common, but it isn't clear what "conflict" is referring to. It can refer to poor relations between Russia and Ukraine, the Crimea incident, the insurgency in Donbass. That's why I favour "insurgency", as it is precise and concise. RGloucester — ☎ 19:32, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Right. I support "2014 insurgency in Donbass" with the precautions I've expressed above.Mondolkiri1 (talk) 20:19, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Insurgency means more of a militaristic situation, and conflict can sometimes be a stand-in word. A conflict doesn't need to be militaristic, while insurgencies are.--Arbutus the tree (talk) 23:24, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support requested move. Insurgents fired at ukraine forces in Izum (Kharkiv oblast`) scores of times: http://www.pravda.com.ua/rus/news/2014/05/29/7027429/?attempt=1 http://podrobnosti.ua/podrobnosti/2014/06/03/978932.html http://tvi.ua/new/2014/06/08/trasu_izyum_slovyansk_perekryly_cherez_obstrily_boyovykiv__tymchuk (etc, etc) So insurgency cover Kharkiv oblast too. 94.45.129.180 (talk) 16:22, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is no independent verification of this, and anyway, those insurgents are not from Kharkiv. It says they are Donetsk insurgents. It vaguely says that the attack was "organised" in Kharkiv, but the attack took place in Donetsk Oblast. There is no indication as to what this means. Either way, one minor incident (if it happened) is not justification for saying "Insurgency" is in Kharkiv. RGloucester — ☎ 16:33, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The current title is simple and clear. The Crimea is also part of Eastern Ukraine - so if you changed the article title as proposed, you would need incorporate the Russian takeover of the Crimea. So the proposed change is not properly thought out.--Toddy1 (talk) 08:23, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Why would you invent the Crimea is in the east of Ukraine??? What a strange thing to do? Please read the Crimea article or consult a map. We are trying to have a serious discussion here. 90.244.7.59 (talk) 19:42, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed correction of stilted English

There has been an edit war over use of language in the article.[1][2] This has left the article with stilted English. It says repeatedly says "Armed Forces of Ukraine", which is a proper name - see the article on the Armed Forces of Ukraine. I think this should be changed to say "military" (a common noun). The latter is more natural English than repeatedly saying the "Armed Forces of Ukraine".--Toddy1 (talk) 08:44, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:War_in_Donbas&oldid=614921769"