Talk:Battle of Voznesensk

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted from this draft on 17 March 2022 by reviewer Bkissin (talk · contribs).

Military history: European / Russian & Soviet / Spanish / Post-Cold War

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	European military history task force
	Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force
	Spanish military history task force
	Post-Cold War task force

Ukraine Low‑importance

	Ukraine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ukraine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ukraine on Wikipedia. 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

It is requested that an image or photograph of Battle of Voznesensk be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.

Wikipedians in Ukraine may be able to help!

The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

On 13 May 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved from Battles of Voznesensk to Battle of Voznesensk. The result of the discussion was moved.

Parachute assault?

There is a totally unsubstantiated and implausible claim of an attempted or actual Russian paratrooper (as in airborne) drop into or around the city. Where does this claim even come from except maybe the early fog of war and confusion? Now that we conclusively say there was not a single parachute infantry landing in the entire war as of August 2022, this article needs a serious re-work. Any objections before I remove this and other unverified claims? 135.23.80.41 (talk) 00:49, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for replying to an old message, but on what grounds do you say there were no such landings during the invasion? SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 23:12, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wall Street Journal article

For editors who can't get past the WSJ paywall, here is an accessible version [1]. Curbon7 (talk) 05:44, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Battle of Kherson which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 05:23, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

BattleS?

Do sources really refer to this as two separate battles? Seems more to me like one battle with a break in the fighting in the middle. HappyWith (talk) 20:20, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

HappyWith: I've taken an interest in this event and it seems that the "second battle" did not actually happen. The sources tell us some videos surfaced on the Internet on 9 March, but this does not necessarily mean they were new videos, and "breaking news" reporting like this should be superseded by the long-form, detailed reports from the journalists who actually set foot in Voznesensk. This may be an appropriate test case of argumentum ex silentio. The seminal WSJ piece, among others, were written in mid-March and mention only one battle very early in the month. This quote from a 22 March BBC article is particularly revealing:

But almost three weeks after that battle, the mayor warned that another attack by Russian forces was probably imminent and that the town's defenders lacked the weapons to hold them off a second time.

(emphasis mine)

Harding's A Small, Stubborn Town is on its way to me in the mail right now. If there's nothing there regarding a "second battle", I will move this page back to Battle of Voznesensk. Best wishes to you as always

SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 08:36, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 13 May 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. Favonian (talk) 12:58, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battles of Voznesensk → Battle of Voznesensk – Procedural nomination. Article was moved on 27 September 2022 without discussion. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 12:39, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The notion that there was a second battle in Voznesensk has stood basically unchallenged since this article was first drafted during the thick fog of war of mid-March 2022. Through this RM, I intend to dispel with this notion once and for all.

The idea of a second battle of 9-10 March and subsequent occupation of 10-13 March was introduced in a section called "Second Russian assault" in this edit, based on a synthesized interpretation of some breaking news sources:

Analysis of source

CNN, 9 March 2022: live-blog-post about a newly-published (but undated) combat video from Voznesensk, which is assumed by the CNN author to portray continued fighting in Voznesensk

Peru21, 9 March 2022: article about the same undated video, references CNN's earlier analysis and also implies that the footage is recent

ISW, 10 March 2022: refers to ongoing fighting in Voznesensk, citing the aforementioned undated video, undated footage of a captured Russian vehicle in Voznesensk, and a Ukrainian General Staff report claiming to have repelled the Russians in the directions of Voznesensk, Kryvyi Rih, and Mykolaiv

France24, 14 March 2022: refers to a 3-day occupation of Voznesensk, but does not specify the date.

Twitter/DefensePoliticsAsia, 10 March 2022: account of dubious reliability proclaiming crazy shit is happening in Mykolaiv region including the "rumored" fall of Voznesensk – the reference was removed in short order.

As one of the first cities to withstand a Russian assault, Voznesensk was a common destination for Western journalists in mid-late March, who wrote several stories for CBS News, WSJ, and BBC, none of which make reference to a second battle or occupation of the city. The BBC source, published 22 March, fortunately includes this very clarifying sentence:

But almost three weeks after that battle, the mayor warned that another attack by Russian forces was probably imminent and that the town's defenders lacked the weapons to hold them off a second time.

The BBC article, authored by Andrew Harding who visited the city, formed the basis for his book on the events in Voznesensk, A Small, Stubborn Town: Life, Death and Defiance in Ukraine, which I have read in full. It contains no mention of a second battle of 9-10 March, much less a 10-13 March occupation of the city. In the face of all these higher-quality sources, a second battle would seem to fall under the category of surprising or apparently important claims not covered by multiple mainstream sources under WP:EXTRAORDINARY, and thus the page should be moved back to Battle of Voznesensk.

Pinging the key early editors of the "second battle" section: @EkoGraf, @Applodion, @Curbon7. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 12:39, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support the move - As SaintPaulOfTarsus pointed out, the title seems to be a remnant of a period during which the situation on the ground was still unclear. Better sources have been published since then, and an update is needed. Applodion (talk) 19:54, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support A well made case by the nom. Cinderella157 (talk) 22:23, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nominator. EkoGraf (talk) 22:32, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.