Talk:Donbas

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Donbass)

Requested move 27 March 2021[edit]

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. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jack Frost (talk) 01:44, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Donbass → Donbas – Per both WP:COMMONNAME and WP:UKR.

Here’s a survey of reliable sources found in search engines, following WP:SET. In G Books the accurate figure only appears at the top of the last results page; you may have to hide the Tools to see it.

Google Advanced Book Search:

GABS restricted to 21st century:

G Scholar

G Sch restricted to 2014–2021

Google News, when:7d

Usage of these spellings has been mixed and variable, and you may get different top results by varying the intervals. Historical trends can be seen much more clearly in a Google Books Ngram chart:

A small survey of reliable sources (see WP:WIAN):

  • BGN’s NGIS GeoNames gives both spellings as variants.
  • Britannica’s article “Donets Basin” in gives both spellings, Ukrainian first; “Ukraine” uses Donbas; “Russia” Donbass.
  • Oxford Lexico gives only Donbas (©2021).
  • Dictionary.com gives only Donbass (Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 2012 Digital Edition).
  • Internet Encyclopedia of Ukraine gives only Donbas.
  • World Factbook mentions “Donbas” several times in “Ukraine,” not in Russia.
  • Merriam-Webster’s Geographical Dictionary (2007) gives no result for “Donbass”; has a see-also entry “Donbas or Donbass”; which links to to “Donets Basin”, whose long title is “Donets Basin or Ukrain. Do•nets' Kryazh \dō-ˈnyets-ˈkryäzh\ or Russ. Do•net•skiy Bas•seyn \də-ˈnyet-skē-bə-ˈsyān;\ Russ. short form Don•bass or angl. Don•bas \dən-ˈbäs, ˈdän-ˌbas\.” It says Donbass is Russian, but Donbas is anglicized.

It looks to me like recent sources and subject-specific sources are more likely to spell the name Donbas. More sources are listed at WP:WIAN, but heed the warning about dated sources, and WP:MODERNPLACENAME.

Per WP:UKR, if there were no common English name, we would fall back to romanization from the native Ukrainian Донбас → Donbas (as this multinational region is chiefly in Ukraine, per GeoNames, Brittanica, World Factbook, etc., and the overwhelming majority of sources mention it in the Ukrainian context).  —Michael Z. 23:15, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, this spelling is already used in article titles Donbas (Ukrainian command ship), Donbas Battalion, Donbasenergo, Donbas in Flames: Guide to the Conflict Zone, Donbas State Technical University, Donbas National Academy of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Industrial Union of Donbas, Justice for Peace at Donbas. —Michael Z. 17:27, 28 March 2021 (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.

Correct definition[edit]

Hello, Wikipedians. I would like to draw your attention to the definition of Donbas, from which the mention that southwestern Russia is also part of Donbas is systematically removed. Recently, the last such attempt was made. RGloucester has deleted numerous reliable sources, while leaving an absurd call to "follow the sources" (in this context, it is absurd because this call is completely inconsistent with his actions). The same user has already removed sources from the article: once he removed a Britannica ref, writing that it "is not reliable (it is like Wikipedia)". The summary of his edit is filled with speculation. He said: "the primary definition used today does not include Rostov, this can be discussed in the article, but it is wrong to include it here". Totally false statements. The correct definition used today does include a part of the southwestern Russia. The frequent definition of Donbas as the region in southeastern Ukraine only can be reflected in the article but the lead section of the article must include correct definition. And now I would like to move on to the main thing - the numerous sources that were recklessly deleted by the user, with citations.

  • Centre-Local Relations in the Stalinist State, 1928-1941, chapter 6, 2002, p 149. E. A. Rees, Hiroaki Kuromiya: "The Donbass, or Donets Basin, straddles south-eastern Ukraine and south-western Russia on the northern shore of the Sea of Azov."
  • Historical Dictionary of Ukraine, 2013, p 135: "Donets Basin. ... The basin extends through the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts of southeastern Ukraine and part of the Rostov oblast of southwest of the Russian Federation, covering an area of 23,000 sq. km."
  • Freedom and Terror in the Donbas: A Ukrainian-Russian Borderland, 1870s-1990s, 2003, p 12. Hiroaki Kuromiya: "Part of what came to be called New Russia, the Donbas lies in southeastern Ukraine (present-day Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts) and extends to southwestern Russia (part of Rostov oblast)"; p. 246: "Moreover, one would have to add repression in the Russian part of the Donbas to make the picture complete."
  • Russia in the Twentieth Century: The quest for stability, 2014, p 227-228. David R. Marples: "in addition to the energy industries of Western Siberia, Soviet planners opted to reduce past focus on development of the giant coalfield of the Donbas (stretching from Eastern Ukraine into the Rostov Oblast of Russia)."
  • Merriam-Webster's Geographical Dictionary, Volume 10, 1997, p 328: ""Donets Basin. Region in plain of Donets River and lower dnieper, E Ukraine and SW Russia in Europe, producing a large amount of coal".
  • Донбасс – единственная часть Украины, возникшая из промышленного региона – историк, 2018: "The eastern part of the modern Ukrainian Donbas, because there is still the Russian Donbas, in the Rostov region of Russia, this territory belonged to the region of the Don army, the same Don region."
  • Britannica, the article about Donets Basin: "The coalfield lies in southeastern Ukraine and in the adjoining region of southwestern Russia".
  • Great Russian Encyclopedia, 2020: The DONETSK COAL BASIN (Donbass), in Ukraine (mainly in the Luhansk, Donetsk and Dnepropetrovsk regions) and in Russia (Rostov region), is the largest in Europe by reserves. With an area of more than 60 thousand km2 (of which about 20 thousand km2 in Russia).
  • encyclopediaofukraine: The Donbas lies in southeastern Ukraine and partly in the western Russian Federation, between the middle and lower Donets River in the north and the northeast and the Azov Upland and Azov Lowland in the south. The basin extends through Donetsk oblast and Luhansk oblast in Ukraine and part of Rostov oblast in Russia. It covers an area of 23,000 sq km.
  • Hanna Shelest, Maryna Rabinovych, 2020; note on p 18: Donbas is a shortening from “Donetsk Coal Basin,” which encompasses parts of eastern Ukraine (partially Donetsk, Luhansk, Dnipropetrovsk, and Zaporizhzhia oblasts) and of the Rostov region in Russia.
  • Vlad Mykhnenko, 2020: The Russian or eastern Donbas consists of four districts (raiony) of Rostov province—Kamenskii, Belokalitvenskii, Krasnosulinskii and Oktyabr’skii.
  • Slyvka, Slyvka, Atamaniuk, 2017; p 306: Donbas is a historical and geographical region, most of which is in Ukraine (Donetsk and Luhansk regions); but a smaller part of Eastern Donbas is in Russia (Rostov region).
  • Kristina Hook, Drew Marcantonio, 2018: The Donbas region also includes major population centers across four Ukrainian provinces (the Luhansk, Donetsk, Kharkiv, and Dnipropetrovsk oblasts), as well as one Russian province (the Rostov oblast).
  • Oksana Voytyuk, 2019; p 98: It is located in two countries - Ukraine and the Russian Federation. In Ukraine, the basin covers a part of the Dnipropetrovsk, Donetsk and Lugansk oblasts, and in Russia – the Rostov region.
  • Yuriy Temirov, 2016: which spreads across Donbas, from the eastern part of Dnipropetrovsk oblast (Pavlohrad) to the Rostov province in Russia.
  • crisisgroup, 2020: Mines just over the border from the statelets in Rostov, in what is known as Russian Donbas, had long since been “optimised”
  • eiti org, 2017; p.27 : Donetsk Basin is located in the Dnipropetrovsk, Donetsk, Luhansk and Kharkiv oblasts of Ukraine and the Rostov region of the Russian Federation.
  • Stephen J. Collier, 2008; p 374: Belaya Kalitva is located at a pictursque confluence of rivers of the northeastern edge of the Donbass coal basin in Rostov oblast'
  • Stephen John Collier, 2001; p 117: but by the end of the Soviet period the mining population had not declined substantially and deep, dangerous, unproductive mines were the rule not only in Belaya Kalitva but in the Donbass region of southwest Rostov Oblast'
  • Mikhail S. Blinnikov, 2021; p 408: The Donbass coal basin is partially located in Rostov Oblast, on the border with Ukraine.
  • Economic and Industrial Profiles, 2013; p. 125: Rostov oblast. ... Ecological situaion: High pollution levels have been measured in the Kuban adkoining waters. in Rostov, in the East Donbass, in the low Don River, and in Taganrog Bay.
  • Saul Bernard Cohen, Saul Cohen, 2008; p 2706: Rostov oblast, including East Donbass, most developed industrially.
  • Stefanie Harter, Gerald Easter, 2018; p 137: the Kuzbass (Kemerovo oblast'), the Pechorsky Basin at Vorkuta (Republic of Komi) and the Russian part of the Donbass (Rostov oblast').
  • Lindsay Mattison, Fuad Nasrulla ogly Aleskerov, 1994; p 169: coal in the eastern part of Donbass (Shakhty, Donetsk, Gukovo)
  • Emilia Parpală, Leo Loveday, 2016; note 6 on p 72: Donetsk an Lugansk oblast in Ukraine an Rostov oblast in the Russian Federation
  • Luiz Alberto Moniz Bandeira, 2019; p 187: The basin stretches across the Russian border and is identified with the Rostov Oblast
  • Clive Jones, Caroline Kennedy-Pipe, 2020;: ... while miners from the Donbass region of Rostov oblast blocked the North Caucasus railroad
  • Mark Nuttall, 2005; p 1793: Other areas of extensive coal mining are the Pechora Basin (Komi Republic), Donbass (Rostov Oblast') , Mosbass (Tula Oblast')
  • VLAD MYKHNENKO, 2004; p 6-7: Westward, the greater Donets Basin extends to Pavlohrad county of Ukraine’s Dnipropetrovsk oblast (the western Donbas). Eastward, the Donbas extends to western and northern districts of Russia’s Rostov oblast
  • ostro org, 2015: "For example, in the Russian Donbas (Rostov region of the Russian Federation) at the time of Putin's coming to power there were 64 mines, and at the time of the start of the war between Russia and Ukraine there were 4(in russian)
  • Radio Liberty, 2017: "Donbas loses its mines and follows the well-trodden path of the mining areas of the English Newcastle and Sunderland, the German Ruhr or the Russian eastern Donbas, where the city of Shakhty in the Rostov region is".(in russian)
  • Radio Liberty, 2019: "Poverty, theft and hopelessness. What is happening in the Russian Donbass" (in russian)
  • Anders Åslund, 2014:"In the Russian part of Donbas—the Rostov oblast—numerous loss-making coal mines have sensibly been closed while their state-owned counterparts still work in Ukrainian Donbas.".
  • Slava Tsukerman, 2016:"Gukovo is located on the Ukrainian border near the territory ruled by the rebellious separatists. It is the Russian part of Donbas, one of the biggest coal mining areas of the former Soviet Union".
  • farbitis, :" The city of Shakhty is the main industrial center of the Russian Donbass"
  • Viktoriya A. Merkulova* and Anna A. Bogoliubova**, :"The city of Shakhty is the main industrial center of the Russian Donbass"
  • Vadim Anatolyevich Borisov, 2000; p 187:"During the time of our research, an emergency meeting of the Miners of the Russian Donbass was held in the town of Shakhty."
  • Roman Szporluk, 2020:"Miners of the Ukrainian Donbas and their comrades in the Russian part of Donbas and in other regions of Russia found themselves in two different countries.".
  • Tomas Casas i Klett, Yuliya Ponomareva, 2019; p. 66: "The Russian part of the Donbass is close to exhaustion".
  • L. Dienes, I. Dobozi, M. Radetzki, 1994; p.90 : "Coal production in Ukraine and the adjoining Russian part of the Donbass has become particularly unprofitable".
  • Radio Free Europe, 1995: "Hundreds of miners from all 26 mines belonging to the Rostovugol association in the Russian Donbass rallied outside the associations' headquarters to demand that their wages be paid."
  • Bohdan Butkevych, 2014: "This is why coalminers show no significant support for separatists, understanding that in Russia their coalmines would simply be closed as unprofitable as in the Russian part of the Donbas where only one active coalmine remains".
  • Luigi Narbone and Lisa Ginsborg, 2019; p. 4 :"Competing industries, based on the same raw materials, can be found in the Russian part of the Donbas, just across the border with NGCT (non-government controlled territories)".
  • Richard Sakwa, p. 265 :"the attempt to close only 4 out of 26 mines in the Russian part of the Donbass led to strikes".
  • euromaidanpress, 2021: "the historic so-called “Old Donbas” mostly lies in the north of Donetsk oblast and the south of the Luhansk one, partially covering also parts of Ukraine’s Dnipropetrovsk and Russia’s Rostov oblasts. In Soviet times, the unofficial name Donbas stuck to Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts as a whole — the provinces newly created in the 1930s, although technically only half of each oblast had something to do with the Donbas"

And no, @RGloucester:, Britannica is not like Wikipedia because the content in Britannica is written by an academic scholars and is considered a scholarly source. In Wikipedia, the content is written by people like you. That's the difference. So let's follow the sources.5.167.161.110 (talk) 10:59, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Britannica is not written by 'academic scholars'. Anyone can edit the modern version of Britannica. In any case, I think you need to read the article's lead once more. It clearly states that multiple definitions of the region's extent exist. The critical point, however, is that the most common definition now is limited to Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts of Ukraine. This is verified by sources in the article. There is no good reason for Wikipedia to deviate from common usage, and there are no grounds for asserting that only one particular definition of the region's extent is 'correct': the extent of the Donbas has never been officially demarcated. Of course, the lead specifies that 'Donbas' can refer to an area including Rostov, and indeed, an area including parts of Dnipro oblast, but again, when most people will come to this article, they won't be wanting information about the coal-mining region, but about the current social-cultural region. RGloucester — ☎ 17:30, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Misleading statements about Britannica again. WP:BRITANNICA: "The Encyclopædia Britannica (including its online edition, Encyclopædia Britannica Online) is a tertiary source with a strong reputation for fact-checking and accuracy". All the contents in Britannica undergo the encyclopedia's editorial process and content authorship is disclosed in the article history.
"The critical point, however, is that the most common definition now is limited to Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts of Ukraine".
You are misleading, again. Before appealing to the sources in the article, it would be nice to get acquainted with them. And also with those six (or so) reliable sources that you have recklessly removed from the article. The statement about the most common definition is your original research. It would be more correct to call it not a common definition, but a common misconception (among ordinary people, not experts). The same as when the Netherlands is called Holland. As for evaluating whether the definition of the term is commonly used or not. This can be estimated not only by a predominance of a particular definition in secondary sources, but also by tertiary sources (such as Britannica). There is no much contradiction of secondary sources in this matter (there is only one source, which ignores the south-west of Russia as part of the Donbas, and, according to WP:RSUW (Wikipedia aims to present competing views in proportion to their representation among experts on the subject), this is not a good reason to redraw the most read part of the article under this point of view). The overwhelming majority of the sources defines Donbas as a region in the east (or south-east) Ukraine and the south-west of Russia. The information in Britannica may also indicate the prevalence of this or that definition due to WP:TERTIARY (Reliable tertiary sources can be helpful in providing broad summaries of topics that involve many primary and secondary sources, and may be helpful in evaluating due weight, especially when primary or secondary sources contradict each other). So the definition of Donbas in Britannica suggests that such a definition is a common definition. Also the vast majority of reliable sources and experts on geography and the history of the region clearly include in the region not only the east or south-east of Ukraine, but also the south-west of Russia. This majority is a ground for asserting that this definition of the region is the most correct. As you can see just by having acquainted with the sources given here on the talk page. The sources which were arbitrary removed by the user from the article. Even the source, on which, for some ridiculous reason, the statement was based that boundaries of the Donbas have never been officially demarcated (although it says only that "If you take ANY REGION, it will not have clear borders") reads: "Its borders were formed on the basis of an industrial region", and also unequivocally states: "... because there is still the Russian Donbas, in the Rostov region of Russia, this territory belonged to the region of the Don army, the same Don region". Let's follow the sources.94.181.192.17 (talk) 04:28, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I did not remove any sources from the article. In fact, I am the one who originally added most of those sources INTO the article. You have no grounds for stating that this is a 'misconception', when reliable sources frequently use this definition of the term 'Donbas'. Examples include Papic, Syvatets, Pleshakov, Swain, the British Academy, and Mischke. For news sources, see the BBC, Newsweek, Radio Free Europe, &c. Common usage in RS now usually refers to Donetsk and Luhansk, and that's what most people that come here will be looking for information on. Again, multiple definitions do exist, and the article should mention these, but we cannot impose some strange notion of correctness and deviate from common usage. Wikipedia is not based on correctness. RGloucester — ☎ 18:31, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yeah, did not remove any sources from the article. "Common usage in RS now usually refers to Donetsk and Luhansk". No, they don't. Your opinion about the common usage is your original research, numerous reliable secondary and tertiary sources will disagree with it. You are limited only to those sources that talk about the war in the Donbas (of course that doesn't apply to the Russian part) and not about the Donbas as a region in general. Only a separate section in the article is dedicated to the war in the Donbas,not the entire article. "...that's what most people that come here will be looking for information on". To claim that you know what information readers are usually looking for when visiting the article is quite an unreasonable statement. And how can the information that the Donbas located not only in southeastern Ukraine, but also in southwestern Russia, prevent readers from looking for information they want, could you please explain? Maybe because they will learn something that they did not know before reading the article? If the reader did not know before that the Donbas is located not only in Ukraine, but also partially in Russia, and learned that simple fact thanks to the first lines of the article, there is definitely nothing wrong with that. And this knowledge will not prevent them from getting information about what they were interested in, won't it? But your intention to remove the mention of southwestern Russia from the most widely read part of the article is really "strange".
Besides, what is also really strange is your interpretation of the content of some sources you have proudly added. For example, you added a source to support the claim that the Donbas is located in southeastern Ukraine (ignoring its Russian part), although the author of this source, Hiroaki Kuromiya, the author of a huge book exclusively about the Donbas - it is difficult to find a more reliable source - says: "Part of what came to be called New Russia, the Donbas lies in southeastern Ukraine (present-day Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts) and extends to southwestern Russia (part of Rostov oblast)". I repeat, with this source you tried to confirm that the Donbas is the south-east of Ukraine without the south-west of Russia. It is very revealing. The definition of the Donbas as the region in the south-east of Ukraine without mentioning southwestern Russia still refers to Kuromiya's book (ref 6 in the article) although the book, as you can see, gives a different definition. Or another source (ref 8 in the article; Radio Svoboda aka Radio Free Europe), with which you tried to confirm a statement that is not mentioned in any way in the source itself. Meanwhile, the source definitely states that "there is the Russian Donbas, in the Rostov region of Russia, this territory belonged to the region of the Don army, the same Don region".
And let's take a look at what exactly the sources that you deigned to present say. Where in the article on Radio Free Europe did you see the definition of Donbas to refer to it? The author of the article emphasizes: "I first arrived in Ukraine's Donbas region as a Peace Corps volunteer in 2010". That is, the article deals exclusively with the Ukrainian part of the Donbas. Similarly, Newsweek, in the context of the war writes exclusively about the Ukrainian part of the Donbas: "The political operative had proposed that eastern Ukraine's Donbas region". The BBC also writes about the Donbas purely in the context of the war. Syvatets writes exclusively about the separatist ("secessionist") region of Donbas ("The secessionist Donbas region comprise about one tenth of Ukraine's territory and includes the cities of Luhansk and Donetsk".), to which the Rostov part of Donbas, of course, does not apply. Referring to Swain, you refer to a chapter of his book called "The Ukrainian Donbas in transition" which makes it clear that it says exclusively about the Ukrainian part of the Donbas. Pleshakov in his book, also dedicated to the annexation of Crimea, cites the simple fact that Luhansk and Donetsk region is called Donbas what it certainly is. Papic also talks about the Donbas in the context of "the Donbas war". It doesn't apply to the Russian part of Donbas. Mischke mentions the Donbas in the context of the so-called Anti-Terrorist Operation (ATO) in the Donbas. It doesn't apply to the Russian part of Donbas. The research of the British Academy also focuses on the annexation of Crimea and the insurgency in the Donbas region, speaking about the Donbas in this context. The insurgency doesn't apply to the Russian part of Donbas.
The sources you have presented speak exclusively about the part of Donbas where the war is going on - about the Ukrainian part of Donbas - and do not give any clear definitions of the Donbas region. Against this background, your clear intention to continue blindly ignoring reliable sources, which speak about the Donbas region and its definition in very clear terms (this majority of reliable sources is a ground for asserting that this definition of the region is the most correct), looks especially strange. If this article was exclusively about the region where the war is going on, of course it would be irrelevant to mention the Russian part of the Donbas. And here, correct me if I'm wrong, the article is written not only in the context of the war in Ukraine (like I said, in the article there is a separate section about the Donbas in the context of the war), but mostly in the historical context. In this context, the most correct definition of the Donbas must include not only southeastern Ukraine, but also southwestern Russia. And the most read part of the article must include the most correct definition. And when this definition is indicated in such a number of sources, it cannot be said that it is uncommon.5.167.164.6 (talk) 07:15, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I guess you can't actually read the sources I linked, and you continued to misconstrue what I've said here. Papic says 'Donbas is a region of East Ukraine'. Pleshakov limits the Donbas to 'Donetsk and Luhansk'. Swain says 'The Donbas comprises two heavily industrialised oblasts' (Donetsk and Luhansk), and this source predates the war by quite a while. The BBC says 'Ukraine's eastern Donetsk and Luhansk regions - known as Donbas'. These sources limit Donbas to 'Ukraine' and 'Donetsk and Luhansk', and do not include Rostov (or even the parts of Dnipro that used to be included in the mining region, proving that they are not merely talking about some 'Ukrainian Donbas' based on the old the definition that excludes Rostov). This is not a mere discussion of the war. The fact of the matter remains that 'Donbas' commonly means DONETSK AND LUHANSK specifically, not the old Soviet mining region. You continue to speak as if I pretend this region does not exist. Of course the old definition still exists. But it is not what most people mean when they say Donbas now, and RS support this statement. RGloucester — ☎ 11:38, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You took my words about one source, attributed them to another source and "successfully" disproved them. Very funny. Do not confuse what I said about the mentioned sources, or this will inevitably lead to a misconstruction. When I spoke about the Swain ref, I did not write anything about its discussion of the war. I repeat: referring to Swain, you refer to a chapter of his book called "The Ukrainian Donbas in transition" which makes it clear that it says exclusively about the Ukrainian part of the Donbas. Ukraine's eastern Donetsk and Luhansk regions are undoubtedly known as Donbas, its region is called Donbas, but this fact in no way limits the Donbas only to these regions, it does not mean that only these regions are called Donbas. The parts of Rostov and Dnipropetrovsk Oblasts are also called Donbas to this day. This is more than unequivocally stated in a number of modern reliable sources that you continue to ignore. You for some reason are mostly determined to such sources, in which (not all, but most) it is written about the Donbas strictly in the context of the war, so they mention Donetsk and Luhansk, and not the parts of Rostov or Dnipropetrovsk oblasts. It should also be noted that what you call the "old definition" has never been old. This is your personal misconception. This definition is given in modern reliable secondary and tertiary sources and there is absolutely no reason to consider such a definition old or uncommon.--Eksul (talk) 14:51, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Throw out Britannica, again. Focus on sources from the last decade. See what you find! You will find modern, reliable sources, like the Oxford dictionary, which limit Donbas to Ukraine. Are you implying this is not a reliable source? RGloucester — ☎ 15:11, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There is no good reason to throw out Britannica just because for some reason you consider it an analogue of Wikipedia (I do not see any point in repeating myself about Britannica). Lexico is the only source in which the definition of the Donbas is clearly reduced only to the Ukrainian part of it, and this is the source I had in mind in my comment of August 19 (there is only one source, which ignores the south-west of Russia as part of the Donbass). Here are a few sources of the last decade, some of them I have already presented at the beginning of the discussion, but it is not difficult for me to do it again. Although most of these sources are new to the topic (note: new sources added to the list at the beginning of the discussion).
Historical Dictionary of Ukraine, p 135: Donets Basin. ... The basin extends through the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts of southeastern Ukraine and part of the Rostov oblast of southwest of the Russian Federation, covering an area of 23,000 sq. km.
Great Russian Encyclopedia: The DONETSK COAL BASIN (Donbass), in Ukraine (mainly in the Luhansk, Donetsk and Dnepropetrovsk regions) and in Russia (Rostov region), is the largest in Europe by reserves. With an area of more than 60 thousand km2 (of which about 20 thousand km2 in Russia).
encyclopediaofukraine: The Donbas lies in southeastern Ukraine and partly in the western Russian Federation, between the middle and lower Donets River in the north and the northeast and the Azov Upland and Azov Lowland in the south. The basin extends through Donetsk oblast and Luhansk oblast in Ukraine and part of Rostov oblast in Russia. It covers an area of 23,000 sq km.
David R. Marples, p 227-228: "in addition to the energy industries of Western Siberia, Soviet planners opted to reduce past focus on development of the giant coalfield of the Donbas (stretching from Eastern Ukraine into the Rostov Oblast of Russia)."
Hanna Shelest, Maryna Rabinovych, note on p 18: Donbas is a shortening from “Donetsk Coal Basin,” which encompasses parts of eastern Ukraine (partially Donetsk, Luhansk, Dnipropetrovsk, and Zaporizhzhia oblasts) and of the Rostov region in Russia.
Vlad Mykhnenko: The Russian or eastern Donbas consists of four districts (raiony) of Rostov province—Kamenskii, Belokalitvenskii, Krasnosulinskii and Oktyabr’skii.
Slyvka, Slyvka, Atamaniuk, p 306: Donbas is a historical and geographical region, most of which is in Ukraine (Donetsk and Luhansk regions); but a smaller part of Eastern Donbas is in Russia (Rostov region).
Kristina Hook, Drew Marcantonio: The Donbas region also includes major population centers across four Ukrainian provinces (the Luhansk, Donetsk, Kharkiv, and Dnipropetrovsk oblasts), as well as one Russian province (the Rostov oblast).
Oksana Voytyuk, p 98: It is located in two countries - Ukraine and the Russian Federation. In Ukraine, the basin covers a part of the Dnipropetrovsk, Donetsk and Lugansk oblasts, and in Russia – the Rostov region.
Yuriy Temirov: which spreads across Donbas, from the eastern part of Dnipropetrovsk oblast (Pavlohrad) to the Rostov province in Russia.
crisisgroup: Mines just over the border from the statelets in Rostov, in what is known as Russian Donbas, had long since been “optimised”
eiti org, p.27 : Donetsk Basin is located in the Dnipropetrovsk, Donetsk, Luhansk and Kharkiv oblasts of Ukraine and the Rostov region of the Russian Federation.
Mikhail S. Blinnikov, p 408: The Donbass coal basin is partially located in Rostov Oblast, on the border with Ukraine.
Clive Jones, Caroline Kennedy-Pipe: ... while miners from the Donbass region of Rostov oblast blocked the North Caucasus railroad
Radio Free Europe: The eastern part of the modern Ukrainian Donbas, because there is still the Russian Donbas, in the Rostov region of Russia, this territory belonged to the region of the Don army, the same Don region.
Also I don't see any problem in Kuromiya's books of 2002 and 2003, which you were happy to refer to in the article (and you continue to refer to his books, but I think without much happiness now) because he is one of the most significant researchers of the history of Donbas, with the book dedicated exclusively to this region. It's strange that you suddenly found his books not relevant enoughEksul (talk) 19:18, 21 August 2021 (UTC).[reply]
I don't have any problem with any of those sources. As I said, multiple definitions exist. Indeed, in those sources you cited some include parts of Kharkiv and Dnipro, and others do not. You are trying to impose a consistency that does not exist, and discounting sources provided to you that suggest otherwise. Meanwhile, I agree that these multiple definitions exist, and should be described as such. But, there is no justification for saying any one is the 'correct' one, when Donbas is not an official region with official demarcations of any kind. RGloucester — ☎ 20:22, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not talking about total consistency, I'm talking about the predominance of a certain definition in reliable sources. Also I have never ignored the reliable sources, I just evaluated their ratio. As you can see, there are plenty of relevant sources published in recent years that define the Donbas as the region in the east/south-east of Ukraine and the south-west of Russia. In the Rostov oblast there is a city of Shakhty, which is recognized as part of the Donbas. In the Dnipropetrovsk oblast there is a city of Pavlohrad, which is also recognized as part of the Donbas. Therefore, no matter how unclear the borders of Donbass are, they definitely include parts of the Rostov and Dnepropetrovsk regions.Eksul (talk) 22:02, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Except, some of the very sources you cite exclude Dnipro oblast from their definition of the Donbas. How do you plan to reconcile this inconsistency? In any case, I think the fundamental problem here is that you are conflating the coal basin with the socio-cultural region. These are not equivalent. In fact, there was a time when the coal basin had a separate article. It may be possible to revive that article if you can demonstrate that there is adequate content available on this subject. The socio-cultural region in Ukraine, however, which is indeed defined commonly as 'Donetsk and Luhansk', is a notable subject that is clearly the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC of the word Donbas. This, of course, is also the reason that 'Donbas' is now more commonly used than 'Donbass'. This is to the point that Freedom House refers to the occupied portions of Donbas as the 'Eastern Donbas' (conflicting with Mykhnenko, above). Of course, if parts of Rostov were to be included, the idea of an 'Eastern Donbas' limited to occupied areas of Donetsk and Luhansk would not make any sense. What of Sasse and Lackner, who write 'the frontline has cut the historical region of Donbas, used as a shorthand to describe Donetsk Oblast and Luhansk Oblast, into two parts'? When people shouted 'Donbas is Ukraine' in 2014, were they expressing an irredentist claim to parts of Rostov? Please try and see reason here. RGloucester — ☎ 17:16, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, the problem is that you for some reason are trying to conflate the socio-cultural region only with those parts of it where the war took place - with Luhansk and Donetsk. Meanwhile, it is a big mistake to exclude in particular the part of the Rostov region from the socio-cultural region of Donbas. There is no good reason to reduce the socio-cultural region of Donbas only to Donetsk and Luhansk, while giving your own interpretations to the definitions of the region in the sources.
"How do you plan to reconcile this inconsistency?" Such inconsistencies are always reconciled by the prevalence of a particular definition in the sources, as I have already said. Most of the sources include part of the Dnipropetrovsk region in the Donbas. In addition, this inconsistency is not a problem, because it is reconciled by the more general term of "southeastern Ukraine" (or "eastern" - some sources call it this way, that way, which is also not uncommon or problematic).
"The socio-cultural region in Ukraine, however, which is indeed defined commonly as 'Donetsk and Luhansk'" This is again your original research and the deepest misconception. There is no reason to claim that the "socio-cultural" region is defined only as the regions of Donetsk and Luhansk. Numerous reliable sources perfectly show that the definition of Donbas as a territory in the south-east Ukraine and south-west of Russia is "common". As for WP: PRIMARYTOPIC, I certainly agree that the Donbas as a socio-cultural or historical region is the primary topic. And, I repeat, part of the Rostov oblast is included in this region.
"This, of course, is also the reason that 'Donbas' is now more commonly used than 'Donbass' Really? I thought that the reason 'Donbas' is now more commonly used is that most of the Donbas is located in Ukraine, and the Ukrainian name is written with one "с", and not with two, as in Russian, therefore, transliteration from Ukrainian is paramount (the conclusion about the renaming (at the top of this talk page) reads: "as this multinational region is chiefly in Ukraine, per GeoNames, Brittanica, World Factbook, etc."). As for your refs about the frontlines and the shouts of people, you have again demonstrated that you are fixated only to those sources that talk about the war in Donbas (of course that doesn't apply to its Russian part) and not about the Donbas as a region in general. Only a separate section in the article is dedicated to the war in the Donbas, not the entire article. Also there is nothing wrong with the fact that the Donetsk and Luhansk regions are sometimes shortened to the word Donbas, especially in the context of the war. Moreover, Sasse and Lackner have never limited the Donbas to these territories only. In Soviet times, the entire territory of the newly formed Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts was informally shortened as the Donbas, although technically only half of these oblasts had something to do with the Donbas. The reference to the shouts of the people as proof of the definition of Donbas only as its Ukrainian part is simply ridiculous. The main thing is that the context of their slogans is also obvious - the war and the regions in the war. All the references that you rely on deal with the Donbas strictly in the context of the war, this is the fundamental problem here.--Eksul (talk) 05:17, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how you can say that what I am saying is 'original research' when tons of sources have been provided above that verify that 'Donbas' is commonly used to refer to 'Donetsk and Luhansk'. Whether the war the had an effect on entrenching this form of the definition, that we cannot speculate on, but the fact remains that in the present, the vast majority of the sources dealing with this region in English are dealing with the war, and these cannot be discounted merely because you think that somehow, when the war in discussed, the definition of Donbas changes. RGloucester — ☎ 12:42, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Tons of sources provided above define the Donbas as a region that includes not only part of Ukraine, but also part of Russia. Your tendency to reduce the "socio-cultural" region of Donbas only to Donetsk and Luhansk is original research. Just to clarify… Do you still think that the definition of the Donbas as a region in eastern Ukraine and southwestern Russia, despite the sources given, is not common and should not be used in the article as the main definition of the region?Eksul (talk) 15:11, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think that both definitions are valid and should be included, but that the primary topic is the Ukrainian region, as demonstrated by the preponderance of recent sources in ENGLISH, especially since 2014. It's that simple. Furthermore, when I say 'both' definitions, it is important to note that the broader definition (for the coal mining region) is not clearly demarcated. It sometimes includes parts of Kharkiv, sometimes excludes Dnipro, sometimes excludes parts of Donetsk and Luhansk, &c., and thus cannot be easily quantified as a subject. The Donetsk and Luhansk definition, however, is easily quantified. Again, what does it mean when President Zelensky says 'Donbas will never be Russian territory'? RGloucester — ☎ 15:32, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have never tried to define a broad coal mining region here. The thing is that the socio-cultural region of Donbas also has a broader definition than just "Donetsk and Luhansk". In addition, this is not the case when we can divide topics in such a way, as, for example, we can divide a socio-cultural region from a coal-mining one and write separate articles about each. If less attention is paid to the small part of the region than to another, larger one, which often appears in news reports in connection with the war and humanitarian catastrophe, this is not a good reason to rewrite the very definition of this region and exclude the mention of the small part from it.
Besides, I don't quite understand how the ability to evaluate a quantitative assessment and clearly draw the boundaries can be an argument in favor of any definition? As I said before, in Soviet times the name Donbas was assigned to Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts as a whole - absolutely clear demarcation. But nevertheless, despite the clear demarcation, it was completely incorrect, since only half of each oblast had something to do with the Donbas. A clear demarcation has nothing to do with the correct definitions. As you can see from the sources, many experts on this topic prefer a more vague definition, but, in their opinion, a more correct one.
"what does it mean when President Zelensky says 'Donbas will never be Russian territory'" This is a political slogan of a politician, a reaction to the loss of control over a part of the Donbass, public expression of the desire to return it. It doesn't look like an expert opinion. To prove with such slogans that the Russian part of Donbass does not exist is absurd, especially against the background of numerous reliable sources written by experts on the topic, in which part of the Rostov oblast is also included in the region.--Eksul (talk) 16:42, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This 'clear demarcation' cannot be said to be 'incorrect', in fact, the term is still commonly used as such to this day, as you can see above. To say that this is 'incorrect' is the real WP:OR in this discussion, unless you have a source that says: 'Referring to Donetsk and Luhansk as "Donbas" is incorrect'. The point I am trying to prove is not that that the 'Russian part of Donbas does not exist', but that, the term 'Donbas', without further specification, is commonly used now to mean Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts. I think that you cannot possibly deny this, and the point of me citing Zelensky or Freedom House, &c., is to make clear that this is how the term is actually used in practice. In such a case, there is no basis for any argument about 'correctness'. RGloucester — ☎ 17:32, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The definition used in practice is clarified by tons of sources written not by shouting people or politicians speaking about the war, but by experts on the topic. Such a huge number of sources that use the definition, which, along with south-eastern Ukraine, also includes part of the Rostov region, suggests that such a definition should be considered as a common definition. But the problem is that I have already said this many times, which means that the discussion has gone in a circle.--Eksul (talk) 07:23, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Discounting sources about the war when most sources in English dealing with the region are about the war post-2014 is absurd. Just for fun, I looked at your Britannica article. You know what it says, I presume: 'the coalfield lies in southeastern Ukraine and in the adjoining region of southwestern Russia'. The article's scope is limited to the coalfield, and deals primarily with mining. It doesn't even mention the war, once. As we've discussed numerous times, this article is not about the geographical coalfield, but about the socio-cultural region in Ukraine. While Britannica should not be used anyway, I don't know how you think this source supports your claims here. RGloucester — ☎ 11:42, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

About the Third Opinion request: The request made at Third Opinion has been removed (i.e. declined). Like all other moderated content dispute resolution venues at Wikipedia, Third Opinion requires thorough talk page discussion before seeking assistance. Thorough talk page discussion requires at least couple of back-and-forth, on-topic attempts to talk out the dispute. Since one editor only has one post here, that threshold has not been reached. If an editor will not discuss, consider the recommendations which are made here. Note to IP editor: Your IP address frequently changes. It would be of considerable assistance to anyone evaluating your edits and comments if you would register an account and edit only from that account. — TransporterMan (TALK) 16:47, 20 August 2021 (UTC) (Not watching this page.)[reply]

OK, it's done.Eksul (talk) 07:53, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I came here from the 3O page. I do not feel qualified to offer a full third opinion, nor have I read all of the discussion above. However, I do have read a fair bit. I propose below a summary of the dispute; If that summary is accurate, I believe a compromise could be found (or at least a third opinion offered) without having to dig very deep in the sources either of you provide.
  1. Both of you agree that there are two definitions of Donbas depending on sources
    1. One "smaller Donbas" (hereafter SD) includes the Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts, is mostly administrative, and is contained entirely in Ukraine
    2. One "larger Donbas" (hereafter LD) includes at least Rostov and possibly Dnipropetrovsk; it is more vague and might include Dnipro or not; it covers more or less the historical area of Soviet coal mining
  2. Both of you are OK with discussing the different definitions in the body of the article, but you disagree on which definition should be given prominence in the lead
  3. Eksul contends that
    1. LD is the definition favored by the majority of reliable sources, in particular more scholarly work
    2. This is the case even when talking about something else than the old Soviet mining area;
    3. There is some socio-cultural unity in the region covered by LD, even after the war broke out
    4. Even if one was to restrict sourcing to recent (post-war) sources, high-quality (scholarly) sources still use the LD definition
  4. RGloucester contends that
    1. SD is the more common use, or at least as common as LD, in recent usage
    2. The definition used in contemporary English media is at least as relevant as the one used in scholarly work
    3. When discussing Soviet mining, the LD definition is in use, but the current article is not about the old Soviet mining and therefore this usage should not be in the lead
    4. There might have been a time of socio-cultural unity, but for sure the war destroyed any such unity, and with it any reference to the region as a socio-cultural sphere
Feel free to object to any of the numbered points (obviously about what you think, not about what the other person thinks). TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 16:46, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your summary. I would like to note that the conditional "smaller Donbas", consisting of the entire Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts, does not include parts of the Rostov and Dnipropetrovsk oblasts, and the conditional "larger Donbas" does not include about half of the Luhansk and about half of the Donetsk oblasts. The territory of the latter (conditional "larger Donbas") is actually very different from a large coal mining area, the Donbas coalfield. That coal mining area is much larger. Also I would like to clarify that the historical, "old" Donbas and what was called the Donbas for some time in Soviet times are far from the same thing. In Soviet times, when the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts were just formed, the name Donbas fixed to the entire territory of these oblasts, although in fact only a part (about half) of their entire territory has something to do with the Donbas region (other parts of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts include Pryazovia and Slobozhanshchyna).
In the recent article from July 3, published on the Ukrainian website euromaidanpress, it is clearly clarified: "so-called “Old Donbas” mostly lies in the north of Donetsk oblast and the south of the Luhansk one, partially covering also parts of Ukraine’s Dnipropetrovsk and Russia’s Rostov oblasts. In Soviet times, the unofficial name Donbas stuck to Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts as a whole — the provinces newly created in the 1930s, although technically only half of each oblast had something to do with the Donbas". There you can also look at the map, which clarifies how the boundaries of the broader coal mining region of Donbas differ from the historical Donbas. As you can see, part of the Rostov region of Russia always remains a part of Donbas, no matter in what context the definition of Donbas is considered.
And the people who live there are well aware that they are part of the Donbas. For example, on this site (or that, but in Russian) you can see a photo with a caption, which depicts protesting residents of the Russian part of Donbas, standing with posters, one of which reads: "Russian Donbas is against thieves and crooks!". To claim that they are not part of the socio-cultural Donbas is nonsense. But the main thing is that tons of modern reliable sources make it clear that there is not only the Ukrainian part of Donbas, but also the Russian one, in Rostov oblast. --Eksul (talk) 23:37, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Coming from Third Opinion. After reading around how other wikipedias handle it and what is going on on this talk page, the immediate conclusion is there is a conflation between historical region and coal/industrial basin, both sharinh the name. Therefore there must be a geographical/geological article Donets Coal Basin (now a redirect). Its extent is uncontroversial and articles in ukwiki and ruwiki are larger than this one. (The coal basit is further subdividedd into Eastern Donbas and Western Donbas. Second, I have never heard (I aint an expert) that Russian coal areas are called simply "Donbas" today. Today Donbas are thadidioannly Ukrainian land. I have an impression that in Russian Empire and Soviet Union thre was no partition into Russian and Ukrainian Donbas. Finally, there was such thing as Donbass Euroregion [ru] Lembit Staan (talk) 00:49, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have never sought to ensure that the primary definition of Donbas in this article should be the definition of the coal-mining region, I have always agreed that this article is about the Donbas as a historical and socio-cultural region (quote from my early comments: "I have never tried to define a broad coal mining region here"; " I certainly agree that the Donbas as a socio-cultural or historical region is the primary topic."). If you had read the discussion, you would have paid attention to what the modern sources say, for example, the last one given (published on July, 3, 2021) : "Geographically, the Donbas coalfield is a large inkblot-like area stretching from the Dnipro River north of the city of Dnipro to the east up to the Don River in Russia, though the historic so-called “Old Donbas” mostly lies in the north of Donetsk oblast and the south of the Luhansk one, partially covering also parts of Ukraine’s Dnipropetrovsk and Russia’s Rostov oblasts". Therefore, the definition of Donbas as a historical region you say about in your commentary must include not only parts of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts of Ukraine, but also the Rostov oblast of Russia. And there is no need to try to present the situation as if I was trying to define the Donbas here as a geological coal-mining region and not a historical one, that is not true. I repeat: the historical region of Donbas, although it is much smaller than the coal-mining region, still includes part of the Rostov oblast. So there are big doubts that you have actually read this discussion, since much of what I have said, and, more importantly, what the sources say, has gone unnoticed for you. Please analyze the arguments in the discussion and read the sources in order to be based not only on your own philistine perception.
"I have an impression that in Russian Empire and Soviet Union thre was no partition into Russian and Ukrainian Donbas" - Was it a joke?. "Today Donbas are thadidioannly Ukrainian land" - Totally false statement, It's a pity that you didn't get acquainted with the sources. "I have never heard (I aint an expert) that Russian coal areas are called simply "Donbas" today" - I believe you but, as I said earlier, If one part of the region, a larger one, is more often mentioned in news reports in connection with the war going on in its territory than the other, a smaller one, it is not a good reason to rewrite the definition of the region and exclude a smaller part from it. Eksul (talk) 11:55, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Was it a joke?. no it was not. At these times it was a single country and Donbas was a common treasure. Nobody in sane mind claimed that Volga belonged to Kalmyks, and Don belonged to Ukrainians. It was common goods, possibly subdivided geographically for accounting purposes. Yes I did read the discussion, but apparently you didnt read my answer. Yes the discussion significantly conflates the coal basin and traditional area. Hence my major suggestion: have a separate article. As for "historical" region, the article must say that it is directly based on the industrial region. And all talks about "Donetschina"/Донеччина is a modern invention of Ukrainian nationalists who work hard to push the history of Ukraine all the way down to the donosaurs. Lembit Staan (talk) 17:55, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
About not_a_joke. I don't think it matters for this discussion, but I would like to clarify. Let's start with the fact that in the Soviet Union there was a partition into the Russian and Ukrainian Donbas. In dozens of Soviet sources (from the 60s, 70s, 80s) on the topic, you can find such formulations as "Ukrainian Donbas" and "Russian Donbas"; one in the Ukrainian republic,UkSSR, the other in the Russian republic, RSFSR. As for the Russian-Imperial Donbas, the fact that there could not have been a partition of Donbas into Ukrainian and Russian at the time is so obvious that it does not need to be explained and even mentioned at all. But why do you even tend to talk about its partition back in the times? Or about which region belonged to whom? What does it even matter for this discussion? There is a region that in the days of the Russian Empire was located in one state; in the times of the Soviet Union, the border of two republics passed through it; in our time, the border of two countries passes through it. And the main thing that really matters for the discussion is that there is now the Ukrainian part of Donbas. And that there is now the Russian part of Donbas.
"Yes the discussion significantly conflates the coal basin and traditional area" - By the coal basin, did you mean a vast coal-mining area? Because the traditional area you talk about is essentially also the [Donets] coal basin (quote from the article itself: "The word Donbas is a portmanteau formed from Donets Basin, an abbreviation of "Donets Coal Basin"). If it seemed to you that the discussion conflates this traditional socio-cultural region and the broader area of the coal-mining region, this is regrettable for me, because I tried my best to avoid such a conflation, to make it clear that I speak about the traditional socio-cultural region, that it is primary topic of this article, and not the broader coal-mining area, about which it would really be reasonable to create a separate article. The traditional region of Donbas, although it is much smaller than the broader coal-mining region, still includes part of the Rostov oblast of Russia.--Eksul (talk) 23:49, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation suggestions[edit]

Should we really have UK and US pronunciations of what's fundamentally a Ukrainian word? Does it make sense?

Secondarily, the Merriam - Webster entry doesn't seem to exist, or is incorrectly linked. 175.32.198.14 (talk) 13:04, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I fixed the link. These are all English-language pronunciations of the name in English dictionaries. —Michael Z. 23:54, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please add link to German[edit]

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donezbecken is the German equivalent. (Germans like to make things complicated … And I’m too simple to be able to add a language link, sorry.) – Fritz Jörn (talk) 10:40, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There are separate Wikidata items where the interlanguage links are managed for Donbas (Q605714) and Donets coal basin (Q23907747). This article corresponds to the former, but de.wiki only has an article corresponding to the second. I don’t know if there’s a way to work around this. —Michael Z. 16:58, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Soviet period" section edit[edit]

Preserving here by providing this link; my rationale was: "remove non-RS; other c/e". --K.e.coffman (talk) 05:29, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reports on recent events[edit]

The report of the events immediately preceding and following the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 appears biased. It includes handpicked minor news (e.g. Nicaraguan reaction, protest in Milan, Italy) and dubious sources. 2601:740:8101:30A0:F8E0:94AC:C952:4E65 (talk) 23:05, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Should be blocked[edit]

Taking into account the current situation in Ukraine representatives of the agressor places misinformation. It makes sense to remove it till the end of the conflict. 91.90.11.173 (talk) 23:31, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not One Mention of the Minsk Agreements[edit]

I mean come on. Are we really going to have an entire article on the Donbas without one mention of the Minsk Agreements?[1]


Michael.suede (talk) 22:39, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've added that bit in, but I agree, this article is in a sorry state. If I have time I will see if I can work on improving it. RGloucester — ☎ 23:29, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/what-are-minsk-agreements-ukraine-conflict-2021-12-06/

Does Donbas have oil/gas?[edit]

I've seen it asserted that reserves were discovered there about ten years ago...I tried Googling but the results were swamped with things related to the current war and debates about Russian natural gas supplying Europe....tia.Historian932 (talk) 16:55, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To note, this page is not a WP:FORUM for discussion of these matters. However, I can confirm that there are gas reserves present in the Donbas, namely parts of the Dnieper–Donets gas basin. Information about the conflict's impact on potential shale gas production can be found here. RGloucester — ☎ 17:47, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've added a blurb in the economy section of the article, if you care to take a look. RGloucester — ☎ 18:11, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

“Donbas” vs “the Donbas”[edit]

I understand the political significance of “Ukraine” vs “the Ukraine” (and the relevant Wikipedia entry addresses it). Is there any significance to “Donbas” vs “the Donbas”? The current article seems to use a combination of both and I couldn’t suss out a consistent grammatical reason for the choices. The Associated Press seems to recommend “the Donbas”, albeit without much explanation. Tycho Bray (talk) 19:08, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it matters that much in actual usage, but it should properly be 'the Donbas'. As for why, it's because 'Donbas' is a portmanteau of 'Donets Basin'. Just as 'Donets Basin is a region in Ukraine' is awkward and unnatural without the definite article (It should of course be 'The Donets Basin is a region in Ukraine' in normal English), so too, in theory, is 'Donbas is a region in Ukraine'. In practice, however, usage seems mixed. RGloucester — ☎ 02:35, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
AP Stylebook (in March–May) said “Usage: the Donbas or the Donbas region, not simply Donbas.”[1]  —Michael Z. 16:27, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]


How many people live in Donbas?[edit]

The population and demographics section doesn't seem to have any numbers for this, just percentages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Evanwolf (talk • contribs) 18:14, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The numbers are 'dynamic', people run away, die, are deported (kidnapped).Xx236 (talk) 07:39, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Obsolete lead[edit]

"Parts of the Donbas are controlled by separatist groups as a result of the Russo-Ukrainian War: the Donetsk People's Republic and the Luhansk People's Republic." Should be "Parts of Donbas are controlled by Russia..." Xx236 (talk) 07:38, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 March 2024[edit]

Retshsnn (talk) 09:42, 16 March 2024 (UTC) Я хочу начать редактирование статьи о Донбассе. I want change Donbass[reply]
 Not done It's unclear what changes you want to make. Edit requests are for concrete changes, you can't request access to extended-confirmed-protected articles. In order to be able to edit the article, you need to make at least 500 edits to English Wikipedia. (Неясно, какие изменения вы хотите внести. Запросы на правку предназначены для конкретных изменений, вы не можете запрашивать доступ к статьям с расширенной подтвержденной защитой. Для того чтобы получить право редактировать статью, вам необходимо сделать не менее 500 правок в английской Википедии.) Brat Forelli🦊 10:50, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Donbas&oldid=1213993301"