Talk:International representation of the Donetsk People's Republic and the Luhansk People's Republic

These representation offices do not represent official or quasi-official state-to-state relations

These representation offices are examples of pseudo-embassies. For example, the DNR embassy that has been established by the DNR inside of the Czech Republic is not actually recognised as a legitimate embassy by the government of the Czech Republic itself. So, we cannot describe this institution as a real embassy, because an embassy can only be classified as such if BOTH parties agree that it should be classified as such. I think the same applies to most of the entries in this article. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 11:05, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Based on my recommendation above, I've gone ahead and split the article into two distinct parts; "Legitimate embassies" versus "Pseudo-embassies". Indeed, I checked the link for the Finland embassy... The link was to a Donetsk government website, which was presenting the Donetsk embassy in Finland as a legitimate embassy. However, strangely enough, the article didn't mention who was the official representative of Finland, claiming that a "friendship society" (is this really a government representative?) had accepted the opening of the Donetsk embassy... I've gone and had a look online for the official position of the Finland government, and, as I've suspected, they don't actually recognise the Donetsk embassy (why would they, when they don't even recognise Donetsk as a country in the first place?). Finland regards the Donetsk embassy as a hoax, or as an otherwise illegal entity that Finland did not consent to being established. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 11:41, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Here are two articles from Finnish fact-checkers that conclude that the creation of these pseudo-embassies by the Donetsk PR is part of a hybrid warfare disinformation campaign to sow confusion among the Finnish public. And these "DR representation centres" are indeed regarded as hoaxes by these fact-checkers.

- https://www.stopfake.org/en/fake-donetsk-people-s-republic-office-opens-in-finland/

- https://euvsdisinfo.eu/report/donetsk-peoples-republic-launches-representative-office-in-helsinki Jargo Nautilus (talk) 12:28, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Proposal

I propose that all of the pseudo-embassies be deleted, unless a good reason is provided for them not to be. If this article is to be interpreted as a "list of the official embassies of the Donetsk and Luhansk PRs", then we cannot in good faith include all of these pseudo-embassies in the article. On the other hand, if this article is to be interpreted as merely "Donetsk and Luhansk diplomacy", without the presupposition that this diplomacy amounts to official diplomatic relations (and can instead be just considered "diplomatic activities/activism"), then these pseudo-embassies might be able to stay in the article. Also, if people simply think that having a list of all of these pseudo-embassies together is useful, then so be it. However, as I've pointed out in my corresponding edit summary (to the main article), I don't believe that any of these pseudo-embassies meets the NOTABILITY guidelines. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 11:48, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Conclusion

Notwithstanding the fact that no one has replied to my observations and proposal after a few days, I've decided to go ahead with my plans anyway, which I deem to be reasonable (if another editor disagrees, they can say so here). I have deleted all of the pseudo-embassies, leaving behind only the real embassies, which are contained within countries (or breakaway republics) that officially recognise the DPR and LPR. So far, this only includes Russia and South Ossetia. There are other countries/breakaway republics that recognise the DPR and LPR, but there are no entries for embassies relating to these countries in the article at the moment. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 02:06, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

The article is eligible for deletion or merging into "International recognition of DPR and LPR"

I'm not going to officially create a deletion or merge request just yet, but I am recommending here now (as stated in my recent talk page summary) that this article is not NOTABLE enough to qualify as its own distinct article. The contents within this article could easily be streamlined into the much larger "International recognition of DPR and LPR" article. There is as of yet no reason to keep this article up and running. The only way that this article would become relevant is if the DPR and LPR suddenly gained a significant degree of recognition (and, by extension, embassies), to the point that such recognition is heavily detailed in reliable sources (rather than primary sources); such recognition would likely entail an increase in diplomatic activities ("international representation") as well. As it stands, this article is effectively useless, in my view. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 02:06, 22 July 2022 (UTC)