Talk:Battle of Novoazovsk

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Battle of Novoazovsk article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Military history: Russian & Soviet

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 not met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Russian, Soviet and CIS military history 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.

My head

We now have four (read: four) articles dealing with the exact same subject matter: War in Donbass, 2014 Russian military intervention in Ukraine, and "Fall of Novoazovsk", and Russian Invasion of Ukraine (2014). This is so absurd that it defies reasoning. Please, stop! STOP THE FORKING. There are now four articles dealing with same thing in different manners. FOUR! My poor head will fall off my neck. RGloucester — ☎ 17:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This article actually is a more reasonable fork since specific details about the battle and the aftermath should not be expounded upon so much in more general articles.--The Devil's Advocate _{tlk. cntrb.} 17:43, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you. If we manage to get rid of the "invasion" article, I'll quite support this article as a neutral way forward. RGloucester — ☎ 23:42, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]