Talk:March 2024 western Russia incursion

Map?

Should a map be added? Lukt64 (talk) 17:59, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

There isnt a reliable map anywhere online unfortunately 2603:8000:E203:922:D4AB:5CF5:A53A:D751 (talk) 23:36, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

• Source for map linked further down in talk page. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 20:23, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Commander of the "Legion Freedom of Russia"

According to the Legion of Freedom of Russia's Telegram, Maximilian Andronikkov no longer a commander Onushe (talk) 20:12, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Link pls? Firestar464 (talk) 03:53, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Merger Proposal

I propose merging this article to 2023–2024 Belgorod Oblast incursions as this just so happens to be one of those incurious into that particular Oblast, though the Kursk Oblast is also involved this time. Perhaps some discussion here could clear things out as to whether a separate article is needed for this incursion or not. IanDBeacon (talk) 00:34, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

With 234 (allegedly) killed, I think deserves an own and separated article.31.221.207.216 (talk) 23:16, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Russian Government Casualties

How many Russian Government men have been killed and wounded by the rebels? Does anyone have sources? 2001:8003:3A18:E00:3145:956B:894B:F2A9 (talk) 11:25, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Also need to specify circumstances of vehicle losses. Borgenland (talk) 12:07, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

2 BMD-2's were destroyed, confirmed by the Freedom of Russia Legion about half an hour ago on their Telegram Group. 151.37.156.187 (talk) 13:03, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

By drone attack 151.37.156.187 (talk) 13:03, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Again, we need sources. Scu ba (talk) 17:26, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

References

Visegrad 24 report

Hey Borgenland. I saw you removed the Visegrad 24 report under OR due to the 2nd sentence source being predated. I will give you that. However, the first sentence was not predated and is a valid thing to mention (I believe). So, would you be opposed to the following being included in the article? Visegrád 24, a large advertising agency account on X, reported that the Freedom of Russia Legion had captured the towns of Kozinka and Glotovo in Belgorod Oblast. That statement is factually accurate and has encyclopedic value due to the history of Visegrad 24’s misinformation. It doesn’t have to be present in a “misinformation” section either. I am thinking about adding it at the end of the 12 March 2024 section, since that is when it was reported. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 00:36, 14 March 2024 (UTC) The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 00:36, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

I just need a better source for the correction. I don’t mind the first part. Borgenland (talk) 00:40, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Preferably one that directly addresses the claim. Borgenland (talk) 00:43, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

It's unclear how the inclusion would have encyclopedic value due to the history of Visegrad 24’s misinformation -- am I missing something? --K.e.coffman (talk) 00:56, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Technically, no one has stated their report was misinformation. They have just mis-reported a couple of things in the past (see their Wikipedia article). But this has not been confirmed to be misinformation at all. Also no RSN discussion on them yet. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 01:08, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

This is dubious info cited to Twitter -- suggest it be removed as non-RS / undue. --K.e.coffman (talk) 01:10, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Do you have proof it isn't RS? No discussion on RSN has deprecated or even occurred over them. Twitter news outlets are allowed as BNO News is considered reliable and they are fully a Twitter-based news outlet. Just like Borgenland suggested, sources are needed, and in this case, a source is needed saying what they reported isn't true. They are cited by several news outlets that are RS, so no source saying it isn't RS means it should not be removed. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 01:12, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

• I removed Visegrad as undue/non-RS; preserving here by providing this link, as well as this one. The burden to show the reliability of a source is on those who wish to include it; see WP:BURDEN. Welcome to start a discussion at RSN. --K.e.coffman (talk) 01:49, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Understood. I will not be attempting to restore the material. However, BURDEN also would be on you as the remover to show the source provided is not a reliable source. So, as that has not been done, this discussion plays not further impact on the reliability or future usage of Visegrad 24 in this article or on Wikipedia. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 02:48, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

References

Losses

Hey Borgenland, I have some sources for you like you asked regarding losses for both sides, if you deem them acceptable may I add them?

Militant losses:

1st T-64: https://t.me/mod_russia/36541

1st IMR-2 and BREM-1: https://t.me/mod_russia/36542

2nd T-64, 2nd and 3rd IMR-2, and one unknown vehicle: https://t.me/epoddubny/19328

Russian losses:

1st and 2nd BMD-2: https://twitter.com/legion_svoboda/status/1767895216030150816

1st BTR-70(?) unknown if that is the exact BTR model but it looks like it: https://twitter.com/legion_svoboda/status/1767455563632251189 2603:8000:E203:922:EC23:509C:AB0F:3033 (talk) 02:01, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

These are not reliable sources. --K.e.coffman (talk) 02:15, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

2 of them are from the Russian MoD, others are from pages of the militants. I get that the other Russian TG is not very reliable but they all show the videos. How else are they supposed to be confirmed? 2603:8000:E203:922:EC23:509C:AB0F:3033 (talk) 02:18, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Best to wait for reliable secondary sources to cover this; otherwise, we'd be conducting original research based on primary sources / unreliable wartime propaganda. --K.e.coffman (talk) 02:22, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

None of these are usable, you can't cite a blog, or a social media post. Especially pro-Russian blogs with a propensity for disinformation. These have to actually be reported by legitimate organizations through legitimate channels. Scu ba (talk) 02:25, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Is the Russian MoD not a legitimate channel? 2603:8000:E203:922:D4AB:5CF5:A53A:D751 (talk) 02:30, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia has standards for what sources can be cited, and, as per WP:SPS and WP:SOCIALMEDIA, social media, including telegram, cannot be cited. Scu ba (talk) 02:34, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Oh. I put telegram because, since I live in the US, the Russian MoD website is blocked. Telegram is the only official MoD source I can use that isnt blocked 2603:8000:E203:922:D4AB:5CF5:A53A:D751 (talk) 02:38, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Okay, so then we can't cite the Russian MoD. We'll need sources published by verifiable third parties. Scu ba (talk) 02:41, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Here is a link to footage from the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, from the Zvezda TV channel, where the destruction of equipment is shown

https://tvzvezda.ru/news/20243141359-yT6Uq.html Danilzeez (talk) 18:56, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll work this into the article. Scu ba (talk) 02:25, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

The War Zone

I hate to cast doubts on a legitimate news source, but I can't find an about page for The War Zone, one of the primary sources in this article. A quick search for articles containing their url only came up with 7 results. They look legit, and publish mostly technical news on military vehicles, but has anyone actually done a search on if they have an editorial staff, or other quality standards? Scu ba (talk) 02:25, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

They look borderline. They do have an editorial team, which is listed here: https://www.thedrive.com/team -- under the "The War Zone Masthead". --K.e.coffman (talk) 02:40, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

That is a redirect to their sister website for cars, The Drive, presumably they would have the same team, but I cannot verify that. Scu ba (talk) 02:42, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

nvm, I didn't scroll down all the way, I see The War Zone is a separate section. Scu ba (talk) 02:43, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 March 2024

Where it says in casualty section that a "BRM reconnaissance vehicle" was destroyed, its actually supposed to be just a bmp. Slimebor (talk) 13:37, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

do you have a citation or a source? Scu ba (talk) 15:03, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. M.Bitton (talk) 14:45, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Image?

Per WP:NFCC, could we include, say, this image? 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 15:33, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

If it was published by the Russian ministry of defense we can put it on wikicommons under a "Mil.ru" tag. Scu ba (talk) 17:32, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

It was. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 18:39, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Go ahead with it.Mr.User200 (talk) 20:37, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Source for Map

If someone is familiar enough with creating a map similar to File:2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine.svg, the Institute for the Study of War published a map of the incursion, which will almost certainly be updated as the mini-invasion takes place. See this detailed map for creation of the map. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 20:21, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Check your talk page in a bit. Cheers, RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 11:16, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Zvezda News reports on casualties

Zvezda News has released some videos about the situation. Is this able to be added to the list of casualties?

https://tvzvezda.ru/news/20243141429-XB7vp.html

https://tvzvezda.ru/news/20243141359-yT6Uq.html BaddyVladdy (talk) 04:24, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

https://lostarmour.info/news/lancet_24_03_15_01_epoddubny

This is also good! Drochilnki6 (talk) 21:56, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Irpin Declaration

I reverted the recent addition of Irpin Declaration to the infobox: diff. My rationale was: "remove Irpin Declaration from infobox -- not supported by sources, unclear if this entity actually exists". The sources do not discuss this entity as having played a role in the incursion. The linked article describes Irpin Declaration as an "alleged" organization, and states that one of the supposed signatories, the Russian Volunteer Corps, denies ever signing the declaration.

I also question the inclusion of Ilya Ponomarev as "Political leadership" in the infobox. His role, as discussed in the article, amounted to issuing a statement, as a political head of the Freedom of Russia Legion. This is too minor to warrant inclusion in the infobox. -- K.e.coffman (talk) 05:51, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

The Irpin Declaration is real, and it is what connects the Freedom of Russia Legion and the Russian Volunteer Corps under a single jurisdiction. How much control does the deceleration have over the units? next to none. Their control over the Russian forces in Ukraine is solely on paper, but should still be mentioned. Ilya Ponomarev has been the leader of the Declaration and it's Congress of People's Deputies since it was established in 2022, but again, has no actual control over the forces. It is a purely ceremonial position (but still a position). Scu ba (talk) 17:14, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

There hasn't been discussion of the Irpin Declaration (or any political union between the two formations) in the sources about the current incursion; nor about Ponomarev playing an overreaching political role in it. Such sources need to be present in the article before considering inclusion of these two items in the infobox. --K.e.coffman (talk) 07:48, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Ponomarev was mentioned in the article body when this was first created, but yeah talks about the Irpin Declaration are scarce, but they do exist, and the FRL and RVC are members, at least on paper, and they're coordinating these attacks together so it stands to reckon that the Irpin Declaration can be used to describe both groups. Scu ba (talk) 13:32, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Ukrainian Participation?

I have a question about this incursion. If Ukraine is not involved, how did the rebels gain access to tanks and other heavy equipment?

Based on that, shouldn't Ukraine be added as a belligerent without any clauses attached to it? Furthermore, these groups operate in the Territorial Defense Forces of Ukraine. One more point, these incursions were conducted from Ukrainian soil into Russian territory, so it would not be like Ukrainians had no idea on that. If that was an uprising conducted from within, we could put Ukraine's involvement as debatable.

I would like to hear other's opinions on this topic. Kapitan Siddharth (talk) 07:15, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

The main thing is that this equipment is destroyed and some Ukrainian units will be left without it. And all for the sake of 300 meter advancement. Drochilnki6 (talk) 22:23, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Seeing as how the only confirmed lost equipment is a tank from the 1960's, I don't think it's that big of a loss for the Ukrainian army. Scu ba (talk) 17:12, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

The TDF forces originated from civilian defense militias in 2014, and weren't even formally part of the Ukrainian army until 2022. After being incorporated these units to this day maintain a very independent command structure, with the Ukrainian MOD admitting that they can't really give the militias direct orders. The Russian forces are part of the TDF, specifically the international legion, and as such Ukraine can at least have plausible deniability. To date, as far as I am aware, there are no ethnically Ukrainian forces participating in the incursions. Scu ba (talk) 17:11, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

TDF is a part of a Ukrainian government and military forces (Freedom of Russia paramilitary and and the so-called Siberian Battalion are under their command), and so is the HUR MOU (RDK is under their command). No matter what the Ukrainian government claims they are not independent in any way, they could not have gotten their gears, tanks, Strykers, helicopters and BMPs without the direct support and financing. They are not acting autonomously. It is just obvious PR-style plausible (not really, it's quite obvious) deniability. We should not play into that. They should be requalified as objective parts of the Ukrainian forces. Luroe (talk) 17:25, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

@Scu ba, RS don’t seem to buy the official version, although exact presentations and phrasing do vary quite a bit. RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 11:19, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Any new Advances?

The map is only based on March 12th. So I have to ask, is there any new advances or no? Just asking 24.235.144.97 (talk) 15:04, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Russia claims they've repelled the incursion, but it sounds like there's still fighting in the area. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 20:11, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

There isnt any confirmed deaths. Lukt64 (talk) 22:54, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

There has been a rather significant uptick of info regarding Grayvoron the last day or so, looks like there is a concerted effort by the anti-Government forces there to push towards the city. Scu ba (talk) 17:09, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

There hasn't been any updates on this so far since like a week. Is the incursion over?

Also deepstate ua posted on telegram: https://t.me/DeepStateUA/19175

Quoting the source:

At the front as of the end of the day on April 4, 2024

▶️ Belomoskov , Siversky and Bilhorodsky shades — the number of clashes on the territory of Moscow is practically zero, but the enemy's attempts to throw their missiles into our territory continue. Kapitan Siddharth (talk) 04:07, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Chechens?

I haven't seen anything about Chechens fighting on either side. Someone added the pro-Ukraine Chechens to the infobox, can someone elaborate on that. Also weren't the Kadyrovites deployed to Belgorod after the 2023 incursion? Is there any update on them? Scu ba (talk) 14:48, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Several users just inserted them after purportedly seeing videos and social media posts but no proper reference was given. Borgenland (talk) 14:50, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

So should we remove them? or just keep them until an actual source talks about them? Scu ba (talk) 15:14, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Personally I'd go for removing them, especially since there is no mention of them elsewhere here. Borgenland (talk) 15:22, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Alright, ill remove them now. Scu ba (talk) 16:57, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

https://t.me/legionoffreedom/1161

Mentions ichkerians but hardly a source Blemp15 (talk) 14:47, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Found a source I've added them back to the infobox. Scu ba (talk) 17:06, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

References

Ukrainian Mi-8 or Mi-24 downed over Sumy region (RU MOD claim)

https://t.me/rbc_news/90751 A lot of TG channels are posting videos of a burning heli with coordinates attached but they're saying it's Mi-24 despite arguing that it was transporting troops (it's a fire support/ground attack helicopter though). Mi-8 seems to be more logical since it's a transport aircraft. And Ukrainian side have already tried to deliver troops by helis in this region before. 93.81.37.232 (talk) 14:04, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Can't cite telegram, provide a usable source. Scu ba (talk) 14:05, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

https://www.rbc.ru/politics/17/03/2024/65f6eee79a7947483d6d5d1f

RBC is a major information agency afaik 93.81.37.232 (talk) 14:09, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, next time start with them. Scu ba (talk) 14:18, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

OK, got it. 93.81.37.232 (talk) 14:19, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Scuba, Im still want to figure out what makes you believe that the Ukranian officials have denied any loss of helicopters, when ISW only says "The Ukrainian Main Military Intelligence Directorate (GUR) denied the Russian claims that Russian forces downed a Ukrainian helicopter and characterized the claims as part of a Kremlin information operation" Here but their source #26 Here only says that all BlackHawks are in excelent condition. Jkraine operate many more types of helicopters that BalackHawk. You are changing the content, hope is something you did by error, if not this could be WP:CHERRYPICKING.Mr.User200 (talk) 00:00, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Sorry I was skimming the ISW article and misread it, didn't mean to make this come across as cherry picking. Scu ba (talk) 15:02, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

I removed it because the source did not directly mention the insurgents nor did it hint that the helicopter was carrying them. Borgenland (talk) 06:39, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

HUR

Does the HUR statement amount to Ukrainian involvement? It sounds contradictory to write denials in the article (especially in the Lead) when that statement exists. Borgenland (talk) 17:17, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

As far as I can tell we have two statements, one from the Ukrainian military saying that the anti-Government forces are practically independent and that the Ukrainian military had nothing to do with this, and then a statement from HUR saying they'll "support" the anti-Government forces, what exactly that support is is vague. I don't think it means boots on the ground with SSO forces, but rather help with intel and intercepting Russian communications which they have already been doing. Scu ba (talk) 18:14, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

It does mean boots on the ground considering the fact that RDK is controlled, operated and supplied by HUR. I see no actual, rational reason as to why the article says that the attacks are made by "Russian opposition" (the phrase is incredibly vague and throws unwanted shade on actual mainstream pro-peace russian opposition) instead of actually naming the actual units involved and who they are ultimately controlled by, coordinated by and supplied by which is Ukrainian government, particularly HUR and International Legion. Luroe (talk) 18:03, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

The article you cited isn't helping your case. In it the RVC claims that HUR only helps with logistics and coordination, and that the RVC is totally independent in choosing it's targets and operations. There is nothing in this 24tv article that says that the RVC is "controlled operated and supplied by HUR"

"Мы полагаемся на их логистику, на их помощь", – добавил Никитин.

("We rely on their logistics, their help," added Nikitin)

"Впрочем, учредитель РДК подчеркнул, что каждый раз, когда они пересекают государственную границу России, там они действуют исключительно самостоятельно."

("However, the founder of the RDK stressed that every time they cross the state border of Russia, they act exclusively independently.")

This article deconstructs and works against the argument you are trying to make. Scu ba (talk) 23:06, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

New Claims by Rebels of Russian Losses

https://t.me/legionoffreedom/1169

Content of Message for Reference:

Over the course of several days of a limited military operation on the territory of the Belgorod and Kursk regions against Putin’s troops, our enemy suffered huge losses in manpower and equipment. Kremlin soldiers are demoralized by the mass deaths of their colleagues, who became senseless victims of Putin's sick ambitions.

As of the morning of March 18, the losses of Putin’s army in the Belgorod and Kursk regions were:

Personnel: Permanent losses: 613 military personnel Sanitary losses: 829 military personnel Captured: 27 military personnel

Destroyed equipment: 7 tanks (including three T-72, one T-72BZ) 20 infantry fighting vehicles (including BMP-2, BMP-3) 6 howitzers D-30 4 armored personnel carriers 4 mortars 2 MT-12 "Rapier" 2 2S19 "Msta-S" 2 ZALA UAVs 1 BM 21 "Grad" 1 LNG 1 complex "Murom" 1 electronic warfare station 1 repeater 2 units of armored vehicles 2 units of engineering equipment (excavators) 57 units of various automotive equipment (heavy and light)

Disabled equipment: 1 T-80PVM tank 1 T-72 tank 1 BMP 1 BM 21 "Grad" 2 MT-LB 1 Msta-B 1 TOS-2 1 BM 21 "Grad" 1 2С1 “Carnation” 1 electronic warfare station 1 armored vehicle 20 units of various automotive equipment (heavy and light)

Also, places where personnel were concentrated, ammunition depots, dugouts, towers with antenna complexes, fortifications, CCTV cameras, a cellular communication station, and a bridge in the village were also destroyed or damaged. Gorkovsky, etc.

But the greatest damage was caused to Putin’s image as a figure who could supposedly keep the situation in the country under control. Putin brought the war to Russia. Russian cities are burning, Putin's military machine has been reduced to ashes, and Kremlin artillery is wiping out one Russian village after another. And the most important thing is that Putin devours the lives of people - soldiers and civilians - solely in the name of maintaining his personal power.

It is equally important that as a result of the “elections” the image of the Russian dictator for the PRC and the countries of the “global South” was virtually destroyed. There is no need to talk about the reaction of the civilized world community: the leaders of the world's leading countries, even before the start of voting, regarded these elections as a farce.

We call on all Russians to join us to quickly end the horror that Putin has turned life into in Russia. Together we will bring peace to our country!

☠️ Become part of the Legion | Subscribe to the channel

This message was posted at 5 AM EST on March 18th. James101013 (talk) 11:54, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

As per usual, we cannot cite telegram, if this is true we'll have to wait until a cite-able source reports on it. But I'll keep my eyes open for info. Scu ba (talk) 15:02, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

A few websites now are also reporting these new losses now, such as Kyiv Post (https://www.kyivpost.com/post/29711), online.ua (https://news.online.ua/en/legion-freedom-of-russia-announces-russian-troops-losses-in-belgorod-kursk-regions-875126/) and MSN (https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/freedom-of-russia-legion-reveals-significant-losses-of-russian-army/ar-BB1k5VvH). I won't add them yet though, will wait what others think. Sadustu Tau (talk) 15:48, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll add this to the article now. Scu ba (talk) 16:59, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Putin's claims about the numbers and casualties of incursion groups (as of March 18)

He mentioned it in his first speech after elections, on the morning of March 18. https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/6578638 , for example. He said there are around 2,500 troops from Russian-nationality groups and 5,000 troops in total (including Ukrainians). RU-UKR groups have suffered ~800 casualties and the force in total have suffered around 40% cas, 35% of them are irretrievable. So it means about 2000 cas in all including ~700 killed/maimed/grievously wounded if I understand correctly. 93.81.37.232 (talk) 18:15, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Yeah we can update the Russian claims in the infobox, but im not sure Kommersant is a usable source, but I've seen this figure float around in some Reuters articles recently. Scu ba (talk) 14:37, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Romanian battlegroup?

Romanian battlegroup "Getica" claims they have joined the other groups in the Belgorod fight. Source: https://www.facebook.com/rolegiongetica From their Facebook account with 13k followers. FlashButEastern (talk) 11:36, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Again, we can't cite social media. Scu ba (talk) 12:17, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

How about these two sources (https://www.fanatik.ro/video-viata-mercenarilor-romani-in-ucraina-s-au-aliat-cu-batalionul-siberian-si-au-intrat-in-rusia-20638611 and https://www.dcnews.ro/romanii-din-grupul-de-lupta-getica-au-intrat-pe-teritoriul-rusiei-dormim-in-frig-dar-simtim-caldura-voastra-a-romanilor-liberi-video-viral_953015.html)? Granted I'm only using Google Translate to translate these (I don't know how accurate it is with Romanian), but it seems to be the case. Sadustu Tau (talk) 13:44, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

I think the dcnews source can be used, I'll incorporate it into the article shortly. Scu ba (talk) 14:36, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

New map & advances?

The map was removed, so I am wondering? Is there gonna a new map with new advances? 68.71.12.18 (talk) 18:00, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

The map wasn't really helpful, all it showed was where Tyotkino is on a map. As far as I know there isn't anyone other than deepstatemap that is even trying to give a coherent map, and even then they warn it is inaccurate. Scu ba (talk) 21:17, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

About the "19 march" section. It says '...despite anti-Government forces still occupying four villages along the border' and then a link to the ISW 19 March analysis is provided. However, this article doesn't mention anything about territorial control in the area so it seems rather misleading. It mentions only reports about cross-border attacks on Kozinka being repelled and Putin talking about this incursion. 93.81.37.232 (talk) 11:22, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

References

Civilian victims in infobox

Preserving here by providing this link; my rationale was: "these are victims of air strikes not rebel incursions -- restore the source that talks about that", i.e. the Medusa source. The Moscow Times source originally cited includes this: "Meanwhile, health officials said 11 Belgorod region residents were killed and 82 others were injured in cross-border shelling last week" source. It does not attribute the victims to the rebels' incursions. -- K.e.coffman (talk) 05:37, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

I also removed this bit, from the same MT source. The article talks about shelling and missile attacks; it's not about preventing further incursions. --K.e.coffman (talk) 06:24, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

It was my understanding that the missile strikes on Belgorod where launched by FRL Vampires, however, if we feel the airstrikes fall outside of the scope I'd be more than happy to remove any references to them.

As far as civilian casualties, it looks like the Russian officials are counting both casualties from the incursion, and from airstrikes, as one in the same, so it would be hard to find an accurate number for just the casualties from the incursions. Maybe we should just remove it? Scu ba (talk) 14:04, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Is there a special difference? There would be no casualties if there would be no invasion of the Russian border territories. As of March 19, 16 dead, more than 98 injured. AlexeyKhrulev (talk) 16:31, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

They've been shelling the area since before the incursion, the difference is under whose flag is anyone firing. Borgenland (talk) 17:51, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Bloomberg

There was a similar issue with the Bloomberg source used in the article that I removed in this edit. The source in question is here: archive version. The passage I removed reads (underline mine):

In an interview with Bloomberg, residents of Belgorod stated that the incursions made people “be afraid and panic. Everyone who could has begun to leave.” Several industries also shut down, with Vkusno i Tochka closing all its locations in Belgorod Oblast, and Alexey Mordashov announcing that Severstal, which owns the Yakovlevsky mine, the largest iron ore reserve in Russia also located in Belgorod, will pay hazard pay to local workers due to the dangers of the incursion while also offering a program to resettle workers in other parts of the country.

The passage attributes the panic, relocations, and hazard pay solely to the incursions, which does not match the source. --K.e.coffman (talk) 06:05, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean.

The strikes are upending civilian life particularly in Belgorod, which has also faced ground incursions from Russian volunteer militias fighting on the side of Ukraine.

Without the incursions and the airstrikes there wouldn't be any hazard pay, but saying that the due to the dangers of the incursion is the wrong wording is simply wrong. The incursions are the conditions for the hazard pay. Scu ba (talk) 23:09, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

then include the two words due to the dangers of the incursion and airstrikes instead of deleting a whole paragraph. Scu ba (talk) 03:03, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

References

The Bloomberg article reads (underline mine):

Regions including Belgorod and Kursk have faced drone and missile attacks in recent weeks as Ukraine mounts a campaign targeting infrastructure and industrial facilities including oil installations to try to undermine Russia’s war machine.
The strikes are upending civilian life particularly in Belgorod, which has also faced ground incursions from Russian volunteer militias fighting on the side of Ukraine.

That's why I said attributing these effects solely to the incursions, as the passage did, is inaccurate; it's a misuse of the source. This source may be better suited to the parent article, Attacks in Russia during the Russian invasion of Ukraine. --K.e.coffman (talk) 14:55, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Latest FRL casualty claims?

If anyone wants to add this or consider it reliable (https://news.liga.net/en/politics/news/legion-svoboda-rossii-obyasnil-voennyy-smysl-svoey-operatsii-sorvali-novoe-nastuplenie-rf) they can do so. Sadustu Tau (talk) 11:19, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Repulse of the incursion in Kozinka

Source website is https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-says-it-repelled-attempted-ukrainian-cross-border-incursion-thursday-2024-03-15/ Hollowww (talk) 20:34, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

This article is from March 15, terribly out of date in the day to day nature of this article. Scu ba (talk) 22:59, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

LLM Experiments

I am going to be conducting a few verification LLM experiments on the article using Chat-GPT4. I have conducted two documented experiments so far with LLM (the 2nd being on this article) and both have worked successfully (first seen at WP:LLMExperiment1). If I locate any issues, I will be dropping notes here.

As of this time, I can confirm the 13 March section as of this message is 100% verifiable (see LLM Experiment 2). The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 01:09, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Voronezh

Preserving here by providing this link; my rationale was: "Removing Voronezh due to insufficient sourcing". The source in question is this article, from the The New York Sun which seems somewhat obscure. The article states: "Incursions reportedly are ongoing in two other border regions — Kursk and Voronezh", without specifying who and when reported this.

Voronezh Oblast borders Ukraine via Luhansk Oblast; the later is mostly under Russian occupation so it's unclear how insurgents would have been able to pass through it. I've not seen any other sources reporting on incursions into Voronezh; what's available mentions air strikes and drone attacks. Stronger sourcing is needed to include this. -- K.e.coffman (talk) 16:39, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

I fully agree, as the editor that added it, I only added it because that was literally what the New York Sun says. But yeah, I've seen nothing beyond this one sentence in this one article to indicate there is anything happening in Voronezh Oblast. Scu ba (talk) 22:58, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

This seems to be incorrect (https://www.nysun.com/article/putin-after-re-election-hoopla-faces-the-question-that-worried-the-tsars-how-does-one-defend-worlds-largest-country). Youare however correct that the insurgents couldnt have gotten into voronzeh oblast through ukrainain territory. However, theres not that many that they couldnt possibly have snuck through occupeied lahunsk oblast (perhaps bypassing the frontlines through belgorod). In addition they may have came from their previously conquered territories in belgorod@K.e.coffman@Scu ba 68.132.201.101 (talk) 21:32, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 March 2024

Change the image from 2024 Western russia incursion.png to Template:Russian internal conflict detailed map. Much more actually useful things (Current map has like 5 places and all but one it, now incorrectly, claims to be contested. 68.132.201.101 (talk) 12:14, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

No, map is horribly incorrect, stating that Russian rebel forces had captured Grayvoron, which simply did not happen. Scu ba (talk) 03:02, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Is anything, the opposite should be done (i.e. removing the link to this detailed map since it's blatantly misleading). It could only work as a map of all places where the presence or attacks by the incursion groups was claimed since spring 2023. 93.81.37.232 (talk) 06:32, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

That is not, that clearly happened, plenty of sources@Scu ba 70.23.57.138 (talk) 16:14, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Then give me a source, anything, there hasn't been any claims that Grayvoron was captured. Scu ba (talk) 17:14, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Heres one to start, want more? https://charter97.org/en/news/2024/3/16/587775/ 68.132.201.101 (talk) 22:24, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that article is indeed cited in the article, I put it there myself. But again, nowhere in the article does it say that anti-government forces have captured Grayvoron. Rather that the incursion was "Around Grayvoron" and that there was at least one attempted assault on the city, but no report on if the assault was successful, and juding by how nobody else talked about it, it wasn't. rather, the article claimed that the villages of Glotovo and Kazinka where captured. Scu ba (talk) 15:18, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit extended-protected}} template. Clearly not an uncontroversial edit. PianoDan (talk) 19:56, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Other groups

I removed claims being made by other groups about participating in the incursions; preserving here by providing this link. My rationale was: "insufficient sourcing". More specifically, these sources originate from obscure publications that merely repost the groups' statements, without providing any independent corroboration, and are not suitable for these claims. -- K.e.coffman (talk) 16:02, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

I don't see the problem here. They are sourced by reliable sources. You say they are "obscure" which is not anything backed by Wikipedia policy. Super Ψ Dro 20:38, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Just a quick search for kavkazr.com on wikipedia only shows the site being used 4 individual times, maybe air on the side of caution, but if other people are familiar with it and trust it as reliable then we can use it. Scu ba (talk) 03:37, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

End date

It has been 3 days since I've seen any RS talking about the incursion as such, should we put an end date of March 21 (the last ISW report to mention an incursion) in the infobox and put all subsequent info in an "aftermath" section? Scu ba (talk) 03:38, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

I also suggest that the Result part should be something along the lines of 'inconclusive' or 'status quo remains' because even RS themselves admitted they don't have the power to hold onto any settlements long-term. 93.81.37.232 (talk) 07:46, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

I'm still not fully sure what the RFL/RVC's goal was, they said it was to establish a grey zone on the border to stop artillery strikes, and they also said it was to galvanize domestic unrest, I'm not sure how exactly we can quantify if they succeeded or failed in those regards. Scu ba (talk) 12:45, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

I'd suggest 'failure' based on the goals they've proclaimed themselves.

For example, small villages like Kozinka took very heavy damage so it'd be actually easier for Russian Army to establish full-time military presence there because local citizens will be evacuated. Also they've been talking about stopping elections in the Belgorod region but I remember an article in Washington Post where local people said they're going to vote exactly because they don't allow anybody to strike fear in them. And the electoral process wasn't suspended even.

Also these groups said that they wanted to show to the 'Global South' that this elections is illegitimate but the countries like China, Arab world and African states were the first to congratulate Putin after his victory.

And on the part of fomenting unrest, even that article from New York Sun which feels very PR-ish (for "rebels") admits that their actions didn't find any support amongst local residents. 93.81.37.232 (talk) 13:06, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

If you think the Sun isn't a reliable source open an RfC on WP:RSN. But getting back to the point of the incursion, even Ukrainian media isn't sure, calling it a failure because they didn't take over Belgorod would be unfair because we simply have no idea if that was the goal. Regardless of what the goal was these incursions got a reaction out of the Russian government, and gave them a bit of a PR disaster, which would mean regardless of what the rebels (yes, they're rebels) wanted, we cannot describe this as a victory for the Russian government. Scu ba (talk) 03:01, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

OK, I thought NY Sun was just an American branch of that infamous British tabloid Sun. 93.81.37.232 (talk) 06:18, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Freedom of Russia legion claims to still be fighting (https://t.me/s/legionoffreedom), and considering Russia has never said they were driven out (at least since there last disproven claim on the 19th), I think it's reasonable to assume they are still there.@Scu ba 68.132.201.101 (talk) 21:03, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Interesting, but again, we can't cite telegram, and I still haven't seen any sources talking about this, and without a way to time stamp that image it could have been an earlier picture simply posted now. The forces involved held a press conference, very similar to the end of the 2023 incursions, which also included a segment and social media posts saying "the incursion totally isn't over yet" but in reality it had effectively ended when they held the conference. Scu ba (talk) 02:59, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

It says its on march 25 @Scu ba 68.132.201.101 (talk) 10:12, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Time stamp means we have a way to confirm on which day the photo was made by looking on this photo. Maybe there is a newspaper in the view, a specific weather etc. 93.81.37.232 (talk) 14:41, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

The time stamp is when the image was posted. There is no time stamp for when the image was create. ie: we have no way to confirm if they took that picture on the 26th or the 18th. Scu ba (talk) 00:25, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

The latest claim about them already driven out was made on March 22 by Peskov: https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/6591892

He was asked to explain what did he mean when he said earlier that day that Russia needs to liberate its occupied territories and he answered that it's about parts of Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhya and Kherson regions while there isn't any enemy presence in Belgorod and Kursk oblasts. 93.81.37.232 (talk) 05:53, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

They seem to still be there thoguh (https://www.thedailybeast.com/vladimir-putins-emergency-plan-for-russias-spiraling-borders) 68.132.201.101 (talk) 10:15, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

This article does not mention any specific dates, places or events on the settlement-level. It speaks directly only about shelling of Belgorod (which could be and is done from Ukraine, given that it's just 30kms North of the border), not ground attacks. Please point to a direct quote from this article which confirms your statement. 93.81.37.232 (talk) 14:39, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

To be fair, that Daily Beast article doesn't mention that the incursions are still ongoing, rather that the RFL and RVC have been "waging an armed offensive in the Russian border region of Belgorod in recent weeks." which doesn't explicitly state that the offensive in question is still ongoing nor does it state when these "recent weeks" are, but recently =/= presently. Scu ba (talk) 00:27, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

I'd say its best to wait a while, for now, until we get any definitive news about any new occurrences. Evaporation123 (talk) 14:50, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Maybe a timeline isn't the way to go?

This page is rather bloated, and now that there have been periods where nothing is reported, there are holes in the timeline. Maybe we should just scrap the timeline entirely and restructure the article around combat in specific regions? Like a section on Grayvoron and a section on Kozinka and so forth. Does anyone think this is a good idea? Such a big change would need consensus first. Scu ba (talk) 00:24, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure yet. I'd probably give it more time first, probably an extra week or so, see if there is any more reporting on the situation or not. If still nothing new, I wouldn't oppose such a change. Sadustu Tau (talk) 10:45, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Kozinka

According to some sources, as a result of these incursions, some villages, one of them Kozinka, were fully destroyed. There are photos and throughout Russian opposition media it seems to be true, shouldn't this fact be added here? The sole Kozinka village article on all Russian, Ukrainian and English Wikipedias claim this. The Moscow times have reported on this in Russian, in English I haven't found any more credible sources other than Daily Mail Pusf.smbd (talk) 06:48, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

I wouldn't oppose that addition. Not sure on the consensus of The Moscow Times reliability but it seems to be true from what I've seen. Sadustu Tau (talk) 10:53, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Newsweek has also reported something similar, although WP:NEWSWEEK seems to use a case-by-case basis. The Moscow Times is not listed on WP:RSPSOURCES hence the comment about reliability. But I'm inclined to believe it seems genuine in this case at least. Sadustu Tau (talk) 10:55, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

From a quick wikipedia search, "The Moscow Times" (not including "Moscow Times" or "themoscowtimes.com") has been cited 38,911 times on Wikipedia, so I'd say it's safe to use them. Also, as far as I can tell, they have an editorial board, and try to be non-partisan and reputable, although, being an independent media outlet in Russia tends to corner you into being pro-opposition. Scu ba (talk) 15:15, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

FRL losses

https://t.me/s/legionoffreedom

Post on april 5th announces one of their soldiers killed

Not sure if I can use telegram as a source and i'm new to wikipedia editing so posting here Blemp15 (talk) 05:17, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Also unable to edit anyways, but this was already posted so im not sending an edit request Blemp15 (talk) 00:32, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Conclusion

Who the hell said the incursion ended? Theres been no surrender or anything, all they said in the article was they were transitioning to a new stage of war. Has there been any notice of withdrawal from the villages they captured? Funtasticknowledge (talk) 13:01, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

"Sabotage and reconnaissance groups have remained in Russia even after the hot phase of the operation was completed, according to the Russian Volunteer Corps." This is according to the article referenced. No way does this mean that the incursion is over and Russia won. Funtasticknowledge (talk) 13:14, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

I reverted that edit just now. The thing is that the situation now gets somewhat ambiguous. The RVC has said the "hot phase" of the incursion is over, meaning intensive fighting concluded (that's very much still ambiguous in itself- as you said, no mention of the status of the supposedly captured towns), but there are still reconnaissance and sabotage groups in Kursk and Belgorod Oblasts.

Perhaps what will happen is that the lead infobox will be changed to reflect two phases, the "hot" phase from March to 7 April, and a "low level insurgency" phase from 7 April to the present. That's just an assumption on my behalf, we still ought to wait some more. The absence of news isn't really helping though... Evaporation123 (talk) 06:18, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Should we really treat RVC statements as a reliable source? I mean they've already been cornered with fake claims that they were in a Russian village when the photo evidence provided was in fact made on Ukrainian territory. I'd say we need at least one more source claiming that the incursion is still ongoing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gorgedweller (talk • contribs) 10:15, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

I've gone and marked the incursion as ended considering that exactly zero (0) things have been added to the article since the RVC announced the end of combat operations. We cannot assume that they're waging an insurgency now simply because they claimed (sans evidence, afaik) that they were still there- the RVC cannot be universally treated as a reliable source as @Gorgedweller: rightfully pointed out. The absence of news about armed action in western Russia since 7 April shows that it makes no sense to have it marked as ongoing when it probably isn't - presidentofyes, the super aussa man 10:11, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't know if it was you who did this, but it now says "inconclusive", which seems like the best option right now. Still seems very strange to me how little news we're getting from the region. Evaporation123 (talk) 05:05, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

https://www.newsweek.com/russian-soldier-complains-losses-belgorod-total-mess-1889605

Article was posted a few days ago (12th of april) and claims fighting is still happening but couldnt verify the sources themselves Blemp15 (talk) 00:37, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 29 April 2024

Change "Inconclusive" result to "Failed Russian Opposition Operation" or "Defeat of Russian Opposition."

The incursion was clearly repelled and objectives we're not achieved. RLGSInfo (talk) 21:52, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit extended-protected}} template. M.Bitton (talk) 00:33, 30 April 2024 (UTC)