Talk:On conducting a special military operation

Russia Low‑importance

	Russia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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.

Military history: Russian & Soviet / Post-Cold War

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

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

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

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Very inelegant translation

I do not know what it the canonical translation in English of the name of this speech, but the one currently used here is really clumsy. "On launching a special military operation" or "On the launch of a special military operation" would be better translations. Also, Russian does not have determiners, so it could also be translated as "the special military operation". Veverve (talk) 22:50, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Veverve: Absolutely agree, had a similar argument with a user about the correct title of another article. Ентусиастъ/Entusiast (talk) 20:22, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Full text of the special military operations address

Full text of Vladimir Putin’s speech announcing ‘special military operation’ in Ukraine https://theprint.in/world/full-text-of-vladimir-putins-speech-announcing-special-military-operation-in-ukraine/845714/

May1787 (talk) 12:13, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Россия нарушила ряд международных законов, начав войну в Украине.webm

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:57, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral POV issues?

In the analysis of Putin's claims, there is a section that debunks his claims of Ukraine as a neo-Nazi country. It mentions the neo-Nazi links of groups such as the Wagner Group—which is accurate and appropriate in context—but does not talk at all about the Azov Battalion. Not that this makes Putin's claims correct, but surely neutral POV would require at least mentioning the Azov Battalion's historical links to neo-Nazism—not least because it was a central part of Putin's rhetoric at the time. Of course, that does not mean taking Putin's side—the analysis could point out commentators who disagreed that the Azov Battalion still had such an ideology at the time of the invasion, or that its numbers were very small compared to the Ukrainian armed forces as a whole—but it seems an omission not to address it at all in the analysis of Putin's claims about neo-Nazism when the equation of the Azov Battalion with the Ukrainian government was the linchpin of his assertions.

In addition, there is a section on "international condemnation," which only lists the negative reactions to Putin's declarations. Compare that to a page for something similarly vile, like George Wallace's 1963 Inaugural Address ("segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever"), which has a section titled "Reactions," which while focusing on negative reactions for obvious reasons (since most were indeed negative), also talks a bit about the popularity of Wallace's racist rhetoric with his supporters. Indeed, that section refers to a page about reactions. 98.60.235.71 (talk) 23:01, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a line about the Azov Brigade here. – Asarlaí ^(talk) 15:22, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ukraine wasn't gonna join NATO?

Why are we pretending like Ukraine joining NATO was some outlandish claim? Even according to NATO, they said: " We reiterate the decision made at the 2008 Bucharest Summit that Ukraine will become a member of the Alliance with the Membership Action Plan (MAP) as an integral part of the process; we reaffirm all elements of that decision, as well as subsequent decisions, including that each partner will be judged on its own merits. We stand firm in our support for Ukraine’s right to decide its own future and foreign policy course free from outside interference. The Annual National Programmes under the NATO-Ukraine Commission (NUC) remain the mechanism by which Ukraine takes forward the reforms pertaining to its aspiration for NATO membership." So according to NATO, they were working with Ukraine to get them into NATO. The only reason they did not join NATO is because of Crimea.

Source: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_185000.htm 2601:601:8582:8FF0:5CC:61B2:A64B:8EC4 (talk) 02:25, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

i don't know how anyone can claim Ukraine was not going to join NATO. They literally wrote the goal of joining NATO into their constitution https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-president-signs-constitutional-amendment-on-nato-eu-membership/29779430.html Stuffmaster1000 (talk) 06:40, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article never claimed that "Ukraine was not going to join NATO". The 2008 Bucharest summit was already mentioned. And the 2019 amendment to the Constitution has just been added. – Asarlaí ^(talk) 14:25, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Straight up incorrect information in analysis section

From the analysis section: "Outside its member states, NATO only has a military presence in Kosovo and Iraq, at the request of their governments."

This is not accurate. The Iraqi government has requested for several years that American troops leave Iraqi soil but US forces have not left the country. You can find any number of sources online here is one: https://apnews.com/article/182bae76452d7565b0a3d840ff0369cb

After the Trump administration assassinated Qasem Soleimani, the Iraqi parliament voted for a resolution to expel foreign troops from the country. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/1/5/iraqi-parliament-calls-for-expulsion-of-foreign-troops Stuffmaster1000 (talk) 06:35, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The NATO training mission in Iraq is not the same as the US-led mission. – Asarlaí ^(talk) 14:25, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Russian Propaganda

In recent times there has been a massive push by the Russian government and media spreading FAKE NEWS. This should be documented for history 82.13.135.76 (talk) 23:58, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]