Talk:Republic of Crimea (Russia)/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

A new category for this ?

@Hecseur: thanks for starting a discussion at Category_talk:Republic_of_Crimea#On_the_subject_of_controversiality. Maybe it's better to continue the discussion here, since the category talk is a bit difficult to find. We already have Category:Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation and its subcategory Category:Events affected by annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation. All pages that you added to the new Category_talk:Republic_of_Crimea which you created, belong in on of the "Annexation" categories. That's the better name for the category, no need to create an additional one.

The new category is also POV, since the international community doesn't recognize Crimea as a Russian federal subject. And finally, it's confusing, since there are other uses for the name "Republic of Crimea". Since the English WP has its own system of categories, the existence of a similar category in other languages is irrelevant here. Rsk6400 (talk) 10:59, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Why do we need yet another category? Slatersteven (talk) 11:01, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

I do still think that there is an important distinction here: A category called "The Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation" has a very large scope and covers a vast amount of articles relating to military actions and other events occuring within Crimea during this time. A category on the "Republic of Crimea" is entirely specific to the political entity, focusing on its governing structure and laws. I believe it's a useful distinction that makes information about how this political entity operates more readily available. Just as well this has been done in other language wikis before: Excluding the English Wikipedia, there are 23 languages in which a category for the Republic of Crimea exists, alongside 34 who have a category for the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation. A quick glance shows that more than a handful of languages have both categories.

While this is not a rule, other languages do give precedent for this sort of categorisation. However, much more importantly, I do believe it makes a very simple distinction that can be useful to the average reader.

Regarding POV:

The Republic of Crimea (the political entity formed by Russia) most definitely is a Russian federal subject. The first line of the Wikipedia article for it says as much.

It's important to remember we are not here to right great wrongs, and the fact Russia is doing abominable things in these conquered territories does not change how these territories are currently administered.

Could it be confusing?

Possibly. There is the case of the Republic of Crimea that existed between 1992 and 1995. However, considering the main article is already unambiguously named Republic of Crimea I do believe the case of naming is already settled here.

Please let me know if there's any other issue you'd like me to address Hecseur (talk) 15:16, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

There really are cases where the "Annexation" categories cover military events, but I think those events should be removed from the cat, since annexation is a legal action. I don't see any article correctly belonging to "Annexation" that should not also belong to "Republic of Crimea". The annexation was the founding event of that "republic". You don't have to remind me about RGW, but we shouldn't name categories (or articles) in order to make unrecognized entities seem normal. We could call your category "Russian occupational administration of Crimea", but between that and "Republic of C.", the current name ("Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation") seems the natural choice. Rsk6400 (talk) 07:40, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

I disagree with your outlook here. I very much do agree that the naming of articles and categories should not work to legitimise unrecognized entities. However, I completely disagree that this practice of a rather simple WP:TOPICCAT constitutes legitimisation; Merely acknowledging something exists and the way that it works is not, and cannot be interperted as an endorsement. Other examples of unrecognised entities being categorised in this manner include Category:Northern Cyprus, Category:Transnistria, Category:Abkhazia, Category:South Ossetia, and many more such examples.

Categories are organized as overlapping "trees"; The fact that there isn't any article that could be categorised under Category:Republic of Crimea that isn't within the scope of Category:Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation simply means that the former should be a subcategory of the latter, which is something that I should've done when creating the category. Hecseur (talk) 12:30, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

In my view, its also vice versa: There isn't any article within the scope of Category:Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation that could not be categorised under Category:Republic of Crimea. Meaning, the two categories have identical scopes. Rsk6400 (talk) 16:19, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

I don't see how Category:Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation, a category that currently encompasses everything from the events that lead up to, to every consequence of the Russian annexation could have the exact same scope as a category specifically focused on an governing entity formed in the aftermath of the annexation. I see that in your view the scope of Category:Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation should be reduced, but that is not the circumstance in which Category:Republic of Crimea is being created in. Hecseur (talk) 23:19, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

I also support a specific category for the political subject of the Russian Federation, as per Category:Northern Cyprus, Category:Transnistria, Category:Abkhazia, Category:South Ossetia, and many more such examples. To expand on this, Category:Republic of Crimea is very useful for cat hierarchy, but despite that it can include subcats and pages that Category:Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation does not - and should not - include, e.g. Category:Politics of Crimea (including Category:Political parties in Crimea), List of chairmen of the State Council of Crimea, Prime Minister of Crimea, President of Crimea and even pages related to the Pro-Russian Republic of Crimea (1992–1995). Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 01:11, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

How are those examples precedents?

We already have a Category:Crimea which represents the geographical region and subdivision of Ukraine. There is no separate Category:Autonomous Republic of Crimea for Ukraine’s political division in Ukraine, but there already is Category:Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation about the Russian political division in Ukraine. And you want to create a second category on the Russian division of the exact same territory of Ukraine?

Which of these cited examples have more categories about their Russian occupations than about their native administrations and need still more? And why?

Looks ridiculous to me.  —Michael Z. 04:44, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

@Mzajac: Actually, what looks ridiculous to me is having to read this. The precedent is clear: we have Category:Cyprus (island) and Category:Northern Cyprus (unrecognized political entity), so what's the difference? As I already noted, Category:Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation does not - and should not - include Category:Politics of Crimea, Category:Political parties in Crimea, List of chairmen of the State Council of Crimea, Prime Minister of Crimea, etc. - all of them being strictly related to the political entity (Republic of Crimea). Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 08:43, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Are you saying politics of Crimea relates to the illegal Republic of Crimea, but not to the geographical region of Crimea, the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, nor the historical the Crimean Oblast, nor the historical Republic of Crimea? Per you, does it include the city of Sevastopol or not? Are you going to create a new article Sevastopol (since 2014)? Do we need new articles “Politics of Crimea (X)” for every historical Crimean entity?  —Michael Z. 12:22, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

I agree, this is definitely wrong. The categories on Republic of Crimea and Autonomous Republic of Crimea should both be subcategories of Category:Political history of Crimea which is a subcategory of Politics of Crimea, which directly relates to the geographical region of Category:Crimea rather than any specific subdivision. Hecseur (talk) 05:44, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Actually you raise a good point: I believe there should be a seperate Category:Autonomous Republic of Crimea; It's already the case with 23 different language wikis. The distinction between Crimea, a region that has a vast scope of history and culture, and a specific subdivision in Ukraine is useful to someone unfamiliar with the topic looking for information specific to the Ukrainian subdivision. Hecseur (talk) 10:10, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Correction: It might be 22 languages actually. Mongolian has idiosyncratic categorisation with a category for "the Crimean Penninsula" and an additional category for "Crimea". While they do recognise that this Crimea category refers to the Autonomous Republic of Crimea (by stating that Wikimedia has media relating to the "Autonomous Republic of Crimea" on the category page), I'm not sure if it actually counts. Hecseur (talk) 10:20, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Hecseur, Est. 2021, one of the problems of the "Republic of Crimea" is that you two have differnt ideas of what should belong in that category. Rsk6400 (talk) 13:27, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

@Rsk6400: I actually agree on all the pages included by Hecseur, just pointing out that we should also include the subcats and pages I mentioned above, that are not - and should not be - included in Category:Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 00:38, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

As there's no definitive position against the category (nor CFD), and as {{db-catempty}} states that category may be deleted if it has remained empty for at least seven days, specifically on or after 06:41, 4 December 2023 (UTC), I'm going to temporarily repopulate the category to supersede {{db-catempty}} at Category:Republic of Crimea. In case the result of this discussion will be opposite, you can pursue the deletion of this category, but wait until then. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 09:29, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

I'm removing Category:Politics of Crimea as I believe I have already explained concisely why it absolutely shouldn't be categorised under here. As for this discussion, if you think this category merits deletion you can discuss it at WP:CfD, as the appropriate avenue to discuss category related issues. Otherwise removing all categorised pages creates an empty category that is to be deleted by WP:C1, but does not qualify to be deleted under WP:SPEEDY as there's no consensus. By policy, this is not a valid course. Hecseur (talk) 11:04, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Non-NPOV location maps

The location maps reflect a non-WP:neutral POV. They show two different non-NPOV international boundaries: the Russia map reflecting Russia’s current claims, the Crimea map its former claims 2014–2022. The Russia map shows the 2022 “annexation” as disputed (with stripes), but the 2014 annexation as not disputed, and there is no reason for the inconsistency. The Crimea map is just Kremlin POV and should not be used.

They should be replaced with up-to-date maps that highlight the territories in question, but otherwise reflect a neutral POV according to policies. International boundaries should be shown as recognized legally, internationally, and by the UN. Russia’s illegal claims should be treated as Russia’s claims.  —Michael Z. 16:29, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

There is a typo, are you saying that the 2014 annexation was not disputed? Slatersteven (talk) 16:42, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

What is the typo and where?

I’m saying that Russia calls parts of Ukraine “annexed” Russian territories, including Crimea, Sevastopol, Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Donetsk, and Luhansk oblasts: so any maps that show Russian “annexation” with stripes should show all of these areas with stripes consistently, and they should show international boundaries neutrally and consistently.

(Russia also claims other places: this week Putin said the Black Sea Coast and Odesa are Russian, and Russia issued Kharkiv Oblast licence plates before being driven out of there, but the map is based on the declared “annexations.”)

(And the two similar location maps should also highlight the subject the same way, either in red or in yellow, but that is merely a failure of consistency and not neutrality.)  —Michael Z. 20:13, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Ahh I see, yes all the maps should show the disputed claim. Slatersteven (talk) 11:50, 21 December 2023 (UTC)