Talk:Russo-Ukrainian War

The whole story, not just a part

I believe that if it's correct to include the sentence "Russia has carried out attacks on civilians far from the frontline", it's also correct to include "Ukraine has committed attacks on civilians into Russia's Kursk region", or a similar phrase; see, for example, [1] and [2]. JacktheBrown (talk) 14:58, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

First off, MAybe, but Russia carried them out first (as Ukraine had not invaded Russia), and so that should be the Order, Ukraine than Russia. Rather than implying it is the other way around. Second, we have many RS saying (directly) Russia is attacking civilians, you only have provided sources that say Russia has accused Ukraine of attacking civilians (and one of them does not say Civilians have been targeted, only evacuated), thus this 100% needs to be attributed as a Russian claim only. Slatersteven (talk) 15:04, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Fourth (As I did not pick up on this) this is the wp:lede as such putting even attributed claims in there is dubious unless they make up some degree of the article. Fifth, as far as I know no charges have been brought (led alone successfully prosecuted) at the ICC over accusations of Ukriaian war crimes against civilians. Slatersteven (talk) 15:12, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

The first source makes no claims of Ukrainian attacks on civilians and the second is saying russia is accusing Ukraine of attacks on civilians, it is not saying that Ukraine attacked civilians—blindlynx 15:58, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

WP:DUE applies, I suggest you read this carefully before you continue to edit war. TylerBurden (talk) 19:03, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

@TylerBurden: since I started this conversation, the """edit war""" is over. JacktheBrown (talk) 19:23, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Great, you can also stop pinging me constantly, this article is now on my watchlist so it's completely unnecessary. TylerBurden (talk) 19:27, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

You didn't warn me that I can't ping you, so I'm absolutely not wrong. Please stop blaming me. JacktheBrown (talk) 19:30, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

First, it's important to distinguish between intentional attacks and collateral damage. Collateral damage occurs when civilians unintentionally die as a result of a military attack targeting a legitimate military objective, such as a command post. This is a regrettable but often unavoidable consequence of warfare. According to international law, while collateral damage is not illegal per se, the principles of distinction, proportionality, and necessity must be adhered to in order to minimize civilian harm. Investigations by the UN, ICC, and other independent bodies are ongoing to assess these incidents. So far, there is no evidence that Ukraine has intentionally targeted civilians in Russia or in any other location.

Russia's actions in Ukraine have been widely criticized for their brutality. The Kremlin has engaged in extensive propaganda efforts to distort the reality of the conflict, suppress independent journalism, and spread disinformation globally. These tactics have contributed to a narrative that obscures Russia's role in committing widespread violence, including what many consider to be acts of genocide against Ukrainians and indigenous Crimean Tatars. AlasdarVan (talk) 05:25, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

@AlasdarVan: all states on the planet distort reality in their favour. Having said that, I'm leaving this discussion. JacktheBrown (talk) 11:18, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

no i think what you rather should do is write pages on North Korea, citing North Korean news. Good luck AlasdarVan (talk) 18:52, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't understand how that overrides out sourcing standards or policies about due weight—blindlynx 22:17, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Subjective terms

[3]. @TylerBurden: no, in an encyclopedia it's not correct to include subjective terms such as "many", "deliberate" and "indiscriminate"; I'm aware that there's currently no peace between the United States and Russia, but for an encyclopedia it's not appropriate to include subjective terms. JacktheBrown (talk) 18:59, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Go ahead and provide the policy where such terms are banned from Wikipedia. TylerBurden (talk) 19:04, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

I've modified the wording from 'many' to 'repeatedly'. That shouldn't be controversial as 'many' is a WTW with regards vagueness, whilst 'repeatedly' simply indicates that an event has occurred more than once. It's more formal in tone. The other two words, 'deliberate and 'indiscriminate', are used by various reputable sources. The OHCHR source, which is the most authoritative source cited, uses 'indiscriminate' twice in text. Once in discussing Russia's attacks in Chernihiv, and once in acknowledging allegations against Ukraine in the Donetsk region. Mr rnddude (talk) 19:43, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

'deliberate' is used by the bbc source—blindlynx 13:02, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 September 2024

Hi, there should be an X next to Yevgeny Prigozhin under the Commanders and Leaders section linking to this page: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Wagner_Group_plane_crash 23.175.112.147 (talk) 02:17, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. TylerBurden (talk) 18:09, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Casualties in the infobox

The infobox says tens of thousands at a minimum. This should be changed to hundreds of thousands. The US estimates 600K Russian casualties alone. Fryedk (talk) 13:25, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

North Korean troops

With the formation of Buryat battalions, I think it's time to consider whether or not North Korea is considered to be a participant in the war. 92.11.10.240 (talk) 20:17, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

I agree, i believe it’s time to add North Korea as official participants. Gonzafer001 (talk) 01:17, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

@92.11.10.240 I would say yes, but are they organic KPA units fighting alongside Russian units, or are they soldiers acting as augmentees in Russian units?

Also, do we have confirmation of this? Either with proof of captured NK soldiers, or announcements from KCNA stating that units are "volunteering" with Russia?

That's what needs to be answered to ensure an accurate change of NK acting as active participants. Aridantassadar (talk) 01:37, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Let's try to have a centralised discussion here; there is already one about this issue at Talk:Russian invasion of Ukraine#north korea should be listed as an ally of russia, and as this is the larger-scope article, any change in belligerence is going to happen in the 2022-present article first. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 04:03, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

I think it should definatley be considared as a possibility, but we do not yet have any formal statements from the North Korean government. Some reports are saying thousands of troops fighting on the frontlines, while others are just saying a couple being sent to man missle batterys. We should wait for further developments before possibly exaggerating the extent of North Korea's involvment in th war. Dareldrem (talk) 04:12, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

When an RS actually says they are a combatant we can, they have top say it, not imply it. Slatersteven (talk) 10:59, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Note: The special Buryat battalion is a formation operating under the flag of the Russian Federation. The troops are composed of North Korean citizens, but they are not operating under the auspices of the North Korean government. Mr rnddude (talk) 11:01, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

And what is the source for that statement? XavierGreen (talk) 13:48, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

https://newsukraine.rbc.ua/news/russian-army-forms-special-buryat-battalion-1728996935.html Slatersteven (talk) 13:50, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

And everyone else that has reported on it. It's a formation of the 11th separate airborne assault brigade of the Russian Armed Forces.1 It's curious that one of the few established facts about it, is the statement that gets questioned. Why does nothing else need a source in this whole discussion? Mr rnddude (talk) 14:14, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

@Mr rnddude and until North Korean forces are fighting under their own flag, then they are just a supplier and not an "active participant", even though in all intents and purposes they are. Aridantassadar (talk) 16:37, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

I'll try to provide a condensed summary about the special Buryat battalion (SBB) that South Korean and Ukrainian intelligence, reliable news sources, and lastly Wikipedians are dealing with. I've surveyed about a dozen sources – in collaboration with other editors – in the parallel discussion linked by Flemmish Nietzsche, such that this is drawn from that analysis.

The 'special Buryat battalion' is a formation of the armed forces of the Russian Federation composed of an estimated 3,000 North Korean either citizens or troops, depending on the source consulted. They are in Sosnovyy Bor, Buryatia receiving equipment and training. That puts them about 4,500km / 2,800mi from Ukraine. They are not presently deployed in the conflict, and are not expected to become active until the end of this year. Ukraine has also indicated that they have not yet encountered any active North Korean combatants. Once activated, intelligence sources are unclear on how they will be deployed, but it's possible that they'll be providing relief support in the Kursk region, particularly around the Kursk salient, thus freeing up Russian resources inside Ukraine. That's assuming that the battalion will be deployed in combat, instead of in a logistical role which is another possibility. Russia is denying practically all allegations. I am, however, unaware of any statements from North Korea.

That's the highly condensed version, see the linked sources for greater detail and depth. The most detailed accounts are in The Washington Post, Kyiv Post (two sources), and RBC Ukraine.

When can we reasonably list North Korea as a belligerent? I will borrow the wording employed by Cinderella157 in answering the same question: [w]hen there is a consensus in good quality secondary sources in their own voice that North Korea is a belligerent, then we might make the same statement in a Wiki voice in the infobox. This standard abides Wikipedia policies. Mr rnddude (talk) 19:55, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

The situation you described would mean that North Korean forces are Auxiliaries, which under international law are foreign or allied troops in the service of a nation at war. In essence, a nation lending its military personnel to another. For infoboxes on such situations, the nation providing the auxiliary force should be bulleted under the principal belligerent to whom they are lending their troops. See for example how Hesse-Kassel is treated in the American Revolutionary War infobox. Alternatively, if all we have are Ukrainian allegations, than the infobox can list North Korea as a belligerent and say (Alleged by Ukraine) next to it, just how russia was listed in the Donbas War infobox early on in that conflict.XavierGreen (talk) 20:51, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Citations

Citations
Notes References