Only extended-confirmed editors may make edits related to the topic area, though editors who are not extended-confirmed may post constructive comments and make edit requests related to articles within the topic area on article talk pages. Should disruption occur on article talk pages, administrators may take enforcement actions against disruptive editors and/or apply page protection on article talk pages. However, non-extended-confirmed editors may not make edits to internal project discussions related to the topic area, even on article talk pages. Internal project discussions include, but are not limited to, Articles for deletion nominations, WikiProjects, requests for comment, requested moves, and noticeboard discussions.
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. Ifconsensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations 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.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
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:
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
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject NATO, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.NATOWikipedia:WikiProject NATOTemplate:WikiProject NATONATO articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe 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.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history articles
Stephen Harrison (1 March 2022). "How the Russian Invasion of Ukraine Is Playing Out on English, Ukrainian, and Russian Wikipedia". Slate. On Thursday, President Vladimir Putin issued the order for Russian forces to invade Ukraine. Since then, Russians have killed 352 Ukrainian civilians, including 14 children, according to Reuters. That information is now reflected on the English Wikipedia page for the "2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine," an article that sprang to life mere minutes after Putin's televised address and has been collaboratively written by nearly 740 distinct authors as of Tuesday morning.
Jenny Nicholls (12 March 2022). "History is written as it happens by Wikipedia editors". Stuff (website). Retrieved 14 March 2022. It has been fascinating to watch two very different Wikipedia pages emerge in recent weeks – 2022 Wellington protests, with 151 referenced sources and seven images; and the page 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, with, as I write, 626 references and 33 images.
Ina Fried (15 July 2022). "Wikipedia blazes a trail to agreement in a divided world". Axios (website). Retrieved 17 July 2022. The Wikipedia article (at least the English language one) includes some of Russia's most outlandish claims — such as the idea that the Ukrainian government included Nazis — but authoritatively debunks them as false.
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:
Text has been copied to or from this article; see the list below. The source pages now serve to provide attribution for the content in the destination pages and must not be deleted as long as the copies exist. For attribution and to access older versions of the copied text, please see the history links below.
Please do a minor the grammer fix. In the International Aspects, under reactions, in the first paragraph, it says "...shift its coal exports to from Europe...". Please remove the first "to". Thank you for your time. Chunkybeef9847 (talk) 18:22, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Under Belligerents, it is shown Russia, Donetsk , Luhansk PR and supported by Belarus on one side and on the other side, Ukraine. Shouldn't on the other side show Ukraine and supported by USA, UK and EU or NATO? Sarvagyana guru (talk) Sarvagyana guru (talk) 09:49, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See talk page archive, discussed over and over again, you have brought no new arguments forward. Slatersteven (talk) 09:52, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 May 2024[edit]
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Not done: The date range in the title of this section is 1 December 2023 – present, but the image is from 19 October 2023. Jamedeus (talk) 03:10, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Change to [[Avdiivka_Central_City_Hospital_after_Russian_shelling,_2023-12-27.jpg|thumb|[[Avdiivka]] Central City Hospital after shelling]]]] --Hoben7599 (talk) 08:45, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Should France be added as a belligerent or as at least supporting Ukraine ?[edit]
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-commander-french-military-instructors-visit-ukrainian-training-centres-2024-05-27/
Clearly sending french soldiers into Ukraine to train Ukrainian units would make them active participants and targets for the russian military.
https:theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/mar/04/british-soldiers-on-ground-ukraine-german-military-leak
It is also surprising that the British haven't been already added to the belligerents section given the leaked German military phone call that detailed British troops are on the ground helping with missile targeting. 94.142.59.241 (talk) 20:59, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
maybe not active participants as they aren't actively fighting Russian forces, but some way to recognize them as "pro Ukraine" would work Icantthinkofaname1 (talk) 16:18, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Map which shows territories controlled and regained from Russia in Ukraine is somewhat misleading[edit]
The first map at the top uses a very similar colo(u)r for bodies of water and territories that Russia no longer occupies. This makes the area around the Dnipro river confusing, as a reader could very well believe that it is territory formerly occupied by Russian forces due to the similar colors. A change in colors for this map (such as changing the color of territories regained by Ukraine to a color other than blue) could be helpful. Thanks Icantthinkofaname1 (talk) 00:29, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yellow is already the color Ukrainian held territory is being used for, and any other shade could still be mistaken. Green would give the idea of "Ukraine good Russia bad" by implying Ukraine retaking territory is a good thing(while it might be a good thing for you or others, it goes against the idea that wikipedia should be a neutral source) Purple could work though, it is different from the rest of the map and is more neutral Icantthinkofaname1 (talk) 22:31, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think a light shade of purple would work best. – Asarlaí(talk) 08:15, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I have realized that most maps in this article use the same format as the top one. Making changes would require a lot of time, as it is preferable to have the maps coincide with eachother colorwise, so keep that in consideration Icantthinkofaname1 (talk) 16:20, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think there needs to be a broader question on whether it should be included in the map at all. The other way around (territory recaptured by Russia) isn't indicated in any way, making the map unbalanced in terms of what it's trying to portray. Right now, for example, there is no indication that those two areas captured by Russia in the 2024 Kharkiv offensive were previously indicated as "light blue" on the map. So in effect, the map is presenting a biased view where Ukrainian territorial regains are represented, but Russian territorial regains are not. I think this should be addressed.--JasonMacker (talk) 23:26, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
maybe it would be better to get a gif which shows the evolution of front lines throughout the war every month or so, and remove the idea of "formerly occupied by ___" all together, which would make the map more straight forward and unbiased Icantthinkofaname1 (talk) 16:16, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking of the map, has anyone ever explained how it is not in violation of WP:NOTNEWS? TylerBurden (talk) 16:29, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How is that remotely a relevant policy here? Mr rnddude (talk) 17:19, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the blue-shaded areas are derived directly from whichever areas were colored in red during the early period of the war (February-March 2022), and are thus prone to the errors inherent in breaking news reports. As a result, the boundaries of this blue area are highly suspect.
As an example, I recently found that the cities of Bohodukhiv and Derhachi were denoted as having been previously Russian-occupied, based on a vaguely worded report that an editor had seemingly misinterpreted on 26 February 2022. I demonstrated on the talk page that based on more recent retrospective sources, those cities had never been occupied in the first place. The map's primary editor indulged my request and shifted the blue area so that it fell just outside of the aforementioned cities, despite, in the case of Bohodukhiv, there being no evidence that Russian forces were ever anywhere near this city. On these grounds I can say that at the very least, some parts of the blue-shaded regions on the map are a total mess of synthesis and original research. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 00:57, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mr rnddude Your response to this? Are Wikipedia editors frontline journalists now? TylerBurden (talk) 11:27, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It was a fair question. If there is any issue here, I would think it is WP:OR/[WP:SYNTH]]. I don't see how WP:NOTNEWS reasonably applies either? Cinderella157 (talk) 12:14, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the Prisoners of War section of the article, it says "Zelensky compared Russian soldiers to "beasts" after the footage was circulated." In the rest of the article, his name is spelled "Zelenskyy". It should be spelled like that here too. MORTALITY ANOMALY (talk) 22:09, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are concerns from editors regarding File:2022 Kherson-Mykolaiv Offensive.png, created by @Rr016:, that the image contains original research. Can editors, or Rr016 verify the source(s) for this map? This map is in use on some child-articles currently and has been removed by others under OR grounds from Battle of Kherson, in prep for a GAN. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 23:02, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
.svg)
Not done: The date range in the title of this section is 
Done --JasonMacker (talk) 22:24, 2 June 2024 (UTC)