Talk:Battle of Enerhodar

Grenades against protestors on 2 March - any WP:RS?
Apparently live grenades have been used against the citizens. Can anyone find a reliable source? Boud (talk) 16:04, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

British Channel 4 News via YouTube? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqNuZDeMrKQ&t=77s --80.137.45.13 (talk) 01:00, 3 March 2022 (UTC)


 * The Mayor was cited in Ukrinform, so I added that. I'll add the youtube link too. ErieSwiftByrd (talk) 07:06, 3 March 2022 (UTC)


 * "Alleged" is really the word here. "Grenades" is not very specific but the nature of the grenades allegedly used would be very relevant to the nature of the claim. Soldiers targeting civilians with frag grenades would almost certainly constitute a war crime the same as trying to shoot them. But using shock grenades or the like would not be. Lethal vs non-lethal force. So is the claim that this was a full-on frag grenade? That would seem a rather extraordinary claim given how close the people in the video is to the blast. If the video is to be trusted that is, because strictly speaking - it doesn't show a grenade (neither thrown or launched), it only shows an explosion. 78.78.143.46 (talk) 20:50, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that Ukrinform article is kinda sketchy. The picture of the frag grenade is clearly a stock image and the entire “article” is a single sentence.
 * Tschau, Dwightol102 (talk) 00:26, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Russian victory?
I can't find any RS saying that the city was captured, just the power plant. Dunutubble (talk) (Contributions) 13:46, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Same. I changed it back to ongoing. Elijahandskip (talk) 15:09, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
 * & where are the sources that the city, not just the plants, were captured by Russian soldiers? The siege was two parts, the plants and the city.  The article only states the plants were captured, not the city. Elijahandskip (talk) 18:05, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

In the map who is in page "2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine" the city of Enerhodar is shown as controlled by Russians. So... Normantas Bataitis (talk) 18:10, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I asked about that in the talk page of the article earlier today. I think someone prematurely updated the map without double checking, thinking that the plants being captured meant the city being captured.  Elijahandskip (talk) 18:11, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
 * It's been fixed. Dunutubble (talk) (Contributions) 18:32, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

I just read the mayor saying that the city council building has been taken with most council members relocating to a local pizzeria to operate out of. Spaceman2288 (talk) 13:11, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

add recent hospital attack.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60675599 COSMIC ARC guy (talk) 18:12, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 * No, as that occurred nowhere near Enerhodar. Curbon7 (talk) 08:50, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 19 April 2022

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Procedural close. in favor of conflicting RM discussion at Talk:Battle of Kherson (non-admin closure) Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 17:04, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Battle of Enerhodar → Siege of Enerhodar – On 1 March when "Russian forces had surrounded the city", it became a siege which lasted four days. The event lasted 5 days, but 4 of the 5 days was a siege, meaning it should be Siege of Enerhodar instead of Battle of Enerhodar. ''Noting this was WP:BOLD moved to the current name. The old name was "Siege of Enerhodar".'' Elijahandskip (talk) 03:53, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose - I was the one who moved the page from Siege to Battle. Why? Because I was unable to find enough reliable sources referring to this as a siege. In contrast, there were many reliable sources using the terms attack or battle. For Wikipedia to refer to something as a siege, it should be a widely-used term in reliable sources. Ganesha811 (talk) 03:58, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Would like to point out that a google search for "Siege" + "Enerhodar" came back with 98 results. Elijahandskip (talk) 05:10, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * That's true - and every single one of the first 20 I checked are using the word siege to talk about Mariupol, and mentioning Enerhodar elsewhere in the article. Ganesha811 (talk) 11:49, 19 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Oppose per Enerhodar. There seems to be no support in the sources for this proposal. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:06, 21 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Oppose and alternative: Having googled news sources for the two terms and looked at a sample of these, I am not seeing either of the two names being used. I would conclude that neither satisfies WP:COMMONNAME. There are no Google Scholar sources. In the absence of anything that comes close to a common name for the event in sources, it is up to us to select a name that is most appropriate. The fighting was over in about a five day period. This is not consistent with the conventional use of the term siege, which usually involves conquest by attrition or a deliberate attack requiring extended preparation. Using "battle of" tends to imply a common name status that doesn't exist.  I would therefore propose "battle for Enerhodar" as a better alternative. Cinderella157 (talk) 02:42, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Ping:, , . Cinderella157 (talk) 02:46, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Battle of Kherson which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 05:23, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Title
So what makes this a battle instead of a siege? Dawsongfg (talk) 01:31, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

What has happened there since March?
??? Xx236 (talk) 10:00, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Merge proposal
I'd like to propose a merge to Southern Ukraine campaign. It appears that some Russian troops moved around for a few days and eventually a firefight took place here for a few hours in the early morning of 4 March. This would not be a significant event but for its location, and even still, it is not referred to as a "battle" in reliable sources. This page could be easily made into a paragraph of the proposed target; indeed, much of the information already exists there. Looking forward to hearing my fellow editors' thoughts. Thank you for reading. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 06:03, 9 May 2024 (UTC)


 * The section of the article I'm proposing this content be merged into is Southern Ukraine campaign – note that a large portion of the content of Battle of Enerhodar is already present there. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 07:53, 9 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Sounds good to me. While the capture of the power plant may have some enduring notability, the engagement leading to it is insufficient for a stand alone article. The capture of the town is only a footnote. Cinderella157 (talk) 08:13, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
 * No objections here. —Ganesha811 (talk) 22:30, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Questions
 * 1. Can I check the Ukrainian page to see if there's content there that the English page has missed?
 * 2. Would the infobox be kept if the page is merged Salfanto (talk) 16:55, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
 * 1. Certainly, but keep in mind that the Ukrainian article covers a fundamentally different topic well beyond the scope of the English article.
 * 2. I cannot think of a reason or precedent to do so.
 * Best regards SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 18:30, 28 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Opposed - Nah, no need for a merge. The campaign/offensive article should summarize the information and the individual battles/engagements should be stand-alone articles. The battle got a ton of international media attention. Even the capture of the nuclear power plant still gets RS mentions years later: The Guardian (March 2024). Full RS articles dedicated just to the battle/power plant capture exist as well. Example is "What we know about Russia's capture of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power complex" by NPR right after the battle concluded. So no, I am not in support of a merge, as this would merge a notable event. This article, with improvement, can also reach GA status in my opinion. I recently worked on Battle of Kherson, and got it almost ready for a GAN to start. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 22:10, 2 June 2024 (UTC)


 * What is notable is the capture of the power plant and the Russian intention to use the plant. The latter is why it keeps popping up in media such as the Guardian article linked. These are adequately and appropriately covered at Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant and Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant crisis. Cinderella157 (talk) 23:41, 2 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Support As others have said, the lasting significance here lies in the capture and occupation of the power plant, not the battle itself. The occupation is already covered in its own article, so we can move the battle itself to the Southern Ukraine Campaign article. Alternatively, I think it would also be fine to just merge into the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant crisis article itself, which seems to be lacking any information on the capture of the city. Gödel2200 (talk) 12:46, 30 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose, still important Dawsongfg (talk) 16:46, 19 July 2024 (UTC)