Talk:Battle of Slavutych

Protection
Can anybody protect the page? There's an edit war going on over whose victory, if any, it is.

What battle?
Once again, by the reasonable standards of warfare and the standards of the Russia-Ukraine War in general, this was not remotely a "battle." Propose renaming the article as "Russian seizure of Slavutych". Refer to news reports which also do not refer to this minor skirmish and unopposed capture as a battle.Sredmash (talk) 21:17, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Now that the 'battle' is describes as both a Russian victory AND and a Ukrainian victory, this article is even more asinine.Sredmash (talk) 03:47, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Ukrainian victory?
It's quite absurd that it's marked as a Russian victory when the Russians have already withdrawn from the city. The Ukrainians have regained control of it so practically it's their victory. 182.239.87.226 (talk) 07:01, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * This article is about the fighting for the town that ended by March 27th. Events that took place days later are unrelated. EkoGraf (talk) 22:08, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

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 05:22, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

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: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:37, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Мітинг проти російської окупації у Славутичі.jpg

Capitalisation of "battle" in "battle of Slavutych"
The initial letter of the title is only capitalised in running text if it would normally be capitalised. Per MOS:CAPS: Wikipedia avoids unnecessary capitalization. In English, capitalization is primarily needed for proper names, acronyms, and for the first letter of a sentence. Wikipedia relies on sources to determine what is conventionally capitalized; only words and phrases that are consistently capitalized in a substantial majority of independent, reliable sources are capitalized in Wikipedia. Per MOS:CAPS, the burden is to show that capitalisation is necessary in accordance with the criteria of MOS:CAPS. Looking at news sources here, it is not even a name used in sources, let alone used as a proper name at all. Ping. Cinderella157 (talk) 07:27, 5 June 2022 (UTC)


 * But isn't it common place to capitalize the word "battle" in "The Battle of..."? Like the Battle of Britain, or the Battle of Gettysburg? Xalia (talk) 07:42, 5 June 2022 (UTC)


 * The phrase "battle of X" is descriptive and not inherently a proper name that would require capitalisation. So, the short answer is no, we don't always capitalise "battle of X" - though the battles you mention are consistently capped in sources. Cinderella157 (talk) 10:04, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Proposal to rename article to "Occupation" or "Seizure" of Slavutych
Now that these events are not as fresh in everyone's minds, could we discuss the inappropriate use of the word "battle" here? By no reasonable standard was this a battle or anything more than the smallest skirmish. The Russians shelled two checkpoints, killed three people, then drove into the city unopposed before driving out again. Furthermore the results of the "battle" had no impact on the war whatsoever, and the Russians' only goal was to seize some pistols and hunting shotguns from police and civilians. If this is a battle, then the war has involved at least three million discrete "battles" and Wikipedia needs a heck of a lot more articles. I propose renaming the article to "Russian Seizure of Slavutych" or "Russian Occupation of Slavuytch." Does anyone have a preference or better wording?Sredmash (talk) 21:37, 5 June 2022 (UTC)


 * I don't even think that this should be a stand alone article. Cinderella157 (talk) 23:58, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
 * +1. Curbon7 (talk) 00:05, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I am also not sure it deserves its own article (at least given the amount of information available), but renaming it is a decent half-measure to avoid over-inflating the importance of the event.Sredmash (talk) 00:56, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Can anyone assist with renaming the article to "Capture of Slavutych"? I know how to rename but don't want to break any links or redirects.Sredmash (talk) 20:58, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Idon't know if you have a consensus to do this. To remove any doubts, mine is an oppose. Cinderella157 (talk) 00:11, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Kindly provide a reason. The Oxford dictionary's definition of "battle" is "a sustained fight between large organized armed forces; a lengthy and difficult conflict or struggle." The events in question do not qualify as a battle. The very term "Battle of Slavutych" does not exist in common parlance or practically anywhere on the internet outside the Wiki universe.Sredmash (talk) 01:16, 9 June 2022 (UTC)


 * This has been called a "battle" here though whether it should be called that or an "engagement" is debatable given the matter of scale applicable to the two terms. A battle|engagement has a conclusion which in this case has been the capture of Slavutych.  I do not see that a conclusion to a battle generally results in it being renamed and do not see that a conclusion is a good reason for us to rename this article.  As you note, there are consequences to renaming the article. The proposal strikes me as "changing your underpants every time the wind changes".  I see no benefit and many detriments. Cinderella157 (talk) 09:38, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
 * That is circular logic, frankly. The Battle of Chernobyl article was renamed as Capture of Chernobyl article because the editors reached consensus on their mistaken nomenclature.Sredmash (talk) 13:53, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
 * The 'Battle of Chernobyl' article has now been renamed to 'Capture of Chernobyl', recognizing the fact that very little fighting took place there. Likewise in Slavutych, there was less violence than most weekend in Chicago or your average French general strike. Article should be renamed to Capture of Slavutych in order not to torture the English language any further.Sredmash (talk) 15:41, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Merge proposal
I propose a merger of content from Battle of Slavutych to some combination of the following articles: Slavutych, Russian occupation of Kyiv Oblast, and Northern Ukraine campaign

I find that the events described here are not notable enough to warrant a standalone article. It was not quite a "battle" in the first place (as discussed above) – troops moved around, checkpoints were shelled, and the Ukrainians withdrew, without much blood spilled.

Before I propose merging an article, I always use search engines to check how often the phrase "Battle of X" is mentioned in reliable sources, as a sort of marker of its notability and whether or not it is genuinely recognized as a legitimate battle outside of Wikipedia. For "Battle of Slavutych" the figure is a resounding zero.

A single newsorg, deemed unreliable by editors (WP:DAILYEXPRESS), has put the phrase "Battle of Slavutych" into print:

The article also mentions that his army surrounded the city for nine days, a number which originated on Wikipedia by editors doing mathematical calculations, but has no actual basis in reliable sources – the true number was around thirty. Citogenesis manifest.

SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 03:15, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Strongly agree. In the context of the large scale military operations and mass killing going on in Ukraine at that moment, Russia's ephemeral seizure of Slavutych is a tiny blip on the radar. Calling it a battle is patently ridiculous. If anything the ensuing protests were more notable. At the very least the article should be renamed to 'Russian seizure/capture of Slavutych', as was done with the previous misnamed 'Battle of Chernobyl' article.Sredmash (talk) 14:01, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Support Where might it redirect to? Might we rename it (the rediredt) as "battle for Slavutych" or even delete it altogeather? Cinderella157 (talk) 23:58, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I propose pointing it to Northern Ukraine campaign for the time being and opening an RfD discussion on it and others in the future as discussed. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 07:55, 9 May 2024 (UTC)