Talk:Battle of Kramatorsk

Merge

@Lvivske:, @Volunteer Marek: This needs to be merged back at once. It is merely forked content from the main articles, and has no particular coherence, as it is just a timeline of random events. RGloucester — ☎ 15:08, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

• @EkoGraf: Haven't you ever heard of WP:BOLD? This is a WP:FORK, pure and simple. It has no basis for existence. RGloucester — ☎ 19:54, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
  • You stated there was a discussion and you asked for a discussion, but nether happened. I you want one than wait. As for the fork part, Wikipedia always urges that material be relegated to other sub-articles from another article so that articles size could be cut-down. Which in fact I intended to do today. I intended to cut down those other two articles to only the basic information since the info is now in this one. EkoGraf (talk) 19:57, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

I did not state there was a discussion. I said that my reasoning was on the talk page. It was. Regardless, that is unacceptable, however, because it was be giving WP:UNDUE weight to certain events in ways that are not found in reliable sources. Furthermore, these events are not at all described in reliable sources as the 'Kramatorsk clashes', nor are they grouped together. It is functionally a piece of original research. RGloucester — ☎ 20:01, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

You said per talk which generally indicates on Wikipedia there was a discussion and/or consensus. And also you asked for a deletion discussion but than ignored that one also. Further, there are multiple precedens for this kind of article. I would refer you to Rif Dimashq clashes (November 2011–March 2012), Idlib Governorate clashes (September 2011–March 2012), 2012 Aleppo Governorate clashes, Deir ez-Zor clashes (2011–present) where you don't have any source calling the events in that way but the names of the articles and both the templates are virtually the same to this one. I can find more examples if you like. EkoGraf (talk) 20:06, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. RGloucester — ☎ 20:07, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

If you would read that policy more carefully it states further In consideration of precedent and consistency, though, identifying articles of the same nature that have been established and continue to exist on Wikipedia may provide extremely important insight into general notability of concepts, levels of notability... The Kramatorsk incidents/clashes have been notable enough in the media since both pro-Western and pro-Russian media have been reporting on them in detail every time they appear. Also, that policy states the exact opposite should maybe used as well. That as much this article should not exist and the others should, it works viceversa as well, with maybe this one needing to exist and the others don't. EkoGraf (talk) 20:14, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Let's keep the discussion in the deletion page for now. RGloucester — ☎ 20:16, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Refurbishment

I've re-written the article in prose-style, and filled out all the references. It should be good to go now. RGloucester — ☎ 02:24, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Infobox civlians killed claimed by DPR

I've removed the bit "claimed by DPR" for the civilian casualties because the wording suggests that the DPR claimed responsibility for killing the civilians (as in "there was a terrorist bombing the city which was claimed by group X"). I don't really know how to rewrite so that the meaning is clearer (ie claimed as in "only they say they were killed" and not claimed as in "they claimed to have killed them"). Nor does it seem that the infobox is the place to state which casualties are claimed by which side in the first place, all of those casualties are claimed by one of the sides yet we don't include that info in the infobox for all of them, that's what the article itself is for.B01010100 (talk) 11:05, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Flag of the Donetsk Republic (Organisation).svg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:23, 20 March 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:

• Flag of the Donetsk Republic (Organisation).svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:09, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Fake ukrainian side death toll

I don't understand why the western media wants to fake the real numbers? Russia losing more soldiers than ukraine's? That is a total bs 2001:4DF4:1322:EF00:B964:5799:1B54:D14C (talk) 21:37, 8 September 2022 (UTC)