| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Russo-Ukrainian War article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies |
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22Auto-archiving period: 30 days  |
 | This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | 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. If consensus 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. |
 | The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to Eastern Europe or the Balkans, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
| WARNING: ACTIVE COMMUNITY SANCTIONS The article Russo-Ukrainian War, along with other pages relating to the Russo-Ukrainian War, is designated by the community as a contentious topic. The current restrictions are:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be sanctioned.
|
| This page is not a forum for general discussion about the Russo-Ukrainian War. Any such comments may be removedorrefactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about the Russo-Ukrainian War at the Reference desk. |
 | Do not feed the trolls! This article or its talk page has experienced trolling. The subject may be controversial or otherwise objectionable, but it is important to keep discussion on a high level. Do not get bogged down in endless debates that don't lead anywhere. Know when to deny recognition and refer to WP:PSCI, WP:FALSEBALANCE, WP:WikiVoice, or relevant notice-boards. Legal threats and trolling are never allowed! |
 | Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting.
|
 | Deletion Discussions, Moves, Merges, Press, etc. | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
There is no consensus for option B. Because that option failed to meet the burden placed upon it by the RfC on "supported by" fields in infoboxes, option A (the status quo) prevails. (non-admin closure) —Compassionate727 (T·C) 02:29, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Should Belarus be listed in the infobox (and accordingly described in other parts of this article) concerning the events since 24 February 2022: A) no (as at present); B) as "Supported since 2022 by: 
Belarus" (in Russia's side).
Please enter your answer to the question in the Survey section with a brief statement. Please do not respond to the statements of other editors in the Survey section. Back-and-forth discussion is permitted in the Discussion section (that's what it's for).
Note to closer and other participants: this RFC was started because the previous similar RFC (started on 16 March 2024) was closed on 17 May 2024 without a clear consensus regarding options A and B, but the uninvolved closer Compassionate727 stated that "Finally, there seems to be a consensus that if added, Belarus should be added with a note that its support began in 2022, although there is no reason that shouldn't be confirmed in the next RfC, which I assume will be forthcoming shortly". -- Pofka (talk) 20:27, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
the only mistake we made’ was not finishing off Ukraine with Russia in 2014" (see: full article), so Lukashenko's Belarus clearly tractate the current Ukraine as an enemy and by exceptionally supporting Russia since 2022 sought for Ukraine's military defeat in this war. -- Pofka (talk) 20:35, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging all the participants of the previous similar RFC who had voted in the Survey section (@Slatersteven:, @My very best wishes:, @Ortizesp:, @Gödel2200:, @Иованъ:, @Manyareasexpert:, @CVDX:, @RadioactiveBoulevardier:, @Cinderella157:, @Mellk:) because I think they should be informed about this RFC and are welcome to express their opinion regarding this question once again. -- Pofka (talk) 20:27, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: May be a good idea to include supporters rather than suppliers in the infobox. Then the role of Belarus should be included as a supporter of Russia and US as a supporter of Ukraine. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 17:10, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I dislike an RFC on a subject we had one recently about. Slatersteven (talk) 11:21, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Noticing that there seems to be contention in the contribution history of this article about North Korea's involvement as a belligerent: https://www.kyivpost.com/post/34893
IMO Sending state-sanctioned foreign troops under a defense pact constitutes belligerency, not involvement as mercenaries. Cyali (talk) 19:59, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
incorrect description of the deployment claims as an official North Korean announcement... without verifying the source of the rumors. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 20:39, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered=or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add North Korea to the belligerents list since they are sending troops. Chechen and Syria has also supplied troops so they should also be added. 2A00:801:7AA:8752:F004:AC6D:546E:2156 (talk) 21:16, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the Russian invasion of Ukraine infobox, Belarus is listed as "Supported by" with a note attached. I propose that, for the Russo-Ukrainian war article, we simply move this note to be attached to Russia instead of Belarus, looking something like:
Russia [a]This would only state the facts of how Belarus has supported the war, and wouldn't create any confusion over the duration of Belarusian support. Gödel2200 (talk) 14:53, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Walter Tau, you add the success of Russia's "special military operation" against NATO-backed Ukraine manifests the end of the USA-lead unipolar "rules-based " international order [1] . I don't see the first source provided to refer to the war as such (a "special military operation"). I also haven't found yet where the source characterizes it as a success. ManyAreasExpert (talk) 21:20, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On 2024-07-14 Walter Tau wrote:
Several prominent political scientists pointed out, that the success of Russia's "special military operation" against NATO-backed Ukraine manifests the end of the USA-lead unipolar "rules-based " international order, and the official start of either multipolarity or of a new bipolar World based on the competion between the United States (with European Union and NATO) and China (with BRICS and Shanghai Cooperation Organization).
In a 2024 journal article political scientists from Ukraine's Kyiv National Taras Shevchenko University concluded, that "the [Russo-Ukrainian] conflict is over the future of international order", and that “the war is structurally shifting the global balance of power and speeds up the trends set earlier by the rise of China and deterioration of the American leadership"...
Along with other recent USA-NATO military failures (e.g. in Afghanistan and in Niger), "it has exposed the limits of the West's capabilities,... and underscored the dynamics of the 'the West versus the Rest' confrontation... <The> Western hegemony, while still influential, is no longer as overwhelming as it once was."[1] Similar conclusions were reached by other experts in different countries.[2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14]
I also suggest linking this explanation of Putin's goals https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Mearsheimer/2014 Russian annexation of Crimea & 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Walter Tau (talk) 12:06, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
References
| This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered=or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The war hit Romani people
https://m.thewire.in/article/rights/how-russias-war-has-hit-ukraines-roma-people/amp 2600:6C50:7E00:316:A4A0:CC7B:8B87:890 (talk) 03:25, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 06:30, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
