Talk:Ukraine/Archive 12

Archive 5

←

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Locator map

Hi, @Chipmunkdavis, about your revert with the edit summary “discussed before and standard practice.”[1] Including battle lines on locator maps is not standard practice and does not follow any reliable sources. Including two-years-out-of-date battle lines on a level 3 vital article and top-importance article to WikiProject Ukraine is ridiculous.

Previous discussion was inconclusive, so we should include locator maps with information that is up-to-date, accurate, and not in dispute. —Michael Z. 02:02, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

The locator map does not show battle lines, it shows lines that were stable enough that they're still commonly shown in maps from reliable sources that describe the current situation. There is enough dispute that there is a live war. CMD (talk) 02:58, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

No, you’re wrong. Last year’s sources on the war label the area as “occupied by Russia before February 2022,” and the line as the “line of contact” (more current sources tend to omit this old line).[2][3][4][5] Sources on Ukraine showing locator maps of Ukraine do not show it at all, e.g. Britannica.[6][7][8] This is not a border of Ukraine, and not even a border of Russian claims: it is lines between opposing forces and it is out of date.  —Michael Z. 03:45, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Literally all four of those sources you note as current ones either include the same lines or include the Crimean line. Even the CIA Factbook map you link notes Crimea is occupied on its map, and that's a tool for US foreign policy workers. CMD (talk) 04:14, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

[Sigh.] You’re not WP:HEARing me.

• The sources about the war have the line and area as historical battle lines which are temporary and fluid since 2014.
  • Aljazeera, January 2024:[9] “Under Russian control before Feb 23, 2022.”
  • BBC, December 2023:[10] doesn’t have the line.
  • NYT, June 2023:[11] “Line of contact before invasion,” a minor line only on a few of the maps, way less prominent than the main subject of these maps. Scroll way down and you also see “Approximate line separating Ukrainian and Russian-backed forces before the invasion.
  • The Guardian, May 2022:[12] “2014–22 frontline.” Pre-2022 maps: “Separatist-controlled area,” “Line of control.”

Line of contact is a military term of art referring to the disposition of forces, not a geographical or political reference to a country’s borders or territory. —Michael Z. 17:41, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

All maps showing some temporary state of the war in Ukraine. Not the location of Ukraine on the globe.

• Sources about Ukraine:
  • Britannica (updated January 2024):[13] has two maps of Ukraine with permanent features and no battle lines.[14][15]
  • American Heritage Dictionary (©2022):[16] apparently old, but only has permanent features just like other locator maps[17]
  • World Factbook:[18] has a label saying that Crimea is occupied. No lines except the permanent borders.[19]

This article is about the state of Ukraine, with a locator map of Ukraine 1991–2024 (which borders have been stable since 1954). It is not a “battle map of 2015–2022.”  —Michael Z. 04:41, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

As you say the locator is not a battle map and does not show battle lines, and that is the case for the stable map here. As you may also be aware from the previous discussions, showing claimed and controlled areas is standard practice for countries with territorial disputes. Other sources such as the CIA Factbook may have different goals and conventions. CMD (talk) 06:03, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

It is not stable because those lines appeared in 2015 and disappeared twenty-two months ago. A representation of Ukraine’s stable borders is the map of the last twenty-two years. And it is not current. It is not showing claimed and controlled areas, which are two different things now, and were two other different things when the lines shown on the map existed, and the map is showing neither of these. Your argument is constructed to have some apparent internal logic, but unfortunately does not represent the facts you represent it as arguing for.  —Michael Z. 21:53, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

If you're saying the map does not reflect the recent war, then yes. There is no stability now, due to there being an ongoing war. I have consistently opposed the map being changed to reflect an ongoing war. If you wish it to, that is another argument, but that is not a great argument to jump to a map that simply reflects your preferred POV. CMD (talk) 01:26, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

It is representing the ongoing war, except showing this war’s two-year-old battle lines. It is not representing Russian claims, neither then nor now. Again, you’re saying stuff while refusing to acknowledge the facts of what you’re referring to.

Why do you want a map intended to show the location of Ukraine to have two-year-old battle lines but not this week’s battle lines?

The location and borders of Ukraine are not “my preferred POV.” They are what every reliable source says they are, including in the maps I have linked to.  —Michael Z. 04:05, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

I also see no reason to depict the Russian-occupied territories of Ukraine prior to the 2022 invasion in light green. Essentially, there are only two viable options: display a straightforward map without the war zone, or represent all Russian-occupied territories of Ukraine in light green. Throughout 2023, the front line remained relatively stable, similar to the 2015-2022 front line. Consequently, the choices should be either File:Europe-Ukraine.svg or File:Europe-Ukraine (disputed territory).svg, but not File:Europe-Ukraine (и не контролируемые).png. --Yorkporter (talk) 09:31, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

I have not seen reliable sources starting to treat the battle lines as stable, but would be interested in reading them. I would expect there to need to be some international agreement similar to 2015 for sources to start to treat them similarly. CMD (talk) 01:34, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Here you go: NYT says “Who’s Gaining Ground in Ukraine? This Year, No One.”[20] The red and blue show both sides’ gains in the first nine months of 2023.[21] Precious little changed in the following three months. These are the relatively “stable” battle lines, although in my opinion a locator map should not show the front lines of a conflict in progress.

“Russian claims” is something else, and there are different versions. What’s stated in the current Russian constitution is shown in the map for Russia but doesn’t belong here. Anyway, that is quite different from Russian claims.  —Michael Z. 04:13, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Compare the locator maps for China and Taiwan – not the same situation, because both consider themselves one country since their separation, while Russia’s claims began with a 2014 war of aggression against a sovereign state, and have been changing and self-contradictory.  —Michael Z. 04:23, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm aware little ground has been gained, that's very different from things being stable. The Ukraine locator map is not meant to show Russian claims. On the examples, are you looking to have the Ukraine map reflect the China map and include the claimed areas in light green, or go the way of the Taiwan map which does not include the constitutionally claimed territories at all? CMD (talk) 06:44, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

1. There were small changes in de-facto territorial control along the line during 2015–2022, and 2. at the scale of the locator maps, the recent changes are probably hidden by the thickness of the map line: so I don’t see any de-facto difference in “stability.”

China is an illustration of an approach in another article (note Taiwan has two locator maps): 1. the locator maps for Ukraine and Russia don’t have to be the same, and 2. Neither map shows the other country’s claims: China is not all light green as claimed by Taiwan, and vice versa (the first situation is only shown in the collapsed second map in the other article).  —Michael Z. 15:01, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

The things are of course not fully stable but the line is stable enough that it is commonly shown in maps from reliable sources that describe the current situation. Yorkporter (talk) 21:28, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

@Rosguill: sorry for disturbing again. Since 2 years, lot of users holding this page (and other Ukraine related articles) "hostage". This is very similar to the Karabakh conflict.

before

after

This has been a norm on Wikipedia uncontrolled territories being markes as light green. Eg. Cyprus, Azerbaijan (now not anymore), West Sahara etc.

This was discussed Talk:Ukraine/Archive_11#Show the occupied territories of Ukraine on the map? here as well. Let alone pre-2022 territories, now they claim apparently we should use the map below. Wikipedia is not United Nations we all know that, so as an administrator I would like to hear your comment as well. Certain users here do even deny Crimea is annexed/Russian control because "it's not official". Since this conflict is at stalemate, and gains are pretty minimal that can not even be noticed on such maps, we should directly go for current frontline.

current map of Russia

Russian occupied territories should be marked as light green since there is no change almost a year

Beshogur (talk) 12:43, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Seems like something that could use an RfC, rather than my opinion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 14:12, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

I am satisfied with the current frontline, which is why I added File:Europe-Ukraine (disputed territory).svg. If you can create a globe scheme locator map that includes the current frontline, it can be added. There are only two viable options: either display a map without the war zone or represent all Russian-occupied territories of Ukraine in light green. Yorkporter (talk) 21:01, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes, exactly that map. We should show the reality. Wikipedia is not United Nations. Beshogur (talk) 13:29, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

@Yorkporter: do you have a globe version? Beshogur (talk) 12:13, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

No, I haven't seen a map displaying that particular line on a global map. Please feel free to create it. I must admit, I lack the expertise required to modify SVG files for such detailed map adjustments. Yorkporter (talk) 21:59, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Me too. Beshogur (talk) 14:48, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

proposed version

Beshogur (talk) 16:20, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Map needs clarification

The map in the section titled "Under foreign domination" - the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth - needs the words "superimposed on modern borders" added to it, as per the original upload onto WikiCommons here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Polish-Lithuanian_Commonwealth_at_its_maximum_extent.svg 14.2.196.234 (talk) 05:02, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

 Done. Mellk (talk) 07:03, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 February 2024

The Ukraine global map should be changed to "Ukraine - disputed 2022 (orthographic projection).svg" as it is currently disputed territory with Russia Khrom3ium (talk) 05:23, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

 Not done Please establish consensus first. I don't think we should call something that is clear according to international law and according to the international community "disputed". Rsk6400 (talk) 12:21, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

No opinion on what map to use, but the statement that land that is literally being fought over cannot be described as "disputed" is laughable. If WAR isn't a "dispute", then nothing is. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 13:06, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

According to the de facto maps, its under Russian control and since Ukraine claims this, its disputed

Forget your opinion on this it a fact Khrom3ium (talk) 17:50, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Please note that your map represents territories claimed by Russia, not those under Russian control (occupied). Russia has annexed far more territory than it has actually managed to conquer. For this reason alone, your map is not suitable. Yorkporter (talk) 21:11, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Atleast Crimean should be shaded light green. Ukraine claims Crimea as their own but Russia has been controlling it for a long time and for the foreseeable future, there's no reason to imply its Ukraine proper TianHao1225 (talk) 03:42, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

The international recognition for all Russian claims is the same: Virtually none. Rsk6400 (talk) 06:48, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

how does international recognition matter in this context, it's about territory claimed vs controlled. Ukraine definitely claims the areas of itself occupied by Russia and doesn't control it. With most countries, Wikipedia does this claim vs control thing why not here? TianHao1225 (talk) 17:53, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Request edit of section, Etymology and orthography

• What I think should be changed (format using {{textdiff}}):

  −

  The name of Ukraine likely comes from the [[old Slavic]] term for 'borderland', as does the word ''[[krajina]]''.

  +

  The [[name of Ukraine]] is frequently interpreted as coming from the [[old Slavic]] term for 'borderland' as is the word ''[[krajina]].'' Another interpretation is that the [[name of Ukraine]] means "region" or "country."

• Why it should be changed: Suggested by users Valentyn Holod (talk) on 22:20, 9 December 2023 (UTC) and Red XIV ^(talk) on 01:49, 2 January 2024 (UTC) under the talk page request heading, "Change/Fix the category Etymology and orthography, as it doesn't match the origin of the article "Name of Ukraine"", the current, existing entry cites only one source and does not adequately convey that multiple interpretations of the etymology of the word Ukraine currently exist as further discussed on the main page, Name of Ukraine. The current entry does not adequately convey that there are other interpretations. This proposed edit takes into account feedback from Marcelus (talk) on 10:04, 5 January 2024 (UTC) to simplify the edit and avoid controversy while ensuring both viewpoints are addressed at a high level.

In what way did you simplify the edit and avoided controversy if it's already HAPPENED, as you took only one viewpoint about the name of Ukraine that was taken from Russian propaganda, and you avoid another viewpoint, turn on the logic, bruh Valentyn Holod (talk) 20:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

• References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button):}}

BowTieTuba (talk) 06:48, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

 Done * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:43, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

References

Ukraine - Middle Power

According to a reputable research center Wilson Center, and de-facto, "the most striking example of a middle state with markedly greater influence is Ukraine", quote:

"But the most striking example of a middle state with markedly greater influence is Ukraine. Paradoxically, even though Ukraine’s population and economy have declined as the war has dragged on, the country’s international status has grown to equal that of the powers that define global and regional agendas. And the United States, China, and Russia have had to adapt to it."

Hence would it be feasible to add a statement that although Ukraine is a major middle power, it de-facto possesses greater global influence? I believe so. AlasdarVan (talk) 23:29, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Oppose, similar to existing discussion at Talk:Israel. "Middle power" is a vague academic term without a standard meaning. Note the linked article in question has to go out of its way to define middle power. The term tells readers very little. CMD (talk) 04:37, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Orthodox Church of Ukraine - Indepence from Moscow?

In the final paragraph of the "History" section, in the "Independence" subsection, reads this line: "In January 2019, the Orthodox Church of Ukraine was recognized as independent of Moscow, which reversed the 1686 decision of the patriarch of Constantinople and dealt a further blow to Moscow's influence in Ukraine."

If we want to be precise and accurate in our information, this should better communicate that the OCU (under patriarch filaret) was not recognized as independent of Moscow, but was rather recognized as canonical by a limited number of the Orthodox Patriarchates. The Orthodox Church in Ukraine as it is now known is the unification of two groups which split off of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church MP, which was the only recognized canonical church in Ukraine prior to 2018. The OCU was recognized as canonical by EP Bartholomew, not simply as "independent." This did not fully reverse the 1686 decree, as the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is also recognized as canonical by the EP and other patriarchates of the eastern orthodox churches.

This is not taking a stand for or against either the UOC or the OCU, just seems that there is a large piece of clarity and context lacking from the existing page. I propose instead the verbiage:

"In January 2019, the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople recognized the Orthodox Church of Ukraine as a canonical and autocephalous church, a decision which has been accepted by a number of other Orthodox patriarchates. This partially reversed Constantinople's 1686 decision and dealt a further blow to Moscow's influence in Ukraine."

This better represents the nature of the church relations in the country and across the Orthodox communion, as well as continues the original point intended by the existing text. WanderingCricket (talk) 17:02, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

KrAZ trucks

In the economy section it is stated that KrAZ trucks are exported to many countries. Is there a source corroborating this statement may I ask? Because since 2008 recession KrAZ struggled even with the domestic market, let alone exporting its products. You can check their yearly production numbers, and since 2008 they were eyewateringly low. Gorgedweller (talk) 08:24, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

I have deleted “Antonov airplanes and KrAZ trucks are exported to many countries.” as uncited Chidgk1 (talk) 11:52, 3 August 2024 (UTC)