Wikiwand AI

Talk:Russo-Ukrainian war

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

More information Remedy instructions and exemptions ...
Close
More information This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:, Associated task forces: ...
Close

Merge with “ War in Donbas”

The “war in Donbas” page incorrectly states that it,” was a phase of the Russo-Ukrainian war” despite the fact the “Russian invasion of Ukraine” occurred about 8 years later. Therefore, I petition this page be merged with the “war in Donbas” page as it should be to avoid misleading readers any further at this juncture. ~2026-16974-91 (talk) 10:08, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

No. In fact the first line of this article is: The Russo-Ukrainian war began in February 2014 and is ongoingblindlynx 15:27, 28 April 2026 (UTC)
So we travelled back in time to February 2014 to rename it that? Genius. ~2026-16974-91 (talk) 22:55, 28 April 2026 (UTC)
Almost like that is an example of the very misinformation in which I was referencing. ~2026-16974-91 (talk) 22:55, 28 April 2026 (UTC)
This article has existed since 23:01, 1 March 2014 (UTC) and has held the title 'Russo-Ukrainian war' since 2016 because that term has been used in relation to this conflict for over a decade. Mr rnddude (talk) 23:31, 28 April 2026 (UTC)
Right, so my point still stands that it wasn’t called that when Russia first attacked Ukrainian territory in 2014, so you could understand why it’s weird that they just changed the name of the article as you’ve acknowledged with no explanation as to why… ~2026-16974-91 (talk) 07:32, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
Ngrams shows a clear increase in the use of the phrase 'Russo-Ukrainian war' in book publications beginning in 2014. This article just wasn't hosted at that title. There is no they; article titles are determined by discussion. Mr rnddude (talk) 15:56, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
Right which is why I am trying to have a discussion about the poorly chosen article title. ~2026-16974-91 (talk) 20:42, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
Why is it weird? It's become clearer over time that the Donbas war is part of a broader conflict as events have churned on, your argument that the framing of an event cannot be revised doesn't seem to be logical. This is like arguing that the Japanese invasion of Manchuria cannot be considered part of the Second Sino-Japanese War because it wasn't described as such in the immediate aftermath. Joko2468 (talk) 15:29, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
Only problem with that line of thinking is that we can’t apply the events of nearly 100 years ago to today. We have more technology now so there shouldn’t be an excuse.
what you said is actually the opposite of the truth, the “Russian invasion” would be part of the broader conflict which started with the Donbas conflict in 2014. Which is why I started posting here in the first place, btw. ~2026-16974-91 (talk) 20:38, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
It currently is. Joko2468 (talk) 21:09, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
But it currently isn’t, because it says that the “War in Donbas” ended in 2022 but that it was also “subsumed” by the Russo-Ukraine war which didn’t start until 2022. So I created this thread to give the opportunity to fix the article(s) to make it more factual. ~2026-16974-91 (talk) 04:24, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
Since there were sources requested, and no source has been provided to the contrary, news just came out that Putin himself is seeking a conclusion to the so called “Russo-Ukrainian War”. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ukraine-russia-war-live-putin-zelensky-trump-victory-day-parade-b2973716.html ~2026-16974-91 (talk) 09:40, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
WW1 was not called WW1 at the time. Slatersteven (talk) 12:32, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
Neither will WWIII be called such when it begins. ~2026-16974-91 (talk) 18:29, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
So? Slatersteven (talk) 09:46, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

Why are the belligerent parties not completely detailed in this article? …

I notice the NATO side is quite lacking in participating parties(I only see Ukraine in the list) yet ironically North Korea is included on the Russian belligerents’ side, despite it only supporting the conflict in its periphery. ~2026-16974-91 (talk) 05:09, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

They are not comparable. The Democratic People's Republic of Korea sent at least 11,000 combat troops to Russia to help recapture parts of western Kursk, after the Ukrainian offensive in August 2024; that is just one operation. "About 2,300 North Korean soldiers have died fighting for Russia against Ukraine". If the British or the Germans deploy similar numbers or have similar numbers killed then we will include them too. But they have not.-- Toddy1 (talk) 09:25, 11 May 2026 (UTC)
Because of every response in every other thread about this, read the archive. Slatersteven (talk) 09:45, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 July 2026

Please change "Russo-Ukrainian war" to "Russia-Ukraine War". It will follow the article's language, which is British English. The source of the British name is Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/event/Russia-Ukraine-War There is no English word "Russo"; therefore, the article is not neutral. ~2026-38061-71 (talk) 13:57, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

Not in fact the case Russo-Japanese War is an example. Slatersteven (talk) 14:00, 3 July 2026 (UTC)
That's not how English lexical forms work. A borrowing from Greek allows -ia to become -o in various contexts: Francia -> Franco in 'Franco-Prussian war'; Graecia -> Graeco in Graeco-Roman culture; Serbia -> Serbo in Serbo-Croatian language; Russia -> Russo in Russophile or Russophobe; etc and etc. Mr rnddude (talk) 15:06, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

"Ukrainian occupation of Kursk since 2024"

This is outdated. All of Ukrainian occupied kursk has been recaptured. Might as well completely remove that from the article, or afd they have been recaptured. ~2026-38393-65 (talk) 21:55, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

Do you have an RS saying it has all been recaptured? Slatersteven (talk) 09:17, 5 July 2026 (UTC)

Adding Iran to the Infobox

Related Articles

Timelines

Top Qs

Fact Checks