Points of interest related to Ukraine on Wikipedia:
Outline – History – Portal – Category – WikiProject – Alerts – Deletions – Cleanup – Stubs – Assessment – To-do

WikiProject Ukraine Shortcut: WP:UKRAINE
Outline map of Ukraine
Main Project Page Ukraine Portal
Work groups and subprojects
Administrative divisions of Ukraine Crimea Ukrainian football
Tools Guidelines Manual of Style Ukrainian places Romanization of Ukrainian Help:IPA/Ukrainian Announcements Bot-assisted find of new articles Photographs requests Articles up for deletion Project banner Project category
Departments Assessment Deletion sorting
v t e

Deletion SortingProject (talk)Project page Lists (by ABC) Lists (by topic) Lists (computer-readable) AfD: Today, Yesterday Delsort scripts v t e

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Ukraine. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add ((Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName)) to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding ((subst:delsort|Ukraine|~~~~)) to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

Note that there are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Ukraine.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to Europe.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Ukraine/archive

Purge page cache

watch

See also: Portal:Ukraine/Ukraine-related Wikipedia notice board

Scan for Ukraine related AfDs

Ukraine[edit]

Igor Fruman

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Clear violation of WP:BLP1E relevant details should be merged into Russian interference in the 2020 United States elections Simonm223 (talk) 15:42, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. We are way past that stage. He has become notable enough for his own article. Giving proper coverage (literally everything here) at Russian interference in the 2020 United States elections would create a due weight problem requiring a summary style splitting off, resulting in what we have here, so there is no sense in deleting this article. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 16:07, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He's notable for a single event. That it's widely covered is neither here nor there.Simonm223 (talk) 16:18, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Crime, Politics, Judaism, Belarus, Ukraine, Florida, and Michigan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:34, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep BLP1E requires three conditions to be met. #3, The event is not significant or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented, is not met. The event is significant and his role in it is substantial and well documented. I say "weak" here because he has maintained a lower profile than Lev Parnas. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:48, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There's more than one event. There's his involvement in efforts in Ukraine to search for damaging information on Biden, and then there's his campaign finance law conviction. The two are, as the article states, unrelated. Jfire (talk) 17:00, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lev Parnas

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Obvious WP:BLP1E violation. Relevant details can be merged into Russian interference in the 2020 United States elections Simonm223 (talk) 15:47, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. We are way past that stage. He has become notable enough for his own article. Giving proper coverage (literally everything here) at Russian interference in the 2020 United States elections would create a due weight problem requiring a summary style splitting off, resulting in what we have here, so there is no sense in deleting this article. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 15:59, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Again, notable for a single event only. That it's a widely covered event doesn't change anything. Simonm223 (talk) 16:19, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Conspiracy theories, Crime, Politics, Judaism, Ukraine, Florida, Michigan, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:32, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep BLP1E requires three conditions to be met. #3, The event is not significant or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented, is not met. The event is significant and his role in it is substantial and well documented. Also #2, The person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual, does not appear to be met. He just testified in front of Congress recently. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:47, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, perhaps SNOW? Per Muboshgu, this is a clear case of WP:NOTBLP1E. Jfire (talk) 16:55, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep There are obviously enough sources about Parnas to establish his notability, his role was substantial and well enough documented – resulting in this long article – and Russian interference in the 2020 United States elections is obviously long enough itself that that the substantial content here cannot be suitably merged. Reywas92^Talk 17:20, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Biopharma LLC

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I have previously nominated this for PROD (and also for SD, before that), but the nomination wasn't deemed uncontroversial enough and I was advised to open an AfD. The rationale is the same as in the PROD nomination:

I would like to renominate the article for deletion again, on the grounds of WP:G5. I agree that my SD nomination was too early. The only substantial edits to this page were by confirmed sockpuppets of Bodiadub and Yuraprox, and User:1sonng. I think that 1sonng is a sockpuppet of Yuraprox for reasons written in this SPI. (The said SPI had been closed because 1sonng hadn't edited for a long time.) If you disagree with my judgement of 1sonng, feel free to deprod. I do not think edits of any other users to this article are significant.

Janhrach (talk) 08:06, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Medicine, and Ukraine. Janhrach (talk) 08:06, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Roman Savchenko (footballer)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to fail WP:SIGCOV, and thus WP:GNG. I did several searches in both English and Ukrainian, and only a hockey player came up. This could be a potential WP:TOOSOON situation. Anwegmann (talk) 01:37, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Anwegmann (talk) 01:40, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Ukraine. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:11, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. Giant Snowman 12:00, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Skadovsk polling center bombing

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Definitively not notable. See 2024 Russian presidential election#Incidents for a list of similar events. This one didn't have any fatal casualties. The only element of notability is that it was done by Ukrainian partisans which isn't enough as I see it. Super Ψ Dro 00:47, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Politics, Russia, and Ukraine. Super Ψ Dro 00:47, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Salfanto (talk) 15:17, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:48, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 17:50, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge This is one of the many attacks that took place during the Russian presidential election. This seems like it can be merged into that article, especially considering there were no fatalities. The only major impact it seemed to have was to "cancel further elections in the city but allow voting at a place of residence," (from the Skadovsk polling center bombing article) but I think this can be covered in the section of the election article. Gödel2200 (talk) 12:57, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to 2024 Russian presidential election#Incidents per Gödel. An event appearing the in the news does not warrant it receiving its own article, especially when it can be covered in the article of the broader topic. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:10, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:36, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Chasiv Yar

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There isn't even any fighting in Chasiv Yar. WP:TOOSOON. If a battle starts there we can give it its own article, but there is no battle right now.

This is another of the many content forks of this war that keep getting deleted. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Tokmak, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Chuhuiv, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Dvorichna, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Krasnohorivka, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2024 Russian offensive. Super Ψ Dro 00:23, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Russia, and Ukraine. Super Ψ Dro 00:23, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Regarding the scope of a battle, a battle does not have to be in the city itself to constitute being a battle. The Battle of Stalingrad was from 17 July 1942 to 2 February 1943, yet the Germans did not reach the city itself till late August, yet the fighting on the distant approaches to the city is considered part of the singular battle. Same applies to the battle of Bakhmut, sources recognize the battle as having began in its outskirts, before the city was even under siege, as early as July, or even May of 2022. The ISW also notes that Russian sources recognize the offensives around Bakhmut as a concentrated effort on taking Chasiv Yar. Reaper1945 (talk) 00:36, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Same could apply to the battle of Kyiv, there was not any fighting within the actual city itself, but on the approaches to it, similar to the Battle of Moscow from 1941 to 1942, no fighting in the city itself but on the approaches. So limiting a battle to having to be actually in the city itself or whatever measurement to define closeness to constitute a battle is subjective and not stringently defined. Reaper1945 (talk) 00:41, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're comparing the Russian capital, the greatest battle in history and the Ukrainian capital with a random town in Ukraine with a pre-war population of 12,250. The case of Kyiv is an exception in the topic area of this war because it was the Ukrainian capital and it was the initial phases of the war when everyone thought Ukraine was going to fall and thus we actually have sources reporting on a battle for Kyiv. I don't see such sources for Chasiv Yar.

Judging from the sources in this article there is an acknowledgment that Russia is approaching the city (Ruins and corpses among the howitzers: Russia prepares its next great siege in eastern Ukraine, Military: Ukraine partially retakes ground near Avdiivka while Russia pushes toward Chasiv Yar) but not of a "battle of Chasiv Yar" yet. May I by the way remind that the article barely has any information on a supposed battle. The article barely reflects the discussion that is taking place here. Super Ψ Dro 10:04, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Most historians would consider the Battle of Stalingrad to be the greatest battle in history, such as British historian Geoffrey Roberts, and Russian sources, such as Soviet general Viktor Matsulenko, and other Russian scholars who refer to it as the "battle of the century".^[1] Also, the Battle of Stalingrad is considered to have began on the distant approaches to the city, in the Don Bend, on 17 July, yet it was neither Moscow or Kyiv, both capital cities, so clearly fighting within a city is the not the definite mark of a battle. On top of that, the Battle of Bakhmut, despite the apparent main assault towards the city on 1 August, is regarded by numerous analysts at ISW as beginning in July of 2022, when Russia made advances towards the city, or even earlier in May, when fighting in the Bakhmut area actually began, yet the city is not a capital. Restricting the naming of a battle because it is not a capital or "greatest battle of all time" is not really sound logic, and the ISW analysts recognize that Russian offensives towards Chasiv Yar constitute an operation to take Chasiv Yar. Again, is there a stringent list of requirements which includes that a battle for a city must first start with fighting inside the city? Otherwise, numerous examples prove otherwise, including those above. Reaper1945 (talk) 17:50, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are there sources saying a battle has started in Chasiv Yar? Ultimately that's what matters, rather than discussing other cases. Currently the article only has sources saying russia is advancing towards the town and anticipating a battle in the future. Super Ψ Dro 20:24, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Six sources given in the lede state that the "fighting", "defence" and "battle" of Chasiv Yar has already begun. Reaper1945 (talk) 13:52, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Salfanto (talk) 17:16, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A !vote without any comment or rationale will hardly be taken into account by the closer. Super Ψ Dro 10:04, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:49, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agree with nom that the battle hasn't actually started yet. None of the sources in English refer to this as a battle (though if someone could check the foreign sources that would be appreciated). The article claims that this source says "positional battles" were occuring around Chasiv Yar, but that is actually incorrect: the source says "positional engagements" were occuring around Chasiv Yar. Until the actual battle starts, this is, as nom said, WP:TOOSOON. Gödel2200 (talk) 13:32, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep I'd normally be all for deleting the article, however, the actual article on Chasiv Yar is really slanted (to be honest, mostly due to my contributions) because there isn't really any other place for info on Chasiv Yar in the war to live. If we where to migrate all the stuff in the Chasiv Yar Russin invasion section to a background section then I'd think we'd have enough to keep this article afloat. I don't think Ukraine is going to be making a push for Bakhmut anytime soon (I'd love to be proven wrong) and it is far more likely that Russia is just going to intensify it's attacks in the Donbas in the near future. Scu ba (talk) 01:29, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CRYSTALBALL. Currently there is no battle in Chasiv Yar, so we can simply not have an article on it. As I said, we can create an article if a battle erupts in the future (maybe draftifying this article could be an option if editors deem a battle to start soon as likely). The information here can be easily integrated at Chasiv Yar#Russian invasion of Ukraine so that no information is lost. Super Ψ Dro 20:37, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A battle does not have to take place in the city itself to constitute a battle, again, this would apply to the battle of Kyiv or Battle of Moscow which saw no fighting within the cities themselves. Reaper1945 (talk) 01:03, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

the March 26 ISW report mentions fighting within city limits. Scu ba (talk) 15:17, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Geolocated footage published on March 24 indicates that Russian forces marginally advanced northeast of Kanal (an eastern suburb of Chasiv Yar). Nothing about fighting inside the city. Super Ψ Dro 10:04, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Per Reaper1945 Durranistan (talk) 16:10, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify- it isn't clear that the battle has begun yet and we can't be sure that there will be a "Battle of Chasiv Yar" in the future (assuming that there will be is WP:CRYSTALBALL)- however, many sources do mention advances towards Chasiv Yar, so it'd be best to leave it as a draft to be expanded and reworked until sources start speaking of an actual battle there.

Some have mentioned the fact that it's not necessary for there to be fighting in the city limits for there to be a battle of that city (e.g. Moscow, Kyiv), but those offensives were major and are universally deemed a battle in themselves, while the apparent Russian advance to Chasiv Yar appears to be... just that, an apparent Russian advance on the town. Doesn't really constitute a full battle yet - presidentofyes, the super aussa man 20:58, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, with name Chasiv Yar during the Russian invasion of Ukraine.Mr.User200 (talk) 14:23, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An article like that seems like it would be easily integrable into Chasiv Yar#Russian invasion of Ukraine, given this article's short length. This would also be an unprecedented format of article. Super Ψ Dro 19:53, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How do you know there is no fighting there? Eehuiio (talk) 21:44, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because there is no proof for now that Russian forces reached at least eastern outskirts of the city, the front line is now close to the city but not in the city itself. Hyfdghg (talk) 03:20, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The burden of proof is on anyone arguing there is a battle taking place in the city right now, not on the opposite side. Super Ψ Dro 10:04, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but rename to Chasiv Yar in the Russian invasion of Ukraine. RS does back up that Chasiv Yar is being targetted ([1][2]), however, RS also supports that there is no direct confrontation in Chasiv Yar nor any attacks/airstrikes. Chasiv Yar is an administrative center for the Chasiv Yar urban hromada, so my !vote for keeping and renaming the article supports that information pretaining to the Chasiv Yar urban hromada's four settlements are included in the article. I do agree that a "Battle of Chasiv Yar" article is WP:TOOSOON, however, deletion is not necessary due to RS support that Chasiv Yar is a current objective in the invasion. Note, my !vote should not be prejudice against a future "Battle of Chasiv Yar" article (i.e. a future renaming of this article to the current title) if and/or when combat begins to take place in the city. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 18:02, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@WeatherWriter There actually have been artillery and air attacks on Chasiv Yar. On 17 February 2024, Russians dropped an ODAB-1500 thermobaric bomb on defending positions in Chasiv Yar,^[2]^[3] and shelling reported on 2 December 2023^[4] and 9 March 2024.^[5] Sources also mention that Rusaian forces are within a couple miles of the city, extremely close and pushing towards the city. Reaper1945 (talk) 18:30, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Reaper1945: Even then, that just supports my !vote. Pushing towards the city does not imply a "battle" has taken place or is currently taking place. The bombing references above just support that the article should not be deleted, but rather (most likely temporarily) be renamed to not include "battle" in the title. It can be renamed back to "battle of" once fighting begins to take place army vs army in the city itself. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 19:07, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@WeatherWriter Settlements in the Chasiv Yar urban hromada have been attacked and stormed, such as Bohdanivka, and Ivanivske, which is immediately east of Chasiv Yar has been captured by Russian forces on 23 March. I do not see how fighting on the outskirts of a city does not constitute a battle? Analysts at ISW and Kyiv Independent reporters clearly view the Battle of Bakhmut beginning on its outskirts when its settlements were attacked and Russian forces pushed towards the city, despite no fighting within the city yet, how can the same not be said for Chasiv Yar? Reaper1945 (talk) 19:22, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Исаакович, Цветков Анатолий; Александрович, Борщ Александр (2018). "СТАЛИНГРАДСКАЯ БИТВА - СРАЖЕНИЕ ВЕКА (К 75-ЛЕТИЮ РАЗГРОМА НЕМЕЦКО-ФАШИСТСКИХ ВОЙСК ПОД СТАЛИНГРАДОМ)". Научно-аналитический журнал Обозреватель - Observer (1 (336)): 111–119. ISSN 2074-2975.
^ Ситников, Александр (2024-02-19). "О начале битвы за Часов Яр известил эпический «почти ядерный» взрыв". svpressa.ru (in Russian). Retrieved 2024-03-31.
^ Shcherbak, Svetlana (2024-03-30). "Was the ODAB-1500 Aviation Bomb Used by the Enemy for the First Time: What Is Its Main Danger?". en.defence-ua.com. Retrieved 2024-03-31.
^ Presse, AFP-Agence France (2023-12-02). "Russian Shelling Kills One In Ukraine's Chasiv Yar: Kyiv". www.barrons.com. Retrieved 2024-03-31.
^ "Russians shell Chasiv Yar, killing a man". www.pravda.com.ua. 2024-03-09. Retrieved 2024-03-31.

Draftify WP:TOOSOON internet searches say that battle hasn’t started yet (Russia did not even reach the city yet) so there is no battle to report (yet).Contributor892z (talk) 03:42, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I don't see a consensus here yet. Please work to give policy-based opinions on what should happen with this article. Thank you.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:28, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete A brief google search of "battle of chasiv yar" gives few results of such a thing existing, with very few mainstream sources. In my humble opinion, it would be better to write about this is a "post- battle of Bakmutt" framework rather than a distinct entity. For instance, as part of the "eastern front" of ukraine, after bakmutts fall, several villages fell after prolonged shelling and skirmishes, including chasiv yar. While I have no doubt many people have died in chasiv yar and much has been blown up, its not noteworthy enough (unlike mauripol, avdidivka, bakmutt). That could change o course, but for now delete.2605:A601:5553:B000:F5AC:CA05:A342:E541 (talk) 19:35, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously keep. By now, it's too late to delete this article. As of today, it was confirmed that Russian forces entered the city and there is already fighting inside city boundaries (check the ISW map). Alexis Coutinho (talk) 20:58, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep In respect to WP:CRYSTALBALL and WP:TOOSOON, this article maybe, probably, was made about a week or two too soon in retrospect. But as of the 4th and 5th of April, an increasing amount of news articles and RS are now mentioning clashes on the outskirts of, or even inside Chasiv Yar's administrative borders, and the Ukrainian command are now (publicly) saying the situation is deteriorating and at least becoming "tense". So, I am inclined to vote for keeping it at this point. And considering the Russians currently have the offensive initiative in the war (regardless of casualties) I personally do not expect or predict they will suddenly stop assaulting the city on their own after today, but will keep pushing and urban clashes will escalate, so the battle can be considered to have begun by at least today's date. Now, the EXACT date it began, that is still up for debate, assuming the article is even kept up after the discussions here.

Additionally, for the record, I am of the group of editors that believes the battle for a city can be considered to have begun before ground troops actually physically cross the city's administrative borders. A battle for a specific settlement can begin on the outskirts and on the approach towards it, before enemy troops actually physically enter said settlement, especially if the objectives and aims of the advance can be reasonably gleamed by general observers, even without any official government/military statements regarding specific objectives. I believe there's historical precedent for this as well, no? I believe other editors have provided examples above, if I'm not mistaken. RopeTricks (talk) 17:29, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Orlivka

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable. Fighting here is irrelevant, this is a continuation of the Battle of Avdiivka (2023–2024). After Avdiivka fell on 17 February Russian forces continued advancing until they were stopped on three villages as fighting became stalled again. These are Orlivka, Stepove and Tonenke. There is no need for this page, it can be covered either in the Battle of Avdiivka article or in the broader Eastern Ukraine campaign.

Uncountable content forks have been created as a result of this war and they've been continously deleted, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Tokmak, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Chuhuiv, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Dvorichna, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Krasnohorivka, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2024 Russian offensive and many many more. Super Ψ Dro 00:12, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Russia, and Ukraine. Super Ψ Dro 00:12, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:50, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Eastern Ukraine campaign#Avdiivka breakthrough (January 2024–present). This battle is much better presented as an aftereffect of the Battle of Avdiivka, and is not notable on its own (and none of the listed sources actually refer to this as a battle). Gödel2200 (talk) 13:15, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:16, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024 Polish airspace violation

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable. There is not much to say about this event that isn't in the article already. Furthermore, other than the deadly missile explosion in Przewodów in 2022, there have been several other events like these in Poland that we haven't given an article [3] [4]. Airspace violations in Moldova and Romania haven't got their own articles either, and they've been often, specially in Moldova. Simply I don't find this event notable. Super Ψ Dro 23:45, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Military, Poland, Russia, and Ukraine. Super Ψ Dro 23:45, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support. This seems to fail WP:TENYEARS. Jebiguess (talk) 01:49, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If there is no follow-up report, this article should be merged. In fact, the description in Timeline of the Russian invasion of Ukraine (1 December 2023 – present)#24 March is sufficient. 日期20220626 (talk) 02:28, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Article is sourced by RS, is very easily searchable on Google for dozens of other RS, and is about an event occurring on the same day as article creation and deletion. Nomination again is on the same day (i.e. less than 24 hours after the event occurred) so WP:RAPID is at play here (AfD less than 5 hours after creation of article). WP:DELAY was waiting for by over 12 hours after the event to help see notability, so the article was not rush created. The other events brought up amid the nomination also may be routine coverage events OR notable events to yet be created. Further research would have to be conducted to see which is the case, anyway that is a clear case of WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST, which is not valid for deletion. In short, the entire deletion nomination rests on WP:NEVENT, which it passess all criteria except for LASTING due to the very obvious RAPID deletion attempt. AfD should be closed as a Keep with the posibility of a future AfD OR merge discussion after it becomes clear (at least a week from now) if the event is routine or has lasting coverage. But yeah, keep due to a very poor RAPID deletion attempt. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 04:42, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If there were no further developments following Poland's protest to Russia, this article should obviously be merged. 日期20220626 (talk) 01:20, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

*Speedy close. I urge the nominator to take this to a merge or redirect discussion. There is no way this will be deleted as it's notable within a larger event. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 05:13, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AFD's can be closed as a merge or a redirect. There is no need for a speedy close. Esolo5002 (talk) 06:29, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I agree with the Weather Event Writer that WP:RAPID applies here. I doubt this will be notable enough for its own article but WP:Lasting coverage over the next few days and weeks are important in deciding notability. Esolo5002 (talk) 06:31, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:NOTNEWS. Event not worthy of an article. Wikipedia is not a news outlet. Ecrusized (talk) 08:44, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTNEWS, WP:TENYEARS. An event where a cruise missile strayed into a neighboring airspace for 39 seconds in the course of a major war, without any effect or apparent intention, is simply irrelevant to the extreme. MaeseLeon (talk) 08:55, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rename into a more generic article like Airspace violations during the Russian invasion of Ukraine, as there are more similar events that could be covered in 1 article. 82.174.61.58 (talk) 09:22, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Violations of non-combatant airspaces during the Russian invasion of Ukraine already exists. Super Ψ Dro 09:58, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rename as indeed "there have been several other events like these in Poland that we haven't given an article [1] [2]. Airspace violations in Moldova and Romania haven't got their own articles either, and they've been often, specially in Moldova." so this is a significant topic! Xobbitua (talk) 08:27, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, non notable as a indvidual event, one of the many such violations Marcelus (talk) 10:15, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As like some of the other similar violations covered in the Violations of non-combatant airspaces during the Russian invasion of Ukraine, this is not notable enough for its own article per WP:NOTNEWS. Gödel2200 (talk) 13:52, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This event had little-to-no effect on the wider conflict, and does not have the notability deserving of a separate article. Royz-vi Tsibele (talk) 19:49, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: no reason to expect WP:LASTING effects. Possibly worthy of a mention in other articles/lists, but definitely not notable enough for its own article. Rosbif73 (talk) 14:12, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. The only ones with an article in Violations of non-combatant airspaces during the Russian invasion of Ukraine have been crashes or have caused deaths. Simply not notable enough for its own article, especially considering similar such events have not had articles made. Sadustu Tau (talk) 17:01, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per NOTNEWS and lack of sustained coverage. Stop creating articles for events just because they appeared in the news. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:03, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep important military and political event, which almost led to a serious diplomatic crisis with the potential expulsion of the Russian ambassador [5] [6]. The details for an international event of this scale would be better in a separate article so as not to overload the more general articles, per Wikipedia:Content forks. — Baidax ^💬 22:26, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that Poland did not expel the Russian ambassador, so the missile intrusion into Polish airspace really has no big impact.--日期20220626 (talk) 11:43, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Poland–Russia relations#Russian invasion of Ukraine — I kind of agree with the notion that the content in Timeline of the Russian invasion of Ukraine (1 December 2023 – present)#24 March might be sufficient, but I think the main impact is on Poland-Russia relations and not as part of the war in Ukraine (just another salvo). It's been pointed out that Poland didn't take any real action ... but it is part of a set of events that might lead to a response, which is where my recommend for Poland-Russia relations comes from. Regards --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:44, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Poland–Russia relations#Russian invasion of Ukraine as there have been many airspace violations by Russia and this is not notable by itself. (unfortunately.. because there have been many such) ++Lar: t/c 01:55, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:03, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest to delete it again. As of now, it's obviously WP:NOTNEWS anymore as expected. It was a very minor event in a major war without significant consequences. Just contextualize and mention it in Violations of non-combatant airspaces during the Russian invasion of Ukraine or Poland–Russia relations#Russian invasion of Ukraine as suggested by others above. MaeseLeon (talk) 13:19, 1 April 2024 (UTC) (unbolding vote, you can not vote more than once. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:25, 2 April 2024 (UTC))[reply]

Delete The article is short and is not of key importance to the events for which it is worth creating it. If so, you can include this information in an existing article. KujKuń (talk) 14:59, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ukraine[edit]

Igor Fruman

Lev Parnas

Biopharma LLC

Roman Savchenko (footballer)

Skadovsk polling center bombing

Battle of Chasiv Yar

Battle of Orlivka

March 2024 Polish airspace violation

Others

Categories

Deletion reviews

Miscellaneous

Proposed deletions

Redirects

Templates

See also