Battle of Vilnius (1812) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

This article is an AI-generated hoax about a fictional "Battle of Vilnius". The absolute majority of the article does not describe an actual battle but instead discusses broader aspects of Napoleon's invasion of Russia, logistical issues, and unrelated details, going as far as to mention Napoleon's exile to Saint Helena. In reality, there was no significant combat in Vilnius during this time. As the article itself shows, the city was abandoned by the Russians and captured by the French with essentially no resistance. The only actual statement about the "Battle of Vilnius" in the whole article is:

Yet the article absurdly claims that:

As for the "second battle" of Vilnius (the distinction between the first and second battles is only made in the infobox), once again there is no evidence of a battle:

The article is also AI-generated: for example, subsections like "Weather and Logistical Struggles" and "Supply Issues" (both under two lines long) follow a predictable pattern, typical of content generated by AI models. The "Artifacts" section, also clearly AI-generated, is backed by a reliable source that makes no mention of this so-called battle, simply stating that Napoleonic artifacts were found in Vilnius. Other issues include a "Background" section that explains how the campaign "reshaped European geopolitics", mostly addressing events that happened after the "battle", unrelated images (including one with no caption at all), and absurd army sizes and casualty numbers (quoted above) in the infobox. Excommunicato (talk) 19:48, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, France, and Russia. Shellwood (talk) 20:08, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete per WP:G3. The recent history of the article should give anyone pause, and the writing style clearly smacks of ChatGPT. jeschaton (immanentize) 20:11, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete per above evidence. I think Jeschaton's comment about the recent history might be referring to the large number of unsourced changes, including corrections to names. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:49, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was referring to the recent creation date of the article, allegedly about a vital battle that would have reasonably had an article made years ago. But yes, these edits are troubling. jeschaton (immanentize) 02:13, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:24, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have added precautionary tags on articles they have been involved with creating: Bad Zwischenahn Airfield, Winter Airfield, Middle Guard (Napoleonic) – The Grid (talk) 20:49, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bad Zwischenahn Airfield looks suspicious, with its extremely short paragraphs and an apparent contradiction about how it was repurposed by Canada after it was destroyed. I can't find any reliable evidence that "Luftdienstverband" (mentioned in the infobox) existed. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:55, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete per the above !votes. XOR'easter (talk) 23:23, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete I don't know much, if anything really, about Napoleon, so at first glance I would have believed this page was a real battle that happened. The fact that it's ai generated is upsetting. RossEvans19 (talk) 02:42, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lithuania and Poland. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:17, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. I noticed that on pl wiki, a few months ago an IP created a slightly different, seemingly a bit better article about what our article describeds as "9–10 December 1812 (second battle)". (I've connected interwiki). While that article doesn't quote much academic sources, the websites it quotes are likely not AI generated - minor Polish newspaper from 2012 [1], or [2] (can't figure out when that was created, however). Those sources certainly contradict the nom's (Shellwood) claim that "In reality, there was no significant combat in Vilnius during this time.", although Shellwood is correct with regards to the first battle (whcih, indeed, was not a thing). The second battle (ie. the proper first and only battle of Vilnius of 1812) is likely notable. Whether anything can be rescued from the mess nominated here, I am unsure. WP:TNT may be warranted, and overview of all articles created by that user may also be needed. Ping User:Marcelus, whom I recall being interested in similar topics. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:30, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus: I'm not the nom. Shellwood (talk) 12:18, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Shellwood My bad, @Excommunicato _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:27, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, @Piotrus, for tagging me in this discussion. Indeed, in 1812, Napoleon aimed for a decisive battle with the Russians on Lithuanian territory, preferably near Vilnius, but such a battle never occurred. The Russians retreated, burning bridges and food depots behind them. However, the occupation of Vilnius was not entirely without conflict. A skirmish took place between Rykantai and Vilnius, as well as clashes between Polish and French cavalry and Russian Cossacks in Antakalnis. In the latter skirmish, Octave de Ségur was captured by the Russians, becoming the first prisoner of the 1812 campaign. Civilians, mainly students, also fought against Russian troops leaving the city.

Similarly, in December, there were no major battles but numerous engagements, including a significant skirmish near Ponary, where retreating French forces lost a large portion of their convoy and the imperial treasury.

Therefore, I propose moving the article to Napoleon's entry into Vilnius in 1812 and potentially creating a separate article titled Occupation of Vilnius by Russian Forces in 1812. Napoleon's entry into Vilnius was an important political event and, as such, deserves its own dedicated article. Marcelus (talk) 12:15, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. KeyMen12 (talk) 16:41, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for my mistake; I was misled by a list of Vilnius battles that mentioned the Battle of Vilnius (1812). After doing some research, I found that the Battle of Vilnius (1812) is not widely recognized as a distinct or formal battle in historical records. KeyMen12 (talk) 09:55, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@KeyMen12 Checking Polish sources, this is not a common term either. Here there is a brief mention that Napoleon wanted to create it in the summer of 1812, but the Russians evaded contact outside small skirmishes. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:29, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to work on this, check [3] and even more importantly, check the works this cites, since the reliability of this website is unclear. Of course, you'd need to be able to get offline Polish works and read them... _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:36, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do wonder why you did not simply translate the article from pl wiki? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:36, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• HARD DELETE: This is clearly WP:G3 and is quite frankly an insult. Mamani1990 (talk) 01:59, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as a hoax and essay - if anything, this would properly be titled about the retreat of Napoleon's army through Vilnius. Bearian (talk) 03:43, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete as per WP:G3. The page is a brazen hoax masquerading as fact. TH1980 (talk) 23:43, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]