Langbahn Team – Weltmeisterschaft

Talk:Battle of Bakhmut: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Xan747 (talk | contribs)
Extended confirmed users
1,798 edits
→Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 July 2023: closed as not done, no rs; gave strong warning that their repeated failure to provide citations is disruptive
Line 210: Line 210:
== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 July 2023 ==
== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 July 2023 ==


{{edit extended-protected|Battle of Bakhmut|answered=no}}
{{edit extended-protected|Battle of Bakhmut|answered=y}}
[[User:DitorWiki|DitorWiki]] ([[User talk:DitorWiki|talk]]) 11:51, 14 July 2023 (UTC) Yevgeny Prigozhin is not currently commander of the Battle of Bakhmut. Wagner Group is also not currently fighting on the Battlefield.they withdrew all their forces from Bakhmut on 5 June 2023.
Yevgeny Prigozhin is not currently commander of the Battle of Bakhmut. Wagner Group is also not currently fighting on the Battlefield.they withdrew all their forces from Bakhmut on 5 June 2023.
Thus, it should be written as :
Thus, it should be written as :


Line 217: Line 217:


PMC WAGNER (Until 5 June 2023.
PMC WAGNER (Until 5 June 2023.

[[User:DitorWiki|DitorWiki]] ([[User talk:DitorWiki|talk]]) 11:51, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

[[File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done:''' please provide [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable sources]] that support the change you want to be made.<!-- Template:EEp -->

You habitually fail to provide citations to support the changes you ask for, which is considered [[wp:disruptive]] behavior. If you continue doing this, you may be reported. [[User:Xan747|Xan747]] ([[User talk:Xan747|talk]]) 17:29, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:29, 14 July 2023

RFC, battle over.

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result was no. Despite a general recognition that the outcome here should be based on consensus in reliable sources, there has been no analysis of any sources in this discussion. Any future RfC on this topic should include some kind of source assessment. voorts (talk/contributions) 22:49, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]



Should we say the battle is over, and that Russia has won? Slatersteven (talk) 17:06, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notes

  1. The scope of this article is defined by the lead, which states: The battle of Bakhmut is a series of military engagements in and near the city of Bakhmut ... [emphasis added] (ie it is about the battle for Bakhmut).
  2. The question of whether the battle is over is determined by a consensus of independent reliable sources explicitly telling us that the battle for Bhakmut is over.
  3. Statements like: Source X says "blah blah blah" therefore the battle is over, fall to WP:SYNTH. Sources should be telling us the battle is over or make an unambiguous and conclusively similar statement that requires no analysis or interpretation.

Cinderella157 (talk) 09:18, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes

  • Yes - The battle is over, even though there still remains small pockets of resistance in the outskirts and suburbs. Can Ukraine retake the city in a hypothetical future "spring"-offensive, or in a new attack a year or two from now? Sure, but that's hypothetical and speculative. The fact of the matter is that right now, the battle is over and the Russians have won and are in control of the city. If this battle is to be regarded as still ongoing, we also have to change the status of other battles that are listed as won by the Ukrainians to ongoing, as there are still attacks from the Russians on many places held by Ukraine. Even the Battle of Kyiv (2022) or Battle of Kharkiv (2022) can be changed to ongoing as there are still attacks with drones and missiles and the Russians can try to retake it later. 2A01:799:1B9B:C300:25D3:B49C:68AA:E95D (talk) 23:54, 4 June 2023 (UTC) striking non-WP:ECP user !vote, per WP:RUSUKR sanctions. Fieari (talk) 05:36, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No

  • No Just because the city is in Russian control does not mean the battle is over, as Ukraine is still conducting attacks to re-take the city. I don't intend this example to be a false equivalence, as the scale is wildly different, but the Battle of Stalingrad did not end simply because the Germans took the city, as the battle continued. Curbon7 (talk) 18:37, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Additionally, as stated below, reliable sources are still in agreement that the battle is ongoing, despite Russian claims. Curbon7 (talk) 20:03, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • No Per lack of WP:RELIABLE sources and WP:RECENTISM. As soon as reliable sources confirm the situation, then we should reflect that. (Hohum @) 19:28, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • No Prigozhin himself conceded that Russia never fully controlled the city and that the Ukrainian army still holds portions of the city's southwest. Scu ba (talk) 01:12, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • No. There may be a case to say that a battle is over here. I see some sources implying it is ended, while avoiding explicitly saying so. But “Russia won”? Well the infobox certainly should not say “Result: Russian victory.” Many sources say “claimed victory,” “pyrrhic victory,” “doubtful victory,” or uses scare quotes for “Russian ‘victory.’” Virtually none say Russian victory. It’s likely Ukrainian forces accomplished what they intended: exploiting the defenders’ advantage to massively attrit Russian forces over ten months (taking the ruins of a town of 75k pre-war population at a cost of 100k casualties!), while the Russians wasted their initiative and 300k mobilization until their offensive culminated. Sources say so in so many words (e.g., “After Russia’s abortive and ill-conceived winter offensive, which squandered its opportunity to consolidate its forces, Ukraine is in a relatively strong position”).[1] That is not victory, according to reliable sources. —Michael Z. 03:08, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • No - Sources I've seen are pretty much in agreement that while Ukraine is out of the main city, the battle isn't over. The flanking and attempts at encirclement are reported as being a continued part of the same battle, regardless of physical presence inside the city. Fieari (talk) 05:31, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • No: I can't even find sources reliably stating that the battle is over, let alone a Russian victory. Wikipedia isn't The News, and we can afford to wait for meaningful information before making significant changes. Akakievich (talk) 10:03, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • So far - No Noting the scope of the article, I have yet to see sources presented that would unambiguously tell us the battle for Bakhmut is over. Cinderella157 (talk) 10:02, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • No As it is not clear (as RS disagree) its true. Slatersteven (talk) 13:27, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • No see my last edit regarding village of Berkhivka. Eastfarthingan (talk) 15:41, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, but it'd make sense to add some sort of divide between the Russian seizure of most of Bakhmut by May 20-22, and Ukrainian flanking counterattacks. If not, then it should stay as is, since Russia is known to lack a good grip on the situation, and many sources say that the battle is ongoing, primarily in flanking areas. Presidentofyes12 (talk) 18:33, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • No At least for now. I would not be totally shocked if, at some point in the future, there is more clarity among reliable sources in assessing that the May 21 time period would be considered the end to the battle. But there is certainly not yet that consensus. Thankfully, we are not the news, and have the luxury of waiting and assessing this consensus rather than piecing together a determination ourselves in real time.--Yaksar (let's chat) 13:42, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • No. Even if the entire city was taken (it was not or very much in doubt), that would not constitute a "victory". The battle is currently ongoing in a large area around the city and close to it. My very best wishes (talk) 19:26, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Seems to me time for an RFC, as we are getting nowhere. Please keep comments brief if possible. Slatersteven (talk) 17:06, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note I have only given two options as either the battle is over (and someone won, and no one has claimed that is Ukraine) or it is not over, so no one has won. Slatersteven (talk) 17:13, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can we also not change the page, until we have consensus? Slatersteven (talk) 17:56, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note wp:v it must say X. So sources saying "effectively came to an end on Sunday." do not say it has ended. They have to say it has ended. Slatersteven (talk) 17:09, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is why we are not a newspaper, we can't have daily live updates. We should wait until the dust has settled and we have a clear idea of what and who. Lets the historians decide when it ended, and who won, and then we repeat them, not new paper clickbait. Slatersteven (talk) 17:15, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note as well that the RFC closer may only take note of arguments made here, not on my talk page or in other threads. Slatersteven (talk) 17:16, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also (right now) we are heading for a snow close as there has not been one policy compliant yes vote. Slatersteven (talk) 14:14, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In terms of managing the disruptive editing at the article and the TP, it is beneficial to keep this open - perhaps until we can say that the battle is over. Cinderella157 (talk) 22:33, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think there is a good consensus that the battle has not ended and recommend a close so we can get to other things. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:08, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Knowledgekid87, I agree that the consensus at this point is that the battle is not over at this point in time. However, this is a dynamic question, in that the question remains valid until the battle is actually over. Furthermore, editors will continue to press the question. The RfC serves the purpose of centralising such discussion and minimising disruption. Considering all of this, there is good reason to keep this RfC open until the real world issue is resolved. Cinderella157 (talk) 06:05, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would strongly suggest only leaving the RFC open until the typical 1 month duration has elapsed, and only start a new one if NEW information is available, or if someone can say that reliable sources at that point are starting to find consensus towards declaring the battle over/to have been over. But I do think leaving it open for the 1 month is wise, simply because following procedure to the letter can work as a nice shield against brigading and trolls. Don't give them any ammunition, even if a snow close would usually be fine. Fieari (talk) 05:09, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We can certainly wait until there is more clarity and there is consensus in RS. However no one disputes that at the moment the city itself is under control of the Russian forces and this is important enough to mention in the infobox. Alaexis¿question? 13:28, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

we are an encyclopedia, not a live news feed. Slatersteven (talk) 13:41, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Can we close this RFC? The overwhelming consensus for "no" has been clear for weeks. HappyWith (talk) 16:23, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Its been clear since day 1. Slatersteven (talk) 16:26, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Slatersteven (talk) 17:06, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"despite Russia’s claim of victory " https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/ukrainian-troops-not-backing-down-despite-russias-claim-of-victory-in-bakhmut

"Ukraine says battle for Bakhmut continues in the outskirts of the city" https://uk.news.yahoo.com/ukraine-says-battle-bakhmut-continues-170453374.html

"repelled but Wagner chief says ground lost in Bakhmut" https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russian-ukraine-war-putin-counteroffensive-latest-b2351361.html These all seem to say it is not over yet. Slatersteven (talk) 17:13, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Kyiv claims gains in Bakhmut" https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-claims-gains-bakhmut-amid-reports-counteroffensive-russia-hanna-maliar/ Slatersteven (talk) 16:36, 9 June 2023 (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.

Sources confirming Russian victory.

The purpose of the OP was to contribute these sources to the RfC at #RFC, battle over. This aim has been achieved. However, this section should not become a discussion fork of the RfC and is being close for that reason. This section should not be move to archives until the RfC has been closed. Cinderella157 (talk) 00:30, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion 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.

Reposted because it is simply unfair to remove this overwhelming amount of evidence that cannot be submitted to the RFC, where it was outright removed instead of being struck, as well the thread presenting it being "archived". This must be left up to ensure for all who support changing the status to Russian victory, especially ECP users, have the resources available to fight for a neutral and good wiki article.

"Brutal Battle for Bakhmut Leaves Russia With an Uncertain Victory" "The nine-month battle for the small Ukrainian city of Bakhmut effectively came to an end on Sunday." - WSJ 21st May

"Russian forces capture Bakhmut, a symbolic but costly victory" "President Vladimir Putin's first major battlefield victory in nearly a year is a symbolic prize that comes as his troops are being forced onto the backfoot around the city and beyond." "Russian forces have claimed full control of Bakhmut, ending an intense months long battle for the eastern city that came to embody Ukrainian resistance." "The news will serve as a symbolic boost for Russian President Vladimir Putin, but his first major battlefield victory in nearly a year may be a fleeting one, with his military forced onto the backfoot around the city and beyond." "It holds no longer, but Kyiv may believe it has served its purpose." "Western officials and military analysts have said that Russia's capturing Bakhmut would be a blow for Ukraine but was unlikely to prove a decisive turning point in the conflict."- NBC News 21st may

"Putin's hollow victory: The capture of Bakhmut in numbers" "The capture of Bakhmut may be hailed as a victory in Moscow, but the battle also served a purpose in Kyiv. Russia finally has a win. But at what cost?" - Telegraph 22nd May

"Fall of Bakhmut would signal ‘a Pyrrhic victory for Wagner’" "This is a Pyrrhic victory for Wagner,” Lieutenant General Ihor Romanenko, former deputy chief of the General Staff of Ukraine’s armed forces, told Al Jazeera." "But the counterattack was apparently aimed at saving the remaining Ukrainian servicemen, a military analyst said. “The goal has been achieved,” Nikolay Mitrokhin of Germany’s Bremen University told Al Jazeera. “The [city] has been abandoned.”" "Bakhmut’s fall may delay a much bigger counteroffensive in the south, especially in the Zaporizhia region, where Kyiv had been amassing forces in recent weeks, he said."- Al Jazeera 22nd May

"Bakhmut falls, but is it really a Russian victory?" "The 200-plus day siege may be over, but what comes next is not exactly to Moscow’s benefit" "The eastern Ukrainian town of Bakhmut, captured by Russian forces after more than 220 days of house-to-house fighting, is unique in that it comes with its own supply of bubbly to celebrate the victory." - Singapore Straits Times (OPINION) 23rd May

"When you think about the difficulty Russia has had taking Bakhmut, it doesn't bode well for the future," Jeffrey Edmonds, a Russia expert and former CIA military analyst, told Insider earlier this year." - Business Insider 23rd May

"Ukraine’s Deputy Defense Minister Hanna Malyar said on May 23 that Kyiv's forces had made some progress "on the flanks to the north and south of Bakhmut." But she acknowledged that Russian forces had taken the control of the city itself and continued to "clear areas" they held." - Radio Free Europe 23rd May

"Moscow’s ‘pyrrhic victory’ in Bakhmut prompts unrest in the Russian military" "You’d be inclined to agree with the description proffered by the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) that this was a “pyrrhic victory”. - The Conversation 25th May

"What to Know About Russia’s Capture of Bakhmut in Ukraine" "Ukraine, whose forces have made small gains on the outskirts, has signaled that it is now focused on making it difficult for Moscow to hold onto the city." "Whatever comes next, Ukraine’s setback in Bakhmut is a significant moment in Russia’s invasion, its first military success since last summer." " but Kyiv has all but conceded that the intense and bloody defense of the city is over." "But on Monday, a deputy Ukrainian defense minister, Hanna Maliar, essentially acknowledged that the city had been lost, saying that the Russians were “mopping up” to clear the remaining Ukrainian soldiers from the ruins." - NYT 25th May

"Moscow’s forces will struggle to capitalize on their first major victory in months after a battle that depleted them" "Russian forces have succeeded in taking control of the small eastern Ukrainian city of Bakhmut." - WSJ 25th May

"The capture of the eastern Ukrainian city of Bakhmut by the Wagner paramilitary group has given Moscow a rare and very costly victory." - NYT 30th May

"After 10 months of warfare, ground assaults have largely come to a halt and the guns have mostly fallen silent in the city of Bakhmut." "“There are no active battles there – neither in the city, nor on the flanks,” Ukraine’s Deputy Defence Minister Hanna Maliar" - Al Jazeera 31st May

"Ukrainian battalion commander Oleg Shiryaev warned his men in nearby trenches that Russian forces were advancing across a field toward a patch of trees outside the city of Bakhmut." "“The goal in Bakhmut is not Bakhmut itself, which has been turned into ruins,” military analyst Roman Svitan said by phone. The goal for the Ukrainians is to hold on to the western heights and maintain a defensive arc outside the city." - AP 4th June

"Moscow hammered Bakhmut, while Ukraine tried to hang onto the eastern city for as long as possible. The Ukrainians finally withdrew from the city last month" - WSJ 5th June

@Bobnesh FYI

Nebakin (talk) 16:18, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We have an RFC, comment there. Slatersteven (talk) 16:21, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
They can't, cuz of the general sanctions. – robertsky (talk) 16:28, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If they can't post there their contribution is pointless, and they are wasting out time. Slatersteven (talk) 16:34, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This post is literally a copy of this. Nythar (💬-🍀) 16:55, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
One possible way is to agree on whether these sources can go into the Sources section in the RfC. I think we should on good faith. – robertsky (talk) 17:35, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If people think it will make a difference nothing is stopping anyone. Slatersteven (talk) 17:37, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That evidence is not very discriminating.
Anyway, today’s news:
 —Michael Z. 19:51, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If the Battle of Bakhmut only constitutes the fighting in the urban areas of Bakhmut, then the starting date of 1 August is also false. But so far the article encompasses the entire concentration of fighting around Bakhmut. Ultimately, the segmentation and naming of battles is not an objective thing, it's up for convention. It's not uncommon for battles to be named of the nearest major landmark even if no fighting is going on exactly there - Kursk, Verdun, etc. It might make sense to segment the urban fighting in Bakhmut that did end around 20th May, and the larger-scale battle in and around Bakhmut. Like how the Battle of Stalingrad commonly refers to more than just the urban fighting within the city of Stalingrad. Or the Budapest offensive is more than just the urban fighting in Budapest.
The important thing is, will fighting continue. If the Ukrainian counterattacks continue for the control of Bakhmut, then there is currently a battle going on for the control of Bakhmut, even if not IN Bakhmut (whatever that exactly means), much like how the Russians can fight the Battle of Avdiivka without really entering the urban core of Avdiivka. If there was a gap in the fighting, it might make sense to segment it as two separate battles, but that's not the case, the counterattacks started even before 20th May. Still, the fighting might die down, and in retrospective we can draw the end wherever it make sense from hindsight.
This is not about trying to hide the fact that Russians control the city itself. It's that we need to have an article for the current fighting too, and it makes no sense to segment it into another article if the fighting before and around the urban core isn't. Vauia Rex (talk) 15:01, 10 June 2023 (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.

Remove Wagner as combatant

Russia has begun assimilating Wagner elements in Ukraine into the regular forces. So should it not be included under Russia or be removed altogether? Sng Pal (talk) 07:02, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

no, thats not how this works. Combatants are groups that fought in the battle. are you claiming wagner was never present in bakhmut? Scu ba (talk) 01:14, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
it should be written as :
Wagner Group (until 5 June 2023)
Yevgeny Prigozhin (until 5 June 2023) DitorWiki (talk) 02:45, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Battle has been over for 2 months

It needs to be changed to Russian victory Napalm Guy (talk) 17:17, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

HAs it, see the RFC. Slatersteven (talk) 17:23, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
read the RfC, to summarize, Russia never fully controlled the city, and there is still fighting in the suburbs. the battle also started before Russian forces entered city limits.Scu ba (talk) 01:15, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Commanders and leaders section

Yevgeny prigozhin is not the Russian side commander since he completely withdrew all his troops from in and around bakhmut on May 10.the commander of the Russian forces should be written as unknown if someone doesn't no who is the commander DitorWiki (talk) 00:35, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. It should list the military commander in charge of the military district or grouping of forces that includes Bakhmut. The info may be buried in ISW’s special backgrounder on command,[2] but I ran out of time trying to find it there.
See also Talk:Battle of Bakhmut/Archive 2#Infobox commanders.  —Michael Z. 01:12, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with your point DitorWiki (talk) 02:43, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As I have said before (eg Talk:Battle of Bakhmut/Archive 2#Infobox commanders), such entries in the infobox should be supported by the article to tell us why they are key or significant - per WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE and the template documentation. This is done for the two that appear at present. A bare name in the infobox (what is required when placing an entry there) tells us nothing about them without supporting material in the article - noting that an article must be able to stand alone. Cinderella157 (talk) 03:21, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
INFOBOXPURPOSE tells us to include key specialized information in the infobox. Every belligerent force in every battle has a commander with unique influence on it, and their identity is k.s.i.  —Michael Z. 15:05, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
thats not how infoboxes work. they list all combatants and commanders throughout the battle. are you claiming wagner and prigozhin where never involved? because that is the only way they would get removed from the infobox.Scu ba (talk) 01:16, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Prigozhin and the Wagner group were involved in the battle of bakhmut until their complete withdrawal from bakhmut on June 5. Thus, it should be written in Belligerent and the Commander & leaders section that prigozhin and the Wagner were Belligerents until June 5. DitorWiki (talk) 02:42, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Request 10 July 2023

I Request an Edit request because their are many mistakes (e.g Yevgeny Prigozhin was the commander of the battle of Bakhmut but now he is not & The Wagner Group is currently not a combatant) even after many Talk the changes aren't being made. DitorWiki (talk) 02:47, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Valid points who is the current commander of the Russian forces in the battle? Slatersteven (talk) 13:33, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Valery Geresimov is the overall commander of all the Russian forces in Ukraine. So If we don't no who is the commander of the region we can write Valery Geresimov. DitorWiki (talk) 16:33, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What I said in the section above. Cinderella157 (talk) 23:55, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think WP:RS would be helpful here. Dcdiehardfan (talk) 23:47, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why should battle of Bakhmut be the first battle that never finish?

This is biased. I do not want to see such low quality wikipedia article.

206.176.151.170 (talk) 19:50, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unconstructive comment, and also this is a relatively high quality article compared to other ones. The lead section is pretty strong and the reason why it's going on for so long is bc it's a fiercely contested city. Do you have any actual complaints or suggestions for improvement? Dcdiehardfan (talk) 23:48, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Fighting Continues in and around the City. Russian forces Haven't captured all of the city some portion of Bakhmut are still under control of Ukraine Where heavy fighting continues. That's why it is called the Longest batte of the Russian invasion of Ukraine.DitorWiki (talk) 11:57, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It won't be, at some point the war will finish and then RS will decide if this was one battle or many battles. At that point historical analysis will tell us when it ended, and who won. Slatersteven (talk) 12:01, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 July 2023

Yevgeny Prigozhin is not currently commander of the Battle of Bakhmut. Wagner Group is also not currently fighting on the Battlefield.they withdrew all their forces from Bakhmut on 5 June 2023. Thus, it should be written as :

Yevgeny Prigozhin (Until 5 June 2023)

PMC WAGNER (Until 5 June 2023.

DitorWiki (talk) 11:51, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.

You habitually fail to provide citations to support the changes you ask for, which is considered wp:disruptive behavior. If you continue doing this, you may be reported. Xan747 (talk) 17:29, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Quelle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special%3ADiff%2F1165359453