![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | On 24 July 2022, it was proposed that this article be moved to Fall of Lysychansk. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
In casualties section there is "He also reported that this attack had been effectuated with cluster bombs, the use of which is banned by international law"
Do we need to mention this? Both Ukraine and Russia did not sign Convention on Cluster Munitions 125.165.110.25 ( talk) 09:37, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
Says RF rather than Russia for whatever reason, does not mention the Luhansk People’s Republic quasi state either. Also, Ukraine has disputed the battle being over. Also, what does the editor mean by “Chechen”? Also, it’s Wagner Group or PMC Wagner, not “Wagner PMC”. Overall just a lot of errors. 2600:1004:B117:24A0:78C0:8653:CA99:2215 ( talk) 17:11, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
Edit them yourself CubanoBoi ( talk) 21:54, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
If Russian reports are true, Lysychansk fell very quickly. If we included all the information about the battle for the city proper in the article, there would probably be not much and it would be a minor part of the article. Still, Lysychansk has been talked a lot about during this invasion, and this article remains necessary in my opinion even if the battle was as fast as it appears to have been. So we could move this page to "Fall of Lysychansk" following the example of Fall of Kabul (2021), as not much actually happened but it was a relevant event. Super Ψ Dro 22:58, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
I disagree... there has still been a week of fighting, I'd say it has been enough to be considered a battle. Potionkin ( talk) 11:50, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
Ok for me, the city was/is being captured in less than 10 days, other "fall of city" battles have range of time like Constantinople (53 days) or singapore (7 days) so this city battle is in the range of time to be called fall. DrYisus ( talk) 14:53, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
Battle is over, please, stop reverting to ongoing.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62030051 DrYisus ( talk) 19:52, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
It was confirmed as finished hours ago by the Ukrainians themselves (see https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid02KUS6NCfLiRTXJrfdm1sgwiTrpjrsX5VskaSavVFNcFYtHRehrMuEjTsY2H5XBuaXl?amp%3B__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R), but for some reason certain editors feel the need to ignore this and revert to "ongoing". And for what it's worth, now Zelensky has admitted (in his nightly address) that the city has been "temporarily" lost. YantarCoast ( talk) 19:55, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
The infobox states a figure of 2,218 killed, 3,251 wounded among Ukrainian soldiers. However, this is what the source states:
Since June 19, units of the Central group of troops commanded by Colonel General A.Lapin, in coordination with the units of 2nd Corps of People's Militia of the Lugansk People's Republic and with support of the Southern group of troops commanded by the General of the Army S.Surovikin, have successfully carried out an offensive operation for liberating the territory of the Lugansk People's Republic.Within two weeks, groups in Gorskoye, near Lisichansk and Severodonetsk had been encircled and eliminated. 25 settlements had been taken under control, the largest of them are Severodontsk, Zolotoye, Gorskoye, Volcheyarovka. The operation was finished yesterday with liberation of Lisichansk, one of the largest cities of the Lugansk People's Republic. In total, within intense offensive action, 670 square kilometres of territory had been taken under control. The Armed Forces of Ukraine had lost a total of 5,469 persons, including 2,218 dead, 3,251 wounded...
This figure is from June 19 to July 5. The source also clearly states that this includes dead Ukrainian soldiers from Sievierodonetsk, Zolote, etc etc. The battle of Lysychansk started June 25, and does not include Sievierodonetsk, Zolote, or any of the settlements listed above. Thus I think we should find a way to write it in the article somewhere, but it should not be in the infobox because it's very misleading. PilotSheng ( talk) 21:36, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
Volunteer Marek - In the interests of not wanting to start an edit war, I will provide my statement here. Russia has declared that Luhansk Oblast has fallen, on the basis of Lysychansk having fallen, and having been the last area necessary for the oblast to fall. Meanwhile, Ukraine has conceded that Lysychansk has fallen. Numerous credible reports from Western sources say that Lysychansk has fallen, and, by extension, the entire Luhansk Oblast. I would recommend describing that Luhansk Oblast has fallen unless there is evidence to the contary. Jargo Nautilus ( talk) 21:30, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved. Proposal has no traction. ( closed by non-admin page mover) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mello hi! ( 投稿) 22:10, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
Battle of Lysychansk → Fall of Lysychansk – I've just read the article and fighting from 25 June to 3 July in the area occurred mostly in the villages and towns surrounding Lysychansk, not in Lysychansk proper. Fighting in the city itself barely happened and when it did, it was mostly on its outskirts, specially the Lysychansk Oil Refinery from what I see. The article also includes one single sentence about confirmed fighting in the city's center which is followed in another paragraph by another sentence saying LPR "officials" were already claiming that Lysychansk was under their full control. This was not a serious battle like nearby Sievierodonetsk was. Lysychansk was arguably even more defensible than Sievierodonetsk and could have lasted longer had it not been part of an ever more narrow cauldron in the constant risk of being surrounded. Ukrainian forces stayed on the city until the last moment and withdrew when it was clear Lysychansk was surrounded, there was not a battle. So I believe the current title should not be kept, and "Fall of Lysychansk" seems like a viable alternative to me. Super Ψ Dro 17:30, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
result = Pyrrhic Russian & LPR victory (source: their failed conquest of Siversk) 209.202.201.238 ( talk) 02:43, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
The commanders in the infobox were removed
here with the edit summary: per WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE - entry not supported by body of article
. They were reinstated
here with additional editing such that they are now "mentioned" in the body of the article. Per
WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE, the infobox is for "key facts" and the body of the article should evidence how or why these commanders are key or significant.
WP:VNOT and
WP:NOTNEWS are also applicable in this case.
In part, the body text now reads: On 26 June, TASS reported that Russian and separatist forces commanded by Aleksandr Lapin and Esedulla Abachev[3] had entered the city from five directions and were isolating Ukrainian units, but this report could not be independently verified at the time.
That the presence of the forces that they allegedly commanded could not be independently verified is sufficient reason not to include them in the infobox (per
WP:VNOT and
WP:NOTNEWS). Also, there is attribution (at least up to had entered the city from five directions and were isolating Ukrainian units) to TASS, but this is not the case.
The the cited source places Zamid Chalaev's subordinates in Luhansk but not Lysychansk and they are reported to be performing the usual role of "protective detachments" - ie echelon troops. It does not place him commanding at Lysychansk.
The
source cited for Apti Alaudinov states: The withdrawal was confirmed on Russian state television by Apti Alaudinov, a commander from Russia’s Chechnya region stationed in Donbas
. He is a commander in Donbas that made a press statement. To assert from this that he commanded at Lysychansk is a leap of faith not supported by the source.
The source cited reports Marchuk as a battalion commander that was killed at Lysychansk. To be killed in battle is unfortunate and perhaps even careless but it does not of itself make a commander key or significant. Per units reported in the infobox, at face value this is an engagement between two divisional sized forces (plus or minus) and a battalion commander is well down in the pecking order. There is no reasonable justification for their inclusion unless it is evidenced that they and their battalion played a key role. This is not the case.
It strikes me that commanders have been added to the infobox for the sake of populating the parameter with something rather than with information (if it were known) that would actually be "key facts". The revised text is just trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Yes, they are now mentioned in the body of the article but the commanders added still fail WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE as to being "key facts". Cinderella157 ( talk) 11:21, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
only involved a few thousand soldiers, then the infobox listing of units is grossly misleading since it suggests an engagement between divisions (plus or minus) with a nominal size of 20,000 each. Cinderella157 ( talk) 23:48, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | On 24 July 2022, it was proposed that this article be moved to Fall of Lysychansk. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
In casualties section there is "He also reported that this attack had been effectuated with cluster bombs, the use of which is banned by international law"
Do we need to mention this? Both Ukraine and Russia did not sign Convention on Cluster Munitions 125.165.110.25 ( talk) 09:37, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
Says RF rather than Russia for whatever reason, does not mention the Luhansk People’s Republic quasi state either. Also, Ukraine has disputed the battle being over. Also, what does the editor mean by “Chechen”? Also, it’s Wagner Group or PMC Wagner, not “Wagner PMC”. Overall just a lot of errors. 2600:1004:B117:24A0:78C0:8653:CA99:2215 ( talk) 17:11, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
Edit them yourself CubanoBoi ( talk) 21:54, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
If Russian reports are true, Lysychansk fell very quickly. If we included all the information about the battle for the city proper in the article, there would probably be not much and it would be a minor part of the article. Still, Lysychansk has been talked a lot about during this invasion, and this article remains necessary in my opinion even if the battle was as fast as it appears to have been. So we could move this page to "Fall of Lysychansk" following the example of Fall of Kabul (2021), as not much actually happened but it was a relevant event. Super Ψ Dro 22:58, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
I disagree... there has still been a week of fighting, I'd say it has been enough to be considered a battle. Potionkin ( talk) 11:50, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
Ok for me, the city was/is being captured in less than 10 days, other "fall of city" battles have range of time like Constantinople (53 days) or singapore (7 days) so this city battle is in the range of time to be called fall. DrYisus ( talk) 14:53, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
Battle is over, please, stop reverting to ongoing.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62030051 DrYisus ( talk) 19:52, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
It was confirmed as finished hours ago by the Ukrainians themselves (see https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid02KUS6NCfLiRTXJrfdm1sgwiTrpjrsX5VskaSavVFNcFYtHRehrMuEjTsY2H5XBuaXl?amp%3B__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R), but for some reason certain editors feel the need to ignore this and revert to "ongoing". And for what it's worth, now Zelensky has admitted (in his nightly address) that the city has been "temporarily" lost. YantarCoast ( talk) 19:55, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
The infobox states a figure of 2,218 killed, 3,251 wounded among Ukrainian soldiers. However, this is what the source states:
Since June 19, units of the Central group of troops commanded by Colonel General A.Lapin, in coordination with the units of 2nd Corps of People's Militia of the Lugansk People's Republic and with support of the Southern group of troops commanded by the General of the Army S.Surovikin, have successfully carried out an offensive operation for liberating the territory of the Lugansk People's Republic.Within two weeks, groups in Gorskoye, near Lisichansk and Severodonetsk had been encircled and eliminated. 25 settlements had been taken under control, the largest of them are Severodontsk, Zolotoye, Gorskoye, Volcheyarovka. The operation was finished yesterday with liberation of Lisichansk, one of the largest cities of the Lugansk People's Republic. In total, within intense offensive action, 670 square kilometres of territory had been taken under control. The Armed Forces of Ukraine had lost a total of 5,469 persons, including 2,218 dead, 3,251 wounded...
This figure is from June 19 to July 5. The source also clearly states that this includes dead Ukrainian soldiers from Sievierodonetsk, Zolote, etc etc. The battle of Lysychansk started June 25, and does not include Sievierodonetsk, Zolote, or any of the settlements listed above. Thus I think we should find a way to write it in the article somewhere, but it should not be in the infobox because it's very misleading. PilotSheng ( talk) 21:36, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
Volunteer Marek - In the interests of not wanting to start an edit war, I will provide my statement here. Russia has declared that Luhansk Oblast has fallen, on the basis of Lysychansk having fallen, and having been the last area necessary for the oblast to fall. Meanwhile, Ukraine has conceded that Lysychansk has fallen. Numerous credible reports from Western sources say that Lysychansk has fallen, and, by extension, the entire Luhansk Oblast. I would recommend describing that Luhansk Oblast has fallen unless there is evidence to the contary. Jargo Nautilus ( talk) 21:30, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved. Proposal has no traction. ( closed by non-admin page mover) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mello hi! ( 投稿) 22:10, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
Battle of Lysychansk → Fall of Lysychansk – I've just read the article and fighting from 25 June to 3 July in the area occurred mostly in the villages and towns surrounding Lysychansk, not in Lysychansk proper. Fighting in the city itself barely happened and when it did, it was mostly on its outskirts, specially the Lysychansk Oil Refinery from what I see. The article also includes one single sentence about confirmed fighting in the city's center which is followed in another paragraph by another sentence saying LPR "officials" were already claiming that Lysychansk was under their full control. This was not a serious battle like nearby Sievierodonetsk was. Lysychansk was arguably even more defensible than Sievierodonetsk and could have lasted longer had it not been part of an ever more narrow cauldron in the constant risk of being surrounded. Ukrainian forces stayed on the city until the last moment and withdrew when it was clear Lysychansk was surrounded, there was not a battle. So I believe the current title should not be kept, and "Fall of Lysychansk" seems like a viable alternative to me. Super Ψ Dro 17:30, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
result = Pyrrhic Russian & LPR victory (source: their failed conquest of Siversk) 209.202.201.238 ( talk) 02:43, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
The commanders in the infobox were removed
here with the edit summary: per WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE - entry not supported by body of article
. They were reinstated
here with additional editing such that they are now "mentioned" in the body of the article. Per
WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE, the infobox is for "key facts" and the body of the article should evidence how or why these commanders are key or significant.
WP:VNOT and
WP:NOTNEWS are also applicable in this case.
In part, the body text now reads: On 26 June, TASS reported that Russian and separatist forces commanded by Aleksandr Lapin and Esedulla Abachev[3] had entered the city from five directions and were isolating Ukrainian units, but this report could not be independently verified at the time.
That the presence of the forces that they allegedly commanded could not be independently verified is sufficient reason not to include them in the infobox (per
WP:VNOT and
WP:NOTNEWS). Also, there is attribution (at least up to had entered the city from five directions and were isolating Ukrainian units) to TASS, but this is not the case.
The the cited source places Zamid Chalaev's subordinates in Luhansk but not Lysychansk and they are reported to be performing the usual role of "protective detachments" - ie echelon troops. It does not place him commanding at Lysychansk.
The
source cited for Apti Alaudinov states: The withdrawal was confirmed on Russian state television by Apti Alaudinov, a commander from Russia’s Chechnya region stationed in Donbas
. He is a commander in Donbas that made a press statement. To assert from this that he commanded at Lysychansk is a leap of faith not supported by the source.
The source cited reports Marchuk as a battalion commander that was killed at Lysychansk. To be killed in battle is unfortunate and perhaps even careless but it does not of itself make a commander key or significant. Per units reported in the infobox, at face value this is an engagement between two divisional sized forces (plus or minus) and a battalion commander is well down in the pecking order. There is no reasonable justification for their inclusion unless it is evidenced that they and their battalion played a key role. This is not the case.
It strikes me that commanders have been added to the infobox for the sake of populating the parameter with something rather than with information (if it were known) that would actually be "key facts". The revised text is just trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Yes, they are now mentioned in the body of the article but the commanders added still fail WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE as to being "key facts". Cinderella157 ( talk) 11:21, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
only involved a few thousand soldiers, then the infobox listing of units is grossly misleading since it suggests an engagement between divisions (plus or minus) with a nominal size of 20,000 each. Cinderella157 ( talk) 23:48, 4 August 2023 (UTC)