Talk:2024 Ankara prisoner exchange

Article title

Why is this called 'American'-Russian prisoner exchange, given that most (non-Russian) prisoners exchanged aren't actually American? 192.76.8.93 (talk) 14:52, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

I created this article without being aware that other non-Russian prisoners were being released other than Gershkovich and Whelan. However, the exchange occurred between the U.S. and Russia. Russian Wikipedia is using the title "Prisoner exchange between Russia and the West", which is not ideal, either; "the West" is a colloquialism. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 14:57, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

13 of the 26 western prisoners are to be released to Germany. Germany is releasing the most high-value Russian we know of de:Wadim Nikolajewitsch Krassikow. The US wasn't even the leading force behind this, Germany was in long talks with Russia for the release of Navaly and family.

2024 Ankara prisoner exchange maybe? Beliar (talk) 15:34, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

I would appreciate it if someone would change the article title to "2024 Russian prisoner exchange" for the time being, or, until a new proposal is made. I have the privileges but don't know how to do it on mobile...
— Urro^{[talk][edits]} ⋮ 15:31, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

But Belarus is also in the mix. Russia is not alone on one side of this exchange. Rutsq (talk) 15:36, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

The place of the exchange seems to be the best descriptor when we don't want any vague terms. And since Turkey MIT is very activly involved, this is no false focus. Saying this is an American exchange really feels wrong reading the list of prisoners in the Russian article Beliar (talk) 15:43, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Out of all of the articles I have seen on the topic, every single one includes "Russia" at the least. Most say "between Russia and America", while others say "between Russia and the West". So, I have changed the article title to "2024 Russian prisoner exchange" for now. It will likely be changed in the future. You are each right to say that it is uninclusive to label it as "American-Russian", but I do not know what else it could be named... It is hard to generalize this for a fit title, in my opinion.
— Urro^{[talk][edits]} ⋮ 18:58, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

I like the German Wikipedia's article title. See 2024 international prisoner exchange and August 2024 international prisoner exchange.
— Urro^{[talk][edits]} ⋮ 19:04, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

The current title seems to be OK. One should focus on describing the people involved, especially on the Russian side (e.g. [1], etc.) My very best wishes (talk) 19:40, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

All four countries on the "West" side are NATO members. Would "NATO-Russian prisoner exchange" work? OneGyT (talk) 16:05, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

No, this is not a common name and a poor descriptive name. However, 2024 international prisoner exchange, as suggested by Urro just above, would be OK. My very best wishes (talk) 16:17, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Seconding this Benica11 (talk) 03:40, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Third, but we might want to check if there are other earlier international prisoner exchange this year to prevent confusion Cherry567 (talk) 10:24, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

I didn't see this article until after the change to the new (albeit described as temporary) title, and my immediate thought is that the title says "Russian" but the first sentence only mentions the United States. While it's true that Russia represents the majority of one side of this exchange and the title is sufficient to identify which event it's referring to, I believe it currently fails the naturalness and recognizability parts of WP:CRITERIA. I too don't have any alternative ideas at this time, but if there was a vote and "2024 Russian prisoner exchange" was the proposed title, I would vote no. Andrew11374265 (talk) 15:51, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Obviously, all the prisoners were either held by Russia or were Russians. Hence, the title is not entirely unreasonable, although probably not optimal. My very best wishes (talk) 22:35, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

One person was part of the swap who was neither (specifically Rico Krieger, a German detained in Belarus). Andrew11374265 (talk) 03:28, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

True. My very best wishes (talk) 19:35, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

I do not want to re-open this topic all over but have you seen the article names in other languages. They are generally focusing on Russian-US aspect in the naming. I think the current naming is biased... Ogün Eratalay ^message 10:43, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Prisoners

Can we split the list in two to highlight the nature of the exchange: those released by Russia (16 adults), and those released to Russia (8 adults, 2 minors)? Currently it's very difficult to tell which side a "Russian" was on. Jpatokal (talk) 02:40, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

In addition, it should be added where they are jailed, and for what reason. Sofeshue (talk) 03:44, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Wait, there are minors? Should we include date of birth, age of release, or something like that in the table? Cherry567 (talk) 05:57, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

I understand that the minors were not subject of the exchange because they were not jailed and were not even accused of anything. Hence, no. My very best wishes (talk) 19:34, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Looks like the requested changes were made, or at least the tables currently in the article are much more readable and parseable than the article was when I first happened upon it. What's still unclear to me is where the Russian prisoners released by Russia (Oleg Orlov, Vadim Ostanin, etc.) were released to. Were they simply released from Russian prisons back to their Russian residences? I'm not finding any news articles or anywhere on Wikipedia that makes that clear, but I'm hoping some editor will know where to find the answer and clarify the article. OneGyT (talk) 16:38, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Need more photos

I think we need to add more photos and videos from http://kremlin.ru/events/president/news/74696/videos. Now the prisoner exchange has more photos from the American side. This is not good. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexander One Rule (talk • contribs) 12:47, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Link to photo from the Kremlin press service http://kremlin.ru/events/president/news/74696/photos Alexander One Rule (talk) 12:53, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 9 August 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved to 2024 Ankara prisoner exchange - Consensus strongly against the present name, primarily on accuracy grounds. The target for moving to was less clear, but "Ankara" was preferred over "international" as more concise and less vague. (non-admin closure) FOARP (talk) 14:51, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

---

2024 Russian prisoner exchange → August 2024 international prisoner exchange – WP:NPOV.

Many seem to be unhappy with the current title.

Compare: de:Internationaler Häftlingsaustausch im August 2024
Alternatives proposed by Gödel2200: August 2024 Russian prisoner exchange, 2024 Ankara prisoner exchange
— Urro^{[talk][edits]} ⋮ 22:08, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

No. It´s not an "international exchange", it is Russia-centric, the sole cause of it are Russian actions and the article should remain as "2024 Russian prisoner exchange". Alexpl (talk) 09:42, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Oppose This would introduce ambiguity into the title. There have been other "international prisoner exchanges" in 2024, for example, this one between Russia and Ukraine in July. This also means the current title is ambiguous, and we should move to "August 2024 Russian prisoner exchange". Gödel2200 (talk) 13:16, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Got it! Considering your points, I've updated the proposed title. It's okay if you still oppose it, just re-write your vote so that it counts again. Thank you for contributing!
— Urro^{[talk][edits]} ⋮ 16:56, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I am fine with the current proposed title, though my personal preference is "August 2024 Russian prisoner exchange", which I find to be more precise than "international prisoner exchange". Gödel2200 (talk) 17:28, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

In all honesty, I am not particularly fond of either August 2024 Russian prisoner exchange or August 2024 international prisoner exchange, as I believe both to be biased or undescriptive in their own ways.

However, the discussion above was still contentious and it's clear that people don't like, at the least, the current title. Really, all I want to know is what the community wants because I am stumped myself.

I'm now going to edit the proposal to include more nuance and your suggestion as well.
— Urro^{[talk][edits]} ⋮ 17:44, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, this is not an easy change. "Russian prisoner exchange" does not fully shed light on the situation, but changing "Russian" to "international" really doesn't help. On a second thought, another possible option might be titling off of where the prisoner exchange took place (in Ankara), which in that case would be: "2024 Ankara prisoner exchange" (I don't think we would need to specify the month in that case). Gödel2200 (talk) 18:49, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Hm, I think this is another good option.
— Urro^{[talk][edits]} ⋮ 18:55, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

yall im gonna do this for no reason, should i do it or no? 188.236.164.58 (talk) 12:45, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

What? Are you talking about moving the page? Please, don't make any controversial changes until a consensus is decided.
— Urro^{[talk][edits]} ⋮ 13:05, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Oppose - even worse. Russia is the sole defining factor, not Turkey. Alexpl (talk) 14:01, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean by this. Russia was not the "sole defining factor" (nor was Turkey). Many nations were involved in the exchange. Gödel2200 (talk) 14:15, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Sure - in various minor roles, hardly reflected in broad public perception. Just like "Ankara". Did they hold a press conference in Ankara? Alexpl (talk) 15:17, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure how all the countries other than Russia could have only played "various minor roles". Russia was not conducting a prisoner exchange with itself! So without the involvement of these other countries, the exchange couldn't have happened in the first place. Gödel2200 (talk) 22:04, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Concur - given that this release involves individuals from other countries beside Russia, noting an international name would make sense. Also agree with the above to indicate that this may not be the prettiest, but at least it would be something to hold it over until a standard is identified for future noteworthy releases. swinquest (talk) 20:46, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Concur - I don't think the new title is perfect, but it's more accurate than calling it Russian. I would also support naming in the Ankara exchange, but I'd like to see some kind of precedent for naming it after where the exchange occurred. 71.11.5.2 (talk) 18:23, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

The first thing that comes to mind is WP:NCWWW.
— Urro^{[talk][edits]} ⋮ 18:31, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Unless there was another Russian prisoner exchange that is large/notable enough for an article in 2024, then any specific cases (such as single or small exchanges) can be handled by hatnotes. There is no need to disambiguate further by calling it the August 2024 exchange. And while other countries were involved, the bottom line is that the exchanges all involved either Russian prisoners or Russian dissidents. So I oppose move, keep current title. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 20:50, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't think the problem is disambiguation, though. It seems to me that it's about about accuracy and bias.
— Urro^{[talk][edits]} ⋮ 20:52, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Titles should be as short as possible while providing accurate information. We don’t have to specify all information in the title - “disambiguation” (i.e. “adjectives” that describe this event specifically) should only be included if they are likely to help the reader reach the right article. So moving to August 2024 anything is unnecessary.

Also noting that the reply feature left my !vote up here - I think it got broken by the struck comment below - anyone please feel free to move my comment to the bottom (I’m on mobile or I’d do it, don’t want to break things more). -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 20:55, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

You make good points.

Also, I think I sorted out the indentation issue. Let me know if anything's still wrong.
— Urro^{[talk][edits]} ⋮ 21:20, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

"Russian prisoner exchange" is not what it is. They are not just Russians so like the german version, the Russian in tamdem is similarly more appropriate "Exchange of prisoners between Russia and Western countries (2024)". Many nationalities were included and they were not just "Russian prisoners". I concur with renaming. Lf8u2 (talk) 21:33, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

To me, it feels demeaning to force a Russian identity onto these people who are their own persons.
— Urro^{[talk][edits]} ⋮ 21:36, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

2024 Ankara prisoner exchange sounds good to me. August 2024 prisoner exchange or August 2024 international prisoner exchange are less descriptive. All are better than the current title. --Error (talk) 17:38, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Concur with proposed change, or title 2024 Ankara prisoner exchange is also preferable. To refer to only one country involved undermines the fact that by definition, to be an exchange, more than one country must have been involved. BobKilcoyne (talk) 22:21, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Oppose all the detainees where detained by Russia or it's proxies, changing the article's name is unnecessary. Scu ba (talk) 21:18, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

There were detainees at Slovenia, Poland, United States, Germany, Norway. --Error (talk) 21:30, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

simple:Apostrophe#Its versus it's
— Urro^{[talk][edits]} ⋮ 17:42, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Concur with the proposed change. An exchange can't have only one side, and mentioning only one of the sides makes it sound as if it is named from the perspective of the other side, in this case - the West: 'we' are one side, so only the opposite side needs to be named explicitly. It's a bit like 'The Punic Wars', 'The Gallic Wars', 'The Jugurthine War', etc. which are named from the POV of the Romans, or 'The French and Indian War', which is named from the POV of the British colonists. (Obviously, from the POVs of the Carhaginians, Gauls and Numidians, these would have been 'Roman wars' instead; for the French, the French and Indian war is La Guerre de la Conquête; and I don't what the Shawnee, Lenape, Ojibwa etc. call it in their languages, but I'm sure it doesn't translate to 'the French and Indian war'.) These are established traditional names in English, but for new ones, perspective-neutral wordings should be used. Not to mention that the current title can be interpreted as if it is the prisoners who are Russian as opposed to the exchange being with Russia.--Anonymous44 (talk) 22:57, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Suggestion I've seen news reports referring to it as the East-West prisoner swap. Maybe 2024 East-West prisoner swap or 2024 East-West prisoner exchange could be a good alternative. Johndavies837 (talk) 04:52, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

They snatched the next US citizen in Moscow on Monday, so with another exchange looming, we may find a more sustainable nameing convention for these. Alexpl (talk) 15:33, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Concur with either the International, Ankara or East-West suggestions. The current title makes it sound like it's a prisoner exchange within Russia or involving only Russian people. It feels misleading. SorteKanin (talk) 18:14, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Have we reached a consensus yet? BobKilcoyne (talk) 05:02, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

I think most people are agreeing, but it's close.
— Urro^{[talk][edits]} ⋮ 16:35, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Concur with either International or Ankara. The aim of the current title is "2024 prisoner exchange of Russians", but the title now sounds like it was Russia only operation. Randam (talk) 20:04, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

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.