Talk:Battle of Azovstal

Article needs significant copyediting and organization

I am going to try to reorganize the article as much as possible, and I would surely appreciate any help doing so. Thanks! PilotSheng (talk) 15:34, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

"Evacuated"

Is that kind of joke or just copy paste of Ukrainian government propaganda? Nix3214 (talk) 18:33, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

the article says both surrender and evacuate which is in line with what sources like the NYTimes says:

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/05/17/world/russia-ukraine-war-news Cononsense (talk) 18:43, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

However, it's still a surrender and capture. You can't be evacuated by your own enemy by the definition of the word ("the act of moving people from a dangerous place to somewhere safe" - how can it be applied to the enemy who can lead you to something such as disarming mines and constructing bridges in a dangerous conditions?), only by people who are on the same side as you. Saying that is equally saying that general Paulus and his army were "evacuated" by Soviet forces from a Stalingrad cauldron. It's just Western press who seems to desperately attempt making Azov win retroactively when they lost. --M1911 (talk) 20:23, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm sensing some sockpuppetry going on here. PilotSheng (talk) 22:35, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

This seems to be a question of narratives, someone is already querying this at Azov Battalion. Just have to wait and see how the RS report it. Selfstudier (talk) 09:56, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

The threshold for inclusion is verifiability, not truth. Wikipedia has a list of trusted selected reliable sources, and whatever those report, will be included. If all reliable sources post war propaganda, so we add war propaganda. It is not up to the author to decide what is the truth. If reliable sources write that the sky is pink, so we say that the sky is pink, even if every author knows that it's not the case (looking out of the window would be own research, which isn't legitimate). Getting into a PoW camp of your enemy isn't evactuation, we all know that, but the reliable sources say that it is, so that's it. 99% of reliable sources are members of the Associated Press, which means that if an AP Journalist writes something and 100 media outlet copy it, this counts as 100 independent reliable sources. This is how wikipedia works, sorry to burst your bubble. 2001:871:237:D8E3:1C5C:28F3:E591:CF3A (talk) 10:03, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

To add on this, when the Ghost of Kiev story happened, the first version of the wikipedia page reportet it as a fact, clearly stating that he esists and that he shot down 50 russian planes. Because that was what the reliable sources wrote. Everbody knew that it is fake. Nobody with a brain would ever think that it's real. But the RS wrote it, so it's added. The reliable sources print war propaganda and lie and everybody is aware of that, but wikipedia is only a representation of those by design. Even Larry Sanger, a co-founder of wikipedia, points out regularly how biased wikipedia is. We know that. We want it like this. 2001:871:237:D8E3:1C5C:28F3:E591:CF3A (talk) 10:13, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

In my opinion there are no doubts they are surrendered. Radio Free Europe: "Ukraine says more than 260 of its fighters were moved from the besieged Azovstal steel plant in Mariupol after surrendering to Russian forces. Many of the wounded were taken to areas held by Russia-backed separatists on May 16. The surrender marked the end of the months-long Russian siege of the strategic port city, now in ruins." Mhorg (talk) 10:18, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes, it shouldn't say evacuated. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 11:12, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

It works as two separate events, the surrender (emphasized by Russian side), followed by an evacuation (emphasized by Ukrainian side), some sources are using both like that.Selfstudier (talk) 11:19, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

But the Ukrainians have been in Russian custody since leaving the plant. Being held by the invading forces isn't being evacuated. Evacuees are brought into safety. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 12:54, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

I don't disagree with you, just the usual thing with sources when there are competing narratives. As I said elsewhere, it seems they were ordered to surrender by their own side, if that is so, we can just say that. Selfstudier (talk) 12:59, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Sure, I know about that being the way Wikipedia works on writing about something recent and political, which exact set of sources it mostly prefers to use and which one doesn't. I've been sporadically an editor for 10,5 years. I just took my chance to mock on how the heroic picture of these "defenders" in the press did not withstand so far its meeting with the cruel reality. --M1911 (talk) 18:05, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

It is a "surrender" because the soldiers are yielding themselves to their enemy. Once they are out of the Azovstal plant, the soldiers have been taken to detention centers, equivalent of POW camps. So yes, they have surrendered. PilotSheng (talk) 14:24, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

The NYT is categoric (17 May), both in headline and in content, title is given as "Surrender at Mariupol" and content is given as "More than 200 Ukrainian soldiers in the Azovstal steel plant in Mariupol surrendered and were taken into custody by Russian forces." They also report that ..Ukraine’s military ordered them to surrender. The surrender directive, issued late Monday, made the soldiers prisoners and ended the most protracted battle so far of the nearly three-month-old Russian invasion of Ukraine.. I think this is clearcut, they were ordered to surrender and they did.Selfstudier (talk) 14:27, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Ukraine declared their "combat mission" over in Azovstal. For the same reason why we don't consider the Stalingrad holdouts (which lasted a month after the Battle of Stalingrad) as part of the battle, we don't do the same here. If organized resistance, resistance ordered by high command ends, then what is defined as "the battle" ends. Yokohama1989 (talk) 15:40, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

@Nix3214 @2001:871:237:D8E3:1C5C:28F3:E591:CF3A, it seems that there should be a revision of acceptable sources then. If the Western Media posts propaganda, then they should be immediately disqualified. 2001:569:7E22:7600:70E7:EAD9:4FA:C407 (talk) 23:40, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Azovstal 05.05.2022.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:07, 23 May 2022 (UTC)