Talk:Russian annexation of Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia oblasts/Archive 1

Archive 1

Requested move 22 September 2022

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.

---

Moved to Annexation of southeastern Ukraine by the Russian Federation. Closure requested at WP:CR <permalink>. Duly noted that this move request was proposed by a user who has been discovered and designated to be a sock of Dolyn; however, it cannot be ignored that several editors (6) have supported this request just as it is proposed. (And several other editors (5) are fully opposed to any move.) So we see below strong consensus to move away from the current title and no agreement as to which title would be highest and best. This makes this RM a WP:OTHEROPTIONS situation, and I had to choose from among the following suggestions:

Titles proposed by participants

may be collapsed for easier reading (in desktop view) 2022 Russian annexation of eastern and southern Ukraine – proposed by nom Russian annexation of southern and eastern Ukraine – proposed by Geopony Russian annexation of Ukrainian regions (2022) – proposed by Geopony Russian annexation of eastern and southern Ukraine – proposed by Super Ψ Dro 2022 Russian annexation of Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, and Zaporizhzhia Oblasts – proposed by Michael Z. 2022 Russian annexation in southeastern Ukraine – proposed by Michael Z. Draft:Annexation of Southern and Eastern Ukraine – proposed by Michael Z. 2022 annexation of the Russian-occupied territories of Ukraine – proposed by Wikisaurus 2022 annexation of the Russian-occupied Ukraine – proposed by Wikisaurus Annexation of southeastern Ukraine by the Russian Federation – proposed by Sundostund Russian annexation of Southeastern Ukraine – proposed by Nice4What Annexation of the Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, and Zaporizhzhia Oblasts by the Russian Federation – proposed by Nederlandse Leeuw Annexation of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia oblasts by the Russian Federation – proposed by Beshogur Russian annexation of Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia oblasts – proposed by Super Ψ Dro 2022 Russian annexation of southeastern Ukraine – proposed by waddie96 ("of" rather than "in") 2022 Russian annexations in eastern and southern Ukraine – proposed by Antony–22 The illegal annexation of the Luhansk oblast, Donetsk oblast, ... – proposed by IP2600+ 2022 Russian annexation of Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia oblasts – proposed by Selfstudier (lc: oblasts) Russian annexation of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia oblasts – proposed by Beshogur Russian annexation of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia oblasts by Russian Federation – proposed by Yeoutie Annexation of Southern and Eastern Ukraine by the Russian Federation – proposed by IP 73+ Annexations of Ukrainian territories by the Russian Federation after merge with this article – proposed by Herr Hartmann 2022 Russian annexation of Ukrainian territories – proposed by Sgnpkd 2022 Russian annexation of Ukrainian territory – proposed by Rreagan007 Russia's claimed annexation of Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia – proposed by LeontinaVarlamonva 2022 Russian annexation of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia – proposed by IntrepidContributor 2022 Russian annexation declaration of four oblasts of Ukraine – proposed by Kammerer55

See many good ideas below such as for and against using the year as dabber, uc or lc concerns, and other good thoughts, so this might not be the final word on the subject. Crucial to this kind of closure are the words from OTHEROPTIONS: [...] the closer should pick the best title of the options available, and then be clear that while consensus has rejected the former title (and no request to bring it back should be made lightly), there is no consensus for the title actually chosen. And if anyone objects to the closer's choice, then instead of taking it to move review, they should simply make another move request at any time, which will hopefully lead the article to its final stable title. Thanks and kudos to editors for your input; everyone stay healthy! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^put'r there 08:27, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

---

Annexation of Southern and Eastern Ukraine → 2022 Russian annexation of eastern and southern Ukraine – Or Annexation of Southern and Eastern Ukraine by the Russian Federation similar to Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation. The word Russian should in the title. Pageborn (talk) 12:33, 22 September 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE – Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:28, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Crimea's article is only titled that way to disambiguate it from Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Empire. "Russian Federation" shouldn't be used here. Super Ψ Dro 16:18, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support renaming to Russian annexation of southern and eastern Ukraine, with redirects created as Russian annexation of southern and eastern Ukraine (2022) and Annexation of southern and eastern Ukraine by the Russian Federation in the interest of being thorough Geopony (talk) 15:15, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

another alternative is Russian annexation of Ukrainian regions (2022) Geopony (talk) 15:18, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Support for renaming to Russian annexation of southern and eastern Ukraine. Southern and eastern should be lowercase, and the year is unnecessary because there is no other comparable historical article for the annexation of these regions. Jay Coop · Talk · Contributions 21:19, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support per nomination. Most main title headers delineating annexations indicate national identity: Dutch annexation of German territory after the Second World War, Israeli annexation of East Jerusalem, Jordanian annexation of the West Bank, Soviet annexation of Eastern Galicia and Volhynia, Soviet annexation of Western Belorussia, etc. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 15:34, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
• Important comment Southern Ukraine and Eastern Ukraine are defined regions which Russia does not fully control and can thus not fully annex. Russia controls a fraction of Kharkiv Oblast and perhaps over half of Donetsk Oblast for Eastern Ukraine's case; for Southern Ukraine, Russia doesn't control a single bit of Odesa Oblast, very small parts of Mykolaiv Oblast, and does not fully control Kherson Oblast. Thus, the proposed title should use lowercase to make clear it does not mean the defined regions. Maybe also alphabetical order. If moved, the article's new title should be Russian annexation of eastern and southern Ukraine. Super Ψ Dro 16:17, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

  I'm Ok with use of lowercase. I will change the nomination. Pageborn (talk) 16:22, 22 September 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE – Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:28, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

• Weak support I moved the article because I did not find any non-russian annexation of eastern and southern Ukraine. But now I'm leaning to move back per Roman Spinner. Another important comment: maybe to add "2022"? Because Crimea is also in southern Ukraine. upd: Move to 2022 proposed Russian annexation of southeastern Ukraine --Privybst (talk) 16:21, 23 September 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE – Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:28, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose  The proposed title is not an improvement, because 1) the designations eastern and southern Ukraine have specific referents that are not what’s being annexed; 2) the title is ambiguous, because “annexation of southeastern Ukraine by Russia” describes the colonization of Zaporizhzhia (region) from the mid seventeenth century and of New Russia in the late eighteenth century. A suitable title would be 2022 Russian annexation of Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, and Zaporizhzhia Oblasts or 2022 Russian annexation in southeastern Ukraine. —Michael Z. 19:21, 30 September 2022 (UTC) [Delete, because the subject only exists in your WP:crystall balls. We have an article about the 2022 annexation referendums in Russian-occupied Ukraine. There is no annexation at this time. —Michael Z. 15:04, 23 September 2022 (UTC)]

  Privybst, Michael, good point about the year, I added it to the proposal. About the WP:crystall ball: maybe to add a word 'Proposed' in line with Proposed Russian annexation of Transnistria, Proposed Israeli annexation of the West Bank and Proposed Russian annexation of South Ossetia? --Pageborn (talk) 15:31, 23 September 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE – Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:28, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

  Hm; Russian government and other leaders have made dozens or scores of proposals to annex various parts or all of Ukraine over the last eight years and, indeed, going back to the breakup of the Soviet Union. Make sure you’re renaming it to match the scope of the article’s actual subject, and not just to paper over a reason to delete. I think this should be moved to [[Draft:]] space immediately. —Michael Z. 16:08, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

  The other example articles are broadly scoped. I think an article about the history of Russian proposals to annex Ukraine in whole or in part could make a good article. But that means a consensus to change the scope and start a new article, compared to the existing content. —Michael Z. 16:19, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose on procedural grounds, the nominator is not in good standing. Such nominations must be made by users in good standing.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:09, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

  Just out of interest Ymblanter, what do you mean by "the nominator is not in good standing"? As far as I can tell, the user hasn't done anything disruptive. Is "good standing" a Wikipedia classification I'm not aware of? Physeters^✉ 05:27, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

  The user virtually only registered on Wikipedia to file this request. We had a lot of block- and ban-evading socks in the topic area before, the nominator is likely one of them. Ymblanter (talk) 05:40, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

  WP:Assume good faith. 23:52, 29 September 2022 (UTC) 2600:6C44:237F:ACCB:E497:41F5:D755:3C19 (talk) 23:52, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

  In the meanwhile, the account which started this discussion was indeed blocked as a sock. Good faith does not apply to the people who are deliberately here to harm Wikipedia. Ymblanter (talk) 07:37, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

  And another sock of this user participated in this discussion (comments now removed). Ymblanter (talk) 07:38, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

• oppose Crimea's annexation occured on 2014.
• Panam2014 (talk) 19:58, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

I do not know the correct title, but some remarks: Southern Ukraine is quite different from the territories annexed, so it should not be in the title; in ruwiki it is called "Annexation of the Russian-occupied territories of Ukraine", but this title gives the impression that either we consider Crimea as Russia and not as another Russian-occupied territory of Ukraine (which violates POV), or we describe its annexation in the same article (which is plainly wrong). Wikisaurus (talk) 11:44, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

P. S. Btw, "2022 annexation of the Russian-occupied territories of Ukraine" (or even "2022 annexation of the Russian-occupied Ukraine") looks ok. Wikisaurus (talk) 11:51, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

• Comment IMHO, its only logical that the title of this article match that of Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation, having in mind how closely related those events are. —Sundostund (talk) 19:52, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

  @Sundostund, you mean "Annexation of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia Oblasts by the Russian Federation"? Wikisaurus (talk) 13:04, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

  @Wikisaurus: No, I mean "Annexation of southeastern Ukraine by the Russian Federation". There is no reason to list all the four involved regions in the article's title. —Sundostund (talk) 19:49, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support Russian annexation of Southeastern Ukraine, per precedent pointed out by Roman Spinner. A year in the title as a distinguisher isn't necessary. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 19:55, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

  There is no such term as Southeastern Ukraine. Wikisaurus (talk) 13:02, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Opposing this proposal per Wikisaurus. Super Ψ Dro 13:41, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose, rename to "Annexation of the Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, and Zaporizhzhia Oblasts by the Russian Federation" per Wikisaurus, WP:PRECISE and WP:NPOV, and by analogy of Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation. "South" and "East" are wayyyy too subjective and arbitrary terms. We must name the specific oblasts to make clear what we are talking about. Otherwise we will invite endless, endless debates about what the "South" and "East" of Ukraine are (or were, depending on one's point of view, as the Russian Federation and its supporters think these oblasts are no longer part of Ukraine, despite the fact that the international community overwhelmingly thinks they are still part of Ukraine). Incidentally, we can also remove '2022' from the title, because this has never happened before (the Russian Empire's annexation of what we now call Ukraine happened before these oblasts existed, and the Russian Federation didn't exist until 1991). Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 16:15, 30 September 2022 (UTC) PS: Switched Kherson and Luhansk for alphabetical order as suggested by Super Dro. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 16:48, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

  • Support this suggestion as well. Giving more formal title. But "the" and "Oblast" with a capital letter is redunant. Thus: Annexation of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia oblasts by the Russian Federation could be better.

  Beshogur (talk) 16:18, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

  I have no strong preference for or against 'the', or whether to capitalise 'oblasts' or not, I'll leave that up to the English grammar experts. I'll support any outcome. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 16:22, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Why should we capitalize "oblasts", and why do we need to use "Russian Federation"? As I said above, the Crimea annexation article is only titled that way because there's a need for disambiguation. or were, depending on one's point of view, as the Russian Federation and its supporters think these oblasts are no longer part of Ukraine the opinion of these people does not matter, and it shouldn't be taken into account in any discussion here in Wikipedia since, as you yourself have said, it goes against the international community. Super Ψ Dro 16:19, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

I'd personally support Russian annexation of Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia oblasts instead. This is shorter, uses alphabetic order, is unambiguous and does not use an Oxford comma. I don't think those are used often in article titles. Super Ψ Dro 16:21, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

The articles are Donetsk Oblast and others, this is why we have to capitalize. Or otherwise move all articles (which pertain to Russia and Ukraine) to Donetsk oblast and such. Ymblanter (talk) 16:28, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Agreed. A capital 'O' is preferable because it is official administrative usage on English Wikipedia (though personally I don't mind very much). Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 16:37, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Alphabetical order has my support, by the way. Even though 'Donetsk and Luhansk' have been commonly mentioned in that order as a pair throughout the war in Donbas, in this group of 4 it's reasonable to go for an alphabetical order. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 16:46, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Articles oblast and oblasts of Ukraine use lower case when referring to the administrative division in plural. Donetsk Oblast and others should be capitalized as they're proper names, but "oblast" is not, it's basically just a synonym of province, which we wouldn't ever capitalize on a title if in plural. Super Ψ Dro 16:57, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Just using 'Russian' could lead to confusion with Tsarist/Imperial Russia which annexed what we now call Ukraine in the 18th century. 'Russian Federation' is unambiguous and puts us in the post-1991 period.

PS: It may be helpful to read Talk:Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Russian_Federation/Archive_2#Requested_move_(April_2014), which outlines the consensus to establish the title "Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation", a consensus that has not been overturned since April 2014. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 16:35, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

This is an overstretch. In that case, there's many articles in Category:Annexation that should be moved to achieve this extreme precision. The four oblasts in question were not annexed ever before by Russia as they did not exist. Their territory was, but it wasn't annexed all at once. Rather, part of one province was annexed once along with other parts of other modern Ukrainian provinces, then another part of the four, then another... In conclusion, never in history have entities known as "Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia" covering the same or similar land been annexed all at once and distinctly from any other territory by a Russian state. So it is not ambiguous. People will know what does the title mean. Super Ψ Dro 16:57, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

I see your point. I still prefer by the Russian Federation, but Russian now seems an acceptable alternative to me. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 17:51, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Too cumbersome. I consider it appropriate to leave "Ukraine" in the title because the annexation is widely considered to be illegal. Dennis Dartman (talk) 19:28, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Then we risk confusion with the 2014 annexation of Crimea. Any title with 'Ukraine' plus a cardinal direction in it is just too vague. We need to name the oblasts. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 20:46, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Support the general notion here, and the name I'm replying to would be acceptable. However there are slight alternatives worth considering. "Russian annexation of..." vs "Annexation of ... by the Russian Federation" is one part that I'm neutral on. For the list order however it should probably be either geographical (east to west, as that's the direction Russia has expanded; Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson) or alphabetical as mentioned elsewhere. Also worth considering is shortening by replacing Luhansk and Donetsk with "the Donbas". eduardog3000 (talk) 23:10, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

I oppose using "the Donbas". We either use geographical or administrative units. Not both at the same time. Choosing an east to west (or any) direction is also unprecedented and not supported by any Wikipedia policy. One could also argue it is Russian POV. I believe the alphabetic version is the ideal here. Super Ψ Dro 08:37, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

I agree with Super Dro, we should not use the term 'Donbas' for these reasons, and the geographical order is arbitrary and arguably POV. The alphabetical order proposed is the most objective. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 10:13, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

• Support More specific. Urban Versis 32^KB ⚡ ^{(talk / contribs)} 03:37, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
• Support as the title is more WP:PRECISE, the year needs to be given as further annexations may occur, also a previous annexation has occurred in 2014. Would also support the other option of 2022 Russian annexation of southeastern Ukraine if consensus leans there.

waddie96 ★ (talk) 21:17, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

• Support it's more concise and specific in relation to the subject.

Iscargra (talk) 10:32, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

@Ymblanter: there was a consensus to move Iranian provinces to a non capital letter versions. That's not a big deal. Beshogur (talk) 19:46, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

I am not saying this is a big deal, I am saying that the whole bunch of articles has to be moved (or not moved), presumably after a RM. As far as I see Iranian provinces now follow the model Foo province. Ymblanter (talk) 19:49, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Move. Unnecessary capitalization. Clyde ^{State your case} (please use {{reply to|ClydeFranklin}} on reply) 21:19, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Misread nomination. I support a move to Russian annexation of southern and eastern Ukraine, but I think "2022" is too unnecessary of a disambiguation. Clyde ^{State your case} (please use {{reply to|ClydeFranklin}} on reply) 21:25, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

• How about 2022 Russian annexations in eastern and southern Ukraine? Using "in" instead of "of" doesn't imply that the entire region was annexed. Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 22:37, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Interesting. It seems better than "of". The problem is that "in" still implies that these territories remain part of Ukraine, at least "Ukraine" in a geographical sense rather than a political one. This would be fine if we had a consensus about "geographical Ukraine", similar to how we distinguish the island of Ireland from the Republic of Ireland. But I think it's safe to say that there are no such clear geological/geographical limits to a region generally known as "Ukraine" that nobody really disputes similar to "island of Ireland". So it doesn't really solve the issue. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 23:08, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support per WP:PRECISE. Plus, the words "southern" and "eastern" should be kept in the lowercase because in the uppercase, Southern Ukraine and Eastern Ukraine are already defined regions (with no unambiguous definitions, might I add) that are not highly correlated with the territories being annexed. Also, I support inclusion of the word "Russian" (but indifferent to "Russia" vs. "Russian Federation" since I believe the year should be presented). However, I do recognize that on the article for Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation, there is no date in the title, but there is a hatnote or whatever it's called at the top stating "For the 1783 event, see Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Empire." I feel, however, that it is necessary in this case to include the date so that the 2014 event and this event are not confused. Crimea is often (though not always) considered part of Southern Ukraine. If there really is issue with people searching titles that are close but not the same, I support Geopony's decision to make redirects with the contesting names. I do think that the current article title is suitable for a redirect, though. LegendoftheGoldenAges85, Team  M  (talk | worse talk) 08:22, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

  If 'Southern Ukraine and Eastern Ukraine are already defined regions with no unambiguous definitions', how does lowercasing the words "southern" and "eastern" suddenly make these regions unambiguous? If we really want to be clear, we should explicitly mention Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, and Zaporizhzhia Oblasts in the title. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 10:26, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose. How could this be ambiguous or misunderstood? (If you point to WP:PRECISE, well, yeah... precise would be "The illegal annexation of the Luhansk oblast, Donetsk oblast, Kherson oblast, and Zaporizhzhia oblast by the Russian Federation under the leadership of Vladimir Putin on the 30 September 2022 after a long military conflict which followed the invasion of said territories to the opposition and condemnation of most of the world to which the Russian government paid no attention" or some bigger monstrocity, a la let's see if we can have a title that spans 5 rows...) 2600:8800:2C00:BC00:C11E:5BE8:9E:B414 (talk) 09:04, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

• Support 2022 Russian annexation of Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia oblasts or similar per suggestion made above. Selfstudier (talk) 09:55, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

  I agree, but 2022 is redunant, since this happened once. Beshogur (talk) 13:10, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

  Agree with Beshogur. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 10:27, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

• Move to: Russian annexation of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia oblasts, clear and detailing title. Beshogur (talk) 13:08, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

  Agree, but switch Kherson and Luhansk so that they follow alphabetical order. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 10:28, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

• Support this proposal as its current state is not an option although "Russian annexation of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia oblasts" or the alternative "...by Russian Federation" are both better alternatives, especially to distinguish from the 2014 Crimean annexation.Yeoutie (talk) 15:18, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
• (Moved from other request; Annexation of Southern and Eastern Ukraine by the Russian Federation) I think we should change the title to what we did with Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation 73.126.133.15 (talk) 15:49, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
• Somewhat Radical Idea: How about merging this article with Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation, and then call the whole thing Annexations of Ukrainian territories by the Russian Federation? The combined article would then include both the 2014 annexation and the 2022 annexation as two separate steps within the same general development. Herr Hartmann (talk) 16:39, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

• Support: However, "Western and Eastern Ukraine" is poorly defined, Odessa is southern Ukraine and Kharkiv is eastern Ukraine yet they are not annexed. Secondly, there is also the 2014 Crimean annexation which is located in Ukraine's south. I suppose we change the title into 2022 Russian annexation of Ukrainian territories. Sgnpkd (talk) 17:24, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

• Support adding the year removes ambiguity. But maybe use the alternative suggested just above by User:Sgnpkd. 89.14.70.34 (talk) 18:13, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

• Move to 2022 Russian annexation of Ukrainian territory Rreagan007 (talk) 21:29, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

  Support your suggestion. This looks like the best title. Zaslav (talk) 01:57, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

  Fails WP:PRECISE. "Ukrainian territory" could refer anything from a square metre of Ukrainian territory to all of the Republic of Ukraine. If we really want to be clear, we should explicitly mention Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, and Zaporizhzhia Oblasts in the title. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 10:31, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

  Oppose this proposal: Donetsk and Luhansk were independent republics prior to the annexation and the other oblasts were contested. Calling them "Ukrainian territory" is inaccurate and misleading 2001:1970:564B:4800:0:0:0:40ED (talk) 21:48, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

  DPR and LPR independence was never widely recognised except by the Russian Federation, Syria and North Korea. The rest of the world considered and still considers them Ukrainian territory, so that's not a very solid counter-argument. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 15:07, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

• Support to make it clear this is about the 2022 Russian-Ukrainian war. JIP | Talk 21:35, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose This would be approaching the problem like musical chairs, and the same issue would exist if support for this passed. Ukraine has been an incredibly fluid territory in the past century, and we wouldn't want to tightly couple every incident to "YYYY X annexation of Y's territory." The territories have names for the people who live there, rather than just some ethnocentric directional name for Westerners, why not use those? Talk⁄Louis Waweru 00:31, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

  Do yo mean inhabitants of Ukraine don't call themselves Ukrainians? Only "Westerners" do that? Zaslav (talk) 01:55, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

  I am talking about people in the regions of Kherson and Zaporozhye, @Zaslav. I don't know what people in the people's republics that voted for succession call themselves, but it sounds like they want to call themselves Russian. Talk⁄Louis Waweru 01:05, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

I don't like what your rhetoric and wording reminds me of. And I think Ukrainians don't either. Super Ψ Dro 13:03, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

I don't know what you're talking about, @Super Dromaeosaurus. Talk⁄Louis Waweru 01:06, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

I don't even understand what you are proposing, Louis Waweru. 'names for the people who live there', what does that even mean? I can imagine many names for people who live there, like Pavlo, Oksana, Serhii, Svitlana etc., but what does that have to do with the title of this article? Are you suggesting 'Russian annexation of Pavlo and Oksana' or something? You're funny. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 14:22, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

It means regions, like what you are calling "eastern Ukraine" have their own words in the languages of the people who inhabit those regions, @Nederlandse Leeuw. Talk⁄Louis Waweru 01:01, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

• Support The title of this event should include the name of the annexing country as well as the (partially) annexed country, regardless of whether there is possible ambiguity. This is a general principle. I also favor the year but less strongly; if Russia decides to "annex" more of Ukraine in 2023, that should be in this same article (but that can be dealt with later). Zaslav (talk) 01:53, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose Unnecessary. 2001:8003:9007:8201:84C4:1957:3106:2BB9 (talk) 02:46, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

• Support. The convention for events, WP:NCEVENTS, demands a when put in front of the title in a majority of cases, because it's more WP:PRECISE. In this case, it also helps disambiguate with Crimea, which is also southern Ukraine. Pilaz (talk) 21:55, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

  "South" and "East" are not 'precise' at all. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 15:09, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

• Support to be WP:PRECISE as to have a clear understanding of the title for the article. —  dainomite   04:31, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

  "South" and "East" are not 'precise' at all. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 15:09, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose the current proposal, I agree with Mzajac to rename to 2022 Russian annexation of ... XYZ oblasts Sungodtemple (talk) 02:20, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
• Support the current proposal, but I would also clarify further to something like this "Russia's claimed annexation of Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia". Russia does not control many territories it claims to "annex", so I think something on this should be made clear in the title and introducction. --LeontinaVarlamonva (talk) 06:48, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose the current proposal, but I also oppose the current name. I oppose the inclusion of the year 2022 as Southern and Eastern Ukraine could be interpreted to include Crimea, which as has been mentioned was annexed in 2014, and additionally there is no precedence for annexation article to have dates appended to the front as far as I can tell. I oppose the use of the phrase "Southern and Eastern Ukraine" for the same vagueness that it causes. Referring to the oblasts instead might be a better solution, but unlike Mzajac and Sungodtemple, I oppose adding the year in the front, simply "Annexation of Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson Oblasts" or something similar. Criticalus (talk) 13:54, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
• Support renaming to 2022 Russian annexation of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia. IntrepidContributor (talk) 13:58, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
• Support renaming to something like 2022 Russian annexation declaration of four oblasts of Ukraine, where "four oblasts" is used as a concise description of what is being "annexed" instead of a more ambiguous "southern and eastern Ukraine", and the added word declaration signifies that the "annexation" is partially imaginary (as was mentioned above by LeontinaVarlamonva). Kammerer55 (talk) 16:39, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

It seems like a consensus might form around a construction similar to this, in that case I have a small comment. The word 'declaration' is redundant because an annexation by definition is a declaration. In case there is some misconception that the word "annexation" implies legitimacy, and that calling this an "annexation" without a qualifier somehow legitimizes the Russian claim to these territories, here are some common synonyms of annexation: "seizure · occupation · invasion · conquest · takeover · appropriation · expropriation · arrogation · usurping" Colloquially, we may think of an 'annexation' differently, but even in previous cases in this very war where the annexation is still contested, the standard is not to include a qualifier (see: Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation). By the same token, adding the year is redundant too, as the annexation is not just an event occurring at the time of the initial declaration, but will continue over the coming years (assimilation, backlash, eg) which will need to be covered here as we also see in the aforementioned article about Crimea. Therefore, I don't see why people want to add the year 2022 to it. The two best name suggestions I've seen so far are Annexation of the Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, and Zaporizhzhia Oblasts by the Russian Federation by Nederlandse Leeuw, and Russian annexation of Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia oblasts by Super. Those are great starting points for a consensus name. Criticalus (talk) 01:17, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment. Just to clarify, the word "declaration" was included not to reflect the legitimacy of the action (which is obviously absent here), but rather to signify that Russia does not control significant portion of the claimed territories, hence the annexation of those pieces is only declared but not supported on the ground by any kind of "occupation/invasion/conquest/takeover etc." This is different from the situation with Crimea, where Russia already occupied the whole peninsula before annexing it. In a similar way, if Putin declares tomorrow that Russia now will include the Moon, because people of the Moon unanimously voted to join Russia, it would be misleading to say that "Russia annexed the Moon", but would be more accurate to say that "Russia declared that it annexed the Moon", hence the qualifier. Kammerer55 (talk) 02:38, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

I support you.Xx236 (talk) 06:40, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm glad to see more and more people are in favour of Super and/or my proposed titles. Note to Kammerer55: de facto military control of the territory in question is not required. As I stated below under "Annexed" four oblasts': 'Annexation is strictly speaking a legal matter. In other words, it happens de jure, but not necessarily de facto. As the article annexation points out, it is "usually following military occupation of the territory." [So usually, but not always]. In this case, the territories in question have not been fully occupied (yet), and appear to be in the process of de-occupation (as the Ukrainian counter-offensives are moving forward), so this is an exception to the rule (as many media and experts have noted), but that doesn't mean it's suddenly not an annexation anymore in the de jure sense'. To add to the lunar example: if Putin signs some legal document approved by the parliament and senate of the Russian Federation annexing the Moon, the Moon would be annexed under Russian law; even though it would be an illegal annexation under international law, it would still be an annexation. The illegality of it doesn't make it a non-annexation. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 08:31, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

PS: I've read a bit more literature, and it seems that 'annexation' in an international legal cross-border situation (as opposed to municipal annexation) is generally seen as an illegal act by definition (see the first few references in the annexation article). It is worth comparing the four 'accession treaties' that Putin signed on 30 September 2022 with the Putin-appointed "governors" of the four oblasts on the one hand, and on the other hand how the former states of the German Democratic Republic (DDR), now known as the new states of Germany, 'acceded' to Federal Republic of Germany (BDR) through the Unification Treaty based on the latter's Article 23 of the Basic Law, which also spoke of 'accession' (Beitritt). The reason why English-language literature does not seem to describe the German reunification as the 'annexation' of the former DDR states seems to be that the process was regarded as legal under international law, and actively mediated and approved by the international community through the Treaty on the Final Settlement with Respect to Germany (Two Plus Four Agreement). So in fact, when we use the word 'annexation' in an international context (especially after the mid-20th century), we may presume that the action described is widely regarded as illegal under international law. So it would be perfectly fine to say that the Russian Federation 'annexed' Crimea, the four oblasts, or hypothetically the Moon (the latter would also informally confirm Putin to be a lunatic, but that is a separate issue).

Another interesting comparison we might make is with the case of the Dutch annexation of German territory after the Second World War: it is a bit more difficult, because minor border changes were indeed approved by the occupying Allied forces at the London Conference of 23 April 1949, but the Dutch at the time used the word annexatie extensively without implying that their own actions were illegal (e.g. the Staatscommissie ter Bestudering van het Annexatievraagstuk or State Commission for the Study of the Annexation Question was founded on 25 August 1945 by Foreign Minister Van Kleffens). With the 8 April 1960 treaty, the Netherlands returned the lands to Germany. The treaty text never mentions the word annexatie, and never explicitly stated (admitted) that the transfer of territories had been illegal, but rather implicitly confirmed that it had been illegal.

• Article 4: 'The Kingdom of the Netherlands renounces the rights transferred to the Kingdom after World War II with regard to the territories belonging to the German Reich on 31 December 1937 in which the Kingdom has asserted such rights and which belong to the Federal Republic of Germany by virtue of Article 1.'
• Article 1: 'The course of the frontier between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Federal Republic of Germany shall be determined by the frontier treaties between the Kingdom of Prussia and the Kingdom of the Netherlands signed at Aachen on 26 June 1816 and at Kleve on 7 October 1816, the frontier treaty between the Kingdom of Hanover and the Kingdom of the Netherlands signed at Meppen on 2 July 1824, and the agreements concluded in implementation amendments and supplements to those frontier treaties, in so far as those treaties and agreements were in force on 31 December 1937 between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the German Reich, and by the arrangements derogating therefrom set out in Annex A to this Treaty.'

What does this say? It doesn't say whether the post-war transferral of rights (by the Allies) had been legal or illegal, but it does clearly say that this transferral of rights plays not role in determining the present border, which is based on pre-war treaties. The fact that the word 'annexation' is not used anywhere anymore suggests that, by that time, it had become a negative term which always describes an illegal action, and the Netherlands' negotiators seem to have carefully avoided the term as well as imlicitly admitting the transfers were illegal by speaking of 'renunciation of rights' to the territories, as if they had any (legitimate) rights to them in the first place. As a historian, as well as a Dutch citizen myself, it's clear to me these were annexations, and they were illegal, and therefore it is correct for Wikipedia to name them as such. The same goes for the so-called 'accessions' of Crimea and the four oblasts to the Russian Federation. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 10:08, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

I have not found any example of annexation, when the annexing party did not have any form of control over the claimed territories. Can you provide one? Of course, the military control is not strictly required, as the annexation can be achieved via other means such as a threat, like in the Annexation of Tibet by the People's Republic of China, or by mutual desire, like in the Texas annexation or Annexation of Hawaii (though these two might have been termed differently today). These examples might have contributed to the definition of the annexation as the "forcible acquisition ..., usually following military occupation of the territory". However, the key term here is the forcible acquisition, which did not occur for the significant portions of the four oblasts here. So, we can either talk (1) about attempted or declared annexation of the whole four oblasts (because parts of those oblasts were not under control of Russia at the moment of declaration, and some parts were never under control of Russia during the conflict), or (2) about the partial annexation of the four oblasts (to refer only to the controlled territories). However, even in the second option, some of the previously controlled territories have been already retaken by Ukrainian forces since the annexation was declared, so the annexation of those parts also should be reclassified as merely attempted/declared. Kammerer55 (talk) 16:40, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

1. To say the Russians don't have any form of control in the annexed territories is quite the stretch. Contested control, surely, but you're ignoring the fact they've set up military administrations for governance which had enough control in these territories to put together (unrecognized) referenda to try and justify their annexation, no? Not to mention the puppet states ruling in DPR / eg in recent years. Surely this demonstrates some control, yes? I think Nederlandse Leeuw went to great lengths to give us a detailed history of the context of international inter-border annexation versus municipal annexation, and I don't see how anything you're saying creates a need to add a qualifier word to "annexation" in this title. You're basically using the day-to-day changes in territorial control to negate the fact that Russia did indeed annex these terrorities by the clear definition of annexation. Whether we as individuals agree with that annexation, or whether the Ukrainians will accept that annexation, is irrelevant to that conclusion. If you have a persuasive argument for the qualifier of calling it a declaration, by all means, but right now I don't see a consensus for a qualifier word, as I haven't seen anyone else mention one, nor have I seen any example to support your feeling, so perhaps let's move on. I think it's clear there is a consensus for a name change, just not which name, so let's figure that out and call a new move request for a consensus name. Criticalus (talk) 02:46, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Well said Criticalus, nothing to add. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 06:54, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

• Support or rename: That would be more specific. However, Crimea, which was annexed in 2014; is also a part of southern Ukraine, right? And its not as if Russia has annexed the entirety of the Ukrainian coastline, or southern Ukraine. So I'd rather suggest renaming the article to 2022 Russian annexation of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia. Stuntneare (talk) 12:10, 5 October 2022 (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.

Move this article to Draft:Annexation of Southern and Eastern Ukraine

This article’s subject does not exist. It is a content fork of 2022 annexation referendums in Russian-occupied Ukraine, and is well enough covered there and in other articles related to the war.

Russia may announce some annexation in a few days time, or it may not, but that is only visible in our WP:crystal balls. We should move it to draft space and the renaming discussion above can continue. If there is no objection with a solid rationale based in our guidelines, I will move it shortly. —Michael Z. 16:15, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

better then to use clear name anyway: Draft:2022 proposed Russian annexation of southeastern Ukraine. Privybst (talk) 16:18, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Name change is being discussed above. My proposal here is distinct and separate from that. —Michael Z. 16:20, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

https://tass.com/politics/1516023 accession documents signed, and enough media reports talking about the topic as annexation. So, it could be moved to proposed annexation for the time being. RE phrase 1: A page about a "annexation referendum" is about a referendum. 89.14.70.34 (talk) 18:17, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Territory Map

Could somebody please create a map that overlays the frontlines on day of annexation, for context of territorial control? I think it's important to highlight that Russia hasn't occupied Zaporizhzhia, for example. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 12:56, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Made some changes

Feel free to edit. I tried to make a chronology. Also think that the lede should change a lot. Beshogur (talk) 22:29, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Map "error"

The map description says Ukranian oblasts, so the territory of the Mykolaiv Oblast south of the Dnieper–Bug estuary, the western half of Kinburn Peninsula, should remain in yellow but the red line should be extended to show it is currently Russian-controlled. Rogl94 (talk) 12:54, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

About a week ago, the Russians merged the Mykolaiv Military Civilian Administration into the Kherson one, so when Russia annxed the administration, it also annexed parts of Mykolaiv Oblast. Physeters^✉ 14:34, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

I know that, but it still refers to the Ukrainian oblasts in the map description and the borders of those didn't change. That's why my suggestion was to extend the red dashed line through the Dnieper-Bug estuary, but change the western half of Kinburn Peninsula back to yellow. Rogl94 (talk) 14:51, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Oh, I see what you mean. I thought the western part of the Kinburn Peninsula was also annexed by Russia. Do you have a source that says it hasn't been? I'll definitely fix it for you if it hasn't. Physeters^✉ 15:29, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, maybe I'm a little bit too pedantic. No, it's definitely (sadly) annexed. I just thought we would keep the current borders and the red line would show what was occupied. But it's a unique situation here, as it is the only border change on the Oblast level that happend under Russian occupation. Maybe the way you uploaded it earlier is the best way for now. Rogl94 (talk) 16:19, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

References

Status of new federal subjects

Has it been officially announced what the status of the new federal subjects is going to be (from the Russian point of view, obviously)? I suppose Donetsk and Lugansk are going to be republics, while Kherson and Zaporozhye will be oblasts, but it would be nice to have a confirmation of that. — Kpalion^(talk) 21:09, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Yes, on the Oblast page they are simply labeled as Luhansk and Donetsk PR but are they going to exist as oblasts or republic, or even people's republics (as they are labeled?) Danielg532 (talk) 11:47, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Russia is in such a hurry to annex that it has not decided what it is annexing, not even the exact borders. Zaslav (talk) 01:58, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Flags

Has anyone seen the flags in the background of the speech. There are two that I've never seen before. Can someone make them in an wikimedia image form so that we can assert them here if they were created for the occasion? 96.22.228.193 (talk) 04:51, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

The blue-white-blue one seems to be a variation of the Kherson Oblast flag, but the coat of arms that should normally be there has been replaced with one showing the Russian double eagle. Herr Hartmann (talk) 17:35, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Ok, checked again. Both of those flags have already been made. Look at Russian occupation of Zaporizhzhia Oblast and Russian occupation of Kherson Oblast. Herr Hartmann (talk) 17:51, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Merged with Russian Ukraine war.

I think this should be merged with the main Russia Ukraine war article.110.175.85.10 (talk) 08:42, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

No chance of that for a while. This article is currently linked to WP:In The News, which is on the homepage. A merger request currently will almost always be a WP:SNOW closure. Elijahandskip (talk) 10:13, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Mergers like that are very bad for readers. Articles on wide topics like Russo-Ukrainian war are often very long and difficult to navigate. Anyone can use hyperlinks and navigate from a more general topic to a more specific one and vice versa.Knižnik (talk) 21:07, 2 October 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:

• Moscow Annexation Ceremony.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:07, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Japan

Has Japan reacted yet? I doubt they'd recognise this. Great Mercian (talk) 20:34, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Speedy move to fix capitalization

I don’t think anyone thinks eastern Ukraine and southern Ukraine should be capitalized. I’d like to move the article shortly to Annexation of southern and eastern Ukraine, to fix the orthography. I don’t think it should affect the current move request in progress. Any objections? —Michael Z. 21:18, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

It says in the move box "Please do not move this article until the discussion is closed" Might as well wait for the RM to finish. Selfstudier (talk) 21:24, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

That note reflects the usual consensus, and of course we can agree to ignore it (the same thing happened recently at Battle of the Siverskyi Donets). That’s why I’m asking. And I’m certain my move won’t affect that move request.  —Michael Z. 23:07, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

You are correct, but let's wait. Zaslav (talk) 01:59, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Reaction

See, I am a non-natve english speaker, but from my understanding a reaction comes after an action, isn't it?

So I start wondering why the, let me cite here "Ukrainian response[edit source]"

also states another or two lines later "On 7 August 2022, the president of Ukraine [...] states [...]"

--Andy386 (talk) 20:24, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Well, technically you're correct. Zelenskyy's statement was in fact a reaction to Russia's stated intention to annex those territories, not to the annexation itself. Herr Hartmann (talk) 10:13, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 October 2022

Add "Ukrainian Counteroffensive" subheader above "Main article: 2022 Ukrainian Kharkiv counteroffensive", I think a subheader there would be necessary. Randomdudewithinternet (talk) 18:56, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

I don't think so. The "Main Article" link actually refers to the sentence above it, and that's indeed the only sentence in this entire section that mentions the counteroffensive at all. Hardly enough for a separate header. Herr Hartmann (talk) 00:10, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

 Partly done: Yes, that template link should be used under a subheader (per its documentation) and looks out of place when it's not. However, as Herr Hartmann pointed out it refers to the sentence above it and is quite relevant where it is. In addition, there isn't enough content for a separate header. Therefore, I've turned the {{main}} template for the 2022 Ukrainian Kharkiv counteroffensive into a wikilink which should fix the problem. —Danre98^{(talk^contribs)} 00:25, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 October 2022 (2)

Move Kherson MCA below Zaporizhzhia MCA to match the order of the leaders presented above, or the other way around. Randomdudewithinternet (talk) 19:17, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Actually, changing the order of the leaders' names makes more sense. The territories are currently listed in a somewhat logical order (first the MCAs by alphabet, then the people's republics by alphabet). The leaders don't seem to follow any system at all. But yes, both lists should definitely have the same order. Herr Hartmann (talk) 00:04, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

 Done -- I opted to swap the leaders instead of their territories. —Danre98^{(talk^contribs)} 00:32, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. Randomdudewithinternet (talk) 01:45, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. Herr Hartmann (talk) 07:47, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 October 2022

Can you add one UN member state that recognized the annexation? It’s confirmed North Korea recognized it. Source: [1] 76.68.77.79 (talk) 13:09, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Removed the claim that no country recognised it from the infobox. Rsk6400 (talk) 13:26, 4 October 2022 (UTC)