Talk:Battle of Orikhiv

Notability

This doesn't seem worthy of a page yet to me - at least not in this form. The Russians only entered Orikhiv proper once, for a short time in March 2022. Everything after that in the article is just shelling and then the stuff south of Orikhiv during the counteroffensive. I might suggest a draftify here. I suppose we could rename it to "Orikhiv front" or "Battle of the Orikhiv sector, to cover the sector that has its own subsection in 2023 Ukrainian counteroffensive, but I think that might be straying into WP:OR territory, since it's really only a handful of news articles and ISW reports [1] [2] that use that terminology. Thoughts? HappyWith (talk) 15:57, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

I would support keeping the article, but it does need some improvements, maybe bring information from the Ukrainian wikipedia here. SnoopyBird (talk) 19:04, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

There actually is no equivalent Ukrainian article. HappyWith (talk) 14:37, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

@HappyWith: This is a similar issue to the one we've had with Battle of Huliaipole. A talk page discussion a while back concluded with broad consensus that the scope should be changed to "Zaporizhzhia front", so as to cover the whole front - including Huliaipole and Orikhiv. Unfortunately, the actual move hasn't happened yet, as I'm still the main person updating the article and such a refocus in scope is just too much work for one person. If you're concerned about the notability of this article, I'd recommend merging it with that one and then we can have a go at moving the article. -- Grnrchst (talk) 08:30, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

ProveIt with ISW cites

@Refhb Thanks for creating the article! I think you were using the plugin ProveIt to add the citations to this article, and unfortunately there's a bug it has with ISW citations where it just completely destroys the information you put in and replaces it with a useless url that goes to a 404 error with no indication of what it was supposed to be citing. When you have the time and if remember what the original assessments were, can you go through and fix those? Right now the links are completely broken. HappyWith (talk) 16:04, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Please correct the phrase

What's the meaning of: "the Russian troops managed to repel the Russian forces" ? 87.13.106.31 (talk) 10:55, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

http://dev-isw.bivings.com

Dear colleague, what do you mean by linking to this non-existent website? Sneeuwschaap (talk) 22:15, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

I've mentioned this before on this talk page, but it's a glitch with a certain workflow plugin a lot of editors use called ProveIt that keeps wrecking specifically ISW citations and making them unusable by turning them all into "http://dev-isw.bivings.com". HappyWith (talk) 22:29, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 August 2023

Change "In the next three days, the Russian troops managed to repel the Russian forces about 5 km to the south"

to "Over the following three days, Ukrainian troops managed to push Russian forces about 5 km southward" Mr.Meneer (talk) 14:05, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

 Done Lightoil (talk) 04:08, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Citation style was giving me a headache

I've cleaned up the titles of the duplicated references, to make it more obvious, but left the rest of the mess intact.

Geolocated footage released on 27 March 2023 indicated Russian forces captured Piatykhatky. On April 4, it was revealed Russian forces captured Kamianske up to the Yanchorak river and on April 5 Nesterianka.

... On the next day, Ukrainian forces advanced into Lobkove and towards Robotyne. ... Over the next two months, Ukrainian troops gradually reached the target of Robotyne 18km south, attacking the town on the Russian front line of defense.

References

Previously, all the titles were "Institute for the Study of War". Many of these are now duplicates all the way down to access-date. — MaxEnt 16:37, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

They aren't actually supposed to be all references to the March 24 report. I'm pretty sure they're supposed to be referencing many different reports, but the URLs kept getting mangled by a bug in ProveIt. Note that basically every claim in the article is about events from 2023 and late 2022, but the report is covering only events from March 24, 2022. Logically speaking, this can't be the right report. HappyWith (talk) 17:57, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Status of Battle

The status of this battle is incorrect. The battle is currently consider ongoing and no information have says otherwise. That's why it should be changed. LegendaryChristopher (talk) 15:12, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 December 2023

I request for the status of this battle to be change from Ukrainian Victory to ongoing. There's currently no information stating the battle as definitively over and until any information could be provided the battle should be consider ongoing. LegendaryChristopher (talk) 15:17, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

 Already done M.Bitton (talk) 23:38, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Merge into Orikhiv?

In the article's current form, this doesn't look like much of a battle or military engagement. It looks more like eight sentences describing artillery shelling and its consequences. Initially I was going to propose a move to Shelling of Orikhiv, but I don't think that would be notable in its own right, so I'm suggesting the information gets merged into Orikhiv and the page removed. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 10:42, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

What about merging to southern Ukraine campaign? This was suggested in a past AfD, and seems a more useful target for a redirect. HappyWith (talk) 14:39, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

HappyWith: That proposal would be better than doing nothing, but I struggle to justify including this content there; I think what we have in Battle of Orikhiv is not particularly notable and would only serve to break the flow. There doesn't seem to be much room in southern Ukraine campaign to discuss the bombardment of minor cities; the article is largely focused on tactical and operational movements on the ground, and we don't appear to be giving any attention to other instances of shelling. I'm not sure that would be due in an article with the scope of a two-year-long military campaign unless the shelling had received particularly significant coverage.

I think Battle of Huliaipole probably has a lot more to offer southern Ukraine campaign in terms of useful content.

SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 17:41, 23 January 2024 (UTC)