Talk:Battle of Chasiv Yar

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Moving Chasiv Yar#Russian invasion of Ukraine to this article

Should we move all of Chasiv Yar#Russian invasion of Ukraine to this article as a background section? That article (Chasiv Yar's) is suffering from a recentism slant. Or should we keep the two separate and only focus on events after the start of the battle? Scu ba (talk) 15:12, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are the battles in Ivanivske (and maybe Bohdanivka?) within scope for this article?

Ivanivske (and Bohdanivka) control the eastern approaches to Chasiv Yar and are basically on the outskirts of the city, just on the other side of the canal. As far as I've checked, there are no separate articles for either of these 2 battles, so details regarding them are mostly mentioned on their respective city pages, or the larger Eastern Ukraine campaign page. Should details regarding the fighting and claimed capture of Ivanivske by Russia be added to this article?

For example, I could potentially add a "fighting east of the canal" subsection to the battle section of this article, to include the clashes on Chasiv Yar's outskirt settlements of Ivanivske and to a lesser extent, Bohdanivka, to give a more well-rounded view of the situation surrounding Chasiv Yar prior to any actual (future) fighting in the city. But I'm not going to try this unless other editors agree that adding some details of the Ivanivske (and Bohdanivka) battles to this article is on-topic and within scope. So, worth it or no? RopeTricks (talk) 02:52, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you find it within the scope of the battle, then yes. The best measurements for determining the scope of a battle in the war are most likely the ISW assessments, or other sources which give support to the notions or statements. Reaper1945 (talk) 00:32, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Debatable, either they're in this scope, or they're in the scope of the Battle of Bakhmut article. But I'm assuming Russia isn't going to stop any time soon in the area so I think it's fine to include them in this scope. Scu ba (talk) 01:31, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Start date

I find it questionable to define the start date as when Russian troops entered city boundaries (after all, this isn't called "Battle in Chasiv Yar"). The Russians were already fighting for Chasiv Yar for months. The battle of Bakhmut and Avdiivka articles had a broader start date. Won't revert because I believe soon we'll have better info. Once again I would recommend commenting out older information instead of deleting it outright. Alexis Coutinho (talk) 22:00, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In the case of the Battle of Chasiv Yar, the starting date for the attack on the city may be good, but it should be added that the fighting for the city has actually been going on on the outskirts since December 2023. In the case of the Battle of Avdiivka, the dates are given well. In the case of the Battle of Bakhmut this is no longer the case. Giving July 3, 2022 as the starting date, justifying it with the capture of Lysychansk, is not appropriate. This is not an adequate justification. The attack on the city took place on August 1, 2022, and since the starting date cannot be justified otherwise, this date would have to be chosen as the start date of the battle. The end date as May 20, 2022 selected as the main one, the best end date for the battle is also wrong. Ukraine controlled until the end of November 2023, on November 29, 2023, probably the southwestern part of the city itself and its southwestern outskirts, and still very close to the city, and even in the city itself, less intense fighting took place and even heavy ground attack ones sometimes. Only then was Ukraine completely pushed out of the city and its outskirts and the fight for the city was actually completely over and ended with Russian victory and control of 100% of the administrative borders of the city and its outskirts, so I propose August 1, 2022-November 29, 2023 as the main date range of the battle with the note that there are also other date ranges. Bortak42 (talk) 10:34, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The fighting WAS at the city limits

There's a weird disconnected neighborhood that, while not physically connected to the rest of it, is legally part of the city and within the city limits(check google maps). The eastern most part of this eastern detached piece is where fighting has broken out over the first row of houses at the edge of the suburbs on April 4th. So the article should not be deleted. 2604:3D09:1F80:CA00:F532:E428:6F0D:FC89 (talk) 00:39, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Krasnohorivka

Some of you might be interested in building the Battle of Krasnohorivka article. See Talk:Battle of Krasnohorivka#Battle has begun. I've also added an entry to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Ukraine/Requests page. Cheers. Alexis Coutinho (talk) [ping me] 20:47, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@RopeTricks: 😊. Alexis Coutinho (talk) [ping me] 23:52, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
working on it RopeTricks (talk) 01:05, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 May 2024

Storm-Z has not been active since June 24th 2023, it has been replaced with storm-V so it shouldn't be listed in the "units involved" list. If you could please change it. AshtonWest032 (talk) 13:50, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Charliehdb (talk) 09:50, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 May 2024

Storm Z haven't existed since June 24, 2023 according to many sources including the Wikipedia page about storm z https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storm-Z . but its still included as a "unit involved" please fix this. AshtonWest032 (talk) 13:10, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly which sources are they? Please clarify. 2003 LN6 16:33, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. M.Bitton (talk) 00:25, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Breakthrough in Eastern Chasiv Yar

In recent days there has been a Russian breakthrough and advances in the eastern part of the city and this could be added to the battle and describe these advances.

BREAKTHROUGH IN KANAL MOCRODISTDICT

In recent hours and days many sources have reported the fall of the kanal micro district which is the easternmost part of chasiv yar, thus this article is outdated Nicolas taquino ricio (talk) 23:31, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What sources, exactly? Once they're gathered any of us can edit an extension to the article & cite them MagnaGermania (talk) 08:19, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stop quoting David Axe as a source

His claim of whopping 90k Russian troops casualties is absolutely farce and he have no evidence to prove that. Even Ukrainian military source didn't claimed that numbers in the battle. Even if he did say not all Russians died in chasiv yar, it's still a bullshit especially when the article mentioned his quote "for every town—or even neighborhood—the Russians capture, they bury tens of thousands of their own troops" which is again a bullshit with no evidence. Dauzlee (talk) 03:13, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agree per Wikipedia:Exceptional claims require exceptional sources; local consensus among editors in the topic area would certainly not characterize Axe as an exceptional source. The claim that while not all of them died in and around Chasiv Yar, a significant portion of them certainly did is unreasonably vague for an encyclopedia (what constitutes a "significant" portion –  10%? 5%?), making the 99,000 figure misleading and undue. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 05:00, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t know, since the Ukrainians don’t dispute his numbers. Multiple Ukrainians news outlets, plus analyst and former navy seal Chuck Pfarrer seem to have accepted his figures. Now, this doesn’t prove them, of course, it’s just something I’d like to point out.
Links:
https://english.nv.ua/amp/russia-lost-100k-man-for-one-ukrainian-neighborhood-in-chasiv-yar-50432639.htmlhttps://euromaidanpress.com/2024/07/05/forbes-russia-lost-up-to-100000-troops-to-capture-single-chasiv-yar-district/
https://united24media.com/latest-news/russian-military-suffers-99000-casualties-since-the-beginning-of-chasiv-yar-campaign-reports-forbes-1081https://x.com/chuckpfarrer/status/1809373654532125181?s=46&t=w92MrkBRhc0b89XGeFgWoA Tomissonneil (talk) 08:48, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's the only casualties estimate we have as of now. I consider it an improvement to have it, attributed, until (if) something better is available. ManyAreasExpert (talk) 09:58, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's not an improvement; we don't need to have any casualty figures, and having one that is extremely vague and an exceptional claim which is misleading and likely untrue to some degree is actually worse than having nothing at all in my opinion. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 16:54, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
an exceptional claim
90,000 99,000 casualties for 90 days is not an exceptional claim. UA MOD-published daily enemy casualties exceed 1,000 and lately they are more or less inline with other assessments. ManyAreasExpert (talk) 20:50, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
90,0000 casualties for 90 days in a single battle in this war *is* an exceptional claim. This isn't World War Two. It's embarrassing that you're citing Ukrainian government departments for an unbiased estimate. 2601:152:4F00:5AB0:C7D:E490:2EAB:8097 (talk) 20:57, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you know what it takes to burry 100.000 bodies? Where are the bodies? Where are the mass graves? Felixkrull (talk) 08:09, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What logic is this? You might as well just source a 4chan post; it's better than nothing, right? David Axe is a known crank who publishes propaganda pieces for Forbes, almost none of it is credibly sourced and is all sensationalised to Daily Mail levels. The UA MOD is not a sensible source either, for God's sake. Why would you take the word of a belligerent's military PR department in a war? 2601:152:4F00:5AB0:C7D:E490:2EAB:8097 (talk) 20:55, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The New Voice of Ukraine, Euromaidan Press, and Chuck Pfarrer have almost certainly mischaracterized Axe's confusingly-written and misleading claim:
Original quote from Axe:

The Russian military has reportedly lost 99,000 troops since the start of the Chasiv Yar campaign. And while not all of them died in and around Chasiv Yar, a significant portion of them certainly did.

The New Voice of Ukraine:

Russian troops captured tiny part of Chasiv Yar, Donetsk Oblast, which was previously home to 12,000 people, three months after launching a broad offensive on Chasiv Yar, at cost of 99,000 killed and wounded

Russia lost 99 thousand soldiers near Chasiv Yar

Russia loses 100k soldiers in the Battle of Chasiv Yar - Forbes

Euromaidan Press:

Forbes: Russia lost up to 100,000 troops to capture single Chasiv Yar district

Russian forces have captured a neighborhood in Chasiv Yar, Donetsk Oblast, after a three-month campaign reportedly costing them nearly 100,000 troops, according to Forbes

Chuck Pfarrer:

Assaults on Chasiv Yar area of operations are estimated to have cost 99,000 Russian casualties.

Nowhere does Axe suggest all 99,000 soldiers were lost in or around Chasiv Yar; rather, he seems to be implying that this is the number of total Russian casualties across the front since 4 April 2024, which is apparently the start date of a supposed "Chasiv Yar campaign". He estimates that a "significant portion" of the 99,000, which may be, for example, 9,900 (10%) or some completely different number, became casualties at Chasiv Yar; regardless, I hope the misinterpretations by the secondary sources reveal to everybody why I found the way he framed this sentence to be so problematic. There is no connection being implied between the geographic area around Chasiv Yar and the figure of 99,000 soldiers. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 23:32, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He does, technically, offer a sort of distinction, with Russia burying "tens of thousands of their soldiers" around Chasiv Yar, but I agree that he should have worded it differently. Also, 4 April was the day that Russia launched their first direct attack on the town, as such the campaign is not a "supposed" one. Tomissonneil (talk) 01:58, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding the notion that a campaign for town X necessarily begins with the first direct attack on town X and continues indefinitely thereafter, I'd argue that the use of such terms in real time is subjective, often inconsistently applied, and difficult to justify; consider that the only results on Google for the exact string "Chasiv Yar campaign" are Axe's article and its derivatives. Other editors have chosen to refer to the same series of events as a battle of Chasiv Yar, ultimately based on marginally greater usage in RS, though this is not without its issues either. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 03:10, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nazar Voloshyn, a spokesman for the Ukrainian MoD, has recently disputed David Axe’s claim, which should end this discussion. Tomissonneil (talk) 04:16, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In regards to a previous edit made, there doesn’t appear to be a misunderstanding. David Axe said in his article that “tens of thousands” of Russians were buried fighting for the neighborhood while Nazar Voloshyn said it was “only” 5,000. Axe also heavily implied that most of these Russians were lost in the Chasiv Yar campaign. Tomissonneil (talk) 01:45, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see no reason to include Axe's original conjecture in the face of the statement by Voloshyn; the awkward wording and bizarre framing of Axe's statement is more likely to confuse our readers. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 02:19, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t see how it would, given that it provides the original context, which is then disputed by Voloshyn, and it also shows that there wasn’t a misunderstanding. Tomissonneil (talk) 02:32, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Espreso article and the quote make it plainly evident that there was a misunderstanding. Voloshyn and Espreso (in addition to the others above) were clearly under the impression that Axe was claiming the Russian military had taken 99,000 casualties in Chasiv Yar alone, full stop, which is a forgivable misinterpretation of what Axe wrote, but one that wildly distorts the meaning of what he actually intended – literally by orders of magnitude. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 02:48, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t actually think that Voloshyn did misinterpret him. David Axe seems to imply that the bulk of the losses occurred as part of Russia’s attempts to capture Chasiv Yar. Axe also does outright say that "tens of thousands" of Russians died taking the Kanal District, which was also disputed. Now, I will trim it down and clean it a bit, but I think that it should be mentioned, mainly show to our readers that Russia had not lost that many men fighting for Chasiv Yar. Tomissonneil (talk) 08:46, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I watched the Voloshyn interview in question (linked in the Espreso article) in the hope of gaining some clarity about whether or not there was a misinterpretation of Axe here. I'll provide a transcription of the relevant portions, which begin at 1:55:16. My approximate translation is included, which you can verify with your machine-translation service of choice.

Interviewer: Пане Назаре, напередодні видання Forbes повідомило про те, що росіяни втратили у битві за Часів Яр уже дев'яносто дев'ять тисяч вбитими и пораненими. Битва за Часів Яр розпочиналась у квітні, і щодня ви повідомляли про те, що сто-двісті окупантів було на цьому напрямку знищені. Де береться цифра дев'яносто дев'ять тисяч? Наскільки влизька вона до реальності?

Voloshyn: В принципі, цифра билзька до реальності в тому плані, що міжнародні експерти і аналитики приписали її в тому плані, що за час активних бойових дій, це за три місяці, по всій лінії бойового зіткнення, така цифра може бути. Скажу одразу, що втрати ворога я спеціально підрахував за нашою інформацією за квітень на нашому напрямку за місяць було понад двадцять чотири тисячі, за травень - понад двадцять п'ять, майже двадцать шість тисяч і за червень - майже тридцять дві тисячі ворога. Тобто, загальна цифра за три місяці наступальних дій як і Часового Яру так і по всій лінії фронту становить - ну, на східному напрямку, наша східна операційна зона, це вісімдесять дві тисячі окупантів. Ну, ще ж є інші напрямки, ну, до дев’яносто тисяч може дійде цифра. Десь плюс-мінус трошки... (interrupted)

Interviewer: Але вісімдесять дві тисячі - це вся лінія фронту в ОСУ «Хортиця», правільно?

Voloshyn: Саме так, та. Це приблизно цифра вісімдесять дві, плюс-мінус, ну, вона варіїрується. Ну, до дев'яносто можливо ще з іншими напрямками, там же Оріхівский, Времівський, ну тобто дев'яносто може бути. Тому, я не буду сперечатися з експертами, вони можливо мають більш детальний цифри. Про Часів Яр, це цифра надто велика. Там цифра за весь час активної часівоярівської ворожої операції про знищенню якраз мікрорайону квартал становить десь близько п'яті тисяч - до п'яті тисяч особового складу російського там було знищено, поховано в тих посадках. Вони не вернуться вже до іхніх домівок і вони навіть не розумїють, за що вони воювали... (interrupted)

Relevant portions end 1:57:27.

Interviewer: Mr. Nazar, yesterday a Forbes piece reported that the Russians had already lost 99,000 killed and wounded in the fight for Chasiv Yar. The fight for Chasiv Yar began in April, and every day [since], you've reported that 100 to 200 occupiers were killed on this front. Where does the figure of 99,000 come from? How close is it to the real number?

Voloshyn: In principle, this figure [of 99,000] is close to the real number, in the sense that international experts and analysts have described it as the number of losses over a three-month period of active hostilities across all the contact lines. In this context, the figure [of 99,000] may be [close to the real number]. I'll say right away that I've tabulated the enemy's losses according to our information – for April, on our front, it was over 24,000; for May, over 25,000 and almost 26,000; and for June, almost 32,000 enemies. That is to say, the total figure for three months of offensive actions, both in Chasiv Yar and across all the front lines amounts to... (clarifying himself) on the eastern front, in our eastern operational zone, this is 82,000 occupiers. But there exist other fronts, so it's possible that this figure [of total enemy losses over three months] may reach 90,000, more or less...

Interviewer: But 82,000 is for the front line of Operational-Strategic Group Khortytsia, right?

Voloshyn: Yes it is. This is approximately the figure [of total enemy losses over three months on Khortytsia's front area], 82,000 more or less ("plus or minus"), it varies. But, up to 90,000 is possible when including the other fronts, such as the Orikhiv front, the Vremivka front, that is to say, 90,000 is plausible. I'm not going to argue with experts, it's possible they have more detailed figures. Regarding Chasiv Yar, this figure [of 99,000 (referring back to the first question)] is too large. The figure for the entire duration of active enemy operations against Chasiv Yar, with the intention of destroying the [Kanal] neighborhood, amounts to somewhere close to 5,000. Up to 5,000 Russian soldiers were killed there and buried in those plantations. They will never return to their houses, and they don't even understand what they fought for...

@Tomissonneil, your spin of the situation, while generous to the Ukrainians and Axe, is selective. You've cherry-picked and dragged in the quote regarding "tens of thousands" in Axe's article, and assumed that Voloshyn's denial relates in some part to it, without any good reason to do so – "tens of thousands" is not the quote that's been republished throughout Ukrainian media, nor was it mentioned once in the interview. In this interview and the pieces written about it, Voloshyn is only asked about a single one of Axe's estimates, that of the 99,000, which has been clearly misinterpreted by the interviewer as referring to the number of casualties in Chasiv Yar, only. There is no basis for you to assume he has read Axe's entire article and is suddenly responding to a totally different unmentioned estimate without having been prompted to so. SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 19:01, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello just piping in to say David "GRU" Axe is a brainless moronic propagandist as is anyone who sources a single word he writes however since I must assume good faith I will say "those who consider David Axe a reliable source should reconsider" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:A601:5553:B000:D1CD:1CB6:E9BC:34BE (talk) 18:53, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 July 2024

Please insert under casualty tab -> A Dutch volunteer of the International Legion was killed in Chasiv Yar on May 20th 2024. (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chasiv_Yar and https://nos.nl/artikel/2522647-nederlandse-oorlogsvrijwilliger-in-oekraine-gesneuveld) Floris Minderhoud (talk) 00:19, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Battle_of_Chasiv_Yar&oldid=1234367518"