Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 1.5 days are automatically archived by ClueBot III if there are more than 5.

Hi. I'm concered there is a part of your userpage that is a violation of WP:UPNOT. The concern on your userpage that I am referring to is the link at the bottom to a video published by a Ukrainian brigade that allegedly contains footage of war crimes. You should know, given your interest in the Russia-Ukraine topic, that killing a soldier who is trying to surrender or who is not resisting is, in fact, a war crime. Please remove this. It is disgusting and not relevant to collaborating on building a high-quality encyclopedia. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 21:54, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Allegedly? Who is alleging that? War crimes are a very serious accusation, please provide a reliable source before making these kinds of insinuations, particularly in a contentious topic area. All I see just from the video is armed militants invading another people's land and being targeted by a defensive brigade, which is certainly not a war crime and I don't think most would consider disgusting. LordCollaboration (talk) 23:03, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You can determine that after researching international humanitarian law. Also, I'm curious, if the tables were turned and I had on my userpage a link or channel to a Russian brigade neutralizing Ukrainian soldiers, would that not be considered "disgusting" or promoting "war crimes"? I believe this is strictly unacceptable to have on a userpage, no matter which side you are on. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 23:27, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm no longer comfortable or confident editing pages related to the Russo-Ukraine war or continuing contact with this user. However, this does not mean I'm not interested in the topic off-wiki. I'm simply no longer interested in disputing issues of territory, morality, casualties, or essentially anything related to it. Therefore, I'm suspending my activities on Wikipedia related to the 'contentious topic,' which is the Russo-Ukrainian war. I'm sorry. Goodbye. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 00:01, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There are Wikipedia editors using Wikipedia as a webhost for lists of killed foreign volunteers where they link to "TrackANaziMerc" Telegram, a Telegram channel where volunteers are mocked, they and their families doxed, and falsely accused of being Nazis, yet there is no moral outrage about this. There is nothing violating about the link, it's a YouTube video, so please stop making false accusations and take your outrage elsewhere. TylerBurden (talk) 13:27, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

What editors are doing that? AusLondonder (talk) 13:08, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That would be EkoGraf (talk · contribs) doing it on User talk:Mr.User200, who doesn't seem to mind his talk page being used for this function. TylerBurden (talk) 11:43, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That is far worse than the YouTube link on your page. AusLondonder (talk) 12:56, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree. TylerBurden (talk) 13:21, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, the telegram channel TrackANaziMerc is not being used as a source in Wikipedia articles due to it not being considered RS per WP guidelines. Me and Mr.User200 (talk · contribs) (sometimes when I am not able, so I am not adding it solely myself), save the links at his talk page (in agreement) as a reminder for us to follow-up on finding RS sources for the reported deaths of foreign fighters, since in most cases RS have eventually confirmed all of the deaths being reported by the telegram channel, regardless of the disparaging language being used by it and the obvious bias. When RS confirmations are found, the telegram posts are deleted/removed from Mr.User200's talk page section. As for the topic of this conversation that was started by editor Alexeyevitch, I have no interest in it. EkoGraf (talk) 19:34, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Well it's certainly a fascinating hobby you and your buddy got, regardless of how you sugarcoat it you're still compiling lists based on a Telegram channel, which is not limited to "disparaging language", but contains actual doxxing, and actively linking to it. My point here is I don't see Alexeyvitch creating ANI threads over it. If he is morally outraged over the video in my user page I would like to see what he has to say about your project. TylerBurden (talk) 12:11, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Alexeyevitch: if the tables were turned and I had on my userpage a link or channel to a Russian brigade neutralizing Ukrainian soldiers, would that not be considered "disgusting" or promoting "war crimes"? The issue is Russian soldiers aren't lawfully present in Ukrainian territory. A video of Russian soldiers killing people in Ukraine may very well be a war crime. You cannot easily compare these two situations. AusLondonder (talk) 13:32, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

		The Username Barnstar
		Your username always gives me a laugh, and I just saw that this barnstar exists, which you are very deserving of. jolielover♥talk 16:49, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad! TylerBurden (talk) 11:31, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I just wanted some advise on where I should put Stephen Charlton's comments about what he describes as "reclassified losses"? Should it be put in the article of the unit he served in (the 2nd International Legion), the International Legion or Casualties of the Russo-Ukrainian war article?

Article link -> Why dismantling Ukraine’s International Legion risks wasting experienced volunteers / The New Voice of Ukraine Lazarbeem (talk) 21:02, 16 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Lazarbeem It would depend what the context is for that portion, by the sound of it it's the 2nd. TylerBurden (talk) 12:47, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

does that mean that if an article says something elsewhere you can put it in the head as well? i couldnt find anything for or against ~2026-11244-58 (talk) 21:34, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@~2026-11244-58 The "head" is meant to be a summary of the article body (the rest of the article), as it says in WP:LEAD: "The lead should identify the topic and summarize the body of the article with appropriate weight." TylerBurden (talk) 21:41, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

understood ~2026-11244-58 (talk) 21:45, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TylerBurden. I think combat experience gained by Russians from the Russo-Ukrainian war is notable enough to be mentioned in the lead as this combat experience will be significant in a future war with the NATO or the Europe, even if President Putin and other Russian officials are claiming that they have no intention of starting a war with the Eastern Europe for now. If you do not object, can you help to mention it in the body of article and restore it in the lead. Pachu Kannan (talk) 18:22, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Pachu Kannan Hello, I don't know if a single source would be enough for the WP:LEAD, but feel free to introduce it to a relevant body section where there would at the very least be a base for it. TylerBurden (talk) 02:22, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]