Talk:Russia launches full-scale invasion against Ukraine

Review

@SVTCobra, Cromium, JJLiu112, Bddpaux: hidden comments added for faster review process.2006nishan178713^t@lk 10:15, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Review of revision 4663242 [Passed]

Revision 4663242 of this article has been reviewed by JJLiu112 (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 23:47, 24 February 2022 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Passed for breaking; please replace source & with just comma , The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Revision 4663242 of this article has been reviewed by JJLiu112 (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 23:47, 24 February 2022 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Passed for breaking; please replace source & with just comma , The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

TASS

I am a bit uncomfortable with using TASS as a source since it is Russian state media. If there was a section on the Russian public being informed about the invasion, but there is nothing about it. There should be more neutral media sources than TASS. AZOperator (talk) 23:49, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

I think it is OK. It shows Wikinews is taking in all perspectives before writing a synthesis article. If the sources were TASS, RT and Pravda then there would obviously be a problem. --SVTCobra 00:50, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

In such circumstances, this will always be an issue. Perfection is nearly unachievable. When in doubt, simply remember:Our policy here is NOT 'balanced'.......but rather, 'neutral'. When confused, fall back to focusing on factual statements (and yes, even those can be moving targets at times!) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bddpaux (talk • contribs) 19:15, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

“Odessa” is the wrong city name.

“Odessa” is the wrong city name. Similar to “Kiev” ITZQing (talk) 06:35, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

You mean it should be Odesa? SVTCobra 06:55, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Yes. It’s the Ukraine official usage. https://mfa.gov.ua/en/correctua https://ukraine.ua/regions-of-ukraine/odesa/ ITZQing (talk) 12:13, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

These names were decided in 1996, The "Romanization Resolution" adopted by the United Nations was in 2012, and the time of the news is 2014-2015. It cannot be considered that new information replaces old information, ITZQing (talk) 15:57, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Not done @ITZQing: I disagree that governments or the UN should be a "language police". I agree it is best policy to observe such requests, but I do not want to go through our archives and change all of these. "Odesa" and "Odessa" are both valid spellings. Even Wikipedia still lists both spellings. And they are both in common usage in English language sources. I also know Turkey wants to be called Türkiye, but again why should they dictate names in another language? Russians use "Нью-Йорк" for New York. Should they be forced to use "New York"? I think not. Wikinews allows different dialects of English (such as "color" or "colour").
Is it best practice to use "Odesa"? Yes, absolutely. If we had Category:Odessa, I would probably even rename it to Odesa, but I would not change all usage of Odessa. I am ranting a bit here, but I hope you see some logic in what I am saying. --SVTCobra 08:00, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

I understand what you mean, but I also want to point out that using a name should take into account the feelings of the local people, which is part of the principle of "name follows the master". In fact, the name "Odessa" is a direct translation from Russian to English, and this name translation was implemented during the USSR period (non-Russian names for Odesa were not regulated during the Russian Empire), with Russification and colonization color of doctrine. "Russification was actively used as a tool to extinguish each constituent country’s national identity" is also mentioned in the information I provided. These things are unacceptable to the local people, and whether it is the Ukrainian government, people, NGOs, etc. are working hard to eliminate these influences, it is reasonable from all aspects Yes, not a moral hijacking,, a lot of people refer to wikimedia, and if they can't see the correct spelling, they will bring the wrong spelling to social, news media, business, school, etc. I believe this is not wikimedia original intention of the establishment. I am ranting a bit here too, but it's my duty to explain it all ITZQing (talk) 08:54, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

I am extremely sympathetic to the Ukrainian people. I also know first-hand that de-Russification was a myth until Putin's military aggression. (He caused what he used as a pretense for the invasion.) I will not delve into this, but suffice to say I have been to Ukraine many times. That said, in my opinion "Odessa" is actually closer (in English) to how it is pronounced. Not that English has great consistency in spelling/pronunciation. This idea of considering feelings is antithetic to the evolution of language. Was the name Copenhagen not given to København by non-English speakers (probably by the Hanseatic League)? Yet it still persists. The list is endless Rome vs Roma. Peking vs Beijing. Venice vs Venizia (many languages also call the city Venidi).

To say "Odessa" is a direct translation of Russian language is really pushing it. Why is it not a phonetic spelling? Both Ukrainian and Russian languages use a different alphabet altogether. I hate to sound regressive, but I am also not a revisionist. SVTCobra 09:35, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

If the name of a region (including its translation) is not decided by the local government and people, who should decide it? Not to mention that "Odesa" is now the most popular spelling in the media and social networks. Also the default spelling of the United States Board on Geographic Names (BGN) and the Permanent Committee on Geographical Names for British Official Use (PCGN). ITZQing (talk) 03:34, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Fixed -- lazily.--Bddpaux (talk) 20:25, 22 March 2024 (UTC)