This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ukraine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ukraine on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.UkraineWikipedia:WikiProject UkraineTemplate:WikiProject UkraineUkraine
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList
This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CultureWikipedia:WikiProject CultureTemplate:WikiProject Cultureculture
This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia
This article is within the scope of WikiProject NATO, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.NATOWikipedia:WikiProject NATOTemplate:WikiProject NATONATO
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
@Stuartyeates:, which Wikipedia guideline is fulfilled by the demand “If there's going to be a 'In Ukrainian' column there also needs to be a 'In Russian' column”?[1] Which requirement of Articles for Creation is this supposed to satisfy? —MichaelZ.15:02, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There’s no lapse of NPOV by including Ukrainian names in a Ukrainian subject. In fact your requirement is not NPOV: we don’t require Ukrainian names in articles on Russia either.
Whatever’s helpful for editors belongs on the talk page, not in encyclopedic copy, but editors can find articles in any other Wikipedia through interlanguage links anyway. Please remove this requirement from the review. —MichaelZ.22:51, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi all, I understand the sensitive situation in Ukraine, but, the last time I checked, the official language of Ukraine is Ukrainian. Thus, by trying to include a 'In Russian' column, it appears as if we are presenting NPOV, but it actually favors a particular POV, in this case Russian POV, in the name of "allowing editors to find sources."
I see a lot of lists at enwiki, and I don't see a "In Spanish" column for the lists about the US despite the fact that there are a lot of Spanish speakers in the US. Isn't this the double standard? I guess that the official language does not mean anything at enwiki, just like many New Zealand-related lists at enwiki do not include descriptions in Māori.
Anyway, what Stuartyeates wrote was "If there's going to be a 'In Ukrainian' column there also needs to be a 'In Russian' column." It's easy to be fixed, though. I'll just remove the 'In Ukrainian' column. After all, this is the Wikipedia in English. RottenApple777 (talk) 19:12, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Let me be clear: I don't believe that the current sourcing is sufficient. The 'In Russian' column suggestion was an attempt to improve the sourcing situation. Other approaches to improve the sourcing situation are also more than welcome. It's also possible that sources don't exist yet, but will soon, as per WP:TOOSOON. You're also welcome to re-submit the Draft and see whether another editor has a different opinion. Stuartyeates (talk) 19:25, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Since there is no response, I just add the following statements before moving on to another issue with the draft that was presented by the reviewer.
The List of cities in Ukraine includes an "In Ukrainian" column and lists pro-Russian/Russian-controlled cities such as Donetsk, Luhansk, Sevastopol and Simferopol. Yet, no one seems to have required to add an "In Russian" column to the list in order to maintain NPOV. As for the claim of assisting to find sources by adding a "In Russian" column, people can use interlanguage links as Mzajac pointed out. I also would like to point out that the reviewer wrote that "If there's going to be a 'In Ukrainian' column there also needs to be a 'In Russian' column." The condition to add an "In Russian" column was the existence of the "In Ukrainian" column in the draft.
The UNESCO list says all the items are covered under "Article 1 of the 1954 Hague Convention" (which seems like a sensible demarcation) but contains items such as "Residential buildings in Mariupol (1930-41) – (Donetsk region)" There is nothing about this list item which allows it to be independent identified or verified (it seems like thousands or maybe tens of thousands of buildings could meet this description) and nothing which suggests is actually covered by Article 1, or why. I'm not sure that the UNESCO list is reliable for building the wikipedia list on. Similarly with "Residential historical building in Kharkiv – (Kharkiv)" and "Historic residential building of the XIXth century (Kharkiv)" Note that the list is prefaced by "UNESCO is conducting a preliminary damage assessment for cultural properties." I don't believe that every item on the UNESCO list should automatically be included on the wikipedia list. Stuartyeates (talk) 23:58, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
UNESCO is the global authority on the subject and presumably it coordinates with sources of primary information and experts. How could we possibly improve on its published work, apart from second-guessing or original research? We could only find additional sources to clarify or get more detail (e.g., identify which specific residential buildings or suite of them it refers to—if it’s even defined that way, considering that over 1,600 buildings in the city are damaged or destroyed).[2] —MichaelZ.00:03, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
New destruction can occur as long as the war is ongoing, and then assessment will continue for weeks, months, or even years afterwards. After damage is identified, someone has to assess the possibility of mitigation, then the costs, then whether it will happen. And then these resources may be written off, demolished, preserved, repaired, renovated, or replaced. So this list will continue to be updated. —MichaelZ.17:56, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I guess I didn’t really address the original comment. As far as I can tell, you are concerned that the press release summarizing the cultural heritage sites that the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization says it has verified might not be a WP:reliable source because 1) we can’t independently verify them, and 2) because there’s no indication these objects are covered by Article 1 of The Hague convention. I believe it is a reliable source, because:
WP:RS doesn’t require us to independently verify facts. It only wants us to use independent sources, and both UNESCO and the cited news media reporting on this are independent sources.
There is exactly such an indication in the light blue box near the top of the article.
Forgive me, but I think you’re missing that we merely need to verify that an independent secondary source reports this encyclopedic knowledge. We are not required to confirm the facts ourselves (which would constitute WP:original research).
So in my opinion UNESCO is a reliable source on this. By definition, as the UN8s global body tasked to define this information, it is the definitive source. It’s time to move this article into main space. —MichaelZ.02:44, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I want to add one more thing: with this list UNESCO is simply verifying destruction and/or damage of cultural sites within Ukraine but not indicating who have actually perpetrated them for now. --RottenApple777 (talk) 15:49, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t think there’s an issue with the status of UNESCO’s list, whether it’s preliminary or not: as a maintained list, there will likely always be information based on various levels of evidence on it.
The subject of this list article is the cultural resources that are listed by UNESCO. There is no requirement for us to verify whether these buildings are damaged, only whether they are on the list. The possible issue is, if you consider UNESCO to be an unreliable primary source, whether secondary sources report on UNESCO’s list. I don’t think that’s necessary, but I think the article has that anyway. —MichaelZ.22:46, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
.svg)
