Talk:Siege of Mariupol#Commanders in infobox

1. The statement falsely implies that the reports of the pyrrhic victory are biased or controlled by the Western establishment, even though they are very credible and unbiased (as opposed to the Guardian, which is less credible and slightly more biased).

2. The Guardian is also “Western media,” so how come it isn’t mentioned as such but DW and The Times are? LordOfWalruses (talk) 21:02, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

• Are you talking about the statement in the lead? Please be more precise when you are making comments about an article. The lead has "some Western reports" and then lists them in the notes; the Guardian is not one of them (but maybe I don't understand your point about the Guardian). And no, it does not imply that those sources are "biased or controlled". Drmies (talk) 21:36, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

The text says "In contrast, Ukrainian president Zelenskyy stated 90 percent of helicopter pilots sent to Mariupol during the course of the siege to resupply Ukrainian forces and evacuate the wounded were lost due to Russian air-defenses," but the footnote says, "And the people who were ready to go were 90% sure that they might not come back.." That is a different meaning. The text in the Wikipedia article is therefor inaccurate. 67.221.109.142 (talk) 17:15, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

{{not done}} Read the source four paras up from where you quote. Material is verifiable. Cinderella157 (talk) 01:48, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Today those two estimates have been removed twice from the infobox, and I think this matter should be discussed more thoroughly.

Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP) is one of the world's leading resources for data on armed conflicts, so their estimate, added by @Tomissonneil a couple of weeks ago, definitely adds important context.

And AP's estimate is consistent with UCDP's, so it's very useful as independent confirmation.

In light of this, I find it puzzling that both of those estimates have been removed, twice - first by @Flemmish Nietzsche, and then by @Cinderella157 - and I would like to understand to reasoning behind this decision. DancingOwl (talk) 13:08, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

:There are more issues with the article. How did the infobox says "Per Human Rights Watch: 8,034 excess deaths", when the source [https://www.hrw.org/feature/russia-ukraine-war-mariupol/counting-the-dead Counting the Dead: Documenting Loss in Mariupol, a Ukrainian City Besieged and Devastated] says - To better grasp how many people died, we analyzed satellite imagery, photographs, and videos of five of Mariupol’s cemeteries. We estimate that at least 10,284 people died and were buried in these five cemeteries during the first year of the conflict, though likely many more died. We estimate that around 2,250 people would have died naturally in Mariupol during that time, meaning the city had at least 8,034 excess deaths above a peacetime rate
, and
10,284 is likely a significant underestimate of the total number of people who died in Mariupol during this period. It is also unclear how many of these people were civilians and how many were combatants. ManyAreasExpert (talk) 13:40, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

::Agree - both HRW's and UN's numbers are major underestimates, as their sources explicitly say, which is why UCDP's and AP's estimates are so important, in my view. DancingOwl (talk) 17:06, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

:::@DancingOwl The AP article says "[T]he municipal government in exile estimated 25,000 people at a minimum had died. But at least three people in the city since June say the number killed is triple that or more" {{emdash}} that is not the AP saying that 75,000 people had died, only acknowledging that some people have said so. I have nothing against the UCDP estimate itself, but any amount of (civilian) casualty claims beyond UN + Russia claim + Ukraine claim + 1 other is excessive. Replacing the HRW statement with Uppsala in the infobox would be fine. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 19:35, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

::::Replacing the HRW statement with Uppsala sounds like a reasonable option DancingOwl (talk) 19:55, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

:::::Done. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 19:59, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

{{edit extended-protected|Siege of Mariupol|answered=yes}}

Adam Delimkhanov as a commander for Russia. Naarwaez (talk) 17:12, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

{{not done}} Per MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE. There is a passing mention that they commanded Chechens but this does not establish they were a key or significant as a commander in this battle. Cinderella157 (talk) 23:28, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

{{Edit extended-protected|Siege of Mariupol|answered=yes}}

I've created SIZO-2 so I'd like to propose adding the following sentence to the end of Siege of Mariupol#Last Ukrainian holdouts and prisoners of war section:

• Some Mariupol defenders, including members of the Azov Brigade, were moved to SIZO-2 in Taganrog, Russia, which is notorious for prisoner abuse.

Thank you. Le Loy (talk) 23:23, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

:Source for the first part of the sentence. The last part of the sentence is possibly WP:SYNTH, unless a sources says both things. Cinderella157 (talk) 01:45, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

:{{Not done}}: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Valorrr ^{(lets chat)} 16:19, 8 May 2025 (UTC)