Talk:Raid on Tendra Spit

This article was nominated for deletion on 25 March 2024. The result of the discussion was keep.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Raid on Tendra Spit article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

WARNING: ACTIVE COMMUNITY SANCTIONS

The article Raid on Tendra Spit, along with other pages relating to the Russo-Ukrainian War, is designated by the community as a contentious topic. The current restrictions are:

Only extended-confirmed editors may make edits related to the topic area, though editors who are not extended-confirmed may post constructive comments and make edit requests related to articles within the topic area on article talk pages. Should disruption occur on article talk pages, administrators may take enforcement actions against disruptive editors and/or apply page protection on article talk pages. However, non-extended-confirmed editors may not make edits to internal project discussions related to the topic area, even on article talk pages. Internal project discussions include, but are not limited to, Articles for deletion nominations, WikiProjects, requests for comment, requested moves, and noticeboard discussions.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be sanctioned.

Remedy instructions and exemptions
Enforcement procedures: Violations of any restrictions and other conduct issues should be reported to the administrators' incidents noticeboard. Editors who violate any listed restrictions may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense. An editor must be aware before they can be sanctioned.

Military history: European / Russian & Soviet / Post-Cold War

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 articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	European military history task force
	Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force
	Post-Cold War task force

Russia: History / Military

	Russia portal 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 articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the history of Russia task force.
	This article is supported by the Russian, Soviet, and CIS military history task force.

Ukraine

	Ukraine portal 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 articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Map needed

It is requested that a map or maps be included in this article to improve its quality.

Photos for the article[edit]

This article needs non-copyrighted photos. Any help finding some would be very much appreciated Salfanto (talk) 13:28, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Review of article[edit]

Salfanto, I have reviewed and copy-edited the article commencing with this edit. At each point, I have provided edit summaries to explain the edits and why, in many cases, there is directly relevant WP:P&G. Overall though, and article is written in summary style. The net result of my review was this edit. Save the lead sentences, you have restored the article in full (here) and made a minor edit (here, that combines an orphaned sentence into another paragraph. You have provided no edit summaries. You have reinstated material from questionable sources (sources which are reasonably considered to be a WP:RS). You have also reinstated information that has failed verification, is not supported by a source or may well fall to WP:SYNTH. The reinstatement also degrades the referencing by reinstating many duplicate references. Cinderella157 (talk) 01:55, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So a "clean up" is required for that page? Salfanto (talk) 11:39, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Salfanto, and that was what was done. But you reverted it. Cinderella157 (talk) 22:56, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notified at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history. Cinderella157 (talk) 02:34, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Revert[edit]

Question, how come the revert removed so much of the article's content? Salfanto (talk) 15:34, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The review of the article was done in multiple steps with edit summaries explaining each step. Cinderella157 (talk) 00:05, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't explain why the infobox and aftermath section were removed Salfanto (talk) 12:37, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the summaries, they will tell you why. The infobox told us that the five Ukrainian boats were opposed by two entire Russian fleets and that the Russians opposing these boats were commanded by no less than two admirals. Of the original five boats, no less than eight were captured or destroyed. It would claim that the Ukrainians were commanded by a colonel but the sources would tell us that he only made a press release after the fact in praise of those that lost their lives - not that he had anything to do with commanding the raid. When one gets rid of all the synth and other cruft, there is nothing left that would warrant an infobox. As for the aftermath, we have two essentially duplicate quotes that that were removed per MOS:QUOTE because they are not an encyclopedic use of quotes. WP is not an obituary nor a propaganda instrument. We also have a quote from a politically ambitious dismissed former-general: We can live without the filibustering of a dismissed Ukrainian general per WP:VNOT. Also, [w]e can live without the claims of a milblogger per WP:VNOT - even if their claim was reported in the Kyiv Post. At this point I considered there was not enough meat in the article to support dividing it into battle and aftermath sections, with the edit summary merge sections - no enough meat here. Once you get rid of the journalistic padding, the propaganda, the synth, material attributed to questionable sources, material that outright fails verification and separate reporting of sources that can be singularly summarised, the article as it now stands is what you are left with. Cinderella157 (talk) 00:35, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for explaining. However, since it was a military engagement it should have an infobox. Salfanto (talk) 12:42, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Infoboxes are not mandatory for any article - military or otherwise. Cinderella157 (talk) 14:00, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's inclusion could help the article Salfanto (talk) 14:17, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Its inclusion is not at all helpful. As I have stated, it is full of dubious and false or misleading information. Once all of that is removed, there is nothing of substance left. Cinderella157 (talk) 21:05, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]