Talk:Kupiansk
Add topic| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Kupiansk article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 December 2025
[edit] | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Kupyansk is now in Ukrainian hands, with many sources online substantiating Ukrainian claims. For example, here is President Zelensky taking a selfie at the city entrance sign: https://bsky.app/profile/meanwhileua.bsky.social/post/3mau6bjefsi26
Various Russian media sources are also admitting that they have lost the city, it does not appear that any Russian sources are still claiming to be holding the city: https://bsky.app/profile/noelreports.com/post/3maqpqjdvo22e AGTMADCAT (talk) 09:29, 26 December 2025 (UTC)
- Sorry I think I did the template wrong.
- Please replace
- "As of November 2025, Russian forces claim control of the city while top Ukrainian military officials deny this.[7]"
- with
- "As of December 25th 2025, Ukrainian forces claim control of the city, corroborated by Russian media."
- with sources as above if deemed appropriate. AGTMADCAT (talk) 09:33, 26 December 2025 (UTC)
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want made. Social media posts are not reliable sources. Day Creature (talk) 15:52, 26 December 2025 (UTC)
- Apologies, are any of these suitable?
- https://www.kyivpost.com/post/66930
- https://understandingwar.org/research/russia-ukraine/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-december-24-2025/
- https://nypost.com/2025/12/25/world-news/ukraine-delivers-humiliating-christmas-day-blow-to-putin-by-recapturing-key-city/
- https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2025/12/19/moscows-narrative-wobbles-as-ukraine-takes-back-kupiansk
- https://www.foxnews.com/world/russian-forces-near-collapse-kupyansk-moscow-allies-concede-city-lost-report AGTMADCAT (talk) 16:39, 26 December 2025 (UTC)
Ukrainian Counterattacks
[edit]Add the Ukrainian counterattacks in Kupiansk in the Russo Ukraine War. American Angel1 (talk) 05:07, 21 March 2026 (UTC)
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 April 2026
[edit] | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Under 'Russo-Ukrainian War'
Paragraph towards the end of the section currently states: "During the Kupiansk offensive, misinformation and false intelligence reports have sparked friendly fire incidents among Ukrainian troops. By early October 2025 the city was again partially occupied by Russia.[48]"
The source cited (https://euromaidanpress.com/2025/10/03/frontline-report-russian-false-reports-trigger-friendly-fire-chaos-in-kupiansk/) explicitly states that "Here, the false reports from the Russian Ministry of Defense have led to chaos erupting inside the town, with Russian commanders trying to create an illusion of victory. This stark discrepancy between the Russian maps and real frontlines has just backfired, with disastrously widespread cases of friendly fire when Russian soldiers attack their own comrades by mistake. The source does not support the text.
Correction required: "During the Kupiansk offensive, misinformation and false intelligence reports by the Russian Ministry of Defence have sparked friendly fire incidents among Russian troops. By early October 2025 the city was again partially occupied by Russia.[48]" ~2026-23774-37 (talk) 15:01, 17 April 2026 (UTC)
NPOV violation and unreliable/biased sources
[edit]The article currently states heavily editorialized, narrative-driven claims as absolute facts, relying entirely on biased, non-neutral outlets (Euromaidan Press and UAWire). Highly partisan sources should not be used to state contested military events as objective facts. Also, using highly charged, emotional, and non-neutral language like "human shields" directly violates WP:TONE. The last two paragraphs should be attributed as a Ukrainian wartime claim with disclaimers or removed if it lacks independent secondary verification (which it does). In general, I suggest avoiding these types of sources as they are highly unreliable/bias and degrade the quality of Wikipedia articles. Paragraphs like these have no place on Wikipedia. This specific one was written by a blocked user @Ilovegeometrydashyay, while the other one by @Historerical.
Paragraphs in question:
"Uawire reports that "The operation to liberate Kupyansk remains far from complete", and that "Clearing continues “house by house,” complicated by the presence of civilians “whom the Russians use as human shields."
"During the Kupiansk offensive, misinformation and false intelligence reports from the Russian Ministry of Defence have sparked friendly fire incidents among Russian troops." ~2026-35053-94 (talk) 21:18, 14 June 2026 (UTC)