Talk:Territorial control during the Russo-Ukrainian War

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Chasiv Yar strong enemy pressure[edit]

Maybe it should be added due to Russian advance nearby in the last few days. Berobalkan (talk) 18:16, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone? Berobalkan (talk) 14:38, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Physeters, @Nurg? Anyone? Berobalkan (talk) 13:16, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Russia is getting pretty close, so it might make sense to add the strong enemy pressure symbol. Physeters✉ 16:16, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I've already added the pressure marker to the map and also considered it "contested" here, since 4 April is an important date. Alexis Coutinho (talk) 13:34, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't say that it's contested. Although, I don't know what is the protocol on this site. Berobalkan (talk) 14:22, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, "contested" is a bit of a loose definition here, but it's the closest option to reality we got. In the "more info" column I also tend to simplify the events for consistency. In the map itself, there are more drawing options. Alexis Coutinho (talk) [ping me] 23:33, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not contested. The ISW ref given says Russians "advanced up to the eastern outskirts", not that they entered the settlement. Nurg (talk) 03:43, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I concur. Physeters✉ 04:01, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The definition of "outskirts" has always been contentious (for me, since the Ukrainian battle for Robotyne). Looking at their map is also very important and it clearly showed that Russia had advanced to the first few buildings within official city boundaries. I only include quotes in my references to aid readers to know more or less what the ref is about, i.e. if it's about geolocated evidence or claims, on what date and in what region. The ISW itself told readers a while back that it would be giving less detail to territorial changes and encouraged avid readers to check their linked references while keeping in mind the broad conclusions that the ISW wrote. Therefore, whatever I quote is not the whole picture especially since I tend to get the shortest quote possible to not bloat the references section. If this practice is misleading, then I may stop it altogether.
Regarding considering it "contested" or not is a semantic discussion. I, personally, will never bother conveying such extra detail (i.e. "they pressured this area" or "they advanced up to these buildings then retreated..."), but you guys are welcome to do so in the extra info column, especially since this is an important city battle ;). I'm mostly focused on completeness and consistency. Alexis Coutinho (talk) [ping me] 18:18, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I follow the definition of "contested" at Module:Russo-Ukrainian War detailed map#Contested icon. Nurg (talk) 23:45, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's reasonable and consistent. Will adopt it in this page too from now on. Thanks 👍. Alexis Coutinho (talk) [ping me] 01:30, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Synkivka[edit]

Might not be contested anymore because of Ukrainain counterattack in the north of the settlement. Berobalkan (talk) 14:39, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Physeters, @Nurg, anyone? Berobalkan (talk) 13:16, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When did the counterattack take place?. The ISW was still showing Russia in control of northern Synkivka yesterday. Physeters✉ 16:13, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Took place on 1 April. Berobalkan (talk) 05:19, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Which source are you considering? Alexis Coutinho (talk) 13:42, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It does seem likely/natural that Ukraine retook it, but I still need a good source. Alexis Coutinho (talk) [ping me] 18:21, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Btw, I'm not checking my watchlist anymore (too many headaches). I was only editing the list page and forgot to check this talk page. So I would recommend pinging if you want to get my attention. ;) Alexis Coutinho (talk) 13:38, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Krasnohorivka[edit]

Why two simbols? One for contested and one for UA control? Berobalkan (talk) 12:49, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, cities can have multiple icons depending on size. I've done the same with Avdiivka. I only transitioned to using the big contested icon when two smaller ones would have been necessary. Russia captured a few blocks a few days ago and, now, has reportedly advanced further. Given the small size of Krasnohorivka, the confirmed advance is greater, relatively speaking, than in Chasiv Yar. Thus a small contested icon is acceptable. Alexis Coutinho (talk) [ping me] 20:24, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I think it is ok, if we want fine-grained info on the map. Nurg (talk) 02:46, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Heorhiivka & Bilohorivka[edit]

According to yesterday's ISW update, Russian forces have yet to enter Heorhiivka, and are within the town limits of Bilohorivka in Luhansk Oblast. Heorhiivka is currently marked as contested, but Bilohorivka is not. Why is this? Is there a different source that says Heorhiivka is contested and Bilohorivka is in full Ukrainian control? Physeters✉ 22:44, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide a link and quote for the ISW update that says Russian forces are within the town limits of Bilohorivka. Nurg (talk) 23:19, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Though the ISW updated their map to show the advance, never directly addressed, which is probably why we all missed it. Their first map that showed Russia within Bilohorivka was published on February 29, and the current map still has it. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/36a7f6a6f5a9448496de641cf64bd375 Physeters✉ 06:52, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maps are not considered reliable enough, so we really need an explicit mention in text from ISW or other reliable source. Nurg (talk) 08:42, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Since when was the ISW's map not considered a reliable source? I've been here for over two years, and their map had always been considered just as reliable as their reports. Was there a debate about this that I missed? Also, if a quote is now required, then the quote citing Heorhiivka as contested is to vague to be used. It just says that Russia "advanced on the eastern outskirts of Heorhiivka". Physeters✉ 17:15, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maps and reports each have their own limitations of reliability. Often a report uses words that are too vague, i.e. sometimes "outskirts" means just outside the settlement edge, sometimes it means a few buildings or blocks into the settlement. "Entered" doesn't always mean the captured territory is still held (it could have been a raid). Maps also have their problems. Sometimes it's just wrong because the ISW doesn't have a grayzone or warzone color, i.e. it could mark a region blue when it's red and vice versa. This happened a few times in Luhansk Oblast after the Kharkiv counteroffensive. The maximum Ukrainian extent remained unknown for a very long time, but ISW was forced to use either blue or red and made mistakes along the way which were silently patched in the maps but never explained in the reports. Iirc, Orlianka, Dibrova and Ploshchanka suffered from this. There was also a big phantom miscoloring near Tavilzhanka in early 2023 that was never explained in reports. Pretty sure Kovalivka and Karmazynivka also didn't show up in reports but were tampered in the maps. Therefore we should always look at both sources with equal weight: a citation here should be backed by both.
Regarding Heorhiivka, it is already contested because Russia controls the NE portion of it (across the reservoir). Gmaps makes this clearer, but this can also be checked in the ISW map because that NE portion is disconnected from NW Marinka, and we know the boundaries of Marinka well. Regarding Bilohorivka, I just felt that that small red control on it was too minor. The Russian pressure is just too low there and this 'ify' situation has been going on for months. It might very well just have been a raid. Don't feel like constantly changing the status between contested and pressured until we have a more concerted Russian push. Russian milbloggers also don't give it much importance and I feel like "weak pressure" describes the situation better, even if the Russians maybe continually hold positions within the village boundaries. Alexis Coutinho (talk) [ping me] 19:41, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is Google Maps considered a reliable source for determining the boundaries/town limits of settlements in Ukraine? SaintPaulOfTarsus (talk) 20:47, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would argue "yes/more or less", especially in conjunction with other maps, i.e. the ISW map. But more important than wondering whether to classify GMaps as reliable or not in Ukraine is to verify if there is agreement between sources. The ISW and Google maps really seem to agree on Heorhiivka. Alexis Coutinho (talk) [ping me] 00:18, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the big explanation. I actually remember that whole thing with Tavilzhanka back in December '22. I thought they said they had geolocated footage from within the town, though I may be wrong. Also, I had not noticed the disconnected part of Heorhiivka; my apologies! Physeters✉ 01:31, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
;) Alexis Coutinho (talk) [ping me] 05:21, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In reply to Physeters re maps as sources for this map, you may have overlooked the long-standing statement at the head of this page, "Copying from maps is strictly prohibited", which seems clear and is quite strongly worded. (It's not set in stone, of course, and could be changed by consensus.) Nurg (talk) 22:40, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But none of the three cases explained under that topic apply to ISW. Pretty sure there was no mapping think tank during the Syrian Civil War, therefore that statement should probably not be taken at face value. Alexis Coutinho (talk) [ping me] 00:28, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Poland & Romania[edit]

Add this Teritorial control Poland and Romania during the Ukrainian War. 94.41.238.6 (talk) 12:16, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

? Alexis Coutinho (talk) [ping me] 19:54, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vuhledar boundaries[edit]

I've noticed that, in the svg map, Vuhledar is marked as contested. I've investigated this in the past, but decided to keep the status that was already displayed on this page: {{UKR}}. However the svg is different and I don't know if it's because it's outdated or because it's genuinely thought that the official boundaries of Vuhledar include that 'upside down T-shaped' region across the road, SE of the city center, that Russia partially controls. Which one is it? Alexis Coutinho (talk) [ping me] 23:43, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

According to Yandex maps, only the northern portion of that T shape belongs to Vuhledar. The southern portion belongs to Mykilske. So far, that was the only map service that extended the dynamic borders that far. Alexis Coutinho (talk) [ping me] 14:23, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, this is very interesting. It says that the underdeveloped middle of the T belongs to the city council [1], not the city proper. Even so, that would still imply that Russia controls a small portion of it according to old ISW reports. I wonder what the mil journalists currently say. Alexis Coutinho (talk) [ping me] 14:34, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
According to Rybar and Deep State, that new area of Vuhledar is controlled by Ukraine. Therefore, the svg map should be updated. Alexis Coutinho (talk) [ping me] 16:15, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Alexis Coutinho (talk) [ping me] 16:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bilohrudove[edit]

It has been more than 4 months since the last Bilohrudove update. I believe we should do something about its status because marking it "contested" for so long doesn't seem to match reality. Should we mark it as "shared control", "Russian control", "unknown control" or comment it out altogether? I'm split between shared and comment out. Alexis Coutinho (talk) [ping me] 14:11, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Found an interesting update from Rybar. In this new map, the northern part of Bilohrudove is marked as warzone/grayzone. This would imply that Ukraine has no stable positions there. At most they would have fire control, but since Russia controls the main part of the village, only they have a physical presence in it. Therefore, and for the sake of consistency, it should be marked as effectively Russian controlled. Alexis Coutinho (talk) [ping me] 16:56, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Alexis Coutinho (talk) [ping me] 17:15, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SuriyakMaps and Russian MoD[edit]

From what I've seen in the past few weeks, Suriyakmaps seems pretty reliable. It's among the more conservative sources that wait longer for confirmation and, most importantly, it's very neutral. It also shows warzone/grayzone/unknown bands in the maps which is always welcome. It has often been used by a more conservative and respected Russian source, Colonelcassad/boris_rozhin (who has recently denied the Umanske capture claim, for example), to show advances in the Donetsk Oblast.

Its coverage of the Kharkiv offensive also has nothing out of the ordinary. Some frontlines are even behind the ISW or DeepState maps, which are sometimes biased. I think we'll be safe if we assume up to the red/transparent transition in the maps. If we come across a dubious episode in the future, such as Rybar's Hoptivka claims, then we could reassess its reliability. Alexis Coutinho (talk) [ping me] 06:18, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Let me also point out that the Russian MoD has been on par with the ISW regarding reliability of capture statements in the last months. This is because it uses the criteria of having finished the cleanup in the settlement and vicinity. Consequently, it often only announces captures several days after the other Russian milbloggers and even geolocated footage indicate a capture. We've seen this a couple of times in the Ocheretyne region. It's even funny sometimes when even the ISW is ahead of them in assessing a capture. In the few times that the MoD was ahead of the ISW, it wasn't by much (less than 24hrs in the Kharkiv offensive for example). The recent ISW confirmations that took longer, I think, were of Khromove and Vesele which took many days, iirc. The thing is, they haven't been proven wrong for several months already. The closest could be the recent Nevelske recapture by Ukraine. But that likely happened several weeks after the MoD announced the capture by the Russians accompanied by video evidence. All in all, I would roughly rank the sources like this:
  1. ISW
  2. MoD
  3. DeepState
  4. SuriyakMaps
Alexis Coutinho (talk) [ping me] 06:37, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
SuriyakMaps is okay, but they definitely had a Russian tilt for the period I paid serious attention to them (January 2023-December 2023), though I can't really speak on their current level of bias. One particular example I remember from last summer involved Andriivka, south of Bakhmut. After Ukraine recaptured it, there was a day when when it looked like Russia had recaptured the northern half of the village. All of the maps updated to show this, but a few hours later, it was shown to be untrue. Every map I followed corrected the mistake within a couple of days, except for SuriyakMaps (I believe Rybar also didn't correct it for quite a while, but I'm not quite sure). Even though almost every map currently agrees that Ukraine controls Andriivka, SuriyakMaps still shows it in a grey zone. There were other things, such as the fact that they were one of the last maps to show a fully liberated Robotyne, but otherwise they were generally okay. To be fair, they have currently given Ukraine more ground in Spirne & Krynky than any other map I follow, but when I scrutinized them, they always gave Russian forces the benefit of the doubt in any unclear situations.
I can't speak on the reliability of the Russian MoD, but I have always heard that they will report a capture when it is imminent, even if they haven't quite finished the job, and that they drag out on confirming Ukrainian gains, which is expected considering they are a part of the Russian government.
DeepState is excellent, and I would say they are probably the best of all of the pro-Ukrainian maps. They still lean a little bit on the Ukrainian side, but they have never been afraid to report Russian gains, and tend to be the first among the pro-Ukrainian accounts to report them.

To add a few more maps to the discussion:
Rybar's maps are okay, considering the amount of bias in their general reporting. They are definitely pro-Russian, but not to the extreme. I would not use them as source, but they are worth paying attention to.
Andrew Perpetua's Map is one of my favorites, as it's mostly based on geolocated footage. It's always been a bit cautious in reporting Russian gains, but he's never afraid to admit when he was wrong.
The map produced by the Youtube channel ThetiMapping is probably the most detailed map produced by any single person. https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1gzOhGdBcaGduxnL7XULkXNqS1BK1nz4 It's ever so slightly biased towards the Russians, but it's basically negligible. The one downside is that it's not updated all that consistently.
LiveUAmap was quite popular at the beginning of the war, but there map has never been any good. I remember that they put Tokmak in a grey zone last summer, which was insane. It's gotten a little better since then, but I would still not consider it good.
MilitaryLand was also quite popular at the beginning of the war. They're pro-Ukrainian, and their map reflects this. It's generally reliable, other than the fact that it lacks grey zones.
A rough ranking of the sources I follow would be:
1.ISW
2.DeepState & UkrDailyUpdate/AndrewPerpetua (tied)
4.ThetiMapping
5.SuriyakMaps & MilitaryLand (tied)
7.Rybar
8.LiveUAmap Physeters✉ 21:05, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
they definitely had a Russian tilt alright, then I guess we should verify its current statements on a case by case basis. I would give it a pass for now and consider it just reliable enough to not require a "claim" statement. Its first reliability test would be today's capture of Hlyboke. The ISW marks it as partially Russian controlled while Suriyak effectively marked it as Russian. I'll check the video to see if the statement makes sense or if it's overoptimistic.
Even though almost every map currently agrees that Ukraine controls Andriivka, SuriyakMaps still shows it in a grey zone. I wouldn't give it too much of a hard time. Andriivka is one of those erased villages that don't offer any real fortifications/positions to hold. I assume there aren't basements in those houses. As such, control over it is mostly by fire control. If these assumptions hold, then it makes sense to mark it as gray zone, with the caveat that Ukraine has fire control and planted the flag there last. This situation is similar to Piatykhatky, though there I believe the Ukrainians do have presence in parts of the village. Many frontline settlements are indeed mostly grayzone, such as Dorozhnyianka near Huliapole. I think Spirne too, hence a contested grayzone.
one of the last maps to show a fully liberated Robotyne I think the previous argument can also be applied here. I'm assuming it didn't paint it all blue while the Ukrainians only had fire control over the southern outskirts. Am I correct? If so, then I see no problem. It's more of a matter of interpretation. For example, I consider a village as controlled by a party if the second party has no physical presence in it, even if the settlement is mostly grayzone. Novoselivke in Luhansk was like this and I wonder if the current Robotyne falls in this case...
they always gave Russian forces the benefit of the doubt in any unclear situations. I see...
I have always heard that they will report a capture when it is imminent strange. I've heard and seen the exact opposite. they drag out on confirming Ukrainian gains Yeah, I should have added the caveat that it's only reliable for Russian captures and we should never wait for it to announce a Ukrainian gain to consider it captured.
DeepState is excellent I wouldn't call it excellent. I think their biggest problem is incompleteness. For example, it doesn't seem to care about geolocated footage to mark advances. Their current Robotyne coverage is garbage because of it. But if they're ahead of the curve for Russian gains, then they're good, as you noted.
I would not use them as source, but they are worth paying attention to. Yeah, I mostly use it for claims and when he rejects other overoptimistic Russian claims, along with Colonelcassad. Though I often consider his claims as true when confirmation comes within 1 or 2 days (I mark the capture date as the claim date, not when geolocated footage was published, especially when it's about drone strikes on Russian troops and not CQB engagements). Oh, and he's useful for reporting Ukrainian advances. If it wasn't for him, we wouldn't have know about the capture of Poima by Ukr in Kherson last year.
Haven't heard of Andrew Perpetua's Map and ThetiMapping. Will check them out when I have the chance.
I remember that they put Tokmak in a grey zone last summer xD. but I would still not consider it good. yeah.
Alexis Coutinho (talk) 23:59, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Talk about DeepState reliabilty... They just retracted their Zelene statement from yesterday, xD. Alexis Coutinho (talk) 00:36, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You used the word overoptimistic, and I think that's the best way to describe my view of SuriyakMaps. It's not bad at all, just "overoptimistic" towards Russia. Also, I do believe there are basements in Andriivka, but they have been mostly destroyed by now as well.
On Robotyne, they left the extreme southern portion in the grey zone for about a week after everyone else. I can't tell you why they didn't when everyone else did, but your theory is possible.
Also, I think you may be right about the current situation in the village. I've seen DeepState's Robotyne configuration on other maps, most notably Andrew Perpetua's map (which I included in my list), but it is definitely the minority position. His reason for having all of Robotyne in a grey zone is because Russia has been performing drone attacks in the southern part of the village, even as recently as May 10th, according to his geolocations. On the other hand, I have no idea why both of them mark that one tree line as Ukrainian controlled.
To be fair about Zelene, most of the maps I mentioned have Zelene in some form of Russian control, (ISW, Andrew Perpetua, Theti, Suriyak, Rybar) if they got it wrong, they were not alone. Even the detailed map currently has Zelene under Russian control!
To give an example of them being ahead of the other pro-Ukrainian accounts ( ISW, Andrew Perpetua, MilitaryLand, LiveUAmap), they are the only one in the list currently showing Russia in southern Staromaiorske, and they are even ahead of the ISW. Physeters✉ 02:52, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, thanks for adding the timeline section at the bottom of the page, it's a great addition! Physeters✉ 02:55, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
An example of the MoD reporting a capture early would be Bakhmut. They announced the "liberation" a day before the last Ukrainian unit left the city. If we want to be incredibly picky, Russia didn't capture the last neighborhood within Bakhmut's city limits until the end of last year; a dacha area in the extreme southwestern part of the town, making the announcement six months early, however, I don't really think that should count. They also announced the capture of Avdiivka a couple of days early too, if I remember correctly. Physeters✉ 03:10, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
His reason for having all of Robotyne in a grey zone is because Russia has been performing drone attacks in the southern part of the village, even as recently as May 10th Interesting. So like a big contested grayzone.. Seems like it's as Rybar said, unless the Russians bypass the village and capture the trenches to the north, it is nearly impossible to hold that ground stably.
Even the detailed map currently has Zelene under Russian control! Yeah, I marked it Russian yesterday thanks to the DeepState post. But now I'll have to reevaluate if the status should go back to claim or straight up Ukr recaptured.
Also, thanks for adding the timeline section at the bottom of the page, it's a great addition! Thank you!
They also announced the capture of Avdiivka a couple of days early too Interesting. So this behavior seems to be more for cities? But was it reported through their Telegram or on state TV or something? And regarding Bakhmut, yeah, the end date there isn't super clear and likely will never be. It's more of a case of notability. Some months ago I made a thorough review of Bakhmut control updates, it's this: Talk:Battle of Bakhmut/Archive 5#Move the end date to 21 May 2023. Alexis Coutinho (talk) 05:58, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Territorial_control_during_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War&oldid=1223764493"