Talk:List of Russian generals killed during the 2022 invasion of Ukraine/Archive 1

Archive 1

Separate article?

Does this really require a separate article? Why not include it in Casualties of the Russo-Ukrainian War? Bommbass (talk) 09:33, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

The topic merits a separate List article for a number of reasons. WP:SAL explains where a "stand alone" list article is appropriate. The most important consideration for a stand alone list is notability. The categories 'lists of generals' and 'Russian generals' are recognition of stand alone notability for generals. Add to this the number of reliable sources which comment specifically on the deaths of Russian generals as a defining aspect of this invasion. Yes, the article can be improved. The best way to contribute is if people continue to add names to the list. AugusteBlanqui (talk) 11:53, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Magomed Tushayev

Should General Magomed Tushayev be included here? He was killed while leading a regiment of "Chechen National Guard" on the Russian side in Ukraine on March 26th -- KrisFricke — Preceding undated comment added 11:33, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Certainly! Thank you. AugusteBlanqui (talk) 12:00, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Death was a fake, I have reverted. Take a look at the past discussion.Mr.User200 (talk) 07:37, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Take a look here Discussion.Mr.User200 (talk) 07:39, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

@Mr.User200: Do you have any source that says he's not dead? We have a low-tier RS saying he did die (dated 4 days ago).[1] A lot of the initial reports are wrong, though. Solipsism 101 (talk) 18:45, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

And this from yesterday. Solipsism 101 (talk) 18:47, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Sure, this was debated before. if you want to go directly to the source see also here .Mr.User200 (talk) 20:20, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

@Mr.User200: I did read the deletion discussion and I failed to find any source. With the source you linked here, all it says is that Ramzan Kadyrov disputes Tushayev's death and posted a video of him allegedly in Ukraine. On his own Telegram channel, however, Kadyrov disputed that Tushayev had been killed. He uploaded a video purporting to show Tushayev with Anzor Bisaev, another Chechen commander who was in Ukraine. “They are more alive than the living,” he wrote. Emphasis added. Kadyrov is not a reliable narrator. As it stands, and more info can certainly come out, we have the Jerusalem Post, The Times of Israel, The Independent reporting this; the first adopting the claim and the latter saying it had been confirmed by Interfax-Ukraine. Solipsism 101 (talk) 22:34, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Enough to be considered disputed. Should a recording of the video call be considered enough for you, or not? I remember seeing one over there.Mr.User200 (talk) 23:19, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Video from 16 March of Tushayev denying his "death" allegations from the internet.Mr.User200 (talk) 23:36, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

This is not an RS whatsoever. His death was reported in multiple RS. My very best wishes (talk) 01:16, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

It's not blacklisted, and shows a video of him alive the second after the video call with the Chechen president, stop the denial mode. By the way the first source that claimed Tushayev death was Daily Mail, the first ever blacklisted source in English Wikipedia. Enough to not be considered, primary source does not have credibility.Mr.User200 (talk) 12:30, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Unlike the other Russian generals, who seem to have been quietly confirmed by Russia to have been killed, the Chechen's death is the only one whos death has been actively disputed. Unless it could be verifiably proven he has been killed, better to remove him from the list. It should also be noted most RS these days that are mentioning the death of Oleg Mityaev, refer to him as Russia's fourth killed general, not fifth if we included Tushayev. If some editors still think he warrants inclusion in the article, maybe the best solution would be to remove him from the table listing, but mention his alleged death by Ukraine in the article text, along with the denials. EkoGraf (talk) 13:27, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

I have no objection to how it is currently set up, i.e. in its own disputed table. Solipsism 101 (talk) 14:58, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm fine with that too Cloudjpk (talk) 16:56, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

References

Magomed Tushayev

Shouldn't Magomed Tushayev be also added to this list? He was Chechen but still he was fighting on the Russian side. 2A02:A312:C539:7F80:9156:2D63:3D9D:79DA (talk) 13:16, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Yes, of course he should be included. My very best wishes (talk) 01:15, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Stray no, there are videos of him alive and one of him denying it's death allegations. Enough to be a disputed claim.Mr.User200 (talk) 12:32, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Mr.USer200 - do you understand that "disputed" is not the same as "disproven"? Your comments on this talk page strongly suggest that you want the claim removed entirely, and that is going well beyond what careful treatment of sources would demand. If I were to encounter a situation such as this in my work (I'm an historian), I would be obliged to mention both the claim and the disputation thereof, explaining the sources for both and explicitly stating the degree of uncertainty regarding the veracity of both the claim and the disputation. I strongly recommend you subscribe to that line of reasoning. 82.176.221.176 (talk) 11:45, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Exactly; it is disputed, there is uncertainty, and veracity is an issue. At the moment, the article would be inaccurate if it said he is definitely dead or definitely alive. The article is accurate in presenting conflicting stories from different sources. Cloudjpk (talk) 17:07, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Andrey Paliy

The Telegraph says Paliy "is the sixth top military figure to die during the invasion of Ukraine"; he is the deputy commander of the Russian Black Sea Fleet. Other sources say his rank is "First rank captain"[2], which would be Captain 1st rank and equivalent to a colonel. As such, this person would appear to not be equivalent to a general officer. We have a few colonels killed as it stands.[3] Solipsism 101 (talk) 17:15, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

wow, this looks confirmed. In addition to The Telegraph we have: Russia confirmed on daily newspaper Kommersant that deputy Black Sea fleet commander Andrey Paliy died while fighting in the Mariupol region. If this article survives deletion and we get another source or two for Paliy then we could change the name of the article to List of Russian generals and flag officers killed during the 2022 invasion of Ukraine. I know a number of colonels have also been killed by Ukraine. However, my preference in keeping with WP:NLIST would be to keep this article for at least the rank of general/admiral (or equivalent). AugusteBlanqui (talk) 18:13, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree with excluding the lower ranks as it stands. The info below general level KIA is a lot murkier too. Solipsism 101 (talk) 18:53, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Although, The Times is saying five colonels have been killed.[4] Solipsism 101 (talk) 14:57, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

General/Admiral/Flag officer is so distinct and really one of the more notable aspects of this invasion. But yes, evidently there are loads of colonels and the naval captain. So would you say that if the article survives deletion we have a RFC about renaming it? Restricting to flag officers as distinct and notable would be my weak preference but I'm happy to let an RfC decide if the article survives!

Actually, on second thought, my concern for widening it to ranks below flag officers is that it would make the article easier to delete or merge at some point in the future as some editors who have voted delete have intimated. AugusteBlanqui (talk) 18:21, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

AugusteBlanqui (talk) 15:07, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't suggest we extend it to colonels (just yet, anyway). My point was that the info is less murky than I thought. If that info becomes more concrete in the future, I would likely support extending it. Perhaps we could add this info to the introductory text, though? Solipsism 101 (talk) 18:45, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Great idea AugusteBlanqui (talk) 19:15, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

I added a line to the article lead about senior commanders. In addition, it may be worth mentioning that, as far as we know, these are all deaths as a result of hostile fire rather than accidents. From what I can gather, historically flag officer deaths are often a result of accidents (plane crash or 'friendly' fire) rather than hostile fire. AugusteBlanqui (talk) 10:57, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

There are, sorry, my mistake, were, some/about forty 2-3 star generals in the start..., no need to add lower ranks, imho☆☆☆—Pietadè^Talk 19:11, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

References

Yakov Rezantsev

At the moment, we have Yakov Rezantsev in the disputed column. We created this column in cases where the Russian side were actively disputing the death. Is that happening with Rezantsev? We don't include any info to say it is happening. Solipsism 101 (talk) 14:29, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

I am not even sure he is a general. Maybe a lieutenant colonel? AugusteBlanqui (talk) 15:01, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

I couldn't find a source saying he was. But a little WP:OR, in this picture [5], he has the lieutenant general insignia with the two pips (see Army ranks and insignia of the Russian Federation). Solipsism 101 (talk) 15:25, 25 March 2022 (UTC) PS: there are RSs out now which give this rank [6]. Solipsism 101 (talk) 15:28, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

He’s a Lieutenant General and commander of the 49th Combined Arms Army. See ru:Резанцев, Яков Владимирович. I don’t think his death is disputed, just not yet confirmed. —Michael Z. 15:49, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Disputed or unconfirmed?

“Unconfirmed” might be a better heading. As far as I know, Russians have not disputed Rezantsev’s demise at this time. —Michael Z. 15:51, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

All but 1 of them are unconfirmed, so it's not a very useful way to describe it. The Russians have only properly disputed Andrey Mordvichev's and Magomed Tushayev's alleged deaths, with the rest going unacknowledged, likely meaning they've died. Most of us on this page seem to have agreed to keep all the names in one list, at least for now. But there are still notes commenting on the disputed deaths, so a different category or list isn't necessary. PixelatedGalaxy (talk) 00:11, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

No, we simply do not know. They didn't address the Ukranian claims at all, Mordvichev just appeared in a video like a week later. If these generals are out of view in another year, then yes, we can assume they are dead. But it isn't as if we'd expect every brigade commander to show up in a video during a war operation. Baxbox (talk) 05:47, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry, I meant to put "possibly" not "likely", sorry about that. PixelatedGalaxy (talk) 09:50, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

Magomed Tushayev: update possible?

It's been several weeks since he has been allegedly killed. Any news on whether he's dead or alive in the meantime? Bommbass (talk) 09:20, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Probably need to leave Tushayev in disputed for now. However, Dan Sabbagh in The Guardian today reported at 10:33 in its live feed:

Western officials believe the Kremlin has lost eight high-level military officers since the invasion began; seven of whom have been killed. They are:

• Maj Gen Andrey Mordvich: killed in action
• Maj Gen Oleg Mityaev: killed in action
• Lt Gen Yakov Rezanstev: killed in action
• Maj Gen Vitaliy Gerasimov: killed in action
• Maj Gen Andrei Sukhovetsky: killed in action
• Maj Gen Andrey Kolesnikov: killed in action
• Gen Magomed Tushaev: killed in action
• Gen Vlaislav Yershov: sacked

AugusteBlanqui (talk) 13:37, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Are there (still) reliable sources that don't consider him dead? If not, we can move him to the normal list. Bommbass (talk) 17:52, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Agreed, he can moved to the normal list. That list is based on 'reporting' as it is and does not use the word 'confirmed.' AugusteBlanqui (talk) 18:39, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

No, "western officials" are not stupid enough to consider someone killed in action when he was present at a press conference shortly afterwards!

Seriously, this "article" is a joke! 2 generals are KNOWN to have died. Russia has simply said yes they are, and have held funerals for them. If they do that for those two, why, oh please tell WHY would they not do the same for others if it was true? Except of course that as usual, almost nothing that comes out of Ukraine is true. DW75 (talk) 18:23, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

@DW75: denigrating a national group is not an acceptable comment, per WP:no personal attacks. Please delete or strike that. —Michael Z. 20:03, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

I have no idea what you're talking about. I didn't "denigrate any national group". I stated blatant facts. Although i was probably misleading in regards to which general i was referring to. We KNOW that THREE generals on that list are alive. And yet this absurd list is retained as if it was based on any kind of facts. The only source for these claims originate with Ukraine and they have a tendency to claim a lot of things killed or destroyed that never was. Like the crew and captain of the Moskva, like the Admiral Makarov etc... DW75 (talk) 02:30, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Mordvichev alive?

There's a new issue today since 'Mordvichev' popped up alive today, and half the sites who report on him used a pic of General Alexey Avdveev. link. Since this is WP Living Person we should get this straightened out asap --BLKFTR (tlk2meh) 21:54, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Should it really be listed as disputed if the sources can't even get the picture correct? Makes it seem like those sites don't know what they're talking about. Have you found any sources that others might deem reliable? Hey man im josh (talk) 22:27, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

He was only ever "dead" according to Ukranian officials, there was never any concrete confirmation. This recent France24 report says it is impossible to verify any of the Ukrainian claims. Baxbox (talk) 06:45, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

The Original Facebook post by the Ukrainian General Staff that was cited by news articles has been deleted. There is no longer a WP:RS for his death. I cannot find ANY sources for his death that do not rely on a deleted Facebook post. The Impartial Truth (talk) 16:33, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

the deletion of the post doesn't have any effect until they say it was false Norschweden (talk) 17:57, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

It does affect it, there are no sources anymore. None. How can the deletion of the sole source not have any affect unless [Ukraine General Staff] makes a new post? I do not need to explain this is not how things work. Wikipedia:VERIFY. The Impartial Truth (talk) 01:37, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

There are plenty of sources that are reporting on the Ukraine General Staff claim. However, they all say that the Ukrainians says this, not that they confirmed this. This is the same for almost everyone on the list. These are claims by an opposing side in an armed conflict. Baxbox (talk) 06:33, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

here's a New York Post (this isn't deprecated is it?) article that notes he still may be alive. This wikipedia list article makes it clear that the list is based on reporting in reliable sources, and the lead notes the difficulties associated with verification. As time progresses the list and sources used for it will no doubt evolve. AugusteBlanqui (talk) 08:06, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Personally I'm with AugusteBlanqui on this one. I'd like to see him re-added to the list until we receive something more to indicate he's alive. Hey man im josh (talk) 11:46, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

I've got a source from the Independent saying that he died: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ukraine-fifth-russian-general-killed-b2039617.html so can we please add him back onto the list? 72.229.242.36 (talk) 14:51, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

The Facebook post is a primary source anyway. The WP:secondary sources that reported on that post and are durably archived are what’s important for the article. If his death is uncertain, then let’s restore a “disputed” or “unconfirmed” section. —Michael Z. 15:18, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

It already did say disputed in the infobox before it was removed, so I think it's safe to restore it with the new sources. 72.229.242.36 (talk) 15:20, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

By the way, what sources contradict Mordvichev’s death? As far as I can tell, the claims surround a nine-second video outdoors with Kadyrov, plus a one-minute video with Kadyrov and Pushilin. I can’t tell whether either one contains anything that dates it after the reported death. Videos from Kadyrov should not be taken at face value, as, he has released for example, a video of him supposedly in Mariupol, Ukraine, in front of a Rosneft gas station, of which there are none in Ukraine. It seems to come down to competing claims, and we should report it as such. —Michael Z. 15:32, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

That seems fair enough, let's just add him back to the list already, as there are plenty of other sources, like the ones already listed about this incident. Also, the claims that Mordichev is dead are also on twitter, which are still around. 72.229.242.36 (talk) 16:13, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Yes, add him back if you can find a source stating he's dead. He can't be put on the list without a source saying he died.

"In a post on social media, the general staff of Ukraine’s army claimed " https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ukraine-fifth-russian-general-killed-b2039617.html

That post on social media is gone. The source is gone. Who is currently saying he's dead? I don't know what nine-second video is being mentioned but he shown on Russian media the 28th of March.. Telegram: Contact @azmilitary11 The Impartial Truth (talk) 19:38, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Okay, how about these?

https://theins.ru/news/249409

https://report.az/en/region/ukraine-destroys-12-russian-air-targets-kills-lieutenant-general/

https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraine-claims-5th-russian-general-killed-attack-kershon-army-base-2022-3 72.229.242.36 (talk) 20:08, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

There are many sources who claim that Frolov is the eighth Russian general killed in Ukraine; but when you get to this page, there are only seven generals listed and you are left scratching your head, wondering what is going on. So, if deemed necessary, create a “disproved” category, but add Mordvichev again. This page is disorienting as it is now and does the reader a disservice. Achero (talk) 15:09, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

If he is put back, I'd say we put him in the 'disputed' section, along with Magomed Tushayev, as the Chechens have disputed his death too. PixelatedGalaxy (talk) 21:39, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

It is still noted that Magomed Tushayev's death is disputed. If you look under the notes for his entry you'll see the first word is "Disputed". It's somewhat disputed, but not directly so in a way that allows them to be removed from the list.

I think the best form of this article does list both of them with the disputed status. Hey man im josh (talk) 21:49, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Yeah I get that, perhaps it's what's best In order to limit confusion. PixelatedGalaxy (talk) 00:03, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

List both as disputed. EkoGraf (talk) 18:19, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Agreed, which hasn't been done yet for some reason. 72.229.242.36 (talk) 19:31, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

There are more videos of him alive and well that came out today. There are no new articles with new information. The facebook post by the Ukraine government declaring him dead is the sole primary source of his "death" that every media article is based on. It has since been deleted. That is the reason it has not been done yet. The Impartial Truth (talk) 02:18, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Correct, and the same issue applies to all other deaths reported by Ukraine only without further verifications. Baxbox (talk) 07:33, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

But it can also be attributed to Russian propaganda, hence why it is disputed 72.229.242.36 (talk) 16:00, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

If Ukraine makes a social media post saying Vladimir Putin is dead but he shows up in a video the next day would that be disputed as well? The Impartial Truth (talk) 14:07, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

No, but because there is no other evidence that Mordvichev is alive, it can be seen as propaganda, because in all honesty, we can't trust Russian media alone, due to how they tend to lie about this war. 72.229.242.36 (talk) 17:12, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

The only evidence he is dead is supposed Ukrainian intel, that's not reliable, only a possible estimate. Baxbox (talk) 07:30, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

The problem with the idea that the intel is not reliable is that all of our information comes from Ukraine and Russia. We don't have any other entities that can reliably report deaths as of now unless Russia admits one of their generals is dead (not likely in almost all cases). Hey man im josh (talk) 11:58, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

But as far as we can tell, Ukrainian sources on the whole are more reliable than Russian sources, due to the amount of times they lied about the invasion, such as when they claimed to have gained air superiority when in reality, the skies were still contested. 72.229.242.36 (talk) 13:43, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Sources that Wikipedia deems generally reliable continue to report (the claim) that he's dead. It's time to re-add him, with a comment that this is "disputed" by Russia. UlyssorZebra (talk) 17:32, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Beyond personal assessments of the claim, is there an RS which says his death is doubted because of social media posts? I would add that Russian manipulation of video footage on social media has been prominent in this campaign (Ramzan Kadyrov and Sergei Shoigu come to mind), so video footage should not be accepted without further investigation. Solipsism 101 (talk) 06:32, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

There are WP:RS reporting the death [7][8], but I cannot find WP:RS suggesting that it was not the case. I'd say it's fair to include this person in the list, but adding a note that it was not confirmed by Russia (but it seems they didn't deny it either). Mindaur (talk) 19:31, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

Strong support on this. Add him back while claiming his death as disputed, as done with Tushayev. Super Ψ Dro 20:43, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

I support re-adding this. We have multiple requests below calling for it to be re-added and there is little sense in omitting it as we have Magomed's death which has also been disputed. Solipsism 101 (talk) 22:22, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

Remove support. Per The Times: At least one Russian general who was reported dead by Ukraine turned out to be alive. Ukraine’s SBU security service said Lieutenant General Andrey Mordvichev was killed by a strike on an airbase near Kherson, southern Ukraine. He was later photographed with Ramzan Kadyrov, the Chechen leader.[9] Solipsism 101 (talk) 06:59, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

I understand your point. On the other hand, plenty of RS in the same time period (the same day as the article you cite and later) report eight dead generals and they include Mordvichev in that tally. I suppose it's not up to us to determine which RSs are right and which ones are not. I propose we just add the different reportings so the reader can make up their mind? With time, the muddy water will clear. UlyssorZebra (talk) 07:42, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Kadyrov photographied himself "in Ukraine" in front of a gas station of a company that does not operate in Ukraine [10]. There's also a claim that a late March video from the Russian government that showed Shoigu (defence minister) to counter claims that he had a heart attack and couldn't be present in public is fake and that the person shown is not Shoigu [11] [12]. To put it simply Kadyrov and only Kadyrov with no other source to support something is unreliable. Tushayev's death is also only disputed by another video from Kadyrov (as far as I know) and there's also doubts regarding it's validity. We do list Tushayev in the list despite this. Super Ψ Dro 17:31, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Note that Vladimir Frolov, recently buried in St. Petersburg, with no prior reporting of his death, was the deputy commander of the 8th Guards Army — Mordvichev's Number 2. So it is possible that there was a general killed at Chernobaevka in mid-March, as claimed by Ukraine, but it was Frolov, not Mordvichev. Mw843 (talk) 00:49, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

• I've readded Mordvichev. There's no convincing point in this discussion to have him removed in my opinion, only that the original source was removed even though there's a huge number of other sources reporting on this supposed death and that Kadyrov published a photo with him, even though he has previously published questionable photos and that he also published a video with Tushayev even though the latter is still listed here regardless. Almost every general in this list isn't confirmed to have been killed by Russia anyway, this isn't supposed to be a 100% accurate and objective list right now, it should simply aim to reflect the allegations that exist in sources about the abnormal number of generals killed that the Russian army has seen in this war. We shouldn't question Mordvichev's death until reliable sources (which does not include Kadyrov) start doing so. Super Ψ Dro 10:21, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 March 2022

Could someone swap the wikidata link next to Magomed Tushayev to a link to his article on the simple english project Simple:Magomed Tushayev? I think it's a much more readable alternate project page as it's actually an article rather than a database, and per the RFC on linking to Wikidata links to wikidata items should not be included in article text anyway. 192.76.8.70 (talk) 21:13, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

 Already done This looks to have been addressed. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:25, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 31 March 2022

Could you please re-add Mordvichev to the list, as per the talk page above 72.229.242.36 (talk) 12:47, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

I agree that this should be done. It's reported by reliable sources. In the comments section, we can expand upon the differing claims. Bommbass (talk) 09:23, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Not accepted, per WP:VERIFIABILITY, the primary source errased his claim, the fact that secondary sources(Reliable) cited the first sources does not mean it could be included. Most likely there is evidence Mordvichev is alive, and possibly that's the reason why the primary source retracted. Take into account that this criteria is more strict regarding living persons.Mr.User200 (talk) 23:39, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

But where is this evidence? The only "evidence" was from Russian State TV, and that can't be trusted, since it is most likely propaganda. 72.229.242.36 (talk) 23:48, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Yeah he should be at least mentioned in the article itself though maybe not in the list. Not even mentioning him - even if we state that there was a video etc. - is just weird. Some RS continue to list him as "killed according to Ukrainian authorities" [13]. Volunteer Marek 20:54, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

I agree with this. Many RS continue to report (the claim) that he's dead. They wouldn't do this if it was certain that he is still alive. UlyssorZebra (talk) 21:02, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

 Already done This appears to be taken care of. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:24, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Other notable ranks in ascending order?

Could this article be expanded to include other notable ranks in ascending order?

Other individuals included in this list for example;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_battle_for_the_2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine

Colonel Yuri, Medvedev and Major General, Vitaly Gerasimov etc... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.7.2.78 (talk) 10:42, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

I support that. Deaths of army, corps, division, brigade, and unit commanders in the field are all notable. —Michael Z. 23:05, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Casualties and sackings

The loss of generals due to serious wounds or being dismissed from their posts is also significant and notable. Here’s an example. Perhaps this article can be expanded in breadth (to other causes), as well as in depth (to other ranks). Maybe rename List of Russian generals lost during the 2022 invasion of Ukraine.

• During the War in Ukraine, Russia Lost Commanders of Four Armies,” Charter 97, March 31, 2022.

 —Michael Z. 15:45, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

I like the idea, but not the proposed title. The word "lost" doesn't cover "wounded" and "dismissed" very well. UlyssorZebra (talk) 17:38, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Navy's Anton Kuprin

Anton Kuprin, commander of the Russian cruiser Moskva, declared MIA. Shou!d this high ranking officier be included ?

• https://au.news.yahoo.com/captain-sunk-russian-warship-moskva-100437596.html

Yug (talk) 🐲 12:08, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

He was a 'first rank captain' same as Andrei Paliy. Technically, this list is limited to 'flag officers' and 1st rank captain is one below. However, there's a sentence in the article about other high-ranking casualties and I'll add these two there. AugusteBlanqui (talk) 13:08, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

See this diff and Black Sea Fleet talk. We have a source saying that Kurpin was the commander,[14] which may be a misunderstanding on the writer's part as the commander of a fleet is usually an admiral; we need to confirm this. However, if Kuprin is not the commander, that leaves the possibility an admiral was on board the ship at the time it was destroyed. Solipsism 101 (talk) 17:22, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

• This is another example of Ukraine making claims on flag officers involved in combat without evidence. Kuprin was later seen at a parade [15]. Baxbox (talk) 06:21, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

  Note The supposed "survivors' parade" was broadcast on state TV, although the news agency did not clarify exactly when it had been filmed. Solipsism 101 (talk) 06:41, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

General Frolov reported killed in action by "Fontanka"

Deputy Commander of Russian 8th army was buried in Saint Petersburg on April 16th as reported at https://www.fontanka.ru/2022/04/16/71262053/

The local governor told he was killed in action in Ukraine. It will make him an additional major-general to die. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.178.86.66 (talk) 13:22, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Also reported on the St. Petersburg government website, here: https://www.gov.spb.ru/press/governor/235716/ Zacharywil (talk) 14:45, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Categorize items confirmed by Ukraine, Russia, or both

Would it be possible/feasible to make it easier for readers to get the status of items on the table at a glance? Like adding a new column to the table or use some colour-coding (like the table here does) 178.197.216.167 (talk) 18:51, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Magomed Tushayev

There is a new video from Popasna(Donbas frontline), where he is clearly alive. I think his entry can be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.90.227.205 (talk) 20:47, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

We only rely on reliable sources. UlyssorZebra (talk) 21:03, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Your sources for his death are dubious at best. Ukrainian sources are no more reliable than Russian sources. When respective side confirms deaths of their own, you can be sure it's happened. Until that is the case, you're dealing with propaganda. The death of Magomed came in the early days of the war, along with other incorrect reportings such as "The Ghost of Kyiv" or the "Snake Island" incident. Just a few days later the Chechen president released a video showing the general is clearly alive. Unless Twitter timestamps are not deemed trustworthy there is no reason to keep that entry up. Besides, the source cited for the death has been taken down too, not that it should matter given the claim was propagandistic in nature, but the entry should be removed at this point. D2857gu (talk) 12:30, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

You misunderstood what I said. I am not saying he is alive or dead. I did say we should use reliable sources. Unverified YouTube videos understandably can't be used as a source. Wikipedia has a clear policy on reliable sources, and a long list of which sources are considered reliable and which ones are not; see WP:RS and WP:RSP. Such sources do continue to report the claim that he is dead, and hence we should include this claim in the article. A claim is not the same as a fact, which explains why there's a "disputed" tag in the article. UlyssorZebra (talk) 12:55, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

References

Lieutenant General Andrei Mordvichev confirmed dead, should be added to list

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60807538

https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraine-russian-officer-elite-decimated-9-who-were-killed-in-combat-2022-3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.187.183.38 (talk) 06:09, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

See above discussion. Solipsism 101 (talk) 06:35, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 April 2022

Magomed Tushayev is alive. The claim of his death was made at the end of February/beginning of March. I'm finding articles from March 1. This is the video from March 3 disputing those claims. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPjZbyocoFI

The death of Magomed Tushayev came along with the barrage of disinformation campaigns, such as "The Ghost of Kyiv" and "The soldiers on snake island". Magomed was not killed and was confirmed to be alive. There is no reason to believe that he has been killed since then. Those initial claims are false.

Also, the sources cited to make the claim that Magomed was killed has been taken down. The source now directs to a broken page. The information is no longer there. Updating this page would be good. D2857gu (talk) 12:25, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

Hence it's got the disputed tag, but this is a propaganda war (which both sides are engaging in, but Russia a tad bit more) and we cannot discount a death and positively say it could not possibly have happened based on social media posts. Indeed, there is incentive for Russia to deny senior figures have been killed (hence lack of confirmation on all but one, iirc). Solipsism 101 (talk) 17:29, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

The video I linked was originally published on Ramzan Kadyrov's Twitter account. Granted, as you say, we're seeing a propaganda war but still the claim should be taken at least with just as much validity as the unverified claim that he was killed. An unverified claim is made and a reliable source posts a video describing the claim is false. Maybe I'm missing something here but it's more rational to think the claim was false than to believe the president had a video manufactured to incorrectly debunk a claim which would easily be verified by the general's troops. I also don't agree with the idea that Russia has an incentive to deny the deaths of senior figures. Denying the deaths of generals and not giving them proper burials would be demoralizing and would instantly be evident. Countries, Russia included (as they've done so in the past), give burials to fallen soldiers and generals once their bodies are retrieved and confirmed so when an unverified claim is made and the body hasn't been verified, and the opponent denies it, unless the source is rigid (and they are admittedly unverified in these cases) there is no reason to believe the claim is the case. Otherwise it's susceptibility to said propaganda. D2857gu (talk) 20:31, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

If there are reliable sources for different viewpoints, we represent these viewpoints in the article. As contributors, we don't decide which RS is right and which one is wrong. This means in this case that we include Tushayev in the article and that we add an elaboration that this is disputed. UlyssorZebra (talk) 20:42, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 April 2022 (2)

The deaths of the following generals are unconfirmed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitaly_Gerasimov https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrei_Kolesnikov_(general) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakov_Rezantsev

Should be stated on the page. Similar to how Magomed's death is stated as Disputed. Some generals are confirmed dead by both Russian and Ukrainian sources, so it's good to know who's actually dead and who's not confirmed to be. D2857gu (talk) 12:41, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

Disputed means that the Russian govt/media are actively saying "no, this venerable soul is still with us". Magomed had images put out saying he was still alive. Did Rezantsev? Solipsism 101 (talk) 17:19, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

I do not believe so, though I was thinking about a separate label, not the "Disputed" label, as their deaths are not disputed, just not confirmed. Knowing who is and who might not be dead would be useful. D2857gu (talk) 20:38, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 April 2022 (3)

The list of killed russian generals is missing an eight (8.) one. Lt-Gen Andrey Mordvichev, killed in the Kherson region on March 19 Source: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10714981/Russia-recovers-body-dead-general-MONTH-killed-Mariupol-steel-factory.html ThyrussGhost (talk) 21:16, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. The Daily Mail is not a reliable source. ji11720 (talk) 00:34, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Article for Tushayev

Magomed Tushayev used to have a page on Wikipedia, but it was deleted for not being notable. I remember the page and it was quite short, and maybe with 6 sources. However, ever since, other Wikipedias have written better articles about him. The best one is from the Chinese Wikipedia [16]. I wonder if we could translate this page and restore an article for him? Super Ψ Dro 21:19, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 April 2022

Vladimir Frolov should be added. Link↓ Forbes has it too.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/vladimir-frolov-russian-general-killed-war-b2059665.html Pixiegrl (talk) 04:50, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

He is on the list already. Best wishes, Solipsism 101 (talk) 06:55, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Vladimir Frolov

Vladimir Frolov should be added no?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Frolov_(general) https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/vladimir-frolov-russian-general-killed-war-b2059665.html Pixiegrl (talk) 04:57, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

"The examples and perspective in this section deal primarily with Anglophone countries and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject."

This doesn't really make sense to me, why would the views of people in a particular country matter for the contents of the list? If this is meant to be a neutrality issue, Template:NPOV should be used instead, or possibly Template:Disputed. However, it would be preferable to tag individual items and explain the claims of both sides for disputed items, instead of wholesale tagging the entire list as such without further information Phiarc (talk) 10:17, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

It is not about neutrality but about a non-global view that seem to suggest (or imply) readers are more familiar with US, Canada and UK military ranks than of other countries. Dentren | ^Talk 11:34, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Dentren, if you wish to add a complementary view, that's fine - just do so and remove the tag? UlyssorZebra (talk) 12:18, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

I busy on other articles. Maybe next week. Dentren | ^Talk 13:09, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

You improperly added a tag and now you're edit-warring with people about it's removal and claiming you're too busy to add a proper tag. That's extremely inappropriate. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:12, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Agree with Phiarc. The non-global tag is confused and confusing. AugusteBlanqui (talk) 13:45, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Hey man im josh, dont's distort my point of view as you did here. Also, I dont know what consensus you are talking about. The issue has never been about neutrality or general POV, but about a specific topic that is represented by "globalization" templates. Dentren | ^Talk 13:47, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

I would suggest removing the US etc ranks and just leaving the two-star reference (as it's used universally in military lingo), but it seems counterproductive to remove helpful info to the reader who will presumably be familiar with the US major-general rank as a comparator.
It's also important to note to the reader that this is an exceptional use of the rank major-general and they should not assume it's the same rank as major general in other armies. Solipsism 101 (talk) 14:58, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps we can equate the ranks with the NATO ranking system. This system standardizes and compares ranks across militaries and is afaik the only international military rank comparison system. So we could equate the dead generals with ranks OF-6 (Russian major-general) and OF-7 (Russian lieutenant-general). I do think that in terms of understandability, a phrasing that compares with ranks in well-known militaries (the current ones and/or complemented by other ones) may work better than a comparison with the relatively unknown OF-number-ranks. (See: Ranks and insignia of NATO and Ranks and insignia of NATO armies officers) UlyssorZebra (talk) 16:49, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Following that logic, which I disagree with, is the military of Canada a well-known? Dentren | ^Talk 17:30, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

I agree Canada is a random one. I think US/CAN/GBR is redundant and we could get away with stating the US alone (which copies the British system anyway) as well as the NATO rank, but I think stating equivalent rank (of the US) is useful to the average reader who does not know the OF system and won't bother to click on the link. We could do French/Spanish too as they influence numerous militaries, but we would be adding excessive detail imo. Solipsism 101 (talk) 17:42, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Or we could footnote Spanish/France/China ranks. Solipsism 101 (talk) 17:45, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

I would suggest the least biased and least redundant option would be to name US equivalence and footnote UK/CAnada/China/France/Spain ranks. Dentren | ^Talk 18:01, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

I did say "the current ones and/or complemented by other ones". I didn't say the current comparison is optimal. What I said, is that a comparison with ranks across well-known militaries (whatever militaries these would be) is better than the relatively unknown and abstract NATO's OF-number comparison. I do oppose a solely US-centric comparison even when complemented by a footnote (as suggested by Solipsism) - that seems significantly worse than the current situation. The current situation at least attempts to avoid US-centricity. NATO rank titles are luckily generally consistent across countries (most countries use similar titles, albeit in their own languages), so perhaps we could compare with the relatively common rank titles and then describe them "as used by most NATO countries". UlyssorZebra (talk) 18:06, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

I would support: "the rank is equivalent to brigadier as used by most Nato countries (OF-6 in the Nato rank structure)", then the footnote for the wider class. The same for lieutenant general. This may risk Nato- or Western-centrism, but my concern is simply that we should use the in-line rank, and I am aiming to offer a solution for the centrism concern. Solipsism 101 (talk) 18:53, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Good proposal. I support this solution. UlyssorZebra (talk) 20:12, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

You all are overlooking the fact that the article is wrong and Russian major-general corresponds to Western major generals. Look at the Russian wiki article, for example: ru:Генерал-майор. The takeaway there is that Russian major-generals are commanding divisions just like their Western counterparts are. Russians simply lack brigadiers (brigades are commanded by senior colonels). Any "comparisons" with lower ranks should be removed. This kind of false information surfaces from time to time on Wikipedia, and I wouldn't be surprised if the journalist got his misconceptions from here. 12:32, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Qualification for disputed?

I noticed 2 generals were removed because they were disputed, but the Chechen one remains on the article with a disputed tag. How are we differentiating what gets removed and what gets to stay? -BLKFTR (tlk2meh)

There seems to be a consensus - or at least a majority view - on this talk page to re-add the removed generals and properly label them as disputed. UlyssorZebra (talk) 15:53, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

I saw Kurpin was removed in this edit, should he be re-added? BLKFTR (tlk2meh) 17:39, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

I would support re-adding him. My approach is: when RSs say Russia disputes without taking a side, add them to disputed. When RSs take a side and say the person is still alive, omit. This is not foolproof as there are outlier RSs who don't fully investigate the claim, follow their gut from what they're reading on social media, etc. But as a general rule, I think it works. Solipsism 101 (talk) 17:47, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 April 2022

Hello,

Just thought I'd share the link. I don't have fancy editing privileges, and this probably needs to be confirmed a bit better then this one source. Looks like two more generals dead, and another wounded. Good luck following up on this, and good day!

https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/3465606-ukraine-army-destroys-enemy-command-operations-center-eliminates-two-russian-generals.html GeogSage (talk) 18:27, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

That's being discussed above in various places. No consensus yet. Solipsism 101 (talk) 20:36, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Rescope and rename article

I propose an expansion of the article to the general (no pun intended) situation of Russian generals during the conflict. There are reports of at least several seriously wounded generals - see Order of battle for the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine plus since the recent Kherson command post attack another unnamed one - which reinforces the exceptional situation Russian generals are finding themselves in. Next to this, Putin dismissed and even had arrested multiple generals since the beginning of the conflict - this is quite exceptional as well. So perhaps rename and rescope the article to "Russian generals during the 2022 invasion of Ukraine"? UlyssorZebra (talk) 10:37, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

perhaps so! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.172.105.215 (talk) 05:38, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

How about "List of Russian senior officer casualties during the 2022 invasion of Ukraine". Now, that's a really long title. Considering this article is not just a list, but also has a pretty large "Analysis" section, how about we skip the "List of" and use something like that: "Russian senior officer casualties in the 2022 Ukraine invasion", which is five characters shorter than the current title. Retaining the current, longer formulation for the invasion "Russian senior officer casualties during the 2022 invasion of Ukraine" is two characters longer - I don't know if this incantation ("2022 invasion of Ukraine") is global consensus for articles like this. I would argue against "Russian general casualties", because it is ambiguous. Using "senior officer" also leaves the possibility open to include colonels and similar just-below general ranks as has been previously suggested and discussed. We could also use "Russian generals killed or wounded" but that's less precise than casualties and much longer. Phiarc (talk) 09:30, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

I think it should stay as a dedicated "List" article for flag officers as WP:NLIST was important when an effort was made to delete/merge this article. List articles serve an important, specific function (do they have meta data that is unique?), and there's no rule that says such an article must devoid of analysis. There's plenty of list articles with substantial discussion/analysis sections: List of justices of the Supreme Court of the United States; List of compositions by Ludwig van Beethoven; List of national parks of the United States, and many more. However, Phiarcs's suggestion of "List of Russian senior officer casualties during the 2022 invasion of Ukraine" might be appropriate, although someone may then just want it merged into Casualties of the Russo-Ukrainian War. Limiting to Generals has the advantage of quite clearly satisfying WP:NLIST. AugusteBlanqui (talk) 09:44, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Yes, if the "List of" is a ward against rule-lawyering then it should of course be retained. Reading in previous discussions the consensus seems to be against including non "flag" officers (if I understand correctly, flag officers are the general ranks this page is about currently), so that might be another alternative for "senior officers", if "flag officer" is actually a distinction the Russians make and not a distinction imbued through comparative ranks in the US. Phiarc (talk) 15:58, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

How about List of Russian officer casualties during the 2022 invasion of Ukraine? We can define the list criteria to include killed general officers, but also some other notable casualties, including wounded and lower ranks. —Michael Z. 13:47, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

A very practical problem of a list of killed Russian officers is that it would be very long, poorly sourced yet very likely highly incomplete. I've seen a list of killed officers compiled from OSINT and it has well over 300 entries. Phiarc (talk) 16:02, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

That does not sound like what I proposed. There have been a number of other notable casualties in reliable sources that can be listed. The one who was murdered by his own troops by being run over by a tank, for example, and the estimated casualties of the Moskva sinking, etc. —Michael Z. 17:46, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Agreed with concerns about poorly sourced. Once you get below general officer, you're dealing with social media and tabloids. We could add where deaths are incredibly well-sourced, but I don't see a need yet. Solipsism 101 (talk) 19:45, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

To reply to the mentioned proposals of casualties - I am not feeling enthusiastic about this because the "dismissed and/or arrested generals" are not casualties (in the normal sense of the word), making the title a bit of a misnomer. I also don't like the idea of including all notable casualties because this dilutes what I - and in my view many sources - see as remarkable, i.e. the truly exceptional senior command situation that characterizes the Russian military in this war. This situation deserves expansion in my view. UlyssorZebra (talk) 19:25, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Is there a demonstrated need from the articles which already cover the war? I.e. is content being deleted about general injuries because it would make the other articles too lengthy? If not, it seems the expansion of this article would be unnecessary. There is also no reason a casualties page could not exist independent of this one. Solipsism 101 (talk) 19:40, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

In my view, yes, there is a need. The uniqueness of this situation is widely and lengthily reported upon, yet is only partially covered in this article (or any other article). This article seems the right place to cover it. I nor any other contributor afaik said anything about content being deleted, so not sure what you are referring to. UlyssorZebra (talk) 19:50, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

If it has been deleted, it suggests it could not fit into the main article Casualties of the Russo-Ukrainian War and a separate article (or folding into this one) is needed. By the way, how many injuries are we talking about? Solipsism 101 (talk) 21:07, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

At least three generals are reported as seriously wounded. My point is not about the wounded specifically, more about the overall situation, i.e. the combination of killed, seriously wounded, dismissed and arrested generals - as well as the newly promoted commanders. And the causes and repercussions of this situation. There's an increasing amount of attention in reliable media to this. UlyssorZebra (talk) 21:33, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

не вторжения,

не вторжения, а начала освобождения Украины от нацизма, который насаждали искусственно все те страны, которые сейчас снабжают(воюют) на стороне террористов-нацистов Украины. 94.231.133.170 (talk) 06:30, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.231.133.170 (talk) 06:28, 27 April 2022 (UTC) 94.231.133.170 (talk) 06:30, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

You should read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine to get a good overview of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Also, Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй. AugusteBlanqui (talk) 08:01, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Major General Simonov

Multiple Ukrainian sources on twitter reporting the death of Major General Simonov near Izyum. If some editors who can read Ukranian and/or Russian sources could keep an eye for more details that would be great. AugusteBlanqui (talk) 19:32, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Use online translator in telegram Smokeonthewater (talk) 23:31, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Edit request: link Andrey Simonov (general)

A request to hyperlink his name to Andrey Simonov (general). UlyssorZebra (talk) 08:49, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

done AugusteBlanqui (talk) 09:36, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Attack on Izyum Command Post

Various sources on Twitter talk about a big attack on a Russian command post in Izyum, leaving Chief of Staff Gerasimov wounded and dozens of high ranking officers (like Major General Simonov) killed. Could be added as general information below the table since injuring such a high ranking officer seems remarkable — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:C1:AF1A:C800:3562:FEDA:B44D:1DAA (talk) 15:39, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Questions

Why are Ukrainian claims from Twitter (non-RS) being taken as face value? Shouldn't we wait for further confirmation and not parrot one side? For example, is there any proof that General Simonov died, apart from Ukrainian social media allegations? 2601:85:C101:C9D0:45DB:90D1:58F4:90AF (talk) 19:29, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

I added a status column to the table so it's obvious at a glance which entries are merely claims, versus confirmed and disputed entries. Phiarc (talk) 17:54, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Siminov

Can we change Siminov to Chief of the Electronic Warfare Troops of the 2nd Army rather than “a senior leader etc” 2A04:4A43:48BF:E34E:80DD:2FE8:FDF1:E922 (talk) 17:22, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Link (from this article) to article at Simple English Wiki (Magomed Tushayev)?

See https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magomed_Tushayev. 89.8.189.184 (talk) 15:39, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

British Ministry of Defence

Washington Post cites the British Ministry of Defence today:

“Difficulties in command and control, as well as faltering Russian performance on the front line, have drawn senior Russian commanders onto the battlefield, likely to take personal leadership of operations."

Their deployment has put them at “significant risk, leading to disproportionately high losses of Russian officers in this conflict"

This summarizes the situation well, and adds a new source. However I can't find a link to the Ministry's statement except their tweet. Is there a better way to cite this?

Thanks. Cloudjpk (talk) 16:36, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

References

Paywalled source New York Times

Can anyone provide an alternative source for the New York Times article? Not a rewrite, something like the Associated Press which will allow readers to see the original article without subscribing to the New York Times. My search only came up with the Japan Times which requires creation of an account, presumably with limits. Humphrey Tribble (talk) 22:22, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

There are three NYT articles cited and is the direct source of some of the quotes. Maybe additional sources can be found, but we shouldn’t remove any sources because one has to go all the way to a public library or log into their online account to verify them. —Michael Z. 14:09, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

You're quite right, Michael Z. (talk · contribs), original sources should always be noted even if they are in a language other than English. I didn't say the original should be deleted, but I should've used the word "additional". Not everyone has access to a public library or is able to visit a library which carries copies of a particular newspaper. Some readers have very limited Internet access. Not everyone is able to create accounts, even free ones (or jump through hoops of any sort), every time they encounter a barrier. Wikipedia is for everyone; the fewer barriers, the better. So a source of the text without a payroll would be appreciated. Humphrey Tribble (talk) 21:37, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

ISW article with russian generals KIA

This article by ISW lists Russian generals. You can ctrl+f for KIA.— Preceding unsigned comment added by SentientObject (talk • contribs)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 May 2022

Can we change Siminov's section in the graph about generals who have been killed to Chief of the Electronic Warfare Troops of the 2nd Army rather than “a senior leader etc” 78.147.85.85 (talk) 07:51, 17 May 2022 (UTC) 78.147.85.85 (talk) 07:51, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

 Done in this edit. SWinxy (talk) 03:18, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Intentionally put in harm's way by Putin?

Some people point out that Putin may have put generals into harm's way as a method of assassination because those generals became opposition to Putin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.235.154.149 (talk) 18:55, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Who has pointed out? Remembering we need a reliable source for any claim. Best wishes, Solipsism 101 (talk) 20:08, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 31 May 2022

Andrey Nikolayevich Paly should be added to this list: https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-general-officer-guide-may-11 — Preceding unsigned comment added by SentientObject (talk • contribs) 13:21, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

@SentientObject: this list is limited to 'flag officers' and 1st rank captain is one below. That is why Andrei Paliy has been excluded. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:06, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Add Roman Kutuzov

https://twitter.com/Archer83Able/status/1533472585949888512 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8109:BD40:65C4:24DB:B545:6C37:129D (talk) 17:05, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Another one bites the dust

Hi, please add reference to one more Roman Vladimirovich Kutuzov. Source. The status shuld be "Claimed" (he was confirmed by the Russian side, but not yet officially). Thanks! With regards, Oleg. Y. (talk). 17:51, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

 Done in this edit, and updated to confirmed in this edit. SWinxy (talk) 02:09, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Only four generals confirmed dead by Russian sources (as at 6 June 2022)

https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1533520588785991681 Regards to all, Buckshot06 (talk) 22:34, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Seems a little weird to have a page listing "Russian generals killed . . ." and then the status of two of them is "Alive." That's how the page reads right now. Knorlin (talk) 22:50, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

• So the best solution is to remove all of those that are definitely alive (Tushayev, Mordvichev, and Gerasimov) since sources that are not pro-Russian have acknowledged that the initial reports were false. This is an example of why we do not need to breathlessly repeat military claims made in the fog of war. Now that Russian official sources often post announcements of officer deaths, it is no longer necessary to rely on solely Ukrainian sources unless some strong evidence is presented (for example, Azov Regiment's photo of Mityaev's corpse posted on Telegram). All of those claimed to have been killed without Russian confirmation could also be removed, which would leave the list with only Sukhovetsky, Mityaev, Frolov, Kutuzov, and Botashev. It may be more useful to convert this into an article discussing Russian senior officer casualties during the invasion, which would allow us to cover the confirmed and significant deaths of brigade commanders. Kges1901 (talk) 23:33, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

I think it would be of value to have a small section at the bottom of the article saying something like "These generals were erroneously reported as killed" or similar. MartinezMD (talk) 00:06, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

I agree with MartinezMD, but we need to list erroneously killed generals right up the top, with references (for the avoidance of any confusion later). Only has to be one line. Apart from that, yes, amend to include colonels as well as per Kges1901. Buckshot06 (talk) 09:10, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

It's getting to the point that List of Russian generals falsely claimed to be dead by Ukrainian Intelligence in 2022 is a valid article. We might actually get to List of Russian generals falsely claimed to be dead by Ukrainian Intelligence in 2022, but later killed. Baxbox (talk) 07:20, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Roman Borisovich Berdnikov

Add Roman Borisovich Berdnikov to the list Source: https://www.9news.com.au/world/russia-ukraine-update-two-russian-generals-killed-report-say/abb1998d-4283-4202-a36d-342929ba2de6 https://tsargrad.tv/news/boj-za-donbass-kak-pogib-general-major-roman-kutuzov_560811 --Titsor8976 (talk) 05:53, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

That most likely seems to be a confusion with Roman Kutuzov who is confirmed KIA 2003:C1:AF1A:C800:A415:CD6B:A290:7D41 (talk) 08:07, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

there is no confusion, the was TWO generals killed

here another source: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/18793151/ukraine-wipes-out-two-putins-generals-single-strike/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10888403/Ukraine-war-Putin-loses-two-senior-commanders-one-day.htmlTitsor8976 (talk) 09:05, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

The claims of Berdnikov's death as well originate with anonymous sources cited by the Volya telegram channel at 11:16 on 5 June. In the post, Volya mentioned earlier claims by Russian channel Astra Press and DNR public channels that a general named Roman had been killed, not naming his last name, and Volya stated that thanks to anonymous sources they knew his full name, naming him as Roman Berdnikov. Around 11:22, Sladkov made his first [17] post disclosing Roman Kutuzov's death. In this tweet, Volya admitted that "their sources could be wrong," "but let's wait two or three days." The claims of Berdnikov's death have so far only been picked up by Western tabloids like Daily Mail. Kges1901 (talk) 12:31, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

This needs better confirmation. Baxbox (talk) 07:25, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

"Alive"

Well, there is possibility that Russian propagandas try to pretend the dead generals are alive. And indeed there are no independent sources to prove that whether those generals are alive, and thus their status should remain "disputed" as before. 182.239.90.104 (talk) 07:23, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Agree, it should be "disputed", not "alive". UlyssorZebra (talk) 09:58, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Stop spreading Putin Propaganda!

There is no "Republic of Luhansk", so no one can have been killed in this fictional country. All Russian invaders were killed on Ukrainian soil. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:E2:3701:9D72:A83A:4841:5DF2:6494 (talk) 09:02, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

There's a part of Ukraine called "Luhansk Oblast", meaning Luhansk State, essentially. The article is stating that the Russian Generals were killed in the Luhansk part of Ukraine. Qoiuoiuoiu (talk) 21:12, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

When the IP posted, the Kutuzov entry said Luhansk People’s Republic. It has been changed to Luhansk Oblast.[18] I support that. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:13, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Ah. I didn't see that! Sorry! Qoiuoiuoiu ( talk ) 17:15, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

New Death and possible Death of russian generals

Maj Gen Roman Kutuzov has been confirmed killed in donbas by russian media (date of death unsure). He is said to have been killed leading an assault on a ukrainian settlement.

Additional rumours of Lt Gen Roman Berdnikov being killed have circulated on social media, yet this remains unverified. Source: BBC News, United Kingdom https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61702862 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.159.124.162 (talk) 09:42, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Stop the propaganda

Get it back to “disputed”. Putin claimed those are erroneous reports, but not Ukraine. The situation of those three Russians are disputed, not verified to be alive. 182.239.120.192 (talk) 08:37, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Assume good faith and don't just call it propaganda when someone makes an edit that you disagree with. Hey man im josh (talk) 11:42, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Gerasmimov should remain disputed. No independent source has confirmed him alive. BBC, a reliable independent source, has verified the other two as alive. So those should stay. MartinezMD (talk) 11:48, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

The report by Pravda.ru of Gerasimov receiving a medal includes a photo of Gerasimov being decorated. This is the same type of evidence that BBC Russia accepted in its later report about that says that Tushayev and Mordvichev are still alive using the videos that were posted. The report was published on 23 May, long after he was claimed dead, by which point other generals Frolov and Sukhovetsky had been reported dead by Russian sources first. Given that there are more than 12 colonels who have been confirmed dead and now four generals admitted by Russian sources, it seems that the Russians are not deliberately concealing the deaths of individual servicemen when funerals are reported. For example, the front page of a major Russian regional newspaper is full of obituaries for soldiers killed in the war. I don't see a reason to act here as if there is some vast conspiracy by the Russians to pretend that generals who are dead are actually alive. Kges1901 (talk) 13:29, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

I'm okay with that logic then. MartinezMD (talk) 18:06, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Are you saying the Russians didn’t deny some generals’ deaths and therefore we know they never have and never will try to mislead or obscure the truth about any general’s death? Despite blatant lies about a thousand other things concerning their war in Ukraine? I am not okay with that logic.

They are clearly not openly reporting their casualties. They have designated military deaths a secret. We should assume they will treat them as military secrets, and possibly selectively release some information to protect other, or evaluate the risk of revelation before deciding what to deny or release. —Michael Z. 19:50, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

In no way does this excuse Russian actions in Ukraine or the reality, that yes, they do systematically falsify information and obviously do not publish accurate total casualty figures. But the Russians already manipulate the deaths of individual generals and soldiers to fit their own narratives of the war, for example Roman Kutuzov's death was confirmed so quickly, and Russian media constructed a narrative of his heroic death. Yes there are obvious military reasons why deaths of senior officers might not be disclosed quickly, same would apply for the Ukrainians, but it is unrealistic to assume that the Russians would be going to great lengths to prove that general who is actually dead is still alive when they can still use deaths to further pro-war narratives. Kges1901 (talk) 20:59, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

They might prefer we don’t know that they’ve lost 10 or 13, and a total of 50 or 60 senior commanders, or whatever it is, and how and why specific ones were lost, for example. —Michael Z. 21:10, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

I believe Russian media are saying four Russian generals have been killed. —Michael Z. 00:43, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Short question: BBC Russia reportet it, did BBC, too? I don't know the structure of BBC, but if it is BBC Russia, then British BBC should reported it, too? I can not read cyrillic and translator is always a catch. - Thank you :)

Edit request: Source does not match writing

Looking to make a small edit. Under Roman Kutuzov's section, it is said "Kutuzov was reportedly killed near the village of Mykolaivka, Popasna Raion, Luhansk Oblast the day after being promoted.[26][25][27]". However, the source that is using, which I believe is source 27 (https://hindustannewshub.com/russia-ukraine-news/putin-promoted-9-generals-participants-in-the-war-in-ukraine-the-moscow-times/), does not actually say this.

It says, "Among those promoted are Defense Ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov, commander of the 6th Air Force Army Oleg Makovetsky, commander of the 11th Army Corps Andrey Ruzinsky, and Major General Roman Kutuzov, who died the day before in the LPR."

I.E. he was promoted the day after his death 2001:569:733C:9700:75AA:ED0E:6335:D9F0 (talk) 09:55, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Edit: To be clear: We should change "Kutuzov was reportedly killed near the village of Mykolaivka, Popasna Raion, Luhansk Oblast the day after being promoted.[26][25][27]" to "Kutuzov was reportedly killed near the village of Mykolaivka, Popasna Raion, Luhansk Oblast"

2001:569:733C:9700:75AA:ED0E:6335:D9F0 (talk) 09:57, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

 Done WelpThatWorked (talk) 04:49, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Edit request: fix sort order of rank column

The column for rank was intended to be sortable, with data-sort-value=1 for Major General and data-sort-value=2 for Lieutenant General (i.e. number of stars in rank). Some point rows were later added by copy-and-paste, resulting in incorrect custom sortkeys. 3 rows need to be fixed: 16, 30 Apr and 22 May entries. Thanks. 2406:3003:2077:1E60:C998:20C6:8CCF:5730 (talk) 06:59, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks for reporting this. Aidan9382 _(talk) 09:30, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Relevance of picture

What is the relevance of the picture of Lapin? He's not among the generals killed. Cloudjpk (talk) 15:38, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

I agree. I replaced it with Sukhovetsky's photo. MartinezMD (talk) 21:43, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Cloudjpk (talk) 01:06, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

You're welcome. Looks like many of the photos in WP are not properly licensed. I added Kutuzov's photo after Sukhovetsky's was removed. MartinezMD (talk) 02:33, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks again. Cloudjpk (talk) 06:29, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

Fine. RopeTricks (talk) 21:15, 8 July 2022 (UTC)