Talk:Malaysia Airlines Flight 17: Difference between revisions
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Malaysia Airlines Flight 17/Archive 26) (bot |
→top: more press |
||
(12 intermediate revisions by 10 users not shown) | |||
Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
}} |
}} |
||
{{OnThisDay|date1=2020-07-17|oldid1=968011731|date2=2022-07-17|oldid2=1098438777|date3=2024-07-17|oldid3=1235116830}} |
{{OnThisDay|date1=2020-07-17|oldid1=968011731|date2=2022-07-17|oldid2=1098438777|date3=2024-07-17|oldid3=1235116830}} |
||
{{Press |
|||
|author = Olga Boichak |
|||
== The International Court of Justice at The Hague did not rule that Russia was responsible == |
|||
|title = How Russia Invaded Wikipedia |
|||
On January 31, 2024, the International Court of Justice in The Hague refused to rule that Russia was responsible for shooting down MH-17. [[Robert_Parry_(journalist)|Robert Parry]] has been ''[https://consortiumnews.com/2024/02/07/robert-parry-vindicated-on-mh-17-reporting/ posthumously vindicated]''. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/2601:600:A481:8E20:8DB3:F53B:F94F:60E5|2601:600:A481:8E20:8DB3:F53B:F94F:60E5]] ([[User talk:2601:600:A481:8E20:8DB3:F53B:F94F:60E5#top|talk]]) 20:22, 7 April 2024 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
|date = October 4, 2024 |
|||
|org = [[Foreign Policy]] |
|||
|url = https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/10/04/russia-ukraine-putin-wikipedia-ruwiki-disinformation/ |
|||
|lang = |
|||
|quote = Another example is the downing of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17. While the English-language version acknowledges that the flight was shot down by the Russian military, which is the international consensus, Russian Wikipedia has called it a “catastrophe” without any attribution of guilt. |
|||
|archiveurl = |
|||
|archivedate = <!-- do not wikilink --> |
|||
|accessdate = October 5, 2024 |
|||
|author2 = Sam Wineburg and Nadav Ziv |
|||
|title2 = Go ahead and use Wikipedia for research |
|||
|date2 = October 17, 2024 |
|||
|org2 = [[The Boston Globe]] |
|||
|url2 = https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/10/17/opinion/use-wikipedia-reliable-source/ |
|||
|lang2 = |
|||
|quote2 = The claim that “anyone can change” Wikipedia isn’t true. Try tampering with the entries for “Partition of India,” “Donald Trump,” “Gamergate,” or “Coat of arms of Lithuania” and you’ll smash right into a lock icon, indicating that the page is “protected.” |
|||
|archiveurl2 = |
|||
|archivedate2 = <!-- do not wikilink --> |
|||
|accessdate2 = October 18, 2024 |
|||
}} |
|||
==Wiki Education assignment: Legal Europe== |
==Wiki Education assignment: Legal Europe== |
||
Line 61: | Line 81: | ||
:It could have been fired by the Russian army soldiers. [[User:Ymblanter|Ymblanter]] ([[User talk:Ymblanter|talk]]) 08:32, 18 July 2024 (UTC) |
:It could have been fired by the Russian army soldiers. [[User:Ymblanter|Ymblanter]] ([[User talk:Ymblanter|talk]]) 08:32, 18 July 2024 (UTC) |
||
::Given that this is a sophisticated piece of equipment, which came with its own trained crew, it almost certainly was 'fired' by 'Russian army soldiers'. Whoever may have been giving orders or deciding targets. [[User:Pincrete|Pincrete]] ([[User talk:Pincrete|talk]]) 09:40, 18 July 2024 (UTC) |
::Given that this is a sophisticated piece of equipment, which came with its own trained crew, it almost certainly was 'fired' by 'Russian army soldiers'. Whoever may have been giving orders or deciding targets. [[User:Pincrete|Pincrete]] ([[User talk:Pincrete|talk]]) 09:40, 18 July 2024 (UTC) |
||
:::Yes, both the Hague court and the JIT in its final report [https://www.prosecutionservice.nl/documents/publications/mh17/map/2023/report-mh17] confirmed that the Buk came from Russia and had a full crew with it. |
|||
:::The JIT report mentions that Girkin said the DPR needed air defense weapons with a longer range than MANPADS and trained crews to use them. Girkin wanted the equipment to come with trained personnel because the DPR didn't have time for training. |
|||
:::Further from the JIT report: |
|||
:::A Buk has 4 crew members: a commander, two operators, and a driver. The commander runs the vehicle and talks to the battalion or brigade command. Only the commander can launch a missile using a special key. The commander is an officer who has completed a five-year training program. |
|||
:::The JIT identified an officer that was part of the 53rd AAMB brigade commander Muchkaev's personal staff. Photos on social media after July 17 show the officer wearing two medals: one for combat operations with the Buk system and another for exceptional service with the Russian security service, FSB. This decoration was awarded only once, on July 21, 2014, four days after the downing of flight MH17. [[User:Difool|Difool]] ([[User talk:Difool|talk]]) 01:40, 21 August 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::This is extremely stupid and manipulative. No real evidence is provided in your sources. Girkin need this and Girkin needed that. It is NOT proved that the DPR OWNED Buk missiles and not only missiles but the whole air defense system. In their report the company which produced Buk missiles stated that the debris into the plane including those who killed the two pilots were NOT from the Buk. The Buk missile serial number for one which "leaked" were traced to be in the Ukrainian possession. The DPR staff simply DID NOT HAVE these weapons, as simply as that. You are simply LYING! [[User:Lip010101|Lip010101]] ([[User talk:Lip010101|talk]]) 01:20, 16 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Sorry, we are way past this point. What you say is plainly incorrect, a court in a civilized country (not in Russia) already took the decision. We are not interested here in broadcasting Russian propaganda. [[User:Ymblanter|Ymblanter]] ([[User talk:Ymblanter|talk]]) 20:27, 16 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:We cannot but the article seems to be a propaganda piece. [[Special:Contributions/2603:8081:4A00:B792:F1D4:64F1:8C93:4C61|2603:8081:4A00:B792:F1D4:64F1:8C93:4C61]] ([[User talk:2603:8081:4A00:B792:F1D4:64F1:8C93:4C61|talk]]) 01:11, 17 August 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:No we cannot. There are NO evidences of that. [[User:Lip010101|Lip010101]] ([[User talk:Lip010101|talk]]) 01:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Wholly agree with [[User:Ymblanter]]. Where have you been for the past ten years? Working for the [[Federal Security Service|FSB]]?? [[User:Martinevans123|Martinevans123]] ([[User talk:Martinevans123|talk]]) 20:44, 16 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Special Livery Image == |
== Special Livery Image == |
||
Line 68: | Line 98: | ||
:No, that kind of thing is planespotter trivia. [[User:Geogene|Geogene]] ([[User talk:Geogene|talk]]) 01:10, 28 July 2024 (UTC) |
:No, that kind of thing is planespotter trivia. [[User:Geogene|Geogene]] ([[User talk:Geogene|talk]]) 01:10, 28 July 2024 (UTC) |
||
== Protected edit request - 8/23/2024 == |
|||
For the section "Claims of shoot-down by the Ukrainian Air Force" |
|||
I suggest changing "Su-25 Fighter Jet" and "Su-25 Jet" to "Su-25 Attack Aircraft" to better clarify the aircraft's role and purpose - A close air support subsonic CAS aircraft and not an air-to-air fighter aircraft. |
|||
This is important contextually. [[User:Rsemmes92|Rsemmes92]] ([[User talk:Rsemmes92|talk]]) 13:43, 23 August 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:@[[User:Rsemmes92|Rsemmes92]]: Please consider using the [[WP:Edit request wizard]] to make the edit request again as the formal process alerts more editors who may be willing to consider your request. [[User:Fork99|Fork99]] ([[User talk:Fork99|talk]]) 22:44, 29 August 2024 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 17:17, 18 October 2024
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26Auto-archiving period: 60 days |
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting. |
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 2 times. The weeks in which this happened:
|
A news item involving Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on the following dates: |
Ukrainian place names are transliterated using the National system. Please see the guidelines on the romanization of Ukrainian on Wikipedia for more information. |
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on July 17, 2020, July 17, 2022, and July 17, 2024. |
This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:
|
Wiki Education assignment: Legal Europe
[edit]This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 29 January 2024 and 15 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): X0730420210 (article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by X0730420210 (talk) 19:22, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
new lead
[edit]there's a new article in Al Jazeera talking about evidence of connections to Russia 2409:40E1:2D:82FB:FC3:26A7:6DA7:4F9D (talk) 17:40, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- What does it say we do not already saY?Slatersteven (talk) 17:43, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
10 year marked by flying flags at half mast.
[edit]this photo was made by me today. It shows the national flag at half mast at the offices of the municipality of Delft to mark 10 years of MH17 being shot down. I'm not sure where/if it should be fitted into the article. 1Veertje (talk) 17:28, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- @1Veertje Nice pic. Yes you can put it in the Legacy section. Alexysun (talk) 22:39, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
Can we definitively say it was fired by pro-Russian seperatists?
[edit]This article keeps beating around the bush saying the missile was fired from separatist-controlled land, etc. Why not definitively say that it was fired by pro-Russian seperatists who got a little bit trigger happy and were itching to fire at something and test out their newly received device? Alexysun (talk) 22:40, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- It could have been fired by the Russian army soldiers. Ymblanter (talk) 08:32, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- Given that this is a sophisticated piece of equipment, which came with its own trained crew, it almost certainly was 'fired' by 'Russian army soldiers'. Whoever may have been giving orders or deciding targets. Pincrete (talk) 09:40, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, both the Hague court and the JIT in its final report [1] confirmed that the Buk came from Russia and had a full crew with it.
- The JIT report mentions that Girkin said the DPR needed air defense weapons with a longer range than MANPADS and trained crews to use them. Girkin wanted the equipment to come with trained personnel because the DPR didn't have time for training.
- Further from the JIT report:
- A Buk has 4 crew members: a commander, two operators, and a driver. The commander runs the vehicle and talks to the battalion or brigade command. Only the commander can launch a missile using a special key. The commander is an officer who has completed a five-year training program.
- The JIT identified an officer that was part of the 53rd AAMB brigade commander Muchkaev's personal staff. Photos on social media after July 17 show the officer wearing two medals: one for combat operations with the Buk system and another for exceptional service with the Russian security service, FSB. This decoration was awarded only once, on July 21, 2014, four days after the downing of flight MH17. Difool (talk) 01:40, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- This is extremely stupid and manipulative. No real evidence is provided in your sources. Girkin need this and Girkin needed that. It is NOT proved that the DPR OWNED Buk missiles and not only missiles but the whole air defense system. In their report the company which produced Buk missiles stated that the debris into the plane including those who killed the two pilots were NOT from the Buk. The Buk missile serial number for one which "leaked" were traced to be in the Ukrainian possession. The DPR staff simply DID NOT HAVE these weapons, as simply as that. You are simply LYING! Lip010101 (talk) 01:20, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, we are way past this point. What you say is plainly incorrect, a court in a civilized country (not in Russia) already took the decision. We are not interested here in broadcasting Russian propaganda. Ymblanter (talk) 20:27, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
- This is extremely stupid and manipulative. No real evidence is provided in your sources. Girkin need this and Girkin needed that. It is NOT proved that the DPR OWNED Buk missiles and not only missiles but the whole air defense system. In their report the company which produced Buk missiles stated that the debris into the plane including those who killed the two pilots were NOT from the Buk. The Buk missile serial number for one which "leaked" were traced to be in the Ukrainian possession. The DPR staff simply DID NOT HAVE these weapons, as simply as that. You are simply LYING! Lip010101 (talk) 01:20, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
- Given that this is a sophisticated piece of equipment, which came with its own trained crew, it almost certainly was 'fired' by 'Russian army soldiers'. Whoever may have been giving orders or deciding targets. Pincrete (talk) 09:40, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- We cannot but the article seems to be a propaganda piece. 2603:8081:4A00:B792:F1D4:64F1:8C93:4C61 (talk) 01:11, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- No we cannot. There are NO evidences of that. Lip010101 (talk) 01:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
- Wholly agree with User:Ymblanter. Where have you been for the past ten years? Working for the FSB?? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:44, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
Special Livery Image
[edit]I feel like adding this image to the aircraft info section would definitely add historical value and interest to the article. The image provides a more comprehensive view of the aircraft's history and can enhance the reader's understanding of its visual identity over time. Thoughts? Hacked (Talk|Contribs) 00:34, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- No, that kind of thing is planespotter trivia. Geogene (talk) 01:10, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Protected edit request - 8/23/2024
[edit]For the section "Claims of shoot-down by the Ukrainian Air Force"
I suggest changing "Su-25 Fighter Jet" and "Su-25 Jet" to "Su-25 Attack Aircraft" to better clarify the aircraft's role and purpose - A close air support subsonic CAS aircraft and not an air-to-air fighter aircraft.
This is important contextually. Rsemmes92 (talk) 13:43, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Rsemmes92: Please consider using the WP:Edit request wizard to make the edit request again as the formal process alerts more editors who may be willing to consider your request. Fork99 (talk) 22:44, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia controversial topics
- Wikipedia articles that use British English
- B-Class aviation articles
- B-Class Aviation accident articles
- Aviation accident task force articles
- WikiProject Aviation articles
- B-Class Disaster management articles
- Mid-importance Disaster management articles
- B-Class Death articles
- Low-importance Death articles
- B-Class military history articles
- B-Class Russian, Soviet and CIS military history articles
- Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force articles
- B-Class Malaysia articles
- High-importance Malaysia articles
- WikiProject Malaysia articles
- B-Class Netherlands articles
- All WikiProject Netherlands pages
- B-Class Ukraine articles
- High-importance Ukraine articles
- WikiProject Ukraine articles
- B-Class Russia articles
- Mid-importance Russia articles
- Mid-importance B-Class Russia articles
- WikiProject Russia articles with no associated task force
- WikiProject Russia articles
- B-Class 2010s articles
- Mid-importance 2010s articles
- WikiProject 2010s articles
- Pages in the Wikipedia Top 25 Report
- Wikipedia In the news articles
- Selected anniversaries (July 2020)
- Selected anniversaries (July 2022)
- Selected anniversaries (July 2024)
- Wikipedia pages referenced by the press