File talk:Ukraine adm location map.svg

Transnistria

Transnistria border doesn't matter for Ukrainian adm.--Dim Grits (talk) 16:24, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

You wrote Would be better discuss before did that. That's right – for you, too. You want to change this file, you will have to explain why this map has to be changed. And if we disagree then my note at your discussion page will be the solution: This file will show what it shows since it exists and you will have to upload a new file.

You started first (edit without consensus). So where did yours mentors tone? Why did'n start discussion first?--Dim Grits (talk) 12:23, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Transnistria exists and so it is shown on this map. NNW 16:47, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Where it exist?! You are kidding me? States borders its international law, not elements the earth relief (however sometimes somewhere yes). Transnistria not exists neither on political map, nor like side fantasy transnistria-ukraine border. Its basic school knowledge.--Dim Grits (talk) 12:23, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Border in Kerch straite

Erase border in Kerch straite is not authoritatively and not neutral. Without any source. --Dim Grits (talk) 16:30, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

You prefer a dashed line in the Kerch Strait? It is not really necessary because the difference between Russia and Crimea is clearly to be seen but if you really want to have it then this is no problem. NNW 16:50, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

I prefer International law, You not. I prefer authority source (map about Ukraine, not Russia or Transnistria), You original research. Whats wrong? Read the rules.--Dim Grits (talk) 12:11, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Next time you change this map without consensus you will find your name at COM:AN/U. I'm tired of your opinions about me or my maps. You are free to upload any file under any new name. Please keep away from this one. You are not forced to use it. NNW 16:21, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Slavutych

Slavutych does not belong to Chernihiv Oblast. Please add the enclave. Szmenderowiecki (talk) 18:44, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

I'll update the map as soon as possible. NNW 15:49, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Referendums

This map will definitely not show any results of any illegitime referendum. NNW 08:32, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

I agree. We should fix the map. Crimea shouldn't be shown differently from the rest of Ukraine. — Chrisahn (talk) 21:56, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

This map is inconsistent / outdated

Why is Crimea shown as somehow separate from Ukraine, but the four oblasts recently "annexed" by Russia aren't? That doesn't make sense. If we want to show what the Russian government thinks is Ukrainian territory, we should show all "annexed" areas in grey. If we want to show what the whole world – except Russia, Belarus and a few others – thinks is Ukrainian territory, we should show Crimea and all the other "annexed" areas in the same colour as the rest of Ukraine. (Also see this discussion on a very similar map.) — Chrisahn (talk) 22:20, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

I think there is a difference. The Ukraine isn't sure about regaining Crimea [1]. There is even the idea of leasing the peninsula to Russia. NNW 07:12, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

These are very weak arguments.

Wikipedia should reflect the views of the overwhelming majority of the international community, not those of a tiny minority.

Almost all members of the international community recognize Crimea as part of Ukraine, which has been reaffirmed by a United Nations General Assembly resolution. See e.g. en:Political status of Crimea for details. This map currently leans towards the views of a tiny minority. That goes against our policies.

P.S.: While it's correct that Ukraine isn't sure about regaining Crimea, that hardly matters. Nothing is certain in war. Ukraine isn't sure about regaining Mariupol, Donetsk or Luhansk either, and yet the map shows them as part of Ukraine (as it should, because virtually everyone recognizes them as part of Ukraine). There's no reason to show these other Russian "annexations" as part of Ukraine, but Crimea as contested. As for "the idea of leasing the peninsula to Russia" – I'm not sure what you're referring to. Maybe some people have that idea, but it's a fringe idea, it's quite unlikely to become reality, and it's certainly not internationally recognized.

P.P.S.: You wrote in a previous discussion "this map will definitely not show any results of any illegitime referendum". I agree with that, and it's another reason why the map should not show Crimea as contested. There's little difference between the March 2014 "referendum" and the September 2022 "referendums". — Chrisahn (talk) 08:28, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

You have read the de facto part in the file description? It is senseless to use in times of war but there hasn't been war for Crimea for more than seven years. NNW 16:03, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Most of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts have been occupied for just as long as Crimea. There's no reason to mark Crimea as "no, not quite Ukraine" but these two as "yes, totally Ukraine".

And yes, the war is about Crimea as well. Ukraine regularly attacks Russian military bases, airports, ports and ships on and near Crimea.

But all of that isn't really relevant. What's relevant is that all Ukrainian terrories currently occupied by Russia are Ukrainian. That's supported by almost all countries on the planet, and by the UN general assembly. Anything else is the opinion of a tiny minority. We must abide by our NPOV policy, which is one of the fundamental rules of Wikipedia. This map has to represent the point of view of the vast majority, not the claims of a small minority. — Chrisahn (talk) 17:33, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

There is no NPOV in administrativ maps and "neutral" is not the same as "majority". It has been discussed with many maps and the only thing that works for at least most projects is a de facto map. There may be laws and decisions on both sides of a conflict but it is very easy to say if it was possible to travel from Kyiv to Sevastopol in 2015 or 2021 without crossing a border post. It's a nice thing to have a map that shows how something should be (unfortunately you need many maps for many sights) but it is better to show how it is. NNW 19:55, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Then we must also mark many other parts of Ukraine as "not quite Ukraine". At least the parts of the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts that have been occupied since 2014 (just like Crimea), but also the areas that have been occupied for months now. Because that's how it is. — Chrisahn (talk) 13:43, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Usually only international occupations were shown on these maps. We don't show inner conflicts e.g. in Syria (unless it's a long term de facto regime), and it's the same with Donetsk and Luhansk. It is senseless to change maps in an ongoing war. NNW 14:19, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

1. "Usually only international occupations were shown on these maps" – I guess that's OK as a general rule. But if we applied such a rule to this map, we would have to mark all occupied areas, since all of them are part of an "international occupation" by Russia. They include large parts of the Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Donetsk, and Luhansk oblasts as well as Crimea. There's no reason to treat Crimea any differently from the other occupied territories. See e.g. en:Russian-occupied territories of Ukraine.
2. "We don't show inner conflicts" – There is no "inner conflict" in Ukraine. Russia has been at war against Ukraine since 2014. (The "separatists" in Donetsk and Luhansk were controlled by Russia, and since Russia's "annexations" in September 2022, there's no difference between Donetsk/Luhansk and the other occupied territories anymore.) See e.g. en:Russo-Ukrainian War.
3. "It is senseless to change maps in an ongoing war" – That's not quite correct. For example, File:2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine.svg is closely tracking developments in the Russian occupation of Ukraine. But of course, that's a lot of work, and it probably wouldn't be a good approach for this map.

The point is that we need to find an approach for this map that is consistent and aligned with Wikipedia policies.

Currently, the map treats Crimea differently from other Russian-occupied territories. There's no logical reason for that. The current map seems to support the opinion that Crimea is somehow "less Ukrainian" than the other occupied territories. That's not a neutral point of view.

To be neutral and consistent, we have to treat Crimea just like the other Russian-occupied territories. To do that, we could either mark all of the occupied territories as "not quite Ukraine", or none of them.

Marking all occupied territories as "not quite Ukraine" would require frequent updates, and that's probably not what we want for this map.

Marking none of the occupied territories as "not quite Ukraine" would be much simpler. That means we must not mark Crimea as "not quite Ukraine" either.

— Chrisahn (talk) 15:03, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

I would say, there is a broad consensus that the actual map is inconsistent. If there is a clear-defined wikipedia policy in this matter, we should study this together and act accordingly.

Anyway, can someone please make a decision and change the map, please?

Opzwartbeek (talk) 12:34, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

1. Chrisahn + Opzwartbeek ≠ broad consensus.
2. If you want to have an Ukraine map which shows the country pre-2014 then you will find one at Commons. There is no need to have a second version of it.
3. There is no clear-defined WP policy for maps.
4. This is Commons, not WP, so no WP policy applies here.
5. A decision doesn't have to mean that something has to be changed. A decision can also mean: no change. NNW 14:01, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

   Thanks a lot, NNW, for this quick and professional response.

   1. You're right.

   2. Right again.

   3. That's good to know and will help in the solution of this problem in Wikipedia.

   4. That's also good to know. I reckoned that the two had the same policies.

   5. The logics of history lead to the conclusion that the application of this outdated map in the year 2023 is inconsistent, so something has to change. In this case, not in Commons, but in Wikipedia.

   Opzwartbeek (talk) 14:36, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

   Thanks for your contribution! Regarding the last point – yes, we could change Wikipedia, but the thing is: This illogical map is used in hundreds of Wikipedia pages. Sure, we could create a correct map, and then change hundreds of Wikipedia pages to use the correct map instead of this broken one. But it would be much less work to simply fix this map and be done with it. It could be so simple: just remove the gray shade from Crimea. But no, NNW insists on keeping this misguided map the way it is. I have no idea why. — Chrisahn (talk) 16:05, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

First of all you obviously don't know which way maps are shown in most WP articles. And even worse: This map is in use in lots of Wikipedias. And you really think that you two are the only ones who recognize a severe mistake? Why can't you just accept that other users/other projects want to show the situation that way? Again: There are alternative versions of this map. If any project wants to have a different map it would be just a single edit to change it. Btw en:wp, the project you mainly edit in, uses Ukraine under russian occupation grey.svg. NNW 17:17, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

1. NNW talks about "pre-2014" and seems to think that this map says something about "post-2014". That's nonsense. In February 2014, Ukraine lost control of Crimea; in April 2014, it lost control of parts of the Donbas. There is no context in which this map should be used – except when we're specifically talking about the situation in Ukraine between late Februar 2014 and early April 2014. For a text about these six weeks or so, the map might be useful. For anything else, the map is just wrong. It does not correctly represent anything about Ukraine outside that very short timeframe. If the map is supposed to show the situation between April 2014 and February 2022, it must show either both Crimea and Donbas as "not quite Ukraine" (or whatever the gray shade is supposed to mean) or neither. To exclude Crimea from Ukraine but include Donbas doesn't make any sense. It's inconsistent, and frankly a bit stupid. — Chrisahn (talk) 15:57, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Everyone who can read and understand knows your opinion, you don't have to repeat it again and again. You will find something less stupid in Category:Location maps of Ukraine. NNW 16:03, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

De-jure changed border between the Autonomus Republic of Crimea and Sevastopol

In the August—September 2023 Verkhovna Rada changed 2016 laws which should change administrative division and names of some cities and villages in Crimea but these laws didn't entry into force of the law. Now it is in force and the border in this file is outdated. I've created new one of the map of Crimea (you can compare to old one) and it is good to update (or create new ones) all the maps of Ukraine with territorial division. Lukdmi (talk) 17:29, 1 January 2024 (UTC)