Talk:3rd Assault Brigade

Ukraine Low‑importance

	Ukraine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ukraine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ukraine on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.UkraineWikipedia:WikiProject UkraineTemplate:WikiProject UkraineUkraine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: European / Post-Cold War

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

Associated task forces:
/
	European military history task force
	Post-Cold War task force

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

You must be logged-in to an extended confirmed account (granted automatically to accounts with 500 edits and an age of 30 days)

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.

Azov

The name of the brigade is Azov. Why isn't that mentioned in the article? Source: https://www.yahoo.com/now/azov-regiment-expands-brigade-within-195700966.html Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 18:55, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was in the article, but then someone removed it. I was going to add it back in, but I had a look at sources and I'm not so sure if "Azov" is actually in the name of the brigade. Sources just say "3rd Assault Brigade" Tristario (talk) 22:27, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Here is another reference form their facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/ab3.army Translation from google:

An extended Azov unit within the Armed Forces, created by veterans of the Russian-Ukrainian war during the full-scale invasion of 2022.

Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 23:32, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MilitaryLand.net

MilitaryLand.net is a blog and should not be used as a source on wikipedia per WP:BLOGS, I will be removing the source, do not add it back, or add any other references to MilitaryLand.net Scu ba (talk) 03:48, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ideology and other data

Information from their website as at 13 May 2023.[1] It would be useful to find secondary sources to include this data in the article:

"The Third Separate Assault Brigade is a volunteer unit formed in the first days of the full-scale invasion. The Third Separate Assault Brigade was formed on the same principles as the legendary Azov and the entire Azov movement. The basic ideological principles of the Azov units are Ukraine-centricity, traditionalism, hierarchy and responsibility. Only highly motivated and strong-minded fighters, ready for continuous improvement and tough battles with the enemy on the front line, join our ranks after a difficult selection process. The backbone of the volunteer TRO unit, established on 24 February 2022, which began the brigade's history, was made up of veterans of the Azov Special Forces of the National Guard of Ukraine and representatives of the Azov Movement. On 9 March, the unit was expanded into the Azov Special Forces within the Armed Forces of Ukraine, and later reformed into a separate unit of the Azov Special Forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. In January 2023. the Azov Special Forces became part of the Land Forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and was expanded to a brigade." Mhorg (talk) 19:43, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The 3rd assault brigade recently minted combat medals modelled off the 36th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS (Dirlewanger) insignia:

https://www.facebook.com/ab3.army/posts/pfbid0GkxyTeVwBx5zG8PSZ9V1P8kCipFwvFaJcGKuJbw2sz8Fcksuw4FgGgBcS8kU7Cfnl

https://web.archive.org/web/20230818015813/https://www.facebook.com/ab3.army/posts/pfbid0GkxyTeVwBx5zG8PSZ9V1P8kCipFwvFaJcGKuJbw2sz8Fcksuw4FgGgBcS8kU7Cfnl

I think it's fair to add "neo-nazi" to their ideological description. Aachenshinto (talk) 02:05, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't necessarily agree that is reflective of the overall unit. You will need to write this in a neutral, and substantiated term - it would be better to describe that certain elements of insignia and badges have neo-Nazi affiliated insignia or meaning such as the black sun. Moreover, it would have to be properly cited as well according to a secondary source to back this up. Alternatively, you could draw back to the formation of this brigade from the SSO Azov Kyiv and SSO Azov Kharkiv, and link the SSO Azov units to the Azov Brigade and how they had controversy in regards to neo-Nazism. I do agree that this should be implemented, but in a way that doesn't summarise the whole unit to be neo-Nazis. The most accurate description of the common fighter in this brigade would be that they are ultra-nationalist, and patriotic, with some individual subunits having neo-Nazi insignia and views. Davomme (talk) 11:17, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Move page for the article

Since every other Ukrainian brigade article has the brackets in the name specifying the unit is from Ukraine, eg 93rd Mechanized Brigade (Ukraine), it would make sense to do the same from this article? So moving the name from 3rd Assault Brigade to 3rd Assault Brigade (Ukraine).

I am willing to hear any dispute or support for this proposition, I will not move the page until a consensus is reached. Davomme (talk) 13:26, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. It may be the only 3rd Assault Brigade in the world, but adding (Ukraine) would be more consistent with other pages. ciaoneef (talk) 18:11, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Revert structure back to bullet points

While the current tree list in the Structure section looks perfectly fine, the template seems to also include the references and Ukrainian Ground Forces infobox below (?). I suggest going back to the bullet points that were used previously in the Structure section, or at least fixing the tree list so that the References and infobox are separate entities again. Frankly I'm scared to try this for fear of messing up further, but hopefully someone with more editing experience than me is able to fix this at some point. ciaoneef (talk) 18:24, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Controversies

The "Controversies" section is written using Mediaport, and two other sources relying the same article from Mediaport. It's therefore one-sided POV, I'm adding the corresponding template there. ManyAreasExpert (talk) 09:36, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is an investigation by a French media outlet considered reliable and quoted by other newspapers. The POV template could be used if some source said that Mediapart lied, which it did not. There is no point in using that template. Mhorg (talk) 09:42, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The POV template could be used if some source said that Mediapart lied
No, the template can be used when The neutrality of this section is disputed. It's literally in the template itself. ManyAreasExpert (talk) 09:47, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand how you would like to balance this alleged non-neutrality of a source who made an investigation. Mhorg (talk) 09:57, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know yet. Too little observers have reported on the case yet.

But in the past, for example, Ukraine Brigade Defending Retreat Against Russia Offensive Has Murky Past (businessinsider.com) But fringe beliefs plaguing Ukrainian volunteer units have been weaponized by the Kremlin. Putin notoriously justified the full-scale invasion by claiming it was a "denazification campaign" and Nazis ran the Ukrainian government. , In 2022, the Russia-backed Donetsk People's Republic rewarded one of its soldiers with a medal for killing Ukrainian "nationalists." The fighter was pictured wearing neo-Nazi symbols while receiving his medal. ManyAreasExpert (talk) 10:41, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mediapart is not questioning that "fringe beliefs plaguing Ukrainian volunteer units have been weaponised by the Kremlin", they are just stating that they noticed neo-Nazis in the brigade and asked French institutions whether it is normal to train neo-Nazis. Please bring a source where Mediapart's investigation is questioned, then we can put the POV template. Mhorg (talk) 10:47, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps integrating language such as "it was reportedly stated that (oh xyz nazi issue here)" would be more appropriate and be seen as more balanced? Potentially another source, though reputable, countering this could add weight to the counterargument and adding a more balanced perspective. Davomme (talk) 10:51, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps... ManyAreasExpert (talk) 11:04, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure this entire section is due on the page. This is a military unit, not a political party. It usually appears in sources in such context. Soldiers with neo-Nazi views exist in all armies (e.g. [2]), which is a notable subject per se. But putting such content (about individual soldiers making posts in social media and wearing t-shirts) on pages about every military unit - I do not think that's a good idea, even though this can be sourced, in part because of the ongoing propaganda about "Ukrainian Nazi". My very best wishes (talk) 15:44, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Claims of the brigade itself

I tried to remove these claims but they were restored.[3] There must not be too much space in the article for what the brigade says about itself, but rather we must report what reliable third parties say about the brigade. As it is now, the article looks promotional, even with the number of soldiers they claim to have killed. I think this is unacceptable. Mhorg (talk) 15:01, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

the article looks promotional
It's not until there is a "Controversies" section. That one needs to be trimmed down. ManyAreasExpert (talk) 17:42, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This organisation is mainly known for its controversial aspects, so this is the right space it should have in the article. Mhorg (talk) 21:01, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree these claims belong to the page. Did anyone dispute them? They well can be true. As far as I know, every Ukrainian unit counts the numbers of enemy casualties and reports them to command for the overall statistics, which is widely reported, even celebrated by Ukrainian media and individual commenters. My very best wishes (talk) 22:53, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 September 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Hello! Would like to ask to make some changes in this place: "1st Mechanized Infantry Battalion. Formed in February 2022 as 98th Territorial Defence Battalion 'Azov-Dnipro'. Commander Bohdan Korzhenko "Adik"."

its incorrect for now, commander of battalion is another person, here is a link to correct information - https://ab3.army/pro-brigadu/ DanyQuePasa (talk) 14:15, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any reliable sources that might mention his real name? All the source you provided says is "Bot". - Adolphus79 (talk) 18:23, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]