This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a
WikiProject dedicated to coverage of
Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the
project page, or contribute to the
project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
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
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
I'd say there is no lineage relationship unless it is officially acknowledged in some way. Typically divisions and brigades have inherited lineages but not combined arms armies, for example
29th Army's history officially begins in 2010. But 41st CAA's
official history includes the Red Army formation. Regardless of any lineage relationship we should have separate articles for the Red Army units and the modern Russian units because of the wealth of information available on World War II units and since there is no organizational continuity, only a shared number (and any combined arms army numbered under 70 would share a number with a World War II unit).
Kges1901 (
talk)
02:04, 16 September 2023 (UTC)reply