Talk:Russian Ground Forces

message: Just few days ago, I saw the strength as almost 400000 personnel, but now it has drastically decreased to 258000. Are the sources right? SReader21 (talk) 20:42, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: IISS is generally considered to be among the most reliable. The previous source may have been inflated. Garuda28 (talk) 01:44, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Whats the correct size of the army? 

message: The section on 'reforms under Putin' needs to be re-written in the past tense as it currently treats 2007 as the present day. Firestar47 (talk) 15:14, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Putin onwards 

message: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Divisions_of_Russia
All such articles need to be updated and renamed. Russian military is no longer based on divisions and it didn't happen yesterday. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.173.116.215 (talk) 16:37, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well that is wrong, since at least 2014 some division are reactivated for example the 2nd Guards Motor Rifle Division, 19th Motor Rifle Division etc. In many articles about divisions you can see when and how are reactivated, as I said at least since 2014, so some were brigades indeed but just for one short period of time before reactivated or back to divison size/name. Nubia86 (talk) 22:42, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  All the former divisions are still being referred to as divisions having been turned into brigades years ago 

message: The Russian Army reserve was 330,000 as of last year, and it said 670,000 for Active in the personnel section. And Russia spends 69-98 Billion on the military. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:7080:4E43:1B00:E5AD:75C9:8149:BC71 (talk) 18:06, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Comments regarding article content belong on the article talk page. If you are going to add or change content, those changes must be supported by reliable sourcing. Along with the notices on your talk page, there are now also 'welcome' templates. I suggest you read through them, and the links they contain, there is a great deal of useful information there for new and/or inexperienced users. Lastly, please sign your comments. Thank you - wolf 18:18, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Russian Ground Force

message: This page does not inform aabout geographic/ethnic composition of the army. According to https://therussianreader.com/2022/05/23/buryats-russian-world/ Dagestan and Buryatia people are overrepresented. Xx236 (talk) 07:19, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you should be able to edit the article Chidgk1 (talk) 17:32, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ethnic composition of the Russian army 

message: *Salaries were generally paid on time from 2001-2003, while contract soldiers' pay increased over 70% over that time.
*Many officer families lack adequate accommodation, while the positive effect of pay increases has been offset by the withdrawal of social benefits at the same time.
*From Fiscal Year 2002 all military personnel have to pay income tax.
*It was planned as of the time of writing (17 Dec 2003) that at least 50% of all servicemen and sergeants will be under contracts by 2007. (all p27)
*The MOD plans to transfer 147,000 personnel across the entire armed forces to contract service, for which Rb80 billion ($2.69 billion) would be required.
*Hoped that moving to contract armed forces would overcome conscription problems. 35% of armed forces' recruits discharged for health reasons annually; 1,800 conscripts "on the run" and "on the wanted list" according to the MOD.
*As of 2003 one-third of all armed forces' officers did not have apartments of their own.
*In 2002 29,000 flats were handed over to servicemen, leaving 160,000 servicemen's families on waiting lists with a similar number of ex-servicemen. Both figures across entire armed forces (all p25). Buckshot06 (talk) 21:44, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notes from Jane's Defence Weekly, December 2003 

message: *:@Buckshot06 You shouldn't just include the part of a quote you like/agree with, when quoting someone, quote them in full. See MOS:PMC. TylerBurden (talk) 11:43, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: If that is the rule, I will follow it. But do you understand the point? This is a US tank general with decades in the US Army, commenting on the way he sees Soviet tanks. They stem from a completely different design philosophy - especially, low height, to minimize sight by the enemy and thus risk. If you took a Russian general and showed him around a US tank, in contrast, they might well have said, there's all this wasted space, and (partially) because of that, the tank is too high, too easy to see - too vulnerable. The M1 Abrams has had its silhouette criticised for this precise reason. Buckshot06 (talk) 23:25, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: @Buckshot06 I can understand where you're coming from, but Wikipedia is just meant to reflect what reliable sources say, and quotes in particular need to be as accurate as possible. After all, the article isn't stating that the tank is objectively cramped, just including Hertling's thoughts on it. TylerBurden (talk) 14:13, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mark Hertling on Soviet-designed tanks 

message: It is currently "Forward, infantry! Вперёд, пехота!" all on one line, since one is simply the translation of the other, at the very least it should be split across two.
Or instead have some note explaining that "Forward, infantry!" is the English translation. DoorOpensCloses (talk) 10:57, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  March section in info box could do with reformatting