Template talk:Armies of Ukraine
This needs a clear image of a historical tryzub (Volodymyr's trident) for the Druzhyna, I think. The ones we have are too modern-looking File:Trident 03.png, or reproduce badly at small size 
. —Michael Z. 2007-08-11 00:52 Z
UPA
[edit]book link considering this is a book on Ukraine's armies, and it includes them (and many other formations), deleting an army that are considered Ukrainian war veterans seems totally POV pushing. --Львівське (talk) 03:54, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- The book also listed Wehrmacht, Sicherheitsdienst and SS and Waffen-SS formations with "Ukrainians" enlisted. Can you suggest to add it also? Could you suggest a source(s) which suggest Stetsko's Regional governing as a "Ukrainian National state" (scholar source ОУН в 1941 році: документи: В 2-х ч Ін-т історії України НАН України К. 2006 ISBN 966-02-2535-0 - clearly state that this event has no relation to Ukrianian statehood history). Same source would be nice for Borovets formation - UNRA. Thanks. I'll hope to see that sources. ThanksJo0doe (talk) 05:57, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
- UPA is an incredibly important part of Ukrainian military history, call the short lived OUN state what you want, but keep your revisionist applied history off of here.--Львівське (talk) 06:04, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
- WP:PROVEIT with WP:RS. Bandera's OUN was not a state. See ОУН в 1941 році: документи: В 2-х ч Ін-т історії України НАН України К. 2006 ISBN 966-02-2535-0 page 14 "сміховарте "державне будівництво" , "Здоровий глузд не дозволяє вважати акт 30 червня 1941 року однім з епізодів державотворчої діяльності українського народу, " Again - same at page 19 - Треба відмовитися від розгляду акту 30 червня 1941 року як однієї з форм державотворчої діяльності українського народу. " Can you suggest WP:RS which debunk National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine scholars conclusion and provide suggested by you conclusion? ThanksJo0doe (talk) 07:20, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
- I'm confused. What are you arguing, the naming?--Львівське (talk) 20:59, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
- Can you provide a scholar source(s) which suggest a) UPA and UPRA as Armies of Ukraine b) "Ukrainian National state" really exist c) UIA-OUN(b) existance in 1941-1955. - See WP:PROVEIT for more detailsJo0doe (talk) 07:21, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not playing your games--Львівське (talk) 15:19, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
- Can you provide a scholar source(s) which suggest a) UPA and UPRA as Armies of Ukraine b) "Ukrainian National state" really exist c) UIA-OUN(b) existance in 1941-1955. - See WP:PROVEIT for more detailsJo0doe (talk) 07:21, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
- I'm confused. What are you arguing, the naming?--Львівське (talk) 20:59, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
- WP:PROVEIT with WP:RS. Bandera's OUN was not a state. See ОУН в 1941 році: документи: В 2-х ч Ін-т історії України НАН України К. 2006 ISBN 966-02-2535-0 page 14 "сміховарте "державне будівництво" , "Здоровий глузд не дозволяє вважати акт 30 червня 1941 року однім з епізодів державотворчої діяльності українського народу, " Again - same at page 19 - Треба відмовитися від розгляду акту 30 червня 1941 року як однієї з форм державотворчої діяльності українського народу. " Can you suggest WP:RS which debunk National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine scholars conclusion and provide suggested by you conclusion? ThanksJo0doe (talk) 07:20, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
- UPA is an incredibly important part of Ukrainian military history, call the short lived OUN state what you want, but keep your revisionist applied history off of here.--Львівське (talk) 06:04, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
Ukrainian SSR
[edit]The project of creating its own Soviet military has failed early on years before the formation of the Soviet Union. The Ukrainian SSR did not have its own military, but rather what was known as Soviet military which essentially was the Russian military. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 02:35, 13 February 2011 (UTC)