Talk:Rank
Please add a Navy/Army equivalence summary table. Veynom 11:35, 2 May 2011 (GMT)
- You mean something like following table?
- shamelessly stolen from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Military_ranks and naturally would need to be adopted for our purposes...
- --Xanyarr Chyakk 14:35, 2 May 2011 (GMT)
- If I had known how to do a table, I'd have done such a table myself. Brilliant idea.
- And I'll edit the page tomorrow, since the seniority mentions are not necessary as the ranks are "in ascending order"...
- King, Viceroy etc. will get their own page (tomorrow) as "Topmost Rank" or something like that.
- Kinsa Rha, 2.05.2011, 19:11 GMT
You got it. :) Veynom 19:56, 2 May 2011 (GMT)
There is a nice article for Admiral. Should we maybe use that as a model? Or link to a good page like this from the rank page where it exists?--Dreighton 22:00, 5 May 2011 (GMT)
- Brilliant article. You're right, this could be used as a fine model. - Kinsa Rha, 6.05.2011, 06:59 GMT
- And would also be a good argument for separate rank pages, otherwise this page will be somewhat cumbersome (for the lack of a better word). --Xanyarr Chyakk 11:48, 6 May 2011 (GMT)
- I have an idea. We keep this page and add this infernal table (I can't it add because I'm not versed enough in the wiki-force). We link from Admiral here to the page mentioned by Dreighton. And we make similar pages for the rest of the ranks.
- This way, someone who wants to know something in general or which rank comes after which or which rank in the Navy equals which in the Army will look here and will see the links to individual pages, too. If he wants to know more about a certain rank, he'll simply click on the link... I'm off to link the Admiral. - Kinsa Rha, 6.05.2011, 13:02 GMT
- That Army/Navy table is now really necessary! And creating and linking to relevant rank pages! - Kinsa Rha, 6.05.2011, 13:23 GMT
Necessary?
We should get rid of this page. It serves no purpose other than to be a nightmare to try and keep up to date.
There's no certain comparative similarities between ranks in different factions or within the same faction over a period of time, and it's impossible to make such a judgment without some knowledge of how those ranks are used in those factions (which not many people will have, and knowledge of which can easily become out of date). The page is riddled with e.g. 'Sergeant (known as Soldatti or Ciavutti in Black Sun)'. Who came up with that equivalent? Is it real or just someone trying to make sense of apples and oranges? Another example, the Republic has eleven military ranks; the Empire has nineteen from memory. In real terms, a Republican Naval Lieutenant JG is equivalent to an Imperial Flight Corporal or Sergeant, yet this page makes no distinction between a Republican Naval Lieutenant JG and an Imperial Navy Lieutenant JG (I'm not entirely sure how the ranks work in the Republic, but I'm willing to take a punt that jumping once from Ensign (starting rank) to LTJG in the Republic is a bit easier than jumping seven (historically up to ten or more) jumps from Recruit (starting rank) to LTJG in the Empire).
If there was any relative consistency between ranks (as there is in real militarties/governments), maybe a page like this could work. In SWC, where we make up whatever ranks we want, it's not going to work without being some hideous mash of ranks and edit wars started by people who think they have a better idea of how to convert a faction using a ten-rank system to compare to a faction using a twenty-five-rank system.
If rank pages are something we want to look at, we should look at pages like e.g. Ranks of the Galactic Empire, and then we can go from there. Orphaea Imperium 13:02, 6 May 2011 (GMT)
- Orphaea - valid point. I'm off to delete the 'present in' sections, but then we'll have to work on making pages similar to the Admiral one for every rank, to document them well.
- Regarding this: 'Sergeant (known as Soldatti or Ciavutti in Black Sun)'. Who came up with that equivalent?' - they're both marked as E-4 in the respective tables.
- I have to admit I was confused by the differences between factions. Documenting every rank well would save further newbies from making the same mistake. - Kinsa Rha, 6.05.2011, 13:11 GMT
- You can't compare ranks by name. You can't compare ranks by whatever letters or position on their own scale the factions give them. You can only compare them by knowing both factions over a period of time and knowing the kind of people that hold those ranks and the responsibilities that they have. It's not an exact science.
- I've gone and edited the Admiral page to something a bit cleaner. Orphaea Imperium 13:30, 6 May 2011 (GMT)
- I've also now done Ranks of the Galactic Empire to show what such a page could look like. That kind of page in combination with the occasional specific rank page for common ranks (like Admiral) I think are better than a page like this. Orphaea Imperium 14:00, 6 May 2011 (GMT)
- I like the Ranks of Galactic Empire page. Brilliant! This page then will stay as a KISS sort of a shortcut. And I'll add the link to your page later. - Kinsa Rha, 6.05.2011, 14:39 GMT
Indeed, nice article. The rank page could then only explains the purpose of ranks, produce the comparison table and link to the various ranks. Alternatively, the rank page could become a category page. Veynom 16:36, 6 May 2011 (GMT)
That is my thought too, Veynom. Just here to explain it, stuff the table and link to details. - Kinsa Rha, 6.05.2011, 18:23 GMT
