Template talk:Military ranks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I add Chief Petty Officer as most Naval force have Chief in place of Warrent officers and the fact that there is a great deal of Differce between the role of a CPO and a Petty officer

- What about the Commonwealth Air Ranks? The UK, Australia, New Zealand, India, Pakistan, etc. all use the Royal Air Force system of ranks for their air force. This should definitely be included in this.

I second the above about Commonwealth Air Ranks. Also, at present the template has General = Commodore. In many militaries this is never true, and even in those with Brigadier Generals, most general ranks do not equate to Commodores. It would be far better to put General = Admiral. Greenshed 19:23, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

that good thinking However I think if we do that Chief Petty Officer should be in as it most Navaies there are Equal to a Warret officer or go for CPO/WO because both are fairly common

Common Military Ranks
Naval Forces Land (and some Air) Forces Other Air Forces
Fleet Admiral Marshal Marshal of the Air Force
Admiral General Air Marshal
Commodore Brigadier Air Commodore
Captain Colonel Group Captain
Commander Wing Commander
Major Squadron Leader
Lieutenant Captain Flight Lieutenant
Ensign Lieutenant Flying Officer
Warrant Officer Warrant Officer Warrant Officer
Petty Officer Sergeant Sergeant
Leading Rate Corporal Corporal
Seaman Private Aircraftman
This template attempts to order military ranks an everyday civilian might hear in many countries to aid in understanding which rank precedes which, excluding combinations of names such as Lieutenant Colonel. Please feel free to improve it.

What about the version alongside? I know it could use a little format work. Greenshed 20:09, 10 November 2006 (UTC)


I think the whole point of this easy-comparison table is to be simple. Also, it probably is meant to be a comparison within each column, not across each row. If we're going to clutter it we might as well include all the ranks and the peculiarities of these ranks which every country has as well? The RAF style is very similar to the naval style and I think it can be omitted. --Rifleman 82 20:18, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

What about the General =! Commodore problem? Greenshed 21:01, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

How about leaving out Commodore and Marshal? --Rifleman 82 21:12, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Inclusion and exclusion of air force ranks

Here's may take on this question.

  • Air force rank titles which are clearly derived from only one navy or army rank should be ommited. E.g. Air commodore is clearly derived from commodore and no other rank. Likewise for wing commander. Therefore they should stay out.
  • Air force rank titles which might (to the uninformed eye) be derived from two or more different ranks should stay in. E.g. Group captain as it is not obvious from the rank title that it is equivalent to a navy captain and not an army captain.
  • Air force rank titles which are do not occur in army or navy usage should be listed. E.g. squadron leader. Greenshed 17:12, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

I think it is probably much better and clearer to use slightly more air force ranks than you suggest. Mesoso 23:28, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

On reflection, you're right. Greenshed 23:09, 22 April 2007 (UTC)