Editing Talk:Captain (armed forces) (section)

==UK Centric==
This article may be too specific for what it is and definitely includes too many UK specific details. And do all the commonwealth countries really follow the same ranking structure?--[[Special:Contributions/99.206.35.139|99.206.35.139]] ([[User talk:99.206.35.139|talk]]) 00:55, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

:I concur.  As a minimum, I think that the "common military ranks" info boxes ought to be removed.  I haven't yet done that, per the "be bold" maxim in WP, just because of time.  [[User:Pdfpdf]] removed the UK and US rank lists for much the same reason.  
:[[User:Don&#39;tKnowItAtAll|Don&#39;tKnowItAtAll]] ([[User talk:Don&#39;tKnowItAtAll|talk]]) 12:50, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

::Hmmm. I'm afraid I have different opinions.
::* I don't see any more UK specific details than U.S. specific: UK 4, US 4, France 1, Canada 1, Commonwealth 3
::* ''And do all the commonwealth countries really follow the same ranking structure?'' - No. And the article doesn't say they do. It says: ''"the air forces of '''many''' Commonwealth countries"''. And in the next sentence: ''"In the unified system of the Canadian Forces, however, the air force rank titles are identical to that of the Army"''.
::* ''"[[User:Pdfpdf]] removed the UK and US rank lists for much the same reason."'' - Not really; I removed the templates because they are about UK ranks and US ranks, whereas this article is about the one rank of Captain, not about ranks in general, nor specifically about UK or US.
::* Regarding ''"I think that the "common military ranks" info boxes ought to be removed."'' - I'm not convinced one way or the other. I think it's appropriate to start a discussion, and will do so.
::Cheers, [[User:Pdfpdf|Pdfpdf]] ([[User talk:Pdfpdf|talk]]) 14:14, 4 December 2008 (UTC)