Editing Talk:Captain (armed forces) (section)

== Name change ==

''Captain (land)'' doesn't make a lot of sense to me: most sports team captains, tower captains, &c, operate on land.  To distinguish OR-2 army captains from their OR-5 naval namesakes I believe '''Captain (military)''' would make more sense: this would apply to army and marine captains, captains in paramilitary forces and certain police forces, without implying football captains, Salvation Army captains, &c.  [[Special:Contributions/78.145.235.241|78.145.235.241]] ([[User talk:78.145.235.241|talk]]) 20:19, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

:I agree. At the moment, [[Captain (military)]] redirects to this article, and [[Captain (military rank)]] redirects to [[Captain]]. Seems like there's some reorganizing to do. [[User:Eric|Eric]] [[User talk:Eric|<sup>talk</sup>]] 17:31, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

::Not being funny, but wouldn't this article be better titled "Captain (Army)"? The disambiguation "land" seems odd and implies "terrain". Captain (military) is still too wide as it would imply air force captains and naval captains as well. Naval captains are are equivalent to colonels, so that would be wildly wrong! --[[User:Bermicourt|Bermicourt]] ([[User talk:Bermicourt|talk]]) 18:25, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

:::'''Comments''': 
:::a) There are OF-2 Captains that aren't "army" (or "land"). 
:::b) I'm not sure what "[[Captain (military)]]" means. Nor am I sure what it "should" mean. 
:::c) I would have thought that <u>all</u> of Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Captains were <u>both</u> "[[Captain (military)]]" and "[[Captain (military rank)]]". 
:::d) I'm not sure what "[[Captain (rank)]]" means, or "should" mean. The current situation of it redirecting to a dab page ([[Captain]]) seems sensible. 
:::e) Similarly, I am quite comfortable that "[[Captain]]" is a dab page. 
:::f) Where they exist, Commonwealth Marine captains are, in general, OF-2. 
:::g) US Army, Marine and Air Force captains are [[Captain (OF-2)]] (i.e. [[Captain (O-3)]] 
:::h) [[Captain (non-naval)]] seems rather silly to me ... (I wouldn't support it.) 
:::i) There is a "[[Captain (land and air)]]" (that currently redirects to "[[Captain (land)]]"). That does 2/3 of the job, but doesn't cover "marines". 
:::j) [[Captain (OF-2)]] is unambiguous and concise. As are [[Captain (OF-5)]] and [[Captain (naval)]]. 
:::[[User:Pdfpdf|Pdfpdf]] ([[User talk:Pdfpdf|talk]]) 16:49, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

:::'''My Opinions''': 
:::a) I think the there should be eight pages: [[Captain]] (a dab page); [[Captain (OF-2)]] (a page); [[Captain (OF-5)]] (a dab page); [[Captain (naval)]] (a page); [[Group Captain]] (a page); [[Captain (United States)]] (a page); [[Captain (British Army and Royal Marines)]] (a page); [[Captain (Royal Navy)]] (a page)
:::b) I don't think either "[[Captain (military)]]" or "[[Captain (military rank)]]" are at all useful disambiguators. 
:::c) I don't think there is much, if any, difference between [[Captain (land)]] and [[Captain (army)]], and neither are particularly useful disambiguators. 
:::d) I much prefer [[Captain (naval)]] to [[Captain (OF-5)]], but it doesn't cover [[Group Captain]], so I guess we need all three.
:::e) I don't particularly like [[Captain (OF-2)]], but it caters for [[Captain (marines)]], whereas [[Captain (land and air)]] doesn't.
:::[[User:Pdfpdf|Pdfpdf]] ([[User talk:Pdfpdf|talk]]) 16:49, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

;Pdfpdf's preferences expanded/clarified (I hope)
{|class=wikitable
! Page name                     || Redirects
|-
| [[Captain]] - dab             || [[Captain (rank)]]; [[Captain (military)]]; [[Captain (military rank)]]; [[Captain (non-naval)]] 
|-
| [[Captain (OF-2)]] - article|| [[Captain (land)]]; [[Captain (army)]]; [[Captain (land and air)]]; [[Captain (marines)]]
|-
| [[Captain (OF-5)]] - dab      ||
|-
| [[Captain (naval)]] - article ||
|-
| [[Group Captain]] - article   ||
|-
| [[Captain (United States)]] - article || [[Captain (O-3)]]
|-
| [[Captain (British Army and Royal Marines)]] - article ||
|-
| [[Captain (Royal Navy)]] - article ||
|-
|
*etc. (See [[Captain]])
|
|}

Thanks Pdfpdf - an outstanding proposal to bring clarity out of confusion! I would support all of the above with just 2 minor caveats: first, a question mark about why [[Captain (naval)]] shouldn't be the main article and [[Captain (OF-5)]] the redirect as at present. AFAIK the only OF-5 captains are naval and its the clearer title of the two. Second, it should be Group Captain as at present, not Group captain, which is a combination that is never used in my experience. --[[User:Bermicourt|Bermicourt]] ([[User talk:Bermicourt|talk]]) 19:49, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

:Dear Bermicourt, I agree with you - that is indeed what I had originally intended! Thanks. Have I now succeeded in making it clearer? Cheers, [[User:Pdfpdf|Pdfpdf]] ([[User talk:Pdfpdf|talk]]) 16:00, 11 April 2011 (UTC)