Talk:Major general

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Military history (Rated Start-Class)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality assessment scale.

Order of Countries[edit]

Given that this is the English language version of the Wikipedia, it is likely that readers will be interested in UK and USA usage before German, Israeli or Korean. I propose that the article is re-ordered with the ranks of English-speaking countries first. What do people think? 88.105.139.68 17:38, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

  • That would surely upset people as it would it appear that the U.S. and U.K. readers are stating that there versions of the rank are more important than the others. Using the alphabet is a pretty good way to ensure neutral POV. -Husnock 18:05, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I would certainly agree, the internet is not exclusive to english speaking countries and the Alphabet is fair. [Dan]

Agree with Husnock. Entries should remain strictly alphabetical. -- Necrothesp 20:13, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Alphabetizing the countries using the English alphabet could be seen as NPOV because it does not adequately represent users of the Cyrillic alphabet, kanji, etc. Perhaps they should be randomized. --VAcharon 13:47, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Those stars[edit]

Those stars at the top of the page on the right are useless. They don't have a caption and are entirely too big. To the uninformed reader, they are completely unhelpful. Also, they are already shown below on the page. I've removed them twice for readability, only to have them re-added. So instead of having an unhelpful edit war, lets discuss it here.--Thomas.macmillan 18:00, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

it is perfectly reasonable to have a iconic representation of the subject heading the article. while it may be a bit out of scale, it is appropriate and should remain. --emerson7 | Talk 21:10, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
I believe I found something more appropriate than an icon: a pic of three Major Generals during WWII (the Big One) during a transfer of aircraft from the USAAF to the Armée de l'Air . --SigPig |SEND - OVER 23:03, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
different...but definately not better. the article is about the rank and iconography. --emerson7 | Talk 23:12, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Can this be correct?[edit]

"Pakistan Army has two Female Major Generals, and it is the only country in the world that has promoted women to such a high post."

That can't be correct. I'm pretty sure that the general in charge of Abu Ghraib was a female Major General. I'll check and remove/ leave. TaylorSAllen 19:20, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Okay, Janis Karpinski, the commander there, was a Brigadier general at the time (now demoted to colonel) but at least one US women has been a Major General, namely Kathy Frost TaylorSAllen 19:24, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Not exactly correct at all. For instance, the USAF has had thirteen female Major-Generals: Norma Brown, Barbara Brannon, Trudy Clark, Elizabeth Ann Harrell, Marcelite Harris, Jeanne Holm (promoted 1973), Tiiu Kera, Susan Pamerleau, Teresa Marné Peterson, Polly Peyer, Lorraine Potter, Melissa Rank, and Mary Saunders; the US Air National Guard has had six: LaRita Aragon, Verna Fairchild, Cynthia Kirkland, Martha Rainville, Annette Sobel and Irene Trowell-Harris; the Air Force Reserve has had four: Linda Hemminger, Betty Mullis, Erika Steuterman, and Kathy Thomas; the Army National Guard has one, Jessica Wright; and the USMC has one, Mary Ann Krusa-Dossin. -- Necrothesp 01:22, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

You can add MajGen Margaret Woodward [1] to the list of AD USAF women to have risen to this rank (as of 1 Apr 2011).DriverDave79 (talk) 21:40, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Austria[edit]

In this section, we state that the Austrian rank Feldmarschallleutnant was equivalent to 'Major-General'. In September, an anonymous user added a line disagreeing, stating that this rank was equivalent to Lieutenant-General instead. Since the Austro-Hungarian Army article uses 'Major-General' for Feldmarschallleutnant, I've kept that definition and removed the other one, but it would be useful to find a reference which could settle the dispute conclusively. Can anyone provide one? Terraxos 22:08, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Everything of interest about the ranks or something else concerning the old austria-hungarian Army you will find in the book
Stefan Rest, M.Christian Ortner, Thomas Ilming "Des Kaisers Rock im ersten Weltkrieg" by Verlag Militaria Wien/Vienna 2002 (in German) www.militaria.at
Source is the Museum of Army History in Vienna (Austria)
--Sardines en huile (talk) 15:32, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Able Seaman (rank) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 23:49, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

What about the Marines?[edit]

I am fairly certain (having served in NATO) that the US is not the only nation with Marines. DriverDave79 (talk) 22:30, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

File:UK-Army-OF7-shoulder.svg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:UK-Army-OF7-shoulder.svg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:46, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Highest rank used[edit]

Comments in the article about major general being the highest rank are inaccurate.

Pdfpdf (talk) 12:10, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

  1. ^ [1]