Talk:Military Ranks (RDM)/Archive3 - Revision history

Joe Beaudoin Jr.: /* Another Admiral? */ reply

2009-08-05T23:51:57Z

Another Admiral?: reply

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:51, 5 August 2009
Line 228:		Line 228:
	Just to be picky here, i just watched "Sine Qua Non" and i distinctly recall seeing Adama promote Tight to Admiral in his absence. It's even listed in the episode article, in the details section		Just to be picky here, i just watched "Sine Qua Non" and i distinctly recall seeing Adama promote Tight to Admiral in his absence. It's even listed in the episode article, in the details section
	[[User:Griffin-2-6\|Griffin-2-6]] 23:23, 5 August 2009 (UTC)		[[User:Griffin-2-6\|Griffin-2-6]] 23:23, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
			: Correct. Tigh was promoted to Admiral, although the promotion is short lived. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [[bsp:\|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 23:51, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Griffin-2-6: /* Lance Corporal */

2009-08-05T23:23:03Z

Lance Corporal

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:23, 5 August 2009
Line 223:		Line 223:

	:Yeah I noticed that to, I'm inclined to chalk it up as an error on the part of the writing staff. None of the production materials we've seen to date recognize the existance of that rank. If such information is forthcoming I think that time would the appropriate time to add it to the chart. Until then, I think it best to leave it out. -- [[User:Grandmaester314\|Grandmaester314]] 14:48, 7 February 2009 (UTC)		:Yeah I noticed that to, I'm inclined to chalk it up as an error on the part of the writing staff. None of the production materials we've seen to date recognize the existance of that rank. If such information is forthcoming I think that time would the appropriate time to add it to the chart. Until then, I think it best to leave it out. -- [[User:Grandmaester314\|Grandmaester314]] 14:48, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

			==Another Admiral?==

			Just to be picky here, i just watched "Sine Qua Non" and i distinctly recall seeing Adama promote Tight to Admiral in his absence. It's even listed in the episode article, in the details section
			[[User:Griffin-2-6\|Griffin-2-6]] 23:23, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Grandmaester314 at 14:51, 7 February 2009

2009-02-07T14:51:52Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:51, 7 February 2009
Line 202:		Line 202:
	:As for the change I made to your recent edits. That wasn't about the content, so much as the style. We already have an entire page of footnotes and such extensive notes aren't good to read IMO. Yeah, I've seen legal documents with one page for ''one'' footnote, but that doesn't mean it's such a good idea. Most of it is necessary here, but the stuff you added was very self-argumentative and could be shortened a lot. Basically it says that it's unclear why the decision was made, that there may be one or two in-universe reasons, but that there are also real-world reasons like an error or production realities. That's perfectly fine, but it's possible to say that in one or two sentences without adding five footnotes, that were frankly hard to read the way they were worded and structured. It took me a while to get what the actual argument was, and then I realized that a lot of it didn't really add to the point made, but just hid it behind verbosity. -- [[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 17:47, 27 October 2008 (UTC)		:As for the change I made to your recent edits. That wasn't about the content, so much as the style. We already have an entire page of footnotes and such extensive notes aren't good to read IMO. Yeah, I've seen legal documents with one page for ''one'' footnote, but that doesn't mean it's such a good idea. Most of it is necessary here, but the stuff you added was very self-argumentative and could be shortened a lot. Basically it says that it's unclear why the decision was made, that there may be one or two in-universe reasons, but that there are also real-world reasons like an error or production realities. That's perfectly fine, but it's possible to say that in one or two sentences without adding five footnotes, that were frankly hard to read the way they were worded and structured. It took me a while to get what the actual argument was, and then I realized that a lot of it didn't really add to the point made, but just hid it behind verbosity. -- [[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 17:47, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

	:I would have asked him directly but I have no way of contacting him. Also I apologize for the "verbosity," I have a very flowery writing style and to be quite honest couldn't simply anything to save my life, if anybody would like to try to do that I welcome the assistance. However I do reserve the right to reinsert something if I believe something of value has been cut.[[User:Grandmaester314\|Grandmaester314]] 14:48, 7 February 2009 (UTC)		::I would have asked him directly but I have no way of contacting him. Also I apologize for the "verbosity," I have a very flowery writing style and to be quite honest couldn't simply anything to save my life, if anybody would like to try to do that I welcome the assistance. However I do reserve the right to reinsert something if I believe something of value has been cut.[[User:Grandmaester314\|Grandmaester314]] 14:48, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

	::With the upcoming auction of BSG props, wouldn't now be an opportune time to replace the rank illustrations with images of actual production insignia? It would also be interesting to see the insignia used on the tan warrant officer uniforms - even if there is an inconsistency, it's something footnotable and worthy of interest.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 08:24, 4 January 2009 (UTC)		::With the upcoming auction of BSG props, wouldn't now be an opportune time to replace the rank illustrations with images of actual production insignia? It would also be interesting to see the insignia used on the tan warrant officer uniforms - even if there is an inconsistency, it's something footnotable and worthy of interest.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 08:24, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

	:::If they're ''high quality'' pictures sure. I decided to use those illustrations in the absence of any detailed references and screencaps. The recently added real pictures are still of pretty low quality. They are a nice complement, but can't really replace the drawings IMO. But if we can get nice photos of all pins, sure. -- [[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 21:51, 13 January 2009 (UTC)		:::If they're ''high quality'' pictures sure. I decided to use those illustrations in the absence of any detailed references and screencaps. The recently added real pictures are still of pretty low quality. They are a nice complement, but can't really replace the drawings IMO. But if we can get nice photos of all pins, sure. -- [[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 21:51, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

	::::Yes, that's why the gallery of pin photos was added, instead of replacing the graphics. Jim's graphics had some inaccuracies that had to be corrected, such as plain "starbursts" w/o the Colonial emblem for the rank lieutenant colonel. The ranks of warrant officer and crew sergeant were missing and had to be "cooked up". Also, replacing the table would have removed the collar piping illustrations, which would have thrown off the text references in the article.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 22:15, 13 January 2009 (UTC)		::::Yes, that's why the gallery of pin photos was added, instead of replacing the graphics. Jim's graphics had some inaccuracies that had to be corrected, such as plain "starbursts" w/o the Colonial emblem for the rank lieutenant colonel. The ranks of warrant officer and crew sergeant were missing and had to be "cooked up". Also, replacing the table would have removed the collar piping illustrations, which would have thrown off the text references in the article.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 22:15, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Line 220:		Line 222:
	Another wrench thrown into the works perhaps (Lance Corporal Maldonaldo)? It doesn't help that he wore the black tactical uniform without rank insignia. -- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 07:32, 2 February 2009 (UTC)		Another wrench thrown into the works perhaps (Lance Corporal Maldonaldo)? It doesn't help that he wore the black tactical uniform without rank insignia. -- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 07:32, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

	:Yeah I noticed that to, I'm inclined to chalk it up as an error on the part of the writing staff. None of the production materials we've seen to date recognize the existance of that rank. If such information is forthcoming I think that time would the appropriate time to add it to the chart. Until then, I think it best to leave it out.		:Yeah I noticed that to, I'm inclined to chalk it up as an error on the part of the writing staff. None of the production materials we've seen to date recognize the existance of that rank. If such information is forthcoming I think that time would the appropriate time to add it to the chart. Until then, I think it best to leave it out. -- [[User:Grandmaester314\|Grandmaester314]] 14:48, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
	[[User:Grandmaester314\|Grandmaester314]] 14:48, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Grandmaester314 at 14:48, 7 February 2009

2009-02-07T14:48:47Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:48, 7 February 2009
Line 201:		Line 201:

	:As for the change I made to your recent edits. That wasn't about the content, so much as the style. We already have an entire page of footnotes and such extensive notes aren't good to read IMO. Yeah, I've seen legal documents with one page for ''one'' footnote, but that doesn't mean it's such a good idea. Most of it is necessary here, but the stuff you added was very self-argumentative and could be shortened a lot. Basically it says that it's unclear why the decision was made, that there may be one or two in-universe reasons, but that there are also real-world reasons like an error or production realities. That's perfectly fine, but it's possible to say that in one or two sentences without adding five footnotes, that were frankly hard to read the way they were worded and structured. It took me a while to get what the actual argument was, and then I realized that a lot of it didn't really add to the point made, but just hid it behind verbosity. -- [[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 17:47, 27 October 2008 (UTC)		:As for the change I made to your recent edits. That wasn't about the content, so much as the style. We already have an entire page of footnotes and such extensive notes aren't good to read IMO. Yeah, I've seen legal documents with one page for ''one'' footnote, but that doesn't mean it's such a good idea. Most of it is necessary here, but the stuff you added was very self-argumentative and could be shortened a lot. Basically it says that it's unclear why the decision was made, that there may be one or two in-universe reasons, but that there are also real-world reasons like an error or production realities. That's perfectly fine, but it's possible to say that in one or two sentences without adding five footnotes, that were frankly hard to read the way they were worded and structured. It took me a while to get what the actual argument was, and then I realized that a lot of it didn't really add to the point made, but just hid it behind verbosity. -- [[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 17:47, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

			:I would have asked him directly but I have no way of contacting him. Also I apologize for the "verbosity," I have a very flowery writing style and to be quite honest couldn't simply anything to save my life, if anybody would like to try to do that I welcome the assistance. However I do reserve the right to reinsert something if I believe something of value has been cut.[[User:Grandmaester314\|Grandmaester314]] 14:48, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

	::With the upcoming auction of BSG props, wouldn't now be an opportune time to replace the rank illustrations with images of actual production insignia? It would also be interesting to see the insignia used on the tan warrant officer uniforms - even if there is an inconsistency, it's something footnotable and worthy of interest.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 08:24, 4 January 2009 (UTC)		::With the upcoming auction of BSG props, wouldn't now be an opportune time to replace the rank illustrations with images of actual production insignia? It would also be interesting to see the insignia used on the tan warrant officer uniforms - even if there is an inconsistency, it's something footnotable and worthy of interest.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 08:24, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Line 217:		Line 219:

	Another wrench thrown into the works perhaps (Lance Corporal Maldonaldo)? It doesn't help that he wore the black tactical uniform without rank insignia. -- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 07:32, 2 February 2009 (UTC)		Another wrench thrown into the works perhaps (Lance Corporal Maldonaldo)? It doesn't help that he wore the black tactical uniform without rank insignia. -- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 07:32, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

			:Yeah I noticed that to, I'm inclined to chalk it up as an error on the part of the writing staff. None of the production materials we've seen to date recognize the existance of that rank. If such information is forthcoming I think that time would the appropriate time to add it to the chart. Until then, I think it best to leave it out.
			[[User:Grandmaester314\|Grandmaester314]] 14:48, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Fredmdbud: /* Lance Corporal */ new section

2009-02-02T07:32:03Z

Lance Corporal: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:32, 2 February 2009
Line 213:		Line 213:
	:: Yes, it's basically the same pin as the Lt. Colonel, but with the smaller diamond plates on the sides... very much like the collar dogs that Chief wears, except gold and silver. There's a picture of it in the catalog in the pin collection... the lot # escapes me right now, but a quick search of the PDF (or of the catalog on Auction Network) will pull that up in a jiffy. ;-) -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [[bsp:\|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 18:31, 5 January 2009 (UTC)		:: Yes, it's basically the same pin as the Lt. Colonel, but with the smaller diamond plates on the sides... very much like the collar dogs that Chief wears, except gold and silver. There's a picture of it in the catalog in the pin collection... the lot # escapes me right now, but a quick search of the PDF (or of the catalog on Auction Network) will pull that up in a jiffy. ;-) -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [[bsp:\|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 18:31, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
	::: Yeah, the side lozenges are closer-in than the Chief's pin, easy to go unnoticed without a dialogue closeup shot (or in auction catalog full-length tan costume illustration) :-)-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 03:31, 6 January 2009 (UTC)		::: Yeah, the side lozenges are closer-in than the Chief's pin, easy to go unnoticed without a dialogue closeup shot (or in auction catalog full-length tan costume illustration) :-)-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 03:31, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

			== Lance Corporal ==

			Another wrench thrown into the works perhaps (Lance Corporal Maldonaldo)? It doesn't help that he wore the black tactical uniform without rank insignia. -- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 07:32, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Fredmdbud: /* Updated Rank Chart based off of format established by Jim Stevenson */

2009-01-13T22:21:18Z

Updated Rank Chart based off of format established by Jim Stevenson

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:21, 13 January 2009
Line 204:		Line 204:
	::With the upcoming auction of BSG props, wouldn't now be an opportune time to replace the rank illustrations with images of actual production insignia? It would also be interesting to see the insignia used on the tan warrant officer uniforms - even if there is an inconsistency, it's something footnotable and worthy of interest.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 08:24, 4 January 2009 (UTC)		::With the upcoming auction of BSG props, wouldn't now be an opportune time to replace the rank illustrations with images of actual production insignia? It would also be interesting to see the insignia used on the tan warrant officer uniforms - even if there is an inconsistency, it's something footnotable and worthy of interest.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 08:24, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
	:::If they're ''high quality'' pictures sure. I decided to use those illustrations in the absence of any detailed references and screencaps. The recently added real pictures are still of pretty low quality. They are a nice complement, but can't really replace the drawings IMO. But if we can get nice photos of all pins, sure. -- [[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 21:51, 13 January 2009 (UTC)		:::If they're ''high quality'' pictures sure. I decided to use those illustrations in the absence of any detailed references and screencaps. The recently added real pictures are still of pretty low quality. They are a nice complement, but can't really replace the drawings IMO. But if we can get nice photos of all pins, sure. -- [[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 21:51, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
	::::Yes, that's why the gallery of pin photos was added, instead of replacing the graphics. Jim's graphics had some inaccuracies that had to be corrected, such as plain "starbursts" w/o the Colonial emblem for the ranks of warrant officer and ~~lieutenant colonel~~. Also, replacing the table would have removed the collar piping illustrations, which would have thrown off the text references in the article.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 22:15, 13 January 2009 (UTC)		::::Yes, that's why the gallery of pin photos was added, instead of replacing the graphics. Jim's graphics had some inaccuracies that had to be corrected, such as plain "starbursts" w/o the Colonial emblem for the rank lieutenant colonel. The ranks of warrant officer and crew sergeant were missing and had to be "cooked up". Also, replacing the table would have removed the collar piping illustrations, which would have thrown off the text references in the article.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 22:15, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

	== Additional footnote for Lieutenant Colonel insignia ==		== Additional footnote for Lieutenant Colonel insignia ==

Fredmdbud: /* Updated Rank Chart based off of format established by Jim Stevenson */

2009-01-13T22:15:47Z

Updated Rank Chart based off of format established by Jim Stevenson

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:15, 13 January 2009
Line 204:		Line 204:
	::With the upcoming auction of BSG props, wouldn't now be an opportune time to replace the rank illustrations with images of actual production insignia? It would also be interesting to see the insignia used on the tan warrant officer uniforms - even if there is an inconsistency, it's something footnotable and worthy of interest.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 08:24, 4 January 2009 (UTC)		::With the upcoming auction of BSG props, wouldn't now be an opportune time to replace the rank illustrations with images of actual production insignia? It would also be interesting to see the insignia used on the tan warrant officer uniforms - even if there is an inconsistency, it's something footnotable and worthy of interest.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 08:24, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
	:::If they're ''high quality'' pictures sure. I decided to use those illustrations in the absence of any detailed references and screencaps. The recently added real pictures are still of pretty low quality. They are a nice complement, but can't really replace the drawings IMO. But if we can get nice photos of all pins, sure. -- [[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 21:51, 13 January 2009 (UTC)		:::If they're ''high quality'' pictures sure. I decided to use those illustrations in the absence of any detailed references and screencaps. The recently added real pictures are still of pretty low quality. They are a nice complement, but can't really replace the drawings IMO. But if we can get nice photos of all pins, sure. -- [[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 21:51, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
			::::Yes, that's why the gallery of pin photos was added, instead of replacing the graphics. Jim's graphics had some inaccuracies that had to be corrected, such as plain "starbursts" w/o the Colonial emblem for the ranks of warrant officer and lieutenant colonel. Also, replacing the table would have removed the collar piping illustrations, which would have thrown off the text references in the article.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 22:15, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

	== Additional footnote for Lieutenant Colonel insignia ==		== Additional footnote for Lieutenant Colonel insignia ==

Serenity: /* Updated Rank Chart based off of format established by Jim Stevenson */

2009-01-13T21:51:56Z

Updated Rank Chart based off of format established by Jim Stevenson

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:51, 13 January 2009
Line 203:		Line 203:

	::With the upcoming auction of BSG props, wouldn't now be an opportune time to replace the rank illustrations with images of actual production insignia? It would also be interesting to see the insignia used on the tan warrant officer uniforms - even if there is an inconsistency, it's something footnotable and worthy of interest.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 08:24, 4 January 2009 (UTC)		::With the upcoming auction of BSG props, wouldn't now be an opportune time to replace the rank illustrations with images of actual production insignia? It would also be interesting to see the insignia used on the tan warrant officer uniforms - even if there is an inconsistency, it's something footnotable and worthy of interest.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 08:24, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
			:::If they're ''high quality'' pictures sure. I decided to use those illustrations in the absence of any detailed references and screencaps. The recently added real pictures are still of pretty low quality. They are a nice complement, but can't really replace the drawings IMO. But if we can get nice photos of all pins, sure. -- [[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 21:51, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

	== Additional footnote for Lieutenant Colonel insignia ==		== Additional footnote for Lieutenant Colonel insignia ==

Fredmdbud: reply

2009-01-06T03:31:51Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:31, 6 January 2009
Line 210:		Line 210:
	:: Is there a distinct warrant officer's pin? The ones on the tan BDU's looked like the Lt Col Fisk/Dualla insignia.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 18:20, 5 January 2009 (UTC)		:: Is there a distinct warrant officer's pin? The ones on the tan BDU's looked like the Lt Col Fisk/Dualla insignia.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 18:20, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
	:: Yes, it's basically the same pin as the Lt. Colonel, but with the smaller diamond plates on the sides... very much like the collar dogs that Chief wears, except gold and silver. There's a picture of it in the catalog in the pin collection... the lot # escapes me right now, but a quick search of the PDF (or of the catalog on Auction Network) will pull that up in a jiffy. ;-) -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [[bsp:\|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 18:31, 5 January 2009 (UTC)		:: Yes, it's basically the same pin as the Lt. Colonel, but with the smaller diamond plates on the sides... very much like the collar dogs that Chief wears, except gold and silver. There's a picture of it in the catalog in the pin collection... the lot # escapes me right now, but a quick search of the PDF (or of the catalog on Auction Network) will pull that up in a jiffy. ;-) -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [[bsp:\|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 18:31, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
			::: Yeah, the side lozenges are closer-in than the Chief's pin, easy to go unnoticed without a dialogue closeup shot (or in auction catalog full-length tan costume illustration) :-)-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 03:31, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Joe Beaudoin Jr.: /* Additional footnote for Lieutenant Colonel insignia */ reply

2009-01-05T18:31:55Z

Additional footnote for Lieutenant Colonel insignia: reply

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:31, 5 January 2009
Line 209:		Line 209:
	: You mean the Warrant Officer's pin, right? Since that was the one mainly used on the tan BDU (with the exception of Sgt. [[Hadrian]]). -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [[bsp:\|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 16:05, 4 January 2009 (UTC)		: You mean the Warrant Officer's pin, right? Since that was the one mainly used on the tan BDU (with the exception of Sgt. [[Hadrian]]). -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [[bsp:\|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 16:05, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
	:: Is there a distinct warrant officer's pin? The ones on the tan BDU's looked like the Lt Col Fisk/Dualla insignia.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 18:20, 5 January 2009 (UTC)		:: Is there a distinct warrant officer's pin? The ones on the tan BDU's looked like the Lt Col Fisk/Dualla insignia.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 18:20, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
			:: Yes, it's basically the same pin as the Lt. Colonel, but with the smaller diamond plates on the sides... very much like the collar dogs that Chief wears, except gold and silver. There's a picture of it in the catalog in the pin collection... the lot # escapes me right now, but a quick search of the PDF (or of the catalog on Auction Network) will pull that up in a jiffy. ;-) -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [[bsp:\|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 18:31, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:51, 7 February 2009
Line 202:		Line 202:
	:As for the change I made to your recent edits. That wasn't about the content, so much as the style. We already have an entire page of footnotes and such extensive notes aren't good to read IMO. Yeah, I've seen legal documents with one page for ''one'' footnote, but that doesn't mean it's such a good idea. Most of it is necessary here, but the stuff you added was very self-argumentative and could be shortened a lot. Basically it says that it's unclear why the decision was made, that there may be one or two in-universe reasons, but that there are also real-world reasons like an error or production realities. That's perfectly fine, but it's possible to say that in one or two sentences without adding five footnotes, that were frankly hard to read the way they were worded and structured. It took me a while to get what the actual argument was, and then I realized that a lot of it didn't really add to the point made, but just hid it behind verbosity. -- [[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 17:47, 27 October 2008 (UTC)		:As for the change I made to your recent edits. That wasn't about the content, so much as the style. We already have an entire page of footnotes and such extensive notes aren't good to read IMO. Yeah, I've seen legal documents with one page for ''one'' footnote, but that doesn't mean it's such a good idea. Most of it is necessary here, but the stuff you added was very self-argumentative and could be shortened a lot. Basically it says that it's unclear why the decision was made, that there may be one or two in-universe reasons, but that there are also real-world reasons like an error or production realities. That's perfectly fine, but it's possible to say that in one or two sentences without adding five footnotes, that were frankly hard to read the way they were worded and structured. It took me a while to get what the actual argument was, and then I realized that a lot of it didn't really add to the point made, but just hid it behind verbosity. -- [[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 17:47, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

	:I would have asked him directly but I have no way of contacting him. Also I apologize for the "verbosity," I have a very flowery writing style and to be quite honest couldn't simply anything to save my life, if anybody would like to try to do that I welcome the assistance. However I do reserve the right to reinsert something if I believe something of value has been cut.[[User:Grandmaester314\|Grandmaester314]] 14:48, 7 February 2009 (UTC)		::I would have asked him directly but I have no way of contacting him. Also I apologize for the "verbosity," I have a very flowery writing style and to be quite honest couldn't simply anything to save my life, if anybody would like to try to do that I welcome the assistance. However I do reserve the right to reinsert something if I believe something of value has been cut.[[User:Grandmaester314\|Grandmaester314]] 14:48, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

	::With the upcoming auction of BSG props, wouldn't now be an opportune time to replace the rank illustrations with images of actual production insignia? It would also be interesting to see the insignia used on the tan warrant officer uniforms - even if there is an inconsistency, it's something footnotable and worthy of interest.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 08:24, 4 January 2009 (UTC)		::With the upcoming auction of BSG props, wouldn't now be an opportune time to replace the rank illustrations with images of actual production insignia? It would also be interesting to see the insignia used on the tan warrant officer uniforms - even if there is an inconsistency, it's something footnotable and worthy of interest.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 08:24, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

	:::If they're ''high quality'' pictures sure. I decided to use those illustrations in the absence of any detailed references and screencaps. The recently added real pictures are still of pretty low quality. They are a nice complement, but can't really replace the drawings IMO. But if we can get nice photos of all pins, sure. -- [[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 21:51, 13 January 2009 (UTC)		:::If they're ''high quality'' pictures sure. I decided to use those illustrations in the absence of any detailed references and screencaps. The recently added real pictures are still of pretty low quality. They are a nice complement, but can't really replace the drawings IMO. But if we can get nice photos of all pins, sure. -- [[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 21:51, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

	::::Yes, that's why the gallery of pin photos was added, instead of replacing the graphics. Jim's graphics had some inaccuracies that had to be corrected, such as plain "starbursts" w/o the Colonial emblem for the rank lieutenant colonel. The ranks of warrant officer and crew sergeant were missing and had to be "cooked up". Also, replacing the table would have removed the collar piping illustrations, which would have thrown off the text references in the article.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 22:15, 13 January 2009 (UTC)		::::Yes, that's why the gallery of pin photos was added, instead of replacing the graphics. Jim's graphics had some inaccuracies that had to be corrected, such as plain "starbursts" w/o the Colonial emblem for the rank lieutenant colonel. The ranks of warrant officer and crew sergeant were missing and had to be "cooked up". Also, replacing the table would have removed the collar piping illustrations, which would have thrown off the text references in the article.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 22:15, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Line 220:		Line 222:
	Another wrench thrown into the works perhaps (Lance Corporal Maldonaldo)? It doesn't help that he wore the black tactical uniform without rank insignia. -- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 07:32, 2 February 2009 (UTC)		Another wrench thrown into the works perhaps (Lance Corporal Maldonaldo)? It doesn't help that he wore the black tactical uniform without rank insignia. -- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 07:32, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

	:Yeah I noticed that to, I'm inclined to chalk it up as an error on the part of the writing staff. None of the production materials we've seen to date recognize the existance of that rank. If such information is forthcoming I think that time would the appropriate time to add it to the chart. Until then, I think it best to leave it out.		:Yeah I noticed that to, I'm inclined to chalk it up as an error on the part of the writing staff. None of the production materials we've seen to date recognize the existance of that rank. If such information is forthcoming I think that time would the appropriate time to add it to the chart. Until then, I think it best to leave it out. -- [[User:Grandmaester314\|Grandmaester314]] 14:48, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
	[[User:Grandmaester314\|Grandmaester314]] 14:48, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:48, 7 February 2009
Line 201:		Line 201:

	:As for the change I made to your recent edits. That wasn't about the content, so much as the style. We already have an entire page of footnotes and such extensive notes aren't good to read IMO. Yeah, I've seen legal documents with one page for ''one'' footnote, but that doesn't mean it's such a good idea. Most of it is necessary here, but the stuff you added was very self-argumentative and could be shortened a lot. Basically it says that it's unclear why the decision was made, that there may be one or two in-universe reasons, but that there are also real-world reasons like an error or production realities. That's perfectly fine, but it's possible to say that in one or two sentences without adding five footnotes, that were frankly hard to read the way they were worded and structured. It took me a while to get what the actual argument was, and then I realized that a lot of it didn't really add to the point made, but just hid it behind verbosity. -- [[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 17:47, 27 October 2008 (UTC)		:As for the change I made to your recent edits. That wasn't about the content, so much as the style. We already have an entire page of footnotes and such extensive notes aren't good to read IMO. Yeah, I've seen legal documents with one page for ''one'' footnote, but that doesn't mean it's such a good idea. Most of it is necessary here, but the stuff you added was very self-argumentative and could be shortened a lot. Basically it says that it's unclear why the decision was made, that there may be one or two in-universe reasons, but that there are also real-world reasons like an error or production realities. That's perfectly fine, but it's possible to say that in one or two sentences without adding five footnotes, that were frankly hard to read the way they were worded and structured. It took me a while to get what the actual argument was, and then I realized that a lot of it didn't really add to the point made, but just hid it behind verbosity. -- [[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 17:47, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

			:I would have asked him directly but I have no way of contacting him. Also I apologize for the "verbosity," I have a very flowery writing style and to be quite honest couldn't simply anything to save my life, if anybody would like to try to do that I welcome the assistance. However I do reserve the right to reinsert something if I believe something of value has been cut.[[User:Grandmaester314\|Grandmaester314]] 14:48, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

	::With the upcoming auction of BSG props, wouldn't now be an opportune time to replace the rank illustrations with images of actual production insignia? It would also be interesting to see the insignia used on the tan warrant officer uniforms - even if there is an inconsistency, it's something footnotable and worthy of interest.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 08:24, 4 January 2009 (UTC)		::With the upcoming auction of BSG props, wouldn't now be an opportune time to replace the rank illustrations with images of actual production insignia? It would also be interesting to see the insignia used on the tan warrant officer uniforms - even if there is an inconsistency, it's something footnotable and worthy of interest.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 08:24, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Line 217:		Line 219:

	Another wrench thrown into the works perhaps (Lance Corporal Maldonaldo)? It doesn't help that he wore the black tactical uniform without rank insignia. -- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 07:32, 2 February 2009 (UTC)		Another wrench thrown into the works perhaps (Lance Corporal Maldonaldo)? It doesn't help that he wore the black tactical uniform without rank insignia. -- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 07:32, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

			:Yeah I noticed that to, I'm inclined to chalk it up as an error on the part of the writing staff. None of the production materials we've seen to date recognize the existance of that rank. If such information is forthcoming I think that time would the appropriate time to add it to the chart. Until then, I think it best to leave it out.
			[[User:Grandmaester314\|Grandmaester314]] 14:48, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:31, 6 January 2009
Line 210:		Line 210:
	:: Is there a distinct warrant officer's pin? The ones on the tan BDU's looked like the Lt Col Fisk/Dualla insignia.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 18:20, 5 January 2009 (UTC)		:: Is there a distinct warrant officer's pin? The ones on the tan BDU's looked like the Lt Col Fisk/Dualla insignia.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 18:20, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
	:: Yes, it's basically the same pin as the Lt. Colonel, but with the smaller diamond plates on the sides... very much like the collar dogs that Chief wears, except gold and silver. There's a picture of it in the catalog in the pin collection... the lot # escapes me right now, but a quick search of the PDF (or of the catalog on Auction Network) will pull that up in a jiffy. ;-) -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [[bsp:\|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 18:31, 5 January 2009 (UTC)		:: Yes, it's basically the same pin as the Lt. Colonel, but with the smaller diamond plates on the sides... very much like the collar dogs that Chief wears, except gold and silver. There's a picture of it in the catalog in the pin collection... the lot # escapes me right now, but a quick search of the PDF (or of the catalog on Auction Network) will pull that up in a jiffy. ;-) -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [[bsp:\|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 18:31, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
			::: Yeah, the side lozenges are closer-in than the Chief's pin, easy to go unnoticed without a dialogue closeup shot (or in auction catalog full-length tan costume illustration) :-)-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 03:31, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:31, 5 January 2009
Line 209:		Line 209:
	: You mean the Warrant Officer's pin, right? Since that was the one mainly used on the tan BDU (with the exception of Sgt. [[Hadrian]]). -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [[bsp:\|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 16:05, 4 January 2009 (UTC)		: You mean the Warrant Officer's pin, right? Since that was the one mainly used on the tan BDU (with the exception of Sgt. [[Hadrian]]). -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [[bsp:\|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 16:05, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
	:: Is there a distinct warrant officer's pin? The ones on the tan BDU's looked like the Lt Col Fisk/Dualla insignia.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 18:20, 5 January 2009 (UTC)		:: Is there a distinct warrant officer's pin? The ones on the tan BDU's looked like the Lt Col Fisk/Dualla insignia.-- [[User:Fredmdbud\|Fredmdbud]] 18:20, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
			:: Yes, it's basically the same pin as the Lt. Colonel, but with the smaller diamond plates on the sides... very much like the collar dogs that Chief wears, except gold and silver. There's a picture of it in the catalog in the pin collection... the lot # escapes me right now, but a quick search of the PDF (or of the catalog on Auction Network) will pull that up in a jiffy. ;-) -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [[bsp:\|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 18:31, 5 January 2009 (UTC)