| Latest revision |
Your text |
| Line 13: |
Line 13: |
| Thank you for joining us! Hope to see you soon! | | Thank you for joining us! Hope to see you soon! |
| --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 21:40, 6 August 2008 (UTC) | | --[[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 21:40, 6 August 2008 (UTC) |
|
| |
| == Military ranks ==
| |
|
| |
| While it's a speculative thread, the additions about the role and command structure of battlestar groups are totally unsupported by anything on screen. It's possible of course, but that doesn't mean that it should be used as proof for something else. It's like making something up to support a desired result. There aren't even two different meanings really. Some groups might consist of several battlestars and others of one. Let alone that ''Galactica'' may be something of a special case due to its age. But we know next to nothing about the specific rank structure involved. So that can't be used as reasoning.
| |
| The point about colonels commanding their own vessels is right, but falls apart when considering that one doesn't need to be a captain to command a vessel in real life either. LCDRs or CDRs can and do command smaller ships. They are merely addressed as "captain", but that's both a position and a rank.
| |
|
| |
| In general, there are certainly arguments for placing ranks differently, and given that the roles don't really match with real life ones all the times makes the table a bit of a crutch. But the article pretty much always placed commander as captain.
| |
|
| |
| I re-added the footnotes about Corman's insignia and Adama's lack of an admiral's uniform. That should probably have been noted before already.
| |
|
| |
| Btw, there is nothing that states that ''Galactica'''s class is "Columbia class". That's just a misconception very common in fandom and dates back to TOS. -- [[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 23:15, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
| |