Talk:Hadrian/Archive 1

Discussion page of Hadrian/Archive 1

The Joyce reference should really be removed, since a "source close to production" isn't really a verifiable source at all. -- Joe Beaudoin So say we all - Donate 21:18, 9 May 2006 (CDT)

Insignia image

Does anyone have a clear image of Hadrian's insignia? --Kevin W.So say we all 11:58, 8 December 2006 (CST)

http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j81/steel_viper/BSG/hadrian.jpg
The closest I could find at BSG Media (my usual source) is this. If you click on the image for the higher res pic you get a fairly good look at it. This is a bit darker, but it shows that there isn't really anything too significant that the first pic isn't showing. --Steelviper 12:31, 8 December 2006 (CST)

Sergeant or warrant officer

A recent edit added the following:

  • Sgt. Hadrian is mistakenly referred to as a Marine in fandom and various forums. In reality the position of Master-at-Arms is a Warrant Officer position in the Navy. The rank designation of Sergeant coincides with various military structures found throughout the world, such as the Royal Air Force which has Flight Sergeant as a Warrant Officer rank.
  • On the set of Battlestar Galactica, all departments (such as props, wardrobe, assistant directors) have designated the khaki uniforms as belonging to Warrant Officers, such as the one worn by Hadrian.

Warrant officer is a rank, not a position, function or service branch - warrant officers form a corps within a branch, along with officers and enlisted. Given RDM's practice of largely following naval customs (and where it doesn't directly conflict the older series), sergeant rank is associated with marines. Furthermore, in the RAF, flight sergeant is considered a senior non-commissioned officer rank[1].

The departmental direction regarding khaki uniforms is consistent with uniform distinction given to senior non-commissioned officers, but that is not necessarily proof that Hadrian is a warrant officer. Furthermore, there has not been any canonical mention of warrant officer ranks (at least to my knowledge).--Fredmdbud 23:05, 19 December 2007 (CST)

In some cases, yes, the rank structure in BSG follows Naval rank structure, but ultimately is a mismash of ranks. There are no Colonels or Majors in the Navy. Commanders are occupying the position of Naval Captains, Colonels are Commnders, Majors seem to be Lt. Cmdrs, they have no correlation for their Captains. etc.

I just know that in my experience from working on the show, that everyone in a khaki uniform is a Warrant Officer. I mispoke when I referred to Warrant Officer as a branch of service, I was thinking of Marines vs. Colonial Fleet.--Zeppo 23:30, 19 December 2007 (CST)

One needs to keep in mind is that BSG mirrors real-life practices to a certain extent, but doesn't follow them 100%ly. So while it's helpful to point out real-world parallels, it is simply wrong to label a deviation from that as an error. Such deviations can be noted, but they aren't errors within the show. For example the position of the CAG with the rank structure doesn't fit with US Navy practices either. That doesn't make it wrong from the show's perspective.
Second, we need a source for that statement. It's certainly very interesting and I'm not claiming you're lying, but we need a cite I'm sorry, but "I'm working on the show" doesn't really work by our usual standards :s . As it stands it's a very tenuous challenge to something that hasn't been established on screen, even if it might be correct.
Also, there is still the point that Tyrol's tone implies that he outranks her. The way he emphasizes her rank. Maybe it's just me. That wouldn't be the case if she were a WO. --Serenity 02:39, 20 December 2007 (CST)
For me, this is more a matter of consistency; when is a sergeant just a sergeant, and when is a sergeant a warrant officer? Is this a retro-active change going forward? And I make no argument about hewing to perfect equivalence to reality (that's why I included the "where it doesn't directly conflict the older series" caveat), RDM's already mentioned his rationale in his blog. --Fredmdbud 02:54, 20 December 2007 (CST)