Well, I think we agree to disagree; this article is not easy to follow given the volume of text.  I'm aware of only one discussion prior to ours; where are the others?  As well, objections were noted previously: the article has grown significantly in size and is now unwieldy almost to the point of lacking utility.  I am also not proposing headings for all ranks: only the flag and officer ranks (which are lengthy sections on their own).  Lastly, any user can collapse the TOC on their screen.

As for the wikifying of real-world terms: the article does not at all link to the articles/concepts of rank and insignia that are described in the title and only weakly described after that.  That is bad form and should be upfront, not at the end.

I acknowledge and appreciate your contributions to the article, but resistance to changing it and your reversion can be perceived as exerting ownership over it.  To that end, I think it prudent to initiate a new discussion or RfC regarding these issues to enhance the article, and we should be guided by the results of that.  Thanks!