Talk:Comparative officer ranks of World War I

message: The Luftwaffe was formed in WWI and there were also Austrian and Ottoman Navies.  Information on these should be added if anyone knows  Dainamo 21:25, 1 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, the German air force remained part of the army during WWI. -- Necrothesp 22:56, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

text: It's generally considered that German ranks equated to one below apparently equivalent British ranks (Generalmajors usually commanded brigades, Generalleutnants commanded divisions and Generals commanded corps, one level below British Major Generals, Lieutenant Generals and Generals) and that Generaloberst equated to General in the British Army. But as with all rank equivalents, it's not an exact science. -- Necrothesp 20:58, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  'generally considered' is not a term for an encyclopedia - what about a source????  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.183.213.15 (talk) 12:52, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Missing

message: Is there any reason why the Russian rank names are in most cases translated (or pseudo-translated) into English but the others countries' are not? If it's just a desire to have some Latin characters in there then a transliteration would seem more appropriate.
*I would oppose translations. 12.220.94.199 01:36, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure where you're coming from here. They are transliterated, not translated. Since they were generally based on German ranks, the transliteration just doesn't look very Russian. -- Necrothesp 03:40, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  translations 

message: Here is a source for Belgium and other countries.  12.220.94.199 01:36, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Belgium and others

message: Rittmeister was also used (I think) by WW1 German air service; von Richthoven was Rittmeister Manfred Baron vR. 
Has anybody considered a pre-WW1/historical table?  Trekphiler 17:39, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ritt baron 

message: Is there any particular need to include the air ranks?  At the moment only the British column has them, and they're identical to the army rank - I assume that these are representing the Royal Flying Corps, and not the Royal Naval Air Service.  IIRC the RAF was the first independent air service, and not until after the war - it seems to me that air ranks, if they differ, should be handled similarly to the Germanic Rittmeister rank, as an alternative within whatever branch of service the air unit is part of.
On an unrelated topic, I was under the impression that both Germany and Austria-Hungary used the form "General der [branch]", as shown in the Austro-Hungarian column. Xt828 21:40, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The British Air Ranks are legitimate since the RAF was formed before the end of the war in 1918 with military ranks up to Lieutenant General.  It was not until 1919 that irs current ranks were implemented. Dainamo (talk) 18:27, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Air Ranks? / German Generals 

message: Why aren't Americans included? CsikosLo (talk) 14:53, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Americans? 

message: Why is General of the Armies listed as a World War 1 rank? It was not created till 1919, the year after the war had ended. The 4-gold stars is not really an officially recognized insignia for the rank, either, but that is a different issue obviated by that of why is it is there to begin with.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Venqax (talk • contribs) 19:09, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  American Ranks 

message: What about Serbian ranks?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.2.19.32 (talk) 12:28, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Serbian ranks 

message: Some people listed a few countries that were not included in the table (Serbia, Belgium, etc.). It seems to have been a clumsy, incomplete list that was created piecemeal. I think it makes more sense to remove the list altogether and simply state: "Not all combatant countries shown in table." I have made this change. If you feel a reversion is necessary, then please ensure that the list is complete. Otherwise it is silly to include it.Nojamus (talk) 23:14, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Country inclusion 

message: Where are the enlisted ranks?
````  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.218.100.214 (talk) 05:12, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aren't Enlisted Men in the Military? 

message: I suspect this is going to cause some reversions, but it seems pretty clear to me that General d'armee, General de corps d'armee, Amiral and Vice-amiral d'escadre did not exist in the WWI French military. Sources are regrettably both in French, but the gist is fairly easy to work out; http://www.defense.gouv.fr/bog/officiers-generaux/donnees/grades-officiers-generaux?nav=web and http://www.servicehistorique.sga.defense.gouv.fr/Les-grades-dans-l-armee-de-terre.html
In particular "Général de corps d’armée : la première mention de ce grade, qui n’est encore qu’une fonction, apparaît dans la notice sur les uniformes du 17 mars 1921. Le grade est créé en 1939." Google translation: "The first mention of the grade, which was still a function, appears in the record on the uniforms of 17 March 1921. The grade is created in 1939." 
RaiderAspect (talk) 12:04, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: French General ranks

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Comparative officer ranks of World War I. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160206141509/https://www.overthefront.com/reasources/military-ranks/french-ranks to https://www.overthefront.com/reasources/military-ranks/french-ranks
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:40, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified