Talk:Purchase of commissions in the British Army

message: This site http://www.cwreenactors.com/~crimean/purchsys.htm#promos claims the price of Lord Cardigan's commission as 25,000 pounds, not 40,000. I have heard usually 40,000, but as high as half a million pounds (an obvious mistake, of course). Any corroborations in publish accounts you may have, gentlemen? TaylorSAllen 00:55, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Price of Cardigan's Commission?

message: I actually came here to find out about objections to the practice historically.  The article mentions that the Prussians didn't engage in the practice but did senior personnel comment on the practice?  Was there controversy between the two styles?  This seems to be written from a very British perspective.Nickjost 18:51, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical Objections 

message: I completely agree with Nickjost's post about this article having an intensely British perspective. More than that, it seems to actually be defensive about the practice of selling commissions, at one point asserting---implausibly, I think---that it isn't signficantly different from other forms of patronage. Perhaps it is, but a more even-handed and dispassionate discussions of advantages and disadvantages might be more helpful. Also, the offhaned reference to the political patronage in other European and American armies needs to be backed up by citations, and elaborated a bit more for its relevance to be clear.  MJM74 (talk) 06:41, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oddly Defensive Tone 

message: This article is almost entirely about the Purchase of commissions in the British army, and should accordingly be moved there. I'll check back in a week or so, and if there are no objections by then I'll BOLDly move it, okay? --Uncle Ed (talk) 15:53, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Scope of article

message: The article fails to explain what the sale of commission *is*.  In particular I had to infer that the money is paid to the previous holder of the position (this became clear only through the mention that the commission serves as a retirement fund).  50.196.145.34 (talk) 02:06, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Second sentence in the article: "Essentially, the commission purchase price was a cash bond for good behaviour, forfeited to the Army's cashiers (accountants) in the event of cowardice, desertion or gross misbehaviour." --DelftUser (talk) 15:22, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there evidence that origin of the term Cashiering comes from cashier, ie from officers getting thrown out and not getting their money back?Catsmeat (talk) 11:51, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

text: Actually no, from reading article, it seems a coincidenceCatsmeat (talk) 13:38, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  No definition 

message: I don't think it's really appropriate to have a section on "other countries" in an article about the purchase of commissions in the British army. If we want a general article about the purchase of commissions, that's fine, but an article about the British army should not be about Austria. Timothyjosephwood (talk) 04:56, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: That's because prior to 2013 the article was "Sale of Commissions" (see "scope of article" section, above).  I'd say the article needs to either be moved back (and the bits about other militaries restored) OR it needs reworking (ie if It's only about the British army, why is the first -and now only - header "United Kingdom"?) Gecko G (talk) 00:02, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Other countries?

message: So, in the Napoleonic era, could someone buy straight in as a captain, or did they have to start as ensign and level up?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 51.6.10.234 (talk) 16:10, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: entry and levelling up