Talk:Grand admiral

Splitting article

I reverted this page to a single entry covering both the Star Wars and Grand Admiral rank. I can understand why some may wish to separate these, but it is clearly stated in the article that the Star Wars rank is fiction. This article is also intended to be an entry on all uses of the Grand Admiral rank. Not to mention that there are dozens of Star Wars articles linked to this page. If the ranks are seperated into two separate artciles, every one of those pages would be linking to the wrong place.

To summarize, I see no need to separate this article into two new ones covering what is essentially the same subject.

Since you seem to be new, I won't get angry that you undid my work without discussing it first. The reason to split is that the two ranks share only a name, and it's no more sensible to have a single article here than to have a single article for the three different persons named John McCain, etc. If there are dozens of Star Wars articles linking to the ambiguous name, then those all need to be fixed - if I'm reading about Star Wars stuff, I don't want to try to sort it out from German stuff, and vice versa. This kind of separation is the norm throughout WP, and it was sloppy to put the two together in this article. So unless you come up with something really compelling, and can show me a bunch of examples elsewhere in WP, I'm going to resplit. Stan 21:12, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

==

I'm not so new...been writing dozens of articles on this site. In any event, I wrote this entire article from its genesis, researching the pictures, and am proud of this work. The intention of the article is to be about all things Grand Admiral...fact, fiction, German, Star Wars, etc. Fleet Admiral was written the same way. I see no reason to split this article just as Fleet Admiral would not be split into 13-15 different articles. Hope this doesnt create bad feelings. But I am a fan of keeping this as one single article -User:Husnock

If you're not new, then you should know better. That's why we have so many disambiguation pages - there are lots of unrelated concepts that happen to have the same name, and it's hard on the reader to wade through irrelevant material. You give this away by saying "all things Grand Admiral" - what readers care about that? Readers are going to be interested in German stuff or Star Wars, not both at the same time. "Grand Admiral" in the German context is just a translation anyway; when I see Großadmiral, I tend to think "Great Admiral", so your idea that the article is about all things Grand Admiral is based on only a particular translation of the German term. Stan 16:41, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

==

I put it up for public discussion. I suppose I could live with what you're talking about. However, Wilk policy about moving pages is pretty specific. If moving part of a page creates a double redirect, then the move is discouraged lest the pages linking to the redirect are all corrected. As previously stated, there are over 15 Star Wars pages, that I know of, which are linked to this page. Those should not be dismissed so quickly.

I will not start an edit war and if you change this back, I will attempt to correct the Star Wars links as best as can. Would recommend giving others a chance to comment before major changes are made.

You can't get a double redirect by splitting an article - that can only happen if you create a redirect, which is not what I did. Also, the "links here" only shows me about three SW pages that connect to "Grand Admiral", so I'm unclear on where you think the 15 comes from (the others are obviously German topics). Finally, I think I'm being pretty restrained in my reaction to your reverting changes - if you're familiar with WP policy, then you should already know about the advice on Wikipedia:How to revert a page to an earlier version. If you really want to maintain an article in a nonstandard structure, then please preemptively put a note on the talk page explaining why - when I'm cleaning up what looks like a mistake, I always look on the talk page to see if there's any explanation for the oddity. Stan 18:13, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

You requested a comment

Well, here's one. It is quite unusualy, to say the least, to put an existing historical military rank together with one from a fictional world. I am very much in favour of seperating these two, and probably the Star Wars part could be worked into an article about Star Wars, or military in Star Wars, or whatever. But really, don't mix history and fiction. -- AlexR 18:08, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I can live with spliting the article if you really want to do that. I will do what I can to fix the links from the other Star Wars pages and will probably expand the Grand Admiral article dealing with the German rank. If you mean to do this, also take a look at Fleet Admiral. The last two ranks in the article are science fiction and the others are factual. Also maybe the United States Fleet Admiral section should be made into a separate article all by itself, much like the article Admiral of the Navy (U.S.). Hope that resolves everything. Happy Father's Day! -User:Husnock

The debate above has been proved null since other parties on Wikipedia deleted the Star Wars Grand Admiral rank article. I can't think of why that was ever even considered as the rank is very significant and its apperance in Star Wars is part of a cultural trend to use real military ranks in science fiction. But, as there seems no place else for this to go now, I've restored the Star Wars information back into this article. -OberRanks 13:13, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Ottoman Navy

I deleted the following sentence from the lead section:

• "The Ottoman Turkish equivalent was Kapudan Pasha."

Kapudan Pasha somehow was the highest rank in the Ottoman Navy from at least 1567 until 1867, but it was a conjunction to the commander-in-chief of the navy. Only this supreme commander held it; and automatically. So it is less of a rank and more title and position until the office was exchanged for a civilian minister. Also, the etymology is from the word captain, not from grand. ... GELongstreet (talk) 18:32, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Category:Fictional military ranks

This article is currently in Category:Fictional military ranks, but I question whether that is appropriate. It has been awarded and held, as the article says. Just because the fictitious Horatio Hornblower was at one stage a Rear Admiral, that doesn't make the rank of Rear Admiral fictitious. Does it? Andrewa (talk) 00:20, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Zaire

Zaire being listed here doesn't seem appropriate. The rank Grand Admiral in both Zaire and the DRC is referring to the French "Grand Amiral" which they use as a rank equivalent to Admiral.

It seems it's caused some confusion and the references don't really seem like military based references.

I could be wrong but I can't find anything to support a seperate what we would refer to as "Grand Admiral" rank.

Lankyant (talk) 10:27, 6 May 2021 (UTC)