Talk:Ranks of the Imperial Japanese Army
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Untitled
editThe officer rank tabs should have two thin red bars. One above the stars and one below the stars. The Gen-sui rank (field marshal) has the same collar tab as a Tai-sho (full general) but also has a stylized patch.
Source for all my changes The Japanese Army 1913-45 by Philip Jowett pg 34
WP:Japan Assessment
editThe names of ranks and pictures of insignias are excellent resources; I'm glad we have an article covering this. But can we not find something worth saying in prose paragraph form about this? Maybe the evolution and origin of the ranking system? I dunno. LordAmeth 12:51, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
Comparisons
editI've fixed the spelling of the Japanese names for the terms... I wonder if portraying the US/UK equivalents is really useful or worthwhile. LordAmeth 11:02, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
- As the one who added the Commonwealth ranks I am, of course, biased. Having said that, I do think that it is useful to compare Japanese ranks with the US and the UK/Commonwealth. These countries were the main opponents of Japan in the Pacific and I think that it offers a useful base of comparison. All a matter of opinion, I suppose. What objections do you have?
- No particular objections other than that it's Eurocentric, assuming that the reader won't understand the Japanese ranks unless given a comparison to US/UK ones. But, that aside, if you think they're valuable to keep, by all means do. My original comment was really more an offhand "gee, I wonder" than a serious complaint or whatever. Thanks for responding so quickly. LordAmeth 22:34, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
- Well, this is the English-language Wikipedia. Admittedly, given the reach of English, it is the de facto 'world' Wikipedia, but I don't think that we ought to totally disregard the audience, most of whom will probably not be terribly familiar with Japan etc. However this is taking us onto shaky ground—arguments as to what 'most people' know or don't know are generally something I try to avoid.
- My layman's opinion here is that some comparison would be good, but right now the US and Commonwealth epaulettes are taking a whole lot of attention on page about Imperial Japanese ranks. Same 'problem' distracts on the Naval insignia side as well. Coparison chart would be okay, but I'm finding it difficult to see the added value of UK/US rank insignias that are portrayed larger than the Imperial Japanese insignias. If you guys feel that the US/UK insignias give vlaue, maybe they should be resized a little smaller, though, as not to jump into focus? --TLein (talk) 07:43, 5 June 2008 (UTC)