Talk:Sergeant major general

Spelling

The spelling for this rank should surely be Serjeant major general, the older spelling of sergeant still used in Serjeant-at-Arms. Sergeant with a "g" would not have existed at the time. There may be an argument that spelling in an language changes, but there is no later equivalent use of the full title where the spelling would have changed. Dainamo (talk) 19:45, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

File:UK-Army-OF8-shoulder.svg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:UK-Army-OF8-shoulder.svg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:45, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

File:UK-Army-OF7-shoulder.svg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:UK-Army-OF7-shoulder.svg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:47, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

File:UK-Army-OF3-shoulder.svg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:UK-Army-OF3-shoulder.svg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:54, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

File:UK-Army-OF1A-shoulder.svg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:UK-Army-OF1A-shoulder.svg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:57, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion

This article is completely unsourced, a single section, purely etymological, since the rank of Major General is effectively identical and directly succeeded this one, and by extension redundant. All relevant information is either already contained in the Major General article, or can be easily inserted into its history section. As such I belive this article should be deleted with prejudice. Fritz1776 (talk) 18:24, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Put Up Or Shut Up

This entry is like 15 years old. People are quoting this article on YouTube. To this day it hasn't been sourced, I've never heard of this anywhere else and you'd think there would be one well researched source for this claim. This is what I refer to as a cancerous entry. It has nothing behind it to back it up but it's spread to various other articles on Wikipedia that use it as a reference. It's also appeared on other people's webpages as well as the comments section on YouTube. In all this time no one has come forward with an authoritative source backing up this article?22:25, 14 September 2020 (UTC)John Simpson54 (talk)