Talk:UNSC rank structure

Further matters to consider
I was wondering if we should change the template and make the presentation of this article similar to this article.— subtank   16:42, 15 March 2014 (EDT)
 * Update: Yup. Definitely looks nicer compared to the old template design. Moreso on mobile browser.— subtank   10:12, 3 April 2014 (EDT)

Senior Enlisted Advisor
Since we saw the Rank insignia for Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy in Halo 3, should the ranks be updated to show the senior enlisted advisor ranks for the Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force?

Individual Pages
In my opinion, the way this page works is kind of outdated. I would like to make individual pages for Fleet Admirals, Generals, etc. like we have for Covenant Ranks but cannot do so because all of those terms automatically redirect here.Japeth555 (talk) 00:11, 18 December 2016 (EST)Japeth555
 * I agree, but I see why we don't have individual articles for them at the moment. A lot of ranks would have little info on them. However, currently, I'm linking to the individual ranks just for if we make articles for them in the future. If anything, we can make articles for just say "Captain" or "General" and include info for that rank in various organizations rather than just a single branch of the UNSC. For example, the captain article would have info for Jiralhanae captains, Marine/Army/Air Force captains, Navy captains, and civilian captains. -- NightHammer (talk)(contribs) 00:49, 18 December 2016 (EST)
 * We used to have individual pages for all of them, as some might remember, but this system suffered from precisely the problem NightHammer identifies: most had little information on them, and were more or less copied from the American rank system on Wikipedia. For that reason, it was decided to collapse them all into one page, like the list of food and drink and other such situations with so little specific info. Since it was decided to do this (I'm sure you could find the discussions somewhere), I would be rather hesitant to undo this state of affairs without first coming to a broad consensus with others. With that said, if you do create any articles, I would advise that they only be about ranks which have something sufficiently notable or unusual about them, some way in which they differ from current U.S. ranks - if the page would just be a list of soldiers and sailors with that rank, it would be better to just make it a category. DefeatingLine (talk) 02:37, 18 December 2016 (EST)
 * The two comments above are indeed correct. Back in those days, the individual articles displayed information from Wikipedia (i.e. lazy editing) and were trivial and useless to readers. So, back then, there was an agreement to merge them all into what you see now (as per my comment in 2014 above). I do think DefeatingLine's proposal is doable; however, do note that editors would need to supervise actively so as to not allow this floodgate to re-open. — subtank   10:12, 22 December 2016 (EST)