Talk:Command hierarchy

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: Technology This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met Associated task forces: /  Military science, technology, and theory task force Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

The chain of command example seems to be specifically focused on the British / English military (army). (I don't think the US has Field Marshalls.) Thus I think it should be labeled as such, and it would be nice if there was a link / reference to a US Chain of Command example. (Which would also vary by service--army, navy, air force, marines, coast guard...)

I'll add a notation saying it is a British army Chain of Command...

I finally figured out how to do that: by editing the Template:Chain of Command.

Rhkramer (talk) 13:40, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The photo within the box entitled "Chain of Command of the British Army" depicts Latvian soldiers. As the photo is embedded within a box describing the British command structure, it should either be replaced with a photo of British soldiers (or another British-related illustration), or simply removed. No disrespect to Latvians, by the way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.112.106.119 (talk) 13:17, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]