Talk:Australian Army enlisted rank insignia

Military history: Culture / South Pacific Start‑class

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

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

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 met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military culture, traditions, and heraldry task force
	Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history task force

Australia: Military history Mid‑importance

	Australia portal Australian Army enlisted rank insignia is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

NATO Ranks

The rank pictures are not shown in the NATO rank format as shown for the British Army and United States Army because Australia is not a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. Although Australia follows many of its conventions, it is not a member.

Warrant Officers

The RSM-A holds the rank of 'WO' as discussed in the attached article http://www.defence.gov.au/news/armynews/editions/1087/topstories/story16.htm I have also revised the text to highlight the difference between an NCO and a WO. A Warrant Officer is a non-commissioned 'rank' but not an NCO LONDON 15:13, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Staff Sergeant

The rank of Staff Sergeant is being phased out of the Australian Army. The WO2 rank now equates with Chief Petty Officer (RAN) and Flight Sergeant (RAAF) LONDON 18:21, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The rank of Staff Sergent has now been phased out. As in no one will be promoted in to that rank. I believe there are only a had full left in the Army. When they retire or are promoted, over the next year or two, the rank will be no more.

What's the credibility of this information? This comment was made more than 10 years ago without a timestamp or sign off (had to check Talk page history for this. See history log 22:39, 31 December 2006), yet the documentation/citation on the article hasn't been adjusted. Tytrox (talk) 04:14, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

G'day, yes, it's credible, IMO: [1]. The last Staff Sergeant I've come across was about ten years ago and all sergeants I've seen promoted since then have gone straight to WO2. There may be one or two left in the Reserves, but there would be very few, if any. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:15, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. So it's indeed time-ambiguous. My thought-pattern is to have a note to say that there's no timeline, and supply this link as citation to justify the ambiguity. Tytrox (talk) 06:52, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated. Tytrox (talk) 07:04, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There are still 10 Staff Sergeants (9 Male, 1 female) in the ADF, they are all in the reserves, and there are no permanent ADF Staff Sergeants - seen here. [2] They are not going to promote out, and are likely going to stay in the service as long as possible just because the rank is no longer actively promoted, and as such there is somewhat of a "flex" to still be that rank.

Yes the rank is being phased out, however, the rank still exists, it is still listed on the "Other Ranks" page of the Army website, [3] - and Staff Sergeant is still included in the Pay and Allowances with a pay scale released by the ADF - [4]

Until such a time as the rank does not exist and every Staff Sergeant leaves the Army, the rank should be returned to the page with a note that it is being phased out, and people are no longer promoted to the position. KarmaKangaroo (talk) 13:16, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Private ranks - other names

I would like to put in references to former ranks that were the equivalent (I think) of Private. For example Sapper, Driver (WW1), etc. Before, I am so bold to edit a reasonably comprejensive and well-organised article, any views?--A Y Arktos 20:36, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arktos, I think I've got them all in there. Apologies if I've left some out.I have also included the E numbers for those that I can remember (upto SGT). For any multination force operations we deploy on they use this system.--Theinnerexits 09:10, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe there is an error with the Private Soldier Ranks. Gun Number is the job description, where Gunner is the actual rank. For example within the Royal Regiment of Australian Artillery there are many jobs. Gun number, Signaller, Operator Command Post (OPCP) Operator Radar etc. The lowest rank in the Corps is Gunner. Unless you have a reference to the rank being Gun Number I think this should be changed. And I’m fairly certain there are no references that will show the rank as being “Gun Number.”

New table style proposition

Firstly, why were all the pics deleted? The article is much worse without. ANyway here are some placeholder images from US ranks

Pay grade	E-9		E-8	E-7	E-6	E-5	E-4	E-3	E-2
Insignia
Title	Warrant Officer	Warrant Officer Class One	Warrant Officer Class Two	Staff Sergeant	Sergeant	Corporal	Lance Corporal	Private

I'd say what has happened is that a bot tagged the images and they were deleted, possibly because they were not justified correctly or maybe because they were being used without appropriate permission, etc. Regardless, it seems to me that there needs to be more commonsense when it comes to images being deleted. This article is now useless, and yet I've found examples of images that are clearly copied from other sources but are passed off as 'own work' being kept, whilst others that in reality are fine are deleted because the uploader didn't know what rationale to write. AustralianRupert (talk) 05:22, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support: I agree with the above vent! You can't blame a bot, but what excuse does a human have (i.e. the Admin that deleted it)? Unless we can come up with replacement images this page might as well just be deleted (along with the one on Enlisted ranks). Anotherclown (talk) 05:41, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Enlisted?

The article says "the Australian Army does not use the term 'enlisted' to describe its non-commissioned ranks", so why is the article itself titled "Australian Army enlisted rank insignia"? Is it for the benefit of researchers who search using incorrect terms? Surely the article should be called "Australian Army non-commissioned rank insignia". Jack Garfield (talk) 10:23, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

so why is the article itself titled ... - To be consistent with wikipedia naming conventions of such articles. (e.g. have a look at Category:Military insignia and similar articles and categories.)

Is it for the benefit of researchers who search using incorrect terms? - No. Is it for the benefit of researchers who search using the otherwise consistent naming conventions.

Surely the article should be called ... - It doesn't really matter what the article is named, as long as people can find it. Thus I have created a "redirect" ("Australian Army non-commissioned rank insignia") that points here. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:03, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Afterthought: Shouldn't it be "Australian Army non-commissioned officer rank insignia"? Pdfpdf (talk) 12:16, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Due to the overwhelming lack of response I've received since December 2010, I've turned that redlink into a redirect.

I've also created Australian Army other ranks insignia. Pdfpdf (talk) 13:46, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Warrant Officer Appointments

This list is kind of selective. For a start it is missing Battery Sergeant Major (BSM) Artilery Equivilant of CSM/SSM. You could also easily start adding RQMS (Regimental Quarter Master Sergeant Major) and a few more. The list could get long and confusing. Thoughts?

Also RAAOC a couple of years back on the creation of aConductors for each RAAOC trade which are considered to be the senior WO1s.--TinTin (talk) 04:04, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This list is kind of selective. - On reflection, Yes, I agree. (However, that wasn't the original intention!)

I've been bold and reorganised the article. I'll be disappointed if my changes are simply reverted. I'll be pleased if someone goes to the effort of improving/expanding my reorganisation.

And yes, I feel the appointments you mention should be added.

Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:33, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

G'day, the changes look fine to me. I've had a go at adding some citations, but it probably needs a few more. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 00:17, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Australian Army enlisted rank insignia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080403033424/http://www.defence.gov.au/copyright.cfm to http://www.defence.gov.au/copyright.cfm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:49, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Insignia of Different Regiments/Corps

A publication that released by the Australian Army history unit (Preserving our Proud Heritage: The Customs and Traditions of the Australian Army) there was a section that detailed examples of different insignia by specific corps and regiments. an example would be, for the Royal Australian armoured Corps the rank insignia of sergeant was primarily white (there were two instances of this, however it did not specify if all ranks were like this). should a section be dedicated to this fact or a brief mention. IronBattalion (talk) 03:29, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

G'day, I suspect it would actually be silver rather than white. By tradition, aviation, armoured corps and nursing corps ranks and embellishments are silver. See, for instance: [5]. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 03:51, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

G'day Rupert, in a nutshell you summarised my point IronBattalion (talk) 01:11, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

G'day, given that this article largely seems to follow a list format, I'd suggest simply adding a sentence to the lead clarifying this point. The distinction between ceremonial and field/combat uniforms possibly also needs to be included in this, though, as in the latter order all ranks are subdued (i.e. black). Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:26, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]