h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: Enlisted Ranks of the US Air Force - A1107019
Author: Akaron Etruit - U197396

Here's my take on the USAF ranks. Any comments, thought, ideas?

Hello Akaron. I don't think we have an entry in The Guide about air force ranks, so this would be a useful addition.

You've put it into the Writing Workshop - usually a step before submitting it to <./>Peer Review</.>. Is that your intention for it? If so you'll need to rewrite parts of it to fall in with the Writing-Guidelines; in particular you'll have to lose all the first person references. There are a few stray apostrophes in there too - "know-it-all's", "Staff's", "Tech's", and "Chief's" don't need the apostrophe as they're plurals not posessives.

If you activate your Personal Space by writing an introduction, one of h2g2's <./>ACE</.>s will come along to welcome you and show you around the place by giving you some useful links.


Scout

Thanks for the info. As you can probably tell, this is my first attempt at a guide entry. I will do a rewrite for the gramatical errors, but I was also looking for comments on the content itself. Are the entries to short/long for each rank? Should I drop the wit and stick to a factual description of each rank? Comments like that would be helpful as well.

Also, I will post an introduction.

Thanks,
Akaron

One thing I've always wondered is how many men are "under" the next rank.

e.g., a field marshall is in charge of four brigadiers. Each brigadier is in charge of thirteen centurions. Each centurion looks after 100 men. Each man looks after himself...

You see?

And it's probably better to understate humour than to overstate it.

T.

I think the wit is fine, as long as it isn't onobtrusive, but that's just my . You'll probably find that if it's inappropriate, it may get skimmed off by a subeditor, anyway - I tend to do that to entries whose writing style interferes with the factual content.

The length of the text for the entries certainly isn't too long; it initially struck me as being a little short, if anything, but after reading through the entry, it seemed perfect, for the amount of depth you go into. .. you might want to add some more content if there's anything you have to add, but I would have thought it'll be fine if you don't.

Also, might it be a nice idea to put in a description of each rank as it sits on the soulder, as you did with the last few (eg. designated by a wreath in place of the center star).

Good entry, though. I was loosely a member of the british air force for a little while, before being in charge of a signals section for a little longer.

- njan

T.: I see what you're saying, but the number of people you supervise depends on your job. My last job was "top heavy" so that 1 Senior Master Sergeant supervised about 10 Techs, Those 10 Techs only had about 8 Staffs total, and the 8 Staffs had 3 Senior Airmen.

Njan: I wanted to put in an image of each rank, but then I saw the copyright rules. I guess I could add descriptions to the rest, but the last three are specialty ranks which warranted the extra description.

Thank you both for your input, I'll give it another go through. I'm curious though at what point I should submit it for Peer Review. Is there a standard number of comments, or it is just touch-and-go?

J

Hmm, I've also seen rates in the US service referred to by an 'E number'... an E5, E6 etc... what about including these?

Those are pay grades that apply to all of the sevices. So a Senior Airman, pay grade of E-4, gets the same amount of money as a Petty Officer Third Class (Navy/Coast Guard) and a Corporal (Army/Marines). I guess it would be ok to include them.

Thanks,
J

Well, that depends; entries as a general rule are in the writing workshop for as long as the author feels the entry's incomplete; as a general guide, entries in PR are complete but unfinished (ie. they require some polishing, rewording, etc.) Entries in PR often have bits added and removed, but entries in the Writing Workshop generally have far more extensive lackings than those in PR.. at least, as far as I can tell.

I'd say this is about ready for PR, if you don't think there's much more you can add to it. .. although I do think that descriptions of each rank's representation on the uniform would be great. .. I suppose it's conceivable that you might be able to talk your way into having a community artist draw you some ranks out, too. .. or else, you might want to try using ASCII symbols to represent the ranks, for example:

My rank when I was in the signals was a sergeant (>>&gt.. my contingent commander was a Lt. Col (@*, where @ is a crown and * is a star), etc etc.

I think it's pretty much done now. I've added some footnotes to clear things up and I am just waiting for clairification on the SMSgt entry from a friend.

J

There are still some first person references in the entry which will have to be either removed or rewritten before it goes to Peer Review, and a few typos too. It's always worth getting an entry in as good a shape as possible before submitting it to PR - the regulars there don't hold back, and if they see something wrong they'll let you know for sure


Scout

Author has 'no recent postings', so flea market time?

Yeah. A pity - this one seemed so close.

just as a comment thx to those who have commented on this entry as it has helped greatly in my scavenging of it.
cheers