Talk:RAAF Air Command

Page Name
This page should be called 'Air Commander Australia' (ACAUST), this page is used to represent the position of the (ACAUST). The page has extremely little information about the 'RAAF Air Command' and more information in regards to the Air Commander Australia. The information that this page contains about elements that the 'RAAF Air Command' has power over which is much like the power of the 'Fleet Command' over elements of the RAN is insignificant to the position of 'Air Commander Australia' which is the seat of the residing power. If the information is considered to be important even though of little Significance then a sub heading can be made with regards to the 'RAAF Air Command' much like in the Chief Capability Development Group page. Nathanael Ford 06:25, 10 July 2011 (UTC)


 * This article isn't a finished product, so its current content shouldn't necessarily determine its name. I don't think that the position of Air Commander Australia is notable in isolation from the command, so it might not support a separate article. Nick-D (talk) 07:47, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Capitalizing "air vice marshal"?
Per WP:JOBTITLES and MOS:MILTERMS, ranks are not capitalized unless part of a person's name: "Brigadier General John Smith, but John Smith was a brigadier general." I don't see the need to capitalize a column of ranks. While we're here, does the RAAF use a hyphen in "Air vice marshal"? Regards, Chris the speller   yack  15:52, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I disagree, capitals looks correct here. The rank column in the table is immediately followed by the name column so the ranks are part of that. FWIW I believe the RAAF does use a hypthen in "Air Vice-Marshal", at least per this source from the the RAAF website . It also appears that way in my copy of the The Oxford Companion to Australian Military History. I hope that helps. Anotherclown (talk) 21:21, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi Chris, I agree it's a bit problematic because of the column (a style of presentation I don't really like, I think it's much more common in the real world to simply show rank, name and post-noms in the one column, and dates the position was held in others) but the overall impression it's intended to give is "Brigadier General John Smith" -- per Anotherclown's response. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:44, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * OK, I guess we're good here. Thanks for your views on this. Chris the speller   yack  13:32, 20 August 2016 (UTC)