Talk:Chief of the Defence Staff (Canada)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Full names[edit]

Why the change to full names? I can see mentioning a person's full name in an article about them but wouldn't it be better here to use the name that the person is usually referred to by? For example I don't think I've ever seen John de Chasterlain referred to as Alfred John Gardyne Drummond de Chasterlain. Cjrother 22:40, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

No one seemed to mind so I've changed some of these to the more common name. Cjrother 19:00, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

New Chief[edit]

Just heard on the radio, but can't find elsewhere. Natinchuk (sp?). Presently, he's the Vice-Chief of the Defence Staff.24.84.233.33 (talk) 16:06, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Found him. He's Lieutenant-General Walter Natynczyk.24.84.233.33 (talk) 16:08, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:RickHillier01.jpg[edit]

The image Image:RickHillier01.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --21:07, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Review[edit]

Hi, I was asked to review this so here it goes. Overall, this is looking very good, but I have a fundamental problem with this list. This list is essentially a much better version of Chief of the Defence Staff (Canada). All of this information should be in that article. Fundamentally, this list doesn't need to exist, it can be integrated into that other article.

I can see both positions, on the one hand, this could easily be merged. On the other, if it is merged, the tables might swamp the article. If it was merged, it would fall in the grey area between FA and FL. Which is it in that case. If it was merged I can't really see any scope for expansion. It is comprehensive and seems to cover every angle. The only thing I could think of would be to add the history of the rank: why was it created?

A couple of small points anyway:[edit]

Lead
  • Do we need to know that the general's surname was Bond "last name was Bond,". That is something for his article, not this one.
Tables
  • Can we rename the references column to notes? It makes the column a lot smaller without changing the meaning.
  • You should fix the column widths so that all three tables have the same column size. It is much more aesthetically pleasing.
  • I don't think the separate picture gallery is really neccessary. Some of these can be added to the lead, the rest should just go in the respective articles.

These are my early thoughts, regards. Woody (talk) 18:21, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Chief of the Defence Staff (Canada). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:24, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Chief of the Defence Staff (Canada). 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 19:31, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Chief of the Defence Staff (Canada). 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 15:41, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

@WildComet: I have trouble identifying in your source where it states that the logo of the CAF is also the CDS's logo. Additionally, the emblem is indeed used by the CDS. Skjoldbro (talk) 10:40, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Skjoldbro:, the CDS uses the CAF badge to officially identify their office. This is seen for example on the official letterhead in this message: https://twitter.com/cds_canada_cemd/status/1253761676249378816. The source I linked also outlines the marks authorized for use on the distinguishing flags of general officers including the CDS, I linked the main page of chapter but if you're having trouble finding it, the PDF is a bit easier to navigate. While the image you linked does indeed show use of the emblem, it is depicting it as a part of what appears to be the CDS' challenge coin design and not the emblem of the office itself. I've not seen any use of that design outside of the image linked, whereas the CAF regularly uses the CAF badge and flag to represent the CDS. Thanks for pinging me, WildComet (talk) 05:35, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed[edit]

The article has used the capitalized term "Chief of the Defence Staff" since 2004. A user just changed the title to "chief of the Defence Staff:

I had changed the the term back to the original term "Chief of the Defence Staff". The user then reverted this change. The user provided a link to a reason for his or her change. However, I would note that that the link provided by the user supports my revision to the long-standing use of Chief of the Defence Staff in the article: "Titles should be capitalized when attached to an individual's name, or where the position/office is a globally unique title that is the subject itself, and the term is the actual title or conventional translation thereof.

As indicated in these links (and in any Government of Canada publication) the term "Chief of the Defence Staff is always capitalized:

https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/corporate/organizational-structure.html https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/corporate/organizational-structure/chief-defence-staff/cds-bio.html

If one looks at the Wikipedia articles for other militaries that have the position of Chief of the Defence Staff, the term is also capitalized, as is the term Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (for the United States, for example).

The Wikipedia article should be consistent with official Canadian government usage and other Wikipedia entries that use the term.

--Greenwood10 (talk) 14:19, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @Greenwood10 and Trackratte:
So the specific MOS:JOBTITLES issue of capitalizing whatever the title is in between "The" and "of" in leads has been discussed probably hundreds of times throughout the website and the consensus has always been to avoid capitalization for the sake of capitalization. With regards to the the canada.ca sites, the government has its own internal style guide, Wikipedia style doesn't change dependent on what it's referencing.
Here is the text of the MOS:
They are capitalized only in the following cases:
  • When followed by a person's name to form a title, i.e., when they can be considered to have become part of the name: President Nixon, not president Nixon | This does not apply
  • When a title is used to refer to a specific person as a substitute for their name during their time in office, e.g., the Queen, not the queen (referring to Elizabeth II) | We are talking about the office, not in reference to a specific person, this also doesn't apply
  • When a formal title for a specific entity (or conventional translation thereof) is addressed as a title or position in and of itself, is not plural, is not preceded by a modifier (including a definite or indefinite article), and is not a reworded description | While Chief of the Defence Staff is the formal title for that position and isn't plural, it is preceded by a definite article, the making capitalization is improper per the MOS.
...
"The formality (officialness), specificity, or unusualness of a title is not a reason to capitalize it."
Bolding and notes mine.
Thanks, WildComet (talk) 21:19, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


WildComet, in all other Wikipedia articles that discuss the position (in relation to the armed forces of other countries) the term "Chief of the Defence Staff" with a capital "C" is used throughout the respective articles. If you use the term "chief of the Defence Staff", it follows that the abbreviation "cDS" rather than "CDS" also would need to be used, but this is not correct either. A consensus has emerged in the Wikipedia community (which reflects the official usage in the relevant armed forces) to use "Chief of the Defence Staff" and the abbreviation "CDS". The same is true for Chief of the Naval Staff, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff etc. I understand that you have views on how the title should be reflected, but your change simply does not reflect how the term is actually used within Wikipedia and in the armed forces generally.

--Greenwood10 (talk) 00:37, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

1. Longstanding consensus on this page and others most similar to it have the title being capitalized. There is no consensus to change it here on this page at this time so WP is clear what to do in that regard.
2. The MOS refered to is A) a style guide for biographies, which this page is not, and B) a guide, not WP, so the guide itself states that it is not to be rigidly enforced or blindly applied.
3. Wp is not a race, and this is not a bio of a living person article. So, there is no need to ram through the overturning of this article's long standing status quo. We have all the time in the world to chat about what is ultimately a triviality with no substantive impact on the article's content oncesoever. trackratte (talk) 01:42, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This is standard from Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to Commandant of the Marine Corps to Prime Minister of Canada to President of the United States; MOS:JOBTITLES would apply here because it is what MOS:CAPS defers to on, well, job titles. Only "Defence Staff" should be capitalized per MOS:MILTERMS and MOS:INSTITUTIONS. I'm seeing that this was also discussed over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Archive 151, so I'll go ahead and start a new thread and we can have that discussion again. WildComet (talk) 02:36, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Trackratte and Greenwood10:
Hi guys - heads up that I made a RfC over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history to continue discussing this. Cheers, WildComet (talk) 05:11, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good and thanks for the link. trackratte (talk) 14:40, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:WildComet - those parts of MOS:JOBTITLES do not apply, because of the higher paragraph on titles and that it is premised on common nouns, shown below. Capitalise when it is the proper noun, the official and complete name of the office or institution. Just observe RS usage when in doubt.

“Overview: Titles should be capitalized when attached to an individual's name, or where the position/office is a globally unique title that is the subject itself, and the term is the actual title or conventional translation thereof (not a description or rewording).”
“Offices, titles, and positions such as president, king, emperor, grand duke, lord mayor, pope, bishop, abbot, prime minister, chief financial officer, and executive director are common nouns and therefore should be in lower case when used generically.”
Cheers Markbassett (talk) 05:13, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Markbassett: Thanks, I've accepted I'm not winning this one, though there is still an RfC open on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history I'd suggest you add your comment to as well. Cheers, WildComet (talk) 05:28, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Queen-in-council or Governor-in-council[edit]

I know at least one Australian editor, who'd love to see it shown as "Governor-in-council". Anyways, hope you both can work this one out. GoodDay (talk) 21:23, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Chief or chief ?[edit]

In the lede, should "chief" be capitalized? -- Ooligan (talk) 16:34, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chief_of_the_Defence_Staff_(Canada)&oldid=1204658478"