Talk:Lieutenant colonel general

Latest comment: 9 years ago by Shem1805 in topic Reason for Rank?
WikiProject Military history (Rated Start-Class)
MILHIST 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.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality assessment scale.
Additional information...
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status:
  1. Red x.svg Referencing and citation: criterion not met
  2. Red x.svg Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met
  3. Orange check.svg Structure: criterion met
  4. Orange check.svg Grammar: criterion met
  5. Orange check.svg Supporting materials: criterion met
Associated task forces (general topics):
Sunset Taps.jpg
Military culture, traditions, and heraldry task force
Associated task forces (nations and regions):
Balkan topo en.jpg
Balkan military history task force (c. 500–present)
Europe satellite globe.jpg
European military history task force

Reason for Rank?Edit

I find the (uncited) claimm that the rank is an attempy at rationalizing the out ranking of a lieutentant-general to a major-general dubious and perhaps original research. Major General is simply a contraction of [historical spelling deliberate] Serjeant-Major General. See the article General for a greater explanation. Dainamo (talk) 19:34, 1 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is this rank "lieutenant colonel general" or "sub-colonel general" ? If it's referencing the rank of sub-colonel/subcolonel, then wouldn't it be "subcolonel general" ? -- (talk) 04:40, 29 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Find a reference, and be bold, my friend. Shem (talk) 17:44, 29 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]