Talk:Unrestricted line officer
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Unrestricted line officer article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg)
Untitled edit
Engineers are part of the Restricted Line community, not Unrestricted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jigen III (talk • contribs) 08:08, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
- Depends on what you mean by "engineer." If you mean "Engineering Duty Officer" then that is a true statement. If you mean to refer to an officer who stands engineering watches or serves in the Engineering Department on a ship, then they are likely a URL officer. (Sonlee (talk) 14:31, 15 December 2009 (UTC))
- A ref copied from Bureau of Steam Engineering. Dzied Bulbash (talk) 00:26, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
- Following up on the previous comment (from October 2007), this article currently suggests that naval engineering officers are RL ("Examples of RL officers include Engineering Duty Officer, Aeronautical Engineering Duty Officer, ..."), but the "History" section says that engineers were amalgamated "into Unrestricted Line Officers in 1899." I still think that there is a contradiction (or at least the potential for confusion) here. 74.71.72.223 (talk) 05:25, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Command of a ship not at sea edit
The article explains that URL officers can command a ship at sea. This is also what I was taught in Naval Science at The Citadel. What about ships not at sea? Can a RL officer command a ship when in port? What about a pre-commissioning unit? (I neglected to think of this question when I was a cadet.) Axeman (talk) 03:38, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
Requested move 29 March 2017 edit
- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: Moved — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:43, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
- Unrestricted Line Officer → Unrestricted line officer
- Restricted Line Officer → Restricted line officer
– Unnecessary capitalization of a common noun. The pages may predate the exhortation in MOS:CAPSACRS "Do not apply initial capitals in a full term that is a common noun just because capitals are used in its abbreviation." Chris the speller yack 15:46, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
- Support – no suggestion of proper name status for these job descriptions. Dicklyon (talk) 04:26, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
- Support standard job title guidance. Primergrey (talk) 04:43, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
- Support this move 2601:541:4305:C70:80B2:A42E:DED3:3EC9 (talk) 19:01, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
- Support per nom. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:09, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.