The (once used) tag seems to be an exact synonym of . I don't have rep enough yet, so could someone else propose this synonym (with as the master)? I could just remove from the question that uses it, but then it might be created again at a later date. This way, it will be permanently synonymized.

If you disagree with this synonym, just leave an answer explaining why.


  • CATCH22 Not only do you need total rep, you also need rep on a question with that tag. At present, there is no-one who meets both criteria.
    – Fortiter
    Commented Dec 8, 2012 at 1:57
  • @Fortiter I forgot to say that [military] should probably be the master. There are four users as of now with one very close to meeting the criteria for that tag.
    – Luke_0
    Commented Dec 8, 2012 at 2:31
  • 1
    If it comes to it Luke, you could flag one of the posts with that tag and drop a link to this post so that the SE team sees it.
    – jmort253
    Commented Dec 8, 2012 at 3:05

2 Answers 2


Synonyms of military would be soldierly, soldierlike, martial. Army would normally be the military land forces. Army is a particular section of the military. If army was to be called a synonym, so would navy, air force etc.

  • I agree with you there, but in the context of this site, there is not much difference. As to navy, air force, marines etc., It is better to respond to tags as they are created rather than preemptively. [Army] had already been created. If the situation arises that more synonyms are needed, that can be done as deemed fitting.
    – Luke_0
    Commented Jan 9, 2013 at 1:36
  • So army could not be used as a tag in other instances, such as if wanted for army of volunteers.
    – Those Legs
    Commented Jan 9, 2013 at 1:39
  • On a genealogy site, I can't see any scenario where a tag like that would be appropriate, much less necessary.
    – Luke_0
    Commented Jan 9, 2013 at 2:51
  • 6
    The location for records pertaining to army, navy, and air force would not be the same, or even in the same place. I recommend distinguishing the tags, rather than merging them, so that military is a generic tag, and army/navy/etc are more-specific tags.
    – ACProctor
    Commented Jan 11, 2013 at 9:38
  • @ACProctor I see. If [military] was just a generic tag then, do you think it would it even be necessary? It might just become redundant.
    – Luke_0
    Commented Jan 15, 2013 at 22:34
  • 1
    I think it would be more flexible to keep both as suggested above. I wouldn't like to try and predict whether some future question might be specific to the army, etc., or generically about military activities or operations.
    – ACProctor
    Commented Jan 16, 2013 at 9:13

I'd like to make a request that we revisit the tags for military records.

I was attempting to pull up all the questions with the tag because I have a question about Royal Navy records.

The search appears to redirect to showing me all the questions tagged instead.

I DO NOT WANT THIS. I want only Navy records, which are going to be quite different from Army or Air Force records. So apparently I can't search by the tag. Annoying. What's the point of having a tag if you can't search for questions tagged that way?

I would also make a case that despite what Ancestry.com does, the Draft Registration cards should NOT be tagged as military records. If I were emperor of the universe, I would tag them with or . The reason for this is simple: in the USA, men who were already in the military did NOT have to register, so if they were already serving at the time the record group was created, they will NOT be found in any of the databases that have selective service records.

  • I agree - army, navy and air-force would seem to be very distinct arms of the armed forces warranting their own tags. I think military should only be used as a catch all for when a more specific tag is not obviously applicable to a military question.
    – PolyGeo Mod
    Commented Jan 12, 2015 at 8:08
  • 1
    I still think meta.genealogy.stackexchange.com/q/1715/104 needs addressing but it obviously wasn't a popular thought.
    – user104
    Commented Jan 12, 2015 at 10:46
  • @ColeValleyGirl that's a good question -- one I had not seen before. Definitely worth thinking about.
    – Jan Murphy Mod
    Commented Jan 12, 2015 at 17:08

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .