Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Orders, decorations, and medals

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by JDBlues (talk | contribs) at 17:28, 5 July 2007 (→‎Next (higher) and Next (lower)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconOrders, decorations, and medals Project‑class
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Orders, decorations, and medals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of orders, decorations, and medals on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Orders, decorations, and medalsWikipedia:WikiProject Orders, decorations, and medalsTemplate:WikiProject Orders, decorations, and medalsOrders, decorations, and medals articles
ProjectThis page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Archive
Archives
  1. December 2006 – February 2007


Article naming question for lists

In Category:Orders, decorations, and medals of Monaco, should name of the of the article be...

  1. Orders and decorations of Monaco (which is the current name)
  2. List of orders and decorations of Monaco (add "List of" prefix)
  3. List of orders, decorations, and medals of Monaco (add "List of" prefix, and new, longer ODM name)
  4. List of Orders, Decorations, and Medals of Monaco (add "List of" prefix, and new, longer ODM name with CAPS)
Thx — MrDolomite • Talk 20:59, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
We probably have to discuss this, how we should evolve a common style of presentation for each nation's ODM (templates, articles, etc). In ideal circumstances this list should be a sort of 'contents page', enabling quick and easy access to the articles which have been (ideally) written on each individual medal. For the time being though, what about Orders, decorations, and medals of Monaco? It keeps the corporate naming style and seems to be appropriate for an overview article.
Xdamrtalk 23:56, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bringing order to Orders

As members of this project are likely aware, the family of Orders of St John is confusing. There is a good deal of chaos in their organization on Wikipedia. I thought I'd bring a proposal here (originally proposed by User:Boven who now seems to be inactive). I'd like to see the articles written and organized thusly:

  • Order of Malta(the catholic order with extended history from the beginnings to present)
The Four Main Protestant Orders
The Four non-German Commanderies of the Bailiwick of Brandenburg

I think that an organization this way would be helpful. We could also add a category such as [[Category:St John Orders]] or something like that to group them all together, as well as a possible template showing their relationships. What say ya'll?--Eva bd 19:43, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • In an effort to keep the discussion in one place, how about we do all the discussing here.--Eva bd 19:20, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scope of the WikiProject

Just was wondering if non-military awards/prizes like Oscars or Noble prize would also come under this WP? Or this WP is just for military related awards, the idea one gets from the project banner? STTW (talk) 19:07, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No they don't. This Project deals with national honours systems, ie awards/decorations for bravery, meritorious service, etc issued by the state to military or civilian personnel. It doesn't really deal with prizes and private awards.
Xdamrtalk 15:08, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Medals

Are all medals created by nations worthy of a wikipedia article? Or only medals such as the VC. Crested Penguin 09:50, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, all national medals are notable enough to have their own article here. Of course you can say more about some medals, such as the VC, than you can about others, but ideally all should have an entry.
Xdamrtalk 12:49, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks Crested Penguin 22:20, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Qualification and Service Badges

Folks, you are mis-cataloging several US Army and USAAF badges, e.g. "Auxiliary Pilot Badges", etc. Unless I'm very mistaken, this category, "Orders, Decorations, and Medals" is for awards for personal or unit behavior during service. Qualification or service badges, like pilot wings, or jump wings, or other service badges are NOT awards for behavior. They're for being qualified or assigned to certain duty-types. Therefore, these entries should be moved out of the ODM category.Maclir2001 21:09, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Remember, the Category:WikiProject Orders, Decorations, and Medals articles is an internal category used to help organize and help contributing editors find articles, not one to be used as in index into WP. You are correct, those badges are not an Order, Decoration or Medal under the military definition. We could change the name to ODMB :) Or maybe the WP:ODM#Scope should be slightly modified to be a bit broader. My personal 2c is that if it's on your chest or in your service record, it would fall under the WikiProject. — MrDolomite • Talk 01:53, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm inclined to agree—I don't see any real problem with them being dealt with here if that is what people want. The Project is the 'Orders, decorations, and medals' WikiProject but, although our main focus, this isn't necessarily all-encompassing.
Xdamrtalk 08:09, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ribbon racks

After wandering through various articles and seeing awards and decorations sections in many layouts, I decided to be WP:BOLD. So, I am looking for feedback on Robin_Olds#Awards_and_decorations and Image:Robin Olds ribbons.png and its use of mw:Extension:ImageMap. Thanks. — MrDolomite • Talk 19:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • I have been throwing around a few ideas myself re creating ribbon bars - Jack Lockett for example. Whilst I like the concept, is it possible to have the mass ribbon bar a bit smaller? It does tend to dominate the page (particular with the huge fruit salad of US ribbons and decorations). Whilst the 'Rackbuilder' tool is useful, it is really only for American forces - so perhaps a more generic template is needed to allow for consistency across nationalities. PalawanOz 03:30, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sure, any of the WP:IMAGE syntax can be used. I changed it to be 200px and centered it here. Wandering through the main website, http://www.medals.lava.pl, I found similar tools for US Cadets, Canada, Italy, and the UK. Maybe there are other websites with more comprehensive tools. — MrDolomite • Talk 04:48, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • The only thing I guess is in ensuring accuracy - particularly when it comes to the award of 'foreign awards', and in how the individual's country treats them (ie, in what order they are displayed)PalawanOz 06:19, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • I can make the ribbon bars also, so if you need a specific rack made, let me know and I can figure out how to best do it. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:58, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is quite an interesting little thing. I echo the concerns re. accuracy—this could only really be used where we had a pretty certain and precise knowledge of the decorations and medals awarded, and of course issues of precedence/order of wear, not to mention (for Commonwealth people at least) the question of whether permission was given for particular foreign awards to be worn or not. Having said this, if we can sort these things out perhaps it might be a good thing to liaise with WP:MILHIST/WP:BIO and see how they feel about adding this to infoboxes etc?

Xdamrtalk 23:23, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Armenia

I noticed form this ref that Kirk Kerkorian got Armenia's top state honour. Is anyone working on this area? This would seem a good starting point. If no one is addressing it, happy to have a go. Rgds, - Trident13 18:59, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do have a PDF file on my computer somewhere of the top decorations in the former Soviet republics that copied the "Hero" titles. I think Armenia is covered so I will look that up. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:53, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Class vs Grade

Which is more correct: "Single class order" or "Single grade order"? I see wiki articles use both and though they mean the same I'm sure one is the correct term. JRWalko 17:50, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Gallantry Medals

I've noticed that this category has been applied to a number of articles, chiefly UK but also to some Aus, Can, and US pages. This isn't part of the 'official' WP:ODM scheme of categorisation (imperfectly outlined at Wikipedia:WikiProject Orders, Decorations, and Medals/Category Policies) and I'm not sure that it is really terribly useful.

Firstly the question arises as to what exactly is a 'Gallantry Medal'. Military or Civil or both? In my experience 'Gallantry awards' typically refer to military decorations, not civil (see for example New Zealand gallantry awards and New Zealand bravery awards). Secondly we already have Category:Civil decorations and Category:Military decorations; this category seems to add little more than a layer of duplication. Thirdly, usefulness. This category as presently constituted seems to do nothing other than lump together a substantial number of articles, regardless of nationality, whether military or civil, rank/significance of award, whether defunct or not, etc, etc. I question whether such a category is remotely useful to anyone.

Any thoughts? Xdamrtalk 13:22, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think Military and Civil are enough. I personally find them too much as it is. I created an article or stub for every currently awarded Polish medal and a good majority of them are both military and civilian awards. That creates the problem of which category they should be in. Long story short the two lists are very similar. Adding another category will only dilute the number of orders in each making the articles less visible. JRWalko 16:31, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If there are no objections I will sent the category to WP:CFD within the next day or so. --Xdamrtalk 12:13, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

India General Service Medal 1895-1902

I recently created this article to fill a redlink in the siege of Malakand article, but someone might want to take a look at it as I know next to nothing about medals :) SGGH speak! 14:50, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Military cross decorations

A category which I have just noticed. I don't think that categorising medals by their shape is particularly useful, anyone think otherwise? We got rid of a few categories like this a while back (the names escape me, though I remember Category:Gold medals was one of them), this would appear to have been overlooked. Anyone object if I send this to CfD (along with Category:Gallantry Medals as above)?

Xdamrtalk 15:29, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I managed to turn up the old CfD debate - Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 January 3#Silver medals, Gold medals, Civilian cross decorations. It appears that we got rid of Category:Civilian cross decorations, but failed to notice its military counterpart.
Xdamrtalk 15:34, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would support a deletion of that category. I saw that User:MatthewSMaynard added this category to a few pages recently. I agree that it doesn't really serve a useful purpose.PalawanOz 13:04, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]


I've finally nominated both these for deletion. I don't anticipate any difficulty. --Xdamrtalk 14:17, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Separate Victoria Crosses

Hello i am posting here to ask for opinions on whether the people here think that the Victoria Cross data for recipients should be changed on the Victoria Cross article even though the separate Commonwealth Awards are technically separate awards. This problem has occured because of the awarding of the Victoria Cross for New Zealand to Willy Apiata of NZSAS. Any opinions would be welcome on the VC talk page. Thankyou Woodym555 19:50, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Next (higher) and Next (lower)

Requesting some group discussion on the correct way to handle the Next (higher) and the Next (lower) section of the Military Award Infobox. In particular, as they apply to the Australian Honours Order of Precedence(OoP). The OoP lists both current awards and legacy imperial awards - should the Infobox contain a reference only to the 'current' award, or should it accurately reflect the OoP? For example: the Star of Courage (Australia) has the Companion of the Distinguished Service Order as the next lower in the OoP, however this is a legacy award. The next current award that could be awarded to Australians is the Distinguished Service Cross (Australia). So - what should be listed as the Next (lower) in the SC Infobox - the DSO, or the DSC? PalawanOz 21:23, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Personally I've always looked at the higher and lower entries as referring to the award level rather than the Order of Precedence. I really couldn't see too much value in a higher/lower entry for Precedence, far more useful is to show which medal is awarded for more bravery or which awarded for less bravery (so to speak). I don't know what the general feeling is about this; do we like listing by award level? If so then the infobox wording could probably stand to be improved.
As far as this present question goes, I'd be inclined to omit the Imperial awards. I'd take a present-day point of view, concentrating on the medals that are being won or could be won as of now.
Xdamrtalk 21:42, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've used it to indicate what medal is worn further to the right based on the official military guidelines. The national militaries probably spent ample time devising proper procedures of wearing medals so I'd go with that. I always assumed these fields apply to currently awarded medals unless the medal in question is obsolete, then it should refer to medals from its own era. JRWalko 22:49, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


I know atleast in the US, awards that are no longer issued and/or will not have anyone wearing them on any form of duty are still listed in our OoP. (Like medals and ribbons from WWII) JDBlues 23:05, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I should perhaps say that I've only ever used these two fields when discussing military/civil decorations (ie bravery), not for any other sort of medal. --Xdamrtalk 23:11, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The info box diections state "lower – optional – for awards granted by countries or other bodies that maintain an order of precedence for decorations, the next lowest award, if any. " It does not specify that it the award must be for bravery. JDBlues 03:07, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Indeed so, this is simply my preference. I don't think that there is too much benefit from entering the higher and the lower medal in the Order of Precedence - these things usually have to be looked at in the context of the wider list. Personally I suggest that there is more value in listing the next highest and next lowest award, so that one can easily see where in the scale of bravery any particular medal comes. My reading of the infobox directions actually seems to admit both approaches, but that is as an aside. What we really ought to do is consider which approach we wish to use in medals-related articles and amend the infobox accordingly.
Xdamrtalk 13:18, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I am more for having the next higher/lower in the actual OoP rather then just awards for bravery since it provides a better "picture" of where the award falls regardless of reason of issue. It just doesn't seem very encyclopidic not to include all awards/decorations. This is especially true given that many Medals are for outstanding acheivement or meritorious service as well as bravery. JDBlues 17:28, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Orders,_decorations,_and_medals&oldid=142703448"