Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Orders, decorations, and medals: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Makfai (talk | contribs)
→‎Royal Warrants: new section
Line 168: Line 168:


{{#if:|[[User:{{{2}}}]] has|I have}} nominated [[Hero of Ukraine]] for a [[Wikipedia:Featured article review/{{#if:Hero of Ukraine/archive1|Hero of Ukraine/archive1|Hero of Ukraine/archive{{#if:||1}}}}|featured article review here]]. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets [[Wikipedia:What is a featured article?|featured article criteria]]. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are [[Wikipedia:Featured article review|here]]. [[User:Brad101|Brad]] ([[User talk:Brad101|talk]]) 17:15, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
{{#if:|[[User:{{{2}}}]] has|I have}} nominated [[Hero of Ukraine]] for a [[Wikipedia:Featured article review/{{#if:Hero of Ukraine/archive1|Hero of Ukraine/archive1|Hero of Ukraine/archive{{#if:||1}}}}|featured article review here]]. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets [[Wikipedia:What is a featured article?|featured article criteria]]. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are [[Wikipedia:Featured article review|here]]. [[User:Brad101|Brad]] ([[User talk:Brad101|talk]]) 17:15, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

== Royal Warrants ==

All awards/medals are established by way of Royal Warrant which are public documents. These RWs contain the actual 'criteria' for the award and I would suggest that it would be useful for anyone who has copies of the RWs to publish them in the page which refers to that award so we can see when the award was established and what the actual criteria are.

Revision as of 15:00, 10 January 2012

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.
ProjectThis page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.


Proposal to change Project Banner

The current project banner does not provide for article classification by quality and importance. Whilst ODM are usually, and should consistently be, tagged with one of the History Project tags (which do have quality and importance classifications), the importance to the field of ODM is often not the same as to history (which has a much broader ambit). The absence of this information also makes it difficult for us to profile articles in order to provide targetted editing effort.

I propose that the current banner be updated to incorporate the ability to categorise pages by importance, quality and project sub-area. Classification by project sub-area will require a little bit of thought. Whilst it makes sense for this to be done by country, the UK presents a special case as the Imperial system of honours and awards was extended over the Empire/Commonwealth for a siginificant period of time and is usually considered by affected countries to be a quasi-extension of their own system. My thought on this is that dual tagging would help solve this with affected pages tagged both 'United Kingdom' and 'Imperial - British Empire and Commonwealth'.

At the moment I am seeking 'in principle' consensus for the change and also welcome comments on implementation aspects. As I see it, there are two different aspects to decide - whether the change is needed and, if so, how to change it.

Cheers, AusTerrapin (talk) 01:11, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agree in principle Aus, not sure yet about the dual tagging it may need a bit of testing to see if it works sensibly. MilborneOne (talk) 17:19, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Although Im a bit late to the conversation I also agree. Perhaps looking at the Way the MILHIST project task forces to start may help. --Kumioko (talk) 20:55, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to rename category

I have proposed on WP:Cfd that Category:Recipients of the Order of Australia Medal be renamed to Category:Recipients of the Medal of the Order of Australia to reflect the correct title of the medal. AusTerrapin (talk) 18:38, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I guess it is more correct. --Oliver Nouther (talk) 22:50, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the CfD was to rename. This was effected when the CfD closed. AusTerrapin (talk) 14:18, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seeking help with a tedious project

I've started some work on List of honorary British knights and dames, in particular trying to rework it into a table format, see Talk:List of honorary British knights and dames/Temp table version draft. As a part of the process, I hope to fill in a fair amount of missing information.

If anyone has any advice about any of this, I'm all ears. And your help would be dearly appreciated. :-) --Jimbo Wales (talk) 13:42, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a look at it and fill in what I can. A good place to search for information about British Honours is the London Gazette. Cheers. --Oliver Nouther (talk) 22:53, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Recipients of the Order of the White Elephant

Category:Recipients of the Order of the White Elephant, which is under the purview of this WikiProject, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:01, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The CfD result was to rename as part of an expansion to a wider grade-based schema. Cheers, AusTerrapin (talk) 14:20, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

CfM for Knights by occupation category schema

A CfM has been raised for the Knights by Occupation category schema. This currently affects the following category pages:

Propose renaming Category:Sporting knights to Category:Sportsmen awarded knighthoods
Propose renaming Category:Cricketing knights to Category:Cricketers awarded knighthoods
Propose renaming Category:Football knights to Category:Footballers awarded knighthoods or Category:Football personalities awarded knighthoods
Nominator's rationale: Rename per sibling categories for actors and actresses. I didn't check whether everyone in the category was awarded a British knighthood but if so the modifier can be included if desired. Are You The Cow Of Pain? (talk) 17:50, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Propose merging Category:Knights by occupation to Category:Knights
Propose merging Category:British knights by occupation to Category:Knights
Nominator's rationale: Merge - not needed for the subcats. Are You The Cow Of Pain? (talk) 17:44, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The CfM is occurring here. Cheers, AusTerrapin (talk) 21:16, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

CfM result for the first three categories was to rename as follows:
Category:Sporting knights to Category:Sports players and officials awarded knighthoods
Category:Cricketing knights to Category:Cricket players and officials awarded knighthoods
Category:Football knights to Category:Football players and officials awarded knighthoods
Cheers, AusTerrapin (talk) 19:56, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm unsure this page is worth the trouble, for the following reasons:

  • It is mostly full of names of not-very-well-known people awarded CBE's, OBE's and MBE's. While it is of course marvelous that they were awarded, there is not much chance that we will ever have biographies on most of them.
  • People keep inserting new names from time to time, unsourced, and it is hard to check if these are real or just pranks
  • The page isn't particularly informative - it's just a huge list

There are several options:

  1. Deletion
  2. Refactoring to only include the "major" awards (KBE and similar)
  3. Better sourcing - but it is difficult due to the annoying way the London Gazette website works

--Jimbo Wales (talk) 20:37, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

IMO this would also apply to the rest of the Yearly New Years and Birthday Honours lists in this template Template:Honours Lists. --Kumioko (talk) 20:52, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I think it would be better to source it better. We have {{London Gazette}} which makes it a bit easier. I think the Honours list as an entity is notable, each individual honours list is well covered and I don't see it clashing with our notability criteria. Just because it is annoying to maintain does not mean it should be deleted. (otherwise I would love to see half the footballers on my watchlist deleted ;) Woody (talk) 20:56, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"review" needed

Hi all.
I have just made my first major article here on Wikipedia (I have made a lot of minor edits and so on, on my old account), and I would appreciate that some of you guys check it out and give some feedback.. Here it is: Royal Order of the Omujwaara Kondo
Skibden (talk) 17:33, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category discussion notification commons:Category:Orders and Decorations has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

-- This also effects a significant number of related categories which have been listed as part of the same discussion. The intent is to assist in standardising the category schema and align it against that in use here on the english Wikipedia based on the projects adopted category schema. Contributions to the discussion on commons would be appreciated. Cheers, AusTerrapin (talk) 14:26, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Légion d'honneur

FYI, Légion d'honneur has been requested to be renamed. 76.66.200.95 (talk) 19:52, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Medal?

What is Iain Duncan Smith wearing below the poppy? [1] Kittybrewster 14:43, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a Royal British Legion badge. MilborneOne (talk) 21:04, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Class and importance criteria

I suggest that the project should document, for guidance, criteria for rating the importance and class of articles. Class can probably follow other projects' precedents but importance needs to transcend national viewpoints (for this reason one project - WPMLHIST - has not used importance. For example, is a major award of a small country more important than minor awards of a major country; how do we guage the international repute of an award? Projects WPMILHIST and WPHERTS have documented criteria. Folks at 137 (talk) 19:47, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We didnt have a importance and class system in this project was it discussed before you User:Flyguy33 changed the templates and related pages? MilborneOne (talk) 23:31, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Not aware that I've changed any "templates and related pages"; don't know how. What are you referring to? Puzzled. Folks at 137 (talk) 12:14, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Apology it was User:Flyguy33 that changed the banner and other pages in the last week. MilborneOne (talk) 21:42, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, sorry about just going ahead and doing this. I actually just noticed this conversation, clearly wasn't paying attention, but I believe in always having ratings and importance scales in project banners. --Flyguy33 (talk) 16:21, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, ratings have remained and are being used, despite the earlier discussions. If they are to remain, I restate my suggestion that criteria should be established, with the caveats. A case in point is the Norwegian War Cross. Its importance is rated as "low", presumably thru Norway not being a major world or regional power (debate elsewhere!), but the award is Norway's top one for military valour. The quality ratings are safer ground and can focus attention where it's needed. Folks at 137 (talk) 11:15, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Highest award in Afghanistan

According to http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/06/05/afghanistan.gates/

Karzai awarded Gates the Wazir Akbar Khan medal, the highest governmental award. It's named after an Afghan leader who fought against Soviet forces after the 1979 invasion of Afghanistan.

I am unable to find any mention of this Wazir Akbar Khan or the medal named after him. There is an article on Wazir Akbar Khan, but it is currently a redirect to Wazir Akbar Khan (Kabul), an article about a Kabul suburb. The namesake of that suburb, Akbar Khan, dates back to the first half of the 19th century and the First Anglo-Afghan War, so that isn't the man after whom the medal is named. The article on Wazir suggests it could be a reference to a Vizier or to the region of Waziristan.

I mention all these details in the hope that someone can create an article about this highest award in Afghanistan that was given to Gates. 68.165.77.25 (talk) 19:32, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello all, the articles on List of Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross recipients (C), List of Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross recipients (A) and List of Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross recipients (U), which are related to this project, are currently undergoing Military history project A-class reviews. Any editor who is interested is invited to help review them. The reviews can be found here: WP:MHPR, while the Military history project A-class criteria can be found here: WP:MHA. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 01:53, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Chryssoun Aristion Andrias"

Is there already a article on this Greek award? I see the Cross of Valour's greek name is Arisition Andrias - is it related? GraemeLeggett (talk) 20:05, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to be translated as the the Bravery Gold Medal of Greece but nearly all searches bring it up as an American award!File:Chryssoun Aristion Andrias Streamer.gif and [2] ? MilborneOne (talk) 21:24, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That looks like the US Army's "preferred translation". Looking here [3], it seems that the transliteration is close, and there is a Gold Cross listed. If you have more sources on this award and can expand the article, that would be awesome. EricSerge (talk) 21:56, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I was intrigued because I saw it had been awarded to the 3rd US Infantry Division for the Korean war. I'm trying to work out what the "Chryssoun" bit means.GraemeLeggett (talk) 22:42, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Chrysoun Aristion Andrias means Golden Medal for Bravery.--46.246.178.119 (talk) 10:21, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People who declined a British honour

The category Category:People who declined a British honour was suggested for creation at WP:AFC/R. I'm not quite sure whether that category should be created - on the one hand, there is already a pretty good list, declining a British honour is hardly a defining feature for the individuals concerned, and there are various unrelated reasons to decline one; on the other hand, we do categorize those who accept accept a British honour, and it seems inconsistent if being proposed for one and declining it is seen as less significant than being proposed for one and accepting it. Thoughts? Huon (talk) 00:02, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I"m concerned about that pretty good list (although I agree with you that it is "pretty good"). Much of it is unreferenced, and I fear that some of it sounds like urban legend, for example the claim that "Henry Lascelles, 5th Earl of Harewood, GCVO (in 1922, as he thought marquessates tended to die out more quickly than earldoms)". There is no reference for that, and no mention of it in the article about him. I fear that a category would simply further spread the errors, if there are any.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 07:50, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of World Orders of Knighthood and Merit for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article World Orders of Knighthood and Merit is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World Orders of Knighthood and Merit until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Decstop (talk) 19:54, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Structure

Note: This one was posted at Talk:Venerable Order of Saint John but because none noticed it I posted here.

In the section structure we should include who are the high officials. (The Sovereign Head, The Grand Prior, The Lord Prior of St. John etc.) In fact I know only who is The Sovereign Head (Elizabeth II) and even if The Grand Prior and the others have not an article, if someone knows their names he/she should include them. Thanks!--46.246.166.248 (talk) 12:59, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Long tranches of decorative icons in military bios

I do wonder whether it's appropriate that short articles on military personnel have huge lists of coloured icons representing their medals, rather than perhaps linking to a centralised page that displays these icons. Not to decry their achievements, it seems to overbalance the informational aspect of WP's bio articles. Examples: Charles R. Bailey, Charles H. Jacoby, Jr., and Charles J. McDonnell, among an increasing number. It does make it like a colourfest, which might undermine the sense of dignity and interest in what the person actually achieved as a member of the armed forces. Does the WikiProject have a policy on this? Tony (talk) 09:45, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This was discussed recently at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject Military history/Archive 104#.22Medal_bar.22 in biographical articles a lot of people didnt like it but I am not sure it came to any conclusions. Some of the decorations are not really notable but because they have an image and because it can be done they are all listed! MilborneOne (talk) 11:02, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article review for Order of Canada

I have nominated Order of Canada for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Brad (talk) 01:00, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article review for Hero of Ukraine

I have nominated Hero of Ukraine for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Brad (talk) 17:15, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Royal Warrants

All awards/medals are established by way of Royal Warrant which are public documents. These RWs contain the actual 'criteria' for the award and I would suggest that it would be useful for anyone who has copies of the RWs to publish them in the page which refers to that award so we can see when the award was established and what the actual criteria are.