User talk:bahamut0013/Archive 8

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9


The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVIII (April 2009)

The April 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:27, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Re:expeditionary strike groups vs amphibious ready groups

How about that! It does look like we're going back to the old ways again. I was wondering if you could update the info. on the amphibious ready group and expeditionary strike group articles. On another subject, good move on your part in regard to the "U.S. Marine List" thing. If some one come challenges the move (which in this case would be an outsider) by questioning the "notable" issue, then we'll get the group together to post our reasoning for doing so. Check out the Sanchez article in the "military" section of "Somos Primos": [1] Semper Fi. Tony the Marine (talk) 22:42, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Re:Admin question

I'll look into it tomorrow and let you know. Tony the Marine (talk) 08:22, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

  • Sorry that it took me so long to answer, so many things came up lately. It seems to me that the "registered" user (Dryamaka) is on the verge of being definitely blocked. If I were one of those admins. who is already involved in disputes with him I would have done it already. You can make a request in this nature to any admin. (including me) by presenting a well evidenced case. I think that User: R.Baley is a good candidate for this since he is already is involved and seems more then willing to do so.

In regard to the non-registered user IPS's, present concrete evidence linking all parties to the same edits thereby proving that they are all related and they can be blocked as sockpuppets. The thing about IPS, is that their blocks maybe temporary (someone may come around 36 hours and undo the blocking) just for the simple reason that they are IPS's. I for one, am against having IPS's or non-registered users editing Wikipedia, since I believe that they are responsible of the majority of vandalism that goes on in Wikipedia. I sternly believe that Wikipedia will never ever become a reliable source until it requires that all users register. Tony the Marine (talk) 18:18, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I think there is strong behavioral evidence that Dryamaka was using Special:Contributions/ after his account was blocked earlier this week (but, ironically, after the block had expired) and possibly also Special:Contributions/ The first IP address is a workplace and the second one may be a home account. The best way to handle this situation would be to report the collection of users at WP:SPI (listing Dryamaka as the suspected puppeteer) and request a checkuser investigation (indicating block evasion as the reason for the request, as contributed during Dryamaka's recent block). The checkuser might confirm a connection (or not). I don't have time to post the request right now, but can do so later today if you don't get to it first. I don't think the situation is sufficiently egregious at this point to block any of the accounts based solely on behavioral evidence of a connection, but all three accounts have been disruptive and may continue to accumulate warnings. --Orlady (talk) 13:32, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dryamaka. I expect that you could add additional evidence. --Orlady (talk) 03:14, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

MTV armor

Hi, I am working on a book on modern body armor and would like to possibly use your layout picture of the USMC MTV armor. Would you allow me to use it?


Martin J. Brayley

(PS I served with UK 3 Commando Brigade in Iraq 1991 and worked with the USMC a number of times) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ww11tommy (talkcontribs) 13:46, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Robert - many thanks indeed.
Credit will be;
Picture courtesy Corporal Robert P Lemiszki Jr., USMC.
Semper FI!
Martin J. Brayley —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ww11tommy (talkcontribs) 11:40, 14 May 2009 (UTC)


It should be up and running, send away. --Dandvsp (talk) 23:32, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Ha, I forgot to confirm it yesterday. --Dandvsp (talk) 12:05, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your support

Unfortunately, my RFA was closed recently with a final tally of 75½/38/10. Though it didn't succeed, I wanted to thank you for your support and I hope I can count on it in the future. Even though it didn't pass, it had a nearly 2 to 1 ratio of support and I am quite encouraged by those results. I intend to review the support, oppose, and neutral !votes and see what I can do to address those concerns that were brought up and resubmit in a few months. If you would like to assist in my betterment and/or co-nominate me in the future, please let me know on my talk page. Special thanks go to Schmidt, MICHAEL Q., TomStar81, and henrik for their co-nominations and support. — BQZip01 — talk

And Semper Fi...


Hello, Bahamut0013. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Pattern_of_disruption_by_PirateSmackK . Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 12:25, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm wondering how you could be an involved party :/ figured it out//eVula's talk page PirateSmackKArrrr! 12:41, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

PirateSmackKArrrr! 19:41, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Wall of Honor

I have inducted you into my "Wall of Honor". In the "Wall of Honor" I honor those Wikipedians which I consider among the best and which I have had the privilege of interacting with. Please accept this "plaque" which you my place in your user page or wherever you place your Wiki awards. Semper Fi. Tony the Marine (talk) 18:27, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Wall of Honor


In regard to: "Have you gotten to look at those admin moves I noted on the 5th? Those two don't look like they've been done."

If you are referring to User: and User: I thought that an admin. directly involved in their case would have taken care of the situation by now. I was involved with some other issues, but if you give me a direct request to proceed with a block, then I will. If it is something else that may have slipped my mind (me estoy poniendo viejo), let me know. Tony the Marine (talk) 18:27, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

You are right, I did miss it. I guess some other messages popped up on my talk page about the same time. I'll look into them tomorrow after my grand-daughters birthday party. Anyway, I want you to check this out: [2]. Tony the Marine (talk) 05:45, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
I'll post it for you to read:
You requested:
1. "USMC War Memorial" be moved to "Marine Corps War Memorial". Done.
2. "2nd Battalion 9th Marines (United States)" be moved once more to "2nd Battalion 9th Marines". Done.
Tony the Marine (talk) 04:18, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

USMC History

I been working on a theme for the USMC history topic. I been reading a lot about the formation of the Marine Corps, before and after, the Continental Navy-era. Even some reciting information on the individual colonial state navies and its marines serving aboard. With all this sources had my disposal, I decided to distribute its (3) types of histories to Wikipedia. I also been creating a template for the USMC history.[see RekonDog's USMC History].

Although it may be too defined, I decided to break up the Marine history into three categories, after I discovered that there are 3-entities of military history. The categories of history consist of: institution, operations, and organizations. To top it off, provide it as a chronological piece as well, as some other as done so. It came to my conclusion that there are a lot of many cool things that evolved throughout the Marine Corps and reading all these books and sources left me with the desire to construct a better historical record on Wikipedia...after reading the uncompleted projects on the USMC Portal. This is however not a completed form...I was just experimenting.

But what do you think about his approach? Do you have any suggestions or comments? Feel free to give me your input. I may consider doing without the 'months' while I chop up the paragraphs I submitted onto my user pages. I won't submit anything until I get all the correct info together. Nothing is completely consolidated yet...just bunch of info that I deliberately threw on here at its last disposal of the moment.

Also, I created an article on American Colonial Marines, does that 'title' suit well?

RekonDog (talk) 00:13, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

User page deletions

I was wondering...I have a lot of "ghost pages" that I don't need there a way to delete my own pages from my user page?
RekonDog (talk) 15:13, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Not Bahamut0013 but.. For user subpages, the user can add {{Db-u1}} to each page to get it deleted. There's a table of these at {{Speedy deletion templates}} for other similar templates if needed (or search for Db-user). -Fnlayson (talk) 00:23, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Gasp! I have a talk page stalker?! Or maybe you have a stalker yourself, Rekon. :P
Fnlayson is 100% correct, that tag will add the page to a category, and an admin will be long shorty to verify that YOU were the one who tagged it and delete it if all seems to be in order. Or you can simply ask an admin, such as user:ERcheck or User:Marine 69-71. This same message will be added to your talk page. bahamut0013wordsdeeds 08:57, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Just a drive by post. :) I have tagged several of my user pages recently for deletion so it was fresh. -Fnlayson (talk) 21:36, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Medal of Honor lists

I just wanted to let you know that I just submitted 2 Medal of Honor lists as Featured List Candidates. The 2 I submitted where for the Philippine-American War and the Occupation of Vera Cruz. I am currently working on the Vietnam war list now and should have that one done in a few days. After that most of the rest still need a lot of articles created so it may be a little while before I get another one to FLC. My goal is to eventually get all the MOH Lits to FL status. Just wanted to let you know.--Kumioko (talk) 20:57, 27 May 2009 (UTC)


Were you going for a diff other than this or just pulling out a diff where all the elements of the conversation were present? I can't see anything recent that didn't crop up before the mentorship started (and therefore that was dealt with at ANI). Ironholds (talk) 10:30, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Are you joking? Have you seen the rent on n-space these days? I'm a mere student, I can't afford that! I've got a hammerbedsit, that's about it. Ironholds (talk) 10:24, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Commandant list

Thanks for the edits you made to the List of Commandants. I am going to submit the List of Medal of Honor recipients for the Vietnam War, Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps and the Marine Corps Brevet Medal recipients next (although that one still needs a bit of work and some articles created) if you want to take a look at those as well.--Kumioko (talk) 11:11, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks I will take a look at those as well. I agree that they walk a line between article and list status and I agree that they could easily become articles, but in order to do that they need a lot more content and the rules for featured articles are a lot more stringent than lists. At least that was my thought process anyway. I appreciate any help you can provide and I understand that priorities are different in the sand box.--Kumioko (talk) 17:21, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the help with the Commandant list. BTW I created a sample of a new Commandant article with more emphasis on the article aspect here and I am going to suggest changing the one currently in FLC to be moved to Commandants of the Marine Corps. --Kumioko (talk) 17:48, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Template:Comparative military officer ranks

in Template talk:US officer ranks you commented you were looking for a way to have even and uniform columns and rows in template:military navigation. i commented there, that my template Template:Comparative military officer ranks is nicely formatted. also, i am trying to add this template to Template:US officer ranks. my arguements are on the template talk page, but basically, my suggested template is easy to read and comprehend and presents the information in a different and informative manner. diremarc (talk) 23:59, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XXXIX (May 2009)

The May 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:09, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Portal page balance

I too try to work out balance when it gets way off. Unfortunately, the balance is also dependent on the screen size you are viewing it on. So, what may be on balance for you, might be off balance for me, or visa versa. I put my mark of support for your suggestion on the Portal talk page. — ERcheck (talk) 16:29, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

image request done

I updated a navy & air force version of the Vietnam Distinguished Service Order. --Dandvsp (talk) 16:12, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

John L. Estrada

Hi! I've seen photos of him having 10 awards of the Good Conduct Medal, but twelve? Plus, why did you revert the Navy Unit Commendation ribbon from 4 back to 3? If you google "John L. Estrada" under "images", you will see a photo that clearly shows three stars on that ribbon, but I ain't seen a photo with twelve awards of the GCM. claudevsq (talk) 12:13, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Carlton W. Kent

Hi! on his latest "official photo", taken a year or so ago, when he received his second award of the Legion of Merit, he has got 9 awards of the Good Conduct Medal, how can he possibly have 11 now? On Bestwick grave photo, it IS a silver and a bronze star, just as with his Sea Service Deployment ribbon, where also two bronze stars are missing. They don't always have enough stars for both uniforms, there are enough examples. Greetings, claudevsq (talk) 12:13, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

The day I got served.

Well, since you didn't seem to agree with my statement about MCMAP, I'm going to expose you for what you are: a POG. The day I get corrected by a POG is a sad day in the world of the Marine Corps. Don't be offended because I speak the truth about the Marine Corps and the lies that recruiters feed you. Come spend a day with me in a grunt battalion and we'll see how your outlook on your beloved Marine Corps will change. And way to go, a corporal still after 6 years in and you're a POG? Way to go. I guess you didn't do your MCIs so you could pick up, or suck enough of your first sergeant's cock. You're a dildo. Congratulations on signing up during a time of war just to edit articles about the Marine Corps on wikipedia. Pretty bitch move if you ask me. You're a fucking boot as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doodoobear1856 (talkcontribs) 00:32, 19 June 2009


Just so we're on the same page then, you're less of a man. The Marine Corps should've been DISBANDED COMPLETELY after World War II. We do the exact same thing the Army does, and act like we're hardasses, which clearly by you taking offense to a comment posted on the internet, is not the case. Go back to your air-conditioned office and push my DD214 thru you fucking POG. And MCMAP, once again, I've seen better karate skills by 7 year olds in a FREE class at the YMCA. I'm sorry I'm not acting like a gentleman on a web based encyclopedia edited by nerds sitting in the internet center in Kuwait. I'm glad that you're collecting combat pay to sit over in Kuwait (or Al Asad because apparently there's a war still going on at THAT base that I didn't know about) on your "combat deployment" to edit wikipedia on your NIPR net that you have running straight to your 2 man air conditioned room. I bet you feel real fucking proud that you collect the same amount of pay as the ones doing the hard work like the grunts. Rest assured knowing that you weren't man enough to take on a real job in the Marine Corps. Sleep tight knowing that some poor fucking boot Lance 03 is on fucking post for you 6 on 6 off so your fucking POG ass doesn't have to. You fucking guinea wop, greaseball, guido, new york piece of shit. Go back to your bumfilled, AIDS infested, cesspool of a state. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doodoobear1856 (talkcontribs) 17:00, 19 June 2009

Pogue & USN page

While I don't disagree that there's no good reason to include a 'See Also' for pogue on the USN page, the reason you gave - totally irrelevant to this article (the Navy doesn't even have infantry to use this term on the non-infantry types) - is incorrect, since people in the Navy use the term pogue (which is actually mentioned in the pogue article). Just because you are in the Marine Corps and are familiar with Marine Corps usage doesn't mean that there aren't perfectly legitimate and correct usages that you are unfamiliar with. CruiserBob (talk) 04:53, 19 June 2009 (UTC)


If more uncivility by the mentioned user comes up, you just give me the word and I'll handle it. Semper Fi. Tony the Marine (talk) 07:13, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

  • Done! Tony the Marine (talk) 20:04, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
    • He is not a "Marine". A United States Marine would never talk about the United States Marine Corps and/or about a fellow Marine the way he did. We who are Marines are proud of our brotherhood and of being members or of having been members of the Great Green Machine. Tony the Marine (talk) 05:38, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
Judging by his tone and demeaner I highly doubt that he actually is a Marine. ANY real Marine who completed basic training would know that the Marine Corps and Army fill 2 completely different roles and although they both have an infantry they are vastly different. The Marine Corps is an Amphibious and Expeditionary force in readiness, in other words they take the beach and then hand it over to the army to maintain and proceed to the next target. That is why the Marine Corps vehicles have fording abilities and the army does not. By the time the army gets there the bridges are built and they don't have to get their feet wet.--Kumioko (talk) 03:42, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Commandant of the Marine Corps

Just thought you would like to know that it made it through and is now a featured list. Next up Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps.--Kumioko (talk) 03:45, 21 June 2009 (UTC)


I've tried to find more information about Archibald Sommers — though I do admit that with the limited time I have right now, I didn't do an exhaustive search. If you have access to reference information and can point me to it, I'd be happy to work on enhancing the article. — ERcheck (talk) 04:23, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Backing out my change

USCG Pales in comparison? Do you know the WW1 and WW2 history of this branch and what they(we) did for the USMC during Guadalcanal? Do you know we're in Iraq too? I understand you backing out the change due to lack of citing. But to delete the section because of your undereducated opinion is disrespectful. Semper Paratus. Remember the flag at Mt.Surbachi? It came from USCG ship. (talk) 03:45, 27 June 2009 (UTC) LT N.


A person who has never before been involved in the management of the "List of U.S. Marines" has expressed him/herself here: Talk:List of notable United States Marines#Remove edit warning. Since you have been actively involved in the management of this list, please express your opinion. Tony the Marine (talk) 20:17, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps

I wanted to let you know that the Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps is now up to FL status. Thanks for your help with that and the Commandants article I am working on the Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps now and should have it ready soon but any help you can provide would be greatly appreciated. --Kumioko (talk) 13:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I agree that the List of active United States Marine Corps aircraft squadrons list would be a logical one to get to FL status. Since I haven't been an active editor on it though they may give me some push back if I submit it alone, do you mind if I put you as a nominator also, you have done a lot more too it than I have and I don't think I shoudl take credit for all you have done for it? I do notice a few things that I think should be adjusted. I will submit though and you should see it in FLC in the next day or 2 after I read through it and fix the minor things I noticed. --Kumioko (talk) 14:57, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, I was just working on some other changes to it as well but I will hold off for now until I talk to himn. There are quite a number of broken links mostly due to a recent revamping of the USMC site where the links where pointed. --Kumioko (talk) 16:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
I wanted to let you know that I submitted the Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps article for FLC. If you happen to get some time please feel free to check it out. I admit the references are a little lean but hopefully it will do ok. --Kumioko (talk) 04:33, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Happy 4th

Hey my amigo, just dropping by to wish you and your comrades a Happy 4th of July. Tony the Marine (talk) 05:36, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps

Thanks for the help! --Kumioko (talk) 12:50, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User page indexing

Please note Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User page indexing has been repurposed from the standard RFC format it was using into a strraw poll format. Please re-visit the RFC to ensure that your previous endorsement(s) are represented in the various proposals and endorse accordingly.

Notice delivery by xenobot 13:57, 8 July 2009 (UTC)


Thanks, No I didn't use yours I have one in note pad that has all the ribbons in the correct order and I use it and just chop out what I don't want. I didn't know you had this but I will probably use it in the future because you have some that I do not. --Kumioko (talk) 17:35, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Alt text for the Medal of Honor image

Good Day to you young man I hope thing are going well for you these days. Not too hot I hope. Anyway there is a new developement in WP land to add alt text to images so that if someone is using a device (such as they cannot see) they will have some nice text to read or be read instead of an image. So with that in mind I am trying to direct this new movement to place an alternate text in the image (specifically in the case of common or difficult to describe ones like military ribbons, patches ranks etc) so that there is consistency to it and also potentially allow a BOT or AWB to automate the placement of said text. I have added a recommended alt text to describe the Navy and Marine Corps medal of Honor as such "A light blue neck ribbon with a gold star shaped medallion hanging from it. The ribbon has is nearly the shape of a bowtie with 13 white stars in the center of the ribbon.". Please let me know what you think.--Kumioko (talk) 19:02, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XL (June 2009)

The June 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:23, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Michael P. Murphy

Good day to you Marine. I am having a problem with this article. I cannot seem to get the table below the ribbons to come out right could you please assist? --Kumioko (talk) 19:31, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again for the help and thanks for explaining the wikitable formatting thing. I wasn't aware of that. --Kumioko (talk) 13:27, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks again, also I think he might rate the GWOT Expeditionary medal as well based on the criteria for it (specifically since he was killed in combat and received the MOH). What do you think? --Kumioko (talk) 16:03, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Pappy Boyington

I went out and made some chanegs to Pappy boyington to start building it up to good article status and I noticed that you made some chanegs recently and as I mentioned I am going to try and get it up to good article status and any help you would like to provide would be appreciated. --Kumioko (talk) 16:25, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks I appreciate it I will keep that in mind. I added a couple things to his (row titles and Naval aviaor wings). --Kumioko (talk) 16:41, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Good to know thanks. I also think that he might be missing a couple ribbons but I need to check a couple sources. He was a POW so he might rate that ribbon but I don't know when that started and the Black Sheep squadron got a couple of awards around the time he was there so he may rate those as well. It borders on beingn original research, but, by showing the dates he was there and the reference showing the unit received the award I think I can get around that. Whay do you think?--Kumioko (talk) 16:55, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, regarding the POW medal you have a good point. The other that I think is missing is the Presidential Unit citation that the Black Sheep go for that time frame. If you look at the black sheep article and then at the references it mentions it. Thats what I was going to use is that, in combination with the awards manual stating the unit and dates from the Marine Corps awards site and a note stating that with his dates and period of service with that unit and these references he also should have received that. It will be a while before I get his article up to speed though I need to add a lot of info and I need to clean up, remove and reword a lot of whats there because theres a good bit of POV and cut and posting form the USMC sites. Hopefully by 1 August or so I will haev it submitted as a GAC.--Kumioko (talk) 17:10, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Portal for the Medal of Honor

I was thinking about creating a portal for the Medal of Honor and since you are active with a couple (the Marine Corps portal for sure) I wanted to ask your opinon if you thought that would be useful? Aside from the general things (portal navigator and commons navigator) I was going to add sections for biographies, pictures, lists, articles that still need to be created and maybe articles that need to be expanded. --Kumioko (talk) 12:47, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, see I knew there was a good reason I asked. Know that you mention it I think your right regarding the shape and number of the articles that could be featured. Maybe once I get a few more cleaned up I will revisit the idea. I have only recently started dabbling in GA's and Featured pictures and I have yet to have much success with DYK's or topics but I am planning to look into those again as well to build up the MOH content. Right now there are several Featured lists, no featured articles (but a couple that I think have the potential (Charles Lindbergh, Eddie Rickenbacher, Teddy Roosevelt and a few others) but still need some work. I have 2 MOH recipients in GA review now but it takes at least a month typically before anyone looks at them, Charles Lindbergh just got out of Peer review and I am going to submit that up for the next level review, a couple more (Eddie Rickenbacher and Teddy) for peer review, etc, etc. My goal is to have at least a dozen articles to GA or better by the end of the year and all the lists (except maybe the ACW), still got a lot of work to do so we'll see.--Kumioko (talk) 13:25, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks sounds like a plan. --Kumioko (talk) 13:45, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Re:National archives

Hey, my friend how's it going? I'm working with the family of Teofilo Marxuach to have the government commemorate the 100th anniversary of what is considered the first shot of World War I on behalf of the United States and which was fired in Puerto Rico. It requires a visit to the National Archives this fall and I will request info. on Bea. By the way check this out: El Boricua, Semper Fi, Tony the Marine (talk) 04:41, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello! Thank you for your help with the mystery of Bea Arthur having been a Marine. You seem to have just added this text:
"However,service record at National Archives under Bernice Frankel/Bernice Aurthur service # 755 043 shows service 3/26/1943-9/26/1945 with the Marine Corps Women's Reserve, mostly in the motor pool at Marine Corps Air Station,Cherry Point,NC where she achieved the rank of Staff Sergeant."
Was it in fact you that posted this? If so, may we ask you a few questions about it? I feel like the bottom of this mystery is close to being gotten to, and you seem to have access to the evidence that could crack the case. Chrisrus (talk) 05:49, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
note: I did not post it. -baha


...for your help with the B. Arthur mystery. I will follow in the direction you've pointed, and hope to see the bottom of this gotten to hopefully this fall. Chrisrus (talk) 23:22, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps

I wanted to thank you for your help with this article and let you know that it is now a featured list. --Kumioko (talk) 14:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Merritt A. Edson

Good Day good Sir, Merritt Edson is almost through Good Article review but it could still use a good read through from someone other than me for copyedit. If you don't mind could you read through and see if I missed anything? I think its almost done and with a little luck we can add this to the list of Good Articles by weeks end. --Kumioko (talk) 20:31, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Marine Corps Security Force Regiment

In your email to me you stated that my edit "appears to have added incorrect information..." :

I presume you are referring to the "Regiment" vice "Battalion" designation for this organization. Apparently this redesignation is recent as the regiment's official website still uses "battalion" in several places. Furthermore, the logo on the Marine Corps Security Force Regiment page clearly states "Battalion" and is labeled "MCSFB" vice "MCSFR".

My other edit to this page involved changing "special forces" (SF) to "special operations forces" (SOF), which is the correct terminology in US military usage since the former term properly applies to a combat arms branch of the US Army (i.e., US Army Special Forces).

I concede on the organizational title issue as confirmed by the USMC official website (with the aforementioned caveat). However, the logo and its label are then incorrect and need updating. As to the "SF" vice "SOF" issue, the redirect for both terms is the same so I maintain that the text should read "special operations forces". In addition to demonstrating correct terminology in reference to "special operations forces" it would serve to clarify that there is no ambiguity re what units are indeed "Special Forces". CobraDragoon (talk) 06:46, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Your email to me stated, "Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles... Your edits appear to be vandalism..." : My edits appear to be vandalism! How is it malicious destruction or defacement to, in good faith, attempt an honest correction or improvement to an article? I appreciate your enthusiasm and desire for perfection but how about a little tact and "brotherly love"? As to particulars re this page, I believe I attempted three edits, to wit: 1. I attempted a good faith effort in correcting (albeit erroneously) the listing for "Marine Corps Security Force Regiment" as discussed above. It would seem that since this is a list of battalions vice regiments that the regiment should not appear on this list at all. Instead, the list should include the regiment's organic battalions as indicated on the regiment's official website. 2. I attempted a good faith effort in adding the Weapons Training Battalion located at MCB Quantico. Noticing that the Weapons & Field Training Battalions for MCRD Parris Island and MCB Camp Pendleton were listed I presumed this was appropriate. (For that matter the Weapons Training Battalion at MCB Camp Lejeune is also not listed.) So, since these battalions do indeed exist (per the official websites for their respective bases) how do you justify your accusation of apparent vandalism? 3. I attempted a good faith effort to "clean up" the battalion listings for MCRD Parris Island by using the common and, quite proper, truncated abreviations for 2nd and 3rd as 2d and 3d (see II MEF & 3D Marine Div. web pages for examples) in order to make each entry one line. Since you are apparently the self appointed "duty expert" on all things Marine, then by all means, "Carry on, Corporal". But remember, some of us were Marines before you were a gleam in your grandfather's eye. Semper Fi, Mac! (signed, a salty old retired Mustang, Officer of Marines) CobraDragoon (talk) 07:41, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Check this out

The "United States" section of the August issue of "Somos Primos": [3], Semper Fi mi brother, Tony the Marine (talk) 06:47, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Misunderstanding about the service number links

I think there was a bit of a misunderstanding about the service number link in each navbox for the separate branches. There is a main article (that you correctly linked in the military navbox) and then that article is subdivided into sections for each branch of service. The links in the individual navboxes for the branches were designed to take an interested party directly to the section about that branch of service. So, this was done very much on purpose. It is quite like having each branch's navbox link to their particular badge or award article (which I also have been involved in). Also, a reader may not know to go to the main page about the United States miltiary to see additional links. Having them on each military branh's navboc widely increases visability of this article.

Its been a pet project of mine and I am hoping for FA status after I add citations and more references. Also great to see another military member on Wikipedia, I myself am a Lieutenant Commander in the USNR. "Whenever we need to go somewhere, you Navy boys always give us a ride" -A Few Good Men.

Hope this clears it up. Have a great day. -OberRanks (talk) 20:48, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I forgot to add that the sections on Army and Air Force service numbers have become so large that they may be split off into their own articles in which case a separate navbox link would be required in any case. Thanks for you understanding and hopefully you enjoyed the article. -OberRanks (talk) 20:56, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm well aware of the piped links to the article sections. My point is that it is the same basic concept with five variations repeated five times. The main variation between each branch is the method in how they divvy the numbers up and issued them, but the concept and use of a service number remains uniform. You compared it to the articles for badges, but the badge articles are seperated because each branch has a whole slew of unique badges that they don't really share at all, thus making it logical for each branch to get its own page. I understand you want to increase visibility, but that's not the purpose of a navigational box; the purpose is to link articles that are closely related. If you look at each of the five boxes, there really aren't any links that are duplicated on each; that's the purpose of having Template:US military navbox‎: to consolidate those general-purpose US military articles instead of linking to them five times from five navboxes. I also reject the argument that it would be a navigational aid to a reader. Say, for example, a reader is on the article United States Air Force and suddenly want to read about service numbers... boom, it's on the main navbox. If the reader is on a more specific article, then Service number (United States) would be linked in the prose if it is relevant (and if it's not, then the reader can use the search bar to satisfy a pretty random desire).
To sum up my argument, I just don't see the point in linking it in each navbox when it is generic to each branch. bahamut0013wordsdeeds 05:12, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see now that the main military navbox is also visible in each of the service branches article pages. If thats the case, then you're absolutely correct. It should only be in the main navbox. Feel free to change it back if you like. Hope you enjoyed that article, BTW, its really become quite something to behold. -OberRanks (talk) 15:19, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd appreciate it if you could take care of that for me, I'd like to avoid the appearance of edit warring if possible. I'm glad we could come to an amenable consensus; I've far too often been aggressively challenged over every damn minor disagreement and misunderstanding. I'll commend your willingness to listen and flexible attitude, a very refreshing quality!
I'll also note that since you've begun breaking the article out into individual articles for each branch, it DOES make sense to link them in each navbox.
And I did read the article, but I avoided commenting on it because it wasn't really relevant to the issue at hand. It was interesting because it's one aspect of military life I've never encountered at all, with most Marines that were issued them having since retired by the time I came around. I would, however, avoid referring to service numbers in fiction and pop culture... this tends to attract insane amounts of trivia. Cheers! bahamut0013wordsdeeds 16:08, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm breaking apart the article as we speak (type) into separate articles for each branch of service as well as the main article which will be a "catch-all" for key points basic to all service numbers used by the U.S. military. That kind of changes things. I will make sure these navboxes get updated. With the articles broken apart like this it will also make it easier to focus on very specific references and citations and make these articles look very professional. Hope you enjoy the end product. -OberRanks (talk) 16:55, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Armed Forces Reserve Medal

Hey hows it going. Someone left a message on the talk page of this article and after doing a little research it looks as though knownone who has this medal has a device. I assume that logic for this device was never created bu wanted to ask you before I ask for the change. Unfortunately this medal can get rather confusing when it comes to devices (hourglass, M and numerals for multiple awards) so it may be difficult to make it cover every possibility but I think we can get close. --Kumioko (talk) 20:12, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Not to intrude on someone else's talk page, but you can't this medal without a device. It must be issued with either an hourglass or an M device. I myself have it with the M device and will be the hourglass in 2 and a half years. -OberRanks (talk) 20:26, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
No problem at all and your absolutely right, thats sorta the point I was trying to make. I got the hour glass and the M myself, i'll get the 2 in a couple years. --Kumioko (talk) 00:22, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Award verification

I took a look at the File:James L. Jones 2.jpg and your right the red stripe is too wide for the Marine Corps Recruiting Ribbon, I also think it may be the Military Order of Italy. --Dandvsp (talk) 00:20, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree that it is not the recruiting ribbon, partally because its too wide and because of its position. I will see if I can find out for you this week some time. --Kumioko (talk) 00:37, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Another thing is what I think what Kumioko is talking about, because of its position. Why would he a General make such a big mistake and put the Marine Corps Recruiting Ribbon in between foreign medals? Even a E-1 would know that all US awards go before all foreign awards (except for the Navy, they put all awards ahead of the Navy pistol & rifle marksmanship awards).

I think after re-looking at his picture again, he has the order in the rank of commander. Commendatore BAR.svg --Dandvsp (talk) 00:45, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Also I think this could he us both when it comes to people with Italian awards. Italian medals 1860-today (Italian Wikipedia) --Dandvsp (talk) 00:47, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: Question about text appearing in edit mode

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Bahamut0013. You have new messages at Kirill Lokshin's talk page.
Message added 16:42, 5 August 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Device Template

Greetings! I just added some text to the talk page for the Ribbon devices template. Specifically, that apparently the Navy and Marine Corps do things differently from how the Army and Air Force do them for multiple awards. You being a Marine and me being Navy, we knew this already... I will try to get some better documentation and then figure out some way to change the script. The good news is I think that oak leaves all work one way and award stars the other... Above all - thank you for your service. DukeEGR93 21:40, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

  • Got a chance to start on the device templates - testing suite at User:DukeEgr93/RibbonTest. Working well so far, except for the weirdness that happens when there are 6 or more actual devices (9 awards plus V, for example...). Also ran into another interesting tidbit - Marine Corps personnel who receive personal decorations or JMUC from Army / Air Force / DoD wear *oak leaf clusters* for that award. I think those cases could just be coded using the raw Template:Ribbon devices/device rather than trying to code something into Template:Ribbon devices. DukeEGR93 16:16, 9 August 2009 (UTC)


You are right, I did miss that one. I looked it over and to tell you the truth I have no idea about how to go about it and I'm afraid that I may mess things up if I attempted to do it. If you have a good idea of what should be done, then do a draft on my "talk page" and I will implement it to see how it looks. I'll check on it tomorrow. Semper Fi. Tony the Marine (talk) 08:37, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

USMC Portal links

Yes I can do that rather easily, my only question is why would we change it. Is there a benefit of one of the other? --Kumioko (talk) 13:10, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Ok, no problem. --Kumioko (talk) 13:16, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
I just wanted to let you know that I am working on this request (got a couple hundred done already) and have about 900 to go. I only pulled in bios but do you want me to do other articles with the portal link as well (such as units) after I am done with this group? --Kumioko (talk) 20:22, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
All bio articles are done. I just pulled in all 4000+ USMC related articles and am going to go through them next so in the next week or so the USMC portal will be replaced by the USMC link template. --Kumioko (talk) 21:11, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Edit warning?

What text would you propose? I'm still extremely limited in the time, so I don't have time right now to figure out the usage. could you provide text / template implementation with details? — ERcheck (talk) 02:17, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

If it can be "fiddled with" once a day this week, then I can help. See User:ERcheck/Sandbox5 for potential article notice and talk page note. Please edit on my talk page — drop me a note when you want it posted. If you leave me a note on my talk page, with edits in the Sandbox, I can work it. Let me know if you want to implement this way. — ERcheck (talk) 15:30, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Made a minor tweak. Could you please take the steps you mentioned — review by Tony and posting on the talk page. I'll do when you are ready. — ERcheck (talk) 16:40, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Marine Corps Brevet Medal

Just thought you might be interested to know that another USMC article has made it to featured status and I have started articles for all those that didn't have one. Most are still stubby and need work but at least they are out there. Have a great weekend.--Kumioko (talk) 03:05, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLI (July 2009)

The July 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:50, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

added a huge group

I just added the ribbons to Authorized foreign decorations of the United States military. The list includes: Argentina Order of the Liberator San Martin, Brazil Order of Military Merit, Chile Order of Merit, Czech Republic Cross of Merit of the Minister of Defense First Class, Ecuador Order of Abdon Calderón, Greece Order of the Redeemer & Order of the Phoenix, Haiti National Order of Honour and Merit, Pakistan Nishan-e-Pakistan, Paraguay Paraguay National Order of Merit, New and correct South Korean Order of Military Merit ribbons. For the most part I have already up date them on the sites that need them. I'm going to sand box soon but if I can still help just let me know.--Dandvsp (talk) 00:11, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Trash in the photo background

Corporal Lemiszki,

On February 28, 2008, you modified a photo on the “Marine Noncommissioned Officers' Sword, 1859-Present” page. I did take note of the previous photo and, in that; it was being worn improperly without a frog. For that reason, I can see why you would want to replace the photo. However, the photo that replaced it is also being seen by the whole world and I’m ashamed to see trash (plastic fork, empty M&M bag along with what looks like a phone book) in the background of what would otherwise be a perfectly fine photo except for the fact that the photo does not include the tip of the sword… (I’m being picky now…grin)

Since I noticed that you took the current photo, maybe you can take two more photos with a natural or military background. The first photo while you’re wearing digies and another while wearing dress blues. Make sure the photo is framed to include the entire sword and the flash is adequate. Maybe revert back to the old photo until your able to take the new ones!? Remember, the whole world is watching.

Semper Fi,

Sgt Clevenger

Xander271 (talk) 16:37, 12 August 2009 (UTC)xander271

USMC Captain and Lieutenant insignia

I created the images you removed in order to more acurately represent the actual insignia. I am sure you are aware that the cross bars are located more toward the ends of the Captain insignia and none of them are beveled like Army/Air Force insignia. If you have the capacity to create vector images, perhaps you can do so. I, unfortunately cannot. SGT141 (talk) 17:57, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Marine Merger Thingy

Hi, I just wanted you to know, that I have posted a comment on your merge proposal regarding This page. --Terran Officer (talk) 00:53, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

8-Bit Theater

I suggest you review WP:NFCC and WP:NFLISTS before removing invalid tags, especially with patronising edit summaries. Black Kite 09:20, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

  • Nearly all the character images fail WP:NFCC#8 (significance). The appearance of the characters is hardly discussed at all, and even if they were, the simplistic appearance of the 8-bit artwork means most of them could easily be described in text. Effectively, if the appearance of the character is not necessary to understanding the text, NFCC8 is failed. More to the point, as WP:NFLISTS says, multiple non-free images in lists are generally deprecated. Most articles of this type have had the majority of their images removed already; the latest database report shows that there are very few left (compare this list from a year ago). Note that not all the images should be removed; clearly, some are required to show the general artwork style. Thanks, Black Kite 10:05, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


Robert, get in touch with me via e-mail. I want to tell you something, but I'm afraid that with the new regulations implemented by the military I may not be able to reach you with your current e-mail address. Semper Fi. Tony the Marine (talk) 05:39, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

An exciting opportunity to improve yourself!


As a member of the Aviation WikiProject or one of its subprojects, you may be interested in testing your skills in the Aviation Contest! I created this contest, not to pit editor against editor, but to promote article improvement and project participation and camraderie. Hopefully you will agree with its usefulness. Sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here. The first round of the contest may not start until September 1st-unless a large number of editors signup and are ready to compete immediately! Since this contest is just beginning, please give feedback here, or let me know what you think on my talkpage. - Trevor MacInnis contribs 05:54, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

USMC shotrthand

Please stop being a idiot: You well know that "Marine Corps" isn't needed in the Lead as "shorthand", yet you keep edit warring to keep it in? Why? Why Marine Corps, but not the Corps, Marines, and Marine (all of which are used in the article to refer to the organization - I DID check)? And why just in that one article? Why not on the US Army, Navy abd USAF pages also, with their respective terrms. What {{WP:POINT|point]] are you trying to prove?? - BilCat (talk) 20:04, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9