This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is related to the Pritzker Military Museum & Library WikiProject. Please copy assessments of the article from the most major WikiProject template to this one as needed.Pritzker Military LibraryWikipedia:GLAM/PritzkerTemplate:WikiProject Pritzker-GLAMPritzker Military Library-related articles
Latest comment: 15 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion
About a year ago, an anon added the MOH to the article. I think that the editor in question saw the large medal in File:Charles Heywood.jpg and assumed it was an old version of the MOH, which is reasonable, because it looks a great deal like some of the old army versions. Unfortunately, that anon was either mistaken or performing some vandalism. There has never been an iteration of the Medal of Honor that looks exactly like the medal shown in the portrait. In addition, Heywood's name does not appear on any list of MOH recipients, official or unofficial, and there is no indication whatsoever of when, where, and how he would have earned it. Neither the official biography nor any of the other references for Heywoon note that he is the recipient of the US's highest award (and that would certainly be a huge oversight if he ideed actually was awarded). I have removed any refernce to the MOH from the article. If anyone would like to disagree, then let me know. bahamut0013wordsdeeds 06:19, 28 March 2009 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for finding and correcting the error — which was obviously introduced without any evidence to support the claim. Possible, as you noted, that it was a good faith edit. Unfortunate that it remained in the article for so long. — ERcheck (talk) 14:27, 28 March 2009 (UTC)Reply
jwillbur — thanks for showing us the GAR membership medal. Any idea on the other two that he is wearing? — ERcheck (talk) 00:37, 29 March 2009 (UTC)Reply
The second one looks like a Loyal Legion medal. I would guess that the third is from another veterans' organization, but I can't place it. — jwillbur 02:37, 30 March 2009 (UTC)Reply
Interesting... Seems that a lot of the military men of the 19th century tended to wear unauthorized devices quite frequently. For example, Littleton Waller drove me nuts with that little triangular medal till I actuall decided to sit and read the whole article. spǝǝpspɹoʍ3100ʇnɯɐɥɐq 17:23, 31 March 2009 (UTC)Reply
.jpg)
