Talk:Achievement Medal

USAF Combat Medal

There is something that is missing here. While this is poorly written, it should be noted that the USAF has added a new combat medal BELOW this Air Force Medal, which means that this Airman has done something remarkable if it is true. The fact that he was awarded this as an A1C and in a non-combat role compels us to determine if this was indeed true. If it is true, it illustrates a missing facet of the explanation of this medal and it's current explanation. Should it be verified, someone should do a better job writing the contribution; are there any surviving witnesses or images? I believe the newspaper which covers the Tinker AFB is the "Tinker Takeoff" and has a wider distribution than the Daily Oklahoman city newspaper so it should be mentioned there.

I think the individual example at the end of the article is pretty unnecessary. Regardless, it is inconsistent - was he an Airman First Class, or an E2?Isaac Crumm 02:13, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Not only is it poorly written, but it reads like a vanity paragraph. I vote we move it here, in case anyone else disagrees, and delete it from the article. --ScreaminEagle 00:53, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

One of these exceptional cases was awarded to Airman First Class Daryl Tempesta, while stationed at Tinker A.F.B. in Oklahoma, he volunteered over 600 hours of his own personal time in improving the living conditions of the Airman's Dormitory. He single handedly painted over 10,000 sq feet of murals. This contribution was the deciding factor of that years world wide official USAF base competition for the most outstanding base. His work was cited as proof of excellent morale and readiness of the base in general. His efforts were cited as the deciding reason in the base competition. This was a very rare occurrence, as it occurred during peace time and not in combat. As well as an E2 pay grade in under 2 years he achieved pentagon recognition which even most officers do not receive in their entire career. This may be the lowest ranking Airman to achieve the medal in such a short time. The mural was destroyed during the buildings replacement.

There is NOTHING remarkable about getting an Achievement Medal in peace time. While the integrity of every award varies from service to service, the Achievement Medal overall is generally practically given away nowadays. Putting up the above example makes about as much sense as me copying the citation for my own that I got 6 months ago, or putting up at random one of the hundred or so that I saw given out over the last two years. It was a little harder to get a couple decades ago, but even then it was still hardly a freak occurrence to see it awarded in peacetime (it was, after all, until recently a non-combat-zone only decoration in the Army and Air Force). Sonlee 02:31, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

There are PLENTY of reasons where an achievement medal is exceptional in peace time. Those that are exceptional are awarded for one-time events (such as a particularly exceptional inspection/meritorious act). However, I will concede that most are "given" away as end-of-tour decorations. But there are certainly MANY times an achievement medal is exceptional.

One example of this was an Airman who jumped out of his vehicle and rescued a person who was hit by a car by performing first aid (despite no significant medical training, he recognized an artery was bleeding, reached into the wound, and held the artery until an ambulance arrived) . Another example I know of was an airman who created a guide for the maintenance of some outdated equipment (with no actual experience on the equipment, he wrote an entire manual and saved the Air Force about $40,000). These things DO happen in peacetime...though the given example is hardly one of them. — BQZip01 — ^talk 06:31, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

— BQZip01 — talk 06:26, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

The details also include that the rate of suicide in that barracks were zero, in comparison to a slight increase base wide according to the statistics. This apparently reflected the communal nature of the barracks that dated to WWII and required updating, and apparently inspired the efforts of Airman Tempesta. The barrack in reference was listed under management of SSgt Jon M Sughroue and under command authority of Airman Ronald Place. In a effort to replace and modernize Airman living conditions, the new barracks were build with separate external entrances and no common area. [Citation needed]

The wording for the AF 2274, which details the medal: The Department of the Air Force. This is to certify that the Air Force Achievement Medal has been awarded to Airman First Class Daryl L. Tempesta for Outstanding Achievement, 6 July 1987 to 27 July 1987. Accomplishments: Airman Tempesta's outstanding professional and artistic skills, exceptional initiative, leadership and thorough knowledge of graphics significantly contributed to improving the quality of life for dormitory residents. As a result, Dormitory 5903 and the third floor of Dormitory 5904 were considered "Best in TAC" during a recent Headquarters, Tactctical Air Command Facilities Inspection. given under my hand this thirteenth day of October 1987. James R Sterk, Colonal, USAF Commander, 552 AWAC Wing.

The biggest external factor attributed to this story is that it occurred during the Airman's enlistment that saw the end of the Cold War and reunification of East and West Germany. What's also interesting is that the date of unification of Oct 3, is the Airman Tempesta's Birthday.

The end of the Cold War - caused a worldwide base re-alignment. This reflects that the BRAC should include discussion about which bases were not chosen—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.109.234.248 (talk) 01:08, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

References

Suggestions

I have just completed the B class checklist and believe that the article could be improved by creating a more defined structure, i.e. adding a distinct introductory section of between a couple of sentences to a couple of paragraphs. Following this there could be a section on History, Eligibility, Notable Awards (possibly), etc. Also, the article lacks in line citations and a requires more references to be up to a B class standard. Once these have been added, you might like to seek reassessment. This can be done by adding it to the list on WP:MHA. Hope this helps. AustralianRupert (talk) 07:32, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

"V" Device

For the Army Achievement Medal, What is the supporting documents that says that a valor device (V) can be put on it? Because while it can be awarded in a combat zone, it is given for non-combat related achievements. I cannot find anything online besides this website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.134.58.28 (talk) 16:19, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I am not aware of any "V" device for the AAM. As far as I know, the lowest medal with a "V" device is the ARCOM. Rklawton (talk) 17:31, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

This entry has is listed as such.

"The Valor device may be awarded the Achievement Medal by the Army, the Navy and Coast Guard, but not the Air Force. Effective 11 September 2001, the Army Achievement Medal may be awarded in a combat area, and can be awarded with the V device for Valor also." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.138.83.34 (talk) 23:56, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Legal

The legal section looks to me like a direct quote from law, and I'm not sure what it adds to the article, since there is nothing to suggest it applies any more or less to this medal than to any other. I propose removing it, unless there are any objections?--86.15.17.142 (talk) 18:19, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Object - the fact that the law also applies to other medals isn't relevant. The fact that this medal is protected by law is relevant to this article about the medal. The decision to keep it in some articles and remove it from others would be arbitrary. Rklawton (talk) 18:29, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Comment: I have wondered for a while who choose to begin adding those legal claims to all the medal articles. I'm not againt it, I just wonder how much of a point it serves. -OberRanks (talk) 19:54, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, the note lets folks know they can't claim one without having been awarded one. I'd say that's pretty useful to know. It easy enough to buy medals, and this information might help keep someone out of trouble. It also lets readers know that the Federal government places some value on these medals - enough to protect them. Rklawton (talk) 20:08, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Achievement Medal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110815025347/https://www.hrc.army.mil/site/Active/TAGD/awards/STATS/Historical_Stats.htm to https://www.hrc.army.mil/site/Active/TAGD/awards/STATS/Historical_Stats.htm#ERAOIF
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090210142406/http://navywriter.com:80/namcam.htm to http://www.navywriter.com/namcam.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:46, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

"V" device gone?

This article says that the DOD got rid of the "V" for achievement medals. Is this true? – Illegitimate Barrister (talk • contribs), 08:42, 22 December 2017 (UTC)