Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Orders, decorations, and medals/Archive 1

Project Banner/Images

I realise that the present image in the project banner is pretty stirring stuff, if you're British that is. Try as I might, I wasn't able to come up with an 'international' image which was anything other than bland and anodyne. If anyone can think of some themes which would be appropriate for a more international image then I'll be happy to replace this one.

Xdamr^talk 20:15, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Challenge coins

Since the military awards challenge coins for excellence in combat and many other reasons like that, do these medals fall under this category? --JAYMEDINC 21:24, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

It probably falls into a grey area. I can see valid reasons for describing it as a military medal, but also reasons to consider it as exonumia and thus better dealt with by the Numismatics WikiProject - your choice I suppose.

Xdamr^talk 21:44, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Living National Treasures

Congrats on making a new WikiProject! I'm afraid this isn't much my field of expertise, so I won't be able to help out too much, but I'm glad that others will be working on this important and interesting subject, and I wish you luck!

I don't know if this quite falls under the purview of your Project, but I have recently created a category for Category:Living National Treasures (Japan), and a number of other related categories. I would appreciate help populating it, if you should happen to come across such people. Please also note that those awarded this title still fall under this same category even after they are no longer alive. Thank you for your help. LordAmeth 22:15, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Stub proposal

Please join in the discussion on Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals/2006/December to get a proper stub for this WikiProject. --JAYMEDINC 22:22, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I'll just echo this, the sooner this stub is approved, the sooner we can get somewhere with the articles themselves.

Xdamr^talk 18:10, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Categorisation

Now that the project is established, it's time to get to work!

One of the major headaches with this topic is in the article categorisation. Our top level category is Category:Orders and decorations. Now the question arises, what do we want in this category? I propose that we include state/national orders, military/civil decorations, and commemorative/service medals issued by the state, along with articles connected to these medals and their award. Olympic medals, Nobel prize medals, etc should be put into Category:Awards.

Within Category:Orders and decorations, each nation should have its own sub-category. As things currently stand there is no consensus as to the name of these national categories. The two most popular are Orders and decorations of XXX and XXX honours system. In the interests of cohesion I think that we should settle on a single name. Which, if any, of these two do we go with - or can anyone suggest a new name?

Xdamr^talk 22:46, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you. Just to flip the direction I believe the category tree you can follow from Royal Norwegian Order of St Olav is a good example of how these articles should be categorised. Another point is that in Norway at least we have an official list of decorations automatically approved for wearing on military uniform. All these would fall under the Orders and decorations cataegory, but some might not fall under your examples of types of medals. There is for example an award for scholarly articles handed out by a private military association. Anyway I suppose most countries will have such a list and it will be a good basis for us. I would suggest Orders and decorations of XXX to be my preferred choise for country categories. Inge 13:14, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Here's one I managed to come up with, XXX Honours system or XXX National Honours system. On the whole I prefer 'Orders and decorations of XXX' but I don't want the category to be mistaken for one solely concerned with Orders and Decorations as objects, rather that as part of an honours system. Perhaps, linking in with the project name, Orders, Decorations, and Medals of XXX is the most comprehensive? This would also allow us to encompass unofficial, private awards if we ever decided that this was useful. Once we agree, we can draft some sort of guideline document and send the contents of Category:Orders and decorations off to WP:CFD for renaming.

Getting into the structure of the national sub-categories, Category:Orders and decorations of New Zealand I think illustrates a pretty decent structure (at least insofar as medals/decorations go - I'm still not certain as to the way we should categorise state orders/orders of knighthood).

Xdamr^talk 18:08, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I want to check, is there any objection to the national sub-categories of Category:Orders and decorations being renamed Orders, Decorations, and Medals of XXX? I ask because, if are no objections, I'm looking to send them to CFD over the weekend.

Xdamr^talk 20:30, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that's fine with me. Be aware that you have to be careful with the Awards of XXX categories. They should stay. Our category is a subcategory of them, but some countries only have that category including medals and orders. There are also some Awards and medals of XXX. Inge 13:12, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, there has been some confusion over the treatment of state honours; some seem to have classed them alongside national prizes and private awards, others, like myself, regard them as a unique manifestation of national cultural heritage and thus requiring seperate treatment. I am going to go through Category:Orders and decorations and move any 'awards' to Category:Awards. Likewise I'll move any orders and decorations from Category:Awards to Category:Orders and decorations. This should rationalise the situation.

Xdamr^talk 14:51, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes. Just a detail: I think it should be Orders, decorations, and medals of XXX not Orders, Decorations, and Medals of XXX. Inge 15:49, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Perhaps we should consider the name of the parent category, Category:Orders and decorations. Should we consider changing this to Orders, decorations, and medals to keep uniformity?

Xdamr^talk 20:40, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

CFD nomination of contents of Category:Orders and decorations can be found here.

Xdamr^talk 03:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Is it really correct to have a comma before the and?Inge 15:33, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, sort of... It's called the serial comma, pretty common in American English but not so common in British usage. I tend to favour it, but whether it is used or not is really down to personal preference. WP:MOS doesn't really take a stand on the issue.

Xdamr^talk 19:14, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Despite being an American, I am not a big fan of serial commas, but maybe I've spent too much time in British English and German texts. And notwithstanding the style guides cited in the serial comma article, I think it is falling into disuse. Now "categorisation"... :) Airbornelawyer 19:13, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

• Make sure you go through Category:Prizes as well as Category:Awards - those two cats are used interchangably at the present time. --lquilter 16:03, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Titles

Do they included in here, like Hero of the Soviet Union and stuff like that? User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 01:48, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it is of the nature of a national order or distinction so I don't see any reason why it shouldn't be included.

Xdamr^talk 01:51, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Just making sure. :) User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 02:18, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Scope of medals covered

I think the Project Page needs to have a clear distinction between what kinds of medals are covered by this WikiProject and which are not. Although the word "medals" is often used as synonymous with "orders and decorations", "medals" is quite a broad term and covers much more than just O&D. The feel I get from the Project Page and the preceding posts is that the only medals covered here beyond O&D are those which are formal military and civil government awards for distinguished service. Is this correct? If so, then the project might really be best named "WikiProject Orders & Decorations" since it makes such a limited coverage of medals, per se. In that way, there will be less confusion if there is ever a WikiProject that covers medals more broadly. Askari Mark (Talk) 03:35, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Not quite. Take Campaign medals for instance; they are not awarded for bravery or distinguished service, merely for having been within the designated battle zone (which may or may not have even placed them in harm's way). This project covers these medals just as much as the Medal of Honor or similar. Likewise commemorative medals such as the Queen Elizabeth II Golden Jubilee Medal - so long as it eminates from the state, we cover it. Having said that, on a case by case basis, we might find other 'unofficial' medals which we might consider come within our orbit - early days yet though.

If you think that the wording of the Scope section needs tightening up though, I'll take a look at it.

Xdamr^talk 03:47, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Lets have a broad definition for now. Our scope shouldn't be so limited towards military or state, that might push away participants from parts of the world where the medals system could be different or people who are interested in medals but less interested in military stuff. Later on we can narrow the scope if we find it prudent, but for now lets focus on recruitment.Inge 13:19, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Im agreeing on Inge on this one; let's include what we can now and if we want to specialize later, we could. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 02:32, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good, lets go with that approach.

Xdamr^talk 03:40, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

The main reason I bring it up is because the scope is not covering all types of medals, so if later on there is a decision to form a project focusing on medals as a whole, this project's title not only produces confusion, but the later any change is made, the more "go-back-and-fix" work is required. Of course, if you want to expand the scope of this project, the issue becomes moot. Askari Mark (Talk) 18:29, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Stub now created

{{orders-medals-stub}}, along with Category:Order, decoration, and medal stubs have now been created. This stub can now be used to tag all articles within the scope of the project. Once tagged, they will be listed in the category. Anyone who has a rainy afternoon on their hands can dive in, pick an article, and get it up to FA standard! Well, perhaps not quite up to FA, but at least get it to show the minimum level of information in a standardised way.

Have fun, Xdamr^talk 16:24, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject categories

The WikiProject's category is Category:WikiProject Orders, Decorations, and Medals articles, all project pages, templates, project images, etc go here. Another category of interest is Category:WikiProject Orders, Decorations, and Medals articles, this contains a list of all articles which have been tagged with the project banner, {{WPODMBanner}}.

Xdamr^talk 17:28, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Portuguese order

Several Norwegian royals have received an order called Portugals Fortjenstorden in Norwegian. This roughly translates to The Order of Merit of Portugal. I have not been able to figure out which order this is. Does anyone else know?Inge 11:43, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't have any definite knowledge myself, however I managed to turn up one or two pages. I'm not sure which time-frame we're talking of here, but there appear to be, or to have been, two orders of this, or similar, name - the Order of Merit and the Order of Military Merit.

• General - Medals of Portugal
• Portuguese Ministry of Defence, Orders and medals
• Insignia of Grand Cross of the Medal of Military Merit
• Pictures of Portuguese orders/medals - Order of Merit at bottom of page

There really doesn't appear to be a great deal out there about the two - in extremis I suppose you could always ask for information from your friendly local Portuguese embassy.

Xdamr^talk 16:39, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

The Next Step

The Project seems to be on course to deliver its first concrete results! The group renaming of the national sub-categories seems like it is going to go through pretty easily. If you haven't voted yet then please do consider taking a look at the debate and help us put the question beyond dispute.

So, what next?

In my view there are two main issues now facing this topic: Firstly, developing a standardised categorisation policy within the national sub-categories; secondly, developing a uniform presentation style for articles on each nation's orders, decorations, and medals - one which enables us to present the national systems in a cohesive fashion. I propose that we complete our work with categorisation first, we can then move into the articles themselves.

To my mind, there are six basic varieties of state award (in its narrowest orders, decorations, and medals sense - not in the sense of prizes etc.):

• State orders,
• Military decorations,
• Military awards (including Campaign medals),
• Civil decorations,
• Civil awards,
• Commemorative medals.

I propose that within each national sub-category (which I will refer to as the 'national categories') there should be further sub-categories for each of these varieties of award.

If you take a look at Category:Orders and decorations of New Zealand you will find a structure which I think is fairly decent. Within this New Zealand category there are two sub-categories: Category:Awards and decorations of the New Zealand armed forces and Category:Civil decorations of New Zealand.

The first category holds the medals and decorations awarded to personnel of the armed forces - bravery decorations, decorations for distinguished service, etc. However, as its name suggests, it also encompasses awards to armed forces personnel. I take this to mean Campaign medals, long service decorations, etc. I suggest including each of these types of award within Awards and decorations of the XXX armed forces as sub-categories - you can see an example of this with Category:New Zealand campaign medals.

Category:Civil decorations of New Zealand holds awards made to the civilian population, ie. awards for saving life, police or fire service awards etc. I suggest that this category is renamed Civil decorations and awards of XXX - this will enable us to include awards (long service medals for police officers, etc) made to civilian uniformed services or similar state bodies.

I think that commemorative medals should be able to be included within either one, or both, of these two categories.

This leaves us with national orders to consider. I'm not wholly certain how these should be treated. I certainly think that they should receive a sub-category witin the national category, distinct from civil decorations and from military decorations. I'm not sure how they should be described though. As Orders of chivalry? As Orders of Knighthood? As State Orders? Any suggestions?

Here is the proposed structure, in diagram form:

Category:Orders and decorations

|___ Category:Orders, decorations, and medals of XXX

. . . |

. . . |___ Category:Orders of XXX - any suggestions for the name?

. . . |

. . . |___ Category:Civil decorations and awards of XXX

. . . | . . |

. . . | . . |___ Category:Police long-service awards of XXX - example of type of awards

. . . | . . |___ ...etc...

. . . |

. . . |___ Category:Awards and decorations of the XXX armed forces

. . . . . . |

. . . . . . |___ Category:XXX campaign medals

. . . . . . |___ Category:Long-service awards of the XXX armed forces

. . . . . . |___ ...etc...

Views, suggestions? (I realise that this is quite a lot to consider!)

Xdamr^talk 03:34, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

The categorization doesn't necessarily work for countries whose honors systems differ significantly from the British standard. It is, more or less, though, the one customarily used for Imperial German awards. Nimmergut's catalog of German awards, for example, categorizes each German states' awards generally by (i) orders, in their order of precedence in the state's honor system, (ii) civil awards, including general merit awards, arts and sciences decorations, more specific merit awards such as in agriculture, long-service awards in various fields (police, fire, etc.), jubilee and commememorative, etc. and (iii) military awards, generally in the order of military decorations other than orders, campaign medals, long service medals and military commemorative medals.

The United States does not have orders, so creating an artificial category and either leaving it empty or populating it with awards like the Legion of Merit, which in certain respects fills the role of an order when conferred on foreigners, would be somewhat misleading. U.S. civilian decorations are also far less significant, for historical and cultural reasons, than those of Commonwealth countries or European countries like France and Belgium.

My preference would be for military awards to precede civil awards in the hierarchy. In my experience, this is where most collector and historical interest lies. And, as noted, for certain countries like the United States, civil awards are fairly secondary.

Airbornelawyer 00:20, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

You're quite right, this structure definitely bears the imprint of the UK/Commonwealth system, this is the area that I am most familiar with. Having said that, the more incompatibilities that we can come up with the better - taking these into account will lead to a better overall structure.

As far as your comment re. the US honours system go, I agree with you. I don't think that it is worthwhile to force Category:Orders of XXX on a country which doesn't issue orders per se. I personally wouldn't advocate putting the Legion of Merit in there based a personal judgement as to the nature of the award - if it isn't regarded as an Order in the US then I'm not going to tell them that they have it wrong! Putting it simply, if a country doesn't have Orders, then don't include the category in its national category.

As far as civil awards go, awards such as the Presidential Medal of Freedom, NASA awards, etc could happily go in there. Taking a look around I find that we have Category:Civilian decorations of the United States which seems to meet the purpose very well. All we need to do is rename it in accordance with the standard naming scheme that we settle upon.

Military and Civilian awards categories (along with Orders) are all at the same level in the category heirachy so they should both be equally apparent to those who are interested.

Best wishes, Xdamr^talk 01:05, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

From the articles I deal with, some nations include titles (such as Honored Artist, Hero, Honored Teacher) and I feel that should be made into a category (if the nation has them). But I feel we should at least evaulute what we have, article wise, then start the recateogorization. It needs to be done, but all we just need to figure out is what system will work for what countries. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 01:21, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm interested to know how you personally would categorise these 'Hero' titles. We could probably force them into a national Orders/titles shaped box, but, as per my comments to Airbornelawyer above, its what they are regarded as in their particular countries that should be our starting point.

Xdamr^talk 01:30, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Another complicating factor is the effect of federal systems. U.S. states have their own awards. Each state National Guard has its own decorations apart from federal armed services decorations. And police awards are generally a matter of localities. The Federal Republic of Germany also has a fairly detailed system of state-level awards.

Imperial Germany is the real outlier on this, since each Bundesstaat was a theoretically separate sovereignty, and the monarch or local leadership conferred a full range of decorations. There's already a fair amount of inaccurate information in this regard, some of which I've corrected, as for example most people assume the Iron Cross and the Pour le Merite were German decorations, when in fact they were awards of the Kingdom of Prussia.

Back on the main point: I'm not sure who the grander audience is, but I imagine collectors will have the greatest interest. The most logical format they are most familiar with, then, might be preferable. Those used by Sidney Vernon's collectors' guide, which covers multiple countries, the Nimmergut guides, which cover German states, or the Medal News Medal Yearbook for Commonwealth awards, might be the best guides.

Airbornelawyer 01:56, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I think that the civil/military dichotomy is a useful one to observe. In some cases it might have less value than in others, but almost all systems that I can bring to mind have some sort of division along these lines. Even if some awards can be issued to both military personnel and to civilians, there's noting to stop us listing it under both categories.

As to your concerns re federal systems, I think that Category:Civil decorations of Canada provides a useful precedent, one which can be applied both to military and to civil awards. You will see that within the Canadian Civil category we have Category:Provincial and Territorial orders of Canada - these awards are presented on a federal basis. I think that this layout draws the distinction between federal awards and national awards quite nicely. What do you think about this as a model?

(ps. when I say federal, I mean pertaining to the individual states/territories of the nation. I use 'national awards' for those awarded on a nationwide basis. This is probably the exact opposite of your conception of 'federal', but there you are!)

Xdamr^talk 23:49, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

For the hero titles, I am going to use Belarus an example. According to their law on their ODM system, there are four teirs: the title Hero of Belarus, Orders, Medals and Honorable Titles (like Honored Artist, Honored Economist, Honored Teacher). It was established at [1]. I believe that all titles, such as hero or honored teacher, can be put into one category, category:Honorary titles of XXX. I hope that is fine with you. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 02:00, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure that category:Honorary titles of XXX is the best choice. Many British awards (orders of Knighthood, etc) are awarded to foreign nationals on a honorary basis - those looking at this from a Commonwealth POV are likely to be confused.

As an outsider, looking at these awards, they appear, setting the 'Hero' title aside, to be awarded for outstanding services in certain civilian fields. Could they not be placed in Category:Civil decorations and awards of XXX? The title is clearly an important part of what they are, but their essential defining characteristic is that they are awards for civilian service. They seem to fit quite happily within the present scope of Category:Civil decorations and awards of XXX.

Xdamr^talk 23:12, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Here is the fundumental problem; Hero titles are awarded for either civilian or military merit, so most of them cannot be in just the civil category. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 23:38, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, take 'Honoured Artist' - this is a solely civilian award? Then take 'Hero of Belarus' - military and civilian. Honoured Artist should fit into the Civil category without too much difficulty. Hero of Belarus, as an award to both military and civilians, could go in both the military and civil categories.

Do I perhaps misunderstand the 'Honoured' title? Are there a set list of awards, ie Honoured artist, Honoured economist, etc? Or is it that a person who has performed outstandingly in their field receives the award? (ie 'Honoured XXX' - where XXX is their occupation ie, farmer, factory worker, etc - is it that there is no set and defined list of what XXX can be?

Xdamr^talk 00:28, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Fixing Ambiguous Pages/Same or Similar Names of Awards

A while back, someone did a yeoman's job of creating pages for Australia's ODM. However, for the most part he simply created pages using the Australian name for the various decorations, without regard for whether other countries had a decoration with the same name. Thus, a page was created named "Bravery Medal" which covered Australia's Bravery Medal.

This is also the case for a number of other decorations. I have on occasion typed the name of a decoration in the search box and been taken to a Wikipedia page not for the decoration I was looking for, and not to a disambiguation page, but to the page for another similarly named decoration.

I think this needs to be fixed. I fixed the Bravery Medal one today. I moved the Australian one to a page named Bravery Medal (Australia), fixed the links to it, and made the old Bravery Medal page into a list/potential link page for decorations called "Bravery Medal" or similar names. Please look at that page and let me know if you think that approach works.

If anyone comes across other examples, please try to fix them as well. Also, when creating a page for a particular decoration, please be mindful that other states may have a decoration with the same or a similar name, and name the page appropriately. Airbornelawyer 02:20, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Good job. You, or anyone else interested, might find Category:WikiProject Orders, Decorations, and Medals articles of use. This Project category contains a list of every page that has been tagged with the Project banner, {{WPODMBanner}}. It should prove a useful tool for spotting trends in naming etc.

Xdamr^talk 02:25, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

British Commonwealth honours systems

There is a category tag at Category:British Commonwealth honours systems.

Postnominal letters,including titles for knighthoods, damehoods, and peerages MUST be included in biographies of the recipients. - (203.211.74.39 02:36, 28 December 2006 (UTC))

Categorisation of federal ODM systems

Extracted from The Next Step discussion, see above.

Another complicating factor is the effect of federal systems. U.S. states have their own awards. Each state National Guard has its own decorations apart from federal armed services decorations. And police awards are generally a matter of localities. The Federal Republic of Germany also has a fairly detailed system of state-level awards.

Imperial Germany is the real outlier on this, since each Bundesstaat was a theoretically separate sovereignty, and the monarch or local leadership conferred a full range of decorations. There's already a fair amount of inaccurate information in this regard, some of which I've corrected, as for example most people assume the Iron Cross and the Pour le Merite were German decorations, when in fact they were awards of the Kingdom of Prussia.

Back on the main point: I'm not sure who the grander audience is, but I imagine collectors will have the greatest interest. The most logical format they are most familiar with, then, might be preferable. Those used by Sidney Vernon's collectors' guide, which covers multiple countries, the Nimmergut guides, which cover German states, or the Medal News Medal Yearbook for Commonwealth awards, might be the best guides.

Airbornelawyer 01:56, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I think that the civil/military dichotomy is a useful one to observe. In some cases it might have less value than in others, but almost all systems that I can bring to mind have some sort of division along these lines. Even if some awards can be issued to both military personnel and to civilians, there's noting to stop us listing it under both categories.

As to your concerns re federal systems, I think that Category:Civil decorations of Canada provides a useful precedent, one which can be applied both to military and to civil awards. You will see that within the Canadian Civil category we have Category:Provincial and Territorial orders of Canada - these awards are presented on a federal basis. I think that this layout draws the distinction between federal awards and national awards quite nicely. What do you think about this as a model?

ps. when I say federal, I mean pertaining to the individual states/territories of the nation. I use 'national awards' for those awarded on a nationwide basis. This is probably the exact opposite of your conception of 'federal', but there you are!)

Xdamr^talk 23:49, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Soviet-style 'Hero' titles

Extracted from The Next Step discussion, see above.

For the hero titles, I am going to use Belarus an example. According to their law on their ODM system, there are four teirs: the title Hero of Belarus, Orders, Medals and Honorable Titles (like Honored Artist, Honored Economist, Honored Teacher). It was established at [2]. I believe that all titles, such as hero or honored teacher, can be put into one category, category:Honorary titles of XXX. I hope that is fine with you. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 02:00, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure that category:Honorary titles of XXX is the best choice. Many British awards (orders of Knighthood, etc) are awarded to foreign nationals on a honorary basis - those looking at this from a Commonwealth POV are likely to be confused.

As an outsider, looking at these awards, they appear, setting the 'Hero' title aside, to be awarded for outstanding services in certain civilian fields. Could they not be placed in Category:Civil decorations and awards of XXX? The title is clearly an important part of what they are, but their essential defining characteristic is that they are awards for civilian service. They seem to fit quite happily within the present scope of Category:Civil decorations and awards of XXX.

Xdamr^talk 23:12, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Here is the fundumental problem; Hero titles are awarded for either civilian or military merit, so most of them cannot be in just the civil category. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 23:38, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, take 'Honoured Artist' - this is a solely civilian award? Then take 'Hero of Belarus' - military and civilian. Honoured Artist should fit into the Civil category without too much difficulty. Hero of Belarus, as an award to both military and civilians, could go in both the military and civil categories.

Do I perhaps misunderstand the 'Honoured' title? Are there a set list of awards, ie the 'Honoured artist' award, given to a top artist; the 'Honoured economist' award, given to a top economist; etc. Are each of these distinct, individual awards? Or is it that a person who has performed outstandingly in their field receives the award? (ie 'Honoured XXX' - where XXX is their occupation ie, farmer, factory worker, etc - is it that there is no set and defined list of what XXX can be - Honoured is in fact a title, and can be put in front of any job or vocation?

Xdamr^talk 00:28, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

"Honored" awards can go to the civil category, no problem with that. Each award is distinct, but do receive the same badges and a state diploma. Plus, I have seen it used in resumes, but you do not call this Person "Honored Arist Lebed" or "Honored Painter Zhukov." Each honored title is created by a national law, but requirements for them are subjective. The Hero title can be put in both categories. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 02:56, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Message, concerning renaming a medal.

I'm trying to rename Ehrenpokal der Luftwaffe, to an English title as explained on the talkpage. Could some of you task force guys get involved?Rex 21:00, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry that I have to point out that there is a dispute between Rex Germanus (talk · contribs) and me regarding his various attempts to delete German words from English Wikipedia and "cleansing this wiki of german nationalists", while introducing Dutch ones elsewhere. For details, see my and his talk page and even WP:ANI (twice!) . -- Matthead ^discuß!     O       23:31, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Two issues: First, I hope this doesn't turn into a matter of honor/honour. ;) Second, the "Ehrenpokal der Luftwaffe" was, as the source site notes, based on an Imperial German aviation award, the "Ehrenbecher für den Sieger im Luftkampfe". Both "Ehrenpokal" and "Ehrenbecher" translate as "honor goblet". If there are separate articles on each of these, the names need to be clear to distinguish the two. "Honor Goblet of the Luftwaffe" is OK for the WW2 version; Luftwaffe, though a non-English term, is, I think, sufficiently familiar in English to be left untranslated (like Blitzkrieg, Flak, etc.). Imperial German aviation was not called the Luftwaffe, so that term would not be usable for the WW1 honor goblet article. Airbornelawyer 21:48, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Airbornelawyer on this one. You could also make Honor Goblet a disambiguation page, so people have a choice of which article to view (either WW1 or WW2). User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 23:01, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I know no German, but my inclination would be to keep the article at the German title, with a number of redirects set up for various English translations. Searching these various names (German/English) in Google doesn't seem to bring up a preferred variant, so I'd be inclined to keep it where it is.

This does raise an interesting point however. Should we go with 'official' (ie. original language) names for foreign awards, or should they be translated into English as a matter of course? Personally, I would propose that as a matter of policy we keep ODM at their native-language title - unless there is an established track-record of their being referred to by an English translation. Therefore we will continue to use Iron Cross in favour of 'Eiserne Kreuz', Pour le Merite in favour of 'For the Merit' or 'Merit Award' (or any other similar translation).

How does this sound as a general policy?

Xdamr^talk 02:22, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

As a matter of course, you really can't use original language names for many decorations. Many names are grammatically complex and would require fixes depending on how used (das Eiserne Kreuz, Eisernes Kreuz, Ritterkreuz des Eisernen Kreuzes, etc.). Transliteration from languages that don't use Latin alphabets would create more confusion and ambiguity. Which is preferable? "Geroĭ Sovyetskogo Soyuza" or "Hero of the Soviet Union"? "Kyokujitsu shō" or "Order of the Rising Sun"? There are really only a few cases where the foreign language names are more customary in English - Pour le Mérite, Croix de guerre, Virtuti Militari, Médaille militaire, as well as Pakistani and Indian decorations. Some are 50/50 - Légion d'honneur vs. Legion of Honor, Croce di Guerra vs. (Italian) Cross of War, and (yes) Ehrenpokal vs. Honor Goblet. So the rule should probably be the reverse of what you describe - use English unless there is a track record of using the native language term. There should be liberal use of redirects for the native language name, though, which should also make it easier for foreign Wikipedia's to find and link to the corresponding page from their own ODMs.

BTW, my particular bailiwick is Imperial German decorations. I generally render the decorations into English when dealing with a wider English-speaking audience unfamiliar with the German names, but even then, I make a few reservations. I don't translate the names of monarchs in decorations - thus Friedrichs-Orden stays Friedrich Order, not Order of Frederick, and Militärischer Karl-Friedrich-Verdienstorden is Military Karl-Friedrich Merit Order, not Charles Frederick. Though there are exceptions. Perhaps because the order's namesake is moderately well-known in English by that name, the Hausorden Heinrich des Löwen becomes the House Order of Henry the Lion, not Heinrich the Lion. Airbornelawyer 03:32, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

That makes a good deal of sense. Despite your proposal being the opposite of mine, essentially we reach the same finishing point - the customary English-language name should be the one used (which may or may not be the English translation). I didn't really take non-latin alphabets into account in framing my suggestion - I don't think that en.wikipedia policy permits us to use them in article names anyway. Redirects are vital though, we should certainly cover all the reasonable permutations of the name, in both languages (non-latin excepted).

Xdamr^talk 03:56, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Rename Category:Orders and decorations?

What's the general opinion on renaming the top-level category, Category:Orders and decorations, to Category:Orders, decorations, and medals by country? This would maintain consistency as well as clarifying the nature of the category. Thoughts?

Xdamr^talk 02:40, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

There are a number of subcategories that are not country-specific on that page, so the change wouldn't fit for them. Some of them seem badly/haphazardly organized on first glance, though. Airbornelawyer 03:44, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

You're probably right. At any rate, this is probably best considered when we have expanded coverage a bit more—get a better idea of what our category requirements are. We'll leave the 'by country' for now.

What about the 'Orders, decorations, and medals' though? It seems to have become the de facto WP name for this area, and the main category encompasses medals to the same extent as orders and decorations—any thoughts on this?

Xdamr^talk 16:14, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Related categorization issue

The super-cat structures in which "Orders, decorations, and medals of XXX" exists is Category:Awards and Category:Prizes, and includes Category:Award winners, Category:Prize winners, and Category:Recipients of formal honors. I proposed to merge A & P into A; and AW, PW, and ROFH into AW. Discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 January 9#Prize winners and Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 January 9#Prizes. I know there are technical distinctions (prizes usually used for awards with money, but occasionally just for money rewards), but as a category, the distinctions seem hard to maintain and not very useful. I think this should not hurt the ODM categorization scheme, since ODMs would continue to be specialized subcats with their own hierarchies, but if there are any bad (or good) implications for the ODM tree, please let us know now. --lquilter 15:59, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

A question

Hi folks. I'm not very knowledgable about this field, so I have a question about a confusing set of related articles I found myself editing as part of the Northern Ireland WikiProject.

I'm not sure how much of my question is covered by the scope of this project, so forgive me if I say anything out of place!

OK - I should start with this article: Randal MacDonnell, 1st Earl of Antrim.

I started by editing Rose MacDonnell of Antrim as her brother was referred to as Randal MacDonnell, 2nd Earl of Antrim. As he was married to the "richest woman in Britain", I thought there might be an article already existing for him.

During my research, I discovered that Randal MacDonnell, 1st Earl of Antrim had been created Viscount Dunluce, then created earl (surely a title has a capital letter?) of Antrim. So I decided to look up Viscount Dunluce.. you know how these things go sometimes when editing the 'pedia!! Please bear with me - I think I'm nearly done!

Viscount Dunluce was not wikified, so I did a search for the article. As you can see if you click on the blue link, it re-directs to Earl of Antrim. Is that because every person who held one title was automatically made the holder of the other title?

The whole thing seems a bit confusing. I'm hoping that not many other articles are as confusing as this set. But it led me to wonder if these titles had a WikiProject.. which leads me to ask: does this Project's scope cover these titles? Looking up the talk page for the article Viscount shows that it has not been tagged as being a part of the project.

Peerage questions are best handled at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Peerage 86.134.78.14 14:20, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Anyway, I hope someone can help with my questions. Thanks in advance. --Mal 04:54, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

By the way, the table at the end of the article George Villiers, 1st Duke of Buckingham has these confusing wikilinks in its template at the bottom of the page:

• Duke of Buckingham which points to the article Duke of Buckingham (yayyy!)
• Marquess of Buckingham which points to the article Duke of Buckingham (Eh?!?)
• Earl of Buckingham which points to the article Earl of Buckingham (yayyy!)
• Viscount Villiers which points to the article Earl of Jersey (Eh?!?)

The article Katherine Villiers, Duchess of Buckingham starts with the words, "Katherine Manners, 19th Baroness de Ros (died ~1649)".

I can understand some of this, but its neither clear nor consistant. --Mal 05:04, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

It's not my area of expertise, but many of these titles (Earldoms etc) have lesser titles which are associated with them. A prime example of this is that of the Marquess of Salisbury. This holds the subsidiary titles of Earl of Salisbury and Viscount Cranborne (which is a courtesy title bestowed on the eldest son).

Xdamr^talk 17:03, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to help. :) I was wondering if, considering your answer, articles should not be named according to the highest 'station' of the peerage that the owner held (unless perhaps if the owner was dishonourably stripped of the title). It would seem that the articles could use a bit of consistency. Cheers. --Mal 17:33, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

That sounds reasonable enough, after all, to hark back to the example of the Marquess of Salisbury, he is never referred to as the Earl of Salisbury, rather by his higher title. Likewise, the holder of a knighthood ceases to be referred to as 'Sir' once he becomes a peer.

Xdamr^talk 17:47, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Spanish Anti-Terrorism Order

Anyone know what this is ? [3] Dowew 21:49, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

It is misidentified. It is the Real Orden de Reconocimiento Civil a las Víctimas del Terrorismo, or "Royal Order of Civil Recognition of Victims of Terrorism", created in 1999. There is a page for it on the Spanish language Wikipedia, but not much information. Here are links to it and to the Spanish government web pages on the decoration: [4][5][6] Airbornelawyer 03:40, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

National sub-categories, internal categorisation

Further to my proposal above, taking account of comments received, here is the suggested scheme for categorisation within the national sub-categories of Category:Orders and decorations. Examples are given for both federal and non-federal governmental systems.

Category:Orders and decorations

|___ Category:Orders, decorations, and medals of XXX (non-federal country)

| . . |

| . . |___ Category:Orders of XXX - any suggestions for the name?

| . . |

| . . |___ Category:Civil awards and decorations of XXX

| . . | . . |

| . . | . . |___ Category:Police long-service awards of XXX - example of type of awards

| . . | . . |___ ...etc...

| . . |

| . . |___ Category:Military awards and decorations of XXX

| . . . . . |

| . . . . . |___ Category:XXX campaign medals

| . . . . . |___ Category:Long-service awards of the XXX armed forces

| . . . . . |___ ...etc...

|

|

|___ Category:Orders, decorations, and medals of ZZZ (federal country)

. . . |

. . . |___ Category:Federal orders of ZZZ - 'Federal' or appropriate national term

. . . |

. . . |___ Category:Federal civil awards and decorations of ZZZ

. . . | . . |___ ...etc, as per non-federal...

. . . |

. . . |___ Category:Federal military awards and decorations of ZZZ

. . . | . . |___ ...etc, as per non-federal...

. . . |

. . . |___ Category:Provincial orders of ZZZ - Provincial/State/etc - adopt usage of country concerned. ZZZ = country

. . . | . . |___ ...articles on orders from each province/state...

. . . | . . |___ ...or, if provincial/state orders are more extensive, categorise:...

. . . | . . |___ Category:Provincial orders of YYY - YYY = province/state

. . . |

. . . |___ Category:Provincial civil awards and decorations of ZZZ

. . . | . . |___ ...articles on awards from each province/state...

. . . | . . |___ ...or, if provincial/state awards are more extensive, categorise:...

. . . | . . |___ Category:Provincial civil awards and decorations of YYY - YYY = province/state

. . . |

. . . |___ Category:Provincial military awards and decorations of ZZZ - 'state' awards are to members of 'federal' armed forces

. . . . . . |___ ...articles on awards from each province/state...

. . . . . . |___ ...or, if provincial/state awards are more extensive, categorise:...

. . . . . . |___ Category:Provincial military decorations and awards of YYY - ie those of each state/province

Each of these categories can be omitted as appropriate, ie US has no federal or state orders, therefore no need to include category, etc. Likewise, in a federal system, some of the 'provincial' categories can be omitted if they do not apply - ie. Canada has no provincial military awards, they all come from the federal government.

Xdamr^talk 16:50, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

'Notable recipients'

I've noticed this section in a number of medal/decoration-related articles (eg Distinguished Service Order). These lists typically degenerate from a list of truly 'notable' recipients to a list to which everyone adds their favourite recipient. To my mind, all recipients are notable to one degree or another, and given that most medals have many hundreds/thousands of recipients, this has the potential to be something of a problem. 'Notability' is clearly an entirely subjective term, making it troublesome to police these lists.

So, do we try and derive some criteria for notability? Or do we, as I would suggest, do away with these sections? The notability of a recipient is more a biographical detail rather than one which is intrinsically bound up with the medal. I would be happy to have categorisation for the recipients of various medals (eg. Category:Recipients of the Victoria Cross, Category:Recipients of the Navy Cross, etc), but notability seems a difficult judgement to make.

Thoughts?

Xdamr^talk 18:13, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, as the author/reviser of a number of these lists, I am generally in favor of them. The criteria are generally subjective. Basically, if they are prominent/notable enough to already have a Wikipedia entry, or they in my judgment should have a Wikipedia entry but one hasn't been created yet, they tend to go on the list. This is of course complicated for the Victoria Cross, since the migration of the VC web site to Wikipedia means every VC holder has a Wikipedia page. I'm not sure about the Medal of Honor, but for many other decorations the principle should hold. It does get complicated for some awards though. For example, in creating the list of Army Distinguished Service Medal recipients, I had to note that practically every general in the US Army will have received the decoration. Since quite a large number of generals have or will eventually have Wikipedia entries, I tended to restrict the list to those more prominent ones: major field commanders, for example. The same would presumably be the case for the British OBE and Order of the Bath or the French LdH, since most prominent British and French military figures, and many civilians, will have these decorations.

For the U.S. Army's DSC, I tended to limit the list to major field commanders, famous names like Audie Murphy, multiple award recipients (including those who also received the Medal of Honor), and a few prominent foreign recipients. The history section for that award, however, also includes an even more expansive discussion of recipients.

For lower-ranking decorations whose recipients number in the hundreds of thousands, or even millions, I agree that a "notable recipients" list makes no sense, though. I specifically ruled that out when I made some revisions to the U.S. Bronze Star Medal page. It wouldn't make sense for the Iron Cross or the Croix de Guerre either.

These lists are valuable, especially for those who may be unfamiliar with the award but will have heard of these recipients. The "Category: Recipients of XXX" pages are less useful, since they tend to grow too long and lack any context like the notes I write for some of these lists explaining why the recipient is prominent. See the House Order of Hohenzollern "notable recipients" list for an example of the annotations.

Airbornelawyer 21:07, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Per the above discussion, note that Category:Recipients of the Silver Star has been nominated for Cfd - see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 February 12#Category:Recipients of the Silver Star

Xdamr^talk 15:08, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Order of the Thistle FAR

Order of the Thistle has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:12, 13 February 2007 (UTC)