Template talk:United States Campaign Medals

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

inclusion criteria?[edit]

You've got both Campaign & Expeditionary medals here, should perhaps the template be titled such? ie the Department of Defense categorizes them separately - though it combines them in the same overarching category as Campaign, Expeditionary, & Service (CE&S) Medals (ie see DoD Manual 1348-33-M, particularily the first volume)- thought obviously this template is not including service medals. Cheers, Gecko G (talk) 19:24, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

In light of the below discussion let me re-word this section: What is the criteria for whether something is included or not in this template? Setting aside the whole issue of "Are the WWI & WWII Victory Medals campaign medals", and the whole issue of some of those very early awards which are commemoratives, You seem to be including Campaign, Expeditionary, and all DoD "Deployed Service" Medals and some "Personal Service Medals" and some branch specific "Deployed Service" Medals. Where and how do you draw the line? The whole thing is a very slippery slope, ie You include the Coast Guard Arctic Service Medal, but not the Navy Arctic Service Medal, but if you include that then why not the Air Force equivalent- the Air Force Overseas Tour Ribbon with an arctic device, but then if you include that why not the rest of the Overseas Service Ribbons - and if your including that, then why not the Sea Service Ribbon's, etc., etc. If you limit it to DoD - or interservice specific awards then several would have to be removed (so many as to make this template of little usefulness) and it's still not clear because you have some but not all of the "Personal Service Medals" (ie the Humanitarian Service Medal, NDSM, and GWOTM-service, all of which are included, but the PoW & Armed Forces Reserve Medals are also and they're not included - and probably shouldn't be).

How and where is the line drawn? Can it be drawn anywhere? (I hope so as I like the idea of this template) Gecko G (talk) 22:43, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

I don't know where to draw the line, other than just including medals at this point. I thought about a separate template for ribbon only awards, but we need to hash out organization here first. I do see that I forgot the Military Outstanding Volunteer Service Medal, it could be a bit of a Freudian slip as I am unsure of why this medal exists. Let me bring you up to speed on my thought process when I constructed this. Obviously, I utilized the format from the similar British Campaign Medal template. To start off with I referenced page 64 of Manual of Military Decorations and Awards: Volume 3, I constructed a timeline of awards by date, starting with the obsolete awards. I fit them into chronological sections according to the time for which they could be earned; some of that ended up being in order of precedence, others it did not. The order of wear for the Span Am commems moved around over the years, plus with Army medals and Naval service medals, there were medals that would never be worn together, so a determination had to be made on where to put them; the early medals were easy, the later medals got dicier. I am open to suggestion and have, myself come up with a modification that I will post below in another section. EricSerge (talk) 15:47, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
So your doing service awards that are not ribbon only awards? There's nothing wrong with that, however If that's the case then calling the template "Campaign" Medals is a misnomer. In that vein your missing a few others (in addition to the Volunteering medal you noted): PoW Medal, Combat Readiness Medal, the various Good Conduct Medals, the various Reserve Medals, and the Navy & Coast Guard Marksmanship Medals.
What is the purpose, point, goal, or usage you have in mind with this template?
I wonder if the template wouldn't just be better to get expanded to include all service awards (ie all non-decorations and non-unit awards). It would A) be more clear cut what is and is not meant to be included (though even still there's a few unclear cases - ie the Training Ribbons and Marksmanship stuff - and questions such as is the PoW medal a decoration or a service medal? and similars), & B) it would be in line with DoD terminology (calling it either Service awards or CE&S awards - either case would match DoD usage - ie see vol. 1 of that same source you linked to).
Another potential route might be to just expand it to include every award that has an actual medal (thus not the unit awards nor the ribbon-only stuff) - but even then, some of the [non-identification] badge's are rather "medal-like" (ie some of the Marine Corp Marksmanship stuff, and the various Army Combat insignia's, etc. to a layperson unfamiliar with the military those can seem like "medals") so there's still cases where the line might not be clear.
Ultimately I suppose it comes down to my above question about what you had in mind with this template? Cheers, Gecko G (talk) 20:27, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Utlimately, I wanted to build the web and link related medals. Many of the missing medals/awards already showed up on other service specific templates or on Template:US interservice decorations; this one bridges a gap in currently existing templates, but does include some overlap. I also chose the term campaign medals as a generic usage of the terms and not the DoD specific definition. Just like the creator of Template:US interservice decorations chose the word decorations even though the bottom half is not decorations. EricSerge (talk) 22:57, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Bridging the gap as in including the older medals? that is an improvement, however, in some respects this "builds the web" in basically the same size just using different pieces (or "links"). The individual templates you want to replace (namely I presume you are refering to Template:US interservice decorations, Template:USAF decorations, Template:USArmy decorations, Template:US Navy Department decorations, & Template:USCG decorations) don't have the older medals but do include the relevant decorations and unit awards, which this does not. Overall I'd say that's like changing the "built web" from "12" to "a dozen", it would probably be better to just add the old ribbons to the existing templates.
As for the name of the template, perhaps I'm using the wrong terminology and I shouldn't be saying "name" but rather "title" - since the existing one's are all named "such-and-such decorations", but the titles are all "Awards and Decorations of the United States such-and-such" and hyperlinked to the article of the same name (except for the minor difference on the one for the Navy & Marines combined). I would only be guessing as to why the templates are named "decorations", but ultimately it's the title (or header) that's more important to me than the short name. I can't think of any definition of "Campaign medal"s, generic or specific, that specifically includes all the one's listed and doesn't include others not listed.
Hopefully other editors will weigh in here, Cheers, Gecko G (talk) 20:05, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
So really there is no need to do a ribbons only award template. This template connects all campaign and service medals, be they Army service, Naval service, or are obsolete. Adding the obsolete to the existing templates maintains the current silos by service. EricSerge (talk) 21:59, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
This title is better. Are you planning on creating an article to link the title to, like other such templates have?
I had hoped others would see this discussion and commented by now, should it maybe be mentioned at WP:MILHIST?
I'm still not convinced this is an improvement. The old system had everything for a particular service in 2 small template's (the service specific one and the interservice template) but lacked the obsolete awards (and as you say it didn't have cross-service awards - though how often do you need that info?). This has the obsolete awards but doesn't have decorations, ribbon-only awards, some service awards (ie the POW medal, etc.), and training and qualification things like the marksmanship medals or the NCO ribbons. Maybe what is needed is just one big template with ALL the awards. Gecko G (talk) 22:49, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
I was only going to write an article about campaign medals if the template did not get nuked. I even went so far as to buy a couple of books. EricSerge (talk) 00:13, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

order listed?[edit]

I can't see by what criteria they are listed. Recommend either a note to explain or abcdize. – S. Rich (talk) 19:33, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

 Comment: my 2¢: I wouldn't alphabetize them. It's the same format as used at British Campaign Medals template - chronologically by creation, thus also in precedence order. Cheers, Gecko G (talk) 19:53, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your 2$. I'm not sure they are in any order; the KDSM predates the GWOT medals, but is at the end. Once the order is established, a small notation can be provided on the template title as to how they are listed. – S. Rich (talk) 20:50, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, I wasn't clear - Chronologically in the order the medal was created/authorized, not chronologically in terms of the time period they covered. While the KDSM was "ordered to be created" in 2002 (by an E.O. of Bush and as part of the 2003 Defense Budget), it wasn't actually created and approved till later (I've got conflicting info on when it actually was authorized- 2003, 2004, 2009 - in any event, after the GWOTM medals - and it's specifically listed after them in the order of precedence).
I'm not sure what you mean by "on the template title"?, I thought you meant as a footnote or something similar?
Perhaps a similar discussion should be started at Template talk:British campaign medals?
Cheers, Gecko G (talk) 21:38, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
Further, I just noticed, it's definately in Chronological order but it's not in precedence order, since the Armed Forces Service Medal & Humanitarian Service Medal are lower in precedence. At first I thought it was because the AFSM is considered a "Deployed Service Medal" & the Humanitarian Service Medal is considered a "Personal Service Medal" and thus they rank differently in precedence than with Campaign & Expeditionary Medals, but a number of other awards in this template are also considered "Personal Service" (ie NDSM, GWOTSM) or "Deployed Service" (Antarctica, KDSM) medals so I'm not sure how precedence is determined. Gecko G (talk) 21:58, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
Mostly chronological, by date of creation. EricSerge (talk) 15:47, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Alternate format[edit]

This version takes the Commemorative medals out of the mix and puts them at the top, just like the Navy's order of wear as shown in the Code of Federal Regulations, 1967. EricSerge (talk) 15:56, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

At first glance I liked this. But upon thinking it through, it raises several further questions and issues.
The simplist is that The Medal for Humane Action is both a service medal and a commemorative (I'd say leave it as is)
But the questions are not all that easy because there are a whole series of other early "commemoratives", of varying "officialness", and with aspects of a "campaign" or "service" medal nature mixed with aspects of a "personal decoration" or "unit award" type of nature:
  • Four Chaplains' Medal (closest in nature to a decoration, but also has elements of a operational service medal)
  • Cardenas Medal of Honor (has elements of all three basic types- personal decoration, unit award, and service award)
  • The Army of the James Medal (aka the Butler Medal or aka Colored Troops Medal) & the Kearney Medal (they have elements of both a unit award and a campaign medal)
  • the Specially Meritorious Medal was originally intended as a sort of campaign medal for specific acts during the Cuba theater during the Spanish-American War, but it ended up being a non-combat decoration for a single event.
  • The Gilmore Medal (basically a campaign or OSM medal but was also awarded as a personal decoration)
  • NC-4 Medal (Commemorative or unit award?)
Cheers, Gecko G (talk) 21:04, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
The Commems that I included met two criteria, they were in one service or another's order of wear and were created by an Act of Congress. The Specially Meritorious Medal is on the bubble for inclusion, but based on its place in the order of wear, its up with decorations; the Four Chaplains' Medal has never shown up in an order of wear, to my knowledge, and again, like the Specially Meritorious Medal, seems more like a decoration. The other semi-official medals: Kearny Cross, Butler Medal, and Gillmore Medal, being unit specific awards do not seem to meet those criteria; the Gillmore Medal is closest to a campaign award, the others were for specific acts and therefore seem more like decorations. EricSerge (talk) 22:06, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Ok, at least there is a definate criteria then - though my 2¢ vote would still be against this alterative - though I definately think the name of this one is an improvement. What do others say? Gecko G (talk) 20:03, 10 June 2014 (UTC)


Currently, on Firefox at least, lines are allowed to break with a ribbon at the end of the line and its description at the beginning of the next line. There's a comment in the code that the   at the start of the lines is necessary for line wrapping to work correctly, but then there is a plain space between the image and the description, allowing it to break there. Any problem with, or objection to, my replacing those plain spaces with  , forcing the image and its description to the same line and making it nicely aligned on the left in the process? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 22:30, 8 September 2018 (UTC)