Talk:United States Marine Corps: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 00:53, 9 March 2022 editThewolfchild (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers51,891 edits →Mass image removal ← Previous edit		Revision as of 01:10, 9 March 2022 edit undoHorse Eye's Back (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users51,925 edits →Mass image removal Next edit →
Line 149:		Line 149:
	: See the MOS for images, we aren't supposed to have text which is sandwiched between two images... What we had before I edited it down was a comical amount of pictures which made this page look like a drunk teenager had done the layout. ] (]) 15:26, 8 March 2022 (UTC)		: See the MOS for images, we aren't supposed to have text which is sandwiched between two images... What we had before I edited it down was a comical amount of pictures which made this page look like a drunk teenager had done the layout. ] (]) 15:26, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
	::I'm familiar with mos:img, and I've fixed ''numerous'' pages becuase of that very reason, but I didn't have to remove images to so, there are other options. Perhaps there were too many images and perhaps they were placed poorly, but I didn't contest any of that. I simply posted them here so there is a record, which is commonly done with mass-removals of content, as some people may disagree with which images were removed. - '']'' 00:53, 9 March 2022 (UTC)		::I'm familiar with mos:img, and I've fixed ''numerous'' pages becuase of that very reason, but I didn't have to remove images to so, there are other options. Perhaps there were too many images and perhaps they were placed poorly, but I didn't contest any of that. I simply posted them here so there is a record, which is commonly done with mass-removals of content, as some people may disagree with which images were removed. - '']'' 00:53, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
			:::I considered other options, but there were just too many pictures for anything but either a deep cut or a completely separate gallery. No judgement on image content. ] (]) 01:10, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Revision as of 01:10, 9 March 2022

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the United States Marine Corps article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

United States Marine Corps is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.

This article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 17, 2007.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
December 31, 2005	Peer review	Reviewed
August 31, 2006	WikiProject peer review	Reviewed
September 22, 2006	Featured article candidate	Promoted
August 24, 2011	Featured article review	Demoted
Facts from this article were featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on July 11, 2004, November 10, 2008, November 10, 2009, November 10, 2010, November 10, 2012, and November 10, 2015.
Current status: Former featured article

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: Aviation / Maritime / National / North America / United States / Early Modern / American Revolution / American Civil War / World War I / World War II / Cold War

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

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	Maritime warfare task force
	National militaries task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	Early Modern warfare task force (c. 1500 – c. 1800)
	American Revolutionary War task force
	American Civil War task force
	World War I task force
	World War II task force
	Cold War task force (c. 1945 – c. 1989)

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

United States: Military history High‑importance

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 Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.

United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by WikiProject Military history - U.S. military history task force.

Template:WP1.0

Archives

Index

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4

Part of the Navy Discussion

This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

Marine Corps casualties section

I’m unclear on this, but what are we gaining from this section? Garuda28 (talk) 01:34, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

I don't know either. Given that the same user added similar information to History of the United States Marine Corps, it's redundant here anyway. User had been warned for 3RR, but reverted anyway. BilCat (talk) 04:05, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Correct 0-3 USMC (& USN, USCG) Rank insignia

I added a correct image for the USMC/ USN/ USCG 0-3 rank insignia and it keep being reverted by those who just use the excuse that the previous one (the US Army & US Air Force) has always been in use. If anyone besides myself, can help me make my point to those who are -not- knowledgeable to the US military rank insignias,(but keep reverting it back because they can), that the one I updated is the correct one. Even the shoulder boards that is in the article page shows the correct one.

USMC / USN/ USCG

USA / USAF/ USSP

The image you keep trying to swap-in you uploaded yourself, and you've added no reliable sources to support you changes, while engaging in a slow edit war. Here is an example of a reliable source. Please have a look at it, specifically the images of USMC Captains bars and Army Captains bars. Thank you - wolf 06:57, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Ok since youre clearly not in the military and wouldnt know that the DoD typically uses Army rank insignia since they are the senior most branch, here are examples. Please have a look at ACTUAL Marines in uniform, specifically their rank insignias. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonorza (talk • contribs) 07:06, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Whoa, you need to cool your jets son. Whether I am, or was, in the military in none of your business. That said, I have already shared with previously that I did in fact serve. But this isn't the military, this is Misplaced Pages, where sourcing and consensus determine content, not ranting and personal opinions.

Those two links you just added are likely of little use. You need to provide images, that themselves are reliably supported, and fit in with the other rank images already in use. Then you need to establish a consensus to support your proposed changes. And you need to do without the ad hominem attacks. You could be a full Admiral, it still gives you no more weight here than anyone else. (In fact, being military could even be a WP:COI). Anyways, do not make anymore comments about people's personal business. Focus on edits, not editors. - wolf 08:25, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Ok, well since you want to be the end all for this page, what 'image' that can reliably supported besides the ones already shown to support that fact that I provided? (An actual service members wearing said insignia). The military rank insignias, though similar in appearance, are not universal in the DoD, and to try to say otherwise is disingenuous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonorza (talk • contribs) 04:23, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Ok, well since you want to be the end all for this page". That's what I'm talking about right there, that kind of needless, personal jab. I Haven't made any personal comments about you, why don't you try to do the same. As for the pics you added, anyone can get some ACUs from a surplus shop, stick on insignia they got from eBay and take a photo of themselves. I'm not saying that you did that, but it's the reason WP has a sourcing policy. You need to familiarize yourself with that. You also need to understand how consensus works and why we have that guideline as well. Otherwise, continuing with this is just a waste of time. - wolf 16:47, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Based on this document published by the US Navy in 2018 on page 21, the insignia they provide matches the USA and USAF insignia. --Cdjp1 (talk) 09:29, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Isn't it ultimately down to the machinery used by whichever uniform contractor manufactures the badges? I remember seeing both styles in my time in both the Navy and Army. Seems like a pretty petty thing to go to war over. WhampoaSamovar (talk) 21:39, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Extremism in the ranks

Recent edits regarding including some history of white supremacy in the traditions and culture section. Source is questionable per https://en.m.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Guide_to_addressing_bias

Citing some incidence in the past of certain beliefs and actions hardly makes it tradition or part of the culture of the organization especially when the organization itself has repeatedly stated that is not the case.

https://www.npr.org/2020/03/31/824370942/marine-corps-aims-to-tackle-evolving-face-of-white-supremacy

https://taskandpurpose.com/news/marines-corps-root-out-racism/

https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Military/2020/0303/U.S.-Marines-lead-charge-in-rooting-out-racism-in-military-ranks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.251.246.246 (talk) 17:59, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

All three of those sources seem to be supporting the fact that historically the Marine Corps has had a major issue with this, did you read them? Your argument that because the Marine Corps has taken action on these issues the issues never existed in the first place is most peculiar, can you expand on it? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:07, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

I agree with the IP editor that the content about extremism/white supremacy doesn't belong under "7.2 Unofficial traditions and customs". But I do think there's been sufficient coverage of the problem for it to be included in the article. I'd suggest its own subsection under "Culture". Schazjmd (talk) 18:44, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

I was trying to fit it into the framework we already had and I didn’t want to make it seem like an officially endorsed part of the corps, a separate subsection is definitely doable. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 23:10, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Some re-wording is needed so as not to appear to be painting the entire Corps with the same brush. Would also suggest moving to a new "Controversies" subsection under culture. (imho) - wolf 05:46, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Semper Fidelis

The article states that this was adopted as the Marine motto in 1883, at the suggestion of the then-Commandant. But why? What led up to this, why then, and why that motto? Some detail would improve the article.

The article does state that about a third of the Corps left in 1861 and fought against the United States. Was there any contemporary discussion of this when the Corps’ new motto was announced? Again, more detail needed. 24.4.136.172 (talk) 04:43, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Feel free to find some sources and add that information, then. Seraphimblade 09:08, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Mass image removal

See comments below gallery;

The Marine Band, dubbed "The President's Own"
Continental Marines landing at New Providence in March 1776 during the Battle of Nassau, the first amphibious landing of the Marine Corps, during the American Revolutionary War
U.S. Marines leading Arab mercenaries to victory under U.S. Navy Lieutenant William Eaton and U.S. Marine Corps First Lieutenant Presley O'Bannon during the Battle of Derna
U.S. Marines storming Chapultepec castle under a large American flag, paving the way for the fall of Mexico City
The flag of the United States Marine Corps from 1914 to 1939
U.S. Marines from 3rd Battalion, 3rd Marines during the Desert Storm deployment in 1990–1991
U.S. Marines conducting a dawn patrol in Afghanistan's Nawa District, Helmand Province, 2010
Two Marines of 3rd Battalion, 6th Marines engaging the enemy during Operation Moshtarak in Afghanistan's Helmand Province
3rd Battalion, 4th Marines loading 120mm mortar rounds during Operation Inherent Resolve in Syria, 2018
Marine recruits on a Squad Rush course
A Marine AH-1Z Viper landing on USS Makin Island in 2010
McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet of Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 212 (VMFA-212) over the South China Sea

Bravo Battery, 1st Battalion, 11th Marines, fight off Iraqi units on 26 March 2003

These 12 images, along with this video clip, were removed today (by another editor), with seven consecutive edits over the course of about 30 minutes. Only edit summaries were repeated comments about "sandwiches". I'm posting them all here to have a visual record, as well as a possible starting point for a discussion should anyone wish to talk about this. - wolf 08:04, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

See the MOS for images, we aren't supposed to have text which is sandwiched between two images... What we had before I edited it down was a comical amount of pictures which made this page look like a drunk teenager had done the layout. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 15:26, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm familiar with mos:img, and I've fixed numerous pages becuase of that very reason, but I didn't have to remove images to so, there are other options. Perhaps there were too many images and perhaps they were placed poorly, but I didn't contest any of that. I simply posted them here so there is a record, which is commonly done with mass-removals of content, as some people may disagree with which images were removed. - wolf 00:53, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

I considered other options, but there were just too many pictures for anything but either a deep cut or a completely separate gallery. No judgement on image content. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 01:10, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Categories: