Untitled[edit]

This was made for US military members to use as a quick reference. I am in no way disrespecting any other International organization or their decoration that is not listed here, but if the US military does not authorize it's wear or it hasn't been awarded to more then a hand full of US military members. It should not be on this list. I ask any of you to first list the award here to see if the rest of the community agrees on it first? If you do not agree with the top statement, then ask your self. Why is there a direct link to the US military awards page then?EHDI5YS (talk) 23:00, 26 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Restricting the topic to US use?[edit]

"This was made for US military members"
Well actually, are you sure about that? Many non-US people have been involved in its construction.
Also, did you realise that these days there isn't much that the US does that Australia isn't also involved in, and that the contents of this page applies almost identically for Australian military members? Pdfpdf (talk) 11:45, 31 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"If you do not agree with the top statement, then ask your self. Why is there a direct link to the US military awards page then?"
I'm afraid I don't know whether I agree or disagree, because I don't understand what you have said. Which is the top statement? Why should I ask myself? Why not just ask you? You know the answer - I can only guess. Pdfpdf (talk) 11:45, 31 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you wish to restrict the page to "International decorations authorized by the US military for wear by US military members", then you need to change the name of the page. However, the name of the page is currently "International decoration", and "International" means international, it does NOT mean "restricted to the USA". Realise, there are 6 billion people in the world; the US is MUCH less than 10% of them. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:45, 31 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Seems to me that the article should cover any military award bestowed by a major international organization. The only reason I could think of for there to be an article that lists only international decorations recognized by the United States is if we decided to have a similar list for each country's recognized international decorations. Since there isn't a huge number of international decorations, they should probably all be in this one article.
Also, I don't see any link to the U.S. military awards page. Looking through the history, I notice that there was a link to it at one point, but that link is in neither the current version or the original version of the article, and seems to have only been there briefly. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 17:49, 31 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"The only reason I could think of for there to be an article that lists only international decorations recognized by the United States is if we decided to have a similar list for each country's recognized international decorations."

Well that's the beauty of wikipedia, any one can make their own topic page! There is a single topic page about militaries and then some one had an idea of making a new topic page about their own country's military. I do not see any Americans going on to the page of the German or the Australian military pages saying well "there's many militaries, it does NOT mean "restricted to the Australians". Realize, there are 6 billion people in the world; the Australia is MUCH less than 10% of them." so we should add that the US is in NATO or is in the Partnership for Peace with them, on their own page. So that's what I tried to do here by making a page for International decorations that the US allows. But like always, some one had to add their own two cents. So me and my friend that helped creating this page to what it is, did it again and created another International decorations page. But this time it says US authorized International decorations in the title! Thank you all. Best wishes, take care now. I must get back to the page that I created. EHDI5YS 00:36, 3 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi all I'm not the original creator of this page but me and EHDI5YS trans formed this page from almost nothingness to a page that is a little more usefull and colorfull. So all I got to say is for every one, please put all and any international decoration that any military world wide has ever received. The more the better! I mean come on the US is not the only country that puts boots on the ground in conflicts right?! For example, the Iraq & Afghan wars. All the countries in the alliance right now if we added them up that would really come close to the numbers that the US has in just one of those countries. Why do Americans think they saved every body in World War II? We had people fighting all over the world! It's not like we were losing and needed their help when they joined the alliance late, right?! Sp 8503 (talk) 00:56, 3 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's rather difficult to work out what you two are on about. Are you requesting a response, or are you just "venting your spleen", or what? What has this to do with International decorations?
I asked a number of questions - I don't think you answered any of them.
Well that's the beauty of wikipedia, any one can make their own topic page! There is a single topic page about militaries and then some one had an idea of making a new topic page about their own country's military. I do not see any Americans going on to the page of the German or the Australian military pages saying well "there's many militaries, it does NOT mean "restricted to the Australians".
I have no idea what point you are trying to make here. What you have written does not make any sense to me at all. What has this to do with International decorations?
Realize, there are 6 billion people in the world; the Australia is MUCH less than 10% of them."
ditto
so we should add that the US is in NATO or is in the Partnership for Peace with them, on their own page.
ditto
So that's what I tried to do here by making a page for International decorations that the US allows.
Except, until you came along, it was a page of International decorations. Why you felt it acceptable to usurp it soley for American use is beyond my understanding.
But like always, some one had to add their own two cents.
How ironic! Had it not occurred to you that you were the ones "adding your own two cents" by usurping and restricting the use of the page?
So me and my friend that helped creating this page
The page was created in January 2005. You and your friend did not appear on the scene until July 2008.
to what it is, did it again and created another International decorations page. But this time it says US authorized International decorations in the title!
Good! That's what you should have done in the first place. Pdfpdf (talk) 14:45, 3 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi all I'm not the original creator of this page but me and EHDI5YS trans formed this page from almost nothingness to a page that is a little more usefull and colorfull. So all I got to say is for every one, please put all and any international decoration that any military world wide has ever received. The more the better!
Your point being?
I mean come on the US is not the only country that puts boots on the ground in conflicts right?!
The page is about International decorations. The US does not award International decorations - it awards US decorations.
For example, the Iraq & Afghan wars.
What is this an example of? I don't see how it has anything to do with International decorations.
All the countries in the alliance right now if we added them up that would really come close to the numbers that the US has in just one of those countries.
What has this to do with International decorations?
Why do Americans think they saved every body in World War II?
I don't know. Perhaps it is because that's what Hollywood has taught them to think?.
What has this to do with International decorations?
We had people fighting all over the world! It's not like we were losing and needed their help when they joined the alliance late, right?!
Your point being? And again, what has this to do with International decorations? Pdfpdf (talk) 14:45, 3 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Merge proposal[edit]

It seems pretty simple to me. This article is a list of all military awards bestowed by a major international organization, and it should include all such decorations, not just those specific to a particular country. Also, since this list is of quite reasonable length, I see no need for the page International military decoration authorized by the US military; I'm going to propose that it be merged into this article and into Authorized foreign decorations of the United States military, which could be expanded to include international decorations. We can then put a link to that page in the "See also" section of this page. Sound reasonable? Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 21:27, 3 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't think that is necessarily a good idea. I don't have time for a comprehensive response right now; I'll provide a better reply later today. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 22:45, 3 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Right! Sorry about the delay.
"This article is a list of all military awards bestowed by a major international organization, and it should include all such decorations,"
I'd prefer: "This article is a list of all military awards bestowed by international organizations, and it should include all such decorations", or perhaps:
"This article is a list of all military awards bestowed by major international organizations, and it should include all such decorations".
If that is not the same as what you intend, please clarify. For the moment, I'll assume that it is, and hence "Yes, I agree."
"not just those specific to a particular country."
By this I am assuming that you mean "not just those used / approved / authorised by a particular country." If so, "Yes, I agree."
"Also, since this list is of quite reasonable length, I see no need for the page International military decoration authorized by the US military; I'm going to propose that it be merged into this article."
In principle, I agree.
In practice, that page should be a subset of this one, so it depends considerably upon what you mean by "merge" ...
"and into Authorized foreign decorations of the United States military"
No, I do not agree with that.
"Foreign decorations" are a whole different "kettle of fish".
"Foreign decorations" includes every decoration in the universe, except those decorations of the country to which the other decorations are foreign.
a) "Foreign" is specific set which is different for each country, whereas
b) "International" is a defined set that is the same for ALL countries.
Merging "Foreign" in with "International" does not make logical sense.
"We can then ... "
No, I don't think so; I don't think it's quite that simple.
"Sound reasonable?"
No, I don't think so; I don't think it's quite that simple.
However, as I said, depending upon what you mean by "merge", "merging" the two "International" pages seems sensible, depending upon how you intend to capture and present the differences in the two pages. (This could possibly be as simple as putting an asterix against those International decorations that are "US authorised", and adding a footnote explaining this.)
What do you think? Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 14:56, 4 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Replying at Talk:International military decoration authorized by the US military. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 21:06, 4 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm finding it a bit confusing to have two threads of the same conversation occurring simultaneously on two different pages. Hence, I too am making my reply, and further replies, at Talk:International military decoration authorized by the US military. Pdfpdf (talk) 13:49, 5 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Page order[edit]

I changed the order of the organizations to reflect the number of awards and member states, so I have the UN first, (most members and awards), NATO is second in both categories (28 member states), EU is third in both (27 member states). The final 3 only seem to have one award each, so Inter-American Defense Board (26 members), System of Cooperation Among the American Air Forces (SICOFAA) (18 members) and finally the MFO (11, formerly 12 members).

This sound good to everyone? Dr. Stantz (talk) 20:54, 5 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

UNTAC Medal[edit]

This page has missed the UNTAC medal - See United Nations Medal Nford24 (Want to have a chat?) 11:46, 12 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on International decoration. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:07, 15 November 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Split?[edit]

Shouldn't this article be split into Orders, decorations, and medals of the United Nations and Orders, decorations, and medals of NATO? "International" doesn't really satisfy a WP:PRECISE scope, does it? PPEMES (talk) 22:31, 30 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Categories