Talk:Australian Defence Medal/Archive 1

Archive 1

Deleted "Distinguished Attendance" joke.

I deleted the sentence about colloquial description of this medal as "Distinguished Attendance" medal. I consider this to be a derisory comment, not appropriate to the introductory paragraph. Perhaps a new paragraph on "Controversy" or "Acceptance" could be added. Some ADF members were unimpressed with this medal, compared with the service and achievements recognised by other honours, awards and decorations - particularly compared with those of veterans. It may also be noteworthy that the medal is not connected with the various long service medals, which are awarded at 15 years, with clasps/rosettes for subsequent 5 yearly awards. There are no clasps for the ADM. A number of joking names for it were circulated by ADF members, including "ADFA Medal" (since three years at ADFA and a year of officer training would qualify a new officer for the medal), but "Distinguished Attendance" would only be one of them. Targetonmyback 00:58, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Unsigned comments

Lets get a few of the names. A few of my mates have some good ones. Even if we don't put it in the article I want some new ones.

We have so far;

ADFA Medal, Mickey Mouse Medal, Battle of short time (said quickly to make it almost sound like a foreign language.), Me too....

I can't think of any more. There are heaps.

One example

One that is bandied around RMC is 'Canberra Campaign medal' which is a variation of the 'ADFA medal' theme.AustralianRupert (talk) 07:10, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

To clarify, I mention this not to denigrate the ADM, but to state what I have heard the award referred to. That does not necessarily mean I endorse the sentiment. — AustralianRupert (talk) 14:56, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Comment

I cannot describe how much the comments by Australian Rupert angered me. In particular comments about suffering from PTSD. After this insult to suffers of PTSD the comment is made “Oh, and I also have a sense of humour too”. Since when has PTSD been a joke? As an officer and a leader you are the joke. I served four and half years in the Australian Army. During this time I was witnessed the death and the aftermath of six defence personal as a result of two separate incidents. All six died in uniform serving their country. The only award they are entitled too is the ADM (Australian Defence Medal). I feel this award is worthy recognition not just for the fallen but for each of the families that have lost a father, son, brother or relative in the service of our nation. For others to degrade or make fun of this award is unforgivable especially from serving officer. Out of these two instances my fellow soldiers along with myself have suffered with PTSD and regrettably in the end this has resulted in the suicide of more than one soldier. So I say no award on the Australian Honour’s list should be degraded. No serving member of the Australian Defence force should be degrading any part of the uniform, awards or otherwise and PTSD should never be a joke. Rememberingthefallen (talk) 00:12, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Reply

Hello. Please be advised that the only comment I added was the "Canberra Campaign medal". I did not add the comments above that about Mickey Mouse medal, etc, which were added by users that did not sign their posts. Nevertheless, I apologise if this comment offended you. — AustralianRupert (talk) 13:26, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

To provide some context to the reference you make to PTSD so that others may understand your comment, you are refering to the comment on my user page where I stated that I felt that I might have "gotten PTSD from my time at RMC". That was the only comment I made about PTSD and as such I feel that you are maybe over reacting just a bit. As a user page, the content is mainly for the user, rather than any other audience, nevertheless I understand that this offended you and for that I apologise. It has been removed. — AustralianRupert (talk) 14:56, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Notes section

The Notes section of this article lacks relevance, I'd suggest it be removed if this article is developed further, edited or under GA review. Reasoning for removal is as per WP:Trivia, and that it is already incorporated into the Claude Choules and HMAS Choules (L100) articles. -- Aeonx (talk) 13:29, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

I agree with your assessment of the section's relevance and decided to be bold. Cheers. EricSerge (talk) 15:02, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes that seems reasonable to me. Anotherclown (talk) 15:11, 15 June 2012 (UTC)