Talk:Stanley C. Norton

26 September 2021

Jamesallain85 attendance at a military academy such as Annapolis is usually categorized as being the start of a military career and would fall under Military career rather than education. I don't understand why you insist on having the detail of the sinking of U-85 in the lede rather than under military career where it properly belongs. I note that the Register of the commission and warrant officers of the Navy of the United States, including officers of the Marine Corps does confirm his posting to the Montana however "Due to the Act of May 22, 1917, he, along with many service men, received a temporary promotion to Lieutenant in June of 1918, about the time of his originally planned graduation date." is not stated in that source and just repeats what is in the previous paragraph. Also if you are adding references like Army and Navy journal you must add the page numbers. And also learn to use proper ship formatting. I would note that all the Register of the commission and warrant officers of the Navy of the United States that you are adding are PRIMARY and don't count towards notability. Mztourist (talk) 10:19, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

I moved the info about the U-85 below into career, which I planned to do. It doesn't fit well as it is currently written in the context of the surrounding text, but I moved it. The reason I left his academy time under Early life and education, is because until he received his commission he was not an active duty service member, he was a cadet. That is the same reason I do not add his Academy years to his time in service. I don't think it is out of place to reiterate the date of his promotion compared to that of his graduation date, it is just to place emphasis on the timeline of how things took place.Jamesallain85 (talk) 10:40, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

As most military bios are written, time as a cadet counts towards service. Repeating the same information should not be done. What was the Act of May 22, 1917? Mztourist (talk) 10:54, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

The Act of May 22, 1917 I think is covered under (U.S.C., title 34, sec. 212), which I am having issue with my internet getting the document to load. It deals with war time control over the US Navy, I believe it increased the number of cadets at the academy and also temporarily promoted large numbers of lower ranking servicemen as the Navy grew and prepared for war. It was also used at the start of WWII, as mentioned in [Order 8984].Jamesallain85 (talk) 12:08, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

You say he was a Commodore but United States destroyer operations in World War II at p 74 says he was a Commander as does U-Boats off the Outer Banks at p 138. Read Commodore (United States) the rank was disestablished in 1899 and reestablished in April 1943, so he was not a Commodore. Mztourist (talk) 13:33, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

I think what you are missing is the historical context. The reason it was probably in quotes in the book probably meant it more as a title. A Commodore is similar to Army Specialist vs. Corporal, it denotes a leadership role. It could be that he was referred to as Commodore without holding the rank of Commodore, because as you stated at that time it didn't exist. That's fine, I'll omit it if it bothers you that much.Jamesallain85 (talk) 18:26, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Except specialist (in all its flavors) is a rank, while commodore was not at the time. And time as a cadet counts toward service time because service academy cadets are enlisted when they enter the academy. If a cadet leaves an academy they are processed out using a DD214. Intothatdarkness 19:32, 26 September 2021 (UTC)