Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Medal of Honor recipients/archive2

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was not promoted by The Rambling Man 07:42, 16 April 2010 [1].

List of Medal of Honor recipients

Nominator(s): Kumioko (talk) 17:42, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it meets all the criteria for featured list. This is the second submission. Kumioko (talk) 17:42, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Staxringold _talk^contribs 21:13, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As I commented during the Basketball HoF list, I feel some of the sections without tables need expanded leads to provide a satisfactory summary of what is to be found at the main article. The Civil War summary, for example, is summarizing more than 1500 medals awarded. Yet, it receives only a couple sentences, far less than the Spanish American War or the Boxer Rebellion. The World Wars, Korea, and Vietnam have reasonable length summaries, but I feel that the Civil War, Indian Wars, and Peacetime sections need serious expansion to properly cover the topic within. Staxringold _talk^contribs 21:13, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Am I correct that Michael E. Thornton was the last man to receive the medal while still alive (he got his in 72, so later than the Liberty incident)? Worth mentioning?
Is there any info on why the medal was so commonplace, relatively, in the Civil and Indian Wars?

Thanks all good points and Ill get to those suggestions right away. On the last point the answer is yes, it was pretty much the only award they could get till world war I. There were a few campaign ribbons, brevet promotions and the purple heart (known as the Medal of merit back then) but for valor, that was it. --Kumioko (talk) 22:49, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The section heads are still quite quite short. See List of members of the Basketball Hall of Fame for an example of serious length. Staxringold _talk^contribs 03:49, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support Reywas92^Talk 22:13, 31 March 2010 (UTC) ;~~Comments~~[reply]

There is some image problem for the Korean Expedition - there's whitespace on the right of the images.
- I'm not sure why this is happening, I think it might be the way the image is. I tried a variety of different things and I couldn't fix it. If you know how to fix it please do. --Kumioko (talk) 03:19, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sections with the list as a subarticle should summarize that list. How many people earned the medal in that conflict? Most give a description of the conflict itself, but nothing about the medal recipients with WP:Summary style.
mid-August, 1934 → mid-August 1934
- Done --Kumioko (talk) 03:11, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
from 1916–1924 → from 1916 to 1924
- Done --Kumioko (talk) 03:11, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
from 1909–1933 → from 1909 to 1933
- Done --Kumioko (talk) 03:11, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
occurred from 1959-April 30, 1975 → occurred from 1959 to April 30, 1975
- Done --Kumioko (talk) 03:11, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice overall. Reywas92^Talk 23:18, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are the notes quotes? If so they should be in quotations. For instance, I can't imagine you came up with "Stood on the gunwale on the Benicia's launch, lashed to the ridgerope and remained unflinchingly in this dangerous position and gave his soundings with coolness and accuracy under a heavy fire." yourself... (see Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Quotation_marks). The Rambling Man (talk) 10:15, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:09, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*Our article calls it the Andrews' Raid (note the apostrophe)

- Done - I chanegd it to the Great locomotive chase. I think its less ambiguous than Andrews' raid. --Kumioko (talk) 14:03, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"armed forces - although" shouldn't be a hyphen per WP:DASH.
- Done --Kumioko (talk) 16:52, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"nearly 1522 were awarded" so, 1521? This is a strange phrase...
- Done --Kumioko (talk) 16:52, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Guam, Phillipines overlinked.
- Done - I think I fixed this know. --Kumioko (talk) 23:33, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I would have thought the "aboard the USS xxx" should sort by the xxx, not by "aboard".
- "Done' I think they all sort correctly. --Kumioko (talk) 14:45, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"The United States" just "the United States" I think.
- Could you clarify which the United States you are referring too. This is used several times and I am not sure which you are referring. --Kumioko (talk) 17:03, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - The one where you use "The" instead of "the"... The Rambling Man (talk) 17:50, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done I think --Kumioko (talk) 19:18, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"U.S.S. Philadelphia" vs "USS Colorado"... be consistent.
- Done - I replaced them all as USS because thats how the template is constructed and I think it looks better that way. --Kumioko (talk) 14:03, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and then there's "U.S.S. CONNECTICUT".
- Done -

That's about half-done. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:41, 31 March 2010 (UTC) Comments[reply]

Not sure about that in-line link in the lead (10 U.S.C. § 6241)...
- Thats how the USC template works as far as I have seen because its linking to an external link. --Kumioko (talk) 14:45, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The swapping of medals for unknown soldiers is not referenced.

Done - Its ref #58. Unless I am not seeing the right place. --Kumioko (talk) 11:29, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"presented during the four years of this" they were actually presented during the war? just checking...
- 'Done I fixed the wording on this I think but let me know if I need to clarify further. --Kumioko (talk) 14:45, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Check the toolbox; there are a couple dead links. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:41, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think I got everyhing covered know. Please let me know if I missed anythng. --Kumioko (talk) 02:37, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

"Spanish-American War" Needs an en dash, not a hyphen. Multiple occurences of this.
"Philippine-American War" Needs and en dash, not a hyphen. Multiple occurences of this.
"While current regulations, (10 U.S.C. § 6241), beginning in 1918, explicitly state that recipients " Doesn't make sense; how can regulations "begin" to state something in a year?
The Spanish–American War section does not mention the MOH awardees at all.
In general, the undue weight given to the events over the recipients is an issue for most of the sections. I would expect only two or three sentences for each event, and a similar or greater amount of prose dedicated to the awardees per sections.
Are all of those external links really necessary? Dabomb87 (talk) 22:17, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.