Talk:Badge of Military Merit/Archive

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This page is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to the current talk page.

Contents

Merge Notice

I saw the merge notice and must vote to oppose any such move. The Badge of Military is a completely separate decoration from the Purple Heart and is considered as such by the Institute of Heraldry. The Badge of Military Merit also has several links to it which only concern this article, and not the Purple Heart, the most important of which is Obsolete military awards of the United States. I OPPOSE a merge. -Husnock 23:46, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Revolution era badges

Did I misunderstand something. There were 3 original badges given, but only one (Brown's) still exists? But there is a modern looking photo of Churchills' badge. It begs the question of what happened to Churchill's badge that Brown's is now the only one existing? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gloryroad (talk • contribs) 22:41, August 6, 2006 (UTC)

That's a good question. According to this site, "Elijah Churchill was decorated by Gen. Washington at New Winsdor Contonement at Vale's Gate along with two other men with the Military Badge of Merit. Found in Museum at Vale's Gate New Windsor." There is a lot of confusion about this badge. I believe the actual total of badges given was 6. (see above link) My ancestor, Louis Alexander Lizotte/Lezott/Lezotte, also received this award, but it is not found in any history books. Yet my distant cousin, when he was doing research in order to qualify for membership in the Sons of the American Revolution, discovered the badge and accompanying certificate for Lezotte, which I believe reside in a Connecticut museum. I don't have access to my genealogy info at the moment, so I'll need to check back and make sure that's accurate. Unfortunately, this falls under "original research", but I'll see if I can find anything else on the badge in published sources. Katr67 18:25, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
I am the writer who edited this page numerous times today noting that there was more than just three soldiers that obtained this award, etc. Many genealogists have copies of their ancestor's discharges showing the Badge of Merit. It is a shame that better research was not done before it was put forth that only three soldiers received this original award. Many sources only repeat this same erroneous story. This ignores the recognition of many fine soldiers. It is also a shame that the Badge of Honorary Distinction award was completely ignored by historians.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Armycaptain (talk • contribs) 09:19, September 30, 2006 (UTC)
I have studied more about the rules of Wikipedia and have tried to edit this page better on my second attempt. I feel that it is very important to correct the record about the origin of the Badge of Military Merit. Based on existing and published (not original!) research (George Washington Papers), the Badge of Military Merit was one of three original badges, or awards, and NOT the first award in the singular sense. Like the other two Honarary Badges, all three are obsolete badges. I have added my sources in the discussion page (where I found the others). I hope this was correct.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Armycaptain (talk • contribs) 3:03, October 1, 2006 (UTC)
I'll take a look at it. We definitely need to clean up the references section. See below about sources. Katr67 21:03, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
I found my genealogy stuff. My cousin found a copy of Louis Lisote's discharge papers in the National Archives, and at the bottom it says "The above Louis Lisote has been honored with the Badge of Merit for five years faithful service." It was signed by Moses Hazen. Katr67 21:19, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

My ancestor's discharge was also signed by Moses Hazen! In fact, I have examined all the orderly books for this regiment. Most of these original books are in the original manuscript collection at the Historical Society of Pennsylvania and have examined them. I have been studying this Regiment for almost 10 years now. Whose Company was your ancestor in? Armycaptain 01:25, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Re: Louis Lizot/Lisot: "He had enlisted...as a private in Captain Gilbert's Company, Hazen's Regiment during the winter of 1777 and served at White Plains and at the taking of Cornwallis. He was also a private in Captain Olivier's 3rd Company and was honorably discharged...in June 1783." From a history of Chazy, New York. Katr67 15:41, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I really don't like the way the article starts out stating the award was for Valor. The term is clearly sourced (comes from an SAR article), but I don't think the SAR is right. Nothing in Washington's order mentions valor. The military has different awards for Valor, Bravery, Courage, Heroism, Merit, etc. The SAR appears to have wanted to tie their overview of badges throughout history with a theme and Valor sounded good. It opens the door to inaccuracy. Armycaptain 00:05, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

William Brown's Badge

Actually William Brown's orginial was in possesion by decendants and was lost in a fire. I believe in other research, Churchill's does exist in Conneticut. I hope to find my documents on this subject when I return to Cincinnati in September. That way we can have less confusion. Ryanburgess 06:07, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Sources

Katr67 18:46, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I feel the U.S. Army Military History Institute page and, if used, the Connecticut SAR page should also be cited as sources on the article -- not just the discussion page. As it stands, I interpret the article source (before my edits) as coming from the National Geographic material. Is this correct?
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Armycaptain (talk • contribs) 5:58, October 1, 2006
Sources are not cited on the talk page. The talk page is for discussing ways to improve the article. I just stuck these sources on this page back in August for future reference and never got back to it. On the main page, sources are placed in the "References" section (or, in this article, "Footnotes"). If you can use these on the main page, please cite them properly there. Please see WP:CITE about citing your sources. Also, please sign your posts with 4 tildes (~~~~). Thanks. Katr67 20:10, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Revert of recent edits

Sorry I had to revert the recent edits, but looking over the edits, there was some good stuff there but there were three major problems, those being:

1) Virtually all of the material was unsourced and in one case stated that historians have actually not been able to verify it.

2) The text contained several personal opinions, in constrast to the Wikipedia:Neutral point of view policy

3) The rewrites destroyed the existing syntax and took out most of the links to other articles.

Given these serious problems, I suggest working on a rewrite on a temp page and then moving over confirmed pieces without blanking or destroying the existing text. -Husnock 18:46, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I am new to Wikipedia and cannot for the life of me find a way to contact Husnock or reply to Katr67! So my last resort is to post this on the discussion page so hopefully they can contact me by my Wikipedia registered email. I tried the Wikipedia instructions for sending a private email and it just didn't work. Sorry!
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Armycaptain (talk • contribs) 17:30, September 30, 2006
Hi Armycaptain. See my reply on your talk page.<-click there Katr67 00:53, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Thank you Katr67. Still a bit confusing. Husnock, please let me know the source of the August 7, 1782 order so I can do further research. Thank you.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Armycaptain (talk • contribs) 11:05, September 30, 2006

Reverted additions by User:Armycaptain that need to be backed by sources

Researchers have not been able to locate or account for the above-mentioned "book of merit."
Without a doubt, Washington chose to publically single out these three men for their unusual gallant conduct on the battlefield as an example to others. However, Washington never meant for this award to be awarded exclusively to only three non-commissioned officers of the Connecticut Line.
And such was not the case. Many Honorable Discharges of soldiers released at the end of the war show that Washington expanded this Badge of Merit to honor soldiers for their faithful service. This is in accordance to his original August 7, 1782 order to award the Merit for "extraordinary fidelty and essential service." Regimental or Brigade commanders would endorse their names directly following the statement of award on the discharges. These discharge certificates were then submitted to Washington as "incentestable proof" of the award recipients' eligibility. Microfilmed images of these discharges bearing Washington's signature can be found in the individual records of soldiers at the National Archives.
Examples of those awarded the Badge of Merit for their "years of faithful service" include Solomone Drowne of the 1st Rhode Island Regiment, Abner Treman of the 2nd New York Regiment and Colin McLachlan of Moses Hazen's "Congress's Own" Regiment. Also receiving this award was Oliver Cromwell, an African-American soldier in the 2nd New Jersey Regiment.

I wanted to keep track of these additions here. I have added some links, but otherwise have not edited for POV or anything else. Katr67 23:33, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Temporary page

I made a temp page, as suggested by Husnock. It can be reached by clicking the link at the very top of the page. Armycaptain, I moved your changes there until I have time to check the references and format them to match the rest of the article. Please don't be offended. I'm at work and I don't have time to look at it right now, and now that the article is cleaned up, I would perfer it stay that way. Thanks for understanding. Katr67 15:41, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Katr67 please check your mytalk. Armycaptain 22:42, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Katr67, ooops, I tried but am not too familiar with that just yet. Please advise when you will be able to clean up the article. It would aid in my understanding. Armycaptain 22:54, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
I'll take a look at it tonight. I talked to my coworker in military records today and he had some interesting insights into this whole matter. But first, dinner... Katr67 03:08, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Badge of Distinction

I figured I could add some talk here while you work on the article, Katr67. I OPPOSE you stating their were only two badges created on August 7, 1782: the Honorary Distinction and the Military Merit. The Honorary Distinction badges can be broken down to two slightly different badges, but different nonetheless. These Honorary badges may not be the focus of this article, but they should not be referenced incorrectly. Please correct! Armycaptain 06:14, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Please, you don't have to SHOUT at me.<—click there Please assume good faith.<—click there Please start new discussion threads at the bottom of the page. Look for the "+" tab at the top of the talk page. Clicking it will allow you to start a new topic heading. Please read these: http://www.sons-of-liberty-sar.org/medalsandawards.html and http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292308-1993659.php from reliable sources about the fact that there are two awards, not three. I believe the Badge of Distinction is comparable to the modern example of the Overseas Service Bar. Katr67 08:00, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
Through my emulation of others using caps on the word "oppose", I unwknowingly shouted at you. I reviewed the links you provided. Whether the Badges of Distinction are somehow similar or ancestral to the overseas service bar is immaterial to this article, but a good lead for another linked article about Badges of Honorary Distinction. Washington's General Order is clear. There were three separate awards that fell into two classes of awards. To prevent misleading the reader it must be corrected. Also, it appears that we have now lost our sources for our statement that other veteran's received the Badge of Merit. However, your writing is still accurate and effective. I assume there is some rule in Wikipedia that allows making this statement without having to source the discharges of individual soldier discharges. Did this arise from the Discussion Page? Armycaptain 12:36, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
Also, found a record of an officer showing that officers received the badge of merit: William Heath Sr. Discharged June 6, 1783 “The above William Heath has been honored with a Badge of Merit for four years faithful service. His apointment as Ensigh of a company in the first Regiment of the Second Brigade and in the Eighth Division of Militia in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. His appointment as Captain of a Company in the Second Regiment of the Second Brigade and Tenth Division of the Militia of the Commonwealt of Massachusetts.” http://www.rootsandrelatives.net/getperson.php?personID=I1463&tree=1 Armycaptain 12:43, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
Could you remove the extra period after source #3? Thanks. Armycaptain 12:49, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
I disagree with you about the number of badges. It is clear that there a two awards, one of which has two levels of recognition. The U.S. Army and the Sons of the American Revolution seem to agree. Other editors need to get involved at this point. The sources are still on the temp page. If you mean the period after the third source on that page, I'm not done filling out the citation templates for those sources--they are not ready to be placed on the main page. I did not place them on the main article page yet because the idea that there were more soldiers who received the award is controversial and I wanted to get input from other editors. Also, individual genealogy websites are rife with inaccuracies and wishful thinking and I wanted to find out if the wikicommunity considered these reliable sources. I figured it would be OK to mention that something called the "Badge of Merit" was awarded and this was evident on various discharge papers on microfilm. I went out on a limb and did not link to any particular evidence--our friends at NARA can probably vouch for that info. I wanted to say something to the effect that the idea of more than three BOMMs being awarded was controversial, but I haven't found any evidence to that effect yet, besides a conversation with my coworker who had had a similar discussion with some people at NARA, etc. I'm taking a break from this article. I've tried to explain, and give you links to various wikipolicies, that we try not to just add info to articles willy-nilly, but do what you will, I'll let the other editors work with you. Thanks. Katr67 14:57, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for all your help. Except for the # of badges, I have concurred with your contributions. Some of my questions are not criticisms, but merely trying to learn the Wikipedia process. And these questions come after reviewing the links you have provided. As the Wikipedia guideline on Good Faith notes; remember that you are dealing with newcomers and try not to get frustrated.

There are two periods after the following source on the main page: Fitzpatrick,John C., ed. The Writings of Washington from the Original Manuscript Sources, 1745-1799. 39 vols. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1931-1944; reprint, New York: Greenwood Press, 1970..Armycaptain 18:11, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Edits of January 31, 2007

Mel Johnson, I am sorry but your edits must be reverted! Your additions appear to be your opinions and not based on the sources that you cite. The sources that you cite are actually sources for previous versions and do do not back-up your statements. Find secondary sources that state this award for "unremarkable service" and "like a Good Conduct Medal" before adding this to the article. Also, you provide no documentation about the "dissension among scholars" about the New Hampshire badge. I am sorry if I offend you if you new to Wikipedia. Please review other articles featured in Wikipedia to learn how to make additions.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.126.115.64 (talk • contribs) 21:56, February 3, 2007