Talk:Submarine Warfare insignia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

I will be adding the Submarine Medical Badge, Sub Supply Corps Badge, and Engineering Duty Officer Pin in the near future. How can I access the "sub message" at the bottom of the screen? When editing the article it comes up as a template {{}} messsage and not a paragraph that can be altered. -User:Husnock 9 Sep 04

Go to Template:Submarine_insignia --the Epopt 23:02, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Template was acting real screwy. I had to perform minor space changes and character shifts to get it to pick up the new articles. A bug in Wilk to be sure. You'll notice my edits listed as "fixed template". In other news, ALL sub badges now written! Acknowldgement to the Epopt put on the discussion page of Military badges of the United States --Husnock 12 Sep 2004

Should the title reflect that the article is only concerned with submarine insginia in the US navy? Perhaps something like "USN submarine insignia" or Submarine insignia in the US navy?Lisiate 22:33, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

This article is not about "submarine insignia in the US Navy," it is about a very specific award, the Submarine Warfare insignia. Do any other countries have something exactly called the "Submarine Warfare insignia"? Until there is a naming collision, I suggest we stick with the simplest name. ➥the Epopt 23:03, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

Could it be mentioned that the 'dolphins' insignia was a tradition started in the Royal Australian Navy that is now commonplace among many navies

It could, if there is evidence to support it. However, use of dophins in naval insignia likely comes from British custom, or likely far before that, so I have my doubts (still, I'm not an expert in Aussie heraldry, so I could well be wrong). Izuko 21:05, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

I have a documentary on DVD that mentions it (it doesn't go into much detail though), i will have a look on the net for some proper evidence once i get my computer fixed (i even have a username here, if i can remember the password lol)

[edit] A bit of fun

I don't know how to properly add to Wikipedia, but...

A discussion pop up on the Yahoogroups DIRSUP group concerning the FLISH. The FLISH is an unofficial USN designator for someone qualified in birds, boats, and skimmers. It comprises a wing, a warship bow, and a dolphin. An entry in the Warfare insignia wiki would be pretty stout!

I would be glad to write it up, provided it was verifiably a designator in actual use somewhere. See Diesel Boats Forever insignia for an article I did on an unofficial but real pin. ➥the Epopt 03:42, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Submarine Insignia may not be the oldest U.S. Naval Insignia

I believe that the Submarine insignia is likely not the oldest U.S. Naval warfare insignia. Compare the date offered by this Wikipedia page for Submarine Warfare insignia (insignia accepted by acting Secretary of the Navy March 1924) with the date for Naval Aviator wings described by the official Naval Historical Center website in United States Naval Aviation 1910-1995 (Appendices): received from Bailey, Banks, and Biddle by the U.S. Navy December 1917.

I propose removing from the introductory paragraph the phrase "(and is the oldest)" for the sake of historical accuracy.

Absent any disagreement, I will make that change in the near future.

Elsa Shoe 17:32, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unencyclopedic content and unpublished synthesis

I started to go through the article and correct some syntax and grammar... I started by correcting the typical officer qualification length and then couldn't help myself. It wasn't long before I was pretty discouraged, though. I haven't read too much past the enlisted section, but this article is rife with original research - no doubt based on the valid experience of plenty of submariners - and cites only one source. It's also pretty unencyclopedic in style and content in places. Anyone have any suggestions on where to start fixing this? I'm sure there's got to be plenty of books or article published by current or former submariners detailing their qual program, and most of what's in this article would probably remain if someone was able to connect some of those sources to most of the statements in here.

Also, it seems that this article tries to cram a lot into one place. I don't know a lot about how to determine whether an article should be split, but doesn't it seem that there should be separate articles for Submarine Warfare insignia and submarine warfare qualification?

Rem01 07:23, 2 August 2007 (UTC)