Talk:Basil L. Plumley

Awards
Does anyone know where the information about CSM Plumley's awards comes from? His wiki photo shows him wearing fewer awards than the list of awards indicates. Meyerj (talk) 14:19, 17 November 2011 (UTC)


 * The number 40 is likely reached by multiple awards of several of these, as seen by the appurtenances affixed to some of them, and also includes his badges and unit awards. Irish Melkite (talk) 06:31, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Does anyone have another photo that can be substituted? CSM Plumley is shown with his medals in the wrong order in the photo used. The Silver Star is after the Legion of Merit in this photo. Probably just an oversight on his part, but a better photo would represent his faithful service in a better light. --Revmqo (talk) 00:52, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Every source of information is all the same source: his obituary, which is not authoritative. He did not have 4 combat jumps in World War 2. His service in a glider unit makes it impossible for him to have done 4 combat parachute jumps. He was a Gilderman. Plus they don't award medals for Parachute jumps. The campaign medals prove he fought in the campaign.

saying he was involved in 4 World War 2 combat Airborne operations would be accurate.. but not 4 combat jumps. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Airborne18th (talk • contribs) 01:27, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Milhist B-class assessment
Start class - needs inline citations and some expansion of content (which ideally should be broken into early life, WWII, Korean War etc... sections). Zawed (talk) 11:01, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 October 2012
Date of death: 10 October 2012

66.74.132.61 (talk) 17:29, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Pictogram voting oppose.svg Declined*Apparently you haven't read any of the edit summaries. You can't list a death without a reliable source. There is no source in GNews reporting his death. Several list that he was diagnosed with terminal cancer and moved to a hospice, but that's not dead. You are one of the reasons this article is protected. Niteshift36 (talk) 18:06, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Now it HAS been cofirmed by reliabe sources and added to the article. Niteshift36 (talk) 18:37, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 11 October 2012
Please edit your entry of CSM Plumley's awards. The subsequent award of the National Defense Medal is denoted by a bronze star not a bronze oak leaf cluster. If you search for "Army Ribbon Accoutrements" you will find an excerpt from AR 670-1, which governs the wear and appearance of Army uniforms. In that excerpt you will find the additional accoutrement of a bronze star for subsequent National Defense Medal awards. Thank you for your time.

69.10.103.242 (talk) 23:29, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Appurtenances denoting subsequent awards change over time. While currently a bronze star, without a cited reference, it would take original research or synthesis to compare the regulations in force at the time of the award with subsequent changes. Dru of Id (talk) 06:48, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I disagree. The appurtenances don't usually change. What we have are numerous reliable sources that state it is a star. What reliable sources do we have saying that is was an OLC? Niteshift36 (talk) 12:21, 12 October 2012 (UTC)


 * I marked this as answered, even though its not, since the page is no longer protected and doesn't need to be on the list of edit requests. After consensus is reached anyone can go ahead and make the edit.  RudolfRed (talk) 17:03, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Four claimed combat jumps
The four claimed combat jumps are among many discrepancies discussed in http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/05/17/army-investigating-we-were-soldiers-legend-for-inflating-award.html?ESRC=army-a_160518.nl Included in the article is a link to his Awards and Decorations both verified with the following unverified ‘Silver Star with one Bronze Oak Leaf Cluster; Bronze Star Medal with "V" Device and two Bronze Oak Leaf Clusters; and Combat Infantryman Badge with one Star.’ http://images.military.com/media/benefits/pdf/plumley_army_memo.pdf Anthony Staunton (talk) 12:08, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
 * At the same time, Plumley's DD214 showed some of the awards that the branch didn't, showing that they weren;t awards he just made up. I say tread lightly. Right now, this is an allegation by some researcher and the Army is looking into it. No official determination has been made. My vote is to wait until it sorts out. We're not on a timeclock and I'd rather get it right. Niteshift36 (talk) 15:52, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Agree with Niteshift36's comments above. It is best to wait until the result of the Army's investigation. David J Johnson (talk) 17:57, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Modifications war
Dear All! I made corrections, better said reverted "corrections" because someone overwrote what I wrote before. My modifications were correct, and authentic. And it was revisioned also. Check please edit history. Department of the Army HRC memorandum is crystal damned clear in my opinion. http://images.military.com/media/benefits/pdf/plumley_army_memo.pdf That is an interessting question. Why Mr. Dave Johnson is so eager to push lies!? Dave you should check this guy 2001:7e8:d3f3:a201:84bc:9ba9:4983:9004 Thank you. Duke83 —Preceding undated comment added 13:45, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Not notable
Per: WikiProject Military history/Notability guide Plumley does not satisfy the criteria. Mztourist (talk) 08:46, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Except that he does.....and more importantly, he satisfied WP:GNG. Niteshift36 (talk) 15:54, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Medals and decorations
There has been disputes about the medals and decorations Plumley was entitled to wear. I find the comparison chart to be enlightening with one serious exception. If just the 1974 DD-214 and the 2015 Army memo were compared there would be many more matching entries. I place very little weight on what Plumley was wearing at West Point in 2010. Comparing two Army records from 1974 and 2015 with how Plumley wore his ribbons as a 90 year old in 2010 is not appropriate. Anthony Staunton 3.41 Pm 8 June 2019


 * entirely in agreement. text amended 213.107.50.32 (talk) 00:01, 21 February 2022 (UTC)