Talk:List of United States Marines/Archive 2

Bea Arthur, part 4
Today, October 5, 2009, I someone of my confidence is searching the National Archives as to if and when Bea Arthur served in the USMC. If no evidence is found that she indeed served, then it can be assumed that she was not a Marine (considering that she herself never admitted to such a claim) and I no longer see any reason for her name to be included in our list. I hope that you all agree with me. Semper Fi, Tony the Marine (talk) 00:13, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Today, October 11, 2009, I have received confirmation that there is nothing in the National Archives in regard to Beatrice Frankel a.k.a. Bea Arthur, to indicate that she was a member of the USMC. As far as I am concerned her name should be removed from the list. I will wait for a period of 5 days for any further comments before doing so. Tony the Marine (talk) 01:32, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * At the very least, we need to leave a hidden note, because you know that some good-faith editors will attempt to add her back in, much like the anon who produced "evidence" of her file in the Archives.  bahamut0013  words deeds 13:00, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The problem is, it seems to me, how do you cite the fact that something did NOT happen? I mean, if she HAD served, there'd be a document you could cite.  As it is, all we have is the fact that we know someone who knows someone that searched the archives and saw that her name WASN'T on some document where it should have been, but nothing to show believers in the urban myth that she served.  We DO have her video from the "motion picture archives" or whatever it was, to show people.  Could we contact the reliable sources that say she served and get them to say that she didn't, Marine Pride, etc.?  I don't know what to do.  Chrisrus (talk) 14:07, 12 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Were in the dubious territory of proving a negative. Perhaps the list needs an appendix for those names, where what would normally be a reliable source, has said they were Marines but a later (or more reliable) source has said they were not.  That would seem to me more informative than simple removal from the list with a hidden note in the code. —MJBurrage(T•C) 09:35, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I favor this solution and recommend it highly! This way, we can present the two conflicting sources, at let the reader decide for his/herself. If the article can avoid saying that she was or was not a Marine, then we meet the spirit and letter of WP:NPOV.  bahamut0013  words deeds 12:53, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

O.K., MJBurrage's idea sounds good. Go ahead MJBurrage and proceed with your idea. However, let me make it clear that I would have preferred that her name be removed altogether, because being a Marine is a question of pride and I'm sure that had she been a Marine she would have proudly admitted to being so, a thing which she never did and has even denied. What is a reliable source? A second hand source which may have been a result of hearsay and not a direct self confirmation? Or an "official" statement from the person his/herself, an "official" military document and/or an "official" document in the National Archive records which would sustain such service. Believe me there are none of the latter to back up what is only an assumption or hearsay. There is nothing, absolutely nothing to proof without a doubt that Bea Arthur was a Marine, the only thing that we have are hearsay assumptions by some authors or websites which have not cited their sources. Just my opinion Tony the Marine (talk) 18:20, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me. She might be a Marine, but trying to work in a Hollywood during and after Vietnam I can see how she could want to minimize that part of her past, non-Hollywood, life. There were times, then, when I considered pretending to be a draft-dodger. htom (talk) 00:06, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, MJBurrage made a great point: trying to prove a negative is hard. Watching the video, there isn't much context, and I could easily agree to either POV: that she was denying service, or denying service in WWII. And like I pointed out earlier, the lack of records in an archive don't prove that the records don't exist, such as the fire in 1973.
 * But, This should settle the matter.  bahamut0013  words deeds 04:49, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion
I suggest that we make an "Infamous Marines" section in the list and list all those former Marines that became notable solely because of their criminal acts. Tony the Marine (talk) 08:35, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Hm. That's actually a bit dicy... if we sort out Marines who are notable for that particular instance, then we would have to sort out by other reasons for notability: actors, politicians, athletes, etc. Otherwise, all we are doing is weeding out those who are less palatable from the main list, which isn't NPOV. And sorting the list by profession is probably not encyclopedic. We could, in theory, turn the list into a giant sortable table with a column for profession/reason for notability, but then we wouldn't have the alphabetic sections.  bahamut0013  words deeds 15:55, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Lou Pizarro
A red link was recently added: Ref:
 * Lou Pizarro &mdash; repo man, one of the stars of Operation Repo television reality show

I have doubts that his notability is enough. But, even if we decide that he is notable enough for the list, the first step would be write the article! I'm also concerned that the ref is an interview, I'd like to get a good third party verification for someone in show biz (because he has every reason to lie or exaggerate... not saying he is, but I don't trust celbrity personalities at thier word).  bahamut0013  words deeds 16:44, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree with you. I also do not see anything to indicate that he is notable. The sad thing is that some people (including my son) seem to believe that just because a person is involved in a reality show, he/she automatically is a notable person and deserves an artilce, when the truth is that after their 15 minutes of fame, no one will ever remember them, yet we have people who are truly notable such as Antulio Segarra whose article have been nominated for deletion, incredible. I am for the removal of Pizarro's name. Tony the Marine (talk) 20:28, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I knew you were gonna mention your son.  bahamut0013  words deeds 20:44, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * But it is true and he knows it (smile). Tony the Marine (talk) 21:33, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Remove edit warning
I have removed the prominent warning about adding new marines based on the Avoid_self-references policy. I understand that people repeatedly add junk information, but there are vandal fighters for that. 138.162.128.53 (talk) 17:01, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Please refrain from removing the set of guidelines which was established by consensus. These are "not" warnings. It is a false assumuption from your part to assume that there are people here that that will remove the non-notable names from this or any list for that matter, because it has not happened and that is precisely way we voted on this issue. Tony the Marine (talk) 17:57, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:SELF primarily relates to prose, which is not the case here. There are hundreds of templates that are self-referential, but serve a similar purpose to this warning: to notify the reader and potential editors about an issue. Despite the fact that I have this article watchlisted, a significant amount of poor edits have been made and missed. Adding a name to this list that is not appropriate isn't obvious, and doesn't flag the vandal-fighters for reversion (such as those using Twinkle or Huggle.  bahamut0013  words deeds   04:58, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I think we should look into using Editnotice. It requires an admin to implement. We should move the notice there, and if it works, then we won't have to return it to the article lead.  bahamut0013  words deeds 05:08, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * There is a work-in-progress of this at User:ERcheck/Sandbox5. If there are no objections or changes, I think we should test it this weekend.  bahamut0013  words deeds 08:08, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * ER has put the notice in... but I can see the notice when the page is being viewed and not edited. When I view the page in edit mode, I see the message twice. I have no idea what is causing this behavior... can anyone else see this?  bahamut0013  <sup style="color:#000;margin-left:3px">words <sub style="color:#000;margin-left:-20px">deeds 10:31, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I also have no idea and as always, I wonder why someone who has never edited the list nor has anything to do with it comes along and moves things, in this case the "editnotice" to the end of the article in a way that it can not be seen. What the heck is going on here? Can't people who have never had anything to do with this list nor have any interest in it, just leave those who are truely interested in the subject resolve the problems involved with it? Tony the Marine (talk) 22:45, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I asked EVula to step in because none of us knew, he's a pretty good technical guru. His edit actually fixed the issue (seems you don't have to transclude anything for it to work). Template:active editnotice just categorizes the pages using an edit notice, it really has nothing to do with the display of the notice at all. Everything looks to be in proper order to me now; try it out by editing the article and you will see it when you are in edit mode.  bahamut0013  <sup style="color:#000;margin-left:3px">words <sub style="color:#000;margin-left:-20px">deeds 05:04, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I see, that answers all of my questions and explains my observations. Perfecto, Marine keep up the good work (smile). Semper Fi. Tony the Marine (talk) 05:28, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * This is why we don't let you old guys play with the toys anymore: you break them too easily. :P  bahamut0013  <sup style="color:#000;margin-left:3px">words <sub style="color:#000;margin-left:-20px">deeds 09:43, 15 August 2009 (UTC)


 * It seems to have helped a little bit, but I'm still finding myself reverting redlinks and items that belong on the other list. Frustration...  bahamut0013  <sup style="color:#000;margin-left:-1px">words <sub style="color:#000;margin-left:-16px">deeds 00:05, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Fess Parker
Given that half the sources on the web say Fess Parker was a Marine, it will come up again. The more reliable sources do say he was in the Navy, the confusion is cleared up by the most detailed source. He was a Navy radio operator who was assigned to the Marine Corps. —MJBurrage(T•C) 01:57, 20 March 2010 (UTC)


 * The more I think on this the less sure I am on the proper interpretation—I don't know much about how such a case would be handled. Would a Navy trained radio operator, sent to the Marines, serve as a Navy crewman attached to a Marine unit? or would they have been made a Marine before shipping out? —MJBurrage(T•C) 15:09, 6 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Don't know the case here, but it could be that a surface fire ship sent in a navy radio operator to help communicate calls for naval gunfire or assault support by beachmasters or Seabees. FieldMarine (talk) 15:24, 6 April 2010 (UTC)


 * The Alcade article mentions that he later served on a minesweeper--way too small of a ship to station a Marine (during WWII, Marines were only on battleships, aircraft carriers, and cruisers), not to mention that it didn't mention his attending Sea School or why a Marine radio operator would be sent to a ship. Also, having been in an artillery unit myself, I know that having a few Navy guys on hand to call in gunfire was not unusual at all. He was surely a sailor attached to a Marine unit, and thus, outside the scope of this list.  bahamut0013  <sup style="color:#000;margin-left:-1px">words <sub style="color:#000;margin-left:-16px">deeds 15:50, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Notable non-Marines
Reading this article, I realized that there have been a number of notable people that have somehow garnered a false reputation for Marine service, such as Fred Rogers and Jerry Mathers. Do we think maybe we could do a section in the appendix for confirmed non-Marines whose rumored service still persists? I did note that the history did mention them.  bahamut0013  <sup style="color:#000;margin-left:-1px">words <sub style="color:#000;margin-left:-16px">deeds 12:58, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * One thought is to place such a section at the top of the discussion page. FieldMarine (talk) 19:51, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Artimus Pyle
An anon added Artimus Pyle to the list (he's a former drummer with Lynyrd Skynyrd). I'm dubious about the source, which is a fan site for the band. Some quick searching only shows fan sites and interviews, but I didn't dig very deep. I'm not 100% sure there are reliable sources for this fellow.  bahamut0013  <sup style="color:#000;margin-left:-1px">words <sub style="color:#000;margin-left:-16px">deeds 12:57, 3 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Here is a picture of him in uniform.


 * More info here & here. FieldMarine (talk) 15:51, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks. I think the Billboard link is the best of the bunch, so I'll ref that.  bahamut0013  <sup style="color:#000;margin-left:-1px">words <sub style="color:#000;margin-left:-16px">deeds 20:10, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Eugene Stoner
I've seen a couple spots that state he served, and the article mentions he was an ordnance guy in the Corps during WWII, but it's not backed by a citation (in fact, his bio is mostly unreferenced). A quick google shows nothing substantive, but I again didn't have the time to look very deep. Can anyone come up with anything definitive?  bahamut0013  <sup style="color:#000;margin-left:-1px">words <sub style="color:#000;margin-left:-16px">deeds 17:22, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Name of article
I recommend moving this back to "List of notable United States Marines". This should only be moved with discussion & consensus. Thanks & Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 18:25, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

John R Bennett
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/53rd_Oklahoma_Legislature 1st Sgt in Marines now on his second term as Oklahoma Representative First republican elected to state office from Sallisaw, Sequoyah County, Oklahoma ever. AlanWBeaird (talk) 17:29, 3 February 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.47.100.9 (talk) 17:22, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

HELP I attempted to add Chesty Puller to the page
I attempted to Add chesty Puller to the page and messed up his son's entry, I tried to undo and it did not work. Don ScobyDon Scoby (talk) 18:07, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Marcus Shirock
His photo appears next to the 'S' names but there is not an entry for him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:AB23:BED9:B163:877B:882E:C4FF (talk) 03:11, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

=== Comment === The article on Marcus Shirock was nominated for deletion in 2015 - and subsequently deleted (lack of notability), so should not be in article. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Marcus_Shirock &mdash; ERcheck (talk) 03:28, 21 June 2017 (UTC)