Jump to content

Talk:Veteran: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→hungry stomachs: new section
←Blanked the page
Line 1: Line 1:
{{WPMILHIST|class=Start|B1=n|B2=y|B3=y|B4=y|B5=y|Biography=yes}}

== Public attitude towards veterans ==1223 follo me daylen
This statement is patently false: "In some countries with strong anti-military traditions (e.g., Germany after 1945) veterans are neither honored in any special way by the general public, nor have their dedicated Veterans Day, although events are sometimes orchestrated by Neo-Nazi and other minority right-wing groups". German banned ANY acknowledgement or celebration of the ideology of Nazism post WWII. '''To state that "(e.g. Germany after 1945...have dedicated Veterans Day...sometimes orchestrated by Neo-Nazi [groups] is simply not correct, and indeed would be a violation of current German law.''' This sentence should/will be rewritten or removed.

== References ==
Most of the references in this article are horrible. The whole thing needs a complete rewrite to avoid being US-centric, NPOV and just plain stupid. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/12.28.104.151|12.28.104.151]] ([[User talk:12.28.104.151|talk]]) 21:12, 22 January 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

This entire article is horrible - it really needs a re-write. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/74.215.31.8|74.215.31.8]] ([[User talk:74.215.31.8|talk]]) 14:30, 11 November 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Thanks for the encouraging comments. I do have more references to add but just have not had time yet - I tend to write bits and then add the reference later, if I leave the flow of writing and look for the references to insert as I go, then the quality of the writing and the logical structure of the sections isn't so clear. ([[User:Bvrly|Bvrly]] ([[User talk:Bvrly|talk]]) 12:48, 7 February 2010 (UTC))

This sentence: "In some countries with strong anti-military traditions (e.g., Germany after 1945) veterans are neither honored in any special way by the general public, nor have their dedicated Veterans Day, although events are sometimes orchestrated by Neo-Nazi and other minority right-wing groups".
It needs a period at the end.
And if you are going to attach Nazism (a word with negative connotations) to 'right-wing' (something many Americans consider themselves to be), you need to cite a reference that shows how there are similar ideologies. Otherwise it's just a pot shot at American conservatives.
A better word, if you don't have a reference to make that connection, would be 'minority nationalist' or 'fascist' groups. [[User:Captain Vimes|Captain Vimes]] ([[User talk:Captain Vimes|talk]]) 18:53, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
:LOL - the world doesn't revolve around Americans, and mentioning "minority right-wing groups" in the same sentance as Neo Nazis is hardly a "pot shot" at American conservatives. ''Especially'' as it is talking about events in other countries. [[User:Wardog|Wardog]] ([[User talk:Wardog|talk]]) 14:06, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
::The above response fails to address the fact that it is simple erroneous to refer to National ''Socialism'' as "right-wing". [[Special:Contributions/195.200.159.1|195.200.159.1]] ([[User talk:195.200.159.1|talk]]) 13:29, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

This article is unacceptable! This horribly written article makes Wikipedia look bad. Nothing but personal opinions, no sources and highly biased. I can not believe this. Especially for such a common word such as veteran. On top of that, this article is locked. Shame on the author of this piece of trash. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:XodoX|XodoX]] ([[User talk:XodoX|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/XodoX|contribs]]) 04:37, 23 February 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

I would like to know where "veteran" is defined as someone who "is serving in the armed forces." I could find no references to support that contention. Concur with other comments that this article is garbage, and very poorly written.<span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by Carlos 03 November, 2013</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP -->

== History of Veterans ==

There should be a distingtion between an entry for Veterans in general and on for American Veterans. This entry seems to focus on American Veterans.

This entry should also touch upon the roots of the Veterans Administration since the article mostly concerns American Veterans.

This entry should include passages from Abraham Lincoln who said:

" To Care for Him, Who Shall Have Borne the Battle, & for His Widow, & His Orphan " Abraham Lincoln , 1865.

This particular quote of one our Nation's most beloved Presidents was made in regard to the Horrors of the American Civil War, & with the beginning of Reconstruction, LIncoln had made the concerted effort to ensure that soldiers of both sides would be afforded care,redress, & comfort, because they were ALL Americans.

The VA ( Veteran's Administration ) uses this same quote ensuring the quality of Life for any & all Veterans, regardless of gender, conflict or peacetime, physical or mental disability.

All this is verifyable by simply going to any American history book pertaining to the Civil War.

Just thought someone should know about that...

Tony Barzola

==Changes in format==
I tired to space the article a bit and take some out of the wording that may have been considererd non nutural. Only a couple very minor changes. I think the formating helps . Kudos to whomever wrote it, still needs work, but I think its improving. I hope you agree. Sorry I made changes before discussion, but the need seemed imediate ([[User:One more parade|One more parade]] ([[User talk:One more parade|talk]]) 16:46, 18 July 2008 (UTC))

Hygiene: When changes and improvements have been made to the article and there is no longer a need for specific comments people have made on this talk page, can we either add a postscript to the original suggestion or remove it? (Other than being perpetually dissatisfied with a section!) Thanks. ([[User:Bvrly|Bvrly]] ([[User talk:Bvrly|talk]]) 12:53, 7 February 2010 (UTC))

Have added a new section for Social Organisations of veterans. Some of the links under See Also need repositioning according to whether they are social organisations or aid/help ones, under the appropriate headers. Please put the country they apply to in brackets after the title in case the name is not definitive. I have not sorted them all myself as I am unfamiliar with most of them.
The page needs more international contributions. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Bvrly|Bvrly]] ([[User talk:Bvrly|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Bvrly|contribs]]) 23:56, 1 March 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== US-specific ==

This article appears to assume the reader is a citizen or resident of the US. It needs to at least make that assumption clear near the top.
::It makes no assumptions about where the reader is from. However, it is almost exclusively focused on the US, and that is the problem. This should be an article about veterans in general, all over the world and across all history. As it stands, this article should be called something like "Veterans in the United States". Of course, a better better than renaming would be to edit it and make it less narrowly focused. [[User:Interlingua|<font style="background: #08E8DE " face="Ariel" color="#000000">'''''Inter'''''</font><font style="background: #000000" face="Ariel" color="#08E8DE ">'''lingua'''</font>]] 13:07, 18 November 2008 (UTC)


I need clarity on a this. My grandpa was in the canadian army in ww2 but never fought because a week or two his platoon I think it was got sick with the measles I think?

==[[Attitudes and reactions to returning soldiers]]==

Both articles need work, could possibly be merged. [[User:Heqs|heqs]] 06:21, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

== Letter Missing from Sometimes ==

I can't edit this but there's an "s" missing from "women have sometime"
New: "women have sometimes" <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Marting10|Marting10]] ([[User talk:Marting10|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Marting10|contribs]]) 01:09, 3 November 2008 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== PTSD dishonorable discharge addition ==

The source given for the PTSD statement is hardly WP:NPOV. It's more of a detailed how-to (on the website "Vietnam Veterans Against the War") for a dishonorable discharge vet and their doctor to convince the Board for the Correction of Military Records and the Discharge Review Board to change the vet's records.[[User:Ndyguy|ndyguy]] ([[User talk:Ndyguy|talk]]) 02:03, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

== Citations ==

Basically all of the citations used in the article pertain to how "America vets are sometimes not honored." Some of the links are to arguably biased sites or those with an agenda. Is that normal to allow those on Wikipedia and should they be removed?[[Special:Contributions/98.196.78.26|98.196.78.26]] ([[User talk:98.196.78.26|talk]]) 08:08, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
:From the volume of your contributions, you don't seem to be "new" to Wikipedia, so you'll have to decide if "[It is] normal to allow those on Wikipedia" or not. As far as if they should be removed, see [[WP:BOLD]].[[User:Ndyguy|ndyguy]] ([[User talk:Ndyguy|talk]]) 00:27, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

If bias is a reason for removal then the whole artical should perhaps be deleted as it is biased towards American perspectives on a global term. Better still to make t clear that the references are US, eg. I shall add this to "Department of Defense" as this could refer to such a department in almost any nation.
The word "Veteran" does not exclusively refer to war veterans so I would suggest the retitling of the article as "War veterans" if it is to be retained. IF it is retained there is much which needs to be added to make it a more accurate and less Americocentric page, although the latter is a problem which is widespread in Wikipedia. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/92.24.122.162|92.24.122.162]] ([[User talk:92.24.122.162|talk]]) 12:39, 2 February 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

==Suicide==

Could this be added about 6240 veterans commit suicide each year: http://www.zimbio.com/Disabled+American+Veterans/articles/14/6240+Veterans+committing+suicide+each+year [[User:Stars4change|Stars4change]] ([[User talk:Stars4change|talk]]) 02:56, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

== opening line ==

In my view the current opening line makes no sense:<br>
"A war veteran (from Latin vetus, meaning "old")[1] is a person who has or is serving in the armed forces, or a person who has had long service or experience in an occupation or office[2]."<br>
This line (taken literally) states that someone is a WAR VETERAN if this person
# "Is [currently] serving in the armed forces" however briefly and regardless of any exposure to a war situations. In extremis this states that the second you sign for military (and serve in the armed forces) you immediately become a veteran.
# "Has serving in the armed forces" (besides the grammatical issue). Again, if you leave boot camp after 5 minutes you have been serving in the forces and would therefore be a WAR veteran.
# "Had long service in an occupation or office". This states that (e.g.) a university professor, or a garbage collector, would become a WAR veteran after being professor for a long time.<br>
This is obviously not what is meant with a war veteran. Can someone who knows what it should be please revise (I would like to but have no real idea how veteran is exactly defined in the Anglo-Saxon context/language). [[User:Arnoutf|Arnoutf]] ([[User talk:Arnoutf|talk]]) 21:24, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

:Why is the term "war" even tagged on to the term veteran? Veteran can mean someone that has served in the armed forces without combat or "war" experience or someone who has, and that is the title of the page.[[User:Sadads|SADADS]] ([[User talk:Sadads|talk]]) 14:38, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I would also like to see clarification of the word "veteran" and the term "war veteran". Would someone who died in combat be considered a veteran, for instance? [[User:Angleshades|Angleshades]] ([[User talk:Angleshades|talk]]) 13:42, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I have tried to rejig and clarify the opening definition again so that it makes sense. I do thnk perhaps that the entire page should be renamed Military veterans or war veterans though. Some military "excursions" are not classified as war, so my preference would be for military vet over war vet. [[User:Bvrly|Bvrly]] ([[User talk:Bvrly|talk]]) 19:39, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

As it is defined in the article, I believe, a U.S. military veteran is someone who has served for a specific amount of time during a time of conflict or war. If people want to article to be less focused on U.S. veterans, perhaps they should add more about other nations. Not everyone who knows about one nation knows about others. [[Special:Contributions/72.42.174.253|72.42.174.253]] ([[User talk:72.42.174.253|talk]]) 12:56, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

==Pending changes==
This article is one of a small number (about 100) selected for the first week of the trial of the [[Wikipedia:Pending Changes]] system on the English language Wikipedia. All the articles listed at [[Wikipedia:Pending changes/Queue ]] are being considered for level 1 pending changes protection.

The following request appears on that page:

{{Mbox|text=Many of the articles were selected semi-automatically from a list of indefinitely semi-protected articles.<br />Please confirm that the protection level appears to be still warranted, and consider unprotecting instead, before applying pending changes protection to the article.}}

However with only a few hours to go, comments have only been made on two of the pages.

Please update the [[Wikipedia:Pending changes/Queue|Queue]] page as appropriate.

Note that I am not involved in this project any more than any other editor, just posting these notes since it is quite a big change, potentially.

Regards, ''[[User:Rich Farmbrough|Rich]]&nbsp;[[User talk:Rich Farmbrough|Farmbrough]]'', 20:46, 15 June 2010 (UTC).

==Removal of non-relevant text, needed (including non-relevant link) ?==
The following text might need to be removed (see [[Veteran#The_Congo]] ):

"Main article: Belgian Congo in WWII" .
Comment: The link (and the text) contributes nothing to the text, regarding the subject "veteran". (However, the link does contain information about military history - but that is not the subject of
this article.
P.S. It might be appropriate, that the following text, links in this manner:

"...[[Belgian Congo|Belgian commitment of the Congolese]] ..."

If there is consensus for the last link, then someone else will have to introduce the link, since I can only view the article (but not edit). [[User:S(l)ick nation|S(l)ick nation]] ([[User talk:S(l)ick nation|talk]]) 13:55, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

== Title of section, needs to be changed? ==

A section, titled "Veterans' experiences around the world", might need to have its title changed.

Wouldn't a more appropriate title be,
*"Experiences as veterans"
*"Experiences after conflict"
*"Nations"
*"By nation " ?

(The term "veterans' experiences", might not be descriptive/appropriate/adequate, in reference to the text in the section.

P.S. I can only view text in the article. Not edit.
:--[[User:S(l)ick nation|S(l)ick nation]] ([[User talk:S(l)ick nation|talk]]) 14:09, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

== POV? Improvement needed? ==

"War veterans are generally treated with great respect and honor for their contribution to the world ..." .

*The above quote, might be non-encyclopedic.

*"... contribution to the world ..." ? This phrase might be non-encyclopedic, in context.
:--[[User:S(l)ick nation|S(l)ick nation]] ([[User talk:S(l)ick nation|talk]]) 14:22, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

== Wikification/ removal of text needed? ==

The following text needs to be removed,

"'''Further information''': Post Traumatic Stress Disorder" .

Comment: In the text of the section, the phrase "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder", needs to be linked to [[Post Traumatic Stress Disorder]] . (The '''abbreviation''' is linked correctly, in the text of the section.
:--[[User:S(l)ick nation|S(l)ick nation]] ([[User talk:S(l)ick nation|talk]]) 14:38, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

== Re: Norwegian veterans: Text that might be included in this article, or in a potential article: ==

There is no article yet, regarding [[History of Norwegian veterans]].

Some of the following text, might fit into this article. Comments?

(Translated from Norwegian text in [[Verdens Gang]], Oct 7, 2010, p.18)
* "Those who have been wounded in international operations, can be compensated by up to 2.6 million [[Norwegian crowns]](NOK) if injured before 2010; if one has been injured in 2010 or later, one can receive more(up to 5 million NOK)"
*"I am ... ''innstilt'' that we ensure that the conditions are equal for those who have served before 2010 — and those who have served thereafter", was said by member of Norwegian parliament [[Sverre Myrli]] in 2010.
*"No money was allocated in the "national budget"(of September 2010), to minimize the difference in compensation schemes, regarding soldiers wounded before and after the beginning of 2010."
--[[User:S(l)ick nation|S(l)ick nation]] ([[User talk:S(l)ick nation|talk]]) 19:47, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
===Links that might be appropriate in a potential article===
*(Norwegian text)
:*http://www.dagbladet.no/2010/12/02/nyheter/forsvaret/utenriks/afghanistan/isaf/14544006/ --[[Special:Contributions/80.203.20.178|80.203.20.178]] ([[User talk:80.203.20.178|talk]]) 18:31, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
:*[http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/artikkel.php?artid=10070026 Wounded in battle in 2005, and received a medal on March 7 2012]--[[User:Hamburgerstand|Hamburgerstand]] ([[User talk:Hamburgerstand|talk]]) 22:20, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

*2012-03-08: [http://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/artikkel.php?artid=10061250 Fearing ''store mørketall'' amongst Norwegian veterans] --[[User:Hamburgerstand|Hamburgerstand]] ([[User talk:Hamburgerstand|talk]]) 22:26, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

== Edit request on 30 May 2012 ==

{{edit semi-protected|answered=yes}}
<!-- Begin request -->

Military veterans include all members of the armed services that served for any length of time in the armed forces and coast guard. The American Legion, for instance, is a Congressionally Chartered Veterans Organization (https://www.nationalresourcedirectory.gov/other_services_and_resources/veterans_service_organizations/chartered_veterans_service_organizations) that requires only serving on active duty during a period of conflict.

Your definition in the header, in inaccurate: ''A veteran (from Latin vetus, meaning "old")[1] is a person who has had long service or experience in a particular occupation or field; " A veteran of ..." .[2] This page refers to military veterans, i.e., '''a person who has served or is serving in the armed forces, and has direct exposure to acts of military conflict,''' commonly known as war veterans (although not all military conflicts, or areas in which armed combat takes place, are necessarily referred to as "wars").''
<!-- End request -->
[[Special:Contributions/69.226.211.235|69.226.211.235]] ([[User talk:69.226.211.235|talk]]) 02:09, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
:{{notdone}} did not specify the precise edit wanted <span style="background-color:#C0C0C0">[[User:Egg Centric|<font color="#222222">Egg</font>]] [[User_talk:Egg Centric|<font color="#7D7D7D">Centri</font>]][[Special:Contributions/Egg Centric|<font color="#FFFFFF">c</font>]]</span> 23:46, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

== Edit request on 5 March 2013 ==

{{edit semi-protected|answered=yes}}
<!-- Begin request -->
The British military definition of a veteran (Enshrined in law by The Armed Forces Covenant (2011) is.....someone having served a day or more, in the regular or reserve Armed Forces..."
<!-- End request -->
[[Special:Contributions/2.126.118.42|2.126.118.42]] ([[User talk:2.126.118.42|talk]]) 17:59, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

:If you'd like that added to the article, please indicate precisely where, and provide a [[WP:RS|reliable source]]. [[User:Rivertorch|Rivertorch]] ([[User talk:Rivertorch|talk]]) 07:10, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

::Page 4 [https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/49469/the_armed_forces_covenant.pdf The armed forces covenant] --[[User:Panzer71|Nozzer71]] ([[User talk:Panzer71|talk]]) 23:51, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

== Worldwide View ==
As a first step in that direction I inserted a picture of a russian veteran dancing, also maybe lifting the mood level of this article a tiny bit. BTW, thanks for freeing us from facism, US veterans. --[[User:Edoe|Edoe]] ([[User talk:Edoe|talk]]) 23:26, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

== hungry stomachs ==

[[User:Kevinjamesjeffers|Kevinjamesjeffers]] ([[User talk:Kevinjamesjeffers|talk]]) 22:42, 22 December 2014 (UTC)"When hungry stomachs are filled and



children are safe and happy, the 'people'


are content" jimmy - See more at: http://hope-catcher.com/#.dpuf

Revision as of 23:01, 9 January 2015

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Veteran&oldid=641795711"