Talk:List of United States Marines

Untitled

When adding a name to this list, please place the same in alphabetical order and provide a reliable verifiable inline source which cites the person's notability (see: Wikipedia:Notability) and USMC service. Unreliable sources such as fansites and Wikipedia articles should not be used. As a guide please see: Wikipedia:Citing sources. Names added to this list must have their notability independent of their service as a Marine; names are essential to U. S. Marine Corps lore or oare notable only for their service can be found at List of historically important U.S. Marines. Additions that are not in alphabetical order or do not cite and provide a primary reliable verifiable source will be removed.
Every name which was on the list prior to March 28, 2008, has been verified as to the person's notability and USMC service by User:Marine 69-71 and User:FieldMarine. References have been added by a number of users, but User:ERcheck would be the primary contact regarding the footnoted sources.

---

Resources/Info on Rumors

There are a number of well-known individuals who are rumored to have served in the Marine Corps. Before adding new names to the list, consider checking out this site:

• "Famous Marine Rumors". Retrieved 2007-10-20.

Here is another article on wannabees:

Hudson, Mike (November 16, 2003). "Real war veterans increasingly uncover truths of 'wannabes'". Roanoke Times. Retrieved March 21, 2009.

Thomas, Erlene

Erlene Thomas

Chief Warrant Officer 2 Erlene A. Thomas joined the Marine Corps on January 26, 1973. She served from 1973 to 1985, seven years active and five reserve, during which time she participated in many "firsts" for female Marines. She was the youngest Woman Marine Drill Instructor to serve on the field, as well in the first class of women candidates at the elite Drill Instructor Academy at Parris Island in 1975.

In 1979 then Sergeant Thomas was admitted to and graduated from the Search and Rescue Academy in Jacksonville, Florida. Sgt Thomas was the first woman to fly as a crewmember for a CH46 Sea Knight, as the SAR Swimmer. Sgt Thomas graduated in 2nd place in the prestigious school separated by one tenth of a point for first place. In 1979 women were not authorized to wear Crewmember (Flight) Wings, but Sgt Thomas did qualify for the coveted award.

Before exiting the Corps, Sgt Thomas did a tour on Okinawa, Japan. She was "deep selected" and promoted to Warrant Officer in the USMCR (active), with only eight years service, Sgt, as a Crash Crew Officer. CWO2 Thomas was respected and well thought of by her Marines, and she was extremely honored to be a United States Marine. She was quoted "Old Corps. New Corps. There's only one corps!" [edit]

Bea Arthur

Bea Arthur There is nothing on her WP bio on her being a Marine or a link to such evidence. I'm going to remove her name.--Colin 8 (talk) 20:12, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• A quick google search, Bea Arthur:TV.comBeatrice ArthurCelebrities Beatrice Arthur There are plenty of sources. Tony the Marine (talk) 21:15, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Please read and respond to this thread: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Beatrice_Arthur#Was_Bea_Arthur_a_Marine_or_not.3F —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisrus (talk • contribs) 00:18, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

See section Bea Arthur Part2 below for more discussion on Bea Arthur. FieldMarine (talk) 01:00, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

fictional

Would a list of fictional US Marines (or fictional parodies of the USMC, like in the movie Aliens) be significant enough to warrant a short section and/or its own article? I'm sure there are plenty, but would they carry the weight to deserve mention, or would it just be cruft? bahamut0013♠♣ 14:38, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

This has been discussed a bit in the past. I think that this list is not the place. It is for real people. I do think that a fictional list might not make it without being put up for deletion — as you said, some find deem it "cruft". — ERcheck (talk) 02:37, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I know ERcheck is aware, but FYI to everyone else, there is Category:Fictional United States Marines. God bless President Jack Ryan. bahamut0013^words_deeds 05:37, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Mike Connors

Mike Connors, actor — need to find reliable source. Most of the online sources say he was a Marine, but this site says he served in the USAF. — ERcheck (talk) 13:42, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Certainly notable enough (a Gold Globe), but without that reliable source, we'd best remove him. bahamut0013^words_deeds 15:22, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

I've done a little looking for a source. Any help would be appreciated. — ERcheck (talk) 19:02, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Finding sources that say he was a USAF fighter pilot.[1][2]. Removing from the list. — ERcheck (talk) 19:10, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Donald Conroy

Removed this entry. Notability by association. His notability comes from USMC service; outside notability is by association. — ERcheck (talk) 13:51, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Agree: possible candidate for List of historically important U.S. Marines. bahamut0013^words_deeds 15:28, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Only ref in article is from a eulogy given by his son, which would not qualify as a reliable source. Don't think he is notable enough for historical Marines. — ERcheck (talk) 17:27, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Agree with not placing on this list; possibly on List of historically important U.S. Marines. FieldMarine (talk) 18:00, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Status of citations - Done as of 24 March 2009

As of 23 March 2009:

• A-P, T-Z — all done (just R (3) & S (14) left)
• total unique references = 182
• Still more to go. Most, if not all, have information in their Wikipedia articles that is referenced, though I did find a few that slipped through.
• Please note that IMdB is not a WP:RS, nor are personal websites honoring Marines.

— ERcheck (talk) 01:49, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

DONE: 199 unique source citations.— ERcheck (talk) 03:17, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Great work ERcheck...BZ! I say we change status to Class B. FieldMarine (talk) 09:34, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Removed / For discussion

• William L. Durkin: Apart from his Marine Corps service, Durkin seems to be "famous" for only one event. So, even the inclusion of an article on Durkin is questionable. I propose removing his name from the list. — ERcheck (talk) 19:01, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

From an external link describing his role with Howard Hughes: "Hughes managed to get out of the plane and laid next to it as it was still burning. A Marine visiting friends across the street from the Myers residence, Master Technical Sergeant William L. Durkin, risked his own life by pulling Hughes away from the burning wreckage, saving Hughes' life."[3]

Agreed. Should not be on list. FieldMarine (talk) 09:38, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

• Needs verification: James Franciscus, actor - unable to find any supporting references for USMC service. Removed from list. — ERcheck (talk) 02:34, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

• Removed - notability related to USMC service: Adam Kokesh is known for his protests against the Iraq War — this notoriety came in conjunction with his Marine Corps service, thus he does not meet the criterion for notability apart from his service. While he may still be getting notice after his discharge, it is still from his protest and actions during his service. — ERcheck (talk) 22:51, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Should not be on list. FieldMarine (talk) 09:38, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

• Needs verification: Mike Montler — professional NFL football player, Buffalo Bills; No information in Wiki article. Unable to find reliable sources, though there are web sources. Not in NFL bio, only on informal list, some Wiki mirrors. — ERcheck (talk) 01:16, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

• Removed - notability related to USMC service: Michael Mori — Defense lawyer for Australian terrorism convictee David Hicks; legal service for Guantanamo detainee is while serving as USMC Major. Therefore, does not meet criterion of notability separate from USMC service. — ERcheck (talk) 03:54, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Should not be on list. FieldMarine (talk) 09:38, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

• Removed - unable to verify: Hari Rhodes — actor. If references can be found, please comment on level of notability for inclusion in the article. 03:46, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

• Removed - notability related to USMC service: Josh Rushing — news reporter for Al Jazeera network; No evidence that he is a "notable" reporter. — ERcheck (talk) 03:46, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Should not be on list. FieldMarine (talk) 09:38, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

• Removed - Notability concern: Listing said attorney general - but was County Attorney, not U.S. Attorney General - Rick Romley — County Attorney, Arizona

— ERcheck (talk) 04:16, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Should not be on list. FieldMarine (talk) 09:38, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Question: Peter J. Ortix

I believe that Colonel Peter J. Ortiz gained his fame and notability as a Marine and not as an actor (Hell I can't even recall seeing him in a movie). Shouldn't his name be placed in the List of historically important U.S. Marines instead? Tony the Marine (talk) 06:29, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

• Hello? Anybody home? Tony the Marine (talk) 00:31, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply Tony, but I agree that he should not be included on this list based on the info on his Wikipedia article. In the future, maybe his acting career will be expanded in his article. Then we can make a better determination about including him on this list. FieldMarine (talk) 00:39, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Bea Arthur Part 2

Attention my fellow comrades. User:Chrisrus, has proved us with the site: (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2PUgDa1jy4) in which Arthur is supposed to have stated (I say "supposed" only because my internet connection is so slow that I haven't looked at it) that she was never a member of the United States Marine Corps. We "must" look into this because if it true then her name must be removed. Please take a look and make recommendations. Tony the Marine (talk) 00:30, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

The interview seems conclusive to me...she says she was not a Marine. I recommend taking her off the list. FieldMarine (talk) 00:57, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree about the video, at 5:30 in Part 1, she is asked if she was a Marine, and she says no. While the interviewer makes some mistakes later on (confusing "Star Trek and Star Wars), Arthur's answer seemed pretty clear.

Having said that, the USMC itself said she was a Marine in Marines magazine (Vol. 36, #1, January–March 2007)

So what do we do with someone when the the Marines say yes, and they say no?

—MJBurrage^(T•C) 04:48, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Qute a gray area! According to the one ref ([4]), it says that she volunteered for service, but not that she actually served (the other ref I cannot view, quite ironic that I cannot view content on the Marine Corp's own website because of the Marine Corp's own networking policies!). Perhaps she was never accepted or made it into the service for whatever reason. I also would think it reasonable to say that Marines magazine was incorrect; records from the 1940s are notorious for being erroneous, incomplete, or lost. I say it is entirely possible that the writers for that article based thier research on references that were not internal (such as the listed one) and thus fallable.

In either case, I would say that she has little reason to falsely claim she wasn't in the service (in fact, the opposite woud be more likely, I'd expect people to falsely claim service that did not happen). Her own words should trump possibly flawed research. bahamut0013^words_deeds 05:04, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I watched the youtube video. Looking at the context, they were discussing the World War II period and after. The interviewer asked (5:17) "How did World War II affect you?" Her answer was "like everyone else....traumatic". Then, (5:31) "I had read somewhere that you joined the Marines." BA's answer was "oh no". Hmm. But here[5] and here Official Marine Corps Magazine, it says she was a Marine, and the first one says it was prior to WWII. At this point, the Marine Corps Magazine is a reference in this List, and one would generally consider an official USMC publication a reliable source. I wish the interviewer had asked a followup question or that BA had elaborated. The "fact" that she was a Marine has been out there for a long time, but this interview is the first information I've seen to dispute it. With erroneous reports, usually there are a number of places that tell otherwise; and, often clarification from the subject. The video interview would not likely be considered a RS. I'd leave it in; possibly with a footnote directing to the talk page or mentioning the interview. — ERcheck (talk) 23:32, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

See these:

• Goodby Bernice Frankel!
• Keller, Scott. Marine Pride, p.235.
• Stanford University Quizbowl, p.5 (PDF)

I'd think that Quiz Bowl questions would be carefully screened.

— ERcheck (talk) 00:15, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, like I hypothesized, if the Marie Corps erroneously claims she was a Marine, everyone else would accept it as gospel fact and follow suit. I could see how every other reference would be willing to accept the Corp's claim at afce value and leave it at that. The one ref references a page that was copied straight out of Wikipedia, so we've come full circle. :P

But you are right, given the context, she might not be referring to her service as a Marine, but simply a lack of WWII service as a Marine. It is unfortunate that the interview is doesn't explore that more; and I also accept the fact that we can't really source Youtube conclusively (though I doubt much that the video is false or doctored). I'm inclined to believe her own answer over what could be the same mistake repeated over and over and over...

There is some discussion at Talk:Beatrice Arthur and the consensus there seems to be "no", but I think it is worth bringing up there again to see if consensus has changed. Regardless, this article and her bio should match, they currently conflict. bahamut0013^words_deeds 05:07, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I suggest that until there is new information, her entry should reed as follows:

• Bea Arthur (uncertain)^[] — star of the television series Maude, and The Golden Girls

With the footnote being a brief summary of the conflict between her interview, and the USMC source. The same summary should be in her article as well I expect. —MJBurrage^(T•C) 05:40, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I have gone ahead and done this since—absent a clarification from the USMC itself—this may never be properly settled. —MJBurrage^(T•C) 14:25, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I have since been asked on my talk page why keep the Stanford source as well as Marines. My thinking is that "multiple sources" should have multiple examples. As for why Stanford; they are generally known to do their own fact checking, and it predates the Marines article. —MJBurrage^(T•C) 14:31, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Archive

This talk page is getting a bit long. I'd like to set User:MiszaBot to work in it if nobody objects. The parameters I think would work are as follows:

{{User:MiszaBot/config
|algo = old(30d)
|archive = Talk:List of U.S. Marines/Archive %(counter)d
|counter = 1
|maxarchivesize = 100K
|minthreadsleft = 10
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
}}

This would update any thread that is over 30 days old to the archive, until it reaches 100kb in size, then starts a second archive. It would leave at least 10 threads at a time so that the page doesn't look empty. I can tag the first thread to linger, because it seems to be a generic notice and some resources rather than content discussion. bahamut0013^words_deeds 05:33, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

If we adopt this, my recommendation is to create an index in the beginning of the talk page with links to the sections on the discussions of individual people so we don't end up restarting the same conversations again. FieldMarine (talk) 11:00, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

We could do that, but then I'd have to do it manually, I think (the index, not the archiving). Not a problem if the consensus if for it, as I have this article watchlisted, but the updates will only be as timely as I am. :P bahamut0013^words_deeds 04:46, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I'll help too, but I'm on deployment so free time is limited. Thanks! FieldMarine (talk) 11:52, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

An alternative is having a separate talk page just for name inclusion discussions. Thanks! FieldMarine (talk) 16:22, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I've implemented the bot template. I will monitor what it does when it cycles tonight, then note the names discussed on the index. I think that a seperate talk page would be impractical for two reasons. One, the majority of discussion has been about inclusion of name son this list; two, an editor that isn't normally involved in discussion here would probably not see a notice about a sub page. bahamut0013^words_deeds 05:26, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I chose not to include in the name listing those Marines who are on List of historically important U.S. Marines. Our scope is pretty clear, and if an editor doesn't regard that and ask why Chesty Puller isn't on the list, then he or she isn't likely to notice a previous discussion on that name. Please make any typo correction you deem necessary, I did mostly a copy and paste job here. bahamut0013^words_deeds 05:17, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Remove edit warning

I have removed the prominent warning about adding new marines based on the Wikipedia: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^words_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^words_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^words_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^words_deeds 00:05, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Bea Arthur part three

To the editor called Eleccion seems to have posted this to the references for the entry Bea Arthur:

"However,service record at National Archives under Bernice Frankel/Bernice Aurthur service # 755 043 shows service 3/26/1943-9/26/1945 with the Marine Corps Women's Reserve, mostly in the motor pool at Marine Corps Air Station,Cherry Point,NC where she achieved the rank of Staff Sergeant."

My purpose of this section is to ask if this seems to be legit to you all. A few points.

1. The user has almost no history and no talk or user pages, so I don't know how to ask him about it.
2. The citation has many small details, such as a service number, that make it look legit on the face of it.
3. The story differs from those of the other citations, which had her as a medical technition/technologist, as opposed to the motor pool. It's the only source so far that says she was in the motor pool.
4. How do we know that this is the same Bernice Frankel?
5. Has "Eleccion" actually seen this record?

If you are satisfied that this citation is real, feel free to re-insert it. Chrisrus (talk) 00:03, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

You could always start a talk page to ask him, but judging by the user's history, it may be a while before he returns to see it.

In any case, Tony has promised to verify the claim when he's at the National Archives this fall, but if somebody can check with them sooner, then we can see if this is a hoax or not. bahamut0013^words_deeds 04:43, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it is true. Either I or one of my comrades will look into the situation at the archives this comiing fall. If said document does exists then she will stay in the list, if it doesn't then out she goes. If for some reason my group is unable to look it up,then she will stay on the list as doubtful. Tony the Marine (talk) 00:57, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

If a record with the number given does not exist, that would only prove that Eleccion's edit was no good; not that Arthur was, or was not, a Marine. Can anyone look up a former Marine by name at the archive? If no, then where could one do so? Her service record (presuming it exists) should be publically available somewhere by now. —MJBurrage^(T•C) 01:51, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

The Military Personnel Records Center has records dating back to 1905. Does anyone live near Missouri? Lets hope it wasn't lost in the 1973 fire. bahamut0013^words_deeds 05:09, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't live in Missouri but I do work a few blocks from the National Archives (at the Washington Navy Yard) so I could look this up if you like? Also, most of the records that where destroyed where army, so we should be good. (although some USMC and Navy records got water and or smoke damage. --Kumioko (talk) 03:12, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

• Great idea, you'll do all of us a favor if you looked up the records. Who knows maybe you will be able to help solve this mistery, something which she should have cleared up while she was alive. Tony the Marine (talk) 03:39, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Bob Watson

An anon added today: Bob Watson - Houston Astros star 1st Baseman and later GenMgr. Served in the USMCR late 1960s attaining the rank of Sergeant.

The article makes no mention of Marines service, and a quick Google search reveals that there are a LOT of individuals named Bob Watson. I believe that this page refers to the same individial as the article, but do we consider About.com a reliable source, especially for a BLP? bahamut0013^words_deeds 16:29, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

• I think that anon has his "Bob Watsons" mixed up (smile). There is this other Watson who served in WWII. Who knows? Tony the Marine (talk) 05:54, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Question: Felix Rigau Carrera

Recently I received from a fellow researcher newspaper articles which established that Felix Rigau Carrera was the first Hispanic fighter pilot in the USMC as member of the First Marine Air Squadron in WWl. He was also the first Puerto Rican pilot and a businessman. I want to know the opinion of my friends is his name should go in this list, where I posted him, or the "Historically important" list. What do you guys say? Tony the Marine (talk) 15:16, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, when I saw the entry on my watchlist this morning, I was going to question it, but reading the article a little closer, I decided not to. I think that his aviation pursuits are sufficient notability, regardless of service, not to mention that some of them were done during the periods when he wasn't actively commissioned. I would say he could serve on either list. bahamut0013^words_deeds 16:35, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

IMHO, first Puerto Rican pilot, first airmail pilot on Puerto Rico, and having actively served in all four branches of the military (is he the only one) would put him on this list. First Hispanic fighter pilot in the USMC should put him on the "Historically important" list.

Why not both lists for anyone who is both historically important to the USMC, and also separately notable enough for an article? —MJBurrage^(T•C) 18:04, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

O.K., I also added his name to the other list. Tony the Marine (talk) 21:31, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

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:

“

• Lou Pizarro — repo man, one of the stars of Operation Repo television reality show

Ref: "Operation Repo interview". Truetv.com. Retrieved November 9 2009. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)

”

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)

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.[6][7] 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^words_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^words_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^words_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^words_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^words_deeds 17:22, 4 January 2011 (UTC)