Talk:List of historic members of the United States Marine Corps

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

More information This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:, Associated task forces: ...

Military history: North America / United States CL‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Military history. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

This article has been rated as CL-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

On 15 January 2026, it was proposed that this article be moved from List of historic United States Marines to List of historic United States marines. The result of the discussion was moved to List of historic members of the United States Marine Corps.

Removing names

Removing the names of Marines who have made history in the Corps is considered vandalism and may deemed as rascist since the names removed are Hispanics. Joseph V. Medina, made USMC history when he became the first Marine in history to take command of a Naval flotilla, Angela Salinas made USMC history when she became the first Hispanic female to become a United States Marine Corps general officer and the first woman to command the Recruit Depot. France Silva was the first Hispanic-American Marine Medal of Honor and Pedro del Valle not only became the first Hispanic to reach the rank of Lieutenant General, del Valle led Company A of the 1st Battalion 5th Marines to capture Shuri Castle, a medieval fortress of the ancient Ryukyuan kings. Seizure of Shuri Castle represented a moral blow for the Japanese and was an undeniable milestone in the Okinawa campaign during World War II. If there is any doubt as to the historical contributions of these people then consult: United States Marine Corps Historical Division. Further deletion of content may led to edit blocking. Tony the Marine 05:46, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Query

Is this the best name for this article? I'm not contesting the list itself, but I wonder if "historically important" is the best possible descriptor (and, as a side note, if it is the best title, shouldn't it be lower-case to conform to naming conventions?). Carom (talk) 05:12, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Do you have a suggestion for a better article title? — ERcheck (talk) 05:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure - the current title just struck me as a little odd. "Historically Important" seems to imply a larger significance than is born out by the commentary in the article. Perhaps substituting "significant" for "important?" Or perhaps something that adds more context - the lead indicates that these are individuals whose significance is primarily within the Marine Corps itself; maybe "List of U.S. Marines significant in Marine Corps lore"? Unwieldy, I know, and not a particularly desirable choice anyway. Just some thoughts, really. Carom (talk) 05:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Referencing

This articles was tagged as possible original research, needing references. All on this list have the summarized details in their referenced Wikipedia articles. I've added a few citations, but the nature of the list — with each person having a Wikipedia article — makes it implicitly referenced. — ERcheck (talk) 00:49, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Additions to this page

It could be argued that all of the Medal of Honor recipients, sergeants major of the Marine Corps and the Commandants should be on this list. Before I add them however I would like to request input on this statement. --Kumioko (talk) 20:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

There are seperate lists for those individuals. I don't see a particular need to duplicate them here. Feel free to add them to the "See Also" section if they aren't already. bahamut0013^words _deeds 05:25, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

List formatting: No blank lines

Apparently, if we leave blank lines between items in a list, then the wiki software declares it to be a bunch of unrelated, single-item lists. This means that anyone who uses a screen reader hears "A list of one item" before each and every item on the page. Consequently, the folks at WP:ACCESS have requested that we please remove the inappropriate blank lines. I've done this for this page, and ask for your help in keeping it that way. Thanks, WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:31, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

John Ripley (USMC)

Recommend removing John Ripley. Although certainly a notable Marine & great example, I don't believe being in the a Hall of Fame makes you "historically notable". Thanks! FieldMarine (talk) 00:29, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Surely you jest, good sir. Numerous valor awards (including a Navy Cross), Some buildings and a FOB named after him, thr Ranger Hall of Fame (I think being a Marine inducted there is incredibly notable), and his actions at Dong Ha bridge being very well known all sum up to historical notability. bahamut0013^words _deeds 12:46, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Can't agree more that he is notable as a great, well known Marine & a standout in many ways. The criteria here is "historically notable". Not sure being inducted into a hall of fame means he is historically notable. To my mind "historical notable" is reserved for a Marine who is the first at doing something important for the service or country or someone who shapes the Corps. I can cite thousands of Marines with valorous acts or deeds of strategic implication on the battlefield if that is the criteria for inclusion here. Just some thoughts on this list. Thanks! FieldMarine (talk) 13:51, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Then we have differing definitions of historically notable. I believe the scope is not necessarily "notable to the Corps as a whole", but individuals whose notability stems from thier service as a Marine (i.e. the other half of the coin to list of notable United States Marines, whose scope is individuals who served but notability is not associated with thier service). Granted that, yes, the list is wildly incomplete. The reason I must disagree with your definition is that it trends into an area that can only be subjectively decided (i.e. deeming one individual worthy and another not will tend toward OR). bahamut0013^words _deeds 15:44, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Putting your formula to test, explain how Ripley fits the criteria so as not to waste anyone's time with other suggested names. Otherwise, this whole project loses it's credibility and violates the Wikpedia requirements of nuetrality which I believe your organization agreed to before hand. Monte Melkonian (talk) 11:53, 24 March 2011 (UTC) Let us be fair. Ripley doesn't belong on this list. Why haven't you removed him yet? Monte Melkonian (talk) 21:24, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Victor Maghakian

Why did you omit Victor Maghakian's endearing nicknames given to him by his regiment and commanding officer? If "Pappy" can have nicknames, why can't "Ear Banger Maghakian?" Why did you diminish his extremely important historical role as being one of the most decorated Marines in WWII history and not merely a Carlson Raider as cited in the sources? Why did you omit the fact that he was the first Marine in China, before WWII, to suffer a wound and his blood spilled by a Japanese saber? To diminish his memory may be "doubleplusgood" speak for the moment, however it may be viewed as dishonorable by Americans. We don't care if Ken Burns burned himself. That is his problem to correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Monte Melkonian (talk • contribs) 18:04, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Because an entry on this list should only demonstrate why he is within the scope, not to be a biography unto itself. If it's notable enough, then add it to his article. bahamut0013^words _deeds 18:30, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

I certainly believe that nicknames like "Ear Banger" (being the first Marine to have to have fought the Japanese and his blood spilled in China before WWII) is extremely notable. Don't you? Don't you believe that being one of the most decorated Marines in WWII is historically notable on this page and is not a biography on its self. It certainly is much notable than Ripley's? Monte Melkonian (talk) 18:46, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

It would be notable on his article, not on this list. bahamut0013^words _deeds 20:40, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Why isn't historically notable to be the first Marine to have his blood shed by a Japanese saber before WWII? Why isn't historically notable to be one of the first Marine Raiders? Why do you insist on misleading the readers and diminish Maghakian's record as merely a highly decorated Marine Raider instead of one of the most highly decorated Marines of WWII? Why haven't you started his own site? These questions are truly troubleing us all and lead us to disturbing questions? Monte Melkonian (talk) 22:00, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Not to offend anyone's sensibilities, why do have Pace on this list? Did he see combat like Harry "The Killer" Kizirian?Monte Melkonian (talk) 22:23, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Why did you delete Harry "The Killer" Kizirian's distinction as being the first Marine to be awarded the Rhode Island Cross? Monte Melkonian (talk) 22:00, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Again, I don't see the historical significance of having Ripley on this list. He may very well be a notable Marine, but, I don't see his actions as more historically notable than Kizirian's. Do you? Without offending anyone's sensibilities (of course).Monte Melkonian (talk) 22:28, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm not saying that it's not notable, but those kinds of details would be better for an individual article on the individual. This is a list; not even a summary, and those details aren't appropriate for this list. bahamut0013^words _deeds 22:32, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Then why don't answer my questions? Please, this extremely important. Why do you have Ripley on this site? Why do you insist on ignoring Harry "The Killer" Kizirian's accomplishments being the first Marine earning the Rhode Island Cross (earned for combat exploits with his "K-Bar") and instead you have Ripley's accomplishments with some simulated combat exploits? 98.148.1.173 (talk) 23:30, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

I did add the first accomplishments by Maghakian as you suggested. However, you deleted them again? Why? 98.148.1.173 (talk) 23:36, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

First off, please don't log out in the middle of a discussion; it's important to know that I'm still talking to the same person. Next, adding discussion like this confuses things, and makes it look like part of my post. Editing comments made by another editor is generally forbidden. Please indent your posts to make following the discussion logically possible.

Next, I'm not telling you that there is no notability there, but I'm telling you to add these exploits to an article about him instead of trying to build one on this list. The entries on this list are intentionally very brief, and the kinds of details you are insiting on adding to his entry would be better placed on an article about him.

Thirdly, wailing about other articles is not going to get you anywhere. Ripley's notability is not in question any longer; but that's irrelevant to the entry on the fellow you added. Stick to the subject at hand. bahamut0013^words _deeds 00:53, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

You seem to be very defensive. Nobody is wailing on Ripley. However, it seems to me that you are wailing on Kizirian. I find that Highly Offensive in not including one of the most decorated Marines in WWII history (and certainly historical firsts) and substituting it with a non-combat exploit by Ripley as counter productive and loss of your credibility. Please don't turn this into a political fiasco. Now, please answer the questions that I have posed with regards to Kizirian at this time. Morevoer, if I unintentionally cut you off or you cut me off, please take no offense to that 98.148.1.173 (talk) 01:31, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm not defensive, merely exasperated that you have again failed to properly format your response. If you persist in commenting out of chronological order, the discussion will become unreadable.

Your questions are also irrelevant. My personal opinion has nothing to with the formatting and content of a list entry, and would merely be rhetorical and not at all constructive. Simply put, your efforts would be better focused on writing an article tahn trying to cram one into this list.

At this point, I have half a mind to remove all of the redlinks from the list; if they are notable enough to be put on the list, they should be notable enough for an article. bahamut0013^words _deeds 01:54, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't want to be misunderstood, but, why do we have Lou Diamond on this list? I mean, I love and have the highest honor for the guy, and indeed he fought courageously and was recognized for his bravery. But, I didn't see anything motor historically notable than Harry '"The Killer" Kizirian." Am I missing something? 98.148.1.173 (talk) 23:51, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

The best approach is for you to add a separate article on Harry Kizirian. I'd be happy to assist if you need it. Semper Fi, FieldMarine (talk) 01:59, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Looks like FieldMarine has taken the initiative in cleaning up all the entries; many thanks on getting the ball rolling. This list has, I'm ashamed to admit, been neglected (except for when it occasionally pops up on my watchlist). bahamut0013^words _deeds 03:11, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Why was Victor "Transport" Maghakian's name removed from this list? Why haven't you responded to my inquiries regarding Harry "The Killer" Kizirian? Why was Kizirian removed from this list?Monte Melkonian (talk) 11:17, 24 March 2011 (UTC) I am sorry you feel exasperated. Just imagine how Victor and Harry felt on those beaches. Please define in clear terms the criteria to be on this list. Please get started on your own with regards to Kizirian and Maghakian. Don't you think as an American, you owe them that much? If you need help with their records, please don't hesitate to contact their respective congressmen. Monte Melkonian (talk) 11:26, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

One of the criteria for being placed on this list is for the Marine to have a separate article in Wikipedia. Agree 100% that Kizirian & Maghakian should have articles & encourage you to honor them by writing one. Please review this article here for help & ask if you have any questions. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 11:42, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Please list ALL of the requirements so as not to waste anyone's time. Morevoer, why don't you be a good Marine and an American and get started on Maghakian's and Harry "The Killer" Kizerian's separate pages? I think your organization owes them at least that much. Don't you? Monte Melkonian (talk) 12:30, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Don't try to pass an obligation onto us. Wikipedia editors are all volunteers, and we edit only what we choose to. If you want the articles created, then by all means, write them; there are plenty of editors that will help you in that, but you can't expect us to do it for you. bahamut0013^words _deeds 13:32, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Then kindly list all of the criteria so as to give transparency to your so-called requirements and give these men a fair chance. I see some names that I want to put through the "Chesty" test. Monte Melkonian (talk) 18:23, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

If you have a good critria in mind that accomplishes "the Chesty Test", then lay it out here so the community can comment. We are always looking for improvements. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 18:56, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Why don't you have straight answers to my questions? You seem to have a political agenda. You keep abbreviating the sacred oath of the Marine Corps. Please don't say Semper FI. That is dishonorable because it means nothing. Semper Fidelis means "Always Faithful." Now, please lay out the criteria for being on this list with Chesty Puller. If you can't lay it out, then you and your organization need to delete some of these names that don't even come close with the likes of Victor "Transport" Maghakian (endearing named "Ear Banger" for being the first Marine to have his blood shed by a Japanese saber.

We Americans await patiently for your criteria. So, please respond appropriately. Monte Melkonian (talk) 21:56, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Here is a thought for improvement, since you are a volunteer editor, please lay out all of the criteria to be on this list so that there are no political shenanigans. Do you like that thought? Please don't end your comments with Semper Fi. It means nothing is dishonorable for a non combat Marine. Semper Fidelis means "Always Faithful." I still patiently await for this criteria to be on the list with the likes of Chesty Puller. Quiet frankly, this list that you have needs to be shortened extensively as not meeting the Puller test. Besides having one's own site, what other criteria is necessary to have the likes of Victor "Transport" Maghakian (also the first Marine to have his blood shed by a Japanese saber before WWII or Harry "The Killer" Kizerian who is famously known for the "K"-bar) So, we await for your criteria to be laid out clearly so as not to give any misunderstandings since you are a volunteer editor as you claim to be. Monte Melkonian (talk) 22:06, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

I just want to pass on the message from the Angel of Death himself who I adore (Harry "The Killer" Kizerian) that you have dishonored the Marine Corps. The Marine Corps is cursed till proper recognition of Harry and Victor are made on this list. For your own sake, I hope you understand the gravity of this curse less you want Harry to visit you in your dreams and touch you. Me personally, I don't mind. He is a very good friend mine. Monte Melkonian (talk) 04:02, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Are you crazy? So you're saying that our motto is disrespectful and we've been cursed. Hilarious. bahamut0013^words _deeds 18:35, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Harry "The Angel of Death" Kizirian (aka the K-Bar) and Victor "Transport" Maghikian are going to be doing God's bidding soon. You ALL KNOW WHERE VICTOR is going to be transporting you all soon. Why do insist on having this curse on your organization? Why do insist on dishonoring the Marine Corps by ignoring the two most decorated Marines in WWII History? Semper Fi Mac...beth. Answer my questions Hell Hounds. Monte Melkonian (talk) 21:16, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Why was Arman T. Manookian removed from this list. Arman, according to the father of Marine Corps History, stated that Arman's name and fame are intertwined with Marine Corps History. ^[1]. He even has his own separate site on Wikpedia. Is it because of his last name? Or is it because of his Christian faith? Semper Fi Mac..beth. Monte Melkonian (talk) 21:05, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Why was Harry "The Angel of Death" Kizirian's (aka K-BARR) name removed from this list. ^[2] I also provided the book source. Is there a requirement for all of Wikpedia posts by Wikpedia that they have their own Wikpedia page? Or, is this your own conjured up requirements? Semper Fi Mac..beth. Monte Melkonian (talk) 21:14, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

The name was removed because he does not have an article in wikipedia. It is not a Wikipedia requirement, but it is a common criteria for inclusion on lists. There is even an essay that discusses this concept, Wikipedia:Write the article first. The editors of each list make up the rules for the list. It is easier to verify that the person meets notability guidelines if there is an article. If you do not agree with this criteria then you should start a discussion and explain why it is in the best intrests of the list and WIkipedia to change this criteria. You should also propose an inclusion criteria so that other editors know how to determine if an entry belongs on the list. GB fan (talk) 22:21, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Why was Arman T. Manookian removed from this list? Why was my query removed from this discussion? Indeed, he has his own Wikpedia site and as stated from the Father of Marine Corps History, his name and fame are intertwined with Marine Corps history.http://www.marines.mil/news/publications/Documents/Fortitudine%20Vol%2029%20No%202.pdf

Semper Fi Mac..beth! Monte Melkonian (talk) 18:24, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Does Wikpedia allow editors to remove comments and discussions? And, indeed, why are you hiding the Curse of Macbeth? Monte Melkonian (talk) 18:28, 29 March 2011 (UTC)Bold text

At this point, you've demonstrated your bias and made enough crazy claims that it's very hard to take you seriously. If you want any traction on this, then write the article, then we can reconsider. bahamut0013^words _deeds 11:37, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

The definition of crazy is repeating the same mistake over and over again. You (and I do mean a female sheep) have, indeed, proved the point that you are the one that is crazy. Next time, watch your language or insinuations or you may get an unpleasant surprise. Semper Fi Macbeth. Monte Melkonian (talk) 22:52, 31 March 2011 (UTC)98.148.1.173 (talk) 22:50, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Stick to the subject please. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 23:37, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Just what kind of unpleasant surprise may they get? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.148.205.77 (talk) 23:52, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Seriously, you're not going to intimidate us by invoking some hoodoo nonsense. Why don't you try focusing your efforts into writing the articles you want instead of trying to bully us into doing it for you? bahamut0013^words _deeds 12:04, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

References

Requesting article

Many Historically Notable Marines from Minority Groups Conspicuously Missing

Requested move 15 January 2026

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. All agree that this page should be moved, the alt suggestions have much more weight than the original supports. (closed by non-admin page mover) – LuniZunie_(talk) 14:21, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

List of historic United States Marines → List of historic United States marines
List of United States Marines → List of United States marines
List of decorated Marines from 3rd Battalion 3rd Marines→List of decorated marines from the 3rd Battalion 3rd Marines

– Per MOS:MARINE, "Terms such as soldier, sailor, airman, marine, and coast guardsman are not capitalized when describing an individual or a group". In this phrasing, "marine" is a common noun. Alternatively, they could be moved to List of historic members of the United States Marine Corps and List of members of the United States Marine Corps and List of decorated members of the 3rd Battalion 3rd Marines (see, for example, List of United States Marine Corps astronauts). —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 00:21, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Support per MOS:MARINE. Popcornfud (talk) 01:20, 15 January 2026 (UTC)
Support per MOS. —Eyer (he/him) If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message. 01:40, 15 January 2026 (UTC)
Support: As the quoted text says above. We know the rules, we just have to follow them. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 02:47, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

And following the rules often requires making minor changes to maximize clarity, so I also support alternative phrasing as Natg 19 points out below. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 16:31, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Support alternates. Marine is typically capitalized in the US, so it is odd to have article titles with the word lowercased (though that fits our MOS). Natg 19 (talk) 08:58, 15 January 2026 (UTC)
Although some people in the US capitalize the word, I don't believe that is a consistent phenomenon among US-based independent reliable sources. Of course, that question has been discussed repeatedly at some length on Wikipedia Talk pages. As may be obvious, the reluctance that some people have for using lowercase is why I offered the alternative suggestion. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 21:20, 15 January 2026 (UTC)
Support – a member of a Marines is called a marine. cookiemonster755 ^(talk) 17:39, 15 January 2026 (UTC)
Support alternatives. Not because I think "marine" should be capitalised (there's absolutely no reason for that other than puffery), but because they read better. However, I don't think there's enough of a difference between List of historic United States marines and List of United States marines. Any former member of the corps can be described as "historic". And I would question why we even need List of decorated marines from the 3rd Battalion 3rd Marines (there should be a comma in there, incidenatlly, to match our article: 3rd Battalion, 3rd Marines). -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:22, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.