Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Orders, decorations, and medals/Assessment

This page is within the scope of WikiProject Orders, decorations, and medals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of orders, decorations, and medals on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Orders, decorations, and medalsWikipedia:WikiProject Orders, decorations, and medalsTemplate:WikiProject Orders, decorations, and medalsOrders, decorations, and medals articles

Australian Honours and Awards - Importance

I’ve reviewed the current Wikiproject Orders, Decorations, and Medals Importance ratings for all Australian Honours and Awards articles and it seems like a review of existing ratings would be beneficial, in addition to assigning ratings to those with just ???? fields.

There are some inconsistencies presently - we have short and long service medals like the Australian Defence Medal (ADM) and the Cadets Long Service Medal rated as Mid (despite being at the end of the Order of Precedence) and yet decorations like the Bravery Medal (BM) rated as Low in importance. That’s just to highlight a few examples.

I’d like to go through and tweak the importance ratings for the Australian Honours and Awards articles so there is some consistency. The Order of Australia, the gallantry and bravery decorations are all high to mid importance (depending on grade); all the meritorious service (warlike, non-warlike, and civilian) medals should be mid to low (depending on grade, volume); commemorative, long service, campaign and other medals should be low (with one or two mid exceptions - for example, RFD due to post-nominal).

If no-one raises any objections over the next two weeks, or wants to discuss over the next two weeks, I’ll start the clean-up of Importance ratings for these articles after that time has expired. Kangaresearch (talk) 16:56, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]