[BUR] US Organizations Full Name

BUR #2065 has been approved by @Hillside_Moose.

mass update marine_corps -> united_states_marine_corps
mass update us_navy -> united_states_navy
mass update us_air_force -> united_states_air_force
mass update us_army -> united_states_army
mass update us_medal_of_honor -> united_states_medal_of_honor

Reason: Standardization, and because using the full name is better, at least for organizations.

EDIT: The bulk update request #2065 (forum #158654) has been approved by @Hillside_Moose.

There's a few issues with this. First, u.s.m.c is an artist. The tag marine corps is largely the United States Marine Corps, but not exclusively.

Next, united states army and us air force are copyright tags, while us army and us navy are general tags. If we're going to rename them, might be a good time to standardize. Most other military organizations are general tags, eg. royal navy, wehrmacht, people's liberation army.

As for the rename itself, I don't mind either way. Although I'm curious why you feel the full name is better?

Blue_Trident said:

There's a few issues with this. First, u.s.m.c is an artist. The tag marine corps is largely the United States Marine Corps, but not exclusively.

I fixed that. My eyes must have been blurry or something since I didn't see that it was an artist tag.

Next, united states army and us air force are copyright tags, while us army and us navy are general tags. If we're going to rename them, might be a good time to standardize. Most other military organizations are general tags, eg. royal navy, wehrmacht, people's liberation army.

That's fine. The BUR will make them general tags since those tags don't currently exist. There are several military organizations that should be updated as well, such as all of the sub-organizations of the JSDF.

As for the rename itself, I don't mind either way. Although I'm curious why you feel the full name is better?

That's just my opinion, although it's mostly about standardizing either way. There are several tags that start with united_states_*, then there are the above tags that start with us_*. Regardless of which way gets decided, they should either all be "us_*" or "united_states".

us_ is easier to read.

+1, we don't abbreviate other military organizations. Compare with the Imperial Japanese Navy (IJN) or Japan Self-Defense Force (JSDF).

Blue_Trident said:

There's a few issues with this. First, u.s.m.c is an artist. The tag marine corps is largely the United States Marine Corps, but not exclusively.

'Corps' is maybe generally US-centric, difficult to say without looking at all the other Marine forces' full titles --- which for reasons that should become quickly apparent, I an reluctant to do, yet the more famous Royal Marines in Britain are also [ presently, they started off as a Maritime Regiment in 1664, and have been 'Light Infantry' and a Brigade in the past ] a Corps. Even older, France's Marines were always very formidable, like the rest of their military and started part in 1622 and part in 1627.

Wiki has 61 present countries [ I dunno if any terrorist groupings have Marine components, such as ISIS, the IRA or Shining Path... ] and 25 historical countries including Rome, the Byzantines and the Austro-Hungarian Reich, with Marines; I would be revolted if the word devolved automatically to mean the USMC.
.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marines

No opinion on the thread proposal as a whole, but South Korea, Taiwan, and Indonesia (ROKMC, ROCMC, and Korps Marinir) come to mind as others using the specific phrasing "marine corps".

Cleanup of the tag if it's changed to refer only to the USMC should be quick; a brief look through its posts found:

post #620362 (Soviet or Russian naval infantry)
post #1087147 (ROKMC)
post #2163705 (???)

and a few that refer to some alternate universe USMC clone.

The bulk update request #2065 (forum #158654) has been approved by @Hillside_Moose.