Talk:West Point Cadets' Sword

West Point cadet sword

(Copied from my Talk page. ElKevbo (talk) 07:07, 11 November 2011 (UTC))

Kevin,

You really did a nice job in cleaning up the article. I do not understand why you deleted a fair amount of the article.

I feel that some of the deleted information as in the Example below should not of been removed as it directly relates to the article. "Today the West Point cadet officer is the only person in the Army who wears a sword and sash, the sole guardian of the tradition.

This is just one of several points that I believe are truly related to the contents of the article that were omitted. I would like to see the information about the new model 2011 replaced and one or two other points. I would like to see the external links replaced.

I agree that several statements really were not directly related, I've been to close to it for a long time and I've asked for help. I'm glade that you are here to render it. My only interest is that this is totally accurate complete and to the point.

I have a 100's of photo's but I can not post them as I do not want problems with copy rights. I've been promised by the Armory at West Point and at Springfield to get the photos once they scan them. The Academy, Museum, Armory and Graduates have been aware of this and have been helpful for years.

Are you an expert on this subject?

I'm looking forward to this being completed.

Thanks

Andy 65.35.76.202 (talk) 02:54, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

If I remember correctly, nearly all of the material I removed was removed because it was unsourced. If you can add information that is supported by reliable sources, please do so!

I think I removed the links because they were out of line with our policies regarding external links. Please remember that Wikipedia articles should not simply contain lists of links but only very carefully curated collections of links that are particularly useful for readers and contain information that can't be added to the article.

I'm not a content expert but I am quite familiar with Wikipedia policy and culture so please let me know if I can help further! ElKevbo (talk) 08:25, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Kevin,

Please check out the changes to see if the are correct before I go on..

Thanks

Andy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andy2159 (talk • contribs) 17:43, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Kevin, Yes the information is old but they do no change things so fast and they still do it today, there is no newer information so just what do I have to come up with for it to be acceptable.. AndyAndy2159 (talk) 20:22, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Kevin, This is a copy of part of page 40 of Todds Cadet Gray.

"Today the West Point officer is the only man in the army who wears a sword and sash, the sole guardian of the tradition"

The Photo's of any Cadets dress for inspection today would prove that this fact is as true today as it was 60 plus years ago. So just how would you work this in. I could get a letter (name Removed)Andy2159 (talk) 17:33, 11 November 2011 (UTC) head of the Armory at the Academy to prove that this fact is still true today. Andy2159 (talk) 02:36, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

The issue I have with the statement is that it's very old but is being used to say something about the current situation. If you can provide verifiable, reliable sources substantiating that this is still the case then please do so. I'm not sure that a photo would be sufficient evidence to support your claim and it would definitely be original research which is not permitted here. A letter might be ok although that may raise concerns about the verifiability of the document.

Aren't there good sources about the traditions and customs of West Point that mention this fact? I would be very surprised if that were not the case! ElKevbo (talk) 07:07, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Kevin, I look at it just a little differently, The reference is dated but it's still a true fact, that is not in dispute. What is in dispute is you feel that this fact has changed but I have seen nothing to discredit that reference. except for the fact that you feel that it is outdated. I think you need to come up with a reference that discredits Todd. Todd wrote the book the only book to date, so please come up with anything that will discredit Todd as I have looked for 5 years. AndyAndy2159 (talk) 02:49, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

This has nothing to do with how I "feel" or what I believe. It's poor form to use a quote from over 50 years ago to discuss "today." If it's so important and interesting that it belongs in an encyclopedia article then surely you can find a contemporary source!

Alternatively, there are probably ways to rephrase the statement so it's acceptable. Maybe something like "As early as 1950, Westpoint cadets were the only..." or something like that. ElKevbo (talk) 14:17, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

I would like to replace the following with the following

West Point Cadets' Swords are swords traditionally worn by cadet NCOs and Officers of the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York. Cadets NCO's and Officers who serve in an official way starting with the Officer of the day and their staff, Honor council members at hearings, the color guard, and the bands Drum Major, they are always under arms and during their tour of duty must keep their hat on inside or outside until they are relieved of duty. The sword is also official used at drills ceremonies such as parades, formations, and of course Graduation. Cadets who are not on duty are only permitted to wear their sword when the Officer of the day states what the uniform of the day will be.

I though that you said that since this book has been republished I would be able to use it as a reference, what happend?

the book Cadet Gray: A Pictorial History Of Life At West Point As Seen Through Its Uniforms by Frederick P. Todd , Frederick Teddy Chapman (Illustrator) Has been republished May 9, 2011 hard cover $37.36 with paperback released October 15, 2011 at $ 19.84 by Literary Licensing. LLC

This book can be found at barnesandnoble.com

ISBN-13: 9781258123567 ISBN: 1258123568

Thanks Andy2159 (talk) 15:33, 15 November 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andy2159 (talk • contribs) 15:28, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I don't understand what you're asking or proposing. ElKevbo (talk) 16:30, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Okay Kevin, Lets start over. Cadet Gray was republished on May 9, 2011. I though that you said that it was okay and I would be able to use it as I would be quoting something that has been reprinted and is up to date. so I changed the part about "Today the West Point officer is the only man in the army who wears a sword and sash, the sole guardian of the tradition" and I used Todd 2011 and it was changed back. So my first question is Will I be allowed to us Todd 2011 as a reference or not?

Then I wanted to replace the first paragraph that in the article with the following.

West Point Cadets' Swords are swords traditionally worn by cadet NCOs and Officers of the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York. Cadets NCO's and Officers who serve in an official way starting with the Officer of the day and their staff, Honor council members at hearings, the color guard, and the bands Drum Major, they are always under arms and during their tour of duty must keep their hat on inside or outside until they are relieved of duty. The sword is also official used at drills ceremonies such as parades, formations, and of course Graduation. Cadets who are not on duty are only permitted to wear their sword when the Officer of the day states what the uniform of the day will be.

This wording is closer to being a quote that the other.

Is this any clearer.

Thanks Andy65.35.76.202 (talk) 17:41, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Kevin you did say "Yeah, probably! Great find and good news! ElKevbo (talk) 04:53, 15 November 2011 (UTC)"

So what went wrong?

Andy65.35.76.202 (talk) 17:47, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

If it's just being reprinted without being updated in any way then it's still a historical source rooted in its original publication date. I tried to edit the article to reflect that so please let me know if I changed the meaning or went too far. ElKevbo (talk) 19:04, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Kevin I'll rewrite the first paragraph here and if you like it let me know and I'll cut and paste it in. If not I'll reword it again. Sorry to give you a hard time. Andy65.35.76.202 (talk) 22:00, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

That would be great, Andy. You're not giving me a hard time at all and I really appreciate you sticking with this even though it's probably a frustrating experience! ElKevbo (talk) 01:26, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Kevin,

I have a new reference and I would like to change the following to read as follows and I would like to post it with your permission.

U.S. SWORD MODEL 1872 WEST POINT CADET

copyright: Springfield Armory.NHS — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andy2159 (talk • contribs) 16:45, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Manufactured by Springfield Armory, Springfield, Ma. Produced from 1872 up to 1920- The cadet sword has a straight blade approximately 30" long. The guard does not extend to the pommel to protect the hand, as is the case of the sabers, as the nature of its use does not necssitate such protection. The blade is made up of high carbon , oil hardening steel, forged, tempered, and straightened. It is nickel plated and buffed, the blade being about 6/10 inch in width at the guard and tapering to a narrow point at front end. The guard is made of bronze and has rectangular slot for shank of blade. It is gold plated and burnished on all polished surfaces. It is cast with an ornamental design of a coiled serpent on each end, forming an enlargement at the extreme ends of guard. The center of the guard contains an ornamental design with the initials M.A. about 3/4 inch high. The inside is cored to fit the shank of blade. The grip is made of nickel bronze. It is formed to fit the hand, with grooves running around the outside having the appearence of being wound with small cord. The pommel is made of gold-plated bronze with polished surfaces burnished. It is screwed on to shank of blade, securely holding guard and pommel in place after they are assembled to blade. The outside has an ornamental design of a spread eagle. The inside is counterbored and tapped to take the end of the blade shank. The washer is made of leather, 0.07 inch thick. It is placed between the guard and scabbard to act as a buffer when sword is placed in scabbard. Complete with 29 1/2" metal scabbard - Army #4440. Scabbard is made of sheet steel, 0.035 inch in thickness, formed, and edges brazed together. It is polished, nickel plated, and buffed. It has a scabbard tip which is made of bronze, polished, and gold plated and burnished. The front end of the scabbard tip is slotted and the scabbard tip protector, which is made of sheet brass is brazed into it. The scabbard tip fits over the lower end of scabbard and is held in place by two small screws. The upper band is made of bronze, gold plated, all of the polished surfaces being burnished. The scabbard hook, which is also bronze, gold plated and buffed, is brazed to band. The scabbard linings, of which there are two, are made of wood and prevent scratching of nickel on the sword blade when inserting and withdrawing from scabbard. They also hold sword in place and prevent rattling. The mouthpiece is fastened to the scabbard by two screws, which also secure the upper band to the scabbard. The screws, of which there are four, two for upper band and two for scabbard tip, are made of brass, gold plated and burnished.

Markings: Cross bar: M.A. Blade U.S. Armory Springfield

Notes: Letter from Benton to Dyer dated 16 October 1867. "Sir: I sent to your address by yesterday's express a box containing a sample Cadet sword.

Agreeably to your instructions I have made it conform more nearly to the present staff sword than to the musicians sword - the one I first sent to you. Should this pattern be approved and a number be required for the Corps of Cadets, I believe that they can be made at this Armory as well and as cheaply as they can be made elsewhere. The one I sent you was made entirely by our workmen…. P.S. The color of the gliding may be improved by making it correspond to that on the staff sword."

"There is a penciled note in Dyer's hand, 'Ask Col. B. to furnish Estimate of the cost of fifty swords like sample.' Armory production records show that 253 Cadet Swords were manufactured between 1868 and 1920…. The Springfield Armory was the only maker of this sword till 1920 and is stamped Springfield

Dates made and the number produced. 1868 - 36 1874 - 25 1876 - 28 1880 - 14 1882 - 50 1893 - 50 1914 - 50 Total: 253 1920 - 100 scabbards only." - Kellerstedt

It would be very hard to a find virgin sword that came from the West Point Cadet Store because the bookstore remade this sword over and over again, as broken swords were returned to issue. The bookstore broke it down so the best parts were used to rebuilt the sword from its parts to be reissued again and again. This sword was never sold to cadets.[3][6] Ames made 40 for VMI. The difference is detectable in the makers' marks. The sword cost $11.00 for the first 100 before the price was cut back to $10.00. Copies of the orders from the Springfield Armory to Ames are shown in his book the order clearly shows that they are ordering swords and not sabers This sword was put out for bids in 1920 swords were made under contract by private companies to companies like Ames, M.S. Meyers and others who made about 200 model 1872 in total for the Academy. This is still true today.

The number of issued swords were made in limited production, cadets were issued dress swords, which were not meant to be used as a weapon, and most were returned to the cadet store. Because cadets had no use for this type of sword in the Army, as officers, they carried the 1902 Army saber. Cadets could always buy their own sword and many did. Real ones are rare. Many are replicas. Collectors must verify the maker's name, that U.S.M.A is engraved on the blade, and that there is an MA molded into the center of the brass handguard. The eagle on the pommel on the top of the model 1872 faced forward. This was changed on the model 1922 to face back.Andy2159 (talk) 16:30, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

References: Kellerstedt, Burton A. SWORDS AND SABERS OF THE ARMORY AT SPRINGFIELD. New Britain, Ct. 1998.

AndyAndy2159 (talk) 16:23, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Proposed draft?

Andy, can you please write a draft of what you'd like to include in the article? That would make it much easier for me (and others, I suspect) to offer feedback and suggestions. Thanks! ElKevbo (talk) 06:34, 6 December 2011 (UTC) Kevin,

I will clean up the 1872 part with the new information ASAP this will replace the whole part of the article. I was able to talk to the folks at the Springfield, they gave me the new reference and photo's I tried to up load the photo's but the system would not allow it as they question the copyrights, The Springfield museum told me that the photo was in the public domain released by the NHS national historical society but I'll have to check it out and get more information about posting images AndyAndy2159 (talk) 10:44, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Kevin this is the revision, it could use a edit as I think I've repeated quotes more than once. References will remain the same as Kellerstedt is just an addition. I'm still in trouble about images that will not be accepted because of Copyright information.

U.S. SWORD MODEL 1872 WEST POINT CADET

Manufactured by the Springfield Armory, Springfield, Ma. Produced from 1872 up to 1920 exclusively for West Point Cadet Book Store. The cadet sword has a straight blade approximately 30" long. The guard does not extend to the pommel to protect the hand, as is the case of the sabers, as the nature of its use does not necessitate such protection. The blade is made up of high carbon , oil hardening steel, forged, tempered, and straightened. It is nickel plated and buffed, the blade being about 6/10 inch in width at the guard and tapering to a narrow point at front end. The guard is made of bronze and has rectangular slot for shank of blade. It is gold plated and burnished on all polished surfaces. It is cast with an ornamental design of a coiled serpent on each end, forming an enlargement at the extreme ends of guard. The center of the guard contains an ornamental design with the initials M.A. about 3/4 inch high. The inside is cored to fit the shank of blade. The grip is made of nickel bronze. It is formed to fit the hand, with grooves running around the outside having the appearance of being wound with small cord. The pommel is made of gold-plated bronze with polished surfaces burnished. It is screwed on to shank of blade, securely holding guard and pommel in place after they are assembled to blade. The outside has an ornamental design of a spread eagle. The inside is counterbored and tapped to take the end of the blade shank. The washer is made of leather, 0.07 inch thick. It is placed between the guard and scabbard to act as a buffer when sword is placed in scabbard. Complete with 29 ½" metal scabbard - Army #4440. Scabbard is made of sheet steel, 0.035 inch in thickness, formed, and edges brazed together. It is polished, nickel plated, and buffed. It has a scabbard tip which is made of bronze, polished, and gold plated and burnished. The front end of the scabbard tip is slotted and the scabbard tip protector, which is made of sheet brass is brazed into it. The scabbard tip fits over the lower end of scabbard and is held in place by two small screws. The upper band is made of bronze, gold plated, all of the polished surfaces being burnished. The scabbard hook, which is also bronze, gold plated and buffed, is brazed to band. The scabbard linings, of which there are two, are made of wood and prevent scratching of nickel on the sword blade when inserting and withdrawing from scabbard. They also hold sword in place and prevent rattling. The blade of the sword is etched with the letters U.S.M.A.. The mouthpiece is fastened to the scabbard by two screws, which also secure the upper band to the scabbard. The screws, of which there are four, two for upper band and two for scabbard tip, are made of brass, gold plated and burnished.

Markings: Cross bar: M.A. Blade Ricasso stamped U.S. Armory Springfield Blade is etched with U.S.M.A.

Notes on sword design and purchasing:

Letter from Benton (Springfield) to Dyer (West Point) dated 16 October 1867. "Sir: I sent to your address by yesterday's express a box containing a sample Cadet sword.

Agreeably to your instructions I have made it conform more nearly to the present staff sword than to the musicians sword - the one I first sent to you. Should this pattern be approved and a number be required for the Corps of Cadets, I believe that they can be made at this Armory as well and as cheaply as they can be made elsewhere. The one I sent you was made entirely by our workmen…. P.S. The color of the gliding may be improved by making it correspond to that on the staff sword."

"There is a penciled note in Dyer's hand, 'Ask Col. B. to furnish Estimate of the cost of fifty swords like sample.'

The Springfield Armory was the only maker of this sword till 1920 and is stamped Springfield. The Armory production records show that 253 Cadet Swords plus a few pattern samples were manufactured between 1868 and 1920…. That’s 48 years in service. In 1920 the Spring Amory stopped making this sword was produced under contract to private makers. Dates made and the number produced by the Springfield Armory. 1868 - 36 1874 - 25 1876 - 28 1880 - 14 1882 - 50 1893 - 50 1914 - 50 Total: 253 1920 - 100 scabbards only." - Kellerstedt

It would be very hard to a find virgin sword that came from the West Point Cadet Store because The bookstore returned the swords to Springfield who broke it down so the best parts were used to rebuilt the sword from its parts to be reissued again and again. This sword was never sold to cadets.[3][6] The sword cost $11.00 for the first 100 before the price was cut back to $10.00. Copies of the orders to the Springfield Armory to Ames clearly shows that they are ordering swords and not sabers. This sword was put out for bids in 1920 swords were made under contract by private companies like Ames, M.S. Meyers and others who made about 200 model 1872 in total from 1920 to 1922 for the Springfield Armory for issue at West Point. The number of issued swords were made in limited production, cadets were issued dress swords, which were not meant to be used as a weapon, all where returned to the cadet store. Because cadets had no use for this type of sword in the Army, as officers, they carried the 1902 Army saber. Cadets could always buy their own sword after 1920 and many did. Early ones are rare. Many are replicas. Collectors must verify the maker's name, that U.S.M.A is engraved on the blade, and that there is an MA molded into the center of the brass hand guard and the Ricasso is well marked.

The eagle on the pommel on the top of the model 1872 faced forward. This was changed on the model 1922 to face back, as this seamed to make the sword look less aggressive.

References: Kellerstedt, Burton A. SWORDS AND SABERS OF THE ARMORY AT SPRINGFIELD. New Britain, Ct. 1998.

Okay Kevin, what do you think.AndyAndy2159 (talk) 11:52, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for taking so long; this fell off of my radar completely! :(

That's a whole lot of text. Can it be trimmed down without losing any necessary information? And can you give us an idea how much of it is being directly copied from the source and how much of it is your own work using the source as a reference? ElKevbo (talk) 15:20, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Kevin

It's all most all quoted work using Todd or Kellerstedt it might be long but it's correct with photo's from the Springfield and another collector which I'm having a hard time with. Kevin, I could edit it and I have it tried, it just does not look or give the information needed. AndyAndy2159 (talk) 18:38, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Kevin, I tried an edit, what I mark through can be cut. AndyAndy2159 (talk) 19:24, 10 December 2011 (UTC) everything can be crossed reference with out conflict. I respectfully sub it my bid.65.35.76.202 (talk) 02:27, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

65.35.76.202 (talk) 02:25, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Kevin, I posted it then removed it waiting to see what you will say.

this is a new copy

1872 to 1922 Model 1872

• 
  Model 1872

U.S. SWORD MODEL 1872 WEST POINT CADET

Manufactured by the Springfield Armory, Springfield, Ma. Produced from 1872 up to 1920 exclusively for West Point Cadet Book Store by the Springfield Armory. Using the official description of the cadet sword as printed in the 1878 printing of Springfield Ordnance Memoranda # 22.

The cadet sword has a straight blade approximately 30" long. The guard does not extend to the pommel to protect the hand, as is the case of the sabers, as the nature of its use does not necessitate such protection. The blade is made up of high carbon , oil hardening steel, forged, tempered, and straightened. It is nickel plated and buffed, the blade being about 6/10 inch in width at the guard and tapering to a narrow point at front end. The guard is made of bronze and has rectangular slot for shank of blade. It is gold plated and burnished on all polished surfaces. It is cast with an ornamental design of a coiled serpent on each end, forming an enlargement at the extreme ends of guard. The center of the guard contains an ornamental design with the initials M.A. about 3/4 inch high. The inside is cored to fit the shank of blade. The grip is made of nickel bronze. It is formed to fit the hand, with grooves running around the outside having the appearance of being wound with small cord. The pommel is made of gold-plated bronze with polished surfaces burnished. It is screwed on to shank of blade, securely holding guard and pommel in place after they are assembled to blade. The outside has an ornamental design of a spread eagle. The inside is counterbored and tapped to take the end of the blade shank. The washer is made of leather, 0.07 inch thick. It is placed between the guard and scabbard to act as a buffer when sword is placed in scabbard. Complete with 29 ½" metal scabbard - Army #4440. Scabbard is made of sheet steel, 0.035 inch in thickness, formed, and edges brazed together. It is polished, nickel plated, and buffed. It has a scabbard tip which is made of bronze, polished, and gold plated and burnished. The front end of the scabbard tip is slotted and the scabbard tip protector, which is made of sheet brass is brazed into it. The scabbard tip fits over the lower end of scabbard and is held in place by two small screws. The upper band is made of bronze, gold plated, all of the polished surfaces being burnished. The scabbard hook, which is also bronze, gold plated and buffed, is brazed to band. The scabbard linings, of which there are two, are made of wood and prevent scratching of nickel on the sword blade when inserting and withdrawing from scabbard. They also hold sword in place and prevent rattling. The blade of the sword is etched with the letters U.S.M.A.. The mouthpiece is fastened to the scabbard by two screws, which also secure the upper band to the scabbard. The screws, of which there are four, two for upper band and two for scabbard tip, are made of brass, gold plated and burnished.

Markings: Cross bar: M.A. Blade Ricasso stamped U.S. Armory Springfield Blade is etched with U.S.M.A.

The Springfield Armory was the only maker of this sword till 1920 and is stamped Springfield. The Armory production records show that 253 Cadet Swords plus a few pattern samples were manufactured between 1868 and 1920…. That’s 48 years in service. In 1920 the Spring Amory stopped making this sword was produced under contract to private makers. Dates made and the number produced by the Springfield Armory. 1868 - 36 1874 - 25 1876 - 28 1880 - 14 1882 - 50 1893 - 50 1914 - 50 Total: 253 1920 - 100 scabbards only." - Kellerstedt

It would be very hard to a find virgin sword that came from the West Point Cadet Store because The bookstore returned the swords to Springfield who broke it down so the best parts were used to rebuilt the sword from its parts to be reissued again and again. This sword was never sold to cadets.[3][6]

The number of issued swords were made in limited production, cadets were issued dress swords, which were not meant to be used as a weapon, all where returned to the cadet store. Because cadets had no use for this type of sword in the Army, as officers, they carried the 1902 Army saber. Cadets could always buy their own sword after 1920 and many did. Early ones are rare. Many are replicas. Collectors must verify the maker's name, that U.S.M.A is engraved on the blade, and that there is an MA molded into the center of the brass hand guard and the Ricasso is well marked.

The eagle on the pommel on the top of the model 1872 faced forward. This was changed on the model 1922 to face back, as this seamed to make the sword look less aggressive.

References: Kellerstedt, Burton A. SWORDS AND SABERS OF THE ARMORY AT SPRINGFIELD. New Britain, Ct. 1998.

AndyAndy2159 (talk) 22:36, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Andy, can you please let us know how much of this material is original and how much, if any, is copied from one or more references? ElKevbo (talk) 18:05, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Kevin,

Kevin

It's mostly all quoted work using Todd or Kellerstedt it might be long but it's correct with photo's from the Springfield and another collectors which I'm having a hard time posting the copy rights with. Kevin, I could edit it and I have it tried, it just does not look or give the information needed.Andy2159 (talk) 18:53, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Kevin, I did a lot of checking and I added more references and I listed it then rolled it back, Please check the updates and tell me what I have to do next. Holiday Greetings AndyAndy2159 (talk) 13:20, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't see any quotation marks or other indicators that the material is quoted. Without such notation, it is indistinguishable from plagiarism. Further, if much of the material is quoted then it's simply much too long and falls outside the bounds of acceptable practice.

Surely you don't believe that a reader needs all of this detail in a generalized encyclopedia article? What are the essentials? ElKevbo (talk) 14:21, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Kevin,

I have changed the references to the Springfield Armory. The fact is that both Todd and Kellerstedt are using this same references that are in the public domain. I changed the wording to reflect the same data in a different format. Please check this over. I can not control the wording as I can not leave out the official description of the sword. which is wordie but can not be changed to reflectively cut out parts.

So lets give this one more try. I think I've come a lot closer to my goal. Thanks

Andy

This is it

U.S. SWORD MODEL 1872 WEST POINT CADET

Manufactured by the Springfield Armory, Springfield, Ma. Produced from 1872 up to 1920 exclusively for West Point Cadet Book Store by the Springfield Armory. Using the official description of sword as described in the 1878 printing of Springfield Ordnance Memorandum # 22 G.P.O.

"The cadet sword has a straight blade approximately 30" long. The guard does not extend to the pommel to protect the hand, as is the case of the sabers, as the nature of its use does not necessitate such protection. The blade is made up of high carbon , oil hardening steel, forged, tempered, and straightened. It is nickel plated and buffed, the blade being about 6/10 inch in width at the guard and tapering to a narrow point at front end. The guard is made of bronze and has rectangular slot for shank of blade. It is gold plated and burnished on all polished surfaces. It is cast with an ornamental design of a coiled serpent on each end, forming an enlargement at the extreme ends of guard. The center of the guard contains an ornamental design with the initials M.A. about 3/4 inch high. The inside is cored to fit the shank of blade. The grip is made of nickel bronze. It is formed to fit the hand, with grooves running around the outside having the appearance of being wound with small cord. The pommel is made of gold-plated bronze with polished surfaces burnished. It is screwed on to shank of blade, securely holding guard and pommel in place after they are assembled to blade. The outside has an ornamental design of a spread eagle. The inside is counter bored and tapped to take the end of the blade shank. The washer is made of leather, 0.07 inch thick. It is placed between the guard and scabbard to act as a buffer when sword is placed in scabbard. Complete with 29 ½" metal scabbard - Army #4440. Scabbard is made of sheet steel, 0.035 inch in thickness, formed, and edges brazed together. It is polished, nickel plated, and buffed. It has a scabbard tip which is made of bronze, polished, and gold plated and burnished. The front end of the scabbard tip is slotted and the scabbard tip protector, which is made of sheet brass is brazed into it. The scabbard tip fits over the lower end of scabbard and is held in place by two small screws. The upper band is made of bronze, gold plated, all of the polished surfaces being burnished. The scabbard hook, which is also bronze, gold plated and buffed, is brazed to band. The scabbard linings, of which there are two, are made of wood and prevent scratching of nickel on the sword blade when inserting and withdrawing from scabbard. They also hold sword in place and prevent rattling. The blade of the sword is etched with the letters U.S.M.A.. The mouthpiece is fastened to the scabbard by two screws, which also secure the upper band to the scabbard. The screws, of which there are four, two for upper band and two for scabbard tip, are made of brass, gold plated and burnished.", Ordnance Memorandum # 22 Dated 1878

Markings: "Cross bar: M.A. Blade Ricasso stamped U.S. Armory Springfield Blade is etched with U.S.M.A." Ordnance Memorandum # 22 Dated 1878

"The Springfield Armory was the only maker of this sword till 1920 and is stamped Springfield Amory on the Ricasso. The Armory production records show that 253 Cadet Swords plus a few pattern samples were manufactured between 1868 and 1920…. That’s 48 years in service. In 1920 the Springfield Amory stopped making this sword was produced under contract to private makers. The dates the sword was made and the number produced by the Springfield Armory are shown in a letter from J. G. Benton from the Springfield Armory dated 16 October, 1876 to A. B. Dyer Chief of Ordnance of the Ordnance Office. 1868 - 36 1874 - 25 1876 - 28 1880 - 14 1882 - 50 1893 - 50 1914 - 50

Total: 253

1920 - Another 100 scabbards only were produced for repairs or replacement." production records M-1872 1868-1920.

It would be very hard to a find virgin sword that came from the West Point Cadet Store because The bookstore returned the swords to Springfield who broke it down so the best parts were used to rebuilt the sword from its parts to be reissued again and again. This sword was never sold to cadets.

The number of issued swords were made in limited production, cadets were issued dress swords, which were not meant to be used as a weapon, all where returned to the cadet store. Because cadets had no use for this type of sword in the Army, as officers, they carried the 1902 Army saber. Cadets could always buy their own sword after 1920 and many did. Early ones are rare. Many are replicas. Collectors must verify the maker's name, that U.S.M.A is engraved on the blade, and there is an MA molded into the center of the brass hand guard and the Ricasso is well marked with the Springfield Armory's stamp. Andy

Please note that the head of the Pommel scroll with sword knot hole faces to the left as you view the face of the M-1872 sword This was on the Model-1922 to race to the right.Photo's of this change can be found on page 10 figure 3 in Burton A Kellerstedt book Swords and sabers of the Armory at Springfield. Andy2159 (talk) 26 December 2011

Kevin, Please let me know

updated 12/26/2011

Andy Andy2159 (talk) 10:51, 26 December 2011 (UTC) 16:55, December 26, 2011‎ Andy2159

References

M-1872

Manufactured by the Springfield Armory, Springfield, Ma. Produced from 1872 up to 1920 exclusively for West Point Cadet Book Store by the Springfield Armory. Using the official description of sword as described in the 1878 printing of Springfield Ordnance Memorandum # 22 G.P.O.

"The cadet sword has a straight blade approximately 30" long. The guard does not extend to the pommel to protect the hand, as is the case of the sabers, as the nature of its use does not necessitate such protection. The blade is made up of high carbon , oil hardening steel, forged, tempered, and straightened. It is nickel plated and buffed, the blade being about 6/10 inch in width at the guard and tapering to a narrow point at front end. The guard is made of bronze and has rectangular slot for shank of blade. It is gold plated and burnished on all polished surfaces. It is cast with an ornamental design of a coiled serpent on each end, forming an enlargement at the extreme ends of guard. The center of the guard contains an ornamental design with the initials M.A. about 3/4 inch high. The inside is cored to fit the shank of blade. The grip is made of nickel bronze. It is formed to fit the hand, with grooves running around the outside having the appearance of being wound with small cord. The pommel is made of gold-plated bronze with polished surfaces burnished. It is screwed on to shank of blade, securely holding guard and pommel in place after they are assembled to blade. The outside has an ornamental design of a spread eagle. The inside is counter bored and tapped to take the end of the blade shank. The washer is made of leather, 0.07 inch thick. It is placed between the guard and scabbard to act as a buffer when sword is placed in scabbard. Complete with 29 ½" metal scabbard - Army #4440. Scabbard is made of sheet steel, 0.035 inch in thickness, formed, and edges brazed together. It is polished, nickel plated, and buffed. It has a scabbard tip which is made of bronze, polished, and gold plated and burnished. The front end of the scabbard tip is slotted and the scabbard tip protector, which is made of sheet brass is brazed into it. The scabbard tip fits over the lower end of scabbard and is held in place by two small screws. The upper band is made of bronze, gold plated, all of the polished surfaces being burnished. The scabbard hook, which is also bronze, gold plated and buffed, is brazed to band. The scabbard linings, of which there are two, are made of wood and prevent scratching of nickel on the sword blade when inserting and withdrawing from scabbard. They also hold sword in place and prevent rattling. The blade of the sword is etched with the letters U.S.M.A.. The mouthpiece is fastened to the scabbard by two screws, which also secure the upper band to the scabbard. The screws, of which there are four, two for upper band and two for scabbard tip, are made of brass, gold plated and burnished.", Ordnance Memorandum # 22 Dated 1878

Markings: "Cross bar: M.A. Blade Ricasso stamped U.S. Armory Springfield Blade is etched with U.S.M.A." Ordnance Memorandum # 22 Dated 1878

"The Springfield Armory was the only maker of this sword till 1920 and is stamped Springfield Amory on the Ricasso. The Armory production records show that 253 Cadet Swords plus a few pattern samples were manufactured between 1868 and 1920…. That’s 48 years in service. In 1920 the Springfield Amory stopped making this sword was produced under contract to private makers. The dates the sword was made and the number produced by the Springfield Armory are shown in a letter from J. G. Benton from the Springfield Armory dated 16 October, 1876 to A. B. Dyer Chief of Ordnance of the Ordnance Office. 1868 - 36 1874 - 25 1876 - 28 1880 - 14 1882 - 50 1893 - 50 1914 - 50

Total: 253

1920 - Another 100 scabbards only were produced for repairs or replacement." production records M-1872 1868-1920.

It would be very hard to a find virgin sword that came from the West Point Cadet Store because The bookstore returned the swords to Springfield who broke it down so the best parts were used to rebuilt the sword from its parts to be reissued again and again. This sword was never sold to cadets.

The number of issued swords were made in limited production, cadets were issued dress swords, which were not meant to be used as a weapon, all where returned to the cadet store. Because cadets had no use for this type of sword in the Army, as officers, they carried the 1902 Army saber. Cadets could always buy their own sword after 1920 and many did. Early ones are rare. Many are replicas. Collectors must verify the maker's name, that U.S.M.A is engraved on the blade, and there is an MA molded into the center of the brass hand guard and the Ricasso is well marked with the Springfield Armory's stamp. Andy

Please note that the head of the Pommel scroll with sword knot hole faces to the left as you view the face of the M-1872 sword This was on the Model-1922 to race to the right.Photo's of this change can be found on page 10 figure 3 in Burton A Kellerstedt book Swords and sabers of the Armory at Springfield. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andy2159 (talk • contribs) 22:57, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello Kevin, I have made changes and corrections. The references all check out with cross references 9O% of what is quoted is public and the other is given credit and cut short. I an working with the folks at the Springfield Armory a museum run by the National Park Service They made it they have all the records and both Todd & Kellerstedt both use it as there major reference. The N.P.S. is free and it is public information plus the staff is more than willing to help. I have had a lot of support with this from the West Point Armory which is part of the National Park Service. Both know of this article and have are aware that they can change anything they want and the have not. I would have to say that my references are down to facts. I would say some cleaning up could do and I wish I could but I'm still unsure of the correct format, if you would like to see the references improve or are in question please let me know as I will produce the source of that information for you. Andy

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Andy2159 (talk • contribs) 10:33, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

A few observations

Chaps, can I make a few points about the article and potential routes to develop it.

It's quite difficult at the moment to extract useful information from it, and I'm left with a number of questions. If these could be clarified then I'm reasonably content to embody them, although as ever subject to sources being appropriate.

1. Issue - Are these issued to Cadet NCOs and Offrs at the beginning of their appointment and then used throughout or are they drawn on an "as required" basis? The introductory paragraph could be read either way, although the former seems more appropriate.

2. At what point in the cadets training are they permitted to buy their own? Are they permitted to use a personally purchased sword during training?

3. How does this differ from a sword carried by a commissioned US Army Offr.

4. Why is the sash issue particularly important, I'd assume that commissioned Offrs wear swords on belts? What's the origin of wearing it on a sash rather than a belt?

5. There could usefully be a clarification of how they're procured. It reads as if it's a competitive procurement, is that correct? The assertion that standards were lowered in 2001, is there something to back this up or is this the point where the contract went to Solingen?

6. Would it be helpful to hav a seciton about the general design of the sword and the history of that design before going into the different variants?

TIA

User:ALR (talk) 11:03, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you,

I can supply the answers to you but it will take a few days, the problem would be how can I supply you with the reference material that you need to support the facts.

1. I know from personal experience that Swords are issued only to Cadet Officers only and not N.C.O. The swords and anything else that they need are issued to them from the cadet store on the day or day after they are ordered back to duty, usually they return 2 to 3 week before the new class arrives. I can not prove this, it just happens year after year. As I understand from the Academy they do not want times or other information published due to 9-11.

2. Cadets can and do purchased swords for friends, family and for their own use. any cadet or grad can buy one at any time. They are only allowed to use wear it if they a appointed a cadet officer. Again the only way to prove this is to try to buy one. there is nothing on paper.

3. Cadets carry Swords though they like to call them Sabers. A sword is a different type of weapon. today the only Sabers that is permitted is the the Pattern M-1902 and it is no longer issued, if you want one you will have to buy one. The chance that they will ever be called to report in full dress and under arms is unusual, it is only used for parades and the like. While the West Point Cadet is always on parade

4. The Army moved to a saber years ago, and gave up the sash year and years ago, they now use a belt. The Sash is important as it is the West Point Cadet Officer are the only people in the U.S. Army who continue to wear a sword and sash. As such, West Point cadets are referred to as "Guardians of Tradition" by the U.S. Army. The swords at West Point are issued only to cadet officers only. The swords are used for official military ceremonies at West Point such as parades, formations, drills and graduations. Now this has been true for years it was true back in the 50's when Todd put the fact down in his book cadet gray but even though this is still a true fact the only reference that I can find is close to 60 years only but to old for Wikipedia. In this Wikipeda http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sash it used the same quote from Todd "Today the West Point cadet officer is the only person in the Army who wears a sword and sash, the sole guardian of the tradition".[4]^ Fredrick Todd Col USAR Cadet Gray page 40 as I did but it to old for me to use is that fair?

5. This is a hard one as there are little facts that the Academy does not want to talk about it, The academy about 10 years ago lowered the standard of the sword to save money, the sword did not hold up well as it had a tendency to bend in the middle. but they have a new issue that has just been released this year to a higher standard.

6. Yes I would have to agree with you on this but I have been doing research on this for close to 10 years and just when I think that I got them all I find another maker, I have tried to list all the makers but it seams that the major makers all made swords for West Point it is just that they made them as custom swords for cadets at West Point you have to remember that it is not an issued sword unless it came from the cadet bookstore.

I'm not a writer, I'm doing the best that I can to uncover the correct information with references that I can, that the easy part it putting it in the correct working order that is giving me the most trouble.

Did I cover everything. If not please just ask.

I will be sending this to the West Point Museum at the academy to get any addition information and will post it hear when they respond.

Andy

65.35.76.202 (talk) 12:43, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

OK, things are starting to make sense. If I can test my understanding of a couple of things.

The US Army started using a sword suspended from a sash, West Point using the same style. The rest of the army subsequently moved to a sabre style, rather than sword (any idea when?) and carry it on a belt (again any dates?). West Point have retained the Sash style and don't use the sabre style. Presumably Offrs on the staff wear a sabre on the belt then?

With respect to manufacture, it's becoming clearer. West Point compete manufacture on an as required basis, these swords are then issued as required and can be sold to cadets. Other manufacturers are at liberty to produce the swords for cadets and graduates. The distinction is reasonably straightforward to capture in the article.

All sounds like a narrative that can be accommodated, although a more recent source would be useful. The issue about sourcing a negative is something that can be dealt with.

ALR (talk) 17:37, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I think that we are on the same page.

The sash is only used when a cadet is dressed for parade, a sword can be warn without a sash as for drill and less formal formations. It's only use today is for tradition, and it really does not hold the sword but it does hide how the sword is really hung and there are a few ways to hang them on your body, belts cotton with or without a sash over the right shoulder or a hook but with a hook a sash is used.

I will have to do research as to when the army stopped using swords but they used the Saber near for close to 200 year or more.

Army officers stationed at the point would ware the 1902 Pattern Sword (M-1902) with a leather belt and a chain that holds the Saber to the belt for parades, this is because the Saber has a curve and will not hang straight, While the Sword will hang straight down and looks better in a formation.

I would have to say that the sale of Swords was a free for all from 1972 to 1922 the reason is that anyone who could would made a custom sword for a cadet at any academy would have if they got the order. The non academy swords are really hard and a lot of people try to pass off fakes the truth is if you went to the academy it would have USMA engraved on the blade at the very least and many more elaborate swords have been produced like sword engraved with your name on the other side was common as well. The makers all had blanks but if you were going to the USMA academy you would not pay extra to buy a Sword at said VMI or the Citadel on it and the other way a round. At that time all military academy swords looked exactly the same.

Then in 1922 the West Point Sword was copyrighted and put out to bid under contract with one maker at a time with the cadet bookstore being the only supplier till today.

I would like to add an external link to a ebay guide called west point cadet sword how to spot a fake, it is very usful if you are trying to find out if it is real or not. the link is http://reviews.ebay.com/USMA-West-Point-Cadet-Sword-how-to-spot-a-fake?ugid=10000000002580709 please check it out. Okay did I get it all I can show you supporting information on most everything. Please if you have a question just ask.

I have also noticed my rating on the article is very high, is this working correctly?

Last but not least Todd was reprinted last year because it is the last book written on the subject it is still used as a reference, very little has changed cadets still where where the same sword and sash and the army still uses the 1902 but no one buys them except the very few that use them.

65.35.76.202 (talk) 21:28, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I think that response raises a few more questions, but we're getting there. In terms of wearing the sword it seems the salient points are:

• The original design of sword was worn suspended from a sash. The original design was also used at the other academies. (are they now different?)
• The sword is now worn on a belt or hook (what is it hooked to?), and in the most formal settings it is accompanied by a sash, reflecting the original wear.
• It's issued to student officers at the beginning of their period of appointment and returned on completion.
• Students, and former students, can purchase a sword either through West Point or directly from a manufacturer. From your comments above it seems that the non West Point swords might be considered as fake? Do you mean that in the pejorative sense?

Can you clarify with respect to the 1902 pattern please. Is that a sword or a sabre? How does it differ, if at all, from the sword worn by students?

A link to ebay probably doesn't meet the external links guidance so I'd avoid it.

I'll try to get some time to play with the article tomorrow now that we seem to have nailed some of the issues.

ALR (talk) 22:55, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Let me take this point by point.

Q. The original design of sword was worn suspended from a sash.

A. Not at the academy, all swords have a hook on the scabbards which connects to a belt of one kind or another. I have photo's that could show you how it works. The sash itself goes back to the days when gentleman used them to show a social status and the did hang swords from them, The sash could be used for anything from a rope to a bandage, it started in the military to show rank as well as what function you performed.

Q. The original design was also used at the other academies.

A. Yes, if we are talking about the model-1872 it was designed by J.G. Benton from west point and A.B. Dyer who was the chief of ordnance and based on the design of the M-1860 the staff and field officers sword which was made by the Springfield armory for the army. After working with the design for several years the Springfield came up with the model 1872 which had no copy rights so every one else copied it. Since West Point only had 253 swords that lasted close to 50 years, and yes this sword was sold to the cadets by a third party and the academy allowed them as long as it conformed to the issued swords. The key word is 3 party as there could of been 10 different makers selling the exact sword. Which is just a copy of a real one.

Q. It's issued to student officers at the beginning of their period of appointment and returned on completion.

A. Unless they have there own and refuse the issued sword.

Q. Students, and former students, can purchase a sword either through West Point or directly from a manufacturer. From your comments above it seems that the non West Point swords might be considered as fake? Do you mean that in the pejorative sense?

A. Students Grads and sometimes family today can only buy them directly from the book store all other sales are not allowed, even though the maker or others will sell them. Non issue swords, are not made anymore as it is copy righted, so we would be talking about the M-1872. I'll let you be the judge on this. The swords that were officially made for used at the academy are the only true issue swords for that time period and they where all made by the Springfield Armory. all other swords were purchased privately by cadets by many makers, Since and the quality I would have to say would of been of a equal or higher quality and the options for custom engraving and the like would make it your, but is it better or worse than one made at the Springfield. I could not tell you. All I can say is that it is not an issued sword. Today some non issued swords bring more money that others, it depends on the maker. The major problem is unless it is marked USMA or West Point you are will have a hard time proving it.

Q. Can you clarify with respect to the 1902 pattern please. Is that a sword or a sabre? How does it differ, if at all, from the sword worn by students?

A. The 1902 is a Saber, the major if not the only difference between the two is that a sword is straight and a Saber has a curve to it. again it would be so easy to show you with images

I'm at your service, Thank you Andy 65.35.76.202 (talk) 00:24, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

To make a point, if there were no presentation, custom ordered swords made by private makers there would be no examples of this type of sword at all. Some of the swords are very special say a gift to a company commander from his company, a named sword with a famous name. Was this sword an issued sword no, so the problem is just how can you connect it to West Point, if its named or etched with USMA or the words, that conclusive but if its not there is no way that you will be able to prove that it was an academy sword. There also was a matter of quality some makers made a better sword quality wise as well as the options were better as well as the price. Are they really West Point swords or sword that were used at west point or after this much time it makes no difference??? Andy2159 (talk) 02:29, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

So you tell me is issue of great importance. Andy2159 (talk) 02:29, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I added an internal link under also see but it does not come up with the correct name it's listed last but has this number 1 next to it can you please correct this for me. Thank you. Andy2159 (talk) 02:34, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

References

Edits, and changes to M-1872

I would like to change this

Presentation and engraved swords were produced by many manufactures. Cadets were free to purchase and use there own swords. Officially this is a copy and is not a officially issued sword. It would be very hard to find a Springfield M-1972 as the few that are around are owned by museums. There are a fair amount of custom made swords available. Unless the blade is etched with with USMA or West Point Military Academy it would be impossible to prove it was used or made for a cadet at West Point unless it is a named sword one engraved with the cadets Name and most are.

TO THIS

Presentation and other special swords were custom made swords produced by many manufactures Like Lilley-Ames Company of Columbus, Ohio, M.S. Meyers N.Y.C. N.Y., Gemsco Inc. New York, Horstmann Company Philadelphia PA as well as a few more. Cadets were free to purchase and use there own swords. Which they privately ordered from one of the many makers. Officially this is a copy and is not a officially issued sword. It would be very hard to find a M-1972 Springfield as the few that are around are owned by museums. There were a limited number of custom made swords produced. Unless the blade is etched with with USMA or West Point Military Academy it would be impossible to prove it was used or made for a cadet at West Point.

Name Swords Sword blades engraved with the cadets name are called named sword and less than 20% were made this way. This was much more expensive, most could not afford the extra money to buy it new. The condition of the M-1872 was not getting any better, so there was a good market among cadets to buy it used swords and resell it to another cadet after graduation. Name swords could not be resold.

Swords of tradition it would not be uncommon that presentation swords used by high ranking cadet officers swords were passes down swords with special history to the cadet that takes their command the following year. The best examples would be the Regimental commanders, Drum Major, Color Guard and even down to Company commanders were given the honor to use the swords for there use as long as they have the position. Which would make them Swords of Honor. Andy2159 (talk) 12:16, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

65.35.76.202 (talk) 12:08, 5 January 2012 (UTC) Andy Andy2159 (talk) 12:12, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Updatery

Right, I got a bit of headspace today to work on this. I've restructured quite significantly in line with the discussion above.

What's missing are actual citations, despite the extensive list of references at the bottom of the page. It would be useful if anyone has access to these to actually populate as appropriate. Clearly there are also some aspects of US Army culture that I'm not familiar with that may need drawn out.

I'm hoping that it's now more readable, although I am conscious that I gutted out a lot of the discursive text to try to get down to a somewhat more pithy article.

ALR (talk) 22:47, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes you really gutted this.

Clearly there are also some aspects of US Army culture that you're really not familiar with.

Did you check my references?

I have been working with both the Springfield Armory as well as the Armory at West Point and the like the last version very well.

Lets play this game since the information that you deleted is of prime importance to the history of this article look at this below.

I have 3 difference references for every word, They are Todd, Kellerstad, and the Springfield Armory plus West Point. This is not made up. I do not understand how you can make the changes that you did with out knowing anything about military history.

Plus if there is a problem I can have someone from the Springfield Armory post this.

The mix of discusion and content is getting really difficult to deal with, so I'm cutting my response in here. Also, could you try to use the syntax to indent and highlight please. It makes it much easier to differentiate the conversation.

It seems that we have a difference in understanding over what a Wikipedia article looks like. There is a Manual of Style as well as the policies around verifiability that apply. I think that the general notability guide probably applies in this instance as well.

What I've tried to do is to extract the salient points, rather than lose the reader in an excess of detail. We're writing for the casual user; not the historian, and certainly not the cadet. My concern about what you had written was both the level of detail, and the ability of the reader to keep track of it.

You'll note that I qualified my familiarity with US Army traditions, such as the peurile USMA/ VMI/ Citadel/ ROTC nonsense. Whilst I'm cogniscant of military history I'm also very familiar with what we're trying to deliver with Wikipedia.

Can you identify anything that's currently in the article that may be factualy inaccurate or misrepresents the situation?

There are some details missing, I was really struggling to find some of them in the bulk last night I'm afraid. And they need to be sourced.

I trust that explains context.

ALR (talk) 15:36, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

The additions of a couple of references were useful, but we need to be clear on what constitutes and acceptable source. The purist would say that it needs to be published in a peer reviewed form, although personally I think that's inappropriately restrictive for most subjects. In this case just "published" would help, something that someone else can go and refer to, so that might be a pamphlet produced by the Academy library or something.

I've reworded a little bit of what you put in and moved it about a bit. One of the difficulties I was having early on was the amount of repetition and deviation in the prose, so I've moved the text you put into the model description about private purchase down to the section about private purchase.

You'll note that I've also toned down the Academy view on private purchase, I'd suggest that the copyright statement needs to be supported, which begs the question of why the sale of unathorised copies has not been addressed?

ALR (talk) 11:40, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

What proof do you need to accept the following bellow.

Manufactured by the Springfield Armory, Springfield, Ma. Produced from 1868 up to 1920 exclusively for West Point Cadet Book Store by the Springfield Armory. Using the official description of sword as described in the 1878 printing of Springfield Ordnance Memorandum # 22 G.P.O. [9]

Markings: "Cross bar: M.A. Blade Ricasso stamped U.S. Armory Springfield Blade is etched with U.S.M.A."[9] Ordnance Memorandum # 22 Dated 1878, or see external links on this page for the Springfieldedge or rediscov for a complete description both from the Springfield Armory.

Please note that the head of the Pommel scroll with sword knot hole faces to the left as you view the face of the M-1872 sword. This was changed on the Model-1922 to faced to the right. Photo's of this change can be found on page 68 of Fredricks Todds cadet Gray and another example is on page 10 figure 3 in Burton A Kellerstedt book Swords and sabers of the Armory at Springfield though this can be confusing as the discrimination of photo # 3 describes another sword and does not match the discrimination.

"The Springfield Armory was the only maker of this sword till 1920 and is stamped Springfield Amory on the Ricasso. The Armory production records show that 253 Cadet Swords plus a few pattern samples were manufactured between 1868 to 1920 and used to 1923. There was another order for 100 scabbards to replace the one that were needed. That’s 48 years in service. In 1920 the Springfield Amory stopped making this sword and then it was produced under contract to private makers."[9] production records M-1872 1868–1920.

It would be very hard to a find virgin sword that came from the West Point Cadet Store because The bookstore returned the swords to Springfield who broke it down so the best parts were used to rebuilt the sword from its parts to be reissued again and again. This sword was never sold to cadets.

Presentation and other special swords were custom made swords produced by many manufactures Like Lilley-Ames Company of Columbus, Ohio, M.S. Meyers N.Y.C. N.Y., Gemsco Inc. New York, Horstmann Company Philadelphia PA as well as a few more. Cadets were free to purchase and use there own swords. Which they privately ordered from one of the many makers. Officially this is a copy and is not a officially issued sword. It would be very hard to find a M-1872 Springfield as the few that are around are owned by museums. There were a limited number of custom made swords produced. Unless the blade is etched with with USMA or West Point Military Academy it would be impossible to prove it was used or made for a cadet at West Point.

Name Swords Sword blades engraved with the cadets name are called named sword and less than 20% were made this way. This was much more expensive, most could not afford the extra money to buy it new. The condition of the M-1872 was not getting any better, so there was a good market among cadets to buy used swords and resell it to another cadet after graduation. Name swords could not be resold.

Swords of tradition it would not be uncommon that presentation swords used by high ranking cadet officers swords were passes down swords with special history to the cadet that takes their command the following year. The best examples would be the Regimental commanders, Drum Major, Color Guard and even down to Company commanders were given the honor to use the swords for there use as long as they have the position. Which would make them Swords of Honor.

Cadets had no use for this type of sword in the Army, as officers, they carried the 1902 Army saber, so most cadets did not want to spend the money for a custom sword so they purchased a used one or took a issued one.Andy2159 (talk) 23:44, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

updates 4-9-2012

====There are 3 existing references which apply to Army cadet swords pre 1802.====

1. General order dated March 30, 1800 required cadets to carry a sword with a cut and thrust blade between 28 and 32 inches long, with a gilt hilt.
2. September 22 1800, Superintendent of Military Stores Samuel Hodgdon requested from a private military storekeeper named John Harris to supply cadets and noncommissioned officers swords. Brass mounted with cut and thrust blade 30 inches long.
3. Regulations published in 1801, stated that cadet swords should be the same as the platoon officers swords, 28 inch cut and thrust blade mounted according to the branch of service.

Getting back to work.. Andy2159 (talk) 13:15, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

All interesting points but in the interests of making the article as digestible as possible for the non specialist we could usefully capture the three references in narrative, rather than just regurgitate.

Might I suggest something along the lines of "Whilst no instances of this pattern are thought to exist there are descriptions of a brass mounted cut and thrust style sword of between 28 and 32 inches in length with the cadet sword being the same as a platoon officers weapon of the period." Then just cite the reference once.

ALR (talk) 14:20, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Not to be hard headed, I just do not know how to word it correctly

65.35.73.243 (talk) 03:28, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Pretty much what I've suggested above really?

ALR (talk) 11:49, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I have a copy of USMA CSB-0146 Oct 2010 with the drawings, a lot of information. my request to use the info will be approve soon but it is public. I will want to post it after I get permission.

Also photos that I took and posted here have been removed they were my photos and they have been uo for years why were they taken down? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andy2159 (talk • contribs) 20:19, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry Andy2159 (talk) 20:24, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I'm not sure why you are sorry so far I think it's all good, even if you cut it. I do need to edit some but I had to use the references work. I have repeated my self. I'll just watch what you have to do. Thanks65.35.73.243 (talk) 12:57, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

References

4/12/2012

New edits

4/12/2012

New editsAndy2159 (talk) 13:40, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I think I've managed to work out what you're saying with the sections that I've edited, but I'm really struggling to make sense of the 1839-1872 section. You seem to be blending your own words with direct quotes from books and it's not really all that clear what the substantive information and what's speculation or editorial.

Can you give me the salient points so that I can structure the rest around it?

Thanks

ALR (talk) 18:47, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Will you give me about 10 day, I have a problem and it will take me away is that okay 65.35.73.243 (talk) 10:14, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

I had a hard time putting the images side by side, if you could help me on that one I would be great full.

I will explain to you after I get back what my points are.

Thanks

Andy2159 (talk) 15:58, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

4-20-2012

There was a West Point Cadet Sword made in 1850 It was made by the Ames Mfg. Co. Called U.S. Sword Model 1850 Cadet Cadet Officer's sword. Silver plated, cruciform hilt is derived from NCO sword M1840. Straight single-edge blade. Pommel is decorated with Federal Eagle. Complete with 29 1/2" steel scabbard (Army #4436).

Markings: Blade: AMES MFG. CO./CHICOPEE/MASS. U.S. Crossguard: M.A. M.A. = Military Academy. Hilt: 15.

Notes: "Little information is available concerning the precise pattern of the Cadet swords ordered from the Ames Manufacturing Company by the U.S. Ordnance Department and no specimens were located to date. It is believed that the Cadet swords were purchased by the Ordnance Department for the U.S. Military Academy, West Point, New York, and the Virginia Military Institute (V.M.I.), Lexington. In any event, Cadet swords were inspected and die-stamped with the inspector's initials, 'US,' and the year.

'Ordnance Office November 27, 1846 N.P. Ames Sir: Your letter of the 23rd inst. has been received, and I have concluded to take the swords of the pattern furnished the Military Academy at West Point, at $11. each.' s/G. Talcott

Ord. Office Dec. 7, 1846 N.P. Ames Sir: The Cadet's Swords alluded to in your letter of the 1st inst. will receive the usual inspection.' s/G. Talcott

'Ord. Office Aug. 22, 1849 James T. Ames, Sir: Your letter of the 20th inst. has been received and you will be pleased to furnish this Department with one hundred Cadet Swords, at the price of ten dollars, stated by you, thirty of which to be completed and delivered at as early a time as practicable, being required for issue to the U.S. Corps of Cadets.' s/G. Talcott

The 100 Cadet swords for the U.S. Military Academy were delivered by the Ames firm November 30, 1849. The final Ordnance Department order for Ames-manufactured Cadet swords is somewhat confusing because the original order for 100 swords was not recorded. The only letter found concerning the swords is cited next: 'Ord. Office July 7, 1856 James T. Ames, Sir: It was supposed from your letter of the 2nd May, last, that 100 Cadets' swords would have been delivered...they are much wanted, and I request that they be furnished at the earliest day practicable....'s/H.K. Craig Ordnance Department records shows that James T. Ames delivered the 100 Cadet swords, in addition to other swords, on July 25, 1856. The Cadet swords were priced at $10.00 each, as specified in Col. Talcott's letter of August 22, 1849 and they are probably of the same pattern as those made in response to that letter."

Now your going to want to know where I'm getting this information and how you can check it out.

Most of it was collected from the Springfield Armory Museum, This Museum is part of the National Park Service and all the information is public. You can see this information at http://ww2.rediscov.com/spring/VFPCGI.exe?IDCFile=/spring/DETAILS.IDC,SPECIFIC=15248,DATABASE=objects,

The major reference for this work would be Ron Hickox COLLECTOR'S GUIDE TO AMES U.S. CONTRACT MILITARY EDGED WEAPONS: 1832-1906. Pioneer Press. Union City, Tn. 1984.

John D. Hamiliton THE AMES SWORD COMPANY 1829-1935. Mowbray Company. Providence, R.I. 1983. with special reference to page 161.

See, Hamilton, pg. 161.

So you can see that as early as VMI and West Point started ordering this type of sword starting in or around 1846 and several other well know authors have pointed out images and photo's with the model 1850. I will have a photo that I will be able to post when I get back. If you check out the web address at http://ww2.rediscov.com/spring/VFPCGI.exe?IDCFile=/spring/DETAILS.IDC,SPECIFIC=15248,DATABASE=objects, you will be able to see a photo of the Model 1850 it's one piece is different than the 2 piece hilt of the model 1972

This is what I'm trying to say, and more if you would let me. Please let's work together on this, it took a long time to get the references I need to pass your test. I'll grant you that I have a confusing style of putting it down, I have all ways worked with an editor. Please ask me if you want to know anything. I'll be back in a few days I did not think that I would have time to knock this out before I left, which means I left half out

Andy2159 (talk) 04:17, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Model 1850

As you know I'm not a writer, I know I have the facts correct and will be adding a photo or drawing. The work here can be referenced by the Springfield Armory Museum, Ron G Hickox COLLECTOR'S GUIDE TO AMES U.S. CONTRACT MILITARY EDGED WEAPONS: 1832-1906. Pioneer Press. Union City, Tn. 1984. John D. Hamilton THE AMES SWORD COMPANY 1829-1935. Mowbray Company. Providence, R.I. 1983.

If you could please edit this to make this as clear as possible I would be great full, I have several more references if you need them. I am free to answer any questions.

Thank you

Andy2159 (talk) 03:10, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

This is the best photo available

Andy2159 (talk) 16:01, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Please point me in the direction of where I can learn how to edit images and text?

Andy2159 (talk) 07:20, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Not really sure as I don't do much with images tbh.

ALR (talk) 07:18, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

4/27/2012

I made this easy, just one change so you can do a quick undo. This holds to the facts and takes out a lot of stuff that is repeted.

Andy2159 (talk) 14:55, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Photos

The number of photos is a bit excessive at the moment and as they don't really add a huge amount, given the lack of anchoring to the text they could probably ne reduced. What would be most useful is perhaps a couple of photos of the sword being worn. It's clear from the amends what you've said is a belt, and I described as such, is actually a cross-belt or baldrick.

Is it possible to get a photo of one worn sheathed and also drawn? How is it carried for drill purposes?

ALR (talk) 09:01, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

I've just started working with images yesterday, not an issue just give me a few weeks before we start.

I was going to go into detain with your about the subject it self, I have a impressive amount off referenced data that I feel is important to the subject totally related to it's development, growth and further of the subject the West Point Cadet Sword.

I get your want the same thing but you want it short and sweet, your not really looking for all the facts just the important ones.

I can live that way.

So let's get down to facts.

A Baldrick a true Baldrick in the U.S. Army holds A saber not a sword is connected to the belt by 2 rings the upper ring of the saber is connect to a hook on the left side of the belt, the second ring on the sabers scabbards is hooked to the lower ring. this makes the Baldrick connected in two places to the sabers scabbards

Cadets where cotton belts, officers where a single cotton belt with a loop at the end and somewhat of a button hole to allow the single hook on the scabbards to hang, this is the way its done on drill, the sword is controlled by the cadet officers left hand so it stays in place.

Cadet's and NCO'S where cross belts only in full dress. the ones that go over the right and left shoulder are or wore for a cartridge case remember they carry rifles the cartridge case was when they carried ball and powder. the outfit was completed with the same Breast plate as officers ware and the addition of a cotton waist belt with a brass buckle.

Full dress is an image, it would not work with out a lot of safety pins holding everything in place, the sash is for dress only it to only stays in place with pins.

So in the army they ware Baldrick's and cadets wear belts, white cotton belts that must be washed clean.

in any case I feel that the only Baldrick's worn at the academy are worn by army officers and that is part should be cut in full as it has nothing to do with this article.

USMA Directing Staff

US Army Directing Staff posted to USMA are issued with the 1902 model Saber worn either on a baldrick or belt. As it has nothing to do with cadet swords, the article is about the cadet sword and the above has nothing to do with this story.

65.35.73.243 (talk) 15:58, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

5-5-2012

I'm still working on some additions and the photo's are fitting into place. Please a week or two so I can get it all out before you edit. Thanks Andy2159 (talk) 00:42, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

You are rather butchering some of the readability again to be honest, even running through it at the moment is getting back to making my head hurt. Can you try to adopt a style that avoids "it should be noted" type wording as it's obfuscating the main narrative.

If I'm honest I'm rather regretting offering to help out here because I'm not getting the impression that you're interested in collaborating, just continuing to push your agenda.

ALR (talk) 09:59, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm not trying to be hard to H work with, I just do not know what you want. I am just presenting to you in facts about this item that I can reference. I have told you before that I'm not a writer, your the editor you can cut it all if you want. All I can say is that the facts are correct and so are the images. There are more facts I would of like to include but I feel you just want me to stop. You take so long to reply, I do not get feed back in time.

So just let me know, Thanks65.35.73.243 (talk) 11:13, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

I made a start. I'll try to do some more tonight. Rumiton (talk) 01:11, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

OK, If I can be candid. I've tried now a couple of times to work on making this more readable and accessible to the casual reader. Each time I've tried that you've ended up re-inserting tortuous sections that to be honest I find very difficult to extract pertinent information from. The Wikipedia interface is not particularly friendly for a dyslexic in the first place and whilst I've tried to be as accommodating as possible every time you insert information you do it in a way that needs me to expend a considerable amount of effort to even get back to the a baseline. I've also pointed you at the relevant policy and guidance a couple of times and I don't get the impression that you've made much effort to read them.

You've asked for copy-editing assistance and that's probably an opportune moment for me to bow out. A copy-editor is broadly disinterested in the topic but will work on the prose and presentation. I'm more interested in military strategy, operational capabilities and systems than the unimportant minutiae of uniforms and dress. I dropped in on this to help out, and I don't feel that it's been particularly reciprocated. My available time is, as you note, as an OF-4 very scarce at the moment. I am going to prioritise to things that interest me and where I don't feel as if it's a chore.

ALR (talk) 07:43, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

I came here through a Copy Editors Guild request. People who care about prose often end up frustrated in Wikipedia but I have found that when the results are clear, the work gets accepted, at least. Anyway, as a retired OF-3 (or my local equivalent) I have some time to spare. In I hop. Rumiton (talk) 09:42, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

That's all I can do at the moment. 65.35 please have a look to be sure what I have done is correct. Also look at the parts I have marked ?? They didn't make sense to me, or seemed to have missing text. Thanks. Rumiton (talk) 10:21, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Working on the ??. I removed this as I could not find the page number "as well as The Civil War caused a delay on delivery for 7 years." I will reinsert it when the page number can be found. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andy2159 (talk • contribs) 12:18, 12 May 2012 (UTC) Andy2159 (talk) 12:33, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

References

new update

The information that I entered is referenced, it is different from what Todd has to say which is also referenced. Peterson, quotes general orders. I think both were used that is what several different people say. It does add information that is useful. It's up to you I'm sorry to dump this on you, I wish I would do it myself. If you fell that it could be worked in okay if you want to cut it okay too. Must say I really like what you have done. Thanks AndyAndy2159 (talk) 15:17, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I will have a look. Rumiton (talk) 01:11, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

The info all looks good and well sourced, though I swapped some of it around for better readability. Also another ?? to look at. Thanks. Rumiton (talk) 01:48, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Rumiton,

I cut it out and re did it. this is more in line with the truth and it connects the graduate to the new sword in a whole. I'll references it asap and photos will be added as well, there is one link on the army sword belts that will show my point http://www.marlowwhite.com/01-050-o.html?___store=default Marlow White is the U.S. importer to West Point of cadet swords today the swords are make in Germany by WKC

I just spent 1/2 looking for a Baldrick the only 2 I found was on on Wilipidia and the other on ebay at this address http://www.ebay.com/itm/Civil-War-Leather-Sword-Belt-US-Brass-Spoon-Buckle-/120900019342?_trksid=p3284.m263&_trkparms=algo%3DSIC%26its%3DI%26itu%3DUCI%252BIA%252BUA%252BFICS%252BUFI%26otn%3D21%26pmod%3D110867944390%26ps%3D54

They just did not use them any more.

I Hope I'm not to much trouble for you and thank you for you kind words. I'm leaving this up to you as far as I am concerned you can delete it all. I will add Marlow White to the list

Thanks

AndyAndy2159 (talk) 05:12, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

This is a photo of a Baldrick http://cdn3.retronaut.co/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/US-Army-Cavalry-officer-in-service-uniform.jpg This is a photo of the army sword belt http://www.vanguardmil.com/army-officer-sabre-belt-armor-p-205.html?gclid=CIL9p5HE_K8CFY_J7Qodmz3GHA

There is a great deal of difference.

AndyAndy2159 (talk) 05:33, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

OK, except that I don't think the new section "1902 Patton Saber" belongs in this cadet sword article, as the cadets apparently have never worn sabers. Rumiton (talk) 11:37, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Rumiton,

Anything you say goes. That whole section can be cut and not replaced at all.

Andy65.35.73.243 (talk) 13:32, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

 Done Thanks. Rumiton (talk) 15:11, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Question

We have: There is no further mention of cadet swords in the Regulations until 1839, but in the next section we have the date 1939. Which is correct? Rumiton (talk) 15:20, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Rumiton, Good cut. and Good question. I can not find any thing else in the general orders about this.

On page 178 Peterson goes on to say, "There-after, however, there are a series of pictures of cadets and some existing specimen which help identify the type worn. According to these sources the first distinctive West Point Sword appeared sometimes in the late 40's. (goes on to describe it) photo is on the page and finishes with This sword was worn until about 1872, when the new pattern was adopted which has be warn with minor variations ever since."

There is may problem. There were a lot of models in use between 39 and 72 Private swords, orders from the Springfield, the model 1950 from Ames. Over the years with the service and maintenance building and rebuilding many of the swords look different close up. No references support this, the only thing that points to this being true is the fact that each reference talks about the swords being rebuilt over the years through today what just adds confusion as all the parts are interchangeable, so you might have a Model 1850 with a Model 39 blade or the other way around or your new privately owned cadet store sword you purchased yesterday could brake and they could replace the blade with one 50 years old.. How do I say this? other than the way I have.

I'm not sure if I answered your question in full but please ask me anything.

Thanks

AndyAndy2159 (talk) 21:06, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

I was just asking whether the mention in Regulations happened in 1839 or 1939. Rumiton (talk) 02:23, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

1839

AndyAndy2159 (talk) 13:08, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I made the change. Rumiton (talk) 16:17, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Question

Rumiton, I've just got permission from the publisher of the Ames sword company 1 of my major references to reprint 3 images from their book, I might add one and replace the others, I had a problem up loading them but permission is in wiki's hands, it has not been granted yet. do you think it will be okay as it shows how the sword has changed but I do not want to over load it with photos that do not add to the story. Thanks AndyAndy2159 (talk) 23:40, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

The copyright situation needs to be very clear. Personally I think there are enough pics in the article already, but if you want to take one out and replace it, perhaps the hand-drawn sketch could go. It is hard to see any detail on it. Rumiton (talk) 01:08, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Rumiton, Understand and Agree... AndyAndy2159 (talk) 10:34, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Incidentally, this article is averaging about 115 visits per day, so quite a lot of people are interested in the subject. [1] Rumiton (talk) 15:19, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Model 1850 Ames Cadet sword compaired to the 1840 Musicians sword.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Model 1850 Ames Cadet sword compaired to the 1840 Musicians sword.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status as of 6 June 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Model 1850 Ames Cadet sword compaired to the 1840 Musicians sword.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:09, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

insufficient inline citations.

We can not find any, if you would point them out will fix. I would of asked but did knot know how. Andy2159 (talk) 12:05, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Photo position change

I had to change it back as the photo is the most important photo, if you move it one would look at the first photo and think that is the sword that this article is about. An editor forced me to put a photo of a standard military academy and explain the difference.

Andy2159 (talk) 02:10, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Citadel sword

This has nothing to do with the article. I am going to remove it as this is not difference than any other sword of this type, The Citadel or VMI but as a point of reference... The article is about the West point cadet sword, it does not matter who uses the non copyrighted and trademarks sword only that there are two types.

Andy2159 (talk) 11:32, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Restored to previous version

As requsted by Andy. For future reference, go to "View history" and click on the date you want. When the article pops up, click "Edit" then "Save." Cheers. Rumiton (talk) 00:22, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Added Wagners link

Excellent information and photos

```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andy2159 (talk • contribs) 12:12, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

"Made in (West) Germany"

User:Andy2159, can you explain your reasoning for wanting the inclusion of both Germany and West Germany? ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 02:49, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

[[User:Sturmgewehr88|, I can as your change really made no real difference to the story. Andy2159 (talk) 08:48, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

@Andy2159: Because "[you] can". Well first off, if it "really made no real difference" then you shouldn't mind me removing the repeate. Also, I'd like to point out WP:OWN. I don't care how much time you've dedicated to this article or even that this is the only article you've ever edited, this is not "your" article, and anyone can edit and improve it. On that note, it makes no sense to have both Germany and West Germany mentioned, as they are the same country, the Federal Republic of Germany. Because the FRG annexed the German Democratic Republic (East Germany), people simply dropped the "West" from the FRG's common name, but it is still the same country. ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 17:19, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

@Sturmgewehr88:

WOW..... I do not own this nor do I claim too.. I hope you found this article accurate.. If it means that much to you to add West Germany That's fine, but it really changes nothing... I just wonder if you know anything about the subject of this article.... Some how I do not think you do...

Andy2159 (talk) 04:01, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

@Andy2159: Well that's good. This article does seem very accurate, I only wanted to remove "West Germany", and yes that's why it's called a minor edit. And yes, I know a few things about this sword. Cheers~ ミーラー強斗武 (StG88ぬ会話) 04:54, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello

I have a sword that looks like either the 1859 Meyer's or the model 1872, I was wondering if I could send you a couple pictures. thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Person745 (talk • contribs) 04:02, 31 January 2016 (UTC)