Talk:FBLA-PBL

Quit Making It A Stub

While I do agree that we do not need to teach all of FBLA-PBL's techniques, we can't have the article just sit here as a stub with no meaningful information. Other CTSOs have detailed pages, why can't FBLA's? Again, we don't need to be TOO specific, but still, sections regarding membership, programs, and conferences should be kept, along with anything else considered meaningful and appropriate for a Wiki. --Millipedeman (talk) 17:33, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Because the information you are adding is directly copied from the FBLA website and that is a copyright violation. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 20:15, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

I didn't add it, someone else did. But still, we shouldn't have just a stub. --Millipedeman (talk) 22:04, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

I agree on that statement. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 14:17, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

The page was more informative before. It was great to see when past conferences were and a true history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.227.148.198 (talk) 18:16, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Quit Making It A Stub pt2

For both the national officer team and the conferences tab, there is clear precedent from other organization's pages doing this and I believe that FBLA should have the same content. DECA's Wikipedia page features both future and past conferences and both their HS and college officer teams. FFA and TSA also have their officer team on their pages and HOSA has their past and future conferences.

Including the conferences is similar to adding fixtures for a football or rugby team on their page and you never see a team page with just the captain or manager, it shows the entire team. Yeetfbla (talk) 03:00, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

I agree, this page needs new info and adding things such as conferences and officers would fit thatInestapuyol6747 (talk) 03:07, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Creed, Mission, Pledge, and Dress Code

I added the creed, mission, pledge, and dress code and it was removed according to "copyright violation". Is this really an issue? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.117.95.99 (talk) 17:16, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it's an issue for two reasons: One it is a copyright violation to be taking the organization's codes and such and posting it here. Two it is not necessary for this article. We give a summary of ideas; we do not need to teach every aspect of FBLA-PBL such as what the full dress code is. either way (talk) 22:38, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Officer list

For years, we have had a consensus to not include the names of officers beyond the division presidents in the info. box. This was the standard for student organizations for many years. However, some users seem to think it's time to put those names in. Personally, I still think this falls under our WP:NOTDIRECTORY guideline. We don't need to list the names of all the officers as it's not encyclopedic information. It's been pointed out that other organizations have their officers listed, but I don't think Wikipedia:Other stuff exists is a valid argument here. Has consensus shifted to keep them in now? I don't think we should be adding the names in until a new consensus is reached. only (talk) 16:54, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

I think it makes sense to add the officer names as it is the standard for student organizations today. Rooneymanu (talk) 02:52, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Based on the initial "making a stub" section, I don't see consensus about leaving out officers and adding new, relevant info. Yeetfbla (talk) 03:04, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

consensus was established years ago but I'm struggling to find where that was established. By long ago I mean probably 2007 area. Again, we can discuss here if we think it's time to change what had been the practice for the last decade. In the past other organization pages did not have officer lists for the same reasons. I don't see any place where consensus switched officially though. Other than "other organizations have it", why do you think the officer list should be on this page? only (talk) 18:59, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on FBLA-PBL. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120226150135/http://www.fbla-pbl.org:80/web/page/614/sectionid/614/pagelevel/1/main_interior.asp to http://fbla-pbl.org/web/page/614/sectionid/614/pagelevel/1/main_interior.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120302072709/http://regions.fbla-pbl.org:80/default.asp?div=fbla to http://regions.fbla-pbl.org/default.asp?div=fbla
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://regions.fbla-pbl.org/default.asp?div=fbla&p=19&c=149

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:02, 28 December 2016 (UTC)